date
stringlengths
10
10
nb_tokens
int64
60
629k
text_size
int64
234
1.02M
content
stringlengths
234
1.02M
2017/04/20
2,299
9,520
<issue_start>username_0: Say you come up with an idea, but X already has written about it before, even though you don't know about this. Is it plagiarism to then publish the idea, even if during publishing you **still** are not aware that X came up with this idea first? That is, can you accidentally commit plagiarism in this way?<issue_comment>username_1: If you publish an idea that turns out to have been previously known, but you were unaware of the prior work before you published it, then it's not plagiarism. Depending on the circumstances, it could be considered poor scholarship, or even negligence if you really should have found the reference. However, it's not a form of academic dishonesty if you truly didn't know. If you come up with an idea on your own, learn that it was previously known, and subsequently publish it as original work without disclosing the prior source, then it's definitely academic dishonesty. I wouldn't use the word "plagiarism" if you came up with the idea independently, but it's still misconduct to act like you're unaware of the idea's history. The trickiest case is if you may have been aware of the idea in the past, but forgotten about it. That's a horrible mess, since the rest of the world has no way of knowing whether you genuinely forgot or are being dishonest. (You really don't want to have to argue that you aren't a thief, but rather massively screwed up.) This is the only case in which I think accidental plagiarism is really plausible. This is not at all common, but it can happen more easily than you might hope, so it's best to be careful to keep track of what you've heard about. The worrisome scenario is the following: you hear Smith give a talk, but you don't really understand it or care very much, so you basically forget about it. Some years later, you are faced with a similar problem and come up with more or less the same idea to solve it. You don't realize how similar it is to Smith's talk, but you may have been influenced by subconscious memories, so you haven't really discovered it independently. When you publish your idea, Smith writes to you to say "How dare you use my idea without giving me any credit! I know you were at my talk, since we chatted afterwards, and your colleague X confirms that he remembers you there as well. Did you really think you could get away with this?" Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Building on David's comment: If you inadvertently reinvent the wheel, without contributing anything additional and meaningful, your paper is unlikely to get published anyway. So let's start with the assumption that you inadvertently reinvented the wheel, did not credit the original inventor, and then added something meaningful. It is likely the review process would trigger a correction in this situation. I think it would be helpful to review what plagiarism tends to look like. I have seen the following, as a copy editor: 1. Neglect to give credit for a creative assertion 2. Lift text from someone else's work, without putting quotes around it 3. Same as 1 or 2, but from your own previously published work Other types of sloppiness I've seen: 4. Cite the wrong author(s) for a creative assertion or quote 5. Make a significant mistake in the citation 6. Cite the wrong work (but at least getting the researcher right) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There is such a thing as independent discovery. In the 17th century, Newton and Leibnitz apparently discovered calculus a year or two apart, but without either knowing about the work of the other. Nowadays, information travels at "warp" speed and "a year or two" would be an unacceptable time lag. Even so, it's possible that two people would publish similar findings, drawn from common sources, days or even hours apart. (And on SE sites, it gets even more intense; sometimes people "publish" similar answers minutes or even seconds apart, neither knowing of the other.) Under such circumstances, concurrent publication is usually excused, but it also behooves one to do a literature search to see if the idea has, in fact been published previously. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I have seen this happening in my field twice. Both researchers became famous because they did some research that was completed by others before its time being completely unaware of that research existence. Neither the editors, or the referees helped with this. In one case, the researcher who was in this situation learned from colleagues that similar work was done in the 70's by a prominent Russian scientist, so he acknowledged it, and everyone is citing the Russian guy ever since. The good outcome is that the Russian guy made his re-entry in the field and made more contributions. In the other case, the original paper was written by a Japanese scientist, who was a postdoc at the time, and everyone forgot about it. Three years later, another researcher wrote a very similar paper, became famous for it, but never cited the Japanese guy. In fact, very few people in the field cite him. Since many fields are becoming increasingly multidisciplinary, I don't believe a single guy can do proper literature search. You can use google and web of science and whatever tools, but unless you are specialist in a field, you are very likely to miss something. Even if your random walk from citation to citation takes a significant percentage of your time, it may not be ergodic. For better ergodicity is good to have conversations with older scientists who might have stumbled upon your reference in the past. In any case, if you succeed to do your literature search properly, you will notice that there are a few others who didn't. The most unpleasant are the ones that should have cited you, and don't even answer the email you send them. To answer the question, I don't believe it's plagiarism. In fact, before the advent of specialized science journals, it was quite a common situation in science. -- Remember all those two-name theorems from mathematics. Many of them were developed years apart by different scientists. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Real plagiarism involves deliberately copying someone else's work. I saw this when editing a paper for a PhD candidate who was worried about his English. Parts of the paper were badly constructed, but other parts were letter perfect. So I used Google to check for some of the unique phrases in the well-written section. Bingo! Wikipedia! I did not tell him what I found. Instead I fixed the most glaring of his errors in English, gave him a note that Wikipedia was not an acceptable source, and hoped that his advisor and his examination committee would discover his malfeasance. They needed to hang him by his thumbs. Generally if you find that you have inadvertently used someone else's idea without attribution it is good if you can later publish something that corrects the situation. It's better to do it that way than to have someone else point you out as a possible thief. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: As addition to the other answers: I think it is possible to distinguish if you are academically dishonest or that you really invented the wheel again. If you reinvented the wheel, you will have worked with the new method a longer time to verify that it really works and you will therefore know its merits and its disadvantages. Moreover the path how you invented will be almost always different from the original author, so it will give you very specific insights which you intuitively grasp, but it does not give you the insights if you followed another path. So a short interview (preferably with the original author *if he/she is not malignant*) would settle with high probability if you really invented the method yourself. The Newton-Leibniz controversy is a good example: Newton used the "fluxion" approach, always dividing out the resulting equation and neglecting the remaining part while Leibniz see them as "differential", a ratio of infinitesimal changes, so he could cancel out e.g. (dy/dx) \* dx = dy. Both used the same method to finally get the derivative at one point, but their interpretation varied. Both methods were attacked for their lack of rigour, but Leibniz approach was formally more elegant and easier to handle, so his integral notation prevailed. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Some assumptions here are that you are intellectually honest, you use a reputable publisher, and the prior work in question was done some time before yours. If your due diligence (and your publishers) didn't discover it in mainstream publishing in your field, it couldn't be considered plagiarism. While this answers your question, it still leaves open the likelihood of conflict over credit. Even without political considerations, history is replete with antagonism that carries for generations. While we as a society consider publishing important work of any kind to serve mankind, you can see how vital it can be to the author. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: There is a famous example for this question. Some people re-discovered calculus in the following paper: “A Mathematical Model for the Determination of Total Area Under Glucose Tolerance and Other Metabolic Curves”, <NAME>, Diabetes Care, 1994, 17, 152–154. You can laugh, but no, they did not commit plagiarism. [More details](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9602/rediscovery-of-calculus-in-1994-what-should-have-happened-to-that-paper). Upvotes: 0
2017/04/20
3,288
13,960
<issue_start>username_0: Since I began my master studies (graduate school) in economics I have encountered too many false mathematical propositions. When I encounter a mathematical proposition which I think is false, I write down an argument (usually a counterexample or a refutation of a premise) explaining why the proposition is indeed false. Since I hold an MSc in mathematics, I am almost always able to do this. Afterward, I present my argument to the lecturer (who may be a professor) who presented, defended and/or used the proposition. If it is my first time talking with him or her (sometimes I send an email), he or she will usually assume that I am wrong even though he or she did not understand my argument. The teacher will defend the proposition again and I will again explain why I think it is false. After a while, he or she will either ignore me, reject that I have something valuable to say, accept my argument, or tell me that I should read a certain book or certain research articles. If I am a bit unsure after I have talked with the lecturer, I almost always read the book (the relevant chapters) or the research articles. As of now, my readings have just cemented my beliefs in my original arguments. So, during the course of my studies, I have encountered false propositions and my lecturers do not seem to respond to critique. In fact, I question their competency when it comes to discussing mathematics. In addition to this, they seldom trust my knowledge. Thus, I have the following questions. 1. **How am I to pursue my mission to convince the teacher that what he or she is defending is false?** 2. **How can I approach the teacher with respect (I am more like an activist than a politician) and send a message that my knowledge is important and that I am of the opinion that I know something to be false which the teacher think is true?** --- After reading [Paul Romer's article on "mathiness" among economic theorists](https://paulromer.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Mathiness.pdf), I feel that this problem may be larger than I thought. --- EDIT: Since this is not a forum about mathematics, I thought I would not comment on the false propositions made. But for those who understand mathematics and mathematical statistics, this is not about propositions which are invalid only if a certain variable is negative or different from zero; because the chain rule was falsely applied; because the hazard function was wrongly characterized; because a limit computation was false; because the conditions for when a matrix is invertible is not satisfied; because the lecturer did not check the second order conditions in an optimization problem; because economists considers infinitesimals etc. These cases have all occurred. But other and more significant false propositions have occurred in my program, which has to do with e.g. the difference between applying ordinary least squares (OLS) and applying generalized least squares (GLS) when estimating certain parameters; the consequences of omitted variables in econometrics and under which conditions we can get unbiased estimates by controlling for the correct control variables; the properties of the Nash product; how different assumptions of an error term affects macroeconomic conclusions; the difference between homogeneity and homotheticity of a production function and the consequences this has for certain relevant propositions in mathematical economics etc.<issue_comment>username_1: **Disclaimer:** I am primarily a student of physics so I'm not sure if the same issues arise in studying economics as well. Since your main question is broad -- it would be applicable for any discipline with complex mathematics -- I am writing an answer, albeit from a physics perspective. First let me summarize some of the points made in the comments and add a few of my experiences. > > It is plausible that an economist or an engineer would use a heuristic argument to "prove" an statement, even though this is not proved in a mathematically precise way. For instance, the "proof" may not work everytime, but it may work often enough. Cases where it fails may not be of interest or not easily characterizable, which is pretty much the opposite to what we do as mathematicians. I've seen some fields that work like that. So the issue may be a lack of common language between the OP and the lecturer. - [Shake-baby](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46838/shake-baby) > > > Have you looked into this? One of the most common cases of derivations being unsatisfactory in physics (in my undergrad) is that a LOT of context is often implicit (as opposed to being explicit in math). Frequently, one needs to be aware of several small points (mentioned somewhere way back in the text) while understanding new concepts. Even more frequently, one proceeds to do calculations without explicitly stating important conditions. Examples of what I think would be at least slightly alarming to mathematicians: 1. Functionals will be considered without specifying which function space is the domain. Also, we often ignore measure theory entirely (in formal training) even though we see integrals over function spaces. 2. The level of differentiability will almost never be specified. The implicit assumption often is: take as many well-defined continuous derivatives as needed. 3. Naked "delta functions" are welcome. The more, the merrier. 4. Physical intuition is often more valuable than a solid definition. In a recent graduate class, we were discussing the fundamental group for special cases like a torus and a projective plane by cutting up paper and playing with rubber bands. However, topology was not a prerequisite for this course (!) and several of my peers had not studied it formally (neither did we define "topology" in that class). If experiment matches theory, all's well and fine. Is there a mismatch directly because of wrong assumptions? Cool! We've got new physics to play with now. Does this hand-wavy approach mean that physics is "wrong"? It simply means that the level of rigor in physics in insufficient for a mathematician but is (often) perfectly fine for *model-building* or *experiments*. --- Suppose you are at a stage where the former point (of common context) is not an issue and still you are facing major difficulties in communicating. > > How am I to pursue my mission to convince the teacher that what he or she is defending is false? > > > First, I would like to point out that "to convince the teacher that what he or she is defending is false" is your mission, should you choose to accept it. No external agency has thrust this responsibility on you. That said, there might be many good reasons why you might feel that you should do so such as: 1. You want to help correct a misunderstanding of the professor for his/her benefit and the benefit of other students. 2. You consider that stating and believing false statements to be true is a bad thing by itself and so you want to correct that. This is different from the first point in that this point would apply even if you were the only student in the class. Fortunately or unfortunately, convincing people is hard. Convincing people that they are wrong is much harder. Convincing people that they are wrong and that you are right is much, much harder [1]. Sometimes it's easier when the opposite person is a scientist. Sometimes it's harder. You try your best and reason with the person in good faith; it will work sometimes and sometimes you just move on after being unsuccessful. > > How can I approach the teacher with respect (I am more like an activist than a politician) and send a message that my knowledge is important and that I am of the opinion that I know something to be false which the teacher think is true? > > > Permit me to break me down the question bit by bit: > > How can I approach the teacher with respect > > > Be polite in words and manners and act in good faith. Some professors might get annoyed if sigh loudly. Others might not even notice or care if you yawn while they are making a key point. There isn't a silver bullet. The teacher is also a person, just like you. Is the teacher is trying to impeded your learning? No. Remember: the fallacy is the key issue, not the teacher. > > (I am more like an activist than a politician) > > > If I understand correctly, you mean that you take speak in an argumentative manner as opposed to a soft tone. I have sometimes been guilty of this myself, especially when I felt what the opposite person is saying is *very wrong* and *very stupid*. One possible solution is: write, instead of speaking in person. I understand this may not be the most practical in a lecture setting but courses often have online forums which make this more convenient. An email (or forum post) allows you to (i) collect your thoughts, (ii) frame your arguments fully and (iii) most importantly, gives you time between framing your points and actually clicking send -- in this time you can go over the language and double-check it (or have a close friend look over the email) and alter it if needed so that your tone does not come off as hostile. Consider the following two emails: > > (1) On Tuesday, you said that the isomorphism that takes the fundamental group with one base point to the fundamental group with another base point is path-independent. That statement is incorrect. It is true if and only if the fundamental group is abelian. > > > (2) On Tuesday, you said that the isomorphism that takes the fundamental group with one base point to the fundamental group with another base point is path-independent. Isn't it true only when the fundamental group is abelian? At the time, had we already assumed that the surfaces under consideration had abelian fundamental groups? > > > Perhaps you think that these two are roughly the same/interchangeable. Perhaps not. I would consider the second one more polite and preferable compared to the first one. Moreover, the second version expresses two things which are missing from the first -- (i) a possibility that you misunderstood something (humility) and (ii) a desire to arrive at the right answer *together* (cooperation). In contrast, the first version just says, "Here is the right answer. You are wrong." (superiority). > > and send a message that my knowledge is important > > > It is the truth which is important. In this special case, your knowledge coincides with the truth ... but are you always correct? Probably not. If a teacher is dismissing your claim as false, don't take it personally (trust me, it never helps). This can get really hard, especially if it happens publicly, but you must keep your cool. > > After a while, he or she will either ignore me, reject that I have something valuable to say, accept my argument, or tell me that I should read a certain book or certain research articles. > > > There you have it: there are all different kinds of professors. Is that a surprised? Some accept your arguments, some don't ... surely, a reasonable academic would accept an argument if it was true? Unfortunately, life isn't so simple... **Footnote:** [1] Based on the author's interactions (mostly with Indians). Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: > > How am I to pursue my mission to convince the teacher that what he or she is defending is false? > > > By publishing your corrections. > > How can I approach the teacher with respect and send a message that my knowledge is important and that I am of the opinion that I know something to be false which the teacher think is true? > > > The more you publish, the more your opinion will be respected. For now, try once; i.e. do give the instructor an opportunity to consider your point of view. But one unsolicited correction per mistake is enough. Version 2 of @theindigamer's email correction is a good approach. Another possibility is to give the correction or contradiction verbally (in class or in office hours), with a polite prologue such as, "I see a contradiction [flaw] in your argument. Would you mind if I explained what it is?" Try to find kindred spirits in the economics world. At the very least, you'll feel less isolated. Most importantly: make sure you figure out, and explain, what harm is done by the error. If pointing out a mistake would be unproductive nitpicking, then just note it down for yourself in your Big Book of Math Mistakes in Economics. My hope for you is that you can eventually be seen as a helpful resource by your instructors, colleagues and students. Also, I hope you will not get too frustrated with the mistakes you encounter, but will instead find a way to discover what's interesting about the mistakes. Maybe you'll figure out some patterns, and even be able to trace back to the origins of certain mistakes. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: A common defect of mathematicians is to believe that all of science works like mathematics. In mathematics a statement has a set of assumptions and a conclusion, and the statement is false if you can find one counterexample. In all other sciences you have some basic knowledge about the world as additional assumptions, and a statement is false if there is a reasonable counterexample. This is even true in physics, where people integrate the delta "function" from 0 to infinity or believe that there is something like a Bayesian probability. To scold a scientist for incorrect use of mathematics is not only petty, but also displays a lack of understanding of science. A theoretic physicist or economist is not a poor mathematician, but has an insight which allows her to make mathematical "mistakes" while being right. So attacking a single proposition does not make sense, unless you can invalidate the whole application of the proposition together with the intuition leading to the application of this proposition. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/21
1,158
4,932
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing my Masters (thesis-based) in Computer Engineering in Canada. I started my research in September 2015 and it is now the end of April in 2017 but I haven't done ANY significant research. It is very distressing and I definitely will need extra time to finish my research and graduate. I meet with my professor and we both decide on what I need to do and a deadline is set for specific tasks. The initial stages of these tasks mainly involve installing software on my lab system which has the hardware I need for my research. I always run into problems during these installation processes and I end up spending more time than necessary JUST to have the necessary tools needed to do my project. By the time I get started with my work and do anything meaningful, the deadline arrives and the tasks remain incomplete. My professor is frustrated by my lack of concrete results but despite that, he is encouraging and believes in my abilities. I also think I can publish at least one conference paper before I graduate. However, I am wasting my potential and my expertise by not meeting set deadlines. I know I can get things done but apparently, I am too slow in getting to where I want to be. I feel that setting aside a set amount of time each day (6 hours or so) is not always effective in meeting goals. Should I just give up sleep (and definitely my leisure time) to meet my goals? I am afraid that it will impact my health and my concentration and negatively impact the quality of my work. **Should I simply come to terms with the fact that given my capabilities, I will need to sleep less to meet my goals?** EDIT: I also work as a TA and a good amount of time also goes towards preparing for labs and marking students' papers.<issue_comment>username_1: Having less sleep would do potentially more harm than good. Quite simply, you are less likely to be able to work to capacity if you are tired and worn out and this is very likely to have a detrimental effect on your studies and on your health in the medium to long term at least - you could end up becoming very resentful towards your work, which would compound the problems you are facing now. There have been a considerable amount of research investigating the link between amount of sleep and academic performance. An example is the article [Causes and consequences of sleepiness among college students](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4075951/) (Hershner and Chervin, 2014), where they state: > > The consequences of sleep deprivation and daytime sleepiness are especially problematic to college students and can result in lower grade point averages, increased risk of academic failure, compromised learning, impaired mood, and increased risk of motor vehicle accidents. > > > Instead of reducing your sleep, you need to ensure that you maintain your sleep duration and patterns, as well as eating well, exercising regularly and occasionally giving yourself some 'time off'. Look for other areas that time can be gained (without harming your studies, health or work, of course). Talk with your professor about these issues as well, particularly about the time spent on installations and as a TA. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Reducing sleep may work for a day or two. However, after that, sleep debt accumulates, and sleep deprivation will lead to a reduction in productivity. Sleep is essential for your physical health, and in particular, it is essential for mental functioning. You may find it better to view sleep as a form of "work time". The cognitive structures you have about your thesis will be refined and pruned while you sleep. You'll make novel connections while you sleep. Sleep will also enable you to have the mental energy to engage in focused activity on the thesis. In particular, the kind of deep creative thinking required to analyse data and write a thesis is helped greatly by being well-rested. Sleep also helps ensure that the work you do is directed towards your goals. Thus, **allocating enough time to sleep so that you are well-rested is essential to overall academic productivity.** So in general, if you are looking to maximise productivity in the medium-term (i.e., from a week or two to perhaps a month or two), then look at things other than sleep and thesis-time that can be trimmed. If possible, remove all other work commitments (i.e., no tutoring, RA work, consulting, etc.). Other work consumes largely the same set of limited mental and time resources that you have available each week. If possible, reduce non-work commitments. Also, in the medium term, many people do pull back from social and leisure activities a little bit. But in the longer term, you want to think about a balance to your life that truly works for you. I also think that incorporating at least a moderate amount of physical exercise is also important. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2017/04/21
2,604
10,726
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote a paper under pressure from my supervisor who gives high importance for publishing. I feel that both the conference and my paper are mediocre. What is done is done. How to distance myself from this evil mistake hanging in IEEE Xplore with my name on it forever? Is there any way? I really hate my predicament. There is no incorrect information in my paper. The finding is nothing startling. The experiments lack rigor. Any serious researcher reading it will definitely point it out. Being associated with a work of mediocre quality pains me. I feel embarrassed. The conference has a 65% acceptance rate. My supervisor says it is a good conference. It is not small. Neither is it specialized. It has multiple tracks. And it's definitely accepting mediocre papers. As for the choice of supervisor. It's life. Mistakes happen. I want to make sure it does not become a blunder. No point in wasting time whining about it. When the time is ripe I will disengage from mediocrity. Edit: Today while the publications were being discussed with another professor my paper was discussed. The professor whose ideology differs from my supervisor's clearly found the paper lacking in substance. And then my supervisor disowned me saying he had a different opinion about my results and this discussion brought new knowledge to him. This makes my wound deeper. First I hate publishing my work and then I am to be blamed when it is criticized? This is the price of working with the wrong mind. Note that the paper was read by my supervisor before sending it.<issue_comment>username_1: It is important for a PhD student to write papers and participate in conferences. By 'forcing' you into this, your supervisor is developing your career. Also, going to a conference can be a good change of scene; when you go, you'll feel much better. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: **How to save face?** Have more high quality papers than poor ones. People understand that a student's first paper is not necessarily outstanding, especially if his/her supervisor is more about quantity than quality. So it reflects more badly on your supervisor than you as long as you have the 'student' badge on. However, you can only wear the 'student' badge for so long. So, aim to get better papers published. Personally, when I glance at a person's CV, I only look for the best publications. That's what I judge him/her on. In summary, people remember successes or high quality papers or those with impact. *Aside*: in my area, there is a paper in a poor venue with 10K+ cites. In contrast, lots of high quality papers have zero citation. Don't despair, there is hope! Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Your paper getting accepted means that reviewers have agreed on the significance of you paper's results. Therefore, I personally would not see a need to *save face.* Your paper, with these results, got accepted. If it is mediocre, as you say, it should be the ones who *accepted* the paper who need to save face. And also, [slightly related](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21819/is-hiding-publications-in-cv-a-good-idea). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I feel the first step is to calm down and to stop exaggerating. Seeing this as an *"evil mistake"* and a *"predicament"* that's *"embarrassing"* is really, really over the top for just having published a paper that's correct but uninteresting at a low-competition conference from a reputable publisher. As you say yourself - "when the time is ripe" you will start publishing better papers, and then nobody (including you) will care anymore about this weak one. And before that time you have at least gotten some experience in writing papers. Now to answer your actual question: > > How to distance me from this evil mistake hanging in IEEE Xplore with my name on it forever. > > > The only way to "distance yourself" from a paper is to retract it, and that's not really an option given that the results are not wrong. That is, you or one of your co-authors have submitted this paper under your name, and now you need to live with it. However, note that it "hanging in IEEE Xplore with your name" is much less of a big deal than you may think it is. The internet is a big place, and a paper in a small, non-competitive conference is virtually invisible as long as it does not get cited frequently or otherwise gets viral (which, if it is boring as you say, is very unlikely to happen). Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_5: Your supervisor, who has more experience than you, thought that the paper was worth publishing. The conference programme committee, who are all more experienced than you, thought that the paper was worth publishing. You should give serious consideration to the possibility that they actually have a better idea of your paper's worth than you do. It is very common for research students to feel that their papers are of little value. And even if you're right about the quality of the paper, one mediocre paper really isn't a big deal. A pattern of mediocre papers is... well, mediocre. But you surely get more credit for a single mediocre paper than you would for no paper at all. Make sure you feel the next one is better. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: Save face by owning it and not making it worse. Go to the conference and cheerfully present the paper. Do not over or under sell its merits. Let the audience be the judge. Avoid a meta-discussion about how and why you ended up publishing it. This could be insulting to the others at the conference. Maybe there is something in your paper that will enable someone else to do great things. Likewise, get as much out of the conference as you can. Learn from each speaker. If the content of the conference is not interesting to you, you can always analyze each speaker's approach to find what works and what doesn't work. I'm guessing that your supervisor pushed you to submit the paper due to pressure from above. Perhaps someone higher up is making funding decisions based on the number of papers that are published. If so, publishing your paper will provide future funding for you and others to write more important papers. Plus, others realize this and will give you the benefit of the doubt. Next time, just make it one you're proud of. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: You appear to be a student working under the direction of a supervisor. Try to actually PRESENT the paper yourself - not your supervisor. You need the practice of standing up in front of an audience and sounding interesting - and answering questions from the audience. The fact that it's not stellar will not damage your reputation at this stage of your career. You can say, if you feel you must, that it's a first draft or a first step in a larger project - but if you say this, be prepared to outline the larger project. Really, just try to give the paper yourself and relax, if at all possible. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: What I've often done at conferences is to give a talk that significantly deviates from the accepted paper. So, if you have some new results in the pipeline that would be more interesting for the audience than what's in the paper, you are free to base your talk on that. No one actually reads the conference proceedings, people visit conferences to have a chat with their colleagues, to listen what they've been up to recently, to show off their work to their peers, to introduce their Ph.D. students to possible new employers etc. etc. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: A question of mine, when I was a student (and administrating the unix systems at school) made it up to `alt.humor.best-of-usenet`. You hardly can go below this when working in IT. My friends and not friends were rolling with laughter to the abysmal (but funny) stupidity of the question. I was ashamed like hell. 25 years later * I smile when recalling this * I think that the documentation which led me to that question was written by a lunatic and that guy should be tortured by making him use a Mac, for writing such piles of [censored], leading young and trustful people into asking such questions. So it was not my fault, but I digress. No worries, you will publish more and nobody will look at how you did early in your life. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: You need to start somewhere. Your supervisor probably asked you to submit the paper, knowing that it had a few shortcomings (at least that's what he implied to the professor). But he probably thought that a mediocre publication was better for you than nothing. As your supervisor, he's being paid to make these judgments. A mediocre first (or early) paper is nothing to worry about. Just make sure that your next one is better, now that you have a "baseline." And given your conscientiousness and new-found experience, that will certainly be the case. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: Most academics have experienced some sort of knock back, and there always will be different views to whatever you submit, don't expect everyone to worship you!, most especial on one of your first!. Everyone has to start somewhere, and you have, so use the feedback to make the next better!. As said above, distancing yourself from you paper only makes you look badder!, better to proudly say, as you do that you submitted some truths, but it is a "work in progress". In saying all that, I, and the academia world are not surprised in the least that a young up-start thinks papers and/or conferences are some what of a joke!, and are lazy and mediocre and submit average-to-trivial material!. Congratulations, your one of the modern lazy ignorant arrogant students so don't go around thinking your a dismal failure and there are none others like you!, unfortunately your part of a large minority!. Some advice, TAKE ALL PAPERS AND CONFERENCES SERIOUSLY, as, you can bet your last dollar that your co-students will never let you forget your "mediocre" attempt!. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: There is an old saying in marquetry work: > > if there is some defect in a piece of wood, do not try to hide it, at the > risk of cheap dissimulation. Put it in evidence. > > > Sometimes, an apparently shallow work grows many sides. After years, seemingly mediocre PhD insights (mine) revealed deeper after more experience. This is the personal side. For the outer readers, you never know who you reach, and at which level. One man floor is another's ceiling. A suggestion for your future researcher's life: strive to find deep roots in this work. Flowers grow from manure. Future will tell. Good or bad, all of mine PhD works revealed structurant. Upvotes: 0
2017/04/21
2,244
9,098
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper to a journal, and I suspect that it is handled too slowly. * How can I decide whether my suspicion is correct? What handling times should I expect? * Given some expected handling times, when should I act? How much leeway should I give? * How should I act? Whom should I contact and what should I (roughly) write? Note that I am interested on how I should approach this situation in general, and do not seek specific numbers for my specific situation. I am therefore looking for general answers that are independent of such factors as the field or individual journal (but mention them if they are relevant factors). *This is a canonical question on this topic as per [this meta post](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3707/7734). Due to its nature, it is rather broad and not exemplary for a regular question on this site. Please feel free to improve this question.*<issue_comment>username_1: * > > How can I decide whether my suspicion is correct? What handling times should I expect? > > > First note that there is no general answer to this as average reviewing times vary widely between fields and even within a field. Therefore, you need to resort to the following: + Read the documentation about approximate times on the journal’s website. + Look at some sample articles – at the dates of submission/revision/resubmission/acceptance that are on the articles – this gives you a bit of a guide. It is potentially more useful to to look at these details on an article similar to the one you submitted or are intending to submit. + Ask colleagues who are experienced with publishing in that journal or at least your particular subfield. + Familiarise yourself with the [general workflow of academic journals](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/55665/7734). * > > Given some expected handling times, when should I act? How much leeway should I give? > > > + Check if there have been any holidays etc. since the submission. + Send an inquiry about a fortnight to a month after the timeframe determined in the first step. **But this time can vary** – it is a bit of a judgement call, depending on the timeframe that is stipulated and the amount of time that has passed. + Keep in mind that the main reason why peer reviews take so long is not the time required by the review itself but that the referee has to find time amongst their other duties (see also [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/54461/7734)). Therefore review durations are subject to high variability. + Additionally, **before you take any action, be sure to check the status of the submission.** There is little point in nagging the editor if the status tells you that some progress was made recently, e.g., the reports have just arrived or a new reviewer was appointed. * > > How should I act? Whom should I contact and what should I (roughly) write? > > > Send a polite email to the editor assigned to my manuscript – after the introductory pleasantries, politely get to the point, asking something along the lines of: > > I am inquiring about the status of the manuscript [title], as X months have passed, which is considerably longer than the Y months stated on the journal’s website. > > > Then sign off, thanking the editor for their time and the usual closing pleasantries. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It might take a long time to find appropriate reviewers. Therefore, waiting for an answer longer than expected is not very extreme. Quoting [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/87982/isnt-it-injustice-on-behalf-of-editor-to-assign-article-status-as-under-review/87991#87991) answer, > > Depending on the scope of submitted paper, editors sometimes have hard time to find a suitable reviewer. During the process, a considerable amount of time might be needed. > > > The reviewing process starts when editors send the paper to the first suitable reviewer, and ends when final review is complete. Usually, it is not a single reviewer, but several reviewers. > > > Unfortunately, some reviewers might reject to review the paper for various reasons > > > **Q:** How can I decide whether my suspicion is correct? What handling times should I expect? **A:** There is no certain way to decide whether such suspicion is correct or not without contacting the editorial board. *Expected* times might be stated in the journal's web site, however stated durations might vary. **Q:** Given some expected handling times, when should I act? How much leeway should I give? **A:** It is natural to act if a considerable amount of time passes after the expected response time (ERT). But please keep in mind that again, this depends on the amount of ERT. For instance, if ERT is 3 months, it is not preferrable to send an email about the status in 100th day. Waiting for about twice the ERT might be a good measure. **Q:** How should I act? Whom should I contact and what should I (roughly) write? **A:** Only office to contact is editorial board. Writing an email to the editorial board, addressing your issues and asking for the status of your paper would be sufficient. However, if you need an immediate feedback because of various reasons, that should be stated in the mail. As an example: > > Dear Dr. *[Name Surname]*, I have submitted the paper entitled *[title of the paper]* to *[journal name]* on *[date of submission]*. > As stated in your website, the > expected response time is *[duration]*. Since it is passed *[duration]* > months after the expected response time, I would like to ask the > status of my paper, which is currently under review. Please note that > I have a time restriction for getting an official review. Therefore, I > may suggest experts of the field to help the process, if you are still > seeking reviewers. Otherwise, please update the expected response time > so that I can plan ahead. > > > If you have no time restrictions, you may simply write the same mail without mentioning the time restrictions. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The answer varies from field to field. As a former journal publisher the timeline for **physics** journals is: * A few days: The journal acknowledges receipt of your paper (not every journal does this). * A few days: Editorial “shuffling” where your paper bounces between editorial board members until one of them agrees to handle it. This might take a few days to a week. * Reviewer invited: Typically within two weeks. * Review complete: This is the largest variance part because some reviewers agree to review but don’t actually submit one, some reviewers decline, some reviewers never respond to the invitation, and so on. My personal guideline was to invite new reviewers if the previous reviewer had gone seven days without answering the invitation. Each time I invite new reviewers, I budget thirty days before I receive a review. It can be faster than this but taking longer is more common. Order of magnitude estimate for the entire stage would be 50–60 days. * Decision made: Depends on the editor, but less than a week after the final review is submitted is typical. This can vary a lot between fields however (math for example takes much longer). There’s also a large variation even within physics, depending on how the journal is set up. Some journals have all submissions directed to the editor-in-chief who then assigns an editorial board member. Other journals might have the journal office decide which board member to handle the paper. Yet others might say, we wait for ten papers, and then send them all to the editor-in-chief in batches. For physics I suggest contacting the journal asking for a status update if: 1. If your paper goes more than two weeks with no sign of it getting to the *reviewer invited* stage. It’s possible the paper got lost in the system, the handling editor needs to be prodded, etc. 2. If your paper is in the *reviewer invited* stage for more than six weeks. You might spur the editor to stop waiting and invite more reviewers. At worst you might get a reply such as: “We invited X reviewers but none of them responded.” 3. If your paper is in the *review complete* stage for more than two weeks. This could mean the editor is slow at submitting a decision, or it could mean the editor is waiting for more reviewers. You might get an early peek at the likely decision if the editor decides to send you the reviews that have already been received. For other fields, this will need to be adapted depending on how long it takes to review on average. If unsure about the estimated time, I’d check with my peers. The person to contact varies depending on the journal. If you’re in direct contact with a member of the editorial board (he or she acknowledged receiving your paper, asked for clarifications, etc), that’s the person to write to. Otherwise, write to the journal office. Most journals will have an email address, and the person answering that email is an employee of the publisher. He or she will know who to pass the query to. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/21
843
3,553
<issue_start>username_0: I want to submit my paper to [Elsevier Optics Communications](https://www.journals.elsevier.com/optics-communications), but I'm confused about the template of the journal. According to the [guide for author](https://www.elsevier.com/journals/optics-communications/0030-4018/guide-for-authors#20000), the manuscript can be in either Word or LaTex format. It seems that there is no sample template for Word format, but they DO say that the Word template should be in ONE column. This journal doesn't provide its own LaTex template but they provide the general template for all types journal in Elsevier. There is also a sample LaTex template which is in ONE column format. There are several options including "preprint", "review", "1p", "3p", and "5p". The default option in the sample template is "review" which has ONE column format. What makes me confused is that the final format of Optics Communication (as can be seen in published paper) is TWO column. Does this journal (and maybe all Elsevier journals) require ONE column format for the manuscript to be reviewed? After the manuscript is accepted, the officer of the journal will turn the manuscript into TWO column.<issue_comment>username_1: The process of publishing a paper has a number of steps. Two key steps are preparing/formatting the manuscript for review and the production of camera ready copy (CRC). The [elsarticle LaTeX class](https://www.ctan.org/pkg/elsarticle?lang=en) *is now accepted for submitted articles, both in Elsevier's electronic submission system and elsewhere.* The instructions for using the LaTeX class suggest the single column format is to be used. There may be a journal (or a conference) that deviates from this, but in general, the instructions to authors would for that journal/conference would be clear about any deviations. Despite some of the options included in the elsarticle class, it is not for preparing CRC: > > The authors can format their submission to the page size and margins of > their preferred journal. elsarticle provides four class options for the same. But it does not mean that using these options you can emulate the exact page layout of the final print copy. > > > Again, there may be some journals/conferences that deviate from this and require authors to submit CRC. In my experience asking authors to submit CRC after the manuscript is accepted is common in many fields. Prior to acceptance, I have only seen requests for CRC for conferences where there are strict page limits. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In mathematics, usually authors aren't expected to format their paper according to the journal's template until *after* the paper is accepted. Even then, authors usually don't bother and leave it up to copyeditors. This is the case for Elsevier as well as other publishers. Although publishers' websites often "encourage" authors to format submissions in a certain way, these suggestions are typically ignored. What is true for math might not be true for optics, so it is probably worthwhile to ask a scientist with firsthand knowledge of the journal (or at least the research field in general). Perhaps such a person will answer your question here. Otherwise, I would suggest that you only invest any effort into reformatting your paper if such a scientist (*not* an Elsevier employee) confirms that this is indeed important. If it's not practical to ask a colleague, you might e-mail a member of the journal's editorial board with this question. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2017/04/21
756
3,500
<issue_start>username_0: After months of waiting, I finally received the reviews for a letter I submitted to a IEEE journal. It’s a 3 page letter, and the first reviewer just had some clarifications regarding a figure and said the paper needed minor revisions. The second reviewer also bought up the figure that the first reviewer mention, but also said he wants us to "do more experiments" without saying what experiments we should be doing, or more "direct simulation results" without stating what he means by "direct simulation results". I did provide "direct simulation results" (atleast as per my understanding of what he would mean by direct simulation results") in the paper which I am going to highlight in my comments to the editor. When I go to the main website, the status of the paper reads as "needs minor revision", which I am guessing is the interpretation of the editor-in-charge. It would be almost impossible to do further experiments at this point, especially since we got a 2 week submission deadline 1 week back. The original letter from the editor-in-charge also mentions that I can ask for a extension, if I cant submit within 2 weeks. All the other points that reviewer 1/reviewer 2 bought up can be handled, and I will address them individually. However I am not sure whether the editor-in-charge even considers the 2nd reviewers concerns about "needing major revisions" seriously, since the main website mentions that the paper needs "minor revisions". Is it appropriate to clarify with the editor regarding what he thinks about the experimental section, and whether I need to address it, by informal email? Or should I just address all points as is typically done in replying to a review (and provide justifications for why we are not providing additional experimental validation), and hope for the best?<issue_comment>username_1: I am not in your discipline (I'm in the health and social sciences). I have always learned that it's best to try (somehow) to address all of the reviewers' concerns. That being said, reviewers are not always clear (as in your case), do not make reasonable suggestions, or their suggestions conflict with other reviewers' suggestions. My suggestion is to revise how you describe the experiment and results. See how you can make your description of these things more clear. Then, when you write your response to reviewers' comments, you could say, "To address concerns by reviewer #2, we have revised and clarified the sections regarding our experiment and results. The time frame provided for the revision does not allow for additional experiments. However, if the editor feels that such work is necessary, we are open to further suggestions on improving the manuscript." This way you do not look like you are disregarding the feedback from the reviewer and demonstrate your willingness to try and address his or her concerns. Good luck! Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my discipline, neuroscience, it is expected to respond point-by-point to all the reviewers. Sometimes, it is as simple as "Thank you for bringing that mistake to our attention. It has been corrected" but it can also be "While that is an interesting suggestion, it is outside of the scope of this paper." If your paper is accepted with minor revisions, that means the editor does not expect more work, only changes to the text. So, in that case, you might just respond to requests for more work as "out of scope". Check with the editor first! Upvotes: 1
2017/04/21
889
3,951
<issue_start>username_0: My master thesis dissertation is approaching, but I have a few concerns. First of all, I am not native English speaker. When I practiced my presentation on my own (I recorded my speech), it was not coherent to me. I feel that the transition between each sentence might be difficult to understand. Can anyone instruct me or provide me a useful English speech that is commonly used for thesis defending? Second of all, I have limited time to present my work, and I tried to make my presentation as possible as clear to outliers. So to make the presentation clear, I have prepared some background knowledge for my audience, but the time to introduce this background knowledge in bioinformatics is more than what I expected. What should I do? My expected audience has a background in computer science, while I finished my thesis in bioinformatics. Can anyone give me possible ideas? Is there any volunteer that can give a useful English speech for thesis defense? Thanks a lot.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there is anything special about thesis defending vs presenting your work in general at a conference or to a group of fellow researchers. So focus on English, not English for thesis defending. I find that I'm better at writing English than speaking it. So I type out my presentations and read it from my tablet, looking up at pauses (commas and full stops). You can read and practice your speech many times to get better at the pronunciation and flow this way before the big day. If reading is out of the question, create a flow diagram of your argument with bullet points at each block that you can then use to build your arguments (if you are worried about staying coherent). Is the audience native English speakers? If not, just apologise for your accent at the start, ask people to stop you if they don't understand, and take it very slow. People who are not native speakers understand, because they themselves struggle with this issue. Regarding your second issue. Keep it short and sweet, clear and concise. Rather ask the audience to stop you and ask a question if they get lost, which you can then explain with explanation slides (located at the end of your presentation that you can quickly page to if required). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: * Use short, simple sentences. * Write a draft script to go with your slides. * Find a friend or an editor for hire to check your draft script. * Make sure you understand each of the corrections this person provides. * Create a target listener. Ideally, this person will be well aligned with your committee members' profiles. Reduce the background information part of your talk as much as possible. Include only the background information your target listener really needs to hear. * Give practice talks to friends. * Videotape one of your practice talks. Many people gesture too much with their laser pointer or ruler, so watch out for that. * After your talk, during the Question period, make sure to repeat *each and every question that is posed* before you start to answer it. This will (1) ensure you have understood the question, (2) ensure everyone in the room has heard the question, and (3) buy you thinking time. *Practice doing this.* Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: From experience, I would suggest to take part and listen to dissertations of your peers. Listening to others will help you understanding what is a good/bad practice in a presentation. Then, practice a lot if you do not feel sure. It is good to spend time letting the audience understanding your work's background, but do not say to much! Just point out the main, important background information. For example, if the total presentation time is 20 minutes, I would divide it as: 7 min for background, 7 min for core of the project (e.g. method used, experimental setup), 5 minutes to show and comment the results, 1 min for conclusions. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/21
490
2,249
<issue_start>username_0: I have used simple excel-style Gantt Charts to create a high level plan of tasks for the academic semester, noted the end times depending on conference and grant deadlines, and then managed my time according to the deadline. I have also added details under each task as the semester proceeds. I am wondering if there are better task planning & management tools that people have used, especially when they are working on multiple projects with different deadlines?<issue_comment>username_1: I have tried many kinds of the task planning apps/softwares for organizing reseach projects. At the end of my search, I interstingly find that ('old school') simple online spreadsheets (Google sheets or Microsoft excel etc.) are the best tools by many standards as outlined below. 1. Simplicity: Just make a column for date/time and rest can be the variables such as name of the project, members of reaserch group etc. The entries in each row can be task planned for each member. 2. Customizability: Every project is likely be different from each other. So rather than sticking to the pre-alloted platform, spreadsheets allow wide canvas to add all and any kinds of variables (eg. holidays etc.) into your plans. 3. Sharability: Applications such Google sheets and Microsoft Excel are well developed, cross-platform tools which allow user friendly sharability and simultaneous editing by multiple users. 4. Quick analyses: Since it's a spreadsheet afterall, one can easily plot numerical variables such as time wasted per day, number of pages written per day etc. This allows pretty good real time progress reports of the projects. I would therefore recommend spreadsheets! Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A different approach would be the Kanban board, which you can use using online resources (like Trello) or simply sticky notes or a whiteboard. The concept revolves around listing your pending tasks, the tasks you are actually performing, and the completed tasks. As you complete your different activities, you move the respective sticky note from the "In progress" group to the "Completed", hence you have more room to move a new activity from the "To do" group, to the "In progress" column. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/22
974
4,054
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Masters student, in the Faculty of Science in Canada. I have a question to ask regarding literature review. I am doing a bit of studying to find protocols for my experiment (where I hope to conjugate a certain linker to a nucleic acid). I tried looking for papers with different keyword searches on Google Scholar, as well as the WebOfScience. There could be different possibilities here - either there are no papers that have been published, or the Search Spider was not able to find the papers (which is a False Result). I therefore tried looking for a paper which we had published 4-5 years back in *Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research*. It does not show up in the search results, probably because it does not have enough citations (you can try by searching this paper on Google standard search, and on Google Scholar: Potential inhibitors against acetylcholinesterase and glutathione S-transferase associated with Alzheimer's disease). Doesn't this give false hope to certain researchers, that the work they are currently doing is novel; or make it difficult for other researchers who are trying to find a protocol to adopt? Hoping to get some insight from the community.<issue_comment>username_1: Although you asked a generic question, the answer is very particular to your own particular article. Most likely, @HoboSci, got the correct answer: you published in a journal of questionable ethical editorial policy that Google Scholar refuses to index. That is, "Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research" is probably such a journal (see <https://bradleymonk.com/Beall%27s_List_of_Questionable_Journals>). I looked up the issue where your own article is published: JOCPR Volume 6 Issue 3: <http://www.jocpr.com/archive/jocpr-volume-6-issue-3-year-2014.html>. I searched Google Scholar for your article "Potential inhibitors against acetylcholinesterase and glutathione S-transferase associated with alzheimer's disease". I also searched for a couple other articles in that same special issue and none of them showed up in Google Scholar. Unfortunately, I don't think there's anything you can do about it because once you've published in a journal like that, you can't republish the same article anywhere else. So,the lesson is to only publish your work in reputable journals, or else your published work might become almost invisible on the Web. :-( Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This probably has nothing to do with predatory publishers or with the number of citations. Google Scholar has no quality requirements - it indexes anything and everything. This is unlike Web of Knowledge, which *does* have quality requirements, and also why <NAME> has said [Google Scholar is full of junk science](https://www.emeraldcityjournal.com/2014/11/google-scholar-is-filled-with-junk-science/). What's likely is that **the publisher didn't provide Google Scholar with what it needs**. Although Google Scholar has no quality requirements, it *does* have certain technical requirements before its bots can even crawl the journal's website. A key requirement is that [Google users must see at least the complete abstract or the first full page](https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/publishers.html#policies). There are other technical requirements, [as can be seen on this page](https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html#overview). Since it's not hard to get indexed by Google Scholar, it is something that authors should demand from publishers, and if the publisher does not do this, authors should approach another publisher. However since you can't retract the article, the next best thing to do is to host it on your institutional website (see the "Individual Authors" section in the last link for more details). If you don't have a website, you can also hand the article to your university repository. There's probably nothing you can do to get indexed by Web of Science however, other than hope the journal someday gets indexed by SCI. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/22
1,178
4,895
<issue_start>username_0: I completed my undergraduate degree in physics in a good university (outside the US). Because of financial commitments, I couldn't leave for grad school straight away. So I worked for a couple of years as a research assistant at the same university after I graduated. I did very well, got three papers out in around three years and picked up a master's by research for that. I loved my time working in physics but the research assistant job was a temp job at best and I eventually had to leave it. Now I work at a well known engineering company. The job is relaxed and spare time is plenty and I'm being paid well. There are good opportunities for growth because the company is about to expand in a big way. I also love having enough time for hobbies, fitness and just life in general. I also applied to PhD programs in the US and was accepted into several good ones. The reason I applied is primarily because I miss physics and I am interested in being really good at core physics. I have this feeling that my education is unfinished in some way. I want to be that guy who has a deep understanding of fundamental physics. That guy who can easily answer questions on the physics stacks. Maybe I'd even like to write a textbook someday. I liked research when I did it but to be honest, I'm not sure I have that same fierce passion for it as I do for learning. In addition to this, I know I'm not cut out for the academic tenure track - Even if I were smart enough (and this is not impostor syndrome or anything, I am self aware enough know that I am good but not great), I have no interest in chasing low paid postdocs and living with the general instability of post PhD life. In five years, when I complete my PhD, I will likely end up in a very similar job to what I have now. With this in mind, should I simply stay in my regular job and do physics as a side hobby or actually do the PhD? TL;DR Is it worth doing a PhD if learning and mastery of physics over research is the primary motivation and sacrifice a great career for it?<issue_comment>username_1: Although you asked a generic question, the answer is very particular to your own particular article. Most likely, @HoboSci, got the correct answer: you published in a journal of questionable ethical editorial policy that Google Scholar refuses to index. That is, "Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research" is probably such a journal (see <https://bradleymonk.com/Beall%27s_List_of_Questionable_Journals>). I looked up the issue where your own article is published: JOCPR Volume 6 Issue 3: <http://www.jocpr.com/archive/jocpr-volume-6-issue-3-year-2014.html>. I searched Google Scholar for your article "Potential inhibitors against acetylcholinesterase and glutathione S-transferase associated with alzheimer's disease". I also searched for a couple other articles in that same special issue and none of them showed up in Google Scholar. Unfortunately, I don't think there's anything you can do about it because once you've published in a journal like that, you can't republish the same article anywhere else. So,the lesson is to only publish your work in reputable journals, or else your published work might become almost invisible on the Web. :-( Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This probably has nothing to do with predatory publishers or with the number of citations. Google Scholar has no quality requirements - it indexes anything and everything. This is unlike Web of Knowledge, which *does* have quality requirements, and also why <NAME> has said [Google Scholar is full of junk science](https://www.emeraldcityjournal.com/2014/11/google-scholar-is-filled-with-junk-science/). What's likely is that **the publisher didn't provide Google Scholar with what it needs**. Although Google Scholar has no quality requirements, it *does* have certain technical requirements before its bots can even crawl the journal's website. A key requirement is that [Google users must see at least the complete abstract or the first full page](https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/publishers.html#policies). There are other technical requirements, [as can be seen on this page](https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html#overview). Since it's not hard to get indexed by Google Scholar, it is something that authors should demand from publishers, and if the publisher does not do this, authors should approach another publisher. However since you can't retract the article, the next best thing to do is to host it on your institutional website (see the "Individual Authors" section in the last link for more details). If you don't have a website, you can also hand the article to your university repository. There's probably nothing you can do to get indexed by Web of Science however, other than hope the journal someday gets indexed by SCI. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/22
1,295
5,866
<issue_start>username_0: My co-authors and myself have recently submitted an article (in the wider field of economics) to a journal and we now wish to submit the same article to a conference while the article is still under review at the journal. There will be no such thing as published conference proceedings and as far as I can tell not even a working paper version of the article will be made available online. **Is there anything unethical about doing so, i.e. submitting an article to a conference while it is under review for a journal?** I am asking since for a journal submission one would write in the cover letter something along *We confirm that the article has not been published or is under review elsewhere.* Now I am drafting the cover email to the conference submission and I was wondering whether I should include a similar phrase and if so what to write? **For a conference submission, should (must/can) I indicate that the submitted article is currently under review in a journal, or would I not want to write any such sentence?** Currently I would not, since as long as the article has not been accepted it is still work-in-progress and as such perfect to submit at a conference (economics conferences also tend to attract fairly advanced-stage papers in my perception). I have asked my co-authors, who are experienced and established professors in the field, on the first question and they both saw no problem. I am asking for a second opinion to calm my mind since I am likely over-thinking the issue and unsure how to address it. I have found one related question: [Simultaneous submission short version to conference and full version to journal](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/83842/49583) but in that field it is common to have a conference paper first, often followed by a journal article. As I stressed above, the difference here is that there is no conference publication as well as the very different fields. [Submitting journal version of an article while conference version is still in review](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/81866/49583) asks about the other way round, submitting to a journal while the conference article is still under review. Here is different in that the article submitted is the same, there is no conference publication and the order is the other way round.<issue_comment>username_1: **In economics** it is entirely normal to submit a paper to a conference while it is under review at a journal. I write as an experienced academic economist who has done this (and seen it done) many times over the past 15 years. So it is fine for you to submit to the conference. No disclaimer/declaration is necessary. The economics discipline has developed very permissive norms about this kind of thing out of necessity because acceptance rates at even mediocre journals are low (typically not much greater than 10%) and review times long. It's not unusual for a delay of 3 years to elapse between first submission to a journal and eventual acceptance at a (likely different) journal. Moreover, economics papers often take a long time to write and, as you correctly intuit, the most common practice is for economists to submit a paper to a conference only once a somewhat complete working paper is ready. If we were to insist on a strict sequencing of tasks then then result would be a decade-long cycle for a paper, whereas allowing overlap between writing, conference presentation, and submission allows work to be developed, circulated, and published somewhat more quickly. All that said, you might like to consider why it is that you are submitting your work to the conference. An important reason, of course, is to disseminate your ideas. But another key purpose of conferences is that they provide an opportunity to obtain feedback that can improve your work. This is especially valuable the first few times you present, when you will quickly get an idea of what the controversial assumptions in your paper are, and what people perceive as the main weaknesses. It is often helpful to delay journal submission until at least after you have presented the paper a couple of times so you can figure out what issues the referees are most likely to raise and address these in advance. Given that you probably have to wait 4-6 months to get a set of referee reports back from a journal, it is often much more efficient to first get feedback on the conference circuit. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm in public health. It is common for people to present papers that are under review or recently published (such is the case if the paper is accepted before the conference). Some conferences have policies forbidding submissions of abstracts of papers already published. However, it seems that in your case there may not be such a policy and the paper hasn't been published yet anyway. If there is no policy, I don't see the need to inform the conference about the paper status. Last January my colleague and I presented a paper that was also under review at a journal. We used the feedback to help with edits when we received a revise and resubmit.mit was later published. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Please note that some conferences may cause a major issue for your paper to be published in a journal. We had a paper in a conference on Economics and Social Development accepted and presented, however, the organisers of the conference published the paper without our consent in their proceeding, even though we paid for presentation only to get feedback from a specific visitor to the conference and made it clear that we are not interested in publishing with them or their associated journals. It is like hijacking your work, exactly that. <http://www.esd-conference.com> This caused us to withdraw the paper from the journal we submitted to. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/22
546
2,318
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote a final exam in a course, in which the professor said that he would not test our memory and give all the needed formulae, so I didn't concentrate on memorizing them. Would it be appropriate to politely send the professor an email with some feedback / opinion about this situation? And if this would be appropriate, what would be the best way to express this opinion as neutrally and politely as possible? So that the professor wouldn't think that I'm mad at him or something like that.<issue_comment>username_1: The personalities of professors vary wildly, so you may want to first consider if your professor would be open to feedback about the exam. Also, make sure that you aren't the only or one of a few students who made such mistakes. For instance, is it possible that you missed some content or communication about the exam? If you are on the same page as others, you have a stronger case. If you feel like giving feedback is beneficial, make sure that you express it constructively and professionally. Some professors may dismiss feedback that simply comes across as "This wasn't fair." For instance, explaining that "many students who studied were confused by some of the communication about how to approach the exam. Is it possible to have a review sheet provided for the next exam?" Or "I studied and followed instructions on the exam, but am confused about how I missed some things that were discussed before the exam. Can you help me understand where I went wrong or how to better prepare next time?" This is less confrontational and helps open a difficult dialogue. I hope this helps! Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: > > Would it be appropriate to politely send the professor an email with some feedback / opinion about this situation? > > > Sending *feedback* may be OK, but sending your *opinion*, on the other hand, may not be welcomed. (Well, it is not helpful you both you and the instructor and will almost surely read as a complaint…) As for most question that ask for "how to give feedback on…" the most important part of the answer is **Respect basic feedback rules.** Some of these are: Stick to facts, not opinions. Describe your experiences, but don't judge the other's behavior. Use "I" and "me" more than "you". Upvotes: 0
2017/04/22
3,024
12,757
<issue_start>username_0: > > I just earned a Ph.D in Mathematics, but there are no available postdoc opportunities for me. What should I do? > > > After four years, I have finally limped and hobbled to a Mathematics Ph.D while working full time at other places - and at the ripe age of 40 at that. It is my second attempt at earning a Ph.D, as my first attempt ended in failure due to poor life choices a decade ago. Now that I am finished with my Ph.D, I have discovered that I am more interested in research in general than I thought I would be. I am a realist - I probably have a middle of the pack dissertation at a school representing the middle of the pack in my discipline. However, as my writing developed, I found myself not really wanting to stop, and perhaps even do research in areas not related to my discipline. Applying to a postdoctoral position is the most logical route; however, my family is here in our midwestern city to stay, my *alma mater* is the only reachable university with postdoc opportunities, and I permanently burned bridges when I left the program the first time. On top of this, I am currently employed full-time at a private nonprofit nursing and pre-med company, and although the choices of courses to teach are far more limited than they were even when I taught at community college, my current employer is wonderful. To be very specific, given my history above, my Asperger's syndrome and my advancing age, I want to understand the best way to publish independently.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a good question but there may not be a good answer. Students who graduate from strong programs with multiple publications and strong letters of recommendation **still** have almost no choice about where they have to go to pursue a postdoc, and the same problem arises 2-3 years later for tenure-track positions (if they manage to get one). It does not sound like your family is OK with the amount of uncertainty that pursuing this path would require. For example, even if you were the strongest student graduating from Harvard, to pursue the postdoc-then-tenure-track course you and your wife would need to be OK with (1) moving next year (2) to a location you don't get to choose, then (3) moving three years later (4) to a permanent location you don't get to choose. (If you're lucky, you might get to decide between a couple options, but none might be where you'd want to live.) Hopefully you get tenure there, otherwise you'd (5) have to move again after six or seven years. My experience is with research positions, and the situation does become somewhat different as you move towards teaching-focused positions like small liberal arts colleges, or community colleges. But it still sounds like staying in your current position may be orders of magnitude better for you and your family than any other option. One thing that stands out about your post is that although it's clearly and cogently written, it is vague about the key point of *what you are looking for*. Do you want a job where you teach stronger students? or more advanced classes? A job that affords you time for research? or which evaluates you on it? Or do you just want to do research and publish? I would suggest taking the time to think about what exactly your goals are; hopefully some of them can be achieved without changing positions. --- As for publishing: the academic publishing industry in mathematics is not so hard to deal with. The difficult part is finding a problem to work on and proving a theorem! Once you do that, given that you have a PhD in math you should be able to look at papers on the arXiv to see the style in which math papers are written. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I strongly agree with everything in username_1's answer, and want to add to it a little bit. The market for postdoctoral and tenure-track jobs is, I'm sorry to say, extraordinarily difficult. In your own words, you "limped and hobbled" your way to a Ph.D. Unfortunately, even people who sail over the bar often have difficulties finding academic jobs. One piece of advice I would give to you is to attend conferences. There are plenty of conferences in a variety of mathematical disciplines, held all over the US and in many other places. These are almost always free to attend, assuming you can afford the travel costs. (And occasionally the conference organizers have grant funding to pay for those too.) At some, you can hear hour-long talks given by leading reseachers. Others have slots for 20-minute "contributed talks", and you can present your thesis research and listen to other talks given by junior researchers. Some conferences combine these formats. These are advertised on the web, so a bunch of Googling ought to turn up some conferences you might be interested in. The mechanics of publishing *per se* are actually simple. Once you've written a paper that is good enough to publish, you might e-mail a copy of your paper to someone whose work you cited and ask their advice on what venue to publish in. What is vastly more difficult is learning to write good papers. I second username_1's advice to browse [the arXiv](https://arxiv.org) and read papers in your area of mathematical interest. Finally, I hope this is not rude, but -- count your blessings. You say that you "currently work for an incredible employer and a great college". Not even all Ph.D.s who do find academic employment would say this about their employers. I would recommend looking for opportunities in your existing institution to expand the scope of what you teach. (Especially since, as you say, moving to a different city is not an option.) Perhaps get a sense of what there might be student demand for, and then speak with your chair or dean? You might not get to teach analysis or abstract algebra, but you might be able to expand the scope of what you're doing a little bit. Good luck! Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Depending on your desire to teach vs. do research you could look for a position in industry at a company which would allow you do research. Depending on the company there may or may not be restrictions on publishing. Many companies are quite supportive of publishing and conference participation. It doesn't sound like your reputation concern has to do with the actual quality of your work. That is all a commercial company is going to be concerned with. You might be surprised by the marketability of a Mathematics PhD in certain industries. I would start with large engineering and technology companies. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Congratulations on finishing! "The only school nearby that has postdocs will not hire me." Putting this together with your partner's unwillingness to relocate, if you want to do original research, you'll have to do it outside a postdoc. That is not necessarily a roadblock. You can work on your own with the help of a mentor, and you can collaborate. You can do both of these things remotely, in principle, with perhaps some visits. * Your advisor may be able to help you find a mentor. * Read papers you find interesting and start corresponding with authors. * Go to conferences and make connections. On the topic of teaching higher level courses, you can apply to teach at other schools without a postdoc and without publications. There's no guarantee you'll be hired, but your chances are better if you: * have outstanding references and student evaluations from your current employer * are willing to work as an adjunct, at least at the beginning * can show a commitment to community outreach, as well as to diversity * are willing to teach any course the department throws at you Here's a fun idea: sometimes there is a group of adventurous high school students who want a math club and need an outside advisor willing to work with them on more advanced math topics than what they might see in their high school classes. If you decide to work with such a group, it would probably be on a volunteer basis. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Maybe you are looking at the problem from the wrong end? As long as you don't have produced exceptional research during your phd (think Einstein in the patent office), graduated from a famous university, and are well connected and politically savvy, you can forget about a typical academic career. I don't know the actual numbers, but we are probably talking about 10% of phd students getting a postdoc position and then 10% of the postdocs getting a faculty position, it is probably even less. So better think about your strength! You have been working full-time, and honestly, I think this is a great plus. By design, people in academia tend to be pretty much disconnected from the 'real world', to the extend that it makes them difficult to employ. So ask yourself, what do you have that the usual graduate doesn't have? Another plus I see for you is that you have done a phd at the age of 40, and this while working somewhere else. You've shown strong dedication and commitment. I salute you for this! I am younger than you, and I don't think I would have the nerve to go through my phd again. While dedication and commitment won't get you into a faculty position in a big research university, there are other places where someone with your experience could have an advantage. I am thinking about community colleges, adult education or similar. You will have much more street cred than a younger graduate. You said that you made some bad life choices. Getting your phd you have clearly demonstrated that you could overcome them by yourself (and a phd in mathematics is no small achievement, everyone knows that). Whatever choices you made then, you now have an experience that other people don't have. Let's say (and I am just making up worst-case stuff, just to show that even something really bad could give you a valuable experience. I am in no way suggesting you had anything do to with drugs). Let's say you were heavily into drugs, smuggling, and spent 10 years in prison. Sounds really bad, but on the other hand, there will be very few people with that background *and* a deep understanding of mathematics. That could make you predestined for a job doing statistics in a related field. 10 years down the line, I could see you as a director of a health-related NGO doing research. Now as far as research goes, doing a phd only touches the surface of what doing research really means. Research is an extremely hard field, many researchers will never find anything important in their lives and their only contribution will be a bunch of papers that no one actually read. To be a successful researcher, you'll need to be a politician, a manager, a marketing specialist, a grant-writing specialist, a diversity specialist (grant applications are judged not only on their scientific merit, but frequently on adherence to the political agenda dujour). If you are not 100% confident that you can meet all of these requirements, or don't have an independent source of income if your plans fail, I would not risk it (personal opinion). On the other hand, a lot of research gets done in non-university settings. You have to understand that there is some kind of firewall between academia and the real world. Academics look down on industry, because they think that they are the smartest and best, and industry looks down on academia, because they are so out of touch with reality. Also, lives in industry and academia diverge, the academics don't want to be seen with the dumb industrialists, and the industrialists are embarrassed if the academics see their big houses and expensive cars. So just take into account that a lot of people in your academic circles will not be aware of many options outside of academia, even though many jobs will be just as challenging and interesting, maybe even more so. Mathematics plays a big role in many fields now, you just need to find the right place. Be careful mentioning the word research when you look for a job, better say something along the lines of 'you would like to use your knowledge of mathematics and your job experience to improve product quality' or similar. There are lots of research opportunities in quality control, signal processing, coding theory, electronic design automation (companies like Mentor Graphics), algorithms, machine learning. In many of these fields, most of the leading edge research is actually done outside of academia. Many of these companies will also allow you to work remotely. If publishing is important for you, a lot of companies will not have an issue with that (as long as it doesn't interfere with your main work), they might even like the publicity it gives them. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/23
502
1,896
<issue_start>username_0: I have completed my PhD 10 years ago, and back then I was not sure if it was ok with my home institution to have it in arxiv. I then realized it's fine and it would actually be good as my institution never cared to set up an open database of their own PhD theses. My question is: is there a way to post it on arxiv with the proper date, so that it shows on a search but it does not show among the most recent ones? EDIT: given the popularity of the question, would it make sense to allow the ability to backdate ONLY PhD theses? It seems like my experience is a shared one, and I can't imagine anybody in her/his own mind lying on when she/he got her/his PhD.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think so. The "proper date" for an eprint *is* the date you upload it to the arxiv. If the arxiv allowed people to back date their work (by up to ten years!), then it would at best confuse and at worst totally ruin the use of the arxiv to sort out chronology and claims of priority. So while I don't *know* that they don't allow this, I have never seen an example, and I *hope* that they don't. What you can do, of course, is to include in the comments that this is your thesis from 10 years ago. If you do that then everything seems clear. If you are worried that your thesis appearing on the feed/list of new papers will cause it to get more attention....wait, isn't that why you are posting it to the arxiv in the first place? Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Not that I know of, but you can contact the Arxiv people here: <https://arxiv.org/help/contact> (those are instructions and an email address, but do read the instructions as a courtesy.) and ask them to add the feature of having two separate dates - the date of upload/submission to ArXiv and the original date the work was published/appeared on. That's not a bad idea IMHO. Upvotes: 0
2017/04/23
1,502
6,266
<issue_start>username_0: **Background:** I did PhD in pure math, then postdoc in medical imaging for 2 years. Because of funding running out, I started a postdoc in France in mesh processing since last 6 months. I'm somewhat proficient in Matlab, which is the only language I'm comfortable in so far. I want to work in R&D of the image processing/computer vision industry. **Facts:** 1) It takes a solid 75 minutes each way from my house to my university, and initially we agreed on my showing up 3 times a week. However, sometimes I feel and am way more productive working from home. I tried to discuss this multiple times with my mentor, but he wouldn't listen: he says I've to come 3 times, since other team members might need me, which is NEVER the case, me being in my first year of mesh processing, even the PhD students probably know part of the subject better and I've never been asked a question. 2) My postdoc advisor knows from me that I'm looking for the above type of jobs in industry. Now, for industry purposes, I want to (and indeed started to) learn NumPy and Scikit-learn to perform machine learning. However, he's not familiar with these libraries, and wants me to look at a certain Matlab package he sent me to perform ML, and got offended because I didn't yet. Now, from talking to industry people in imaging/vision, I know Matlab is rarely used compared to Python. I tried to discuss this so that I could use Python to solve his problems, and being better it at the same time. He said "*Learn Python on your own time. Since you're not very strong in coding, I can't give you couple of weeks to learn a new language*". 3) My postdoc mentor has a specialty in mesh processing in computer graphics, and most of his papers are about mesh geometry. I get the feeling that he doesn't know machine learning(ML) very well. Now, for my future, and also for our project that involves ML, I want to learn certain algorithms from the scratch, so that it serves me the dual purpose of solving his problems and also strengthens my ML knowledge. He, on the other hand, wants to get fast results, and just wants me to use the above matlab package he sent me, because that's what HE is more comfortable in. 4) My postdoc is initially for a year only. So basically, I've to either find a job by the end, or get results so that I can renew my postdoc. I did give him some partial results in the first 6 months that didn't involve ML. Now, learning more ML (I know some ML) is taking time, and he's angry about it, accusing me of not progressing fast enough. So in essence I want to learn the ML algorithms I use from the scratch, but it's not HIS interest, so he'd not just support that. He also said he'd not renew my funding if I don't give him significantly more result. My mentor has a permanent position, where I don't. I thought postdoc mentors should somehow look after their mentees, but I feel he really doesn't care. Also his stubbornness of making me doing things his way really makes me helpless, and frustrated about my own future. He imposes his stubbornness, since he's not very good in Python, and that he doesn't know ML from scratch. I've tried to discuss these issues in person, but he literally blew me off. I'm confused what to do. I invite your opinion.<issue_comment>username_1: The way you describe your relationship, it sounds like manager and subordinate employee. Regardless of anything else - if that's the dynamic, it would not be surprising he expects you to follow his (effective) orders, and not very interested in promoting your independent future. I know that many research groups have this dynamic; so it's not as though it can be easily rectified in favor of something else. Still, that's not how a post-doc is supposed to be like - and that depends on him, but also on you. The way it's *supposed* to be (\*) is: * You're an independent researcher on your own right. Even when you're part of a group, you're supposed to have your own agenda regarding what you'd like to study. * The post-doctoral researcher position is not the same as a 'senior research assistant' or a 'research support engineer' position. In those, the researchers' needs and desires define what you occupy yourself with, almost solely. * As a post-doctoral research you should already have developed, or should now be developing, independent relationships with others in the research community, outside of your group, and the collaboration with them - direct, not just through your research group. * (the part you like) A senior researcher should help his post-docs with their personal development as researchers - but not in a close follow-my-lead-closely relationship as s/he might have his/her MsC/PhD candidates. So, he's not upholding his side of what's supposed to happen, but frankly - I believe you might not be, either, and what's more, it seems you had not clearly agreed beforehand on a reasonable modus operandi between you two; so you're expecting one thing to happen and he's expecting another. The bottom-line suggestion is to try to arrange to have a "state of our relationship and mutual-expections-alignment" talk with him that's independent of any specific single issue or grievance any of you might have. It's hard to make other concrete suggestion without information about your research group, your field, your departmental/university politics etc. (\*) - Again, some would argue that post-docs as plain subordinate grunts with a brain is a valid arrangement. I disagree. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You two are butting heads. As you will not be working with this person very long, you might want to gracefully give in on the bulk of these things. For example, you might consider trying some of the following ideas: * find ways to be able to be more productive when you're at the lab * make the commute more palatable (for example, use public transportation time to be productive or sleep, or if driving, listen to podcasts and call it "stress reduction time") * use some weekend time and some of your work-from-home time to work with Python * pick one ML algorithm to study at a time (weekend and work-from-home days), but use the library you were given in order to hit the productivity targets Upvotes: 2
2017/04/23
1,246
5,379
<issue_start>username_0: I visited a school for a tenure track position and the chair informed me that I am a finalist for that position. While, I still have interviews at other schools remaining, other candidates seem to have finished their interviews. The chair asked me whether I would take an offer before visiting other schools but they did not give me an offer yet. Is this common? Does the fact that other applicants have finished interviews affect the school's decisions?<issue_comment>username_1: Unfortunately there is no shared deadline with these sorts of employment offers, so gamesmanship, departmental deadlines, and immediate teaching need combine together to make timing of interviews and offers almost universally inconvenient and stressful. Different tiers of university also know very well what sort of tier they are on, and they regularly strategically time their offer so it becomes a "one in the hand is worth two in the bush" style conundrum for candidates. I don't think I've talked with anyone who's gone through the process and never had a schedule issue of this sort. So, let's unpack this a little and consider the options. The chair is asking you if you'd be willing to take the offer without visiting the other schools is a feeler for how you view this particular position. Is this job a top choice for you, or just a backup plan that you'll take if nothing else comes through? And if something else does come through, will you drop them in a flash? There's a good chance that they are seriously considering who would actually take the offer now and give up searching, so they know they'll actually get them on-board. No one wants to fail a search, because their work loads will increase or stay high because no one new has come on board, and they'll have to do this whole terrible process over again next year. It wouldn't be unusual for a department to have already failed a search last year, and this can happen multiple years in a row, so they may be really trying hard to avoid it again - but it's hard to say if this is the case here. So, how do you answer? You should probably reiterate your interest in the position and the school, and that you'd be open to discussing the matter. This is non-committal, and probably is as diplomatic as I can imagine you can be. The alternative of saying, "I'd be very interested in discussing an offer with you, but I couldn't possibly accept without completing some other interviews" could result in them giving you an offer anyway, and they may or may not be willing to give you more than 1-2 weeks to decide...but they might also just not give you an offer. They could even still give you an offer, but only if the other person(s) they give exploding offers to end up dropping out on them, and you become a last resort. If you come right out and say "yes, I would absolutely be willing to respond to the offer without waiting", you'll kind of need to do that, because the offer will likely be only good for a week or so. I suppose you could backpedal and come up with an excuse as to why you can't respond in this deadline and ask for an extension, but if they've been so upfront about being unwilling to wait they might simply refuse. They can say, "You can roll the dice and hope you get other offers, and we understand, but we are offering this position for certain right now, and our needs prohibit us from waiting longer as we must fill this position." Then you'll just have to weigh the risk vs the reward. As with all negotiations, it's usually a game of power dynamics. Are you willing to walk away from the deal empty-handed? If so, then the ball is in your court and you can just be upfront, phantom offer notwithstanding, and they either give you an offer with a long deadline or they don't. If you aren't in that position of comfort (you don't have a backup plan you are willing to fall back to), then that greatly limits your ability to negotiate successfully and you just have to do what you can. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: After serving and chairing search committees, I agree with Brian that gamesmanship is often central to the faculty search process. The other candidates for School A may have finished interviewing (assuming that you are correct - how do you know the other candidates' schedules?) but now School A has to make the offer to the candidate they like best AND will say yes. So, they are putting pressure on you. Personally, I feel like the response can be simple. Your question implies that the chair is telling you that you're probably going to get an offer, but do not have one in hand. So, you can tell the chair, "I would be willing to cancel other interviews for an offer IF it's the right offer. If you draft an offer, I will look at it and decide if I can accept it without pursuing other opportunities." This is VERY important, because you legally do not have an offer until they send you one in black and white. Once you have an offer, if you are satisfied with it and like the department, then it may be easy to make the decision. In my first academic position, I was told that an offer would be sent to me and there was an administrative hold up...for two weeks or more (this was several years ago). I called the chair and told him that I was going to go to other interviews before I have their offer in hand. GOOD LUCK! Upvotes: 3
2017/04/23
873
3,755
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote a speculative paper, outlining an approach to make data analysis more efficient. I am a physicist and the idea is described in words and with a few schemes. I don't have the programming skills to show that the idea works. In terms of etiquette, would it be OK to publish the paper on arXiv?<issue_comment>username_1: I encountered a similar issue with my dissertation, where I had to develop and prove an algorithm. My advisor and department chair instructed me to *not* post the MATLAB demo code I had written and originally included as an appendix, out of fear that (a) it could be stolen (we're on the ProQuest online posting bandwagon for dissertations), or (b) that someone could implement it incorrectly, assume it doesn't work, and tag both me and my new *alma mater* for low-quality work. Instead, my graduate committee wanted me to shift focus on providing demonstrative proof that the program both halts (meaning, of course, that it takes a finite number of steps to respond after input) and properly completes its assigned task - in my case, through proof by induction on key loops. Though I know publishing is different than dissertation writing, I would assume the same standard may be in play here, unless the context of your problem itself takes focus off need for formal proof. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In general when is "I have a general interesting idea for solving problem X but don't have tools Y to determine if it really works" worth publishing? It depends on how important the advance would be, how big a step your paper takes relative to the part remaining, and how easy it would be for the remaining work to be done. I agree with Captain Emacs that you should not be using readers as your beta testers. Let me propose three categories: A) Not worth publishing: Is (a+b)^2 = a^2+b^2? Simple question, which could be resolved by actually doing the algebra. B) Probably not worth publishing without extra work/collaboration: Our mathematical model predicts cancer correlates with gene X. Potentially important result, but this is something a bioinformatics person would know or be able to find out easily - so why are you spending so much time writing this up without asking someone to check first? C) Worth publishing: "The Taniyama-Shimura conjecture, if true, implies Fermat's Last Theorem" (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribet%27s_theorem>). Linking two unsolved problems, or providing a potentially new attack on an old problem, can be a useful contribution even if it doesn't solve everything. I think you are probably in case B, because if the issue is just that you don't have many programming skills, you can either learn enough to implement your ideas or find someone to collaborate with. If you can't, this means your question is probably not well-posed enough to interest the broader audience of arXiv. I suspect this is the case, because your question is not too detailed "Data analysis" is a huge field -- you could be trying to speed up an algorithm for a known process (something where you could have a theoretical result -- but it shouldn't be too hard to implement to show you are right), or find a better way of extracting some detail from data (need to test on real-world data to make sure you are not fooling yourself), etc. Your question doesn't sound like you need super-specialized skills, or a giant investment of time to fill in the later details -- so you should try to do this before publishing. Otherwise, you run the risk of spending weeks writing up a draft to wait a month for someone to test your idea to find out that, if you asked the right person, they could have found out in ten minutes that it didn't work. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2017/04/23
903
4,040
<issue_start>username_0: It is a requirement of my PhD to publish a certain number of papers. And for the papers to count, they need to be available online. I have deadline in my PhD study. I have three papers accepted in one journal. It will take time to be online. I can access my papers through ResearchGate but couldn't find them in Google search. How I can find the articles in Google search from ResearchGate, without waiting for the journal publishing procedure in order to meet the requirements for my PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: It's not clear whether you are talking about normal Google or Google Scholar. Since both seem to be built form the same web crawl, the answer in both cases is: **Just wait. It will show up eventually. Be patient because it might take weeks or months.** Google's search result and Scholar's database is built from a [web crawler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_crawler) that slowly visits pages on the web. There are details on this on [Google Scholar's "Inclusion" documentation](https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html). Both Google and Google Scholar looks on ResearchGate and it will eventually find those papers. It likely won't make a difference but if makes you feel better, you can [submit the URL to be indexed by Google](https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/submit-url). Then you can at least be sure that Google knows about it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: While every university is different, the following answer assumes common sense: Whether an article is on ResearchGate or indexed by Google does not provide meaningful evidence that you have published an article. **When is a publication available online?** An article is considered to be available online when it is available from the publisher's website. The delay between acceptance and online publication varies between journals. Some journal will put an accepted unproofed version of the manuscript up almost immediately. Other journals wait until proofs have been completed. This is often a few weeks after acceptance. Other journals have no "online first" version and you have to wait until the manuscript has been allocated to an issue, which can take anywhere from months to even a year or more. For this reason, when evaluating a researcher or a PhD student, it often makes more sense to count publications once they have been accepted. This is especially true for PhD students. Now, for journals that make articles available online rapidly (e.g., less than a month after acceptance) then the difference between acceptance and online is minimal. However, where there is a major time lag, then it would be a stupid policy for a university to require a PhD student to have the publication actually published, as opposed to being accepted. So in summary: * If you've published your articles in a journal with a short lag between acceptance and online access, then you might just want to wait a few weeks. * If you've published your articles in a journal with a long lag, then you should talk to your university about providing other evidence of proof of manuscript acceptance (e.g., editor acceptance letters). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Each journal provides an estimated period before its available online. In my area, this is now as short as 4 weeks. Check your journal(s) for the lead time. It is likely in the author guidelines somewhere along with the stub detailing the statistics for the journal. It is unlikely that you will face any difficulty in its becoming online given the competitive nature of the industry (academic publishing) and access times being critical. What may happen is that because of embargo(s), sharing the documents may be logged/limited by the publisher to maximize his revenues. As Jerome mentions, it is unlikely being on RG / SSRN counts as being available online for your purposes. It may suffice for those needing to refer to your work in their own academic effort, which is why you should put it up on SSRN/Research Gate Upvotes: 0
2017/04/24
763
3,354
<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to do an internship in a theoretical physics area for a year before applying for PhD. My current masters' thesis advisor (who is a hardcore experimentalist) warned me that I might not actually learn anything new in a theoretical intern, and that I will only end up solving some textbook problems. I was wondering how plausible this is, and if it is a strong possibility, how I can make sure that there is a significant addition to my skillset during my intern in theory. Anyone? EDIT : This internship will NOT be a part of my M.Sc. I will be doing it to bolster my otherwise ordinary profile. I basically want to publish something or at least get a good recommendation letter before I apply for PhD.<issue_comment>username_1: Answering is an experimental physicist who had authored a few theoretical papers. I find the suggestion given to you incorrect (maybe voluntarily, as your MS advisor would like you to be his/her PhD student right away?). As a Master student, the level of work you will do is not limited much by your skills/knowledge, rather from your supervisor's wits and guidance. An excellent supervisor with a brilliant idea waiting to be executed can guide you to a very valuable research publication in three months or so. And of course you can be left in a corner with a textbook and generic instructions which will only leave you confused and isolated. It really depends on your supervisor and how much effort will you both put into it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I did an internship of a few months in theoretical physics in an excellent lab in Paris, France. The head of the group was a famous professor who made his name a long time ago by developing a method that is now widely used today. To some extent I would agree with your supervisor that you might end up solving textbook problems. This was the case for maybe 50% of my work, mostly because my background in the field was not strong enough. Had I arrived with better preparation, I would perhaps have had a chance to jump right to contributing to new work. At the same time, I don't think it was a waste of time at all. I learned and improved on a lot of basic skills such as reading literature, writing code and presenting my work in a report and oral presentation at the end. I think it depends on what you want to get out of the internship. If you are hunger to work on something where you can quickly churn out publications and apply your knowledge, perhaps theoretical physics is not the best option. However, gaining a solid foundation in a theoretical subject is likely to be highly useful whatever you end up doing. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: What is your reason for wanting to do so? If your PhD will be in theoretical physics, as I understand, then why not jump in immediately? If you would like to save some money before PhD, then I think this is a valid reason. EDIT: To answer the question per se, the best thing you can do is discuss with the internship advisor what you'll be doing before you commit. And, as others have pointed out, even solving textbook problems at this stage can really give you something (but some planning and discussion is needed for this to be sure as well). You can also try to gauge if it's likely to participate in a publication during that time. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/24
645
2,855
<issue_start>username_0: I work in engineering education in Canada. One of our biggest challenges is to instill the students with a desire to become "lifelong learners". This isn't just an academic ideal, either - we are required by our accrediting body to ensure that students learn to learn, and engage with learning throughout their life. This is notoriously difficult to do - how do you ensure that a student learned such things? We often teach students to set goals. However, I'm not convinced that goal setting is the right thing to do when the purpose is to continually, gradually improve. Goals are, by definition, attainable milestones. I feel that they are useful tools, especially in the short term, of course. I set goals for myself all the time. However, setting goals for the long term (as in, lifelong) is much more nebulous. How can I encourage my students to continually monitor their own progress in the long term, without being concerned about the "end result"?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is a very good question. Goal setting - as you mentioned - is a very useful tool to achieve milestones. The smaller the goals ("microgoals"), the more these follow the characteristics of a continuous growth curve. However, if I understand your question correctly, you might be looking more at something like "values" that you want to teach. If lifelong learning is part of the curriculum, you face the question how to evaluate the process (?) and maybe more meaningful, how to teach something that ends up as an understanding of a useful value in the arsenal of a modern-day student. I'd suggest, the best way to achieve this is to 1) lead by example and to 2) provide further examples. Examples should come from someone whose achievements can be traced back to them learning specific new skills throughout life without which they could not have achieved what we currently perceive as their main achievement. You should by now have a few examples in mind of people in your specific niche that would be examples for this. Talk about them and how their willingness to continually grow and learn enabled them to achieve what they did. Doesn't have to take long, but should stick in students' minds. Hope this helps! Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To be an effective lifelong learner, you need to set yourself goals that are relevant at the time. Your students can start to do that now. The goals they set for themselves need not remain static all their lives. Examples of goals for a particular point in time: * balance reading papers and meeting coursework deadlines; * skim five papers per month and read one paper per month more carefully; * ask an average of one question for every three talks attended. Do you see that some of these might disappear over time, or the numbers might change? Upvotes: 0
2017/04/24
673
2,948
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my masters thesis in computer science. I've heard that one should avoid writing "I". In cases where one describes what was done and it doesn't matter who did it, I understand why writing "I" should be avoided. I, however, wonder if it is ok in the following case: ``` In the following, it is assumed that the reader knows XYZ. In case the reader needs a refresher on any of those topics, I recommend ... ``` It is a subjective statement which is not necessary, but might help students who might in future read it. I should probably point out that a CS master thesis is expected to have about 80 pages, hence length-wise it doesn't really matter. It should be clear that it is subjective; if I changed it to the passive (it is recommended...) then it sounds as if there is a consensus in the community. Some people recommend writing "the author". It, however, sounds strange and it is absolutely clear that "I" is "the author". Hence I don't see an advantage in doing so except for beating automatic tools / grading sheets.<issue_comment>username_1: I think this is a very good question. Goal setting - as you mentioned - is a very useful tool to achieve milestones. The smaller the goals ("microgoals"), the more these follow the characteristics of a continuous growth curve. However, if I understand your question correctly, you might be looking more at something like "values" that you want to teach. If lifelong learning is part of the curriculum, you face the question how to evaluate the process (?) and maybe more meaningful, how to teach something that ends up as an understanding of a useful value in the arsenal of a modern-day student. I'd suggest, the best way to achieve this is to 1) lead by example and to 2) provide further examples. Examples should come from someone whose achievements can be traced back to them learning specific new skills throughout life without which they could not have achieved what we currently perceive as their main achievement. You should by now have a few examples in mind of people in your specific niche that would be examples for this. Talk about them and how their willingness to continually grow and learn enabled them to achieve what they did. Doesn't have to take long, but should stick in students' minds. Hope this helps! Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To be an effective lifelong learner, you need to set yourself goals that are relevant at the time. Your students can start to do that now. The goals they set for themselves need not remain static all their lives. Examples of goals for a particular point in time: * balance reading papers and meeting coursework deadlines; * skim five papers per month and read one paper per month more carefully; * ask an average of one question for every three talks attended. Do you see that some of these might disappear over time, or the numbers might change? Upvotes: 0
2017/04/24
1,375
5,914
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently in the process of applying for a PhD programme. I have sent off my application and it has been deemed satisfactory from an academic standpoint i.e. my degree transcript and CV. I am now only waiting for the awarding of a studentship (funding) from the college I have applied to. Last week, I received an e-mail from my potential supervisor inviting myself to have a tour of the college, visit their research group and to have lunch. I suppose the purpose of this invitation could be to: 1) Give my potential supervisor an opportunity to assess my feasibility to undertake a PhD under their supervision or 2) Give my potential supervisor an opportunity to persuade me to accept a PhD offer. Is it safe to assume that the decision regarding the awarding of funding from the college is all but guaranteed to be successful?<issue_comment>username_1: Both motivations are possible, but there is a third one that's more likely: To give you an opportunity to meet your prospective supervisor and your colleagues, to show you the campus, and so you get to know the town. This helps you both to make an informed decision and decreases the likelihood that you will regret your decision to become a PhD student at this university and bail after arrangements have already been made. If you feel insecure whether the lunch and campus tour is actually a job interview, you can just ask your prospective supervisor (in an email) whether you should prepare for the meeting. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No one can really know what the exact motive is of the professor. However, if he or she is willing to take time to meet with you (especially for lunch, which means the person is also investing money into your meeting), I imagine that the program is able and willing to provide you with support and he or she is assessing your fit to work together. Be aware that this could be something of an interview where he or she is assessing a few applicants to see which one is best suited for working on their project. Therefore, I urge that you to prepare for the lunch as you would any other type of academic interview (e.g. review some recent work of this faculty member, prepare questions ahead of time for him or her). When I applied to my PhD program years ago, one faculty member invited me to meet with her, but ultimately chose another applicant to work on her project. I received support from another faculty member to work on a different project, but the invitation to meet by the initial faculty member did not indicate a guarantee. Best of luck! Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Meeting with the group and having lunch (and perhaps drinks) is a standard part of an academic interview. If and when you'll be looking for a postdoc, this will also include you giving a talk. As any interview, it is a chance for both you and your potential supervisor to understand if you wish to work together (and also to present yourselves in a good way). The fact that they invite you means that you're shortlisted for something (maybe, for the funding that this person has), but there may be other shortlisted candidates as well. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it would be presumptuous/foolhardy on our part to impute such motives on the prof. The Prof is just following standard process in inviting you to a lunch and the courtesy will be extended to all candidates. It is likely part of the process to show the candidates that when it comes to comparing apples to apples, this university is well provided and would not be a pushover for your graces. Additionally it might be part of the process to shower you with illusions of illustrious tradition, better than brand advertised, or that their professor is personally the best to get along with and were you good enough with him (without it being evaluative). He may be allowed to make a few personal judgements about you more in the nature of assumptive inferences, but then he should probably leave that for the interview/second interview. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Both. Or rather, if (1) works out, then (2), plus (1.5): to see if you get along professionally. The professor wants to have someone in their lab who is a good fit and has a good chance of success in the lab. Having lunch with you and giving you a chance to meet your potential future colleagues is an opportunity for them to see how you would fit there, as well as for you to see how you would fit there. Essentially, this is a job interview, so prepare appropriately (though I wouldn't expect silly job interview questions: just a conversation about shared research interests - after all, that's why you are applying to grad school in the first place!). In this situation, you should be both demonstrating your suitability for the position and evaluating whether the position is a good fit for *you*. In other words, your goals should be exactly the same as the professor's. As a side note, if you are someone who experiences a bit of "imposter syndrome" or just get particularly nervous in situations like this, it is definitely okay to internalize that this professor is willing to take some time for you and that is a positive thing, if that makes you feel better and less nervous. What you should not do is take this meeting as a sign that you are "in" and not be prepared to make a good impression. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Your potential supervisor is not hiring a CV or an application form: he's hiring an actual person. Believe it or not, research in general and graduate work in particular is usually done by *humans*, often interacting with other humans. If you constantly toy with your cell phone during your visit, you can bet you will never receive an offer of admission. Pro tip: better start reading the latest papers of this research lab. And don't forget them home when you visit. Upvotes: 3
2017/04/25
866
3,849
<issue_start>username_0: I have written two papers, let's say X and Y, about a concept, let's say A. X is about other overview of concept A and how it can be improved in general. Then I have another paper i.e. Y discusses about relationship of A with reference to one particular topic. As both papers are literature driven papers (can be called as literature reviews) and the focuses are different. However there are some sections which are overlapping with each other. Therefore I have given similar examples and used many common references. My question is, is it a case of plagiarism ? I have written both papers separately and not copied text of one into other, rather sometimes the sense is same. I would appreciate your thinking and advices in this regards whether it can be counted as a case of plagiarism ? Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: As you have stated, your papers have *similarities* and that the text is written separately and not copied, then no, this is not plagiarism (and is unlikely to be seen as such). Using the same references is fine and necessary for similar concepts. It also sounds like the context between the two papers are distinct, this should ensure that the two papers are written differently. Make sure you re-read and compare them to ensure that they are sufficiently different, which you sound like you have already done (and possibly ask a colleague to compare them). If possible and relevant, you could have one of your papers cite the other. There are many guides about plagiarism and what to check for online, for example, this one from the [University of Western Australia](http://www.student.uwa.edu.au/learning/studysmarter/getsmart/plagiarism). Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: @OrangeDog mentioned in a comment above the concept of self-plagiarism. I have definitely been in a position in a program committee where a paper was rejected because it had large parts completely in common with another paper without giving appropriate context. I think @Saturnus is on the mark with the comment that it doesn't matter if they cover the same material if they are written differently rather than copied, but only up to a point. It also matters what the content is. Literature reviews with common references make perfect sense; I think in the example provided here, **you** ought to be in the clear. But I wanted to respond in order to provide a somewhat more **general** answer. If someone wrote a paper about project X, and they had an extensive introduction and a section with a couple of pages about use cases, say, and then they wrote a new paper about X, there are a couple of cases: * Is the new paper an *extension* of the earlier paper, for instance a conference-length paper going beyond an earlier workshop-length paper, or a journal version of a workshop or conference paper? Then it's fine to include earlier content verbatim, with a comment (usually a footnote to the title) that the paper is an extended version of the workshop paper. *Aside: this really complicates double-blind reviewing, as people typically omit the self-referential footnote, and reviewers have to guess.* * Is the new paper substantially different, even if some content is the same? Small amounts of overlapping content, in my experience, are OK, but if it's not quoted or referenced as coming from the earlier material, it may be a red flag if too much. Think about what automated plagiarism detectors would flag. Finally, beware of the "least publishable unit". Whether the content is literally identical (and self-plagiarism) or merely semantically identical, you want to be sure enough is different. Again, in the description provided here, they sound different enough. I'm referring to others who may come across this in the future, wondering about reuse across papers.... Upvotes: 3
2017/04/25
1,146
4,955
<issue_start>username_0: I have been invited to interview for a lecturer position (AFAIK, equivalent to assistant professor elsewhere) in the UK, after being pre-selected following a Skype interview. This means that the department is probably reasonably interested in me as a prospective hire. I have been a postdoc for 3.5 years now, and this is my first interview at this level. I also do not have much experience with interviews in general, since I got my PhD position at the first try, and then was *offered* my postdoc position (I did not interview for it). In the middle I had two other interviews for postdocs that I didn't get, one of which went badly on my part. The other one went well but the position was extremely competitive (1% chance) which makes drawing conclusions difficult. So I would like to have some pointers from academics who are familiar with the UK system on what to expect and how to best prepare for the interview. The email they sent me asked me to deliver a 30-minute presentation on "your research, enterprise and teaching aspirations at [univeristy name], with the first 5 minutes directed at an Undergraduate audience". Then, there will be a panel interview, followed by tour of the department and lunch. I should add this position puts more emphasis on research than teaching (externally funded). Specifically, I'm interested in: * What to focus on during the presentation, e.g., what is a good balance of my past/present research versus future plans * Should I link the undergradute part to my research topics? * What kind of content the panel is expecting from me: "research, enterprise and teaching aspirations" sounds a bit vague (perhaps that's intentional?) * What to expect from the panel interview: technical questions, career plans, ...? --- **Update:** I had the interview, which I think went reasonably well. I found the advice given by the accepted answer to be quite valuable in the end. Things that came up were for example 1) subjects that I can contribute to the teaching portfolio of the department which are not currently taught, 2) what kind of funding I am going to secure to do research, 3) how my research ties in with what current members of the department are researching, 4) why I chose this university/department, 5) some more technical/specific questions about the research project attached to the position (as I said this position is externally funded). Things that did not come up were salary or REF. --- **Update2:** I was offered the position. Unfortunately (or maybe not) I could not accept it because of a mixture of personal and professional reasons.<issue_comment>username_1: This is all pretty standard practise for UK lectureships. They are basically testing your skills that will be required in the position. In the presentation they will want to see a demonstration that you can communicate your own specialism to both an undergraduate audience (as in teaching class) and your research peers (like for a conference). They want to know that you understand how research is done and where the money comes from (knowledge of funding sources), and some assurance that you demonstrate the basic skills to communicate and cooperate with others already in the department to achieve that goal. They will also want some indication that you have done some background intelligence to discover their particular departmental specialisms and how your skills will fit in their niche. You should at least have read the pages on their web site! The presentation is likely to be done in a "public" venue with most staff and PhD's invited, who will also ask you questions at the end, just as if it was a research paper. The interview will be behind closed door with the panel, often with senior staff such as Deans and HR who will ask questions that verify things from your CV/Resume. They will find out about your past employment, measure your level of experience, salary expectation plans for career development and so on. They would want to know how long you planned to stay with them to know if their investment in you was returned. They would want to know that you were self assured and reliant and not dependant on your previous supervisors, but conversely not a loner who could not collaborate with the existing and future teams. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A very UK specific thing is the [REF](http://www.ref.ac.uk/). It is an *exercise* that happens every 6 years or so. Every university in the UK obsesses over it. While the rules/targets keep changing, it has consistently stressed *quality* over quantity. The last REF only looked at your top 4 outputs. What hiring committee was to know is what would your previous REF submission have looked like and what your submission for the next REF will be. Be prepared to answer what your top 4 publications are from 2008-2014 and your top 4 from 2015 forward and future publishing plans are. Upvotes: 3
2017/04/25
777
3,648
<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if there is a difference between the lit review of a dissertation and that of a journal article. I tend to think that a dissertation will contain more extensive background information, meaning that part of the challenge is showing that you know all if the information and can communicate it in a coherent way to support new research. Are there differences between the literature review of a dissertation and article? What is the purpose of each (in terms of the rhetorical structure and any graduation requirements)?<issue_comment>username_1: The review section in an article is much shorter and much more stringent for two reasons. First, the lit review in an article situates your own work within the existing body of literature. It explains the research puzzle from a theoretical angle, shows why your paper is needed and what exactly your contribution to the existing knowledge consist in. It may also introduce the theoretical concepts that you draw on (to the extent that this is not a separate section). The review section in a dissertation does all this as well, but it also serves the purpose of demonstrating to your supervisors and committee that you are aware of and understand the relevant science. This includes literature that is more tangential to your actual contribution. By contrast, an article is about your contribution, not about your proficiency. Second, you have *much* less space in an article to go off on any tangent. Thus you have to restrict yourself to the narrow literature to which you are directly contributing and on which your work builds. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I won't repeat the points raised in @username_1's excellent answer, but I will add one more point. Whereas the lit review section of a journal article must be very short and squarely focused on the topic of the article, a dissertation lit review chapter has the space to explore much further. A doctoral student could do the minimum required, which is to demonstrate knowledge of the bodies of research related to the dissertation topic, but I recommend to take the opportunity to write a lit review chapter that is sufficiently extensive and self-contained to be published as a standalone lit review journal article after completion of the dissertation. The main difference is that the student should be conscious not just of their own dissertation topic, but of the problems that practitioners have faced and that scholars have tried to tackle in conducting research in that area. The chapter should be rhetorically framed such as to prove that the topic of the dissertation is a question that is important and yet insufficiently researched, hence the rest of the dissertation will meet the need that the lit review chapter has demonstrated. However, to be publishable as a standalone lit review journal article, the dissertation lit review chapter cannot depend on the rest of the dissertation to complete it. It should identify a wide range of under-researched challenges and even present a broader research agenda with a series of suggested directions for future research (of which the specific dissertation topic is just one), with evidence of the importance of each direction. This might sound like a lot of work, but, in fact, a publishable dissertation lit review chapter is not that much more work than a non-publishable one, since both require considerable effort anyways. I think it's worth the little bit of extra work in framing the chapter to make sure that it could be published on its own afterwards as an extra article from the dissertation. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/25
2,780
11,993
<issue_start>username_0: In teaching university level Computer Science, I find many students struggling because they lack basic problem solving skills. Having them do more practice problems does not help as they get stuck at those or somehow hack together a solution to some problems but cannot generalize to other problems. Walking them through some solutions does not help as they might understand that solution but are again unable to transfer that to another problem. I thought math competence would ensure logical thinking and hence problem solving but I have seen enough counterexamples by now. The conclusion I seem to be getting to is one that I do not like: problem solving is an innate skill - it cannot be taught. How have others dealt with this problem?<issue_comment>username_1: I speak from experience teaching (and doing) mathematics, and supervising research students for some decades. First, as with nearly anything, of course there can be some degree of innate interest+capacity... What I have observed is that ... seemingly inevitably... academic environments inadvertently train *most* students to worry as much about conformity to the teacher's expectations as they do about the subject itself. This tends to cause critical thinking to wither, and the whole thing spirals downward. Also, by this point it is *really* not clear to me that mathematical competence is strongly related to logical thinking, and, further, I don't think problem-solving facility is much related to logical thinking (of the highly linearized sort that mathematics is often caricaturized into). If anything, the standard mathematics style seems to me to not only squelch the kind of experimental, no-rules thinking that (genuine/serious) problem-solving requires, but to strongly disavow that experimentation is a legitimate methodology. And, indeed, in many contexts, exams and such are structured with time limitations so that experimentation is infeasible. Other traits can be rewarded in timed exams, but not experimentation, and, I think, therefore, not problem-solving (unless of a fairly stylized sort). To draw students into a better problem-solving attitude I think requires more iteration than most courses have time for. That is, a substantially dialected/Socratic process, in which weak solutions' weaknesses are illustrated by just-slightly-hard problems that thwart the weak approach. Repeat and repeat. But this takes a lot of time, since the psychological processing of such meta-issues is not "logical", but something subtler, from what I have seen. Changing one's viewpoint apparently cannot happen overnight. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to content knowledge students need exposure to a process for problem solving such as the following. 1. Define the problem-it's amazing how often students cannot articulate what the issue is. 2. Develop a criteria for the solution-this is not about creating an answer but for developing a set of characteristics the answer should possess. Often the teacher provides this in the assignment requirements 3. Generate potential solutions-don't judge them just make them. This is brainstorming. 4. Judge each solution according to the criteria in step 2-if a solution does not meet the standard it's removed. 5. Select the most appropriate response. This process works in most disciplines and is particular useful for situations that have multiple approaches. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Your conjecture, that problem solving is innate and cannot be taught, does not hold water. It does come more easily to some people than to others, but problem solving skills can be developed in all students. Here are some things the instructor can and should do to help this happen: 1. The instructor should structure things very clearly, and train students to go through a sequence of steps *despite the anxiety they may feel*. 2. *Allow sufficient time*. If you pose a warm-up problem at the beginning of class that you think will take three minutes, and at the three-minute point 20%, or even 50%, of the class is finished, you didn't give it enough time. 3. Show worked examples, explaining how you got from Point A to Point B. 4. Show the students how to recognize certain patterns. (So as to reduce the problem down to one they've already solved.) 5. Be clear about what, if anything, needs to be memorized. 6. Check each student's mastery of the basic procedures and understanding of the material that has been taught. Any vagueness in the student on the basics will create stumbling blocks that will interfere with problem solving. 7. Assign regular practice problems for doing at home. 8. Model positive self-talk. Exactly what the sequence of steps will look like depends on the type of problem to be solved. **Example 1**. Factoring a quadratic expression. Your sequence could be: (a) Check if every term in the expression is a multiple of the same thing (consider both letters and numbers). (b) Check if it's one of the special cases (perfect square, difference of two squares). (You have to get students very comfortable recognizing these special cases by introducing them early in the course, and coming back to them plenty of times, in different guises, and you need to make sure students are *seeing the pattern*.) (c) Analyze the signs to decide if you need two factors with a positive sign or two different signs. (d) Write down the various possible factorizations of the first and third coefficients. (e) Try out some combinations. When you have something that you think will work, put in the signs (positive? negative?) and then multiply to see if it's working. (f) If you get stuck, write a table of values (x, y) and draw a rough graph. See if you can discover, by looking at the graph you drew, where the curve crosses the *x*-axis. If necessary, fall back on polynomial division to see if your guess works, and to find the other factor. **Example 2**. Coding or developing an algorithm. (a) Sometimes it's helpful to draw a rough diagram showing input and output. Starting out with a drawing can be quite freeing. (b) Try out a particular input and make sure you know what needs to happen to it in order to yield the desired result. (c) Write down some processing steps. It's okay if it's in English initially. (d) Try out your algorithm or code on some input data. If that seems to work, try some slightly odder input data. Adjust the procedure if necessary. (e) Reread the problem to make sure you didn't misunderstand something. **Example 3**. Word problem. This has some similarities with the other examples; rough sketches can be particularly helpful here. In addition to ideas from above: At the end, check the units, comparing the problem statement against your solution. **Example 4**. Writing a proof. Break up the problem into smaller parts if possible. Write down what the general goals are, i.e. what you need to prove. The beginning proof writer would do well to write down, at each step, what needs to be shown. In the beginning, verbosity can sometimes help maintain focus. If appropriate, draw pictures, try cranking out the results for some simple input values, and then with more complex input values. If the student gets stuck, s/he should be trained to write down all the facts given in the problem, and any possibly relevant theorems that have been learned so far. Don't be afraid to jump temporarily to an intermediate step and, for the time being, assume we can show a certain result that will help us get to the end goal. Beginning proof writers can benefit greatly from using a two-column format, where for each and every assertion listed in the left-hand column, some justification must be written down in the right-hand column. At the end, reread the problem. **General comment**: In the U.S., the key places where students are typically expected to make a quantum leap in problem solving: * two-step word problems (usually first assigned in 4th grade of elementary school -- example: "The area of a rectangular doghouse floor is 15 square feet; the length of the floor is five feet; find the perimeter of the floor of the doghouse" found at <https://www.engageny.org/resource/released-2016-3-8-ela-and-mathematics-state-test-questions>) * geometry (usually taken in 8th, 9th or 10th grade of secondary school) * linear algebra (STEM students usually take this in approximately the sophomore year of college) For sociological concerns about students' general difficulties with problem solving, it can be helpful to identify at what points in the educational system the quantum leaps are expected to occur. When working with a particular student, it can be helpful to identify at what point his or her difficulties began. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I too have some experience teaching problem solving both at the university level and to military officers. Here are just a few of my thoughts... Problem solving can be viewed as formal i.e. using a specific process in a bounded reality scenario, using only a specified number of factors and seeking to find the optimal solution. Contrasted against the formal approach, is the naturalistic approach such as recognition primed decision making that seeks a workable but not necessarily optimal solution. The formal approach is cumbersome and often times to slow for practical application in real world environments. I generally teach a naturalistic approach using the following guiding steps: 1. Define the problem, what are you trying to decide or solve? 2. Define your terms, people from different field do not use terms in the same way e.g. “attitude” means one thing to psychologist and something different to an aeronautical engineer. 3. Consider all your facts. Do you have any constraints = things you must do, and any limitations = things you cannot do. 4. Consider any assumptions, assumptions must be valid, that is they are based on a fact, and necessary, that is you must make the assumption to complete a line of reasoning. 5. Determine any screening criteria; is there anything that automatically eliminates a particular solution or type of solution? 6. Brainstorm initial solutions. If students get stuck coming up with solutions I have them consider an alternative viewpoint i.e. what would you NOT do... this can assist in jump starting their thought process. I also remind them to avoid “assuming” a problem away. I have found that students often make an assumption(s) without being aware they made one. Finally, consider second and third order effects. 7. Select best usable solution. Although this is presented as a stepwise process it is fairly easy to remember. I focus on the first four steps because students typically want to just get to the answer and fail to really define the issue/problem and associated fact and assumptions. Note that this approach does not attempt any mathematical pair-wise comparisons among competing solutions. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I have struggled with teaching problem solving too, and gave a top-down approach a chance. That's the technique that has best worked for me, so I started teaching it about 15 years ago to my engineering students, and I honestly feel they have improved at it. I made an online course about it on udemy in 2016, and recently wrote a book about it ([The Top-Down Approach to Problem Solving](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B09HN1S153)). The technique is suitable for any type of problem. It's a generic algorithm: 1. Understand the problem. 2. Decompose the problem into a few subproblems. 3. Solve each subproblem the same way. 4. Return each solution to its parent problem. Yeap, it's a depth-first search algorithm. In the book, we go through a bootcamp of problems solved with this method for the reader to get a hang of it. It has problems in many areas: Electric circuits, mechanics, time and speed, probability, calculus, programming, and so on. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/26
1,313
5,984
<issue_start>username_0: When experiments are performed and reported in an academic article, I learned that reproducibility is important. I am implementing a system where I stand between the choices to use GPU acceleration to perform certain calculations, where reproducibility **can not** be guaranteed, or to perform the calculations on the CPU, whereupon the calculations are **exactly the same**. The problem with using the CPU is that it is much much slower. However, it seems that the calculations on the GPU are about the same at each run. I have the perception that researchers sometimes have to choose between qualitative or quantitative measurements. This may seem obvious to experienced researchers, but what I am asking is if a possible solution would be to perform a number of measurements on the GPU that provide estimates, and then calculate an average of the results? Is this "scientifically accepted", although calculations depend to some extent on randomness? I should add that the results are only going to be part of a project at bachelor level, but I'm also interested in how it works in "real life".<issue_comment>username_1: It's probably best to answer a generalised form of your question first before getting to specifics. --- Reproducibility is a tricky issue in applied Computer Science but the principles are the same. The first thing you need to consider is what, precisely, the results of your experiment depends on: * Does it depend on hardware? (e.g., performance experiments) * Does it depend on data? * Does it depend on software? (e.g., an implementation of an algorithm) * Does it depend on configurations? (e.g., amount of memory set) * ... For whatever your experiment depends on, in an ideal case, reproducibility should make those materials available to third parties, either through links from the paper, or as details in the paper itself. However, hardware in particular is often a tricky issue in that you're probably not going to make the machine you ran the experiments on available. For this, it is typical to try use conventional hardware insofar as possible and to provide details in the paper. And sometimes there are practical obstables for even sharing data or software, such as commerical interests, patents, licencing of the software used, and so forth. --- In terms of reproducing your results, another aspect to consider is the stability of those results. When someone reruns the experiments, you would like them to see the same (or "*negligibly different*") results as you published. This means that, for example, if your results vary in each run, you should publish some bound or confidence interval on each run to give an idea of the distribution of results over each run, or you should take a measure like the average of multiple runs to ensure a stable enough result from which to draw stable conclusions. --- **However**, what does "*negligibly different*" mean? Well while results should be "as reproducible as possible" (one will never get the exact same runtimes, for example, in a performance experiment), what is more important to the scientific method is that *conclusions* are reproducible. For example, if a bunch of doctors produce a study of 1000 patients showing a significant and strong correlation between eating popcorn and cancer, it is not necessary that the details of the study be reproducible but rather it is even preferable that the correlation be reproducible (and perhaps strengthened in a further study to look for causation by isolating the bad part of the popcorn and injecting it into some unfortunate mice or something). So if you have general conclusions, then you might want to think about how reproducible they would be on different hardware, on different data, on different software, with different configurations, etc. If you don't know how the results would change when a particular variable changes, then you need to include that variable in your conclusion. That is to say, if you don't know how the result would change for different data, for example, then all you can conclude about is the data you've experimented with and maybe propose a stronger result. --- Of course, almost all applied CS papers I've seen (including my own) don't stick to these rules because peer-reviewers don't hold them to such standards, other than in the most blatant of cases. And it is exceptionally difficult to account for all variables in a thorough conclusion since in applied CS there's so much to take into account, particularly for performance: the machine(s), the programming language(s), the compiler(s), how good the programmer was, possible bugs, the data, other things running in the background, caching, ... hence reviewers tend to be a little more relaxed (perhaps sometimes too relaxed). --- **Summary:** Publish both results if you think they are interesting. Publish as much material as you can to allow the results to be reproduced. If you're worried that the GPU results are too variable in each run to be reproduced, take the average of multiple runs to get a more stable result, or provide an estimated upper and lower bound, or something to characterise the variance. But all of that is just the icing on the cake. The real goal of reproducibility is to be able to reproduce *conclusions*. Be careful to craft conclusions that do not overgeneralise the data they are drawn from. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm no computer scientist. But it seems to me that you have two methods, Method A is fast but has some random error. Method B is slower but more (totally?) accurate. One approach, then, would be to determine what level of error is acceptable in your outputs, run a small experiment with both, and look at the differences between the results of each to find the level of error that is present in method A. If the level of error that you find is less than that which you decided was acceptable, then you can go with A for the speed. Upvotes: 0
2017/04/26
2,274
6,478
<issue_start>username_0: A smart researcher is using a reference manager (zotero, endnote) for citing papers. To import papers into the reference manager is a tedious task. Is there a web based tool that could automate some of it. Consider a block of text with references below (emailed as free text by a colleague) and the tool would convert it into a list of PubMed IDs or DOIs. ``` • <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>. Buprenorphine/Naloxone and Methadone Effects on Laboratory Indices of Liver Health: A Randomized Trial. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2013;128(1-2):71-76. • Woody GE, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>. Extended vs. Short-Term Buprenorphine-Naloxone for Treatment of Opioid-Addicted Youth: A Randomized Trial. JAMA 2008;300(17):2003-2011. • Wu LT, Pan JJ, Blazer DG, et al. Using a latent variable approach to inform gender and racial/ethnic differences in cocaine dependence: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study. J Subst Abuse Treat 2010; 38(Suppl. 1): S70–79. • Wu LT, Blazer DG, Patkar AA, et al. Heterogeneity of stimulant dependence: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study. Am J Addict 2009; 18(3): 206–18. • Wu LT, Blazer DG, Stitzer ML, Patkar AA, Blaine JD. Infrequent illicit methadone use among stimulant-using patients in methadone maintenance treatment programs: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study. Am J Addict 2008; 17(4): 304–11. • Wu LT, Pan JJ, Blazer DG, et al. The construct and measurement equivalence of cocaine and opioid dependences: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study. Drug Alcohol Depend 2009; 103(3): 114–23. • Wu LT, Blazer DG, Woody GE, et al. Alcohol and drug dependence symptom items as brief screeners for substance use disorders: Results from the Clinical Trials Network. J Psychiatr Res 2012; 46(3): 360–69. ``` Output would be: ``` PMID:22921476 PMID:18984887 ... ```<issue_comment>username_1: You could use CrossRef **Go to this link:** **Paste the references into the box and supply an email:** If you want PubMed IDs then click the box: [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/goPh0.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/goPh0.png) You'll get results like this: [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7yACc.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7yACc.png) You could then do some text manipulation to extract the doi or PMID. Note: the tool requires to register your email. > > Enter the email address you registered for use of Crossref services. If you have >not registered your email address, request an account. [link to register] > > > Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_1: Another option is to use the `rcrossref` package in R. Here is a complete example that returns dois and PMIDs for the references you specify. It could readily be adapted to a different set of references. You probably just want to double check that it is returning accurate results. ``` # install.packages(rcrosref) library(rcrossref) # here is a simple example of extracting one ref ref <- " <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>D, Bruce RD, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>. Buprenorphine/Naloxone and Methadone Effects on Laboratory Indices of Liver Health: A Randomized Trial. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2013;128(1-2):71-76." results <- cr_works(query = ref, limit =1) # Save the references to a variable # I've used scan make sure you run the empty line after the last reference to # let the scan function know that all references have been imported refs <- scan(what = "character", sep = "\n") <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>D, Bruce RD, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>. Buprenorphine/Naloxone and Methadone Effects on Laboratory Indices of Liver Health: A Randomized Trial. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2013;128(1-2):71-76. Woody GE, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, Formar RF, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>. Extended vs. Short-Term Buprenorphine-Naloxone for Treatment of Opioid-Addicted Youth: A Randomized Trial. JAMA 2008;300(17):2003-2011. Wu LT, Pan JJ, Blazer DG, et al. Using a latent variable approach to inform gender and racial/ethnic differences in cocaine dependence: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study. J Subst Abuse Treat 2010; 38(Suppl. 1): S70–79. Wu LT, Blazer DG, Patkar AA, et al. Heterogeneity of stimulant dependence: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study. Am J Addict 2009; 18(3): 206–18. Wu LT, Blazer DG, Stitzer ML, Patkar AA, Blaine JD. Infrequent illicit methadone use among stimulant-using patients in methadone maintenance treatment programs: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study. Am J Addict 2008; 17(4): 304–11. Wu LT, Pan JJ, Blazer DG, et al. The construct and measurement equivalence of cocaine and opioid dependences: A National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study. Drug Alcohol Depend 2009; 103(3): 114–23. Wu LT, Blazer DG, Woody GE, et al. Alcohol and drug dependence symptom items as brief screeners for substance use disorders: Results from the Clinical Trials Network. J Psychiatr Res 2012; 46(3): 360–69. # import reference infomation from crossref # cr_works uses the reference as the query # limit = 1 limits returned references to 1 # I think that corresponds to the best match, but you would want to check # this assumption matches <- lapply(refs, function(X) try(rcrossref::cr_works(query = X, limit =1))) # extract doi from returned object dois <- sapply(matches, function(X) try(X$data$DOI)) dois # Use the following function to convert doi to pubmed id allids <- lapply(dois, function(X) try(rcrossref::id_converter(X))) pmids <- sapply(allids, function(X) try(X$records[,"pmid"])) pmids ``` Upvotes: 2
2017/04/26
1,713
7,298
<issue_start>username_0: I'm hoping trying to register for a course I need that is currently full, and am told that I can try contacting the professor for permission to enroll. Under what circumstances are such requests typically granted? More students = more work for the professor, so I'm trying to figure out why a professor might agree to allow me in. My best guess is that I should: * Convince them that since I'm a good student, I won't create very much extra work for them. * Convince them that since I'm a good student, allowing me into the course will raise the average grade for the term and make them look good. What else can I say that they might find compelling?<issue_comment>username_1: I disagree with your proposed strategy. The marginal added workload of one additional student is usually negligible, and the average grade for the term is not usually something that reflects well or poorly on a professor to a significant degree. These aren't usually the main issues. I would expect the professor to make the decision by trying to balance the benefits to you of taking the course, versus the negative effects on the other students from having the course be more crowded. Your case will be more compelling if you can show that: 1. Not being able to take the course would represent a major hardship for you. Something on the level of delaying your graduation. If the only effect is that taking it later is somewhat less convenient, means a fuller schedule, means getting up at 8am, etc, that won't be compelling. 2. The fact that you couldn't register for the course normally is due to circumstances beyond your control, and not a result of inadequate planning on your part. 3. You are adequately prepared for the course, and are reasonably likely to pass it. Being a "good student" overall means something here, but more to the point is showing that you have done reasonably well in all prerequisite courses. If your preparation is marginal, the professor might think there's not much point in giving you permission to take a class you would be likely to fail. There isn't much you can do about the negative effects from crowding; let the professor evaluate that. Don't make suggestions like "I could skip all the lectures so that there will still be enough seats". That tends to counteract #3 above. **Definitely do not** attempt to bribe the professor with money, favors, etc, in exchange for being allowed to take the class. (This should go without saying, but I have known it to happen.) Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I usually based my decision on how many students I already had enrolled. If the cap for the course was 25 or less, I would usually let a student or two in. I assume you are enrolling for Fall 2017, so if the course would not be offered in the spring (especially if you needed it for graduation), I would have no objection to letting you in. If this were a large lecture course (35 or more students), I might still let you in, but the odds decrease as the class size increases. A word of warning: I spent my career at a small liberal arts school, so we were generally more lenient in these matters. At a large institution, your request may get an icier reception, regardless of your stated case. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: In my own teaching experience, I allow overloads, or extra students, only if the student has put the course off until the semester of graduation (which happens with students often in my subject, mathematics). If your college or university so offers, you may also ask if your institution has "independent study" credit. In this case - especially if all seats in the lecture room remained filled until the first exam - you would be expected to work on your own apart from prearranged office meetings with the professor. This path has the advantage of providing compensation (however small) for the professor taking the extra load. As a last resort, your institution should have a waitlist for each of the filled sections. Get on all of these waitlists, especially if the course has a high drop/non-participation rate that shows up early on (at my institution, I'll lose three or four seats right away in sections of our higher-level stats course. If you get in before the last add date, get prepped to do a week or so of catching up right away. If all available paths fail, you may do well in purchasing the material yourself and preparing for the next session. Auditing policy may not allow for this, but usually seats start to empty after the first few weeks (again, especially after the first exam) and in my own experience I have not found occasional students attending the class to be disruptive or against institutional policy. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Maybe they do not need to be compelled. We set up a maximal number of students for some courses. If there are more, the students can still ask to get in (or put themselves on a waitlist). Then the teaching professor will be able to decide. Basically, if there are two more students, they would usually both be allowed in the course. But if there are 25 students more for a course you planned to take 15 students in total? You might not have the infrastructure (large enough lecture hall, enough tutors, ...) to still allow all of them in the course. But you also cannot pick, so none will be allowed. So in that case: If you are the only extra student your chances are good, whatever your reasons are. If there is a whole lot of you, things get more difficult. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: If the Professor doesn't let you in before Class. Try showing up the first day of class. Keep showing up to class and showing interest in the class. I've gotten into a "full" class by doing this. The first day multiple people showed up wanting to join the class. By the end of week 2 hardly any of them were showing up and the Professor let me in the class. My actions showed I was serious about wanting to be there. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Many professors will simply do this as a matter of course. I have personally gotten into many classes simply by emailing the professor and saying 'Is there any way that I could get into this course?' Almost every reply was a yes. Most professors expect a few students to not show up the first day or to drop the class within a few weeks, so letting an extra student in usually is no big deal. I have only in very exceptional circumstances had to explain why I wasnt able to enroll in the course on time. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: I agree with most of what is said above but would add one thing: I find it a lot harder to turn down a student who's standing in front of me than I do to reply in the negative to an e-mail request. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Faculty may not always have the ability to admit students into full courses. We don't have the staff in our department to meet the student demand. So our administrators normally set the roster size to the be the legal limit of people in the classroom. The only way to enlarge the class is to find a larger classroom; and classroom space is another thing we are short on. All this to say, no matter how nicely you ask, you still may not get in even if the instructor wants to let you in. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/27
396
1,718
<issue_start>username_0: I recently submitted my first paper to a philosophy journal. After about a month, the status switched from "Awaiting Reviewer Scores" to "Awaiting recommendation". Then a few days later it switched back to "Awaiting referee assignment" again. Thus, seemingly, the review process ended only for a second one to be initiated by the EA just days later. * Why would the system change back to "Awaiting referee assignment"? * Does this mean that EA has sent the manuscript out for a second review? * Why would the EA send the manuscript out for a second review? * Is the EA unsatisfied with the referees' report, so he wants to get an additional review?<issue_comment>username_1: He is either unsatisfied with the report or he finds discrepancies between the two reports and the differences in the two reports cannot be reconciled. He is taking a second opinion. You will be provided with all the accepted review reports to action if your article is accepted or granted Review and Resubmit. It may also be that there were no review reports returned to the Editor in time. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: What could also have happened is that the initially assigned reviewer first accepted to review the paper, only to then forget to do so. At the end of the time that he/she had for the review, the journal editor might have sent a reminder only to then receive an apologetic note stating that the reviewer does not have the time to do so - then the editor would have to find a different reviewer. All these things have happened. If you want to make sure what is going on, you can always send a friendly note to the journal editor and ask about it. They are human after all. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/27
2,337
9,828
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a senior grad student struggling with existential angst. I'm fed up with my advisor, to the point of fantasizing about quitting my PhD. I likely don't want to become a professor. But at the same time, I still love my field of study (in the biosciences), I like research, and I have a postdoc lined up starting next year at a great institution working on a project that I am *really* excited about. Also, due to conflicts with my advisor, I am really worried I won't be able to graduate in time to take this postdoc job. My questions are: 1. Is it still worth doing a postdoc? Another way of asking is: have other people set out to do postdocs with the clear intention of not becoming a professor? I don't mind the low pay and I'm excited about the topic, so my guess is yes... but I'm worried it might hurt my chances of getting a job in industry or elsewhere afterwards (not sure what I do want to do instead though). 2. Would it be a terrible idea to TELL my current advisor that I don't want a career in academia in the long run, but still want to do a postdoc? I feel that it might help with the current impossible standards he/she is holding me to, and hence speed up graduation. But, I'm worried that both my current and postdoc advisor will assume it means I won't take science as seriously, and hence won't do a good job as a postdoc.<issue_comment>username_1: 1) If you are truly interested in the work, then yes, it can be worth doing. A post doc could also be a path to a long term non-professor role in academia, though those positions are quite rare and are definitely undercompensated. You should probably be aware, though, that your time as a post doc isn't likely to count much as "experience" in the non-academic fields unless the work is very closely related to an industry. 2) I have certainly heard stories of students that were pushed through by their advisors/departments at their request after not expressing interest in academia, so maybe this could help you - personally I think that's silly and isn't how PhDs should work at all, but reality doesn't always match the ideal. Have you done enough to earn a PhD in your department? It isn't clear what exactly your conflicts are with your advisor, and whether you are being held back when you should be allowed to graduate or if you have not been productive enough to have earned the degree. It's also hard to give you advice on this because your current situation with your advisor suggests there isn't a lot of confidence that your advisor has your best interests at heart. That said, at least in the US where I have experience, the reality is that most PhDs in the biological sciences will not get professor jobs, regardless of their desires: the math simply isn't in favor of it when each professor graduates multiple students and yet universities aren't growing exponentially. A good advisor should understand that reality and take some interest in preparing students for whatever they want their post-PhD career to be like. In that context, I wouldn't really be interested in having a PhD or postdoc advisor who could not accept that reality, and from the advisor's standpoint I would expect the same level of productivity out of graduate students and post docs regardless of their career goals, except for being honest with them about the caliber of work that is required for those goals. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You love your field and you love research. Your post suggests that you don't view your advisor as a good professional role model, which is turning you off to academia. However, professors' personalities vary wildly. If you like research, like your field, are excited about the post-doc but dislike your current advisor, it seems that giving it all up now may be premature. You might start the post-doc and it reignites your interest in becoming a professor. No, I wouldn't tell the post-doc colleagues or your current advisor about your disinterest in becoming a professor if you are deciding to go through the post-doc. In many/most fields, post-doc positions are designed to train you for academia, so some may see mentoring you as a waste of their time, unless you are in a field where post-docs normally go into industry (not sure which fields that do that, though). My suggestion...getting a post-doc is hard. They are competitive. If you still love other aspects of what you're doing, stick it out through the post-doc and make your decision after a year. Some people just get tired (or disgruntled with) their advisors after a year or two. It's normal. Hope this helps! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: About whether to tell your advisor about your intention not to go into academia: In general I'd say yes, this is a good thing to do. Knowing what a student's or postdoc's actual aims are helps an advisor provide good advice, and helps tailor projects to things that would be useful. A recent Ph.D. student of mine was not keen on trying for an academic career, looked for a postdoc position with ties to industry, and was very straightforward about this; it turned out very well. In addition, advisors do worry a lot about the difficulty of placing people in academic tracks, and it can take pressure off to know that a student or postdoc doesn't want that path. *However*, I don't know if this general advice applies in your case, since it sounds like your relationship with your Ph.D. advisor is not a good one. If you haven't already discussed your future plans with your future postdoc advisor -- something that should be done prior to accepting a postdoc position, by the way -- you really should. It would be weird to do this without also talking to your Ph.D. advisor, but that's what I would recommend. This gets, however to the more important question: #1. What is your goal in doing a postdoc? It's fine not to have the goal of being a professor. It's good, however, have *some* goal. It's great that there's a particular project that you're fond of, but to me this is insufficient. There are *lots* of wonderful topics in science and technology; perhaps you could find one that both excites you and that sets you on a rewarding longer-term path. Or, think of particular aspects of the postdoc you've lined up -- experimental techniques, potential collaborations, etc. -- that set you up for something beyond. Congratulations, by the way, on being close to finishing, and on getting a postdoc position. Both are real achievements! Since you're passionate about your postdoctoral research topic, I'm sure you'll be valued by your future group, by the way. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a complex, two-part question, so before I take a whack at it, let me first say: if you love research, and you love your field, and are good at what you do, I expect you should be a benefit to a research group whether or not you are planning on becoming a professor. 1. Is it worth doing a postdoc? Take the opportunity cost seriously! If you could already get an industry position doing research you like, doing a postdoc lets you gain skills, do a different topic for a while - at the cost of much lower pay and delaying your industry start for a few years. (And moving!) Industries vary, so talk with someone whose job you'd like to see how they view postdocs. I certainly have not heard anything about liking former postdocs less - as long as you are still OK starting at an entry level! 2. Should you tell your current or future advisor? I would definitely not tell your future advisor immediately until you have a better sense for how they treat postdocs in general, or see how current postdocs who leave for industry are handled. I am not sure if telling your current advisor will help matters. This will depend a lot on *why* you and your advisor are clashing. Conflict at the late stages of the PhD is pretty common - even with good advisors - as you and your advisor start to develop different priorities and tastes about science. Unless your advisor has been explicitly saying something like "it is critical that you do X to get a faculty job/for your future career," I wouldn't expect telling them you're going to industry to help. Side note: even if they say this, don't necessarily trust them, especially if X is "publish this paper in a glamour journal." This is important for a trainee aiming for academia... but also very important for the professor. Even if the professor has the best intentions for mentoring people, their interests and your interests are better-aligned when the trainee is aiming at academia! Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If you look at the numbers, plenty of postdocs who *do* want to be professors don't get what they want. So it's not unreasonable to spend some some as a postdoc before leaving academia. Postdoc life is very different to the late stages of a PhD and is almost invariably in the form of short contracts. *If* the employment uncertainty doesn't put you off, *if* you can get a postdoc position easily, and *if* it's doing something you enjoy, you're in a good position. You can use the time to get publications and build contacts in the field, while taking stock of whether you want to continue in academia. That's a lot of ifs. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In bioinformatics, I've known several people who did academic-focused postdocs who then went on to industry careers--some in biologically focused fields such as drug development, others in "data science" positions for Google and the like that had nothing to do with biology, but certainly made use of their analytical skills. You don't say specifically what field you're in, so I don't know how much this observation applies, but it seems to me that having good research experience on your CV is never a bad thing. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/27
776
2,975
<issue_start>username_0: Lets say I have published paper A in a journal. I am now ready to submit a new paper, paper B. Paper A is cited in Paper B. Since B is related to A, I will probably submit it to the same journal. **Would this help the journal's metrics?** Or, lets say paper A currently has no citations. **Would they be reluctant to accept paper B?** The reason I ask is that it seems like a single person could tackle an area of research that nobody else cares about, submit paper after paper to the same journal, and achieve a paper-to-citation ratio near 1:1 (is that good?).<issue_comment>username_1: *Since B is related to A, I will probably submit it to the same journal. Would this help the journal's metrics?* I fail to see the connection. One paper having one more citation is irrelevant to journal metrics (eigenfactor excludes self-citation, while JCR does not, if I'm not mistaken). Also, I'd expect that papers published in a particular journal would include citations to lots of papers on the same journal. *Or, lets say paper A currently has no citations. Would they be reluctant to accept paper B?* Very likely, no. I don't see as costumary for a referee to look at citation record of cited papers. But, if A is not being cited, maybe that's indicative that this research is not suitable to this journal. *... achieve a paper-to-citation ratio near 1:1 (is that good?)* No. Especially if it's a self citation. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Quoting [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor), "In any given year, the **impact factor** of a journal is the number of citations received in that year by articles published in that journal during the two preceding years, divided by the total number of articles published in that journal during the two preceding years". Accordingly, self-citations (by an author, by a journal, or by both simultaneously) are not excluded in the main metric. It is true that in some cases self-citations are discarded (for instance when comparing journals or manuscripts), but it would be ludicrous to exclude, for instance, the *New England Journal of Medicine* self-citations, and this applies to all reasonably good journals, whose ranking remains stable excluding them: [![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pqLmF.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pqLmF.jpg) Regarding your questions: > > Impact Since B is related to A, I will probably submit it to the same > journal. Would this help the journal's metrics? > > > Yes, it is common practice among researchers and journals. > > Lets say paper A currently has no citations. Would they be reluctant to > accept paper B (quoting A)? > > > No, as long as the citation is appropriate. Also consider that a citation increases the likelihood of your article A being looked afterwards by other researchers and quoted subsequently, and that an overlooked article can always become a sleeper hit. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/27
1,045
4,657
<issue_start>username_0: I'm thinking about applying to a PhD program in computer science this coming December and I'm wondering a couple things about getting letters of recommendation. For some background, I have a BS and a thesis MS in computer science, and I've been working in industry for a while now, but not that long. I did a lot of work with my fellow graduate students while getting my masters and I think that, other than my advisor, they are in the best position to write a letter of recommendation for me. They have all graduated with PhDs and are now working as professors themselves. However I'm not sure if having my former fellow students write letters of recommendation would seem appropriate to a graduate committee. What do you all think?<issue_comment>username_1: When I started reading, I already thought about how to answer "no", because I was thinking of other students writing recommendations. If, however, they themselves are already professors, they should have some academic reputation with which they can vouch for you. Thus, I would suggest the following steps: 1) Ask them what they think about it and let them send the letters to you first. 2) Ask other people, e.g. your advisor from back then, contacts in the field, maybe even a contact in a graduate committee you know but don't plan on applying to. 3) Get "enough" recommendations to not depend on your former colleagues to much, so that you have the desired number of letters (some PhD programs post such numbers online) and these are but add-ons. As you have been working, and this working time was long enough for your fellow students to get a position as a professor, you might need to explain why you apply for a PhD just now, why you didn't so before and why you don't just stay in the industry. As this is rather important, I put an extra number for it: 4) Get recommendations from your current industry job to show that you are not (only^^) applying for a PhD because you want out of the company or lost your job, but rather because you want to learn, study, better yourself. One or two superiors at your current work place, stating that they advise on you getting a PhD (as you show the necessary skills, etc.) might be just as convincing as your former advisor. If possible, take supervisors who themselves hold PhDs and make sure that they sign as something like "Mr XXX, senior YYY at ZZZ, PhD in ... from ..." to show that they are able to judge your capability and the usefulness for you to get a PhD. So long story short, I would if possible get letters from your advisor and from your current job. The former colleagues could be a nice addition to that, but I would not put the main focus on them if possible. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depending upon your other possible reference letters, one such letter from a former PhD student - now professor may be a good option. The strongest reference letters, in the eyes of a PhD admission committee, will be from someone who can personally attest to your research ability with specific examples. The length of time they have been doing research/working in the field is important as it improves their credibility and allows them to make comparative statements between you and the bulk of people they have worked with or advised. Having a well established professor saying you are among the top 5% of students they have performed research with is very powerful. As you mentioned, your MS advisor is in the best position to give you a reference letter, and indeed his/her recommendation is critical. If you have any undergraduate research experience or involvement with outside collaborations during your MS degree, they may offer additional opportunities for recommendation letters. If your industry experience involved any research, or if your letter writer can credibly state your suitability (and is perhaps even pushing you to get your PhD as Bemte mentions), that may be another good option. If your only other options are letters from professors you have taken classes with (when your letter will only be based on grades/class participation) or letters from work (when it will only be based on work ethic/personality), do consider a letter from a former PhD student - now professor. If you were essentially advised by this student, in a sub-project or offshoot of their thesis, it would be considerably better. Be sure, however, that you at least worked together on the same project. Be aware that generally they will only be able to discuss the same work as your MS advisor, which will further reduce the letter's impact. Do not include more than one. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/27
398
1,612
<issue_start>username_0: In a course I am not doing as well as I wanted and I asked the professor for extra credit but he refused saying his goal is to see how well we do compared to our peers. Giving extra credit to one student will make his grade not directly comparable to the others. On the other hand I am absolutely determined to ace this course no matter what and make up for my mistakes on the exercises. In this course we have a huge project upcoming. We are asked to design a user interface (in paper). The implementation is out of the scope of the course. So, I was thinking, maybe I should implement it and hope the professor will give me extra credit? It won't take me much time.<issue_comment>username_1: > > maybe I should implement it and hope the professor will give me extra credit? > > > Probably it won't work, if he has already explicitly said no. But we don't know your prof and don't have the magic power of prophecy. (I think it's unlocked at 3.000.000 reputation.) Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It seems that your professor has made it quite clear, and with solid reasons, as to why the extra credit is very unlikely to happen at all. As such, it becomes imperative to complete the task according to the task instructions - as this is how the professor will be assessing it. Having said all that, by all means complete the implementation -if time allows - at the very least, this would be a good self learning avenue - even show the professor, but please do not continually ask for extra credit - if he wishes to award it, he will offer it. Upvotes: 3
2017/04/27
2,748
11,285
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in Mathematics. I have found one advisor in my local University who does not know my research field at all, but has allowed me to choose my own problems and solve them independently. Initially, I was quite happy as I didn't need to switch places (which I don't want at all). The problem started when my advisor could not assist me in solving the problems I chose. It even happened that I chose a problem to work on and when I told him about it, he said that's an excellent problem and I should solve it.Later on after meeting another professor in this field he told me that it has been solved long before and hence I had no point working on that again. He does listen to me when I say something about the problems but fails to give me any critical feedback in my topic. I searched the web but there are so many directions of the topic I am working on, I am feeling puzzled which way to go. Moreover there is no research group existing in this field in my local University with whom I can discuss or get some inputs abut my problems. I am unable to answer the following questions of mine which is affecting my research considerably: > > 1.Has my decision to stay in my hometown and not go to reputed institutes and talking to experienced professors backfired on me? How can I come out of this situation? > > > 2.Is PhD done in this way only without any help from anyone ?At least my advisor says so. > > > Any comments/advice will be helpful.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, then go and find another advisor. Do not get me wrong, I don't mean a new one, I just mean someone else to talk to. With a PhD, you are supposed to show that you are able to do independent research, that you are able to do more than just work on minor problems that dropped out of some paper/publication by your advisor (as it is often the case in Bachelor or Master thesises). I think a PhD (at least in Mathematics, I don't know that much about other fields) where you only worked with a single advisor for multiple years is really uncommon. Go find other people, other professors, etc. to talk to. Your advisor should help you with the following points in case you get stuck there (list might not be complete...): * How and where to find research material, maybe giving you access to institute libraries that are normally closed to regular students or access to the universities subscriptions to online journals. * Establishing contacts to other researchers on the field, giving you advice on who to talk to, maybe even recommending you for a research stay of a few months at another university for a project related to your research. * Administrative processes. That also includes questions on "How and where to best publish this result I came up with?" or "Which conferences should I visit, should I maybe even present something there?" During a PhD, it is not the advisors job to do your research. You yourself have to decide what you look into, what you do, how much time you spend on one problem until you deem it too hard and move on, etc. If your professor could answer all your questions, then that would mean that your research is not really original and/or rather trivial and thus might not yield a PhD (or at least not an excellent one, and I'm sure you are aiming for that :) ). So don't worry if the professor can't help you solve your problems. Maybe they will turn up to stay unsolved for centuries, who knows? Try to rephrase your questions, don't go and ask "How can I solve this?" but rather "Do you know of experts on this topic that might be willing to talk to me (maybe even at the same university)? Can you put us into contact?" or maybe asked more generally like "Do you have a suggestion on which direction to look from here on? Should I continue down this path or maybe try a different approach?". So long story short: Even if the professor knew your research field, he would not be able to always assist you with your problems. PS: As I am also writing a PhD in math just now I'm a little curious: What is your research field, for which there are no research groups and your professor has no idea about? :) Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I had to work on projects my supervisors were clueless about. They had the money to support my work, but not the time to go into any details, and help me, even with a reference. What I ended up doing, was ask friends if they knew anyone in the field who was using the methods I needed to learn and I got introduced to a few people, some of whom I still collaborate with. I visited my new collaborators and worked on my projects while I was there. Their postdocs or graduate students helped me with details and so on. In Europe, there are some grants which support us going to collaborators to work there for longer periods of time. In your case, it is possible that your field is too specialized, which might be a reason you say there are no groups working in that direction right now. But, isn't your field a subfield of a larger field? Maybe you can find groups working in that field and using methods you need to use in your work. You can ask your adviser, or other faculty you know to help you connect with any of those groups who might help you and see if they are interested in your problems, and/or they can help you. If not, you can try to connect yourself, via email (some answer, some don't), or at conferences. You don't need to leave your adviser if he's not a specialist in your field of choice. He allows you a lot of freedom which is both desirable and dangerous for your progress, as you are finding out. On the other hand, if he doesn't support your going to conferences, doesn't pay your stipend and doesn't help your research in any way, you should consider this. A more experienced adviser might help you more, but might also force you to solve other problems they find interesting. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In mathematics at least, the number one job of the advisor is to actually assist you in formulating a problem (or series of problems, even better), which if resolved would result in a reasonable/acceptable PhD thesis. If the advisor has no idea about your field, I don't see how he can help you do that. It may happen that you are lucky/capable enough to choose and solve good problems on your own, but a very small percentage of grad students are in that category. So you may end up biting much bigger than what you can chew, or aiming too low and end up with small problems which make no impact on the field. For instance, how will your advisor judge if/when you are ready to graduate ? Is he simply planning to count publications/preprints that make up your dissertation and put a stamp on it ? At the very least, I suggest getting a co-advisor who knows your area. Doesn't have to be at your university, professors from other universities can be approached. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: > > I have found one advisor in my local University who does not know my > research field at all but has allowed me to choose my own problems and > solve them independently. > > > Most of the problem solve independently, advisors can only advice you about the research that how to conduct it, he provides feedback, make critical analysis of your work, but evaluation of the research purely dependent upon your knowledge that you will provide to your supervisor. Certainly, Phd work is a kind of novel work and your supervisor also poses same knowledge that you have, that you will provide to him. > > The problem started mid way when my advisor could not assist me in > solving the problems I chose.It even happened that I chose a problem > to work on and when I told him about it,he said that's an excellent > problem and I should solve it.Later after meeting another professor in > this field he told me that it has been solved long before.Hence I had > no point working at that again. > > > Well in current age of science and information, you selected a topic that already covered **Long before**. Before selection of the topic, why did not you conduct a comprehensive study or search? Did you make any discussion with your adivsor? Most of the advisor can't do this job for you that they search novel topic for you. This is your mistake that you didn't make the selection of novel a topic. It is expected from a PhD student that he know preliminaries of the research. > > He does listen to me when I say something about the problems but fails > to give me any critical feedback in my topic. > > > If this statement is true then, surely there is something wrong with the advisor. No matter that you don't know about a sub-topic of your field but you can make critical analysis of it. Even a common PhD student or researcher can do this in his field and this behavior expectation become increase for advisor. surely something wrong with advisor. > > I searched the web but there are so many directions of the topic I am > working on,I am feeling puzzled which way to go. > You should need to do this work earlier before selecting the topic. > > > The problems are cropping up now after 1 year,Initially all was well > and fine. > > > Moreover there is no research group existing in this field in my local > University with whom I can discuss or get some inputs abut my > problems. > > > Internet, Google, Social Media, forums, are your friends, always ready to help you. Search expert of your fields on social media, make them friend/follow, get advice from them. Its easy now. > > Has my decision to stay in my hometown and not go to reputed > institutes backfired on me? > > > You should travel to seek knowledge. This is common and very helpful also. > > How can I come out of this situation? > > > Review your topic again, check its novelty and evaluate it yourself. If it has already solve then your methods can make it more efficient or can make any significant difference? Make questions, get technical feedback from advisor. If he satisfy you then, continue otherwise quit. **BUT** also tell him all the story that why are you quitting maybe he will advice you a lot better than this forum and my answer. He is advisor surely poses more knowledge and wisdom of his field than us. > > ask is Is a PhD done in this way only without any help from the > Advisor ? > Blockquote > > > **No** help of advisor is necessary but i don't know what are you getting from the meaning of "help". Mostly the adviosr don't bother for you to search novel topic and conduct any comprehensive study for you. you should do it yourself and get feedback from him. > > Would the situation been better if I had chosen an experienced > advisor? > > > certainly, but again its dependent on you also. Note: I am not a PhD student but I conducted some of the research recently write a few papers and currently doing MS thesis in computer science. The answer based on my last 2/3 year experience in research and relationship with my supervisor. And the fact i get to know during this short period that you have to do everything yourself. Supervisor make critical and helpful comment on your work. And assist you if you are caught in any problem. Upvotes: 0
2017/04/27
2,297
9,738
<issue_start>username_0: I am in some kind of conundrum. Currently I am a grad student in Germany. Things are reasonably fine, but because of some bad luck I am not 100% confident that I will finish my thesis at the end of this year (as planned). I might need some more months (maximum 3, I hope), which in the worst case I could finish my work even without a salary. Still, I want to try and get done as close to the end of this year as possible. Some sources (the Internet generally) tell me I should soon start searching for a postdoc position, especially because I am for personal reasons bound to a fairly specific location in the UK (not where I currently live, but where my significant other lives). So what do I do? Start looking and applying for postdocs now, wait three more months (to give me the same leeway but with the added three months) or wait until I am actually done. Waiting until I am done is probably the morally right thing to do, but if it is taking me until March 2018 to finish, sustaining myself for potentially some additional months of job search will be financially problematic. If I start searching now (or soon), what can/should I tell potential advisors? How common (if possible at all) is it to set the start day "somewhere between January and April next year"? I have a feeling this would hurt my application significantly, in favor of applicants that have a more well-defined timeline. What is the most common thing to do? I have seen others postpone their graduation, but most of them were planning to leave academia after that anyway, so had to prepare for a fairly different hiring process. I am just worried that even if I find a position quickly after finishing, the start day might be months away and that would still leave me without any salary for a lengthy period of time. Any tips and experiences would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Job market is tricky, a good position might come up now and not again in the next 6 months, especially if you are rather picky in terms of location, or research area. That's generally why people advise to start looking early on. It took me about 9 months to get a postdoc position that was satisfactory in terms of reputation, projects, salary and location. During that time I turned down a couple of positions that were offered to me, and had some 30+ applications rejected. I was lucky enough to have a interim postdoc contract with another group at my department and didn't have to worry financially while looking for jobs. I think it's definitely worth keeping an eye out for jobs already, you might want to wait a bit before applying to positions, since if you are actually a good fit for a position they will want to know when you can start, and "sometime between 6-9 months" isn't a very appealing answer when you really need someone for a position. That being said I think if you see very attractive positions, you should get in touch with the corresponding PI and declare your interest. They might have other positions coming up later and if they think you are a good fit, you will already have "one foot in", as the saying goes... I don't think the situation you find yourself in is particularly uncommon and you'll find that people recognize the difficulty in trying to deal with the two-body problem and in general sympathise with it. Good luck with the thesis and job applications Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I am myself a grad student in Germany and at my university, it is rather common that after finishing a PhD, you get a short, payed position (e.g. half a year) at the same university, funded by some (say 10h/week) teaching you do, which is mostly used for job-search or to turn important results from the thesis into publishable papers. Have you already asked your advisor about this? In case that this is not an option for you, I would advise you to look for a contact at the desired university/area (as it is rather small) and try to discuss it in an informal manner first. Maybe your advisor or some other prof, colleague, etc. can establish a contact? Furthermore you might want to find out when the positions open at your desired university. They might have most of the openings at the start of a semester (e.g. maybe April and October, or March and September,...) as these positions might be connected with some teaching that starts at that time; so maybe you can't start at the first of January either way? Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Actually, what you described seems very familiar and I'm sure it's the same for a large fraction of Ph.D. candidates. So relax a bit :-) But - I have to say that, reading between the lines of your post, I'm uncertain that you should even be searching for a post-doc at all: * You express a desire to find employment that sounds at least as significant, if not more so, than your interest to continue your research. * You are not speaking in terms of what you want to do research-wise but where you need to be geographically. **1. First figure out / soul-search whether what you really want is to find a post-doctoral research position.** Are you absolutely sure that you want to pursue a career as an academic researcher, right now? Are you sure a stint in industry (or other non-academia employment) is not something you would find satisfying, interesting, relevant? (To Op, specifically:) Maybe you are and your motivation and orientation is perfectly sound, but I'm getting a 'vibe' that this might not be the case. If you're certain that a post-doc is indeed what's right for you to do next, then **2. When the conclusion of your Ph.D. duties is in sight, it is time to start searching for a post-doctoral position.** The research groups / departments with which you'll inquire about open positions are very well aware that prospective availability is sometimes up for change, particularly in your case. Do not hesitate to say "I expect to conclude my Ph.D. in between X and Y months". Now, it's possible that someone might tell you "I need an extra researcher who's willing to start *yesterday* to get ahead on some funded research project" - and won't accept you on that account. But, well, that's life - and they won't think less of you because you're not done yet; don't drive yourself mad in some impossible race. **3. Sometimes you don't find a suitable post-doc position even if you search diligently and on time. Think about contingencies.** Academia is never very well funded, positions are scarce, and in your particular case there are some tight constraints. I know this is not very encouraging advice, but it's better to recognize this possibility and learn to live with it than spending the last months of your Ph.D. in dread of it being realized. That's really not a good emotional state to be in - and it won't help your work, either. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I took up a postdoc after finishing writing my thesis, but before appointing the external examiner - the thesis soaked up quite a bit of time nonetheless. So you are quite right to be worried about the moral side: but it is up to your potential employer to decide. I recommend applying straight away and be upfront about the risk of not finishing in 3 months. Applying is a process: by applying you learn about what opportunities there are and how strong you are in comparison you are to rival candidates. The downside is mostly that it takes up mental energy that you need for finishing, but it might also help with cultivating a sense of urgency. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Assumptions: I take it you have worked on a stipend and thus are not eligible for unemployment benefits; and like too many PhD students you couldn't build a financial buffer. There are three issues in your question. First the issue whether it's morally appropriate to apply for a postdoc position when you haven't submitted (nor defended) your thesis. Don't worry about it. Anecdotally, I think many almost-PhDs apply for postdocs, and the hiring persons know it. You're not deceiving anyone by saying that you are "expecting to submit" in N months. Secondly, however, this will of course diminish your chances compared to other PhDs who have already submitted and defended. The counter-examples that I am aware of exist, because the applicants had already established working relationships or have excellent and highly specialized skills. Thirdly, this caveat factors into the trade-off between focusing time and energy on a strong and timely finish versus allocating a non-negligible part of your resources into the job hunt. (And believe me, writing good applications is a full-time job.) Unless you are one of the exceptionally skilled, connected, and sought-after persons mentioned above, the best thing you can do in the short term to improve your odds of landing a postdoc position is to finish your PhD! In other words: Yes, you gain time to prepare applications by starting earlier; but you lose (perhaps disproportionately more) time to finalize your thesis, perhaps ending up unemployed without a PhD. And this is not going to help you to land a postdoc. Two more things to consider in this cost-benefit analysis: How tight is the academic job market in your field? How good have you been so far in predicting your progress, i.e. based on your experience can you trust yourself when you say you need two or three months to finish? Many things factor into this calculation, but I would argue that on average it is not a good investment of your time to start applying before you are just about to cross the finish line. By all means, look out for open positions, but don't fret. Chances are the one big opportunity will come again. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/27
2,007
8,469
<issue_start>username_0: When applying for a Master's, I know that extra-curriculars and part-time work barely count for anything in your application. However, say I have an average GPA but my CV shows that I was busy with several other non-academic activities during my degree, wouldn't that show that my GPA is not an indication of my full academic potential? I mean if I'm able to maintain an average GPA in a rigorous STEM course while working part-time, playing in a sports team and participating in many other things on and off campus, surely I will perform better if I just focus on my course?<issue_comment>username_1: Job market is tricky, a good position might come up now and not again in the next 6 months, especially if you are rather picky in terms of location, or research area. That's generally why people advise to start looking early on. It took me about 9 months to get a postdoc position that was satisfactory in terms of reputation, projects, salary and location. During that time I turned down a couple of positions that were offered to me, and had some 30+ applications rejected. I was lucky enough to have a interim postdoc contract with another group at my department and didn't have to worry financially while looking for jobs. I think it's definitely worth keeping an eye out for jobs already, you might want to wait a bit before applying to positions, since if you are actually a good fit for a position they will want to know when you can start, and "sometime between 6-9 months" isn't a very appealing answer when you really need someone for a position. That being said I think if you see very attractive positions, you should get in touch with the corresponding PI and declare your interest. They might have other positions coming up later and if they think you are a good fit, you will already have "one foot in", as the saying goes... I don't think the situation you find yourself in is particularly uncommon and you'll find that people recognize the difficulty in trying to deal with the two-body problem and in general sympathise with it. Good luck with the thesis and job applications Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I am myself a grad student in Germany and at my university, it is rather common that after finishing a PhD, you get a short, payed position (e.g. half a year) at the same university, funded by some (say 10h/week) teaching you do, which is mostly used for job-search or to turn important results from the thesis into publishable papers. Have you already asked your advisor about this? In case that this is not an option for you, I would advise you to look for a contact at the desired university/area (as it is rather small) and try to discuss it in an informal manner first. Maybe your advisor or some other prof, colleague, etc. can establish a contact? Furthermore you might want to find out when the positions open at your desired university. They might have most of the openings at the start of a semester (e.g. maybe April and October, or March and September,...) as these positions might be connected with some teaching that starts at that time; so maybe you can't start at the first of January either way? Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Actually, what you described seems very familiar and I'm sure it's the same for a large fraction of Ph.D. candidates. So relax a bit :-) But - I have to say that, reading between the lines of your post, I'm uncertain that you should even be searching for a post-doc at all: * You express a desire to find employment that sounds at least as significant, if not more so, than your interest to continue your research. * You are not speaking in terms of what you want to do research-wise but where you need to be geographically. **1. First figure out / soul-search whether what you really want is to find a post-doctoral research position.** Are you absolutely sure that you want to pursue a career as an academic researcher, right now? Are you sure a stint in industry (or other non-academia employment) is not something you would find satisfying, interesting, relevant? (To Op, specifically:) Maybe you are and your motivation and orientation is perfectly sound, but I'm getting a 'vibe' that this might not be the case. If you're certain that a post-doc is indeed what's right for you to do next, then **2. When the conclusion of your Ph.D. duties is in sight, it is time to start searching for a post-doctoral position.** The research groups / departments with which you'll inquire about open positions are very well aware that prospective availability is sometimes up for change, particularly in your case. Do not hesitate to say "I expect to conclude my Ph.D. in between X and Y months". Now, it's possible that someone might tell you "I need an extra researcher who's willing to start *yesterday* to get ahead on some funded research project" - and won't accept you on that account. But, well, that's life - and they won't think less of you because you're not done yet; don't drive yourself mad in some impossible race. **3. Sometimes you don't find a suitable post-doc position even if you search diligently and on time. Think about contingencies.** Academia is never very well funded, positions are scarce, and in your particular case there are some tight constraints. I know this is not very encouraging advice, but it's better to recognize this possibility and learn to live with it than spending the last months of your Ph.D. in dread of it being realized. That's really not a good emotional state to be in - and it won't help your work, either. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I took up a postdoc after finishing writing my thesis, but before appointing the external examiner - the thesis soaked up quite a bit of time nonetheless. So you are quite right to be worried about the moral side: but it is up to your potential employer to decide. I recommend applying straight away and be upfront about the risk of not finishing in 3 months. Applying is a process: by applying you learn about what opportunities there are and how strong you are in comparison you are to rival candidates. The downside is mostly that it takes up mental energy that you need for finishing, but it might also help with cultivating a sense of urgency. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Assumptions: I take it you have worked on a stipend and thus are not eligible for unemployment benefits; and like too many PhD students you couldn't build a financial buffer. There are three issues in your question. First the issue whether it's morally appropriate to apply for a postdoc position when you haven't submitted (nor defended) your thesis. Don't worry about it. Anecdotally, I think many almost-PhDs apply for postdocs, and the hiring persons know it. You're not deceiving anyone by saying that you are "expecting to submit" in N months. Secondly, however, this will of course diminish your chances compared to other PhDs who have already submitted and defended. The counter-examples that I am aware of exist, because the applicants had already established working relationships or have excellent and highly specialized skills. Thirdly, this caveat factors into the trade-off between focusing time and energy on a strong and timely finish versus allocating a non-negligible part of your resources into the job hunt. (And believe me, writing good applications is a full-time job.) Unless you are one of the exceptionally skilled, connected, and sought-after persons mentioned above, the best thing you can do in the short term to improve your odds of landing a postdoc position is to finish your PhD! In other words: Yes, you gain time to prepare applications by starting earlier; but you lose (perhaps disproportionately more) time to finalize your thesis, perhaps ending up unemployed without a PhD. And this is not going to help you to land a postdoc. Two more things to consider in this cost-benefit analysis: How tight is the academic job market in your field? How good have you been so far in predicting your progress, i.e. based on your experience can you trust yourself when you say you need two or three months to finish? Many things factor into this calculation, but I would argue that on average it is not a good investment of your time to start applying before you are just about to cross the finish line. By all means, look out for open positions, but don't fret. Chances are the one big opportunity will come again. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/27
367
1,565
<issue_start>username_0: A few weeks ago, I finished my undergraduate research project. I had 2 supervisors for the project: One supervisor signed off on everything I did and gave me the opportunity to work on the project. He was my official supervisor. The second supervisor oversaw all of my work, assigned tasks, and graded my work. I would like to thank both of them since this was an incredible opportunity, especially when applying to graduate school. I also plan to keep in contact and use them both as references in the future. How should I go about thanking them and what should I say?<issue_comment>username_1: A heartfelt email would suffice or simply thank them in person. Everyone likes to know they have done a good job. You only need to validate that. I wouldn't go in with the objective of securing a reference letter. Otherwise, you would sound insincere. If you have done good work and had the right attitude whilst working with them, they would be more than willing to write one. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You have the options already mentioned: sending an email or visiting them in person to say thank you. However (like me), you might be a little unsure of what to say when speaking face to face. In this case, a handwritten note or card would be a nice touch, as it's more personal and permanent than an email. You might want to ask for a reference at a later date, nearer to when you submit your applications. As username_1 says, if the project went as well as you describe, I see no reason why they would refuse. Upvotes: 3
2017/04/27
1,006
3,662
<issue_start>username_0: Assuming someone has a PhD, MD, CISSP, CPA, CFA, MS, etc. etc. What's the proper way to order them after their name and is the comma needed after the last name? (i.e. <NAME>, PhD, MD, etc. or <NAME> MD, PhD, etc.)<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there's a clear consensus on this (the best guide I can find on the subject is the [AMA Manual of Style](http://www.amamanualofstyle.com/view/10.1093/jama/9780195176339.001.0001/med-9780195176339-div2-10), though they suggest personal choice determines the primary order) but it's *usually* something like Firstname Lastname, MD, PhD, ABC, XYZ where ABC and XYZ may be professional affiliations or specialized degrees like MPH. See also the [Chicago Manual of Style](http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/16/ch10/ch10_sec020.html), though they don't really specify one consistent order. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Questions over titling are almost always a matter of local convention and personal preference. You can read more than you wanted to know over at Wikipedia: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-nominal_letters> A few rules of thumb: * If you're naming someone in a friendly context then your biggest concern is usually *etiquette* rather than technical correctness. If someone insists on being called "<NAME>, PhD, MD" rather than "<NAME>, MD, PhD" then it would be incredibly rude to object to them. Most people would not care, but if in doubt you should ask. * If you're establishing the credibility of someone, such as in a piece of journalism, then you list only relevant degrees starting with the highest degree. Even if multiple degrees are relevant it's likely that one degree will be most relevant. * If you follow the cite note for US degrees in the Wikipedia link above, you'll eventually get to [this page](http://www.formsofaddress.info/post_nominals.html#378), in which a protocol expert says that this is the appropriate order, with ties within each category being broken alphabetically: ``` 1) Religious orders 2) Theological degrees 3) Academic degrees 4) Honorary degrees, honors, decorations 5) Professional licenses, certifications & affiliations ``` * Don't list degrees that have been superseded by another degree. That is, don't say "<NAME>, PhD, MS, BS" because the MS and BS degrees have been eclipsed by the PhD. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: > > Don't list degrees that have been superseded by another degree. That is, don't say "<NAME>, PhD, MS, BS" because the MS and BS degrees have been eclipsed by the PhD. > > > This suggestion by [username_2](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62652/david) may be a reasonable one in many contexts, particularly where you want to give a succinct summary of the expertise of the person. However, there are some contexts where it is appropriate to list all the tertiary qualifications of a person, even if some are undergraduate degrees that are eclipsed by higher degrees in the same field. For example, some staff pages for academics list all the degrees held by those academics, even though the undergraduate degrees are usually eclipsed by a PhD. This is often useful because it allows the reader to see the educational progression of that person, how they started their tertiary education, and where it led. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: My understanding is that two degrees may be listed if they are in different disciplines, even though in one discipline a degree may be lower in status. e.g. PhD, MPH where the PhD is in psychology and the MPH is in public health. How else would one establish credentials in both fields. Upvotes: -1
2017/04/27
2,003
9,162
<issue_start>username_0: I have just received a decision letter for my submitted manuscript to an Elsevier journal. It was a revise and resubmit. However one of the reviewer asked for an executable file in order to check my results. (I felt distrust from his comment..) This is regarding a computer science paper on testing the efficiency of an algorithm on a set of instances from the literature. I compared the results of the algorithm with those of other authors.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know if it's normal, but it *should* be normal for all reviewers to make reasonable efforts to verify that the claims authors make are correct, so to the extent that it's not normal, I can only commend the reviewer for being willing to make an effort that other reviewers don't make. What you sense as "distrust" is the reviewer doing their job, nothing more or less (and it is probably somewhat accurate to say that a reviewer's job is to distrust the author's claims, so I don't see the idea of being distrusted by a reviewer as something to be ashamed of or offended by). By the way, it should also be normal for authors to make available any software (including source code whenever possible) needed to replicate and verify their results. So if you are unhappy with the reviewer coming back to you with annoying requests that delay the decision on your paper, next time around you can preempt such issues by releasing your source code (or at least submitting it to the journal) alongside your manuscript. I am sure the reviewer would be much happier and ultimately everyone would benefit, including you. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Submitting an executable isn't the same as submitting source code. An executable doesn't really give the recipient any access to your original code (as a computer science student should already know, of course). I don't see a problem with this request. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I come from a different field, in which the code we use isn't a major output. But if a referee asked for the code, we would provide it and happily. Most of our work is done in python so an executable wouldn't be usual, the source would (also true for matlab). In fact the only thing I find slightly odd here is the use of *executable* rather than *source*. Don't be offended by the request for a couple of reasons: It's not the reviewers' job to trust you; it's their job to check your paper. If a reviewer takes enough interest in your work to want to run your code, they haven't dismissed your paper out of hand. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: To summarise the situation with your data:- 1) You came up with an algorithm on paper/Matlab/whatever. 2) You implemented that algorithm in some programming language. 3) You built a set of test data to exercise your algorithm, and came up with some results for what it should do in theory. 4) You put that test data through the code and came out with some results for what it does in practise. In this process there are various places where things can go wrong with your methodology. Your code may not correctly reflect your algorithm. Your test data may have been worked backwards from the code instead of forwards from the algorithm. Your test data for your algorithm and your test data for your code may not be the same. Unless the reviewer has the algorithm *and* the source code *and* all the test data for both *and* all the output data for both, they cannot verify that your work is sound and your conclusions are valid. This is not subject to dispute - it is logically impossible, if they want to properly review your work. Anything else is making assumptions which may not be valid. I have personally been affected by this situation, when my company bought some control theory IP from a researcher. He'd written papers on how this was supposed to work and the theory behind it, and then he'd built some electronics to implement his theory. His papers covered the theory, and also included schematics for the electronics. When I read this to work out how to implement his theory in software, I found that the schematic had an extra filter in it. The action of this filter turned out to be critical to the system being stable or even effective, but it was not documented at any point anywhere in his work. It wasn't until we had a phone call with him that we found out what the purpose of the filter was, and how we were supposed to tune it. This was in a paper which theoretically had been peer reviewed when it was published. Clearly it hadn't been peer reviewed thoroughly enough! His results showed that given the same data, the implementation output was pretty close to the theoretical expected output, and the effect of the filter was at a different place in the response. Still though, the implementation flatly would never have worked without this filter present, and it wouldn't have been at all hard to include this in the theoretical model. He could even have said "this filter is required for these reasons, but can be ignored in this area of the response we're looking at for these reasons" and he would have been covered. What is not acceptable is what he did, which is to fail to mention it at all, because the end result of that is that someone trying to implement his work would be unable to. Like I said, he still got his paper published, and no-one complained at the time. It should have been spotted by his original reviewers though. In your case, your reviewer *should* be looking for discrepancies like this - it's the whole *point* of peer review. So if people are asking you for things you haven't made available, (a) it's a good sign they're checking thoroughly, and (b) you should have made it available in the first place as best practise. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Artifact submissions are a thing in CS. What I've seen is that you'd prepare a virtual machine, where your software is already set up and ready for making experiments. So, the reviewer may be referring to that the journal has some official procedure for artifact submissions. Alternatively, some authors just make the source code of their tools and benchmarks available via services like github, and the reviewer may be suggesting you should also do this. Regarding the distrust, computing people are naturally wary about benchmarks and tool comparisons, as the final figures may depend a lot on how your experiment is set up (e.g., if you compare to your own implementation of an existing algorithm, did you implement it correctly). It could also be that the numbers that you give in the paper seem a bit odd, but then the reviewer would have pointed to what exactly doesn't look right to them. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: It is an idiotic request on his part. 1. He could catch a virus. 2. There is no realistic way he can check that the executable implements what is described in your paper, *ergo* no way the request has any scientific value whatsoever. He should be asking for the source code, and that is all you should agree to give him. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Given my personal experience with open source communities and the assumption that the paper includes the entirety of the algorithm in question, then sending the source code or related compilation of said software wouldn't produce many negative effects. This would allow the reviewer to verify results and claims made by the paper's author. The key issue the reviewer might be looking for is that you correctly implemented algorithm in source code an are not mistakenly relying on a feature of the programming language, OS, or hardware to make claims about its running time or other features. Off the top of my head I would relate that in I/O bound cases its easy to mistake efficient algorithms for, as an example, Javascript's ability to make almost every function call asynchronous. Of course this is mostly seen in I/O bound operations rather than proliferative computational loops. Then the efficiency measured is not that of the algorithm as a formal proof but; instead it relies on a language specific feature. The salient point is that there are many cases in which the formal algorithm and the implementation can diverge from representing each other faithfully and in doing so the conclusion, if based on empirical metrics such as running time, can run into many issues where an improper implementation can attest to an incorrect conclusion. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Source code can have bugs, and to truly effectively review an algorithm, a prose description of the method alone may well be insufficient. Sharing something beyond the text is beneficial; a good paper with the actual source code (+sample inputs) is the gold standard for reproducibility. One fun wrinkle: depending on where your reviewer is, you might not be *allowed* to give them a binary. Eg, some code uses proprietary libraries that are licensed freely in academia, but someone in industry might require a separate license to even use an existing binary, much less compile it. (this happened to me once, though not as part of peer review) Upvotes: 1
2017/04/27
971
3,745
<issue_start>username_0: My field is theoretical cosmology. I use [the arXiv](https://arxiv.org/) to find virtually every paper I read. Most preprints are updated with their peer-reviewed, published versions so I don't have concerns about their scientific legitimacy. However, when I've had to work on assignments or projects in other fields or subfields for courses at university I find myself constantly running into journal paywalls, which is very frustrating. For this reason I want to know why the arXiv's system of free access preprints is not more widely used. In [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/16833/49043) it is stated that > > Compared with other fields, mathematics and physics are anomalous in making heavy use of the arXiv, with physics even more so than mathematics. > > > This tallies with my experience. The answer then goes on to say > > Things are trickier in other fields, because many of the advantages depend on network effects. If nobody in your field pays attention to a server, it's not conventional, and it counts for little or nothing regarding priority, then there's less reason to post to it (although it still has some value). > > > Is this the only reason that some fields don't post preprints on arXiv? Should we expect to see more fields publishing on arXiv in the future as the word gets around?<issue_comment>username_1: An important factor is how open are researchers in other fields to publish their manuscripts as a preprint. At least in biological sciences, we have biorxiv (inspired of course by arxiv) and several others preprint servers that are becoming popular. You can check some stats here: <http://asapbio.org/preprint-info/biology-preprints-over-time>. This practice is also becoming extended to other fields. The Center for Open Science made available a platform for the creation of new preprint servers, e.g. <https://osf.io/preprints/?_ga=2.149800182.1984918221.1511841280-890674891.1511841280> Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are several reasons why a field might not use arXiv, or another pre-print service. Whether or not these are *correct* is left as an exercise to the reader: * It will interfere with publication. This is a little circular, but if a field doesn't use pre-prints, journals might not recognize a pre-print being put in a depository as *not* prior publication. Whatever merits there are in putting something in a pre-print repository are offset if you can't get it into a journal. * Pre-prints create version sprawl. If there's significant revision of pre-prints, there's now sort of two versions hanging out, the one on the pre-print server and the one that sees publication. * Priority is not necessarily as important (not that it isn't important). In biomedicine, the ideal is for multiple studies to all independently estimate an effect, so being first isn't as critical. * Pre-prints are not peer reviewed, but a pre-print of an RCT or something may still be used to influence medical decision-making etc. * Pre-prints and double-blind peer review are basically mutually exclusive. This one is, in my mind, the biggest downside of pre-prints. When it comes down to it though, much of it is just field convention - if preprints aren't used, there's very little utility to being a "pioneer" in that regard - it's work, and explaining, and some risk for very little benefit. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It has not been mentioned, but the preferred document format for arxiv is LaTeX, and naturally, fields heavily relying on typesetting equations are more prone to use LaTeX. I am not sure that word documents uploaded ca. 2000 are perfectly compatible with todays version of Office. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/28
614
2,725
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently studying electrical engineering and considering on getting both a physics and math minor. I'm wondering though, is it possible to get a Ph.D. or a Master's degree in Physics or Math when I only have the minor and not a real degree? Is it likely at all to be admitted into a graduate study with only a minor? I'm wondering because I don't know whether or not the minor is actually worth it if I won't be able to pursue a graduate degree later on with my credentials. For reference, a math minor at my school typically means 3 extra upper-level math courses (300-400 level), and only 2 more physics courses (one in waves + light + thermodynamics; the other which samples different fields of modern physics, all required for the degree program)<issue_comment>username_1: You should talk to the student advisor of the corresponding graduate program. In general it should be possible to change your major, but there might be some rules to that, e.g. you not only need to take the 3 courses you already take but a few more to fulfill the prerequisites for the program. I don't think that only undergraduate students from the same university and the same major are admitted to the graduate program, there surely are also externals, internationals,... and yes, also people changing their major might happen. Thus, just talk to people and find out, the rules might be different at each university. Also, depending on how far you already are into your studies, you might consider changing your major already now. If you are only just a few months in, that might be easier than to do it later. Switching major and minor, you might even be able to keep all the courses you already did in your record. Once again: Talk to the responsible persons at your university, the rules are different everywhere. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In the U.S., for graduate work in mathematics, even a minimal *major* in mathematics is not really adequate preparation for a good graduate program in mathematics. Not enough coursework, which means insufficient exposure to higher-level ideas (assuming, as is apparently mostly the case, there's not much interaction with mathematics outside coursework). Even though various engineering programs require quite a bit of mathematics, in my observation the topics exactly do not get to fourth-year mathematics, so that exactly rigorous analysis, abstract algebra, point-set topology are not seen. The latter are a very minimal preparation for graduate work in mathematics of almost any sort. Still, if there's room for those courses in a "minor", then some minimum thresh-hold would be reached for appearing to be prepared for math grad school. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/28
523
2,345
<issue_start>username_0: I have been alerted to a mistake in a (mathematical) paper that I published about 8 years ago, during my PhD. The error is relevant, in the sense that it affects one of the claims made in the main result, but does not invalidate the rest of the paper. After some effort, I now also know how to correct the error. So one course of action would be to submit a 'correction note' to the journal where the article was published. On the other hand, since the time the paper was published also my understanding of the topic has matured a bit. In hindsight I would write the paper somewhat differently, I have had some related ideas that were not included in the original paper and finally I am also not convinced that my choice of journal was optimal. So another course of action would be to write a new paper, including the corrected result and some new additional results and submit it to a different journal. What course of action would be best, from an ethical and from a scientific point of view?<issue_comment>username_1: That depends on one question: If we assume that the original paper would not contain this error, would your new related ideas be enough for a publication? If yes then go ahead and publish it, including the correction (and of course notify the journal about it). If needed put a bit more research into the topic to get enough new results. If no then this might seem like an excuse to get a new publication with content that is not worthy of publication (yet), so it might look like you try to cheat on your paper count, which is of course bad for your professional reputation. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my personal view, corrigendum is a service to the profession. Therefore, if I were you, I would publish that corrigendum regardless of the new paper. So if the new ideas are enough to be published without correcting the old mistakes, then I will publish both a new paper and a simple correction note. The correction note can be as simple as an acknowledgement of the mistake and verify that the other results hold. So if the new ideas are not enough to be published without correcting the old mistakes, then I will just publish a correction note for now, and wait until I have enough results to publish another new paper on a better journal. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/28
332
1,471
<issue_start>username_0: Does a bad credit score affect my chance in applying for a postdoc in math? In my case, I have a credit card that had the bill sent to the wrong address and this impacted my score with all three credit agencies.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the position and organization you are applying to. Since it is in math, I would say no. Your employer will most likely not check your credit score/report. When I was in HR, I only ran credit checks for people who would have financial control over a certain department (i.e. CFO, budget officers, etc.). Since pulling credit reports/scores require explicit permission, it will be stated in either the job application or the recruiter will tell you - it might also be possible that it's listed on the job description - in which case you can either agree, or disagree to it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have a lot of experience with postdoc hiring in mathematics at several institutions. There is no mechanism by which faculty who are reading postdoc files would know your credit score, so you shouldn't worry that it will affect your application. HR departments don't really play a role in academic job searches (aside from technical things like approving the wording of job ads). It is all done by academics. So though in the private sector HR departments do things like run credit searches, this just doesn't happen during faculty and postdoc searches at universities. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/28
334
1,588
<issue_start>username_0: I have just received a decision letter for my submitted manuscript to an Elsevier journal. It was a revise and resubmit. One of the reviewers recommended rejection and his comment was just "the contribution isn't strong enough". I don't really know how to respond to his comment. Should I write something to convince him that my contribution is relevant or only respond the other reviewers comments? What do you recommend me to do?<issue_comment>username_1: You really should respond to all reviewers in your response. If the only comment was "the contribution isn't strong enough", then you need to reply showing why it is, in fact, strong enough. You can say something like "We feel that this topic is relevant because x, y, and z, and this manuscript contributes a, b, and c to the field. We have reorganized the introduction to more clearly outline the need for this contribution, and have added a paragraph to the discussion demonstrating the importance of this work." The second part is important because it shows that you're actually improving the manuscript in response to the reviewer's comments, not just blowing them off. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Suggestion: In the discussion section, find literature that supports why your findings are important. Then in your response to the reviewers, write, "We have edited the discussion section to provide additional explanation of the importance of these findings. We have also added additional literature that highlight the importance of these findings to the field." Upvotes: 1
2017/04/28
591
2,568
<issue_start>username_0: I've just sent out job applications last week and only a few days later received a phone call for a phone interview at one school. I am interested in another school that the chair of that school is on my doctoral dissertation committee. I've expressed my interest in a faculty position to him after he asked me if I would be interested. Since then, I haven't heard from him and my communication with him has been only about my dissertation. He provided me with a lot of compliments on my work and said directly that he is impressed by the amount and speed of work that I get done. However, I still didn't hear from him a call for interview or further discussion about the faculty position. Now that I am called for interviews, what shall I do? Should I let him know that I have interviews. if I do he probably going to ask me which schools?.<issue_comment>username_1: He is probably trying to be professional and separate you as a student and you as an applicant. I wouldn't bring it up to him. You clearly already have a leg up since he told you about the position in the first place. He also probably already knows that you are applying to other places (since people generally apply for jobs before graduation). Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The application process for faculty positions often takes a long time. You may be one of many candidates invited to interview (also, you don't mention if this is a phone or campus interview, which would better help with understanding the timeframe you have). For instance, if you are the first of five candidates being interviewed, even if you are made an offer it could be a month or more away. That's a long time for your choice school to invite you for an interview. My suggestion is to go on interviews and if they progress. If it looks like another school may make you an offer, then I would contact your professor and ask what their timeline is for interviewing. You might not want to jeopardize an offer in-hand for another job you might not be offered. Also note that faculty searches are a group effort and the chair may not have the final say of whom gets interviewed or hired. Therefore, the person on your dissertation committee may even be advocating for you to be interviewed, while the faculty and/or Dean may view your research area as not being a priority. So, don't make decisions about other schools on the desired position unless you have an offer from that department in writing. Until then, it's not your job. Good luck! Congrats on getting interviews! Upvotes: 0
2017/04/28
3,554
14,732
<issue_start>username_0: **Imposter Syndrome and depression:** I feel pretty depressed that I am not as "qualified" as a close family member. In particular, this family member has undergraduate and graduate (PhD) degrees from Ivy League schools in mathematics. Whenever I try to solve a problem, this family member does it in half the time. Does this mean that I should try and find another field to specialize in?<issue_comment>username_1: No it does not. There will always be someone better than you and I in whatever we do, but that does not mean you should give up. Family issues are hard because it's so easy to compare yourself to a relative, especially a close one. However, that does not mean you should give up. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Do you love research and/or math itself? Do you love solving problems and learning about new things and finding out how things work? If not, then I'm afraid your motivation is misdirected. As you progress through life, you will meet many more people that are much smarter than you. I teach students who are much smarter than me and I wish I had their brain. Some colleagues/peers are simply out of this world. However, there is a place for you. There are many research areas and countless opportunities to contribute. If it's not in math, then it's in other areas; there are many areas/problems waiting for new tools and perspectives. This means it is all hands on deck. The scientific community is small relative to the world's population. We are motivated to generate and verify new knowledge. If not us, who else? Go back to basics, and follow your heart and interests. Keep moving and try to stop comparing; otherwise, it's like spending too much time in an art gallery and not doing any work :) Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Research in math (and I assume in general) is hard. It doesn't get better over time, but rather we seem to get used to the accompanying depression and angst. When I feel down, I try to remind myself that I do math because I enjoy it, not because I want to be the best at it, and for some reason people continue to pay me money to do it. If they stop, I'll figure out something else. In the meantime, I get to think about problems that I love, even if the process of that thinking isn't always fun. The above is also hard. There are still rough days. It helps me to know that other people, including really smart people doing great math, experience the same feelings. If you want to switch fields, go ahead. But in general, any field will have someone (seemingly) faster than you - this is not personal, we all feel like this. [![imposter syndrome](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KDmfs.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KDmfs.jpg) [[Picture Credit: <NAME>](https://twitter.com/rundavidrun/status/587671657193455616)] I would recommend reflecting upon why you are in mathematics in the first place. If you're in it because you love doing it, does it matter if someone else is a bit faster? There is plenty of mathematics to go around. Upvotes: 8 <issue_comment>username_4: This may be a cause to move into a different sub-field than him... Many people want the glory and to feel they have done something. There is no reason to think this cannot be done within mathematics. But on the thing of comparision, do you have better questions than him? Do you have novel approaches? These are the things that matter. Also when you talk of his ability to solve problems more quickly, are you talking about elementary problems that take mere minutes? Does he betray a deeper understanding than you? Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Absolutely not! You should only consider a change in a specialisation if *you* choose to, not due to a feeling of being forced - the latter, in all likelihood, would not be sustainable. Explore your specialisation to see if you can identify and capture a niche area that grabs your interest. When I feel a similar feeling, I look at a list I prepared of what I have accomplished within the topic, what I have going at the moment and the exciting prospects that I have planned. Doesn't always work, but does help most times - there is no magic solution though. One thing to consider is engaging your family member in a collaborative project, work together and even learn from them. Good chances are that he'll learn off you at the same time. Perhaps, there is an opportunity to be mentored by your family member - benefit from his knowledge and skills. As a saying goes "chase the dream, not the opposition" - but without the opposition, as you are not in competition with your family member. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Although my field of study is not Math, I can relate to you because I had a experience that was very similar to yours. Just like you, I felt unqualified in my studies and just like you, I had thought about changing to another field and even giving up on trying hard. Eventually, I changed my field of study but not because I wanted to be perfect or better than others in it but because I came to the conclusion that if I want to spend my time and life on something, it should be something that I enjoy doing. I decided to focus on enjoying what I do and trying to improve myself over time rather than comparing myself to other people. For me, it is a fact that almost in any aspect of life, there are people that are better than me. As a matter of fact, there are people in my new field that are better than me (I have close interactions with some of them on a daily basis) and well, that's life. Also, it is good to remember a [well-known quote](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison) from <NAME>on: > > Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration > > > I have studied biographies of many prominent scientists and artists and two personality traits that I have found very common among them are that they enjoyed their work and they worked hard. In my opinion, these are the qualities that you should concentrate on. If you truly enjoy Mathematics, then just enjoy it. For a good biography, I encourage you to read the wonderful memoir of [Issac Asimov](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov), [I, Asimov](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/055356997X). By the way, I hope that by 'feeling depressed', you do not mean that you are suffering from clinical depression (depression is always an alarming word for me). It is quite normal to feel disappointed about your qualities sometimes but, if you feel depressed about other significant aspects of your life too, please also consider seeking clinical help. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In a way I can relate to this experience. My siblings are both in your situation. I am and have been the "smart" guy in my family. My siblings were very often compared to me by teachers, friends and family members and used to be asked why they can't be as "good" as I was. That got them depressed and made them give up on things they wanted to achieve because they believed what they were told, that they "have no talent". If I ever regret something in life, is that I didn't pay attention to that and didn't as much as tell them what exactly talent was. Because, here is the thing. I have no particular talent in anything. I only know that if I work hard enough, smart enough, and I keep myself healthy, I can acquire many talents. How to learn something is a whole science, and I don't plan to discuss it here. All I'm saying, you can get a PhD, a successful career, even if you seem much less competent at the beginning than your peers. In fact, I was surprised myself how many of my PhD colleagues who seemed to struggle with just about everything, ended up making important contributions to the research fields they happened to specialize in. I also think I should mention that even if you don't know whether you'd like or not a certain research field, the beginning is not the moment to decide on that. It's as if you'd decide not to marry someone because you don't like their nose. But, if you stay long enough to know them and you realize they treat you well and have many qualities, I doubt you'd care so much about the nose. Same with the research. Once you reach a certain level of understanding, you begin to like the field. If I were to do a PhD again, I'd choose a field that gives me enough job opportunities, enough challenge, and problems worth solving. I'd not factor other's talents in this decision. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Math can be brutal to your self-esteem. If you are a poet of average skills you could (perhaps) convince yourself that you are an under-appreciated genius with as much raw talent as a winner of the Nobel Prize in literature. In mathematics, if you are mathematician of average talent, you can't plausibly convince yourself that you are even remotely as talented as a winner of the Fields Medal. If you get to that stage you have to ask yourself what is more important -- your ego or your love of mathematics. If the former, by all means switch to another field, perhaps one with more subjective criteria where you can convince yourself that you are the best. If the latter -- keep with what you are doing. Many mathematicians end up teaching undergraduates. If that is the career path you end up following, the knowledge that you are not a world-class research mathematician (if in fact you are not) can help give you the humility that you need to e.g. not lose patience with students who can't seem to understand the chain rule. What you are feeling now about your family member is similar to what some of your students will feel about you. This can help you empathize with such students. If you know what it is like to struggle with a concept that some people find obvious you will be in a better position to help others who are in a similar state. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Even if other people have amazing lunches, you'd still want to have your own, even if less amazing, simply because you're hungry. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_9: you don't say how far along you are. If you haven't finished a first degree in maths and he has a PhD from a good university then he ought be at least twice as fast as you. In fact, if he is only twice as fast as you, you are doing rather well. A more interesting question to ask, is how is his career going? I have seen plenty of people with PhDs from top name institutions have trouble making a career in maths. If you really truly believe that you have less talent and he is having trouble in the job market, it's probably a sign that you should specialize in something more employable. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: > > Whenever I try to solve a problem, this family member does it in half the time. Does this mean that I should try and find another field to specialize in? > > > If you and this relative are unable to put a bit of academic distance between yourselves, for example by refraining from tackling the same math problem (and then comparing your results and your speed), then I imagine you would probably be happier not studying in the same field. It sounds as though you may be setting yourself up repeatedly for this type of comparison, which you then get discouraged about. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: Einstein struggled a lot more with mathematics than a whole lot of his contemporaries, particularly mathematicians. <NAME> was able to retrace (and do the finishing touches Einstein was still working on) a significant amount of Einstein's General Relativity work in a small fraction of the time Einstein needed and made a paper which he later retracted since he saw it as credit-stealing. Einstein needed a lot of time to get where he wanted to but he had the advantage of knowing for sure where he wanted to get. That produced more tangible results than brilliant minds without his aim. So no, the mere speed and skill with which one of your relatives (what does it matter that he is a relative anyway?) works with mathematics does not tell much about what mathematics can do with and in your life. I mean, if he is a relative, that should be a good omen, shouldn't it? That makes it likely that your genes are not entirely remote from your interests. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: > > Does this mean that I should try and find another field to specialize in? > > > In any field you choose to specialize in you will encounter someone -- probably multiple people -- like your family member who have better training and probably more talent than you. That makes me wonder why you assume the premise that it is especially bad to have *a family member* who is that super-talented person? Won't it be just as frustrating to have such a person as your supervisor or your colleague? In which case, isn't the conclusion that your only hope is to retire to a desert island and not attempt to do anything meaningful with your life, so that you never have to compare yourself with someone who is better than you at what you do? The answer of course is that the premise is incorrect. You should aspire to choose a profession that brings you the highest level of personal satisfaction. If math is that area, it would be a shame to choose a different area for the sole purpose of avoiding professional jealousy between you and a family member, when in all likelihood you will encounter many other people likely to arouse similar feelings of jealousy in you. Better to learn to deal with the jealousy, accept that you are not the smartest person on earth, and find joy and meaning in your ability to make humble but useful contributions to mathematical knowledge. Good luck! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: On the contrary this should encourage you to go into the same field as your family member. **The best way to improve at something is to surround yourself with people who are more talented than you are.** When you have a problem that you are working on (or even better after you have solved it) you can discuss the problem with your family member about how they would have solved and how you could solve it better in the future. You also have the benefit of having casual conversations about things tangentially related to your professional interests. I think that key thing here is that you already have a network of highly skilled people in your field. This is an extraordinary advantage and you should harness it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: I think that mathematics research is about being more creative than being fast. Being faster is more likely to help you in math competitions, examinations. But you will need different qualities for mathematical research. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/28
1,105
4,401
<issue_start>username_0: I received a template from a senior student where every response to the reviewer's question begins with thanking the reviewer. For instance, > > *Question 1: Please resize Figure 4.* > > > > > > > The authors thank reviewer #4 for the suggestion. We.... > > > > > > > > > *Question 2: Why was this test performed?* > > > > > > > The authors thank reviewer #4 for the insightful question. We.... > > > > > > > > > It seems a bit odd to thank the reviewer for each and every question. Then again, this seems to be a popular format for the journal. I have already prepared a response file in this pattern, but just before uploading it I had second thoughts. Should I go in and remove the thanks from every question, or is this a common / expected pattern? EDIT: This is meant to go to an IEEE journal for Remote Sensing.<issue_comment>username_1: It's fine as it is. If the reviewers have been especially critical and/or the responses are rejecting most of the proposed changes and additions, offering so much thanks might sound passive-aggressive. Otherwise, this extreme politeness is not uncommon in any form of editorial correspondence. I suppose authors just don't want to seem like they aren't grateful. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm in the social and health sciences, so etiquette in your discipline may differ (though I doubt it). I have never done this. Generally, I thank the editors and reviewers for their time and effort in the body of the response letter, but I stick to business in the individual comments. There may be a really exceptional comment by a reviewer that I may thank them for (suggesting a specific citation I didn't think of or identifying an oversight, where addressing it may improve the manuscript immensely). So, basically my individual responses look more like "As suggested by reviewer #1, we have added additional literature about topic x in the introduction...We have revised figure 2 so that it more clearly displays the findings." Hope that helps! Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I would prefer to use the surreptitious ingenuity of the authors in thanking the reviewers. This removes any uncertainty in the reader's mind about your acceptance of the comment nad lets you present the response objectively. If you remove the thanks, and a thankful introduction, the comments would look disjointed and fail to have any impact and leave the reviewer in doubt as to whether the comment is closed. This is because in the response you might aargue your point, make changes to language and grammar and otherwise unwittingly run down the imort of what the reviewer implied in his review comment. Also this interjection of thanfulness isolates different comment responses from priorr and post comments and responses and shows the reviewer that the response is to this specific comment andis not overlapping into the next serialised response as it deserves to be a complete standalone response in each point. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is completely unnecessary and, honestly, looks like you're grovelling. Replies to reviewers are mostly there to indicate that you've considered everything they suggested, to draw their attention to the changes you've made and to allow you to explain why you're not making certain suggested changes. By all means thank the reviewer for anything particularly insightful and thank them if the review as a whole was particularly useful, but there's no need to thank them for every single comment individually and tell them that every word they wrote was amazing and changed your life. It just looks insincere. I would suggest something along the lines of: > > > > > > Question 1: Please resize Figure 4. > > > > > > > > > Done. > > > > > > > Question 2: Why was this test performed? > > > > > > > > > This was to check that the decreased widget performance really was because of interference from space aliens. We have inserted an explanation of this below the description of the test (paragraph 5, page 4). > > > > > > > Question 3: There's a subtle but important error in your argument on page 8, which the referee must have read very carefully to have noticed. And perhaps a suggestion of how to fix it. > > > > > > > > > Thanks! We've fixed the problem by [doing whatever you did]. > > > Upvotes: 3
2017/04/29
916
4,040
<issue_start>username_0: Nowadays, there were many data published online and with papers, such as PLoS journal. I am wondering can I use those data to perform my analysis and if so, do I need permission of those authors to publish my results? Thanks. Edits: The data I am trying to use is the supplementary data that provided by the article. The field I am working on is epidemiology. All comments are appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: The data published in most journals/repositories have licenses - as published articles have. So you have to check individually what the license of the data you want to use allows and what it doen't. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want to use a data, you should ask the publisher to get the agreement of use it. This is the same as any figure that you want to use. You should ask for permission because some journals does not give that permission even it is published. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: They've published their data. The way academia works is that people build on other people's work. You're just expected to reference their work properly. Copyright is not particularly relevant here. Copyright law varies from country to country, but in any case copyright does not prohibit you from, e.g., adding two numbers just because those two numbers appeared in a copyrighted paper. Here in the US, [copyright applies to the presentation of a work, not to ideas or data](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11359/can-you-copyright-data). For example, telephone directories have been found not to be copyrightable in the US. Since copyright is not very relevant, neither is licensing. Copyright law is specifically constructed so that it will not interfere with activities like scholarly commentary. You will of course want to behave well toward the people whose data you're using. It won't hurt to talk it over with them. They know it intimately, and they may be able to warn you against misinterpreting it. For example, you don't want to be in the position of publishing a "gee whiz, amazing!" conclusion based on their data, only to find later that it was a misunderstanding. It may be appropriate for them to be coauthors on any resulting paper. Even if the purpose of your analysis is to contradict the conclusions they drew from their own data, it still doesn't hurt you to tell them what you're doing, and be above board and respectful. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Published data is public. This is essential to the proper functioning of science. Others can examine and re-analyze the data, challenge existing interpretations, and test new theories. It is nice to let the authors know that you would like to analyze their data, and to show them the results for comment before submitting a paper, but it is not required (formally, or by academic custom) that you do so. The only non-negotiable requirement is that you properly cite the source of the data. It is indeed a sign of progress that more studies make their data available in easy-to-use formats. I remember the days when we xeroxed plots on graph paper in order to extract numerical data. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: The whole meta-analysis field would collapse if data extraction from published sources was not allowed, was restricted, or required permissions to be sought from the copyright holder. It is also important that data cannot be copyrighted. Copyright is restricted to expressive and creative outputs, not measurements. So, if you are drawing from a raw data source, you do not have to ask permission. It is however standard practise to acknowledge the source of the data, which gives credit to the original gatherers of the data and lets those that read your output know where you got the data. Note, it is possible to get a doi for your data when you post it on platforms such as figshare or zenodo. If the original authors have done so, then cite the data source, not the paper accompanying paper (unless you also refer to the outcome of the work). Upvotes: 1
2017/04/30
3,915
15,677
<issue_start>username_0: In U.S. colleges, in quantitative fields of study like engineering and mathematics, how do instructors curve their courses? That is, how do instructors decide, in a given course, how many As to award, how many Bs, how many Cs, and so on? I do not ask the opinion-based question of how an instructor *should* curve his or her course. Rather, I ask the fact-based, or at any rate experience-based, question of how a normal, responsible, experienced instructor *does* curve his or her course.<issue_comment>username_1: For years, I have taught engineering part-time at a typical agriculture-and-mining-type state college with a big engineering program. I have no opinion of my own as to how to curve a course, but because I wish my grading curves to be typical and unremarkable, I have over the years asked several tenured faculty in my department how they curve their courses, and have adjusted my own curves accordingly. From the tenured faculty I have interviewed, I have learned three things: 1. Tenured engineering faculty approach the question in various ways. 2. However, on the whole (to my surprise) none of the tenured engineering faculty I have interviewed grades markedly stricter or more leniently than the others do. 3. I can extract from the interviews a heuristic to set a typical curve in my own courses. Here is the resultant heuristic: * Target a course average of 70 plus three per year. That is, target 73 in a 100-level (freshman) course, 76 in a 200-level (sophomore) course, 79 in a 300-level (junior) course, and so on. I have never taught a 500-level graduate course, but at least one tenured faculty member who does teach such courses informs me that the trend continues through that level. At any rate, the general concept is that the weakest students progressively drop out before reaching the higher levels, so the average among the survivors progressively rises. (Since most dropouts are freshmen and sophomores, this does not explain specifically why the senior average is higher than the junior, but I gather that faculty just like to grade their seniors a little more leniently.) * If the course has a prerequisite on the same (or a higher) level, add one point. For instance, a 200-level course with a 200-level prerequisite can target an average of 77 rather than 76. * Many courses are taught principally during the fall semester or principally during the spring semester. Most students take the course during the principal semester, but at the 300 level and below, for various reasons, a few students take the course during the other, off-sequence semester, or during the summer. Experience finds the on-sequence students to be smarter and/or harder-working on average. Therefore, if the course is on sequence, add one point. For instance, the above-mentioned 200-level course can target an average of 78 rather than 77 if it is on sequence. (A few courses may have approximately equal enrollments fall and spring. Such a course has no on-sequence semester. For such a course, split the difference by adding half a point each semester. However, add zero for a summer course in any case. Most senior-level courses are offered only once a year, but I don't teach those courses, so I do not know how to adjust those. My *guess* would be: add a full point except during the summer; but I have not actually asked any faculty members about that.) * Target a standard deviation of 0.60\*[100 - (targeted course average)]. For example, if targeting a course average of 78, target a standard deviation of 0.60\*22 = 13.2. * When computing the course average across all students, disregard students who drop the course during the early or middle parts of the semester. Some colleges however allow students to withdraw late under restricted conditions. This is harder, because the late withdrawers are usually students that (a) actually took most of the course and (b) would have finished with Ds or Fs. I have discussed this problem with only three faculty members, but after discussing it, my practice is this: impute to late withdrawers a curved (not raw) average of 60—in other words, place late withdrawers on the borderline between a curved D- and a curved F—then include them in the overall average. * Regardless of the curve, if a student achieves an unadjusted score of 93, award him or her a straight A; if 90, at least an A-; if 87, at least a B+; if 83, at least a straight B; if 80, at least a B-; if 77, at least a C+; if 73, at least a straight C; and so on. However, your exams/tests/quizzes should probably be hard enough that this rule seldom comes into effect. Most students should end up being graded on the curve. * After all the above, keep one extra point of leniency in your pocket (as it were) to push some students at discretion over the line into the next higher grade. Illustration: suppose that the *curved* standard to achieve a B- in your course turns out to be 76.0. Suppose that you have a tight cluster of students whose averages are 76.1, 75.9, 75.8, 75.6, 75.4, 75.2, 75.1, 74.9 and 74.8, followed by a gap, after which the next best student is a 72.0. Just award the whole tight cluster of students a B-. Do this as needed at various grade cutoffs to raise the overall curved course average by about one point. However, an average of one extra point of leniency suffices and you don't want to allow your grade cutoffs to become too sloppy, so try not to exceed one extra point of leniency on average. * Regardless of subjective factors and leniency, never give a student with a higher course average a lower grade. That is, if some student with a 74.8 gets a B-, then every student at or above a 74.8 gets at least a B-. That's only fair. * If the course enrollment is small (fewer than 20 students, say), then subjectively consider the overall quality of the class. Adjust your cutoffs accordingly, but don't overdo it, and be honest. Such subjective adjustments should sometimes go up and *sometimes go down,* so that overall averages over the school year are maintained. If the course enrollment is large, then do not trust your subjective opinion but rather trust the law of large numbers: in that case, pretty much just stick to the averages. * If the course enrollment is extremely small (fewer than 5 students, say), then I do not know what to do. I have not taught such a course. * If some unusual administrative condition applies to a particular course during a specific semester (for instance, if an honors section usually exists but that section got canceled this year, dumping the honors students into your section), then adjust accordingly. * (Speaking of honors sections: my department does not have any of those. However, if yours does and you are teaching one, then you'll presumably need to adjust—but you are probably tenured faculty in that case and have no need of my advice. If had to guess, I would guess that an honors section boosted the targeted average by about ten points.) * If you have a particular student (or group of students) you are fairly sure has not learned/achieved enough to earn even a D-, if the student's raw average is below 60, then raise your curve's cutoff against a D- and give that student an F. Reason: you owe it to the public to block that student for the time being from graduating and entering professional practice. This is unpleasant, naturally, but fortunately it usually isn't an issue, at least not in my experience. If you curve as herein advised, then the student in question will usually get an F, anyway. Still, the issue does occasionally arise so I mention it. Admittedly, the above is quasi-anecdotal. It is not a proper study (if it were, then I suppose that I would give it as a journal paper rather than as a StackExchange answer). On the other hand, it has little to do with my own opinion. Based on interviews, it reflects and approximately averages existing practices among tenured faculty in my engineering department, practices which—as far as I know (for I earned my own degrees far away in another region of the U.S.)—are typical of similar public colleges in other states. The above is neither lenient nor strict as far as I know. It is typical, rather. Of course, I have no documentary proof to show, so you must decide for yourself how credible I seem. I am merely part-time adjunct faculty at a state college, which in academia makes me an extremely unimportant person; yet I haven't seen this question asked and answered on StackExchange, and I happen to know something about it, and I moreover happen to have some years of minimally relevant experience to back my answer up, so there you have it. Back when I first started instructing, I would have liked to find such an answer on StackExchange, so today I write the answer. Make of it what you will. **EXAMPLE** Suppose that you were teaching a 300-level (junior) course. Suppose that this course has a 300-level prerequisite. Suppose that most students who take this course at your college take it during the spring semester, and suppose that you are teaching the course during the spring semester. Suppose that you mean to follow the above-described heuristic. Suppose that initial enrollment is 110, but 10 students drop the course by the registrar's mid-semester drop deadline, leaving 100. **PROBLEM** According the above-described heuristic, if you are the instructor, then how should you curve this course? **SOLUTION** Target an average of 81 with a standard deviation of 11.4. Consider only the 100 students; ignore the other 10. At discretion in specific cases (mainly where students with similar marks cluster together), bump some students up over the line into the next grade, *effectively* (indirectly) boosting the overall average to 82. Late-withdrawing students, if any, slightly complicate the solution as earlier explained. *You should not ignore the late withdrawers,* for that would be unfair to the students who complete the course. However, unless many students withdraw late, their effect on the averages will be fairly small. Nevertheless, their effect (even if small) poses a significant calculational hassle and you should allow adequate time before the grading deadline to adjust for it. **VARIANT PRACTICES** There exist many variant practices among divers professors, though all the practices my interviews have discovered achieve similar averages and, usually, similar standard deviations. For example, one professor I know awards a set percentage of his class a straight A, a set percentage an A-, and so on; but even this professor adjusts his percentages by class level to achieve distributions like the other professors achieve. At least one professor I know, like perhaps many others, grades late withdrawers according to the withdrawers' incomplete course averages excluding the final exam. That's not what I do, but its effect is fairly similar and it should work well enough. One professor I know ignores the late withdrawers as he ignores the early withdrawers. The consensus however seemed to be that that was probably not the best way to handle the matter. On the other hand, if late withdrawal is rare, then the difference probably does not amount to much. Inexperienced assistant professors, who have yet to achieve tenure, might grade in unusual ways. Or not. I don't know anything about that. Interested only in experienced opinions, I have not interviewed any assistant professors. **CAUTION** Grades in the humanities and other nonquantitative fields of study seem to be distributed and assigned on a very different basis, presumably because faculty in those departments are much less likely to think statistically than we engineers are. Nothing written above applies to humanities courses as far as I know. Undergraduates seem to evaluate an instructor more leniently when they expect lenient grades from the instructor. This is unpleasant but is also a fact of academic life. Undergraduates are often immature. That's just the way of it. (Fortunately, my department takes this leniency effect into adequate account when weighing students' evaluations of faculty, so the effect has posed little problem for me. I vaguely gather that, during the late 1960s, maintaining a B average in college saved a U.S. student from being drafted and sent to war in Vietnam. This led to rapid grade inflation among faculty who, understandably, felt unwilling to be the proximate reason a student of theirs got shot and killed; and there were knock-on effects, indirectly including the aforementioned problem with students' evaluations of faculty. Enough decades have passed since then—after all, your department chairman was probably in elementary school during the Vietnam War—that the problem in question may have largely stabilized. At any rate, as I said, it doesn't seem to be a big problem where I work.) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: > > I do not ask the opinion-based question of how an instructor should curve his or her course. Rather, I ask the fact-based, or at any rate experience-based, question of how a normal, responsible, experienced instructor does curve his or her course. > > > I think the following would be a typical story of the process. Jane is hired to a tenure-track faculty position in physics, and she is going to teach freshman mechanics her first semester. To find out what is considered the normal academic level of the course at this school, she looks at available information such as the text being used, the lab manual, the problem sets assigned by previous instructors, and, if possible, exams set by previous instructors. She looks at myedu.com to see histograms of grades given by other teachers at this school in this course. Based on this information, she tries to set standards that will seem somewhat easier than average at this school. She wants to make sure that her grading isn't seen as too harsh, which could result in poor teaching evaluations and endanger her hopes of tenure. She can't afford to be as stringent a grader as some of the senior faculty, because she's not insulated by tenure as they are. She can use an infinite variety of factors to adjust the level of difficulty, but she is constrained by this need to appear a little more lenient than average. In most cases, people end up teaching at schools that are less selective than the ones at which they got their own degrees. This is the case for Jane, so after the first midterm she finds that her best attempts to be perceived as a lenient grader are failing rather badly. Many of her students are very upset. Jane is alarmed. She has recently acquired a mortgage, and a terrier that everyone says looks like President Trump. If she doesn't get tenure, she and the dog will be out on the street. She makes further downward adjustments in her standards. Within a few semesters, she arrives at a set of standards that become the ones she considers normal for the rest of her career as a "normal, responsible, experienced instructor." Jane gets tenure, and as time goes on, more tenure-track faculty members are hired in her department. These new folks go through the same process described above, arriving at standards that are in turn incrementally lower than the ones Jane uses. This trend continues over the years. By the time she retires, Jane owns a bulldog that everyone says looks like President Bannon, and she has become legendary as an extremely harsh grader compared to her younger colleagues. For more on this topic, see: Arum and Roksa, Academically Adrift, 2011 <NAME>, Grade Inflation: A Crisis in College Education, 2003 Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2017/04/30
1,463
6,360
<issue_start>username_0: I know that we have to be meticulous in pure mathematics courses, and I appreciate that. Comparing a particular course I took recently to the other pure math courses I've taken before, it appears that the marking has been unnecessarily severe. I had assignments which weighed 25% of the total mark, but the marker could almost arbitrarily pick what we would have had to specify in solving a problem. For instance, sometimes there were points in a proof for which it was not clear at all whether or not they should have been specified, since they were either evident (clearly, there were parts in which the marker was very fault-finding, not like in most other pure math courses I had taken) or were previously proved in class or in a previous assignment. The marking scheme was entirely up to the TA who marked the assignments, so that he decided which questions to mark or not to mark. There were usually 20 to 25 total marking points in each assignment, but some questions were deemed to weigh only 2-3 points, and the TA could easily deduct 33-66% of the mark for missing / skipping minor details of the problem, whereas the entire answer / main point was correct. The instructor had admitted during the course that either more total points should be introduced or partial points (such as 0.5) should be given, but that didn’t happen. Some questions weighed disproportionately many points, such as when in one assignment, which consisted of five questions and which was marked out of 25 points in total, one of the questions was worth 9 out of 25, and it was not the most time-consuming question. In the final examination, the marking style similar to that of the assignments was applied, and I’m convinced that it was too harsh. I've discussed the exam results with the instructor, and I'm still convinced that the marking was not always quite appropriate. I also wrote an email to an advisor and he said that I could write a petition to reconsider the marking. But should I really do this? I feel that the department would not perceive such an action very kindly, and some talks in the department would probably follow. So I'm not sure if it's worth it. Should I just move on and forget about this?<issue_comment>username_1: If I assume you are in the U.S., given the situation you described, > > there is no reason not to follow the procedure the advisor described. > > > Although no one here can decide for you, what I can say is that there is an objective consideration in favor of filing a petition: to help your department improve. If you decide to file a petition, I recommend keeping that motivation clearly in mind for the writing of the petition and for any discussions you may have with the instructor or department administrators. In other words, it's best not to project concerns about your grade as your prime motivation. If you are undecided whether to file a petition, it might be helpful to meet with a department administrator first, to ask for guidance. This can help you pick up on subtle things such as staffing issues that the department is already aware of, for which a solution is already in the works. Also, the administrator may decide to look into the situation without your having to file a formal petition. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I disagree with aparente's suggestion that filing a petition is a good way to get the department to improve. Generally speaking, an instructor has a lot of latitude to determine how grades are determined in their class. You can challenge your grade by a petition, but whoever considers the challenge will be inclined to defer to the instructor's judgement, unless the grading was blatantly unfair or unreasonable (some universities use the standard "arbitrary and capricious"), such that the grade wasn't really related to the quality of the students' work. A grading scheme that is just "too harsh" or "too picky" isn't likely to meet that standard. It also isn't really a good way to bring the issue to the attention of the department, due to the adversarial nature of such cases. If the grade is upheld, as I suspect it would due to the required standard of proof, people may tend to view it as "the instructor is right and the student is just whining". It will also focus the attention on you personally, instead of on the fact that this is a general problem affecting many students. I would suggest instead that you mention this issue in your course evaluations, and encourage other affected students to do the same. Explain the issue in detail and as objectively as you can, keeping the focus on how this affected the quality of the course, rather than on how it impacted your own grade. If the department cares about teaching quality, this will encourage the instructor to work on this. If they don't, then there is probably nothing you can do about it in any case. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Assuming you in the USA, I find many students to be too focused lately on the "points" they get within the class. The thing is for most universities your final letter grade is decided by the instructor and not necessarily based strictly on how many points you got in this assignment or that. In other words, it is based on quality of students' work, participation etc. not only the numbers you accumulated in class. This is not to say that grades in class are worthless, they are not the only measure whoever. You are much better off discussing your answers with your instructor during office hours. If not to recover points it is to let him/her know that you know better than what you got evaluated for. Submitting a petition for within-class grading is a seriously bad idea. Departments do not usually dictate how professors grade assignments/exams. In addition, you were alienate your instructor. The only exception to the above is if (after you got your final letter grade) you felt you were personally being discriminated against. That is: your grade is significantly less than others of similar or less performance than you in your class, not that you feel you deserved a better grade. One question though: what is this instructor's final letter grade policy? does s/he use a curve? in many cases instructors are harsh graders because it is on a curve which means you are graded in relation to your peers. Upvotes: 1
2017/04/30
1,538
6,711
<issue_start>username_0: I've already got a little experience doing self-led research but not in doing setup for the domain in which I work. I really enjoy talking with my supervisor about actual research *topics*, but I don't enjoy the workflow he suggests. For example, there is a particular software development toolkit I've been told† to use, but it's constructed in such an unorthodox way as to be unusable outside of a certain development environment in a very specific way (in Eclipse IDE) and isn't compatible with development conventions which are nearly ten years old (Maven). I only found this out when it was too late and have had to jury-rig everything as I go, and now, due to having thrown together a bunch of weird stuff together without testing it properly (having been given the green light by my supervisor, respecting his decision that it would work fine), I've spent six months collecting data which is messed up to the point of being unusable. My supervisor was also surprised, admitting that he didn't expect any sort of problem like that (which is why he recommended throwing the said things together). I like and respect my supervisor but can't help but feel the whole project has gone sour thanks to "just doing it the simple way" which has turned out to be unbelievably complicated and now it's very likely I spent all that effort for nothing. **What can I do when I respect my supervisor's research advice but don't like doing things the way he does? — What kind of "workflow" can I form where I take his research advice but still do things "my" way... or at least to know what implementation advice I should take with a grain of salt?** Obviously it works well for him, so I feel even more disillusioned that I'm the one with all these problems. I feel that just saying "no, your software doesn't work" would not be constructive, because it *does* seem to work... for him. --- † Being more sure of the nature of the working relationships at the department, I now feel that I could have politely declined at the time without offending said person as long as I was confident and produced results.<issue_comment>username_1: First, research doesn't come with a specification with all details ironed out. In most cases, many things are undefined and unknown; hence, it is called research. We could change direction at any time, especially when we realize there is a better problem or the problem at hand is rubbish. Consequently, the code in academia is pretty bad, poorly designed, and ad-hoc as compared to what you find in the industry; although codes in the industry can be one bowl of spaghetti too. On your question, think about the problems at hand. Try to plan them out as best as you can. Collect **evidence** to justify the strength and weakness of a given tool/solution. Bring these pieces of evidence to your supervisor. If he/she is rational, he/she will either side with you or give you better reasons to not go a certain way. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Sounds like you feel your contributions are not valued, which very well may be true. When we look at how our actions are or are not being addressed it can be easy to loose sight of your true goals. If you feel the situation is unhealthy have a face to face conversation away from any snooping coworkers and break down how you really feel. He will respect you more for it. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: One important part of being supervised is to learn to know when you are likely to know better than your professor. You can expect him to know the broad field better than you, and be a good judge of whether a broad strategy is likely to work, or if it has been tried before and failed. You should be the better expert in your particular dataset, instrument, etc. You are the one working with it, you know the problems and the technologies, you are the one that calls the shots. I have had to reject all sorts of ideas of my supervisors because the data was too noisy, too biased, the idea would solve the wrong problem, or they misunderstood something. Sometimes, this lead to a second round of ideas that corrected the original problem, or me ignoring the idea and going on with my choice. (In fairness, I have also rejected ideas that were actually good, but that is the cost of learning). With time, we all learned what each other is better at, my supervisor gives me more advise on the areas that I need, and I can judge better when the ideas are applicable. There is one sentence that raises a concern: > > having been given the green light by my supervisor, respecting his decision that it would work fine > > > I don't know how your workflow is, but I know that my supervisor is not familiar with the details of my code. His way of finding bugs is by looking at the results, and comparing with what he would expect. If there is a mismatch, he will ask for further analysis to either bound the problem, or convince himself that the results are correct. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Supervisors are not superhumans. Their knowledge and experience might fail them like yours does you. If you are doing a PhD, now is the time to start being an independent researcher. I tend to expect more independence from bachelor students than I probably should, but I still give them way more guidance than I receive myself. Yes, sometimes you would need more guidance. But in a PhD thesis it is not your supervisors job to know beforehand how exactly everything has to be done. It might be for a bachelor thesis (but leave a good student freedom, if you trust they can handle it). It is to some extend for a master thesis (but already here is normally some venturing in the unknown included). But definitely not for a PhD. In a healthy environment it should be perfectly fine for you to go to you supervisor (regularly) saying something like "I tried/researched what you suggested but it is not a good option because of A, B and C. I did some more research and here are options D and E that I found. I would prefer to start with D, because it sounds more promising and Someone et al. used it in a comparable setting. Are you okay with that?" This behaviour should be a strong positive in your supervisors eyes, not a thread against their "supervisorness". It did not sound like your supervisor brought you in this situation knowingly, neither did they so far say anything blaming you on it, as I understand from your post. The blame and the possibility they will (knowingly?) fail you again is something you seem to suggest yourself. If that is not the case and there has been fighting and name calling, the situation is of course rather different. Upvotes: 2
2017/04/30
486
2,137
<issue_start>username_0: I have been asked to peer review a paper related to my field of expertise. My educational level is MSc, however I am published. I am referred to as Doctor throughout the request email even though when published, this is not how I refer to myself by any means. This has occurred before and I responded that whilst I would be willing to peer review, I was not a PhD, however they asked me to do it regardless (a different journal than the current requesting journal). I am willing to peer review again and am extremely thorough and capable of doing so, however I don’t think you could call me an expert in terms of years and years of papers and academia. I am not sure how to respond. Firstly how was I chosen, was it random or specific enough; it’s a wide field and even when honest about qualifications I was asked to go ahead. Anyone have any thoughts? Just to add this is a journal under the same umbrella group that I previously reviewed for and one in all likelihood I will submit to myself in the future. Would refusing a request for per review then go against me?<issue_comment>username_1: Assuming this is a reputable journal, then I don't see any problem, especially if the manuscript is in your areas of expertise. It is this expertise the editor seeks. It is not how long you have been in academia. A good editor will seek multiple opinions. Since you have published in the same area, then you are in a good position to provide useful opinions. Editors usually do a Google search to find people who have published in the same area. Alternatively, the manuscript in question may have cited your past works. Also, editors tend to have their personal pool of reviewers. Any papers assigned to them will then go these reviewers. Lastly, the journal submission system may maintain a pool of reviewers or past authors and their expertise. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you have been asked then go ahead, you could check with them. Do consider that they may have chosen you as you may be more "current" in that particular field than some of their "standard" referees. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2017/05/01
818
3,433
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a foreign PhD student and have had extreme difficulties in the last six months due to the university school administration not providing the documentation required to get a residence permit in time to start working on the date agreed to by said administration. This means I had to wait for about four months past the intended start date... meaning that I had also e.g. formally canceled my work and living arrangements by that time, making me homeless and jobless while still trying to sort out a bureaucratic nightmare all by myself. The university continues to be extremely unhelpful to foreign students (apparently there is no support at all for them despite the university having loads of foreign students.). I'm finally here, but the situation is not getting better. My experiences in combination with the issue being effectively ignored by administration has soured my feelings on staying for the years it takes to get a PhD. Irrespective of this, I do respect and like the actual people in the department I work in, and I still am interested in my particular area of research (despite feeling like I need to take several months off already despite having done very little actual research); I feel bad about "abandoning ship", but the problem won't get better as I'm not going to suddenly acquire another, better passport. **Is this a valid reason to give other departments when inquiring about working with them, and, if so, how can I formulate this in a way which is positive?**<issue_comment>username_1: > > Is this a valid reason to give other departments when inquiring about working with them? > > > **Yes, absolutely!** By not providing the necessary resources for you to begin on your expected start date, the university has released you from any obligation to attend. You are a free agent. > > How can I formulate this in a way which is positive? > > > It's not clear that you need to formulate it at all. Since you never attended your intended university, you are under no obligation to mention it in your CV or application. At most, you may need to explain the one-year gap in your education/employment record, in which case — if asked — I'd suggest something simple like "I was admitted to the graduate program at [University X], but I was unable to attend because of unforeseen delays in processing immigration documents, which was out of my control." As a courtesy, you should also explain your decision to pursue other opportunities to the department that admitted you, and in particular to your prospective advisor (if you have one). In fact, I would recommend starting there; your department/advisor **may** be able to pressure the university bureaucrats into providing the paperwork you need. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is intended to supplement username_1's answer. > > *How can I formulate this in a positive way?* > > > You can ask, > > What guidance and support does (name of institution) provide to international students and scholars who might be facing visa difficulties? > > > You can also take a look at their websites, to see what sort of institutional commitment the university might have made in this regard. Here's an example of one that gives me a good impression: [University Letter of Support for International Students, Faculty, and Staff](https://gradschool.utah.edu/) (University of Utah). Upvotes: 0
2017/05/01
540
2,411
<issue_start>username_0: Typically, for PhD students who are in their third or fourth year, is it worth pursuing poster submissions at relevant conferences? Obviously this is a somewhat subjective quantity, but is it generally considered appropriate for researchers who are not new to their field to pursue such publications, and do they realistically have standing, relative to, let's say, short papers?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm in the social and health sciences and do not know what field you are in, so this may be discipline specific. However, it is appropriate for advanced PhD students to give poster presentations. As a PhD student, you are considered a junior scholar (as you would also be considered as an pre-tenured assistant professor) and poster sessions are appropriate at this stage of your career. However, if publishing papers is more desirable than presentations in your field, it is advised that you spend more time working on getting your papers in print than presenting them at conferences. I know of academics who did not receive tenure, because they presented papers at a ton of conferences, but never submitted the papers for publication. Posters have great purposes, but may be less likely to turn into a paper. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Poster presentation are useful for all scholars: PhD's, postdocs and even professors. I think it's worth to be explicit as to why we do the things the way we do in academia - rarely you can find a colleague or supervisor explaining the reasons behind academia quirky mechanisms. Posters, Conference presentations, journal publications are all means of disseminating your academic work. Posters typically pass very quick scrutiny and reach typically a dozen people or so, conference presentations a bit more scrutiny and reach up to hundreds of people - especially if they get published proceedings - and journal publications have to pass the full peer-review process and have the potential to reach thousands of people. That is why posters are "worth" less than conference presentation, that in turn are "worth" less than journal publications. That being said, a poster can be a way to disseminate results of an already published paper, so the boundaries are subtle. All in all, a poster is an excellent way to discuss with other specialists your either preliminary or already concluded piece of work. Upvotes: 1
2017/05/01
3,754
15,488
<issue_start>username_0: As a teacher, I've often had students say that they turned in an assignment, but that because I don't see it, grade it, and return it back to them, that I must have lost their papers/assignments. I tend to be disorganized at times, so it's hard for me to confidently say that I really haven't lost their papers. To make matters worse, I *have* lost a student paper or two over the years only to find it weeks later. How should I respond? Notes: * Many have noted electronic submission. I'm assuming for this question that students turn in something physical that I *could* theoretically lose. ;-) This also allows this question to be applicable to schools that may not use electronic submission.<issue_comment>username_1: ### First, get organized. You need a good defence. Make sure that you are not at fault. What I've done is to put student assignments in a folder and keep it entirely separate from any other papers I have. When I bring their assignments home, I transport them in a plastic bag to further distinguish them and prevent papers from falling out somehow. For situations where the class turns in lots of assignments and students don't always pick up their graded assignments, papers can get out of order, so I make sure to keep each assignment in a separate folder, or I put all graded assignments in a single stack alphabetized by last name. I know with full certainty that students' assignments are in my "to-grade" folder, or my "to-return" folder, and nowhere else. ### Second, respond to the student If they say you've lost their paper, give them the benefit of the doubt by looking through your stack. If it's not there, you know it won't be anywhere else, short of a devious third-party intervention, and you can tell them so. :-) Alternatives ------------ * Use an electronic submission dropbox (e.g. Blackboard, D2L, etc.). + You *could* have students email their assignments to you, but there's always the possibility that it gets caught in your spam filter. If you did this, you should send them an email ASAP to confirm that you received their submission. * Keep all papers in a single room: never take them home to grade, etc. * Keep a list of students who submitted their work as they turn it in. * Scan in assignments, keep an electronic copy and send the copy to students (idea from @MadMyche, in the comments below). Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The best way to prevent students from saying you lost their paper is a) not losing them, and b) keeping a record of the submitted assignments. If you're sometimes disorganized, find a simple, even better: automatic way of record-keeping and stick to it. For example you can achieve a) and b) by accepting only digital assignments that students send by email or upload somewhere. This way, you will also have a time-stamp. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I see two alternatives: (i) When it seems within the realm of reasonable possibility that you've lost a piece of student work, apologize and allow the student to resubmit it. It is by the way a good idea for students to keep copies of the work that they submit. Current technology makes this pretty easy independently of the format -- e.g. by taking cell phone pictures of handwritten work. (ii) Get more organized, so that when a student claims you've lost their work, you can be confident and convincing that you haven't. As for me, I mostly go with (i) for things like written homework (which tend to pass through a grader's hands before they get back to me; lots of opportunities for loss there), but I favor (ii) for exams: I have never lost an exam, and I would happily stare down a student who said I did. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Electronic submission is the best. I couple this with simultaneous printed submissions. If they give it to me in print, it's on time but I expect an electronic copy ASAP and likewise if it's in online, I'll expect a print copy ASAP. (I personally wouldn't mind printing them, but the way our LMS works it can take me a solid minute or two to print each, and that's an hour or two wasted). On test day, I take roll and ensure that I got each person's test (this is as much for the students as for the instructor, to make sure no stray tests will be floating around before everyone in a multi-section class has taken it). Students can see that literally the moment they walk out and that means no one can claim otherwise. For anything handed in on paper, I also binder clip them together AND put into a manila envelope. Haven't lost anything yet, although I probably overkill it a bit. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I used to work in a job where I was required to keep a solid paper trail that could be backed up in case something was 'lost'. The best way to do it is to take a picture of every item that comes in with a cellphone (or digital camera - both super cheap these days!). No need to take a picture of every page, just a picture of the front cover. You won't need to keep these pictures for long (just until you hand stuff back) and it'll stop it being an issue. Do it as it's handed in, and allow your students to see you do it, in case they're trying to get one over on you as you've lost it before. If you lose stuff after that, there's not much you can do other than keeping more organised. Have a bag for 'stuff to mark' and 'stuff to hand back'. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Have the students write date, their name and the title of the assignment into the lower right corner of the first page. When you receive a paper, put a stamp/short signature next to that, cut off the corner, and hand it back to the student. It'll serve as a receipt. There are even stamps with an "auto-increment" feature, which produce serial numbers. Now, no one can claim you've lost some paper which has never been in existence, and no one can use the cut-off corners for a different assignment (you don't even have to collect them when returning the graded papers). Next step: do not lose papers. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Place the burden of proof on the user. This involves giving them a receipt. Yes, this can be a physical receipt, which you hand out when they personally hand the assignment to you. The receipt could simply have a number on it. e.g., 631453 for assignment 6, period 3, desk 14, if they have a 5 page document, turned in on Wednesday (the third weekday). The reason they make this claim (even if it is true) is usually that they don't want to be penalized for lateness. So give them the full benefit of the doubt if they produce a receipt and you can't use that receipt. But if they can't produce the receipt, then regardless of how true their story is, they will not get the points. Clearly what is described above seems cumbersome. Electronic submissions would be nice. However, you can also customize this process as extensively as you like. For instance, you don't need to hand out a receipt to every student; just the ones who request it. Then, **IF** they make a claim that you lost things, you can rightfully say that they had a known process to be able to protect themselves from this very issue, and they won't have a foundation to be able to insinuate that their lower GPA is due to something that is your fault and out of their control. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: **Another form of receipt**. You prepare them outside the test. The first is a document which contains for each test and each student a *randomly selected long number*, e.g. 17289346983. This paper is stored at home and **never in the office.** Then you print out for each test: name of the student / number as a receipt and sort them alphabetically to find them fast. Do that in a copyshop with a cutting machine, it's quite fast. The students give up their test and get in return their receipt. **Any given test without receipt are invalid, so the students will not conveniently "forget" to get their receipt**. Using random numbers that you only know prevents fakes or forgery and is not so work-intensive like signatures (which can be still be forged). *Do not let pressure you* for shortcuts or many students demanding them at the same time. Many students => queue. If they coming up with "important reasons" and "no time", *their* problem. But the students themselves will not really fight the system because you are already known as the professor losing papers (sorry to be blunt, but such blunders will be communicated through the grapevine without mercy). Otherwise I can only reiterate that you need to get organized one way or the other. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: For dispute resolution without the time involved in a formal receipt process, set up a dashcam, and record the physical submissions. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: You could ask students to save copies and that you might lose papers. Then be liberal in letting students turn in work late. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: **LIST OF NAMES** Make a list of the students in your class. Make copies of this for all assignments, papers from this class. Leave space for a heading. eg: Math Assignment May 2nd 2017. **SIGNATURES** Have four columns next to each student name - two for your signature, two for students signature. When the student submits the paper ask him to sign the sheet. When you receive a paper both of you sign. When you give him back the graded paper, again both sign. This way its impossible for the student to lie. Ensure that everyone signs so that no one can say they didn't sign. Also while handing out graded papers always give them one by one. Leaving graded papers on your desk is a good way for papers to be lost. Finally, DON'T LOSE PAPERS. GET ORGANIZED. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: Print a big spreadsheet of names -------------------------------- Just my grain of salt: at my high school, they have a list of students supposed to pass a given test. When we give in our copies, we have to sign it. This serves as proof of work. You just supervise if they really have signed their work in as they fill it in, and you can log even more info, such as date (or time), number of sheets etc... This way, you close off many loopholes, and because the students are the ones filling it in, they know they can't cheat this way and won't even try. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_13: There are many good answers above. However, for your particular situation (only physical papers, and **being realistic**) realities of life is that submission within the classroom is rather hectic and you can't check/verify every student submission on the spot. **The way I suggest is simple**: you just need to ensure that nothing is/was lost by you. In order to do so: I place a large envelope (or even a box) on the table, visible enough to ensure no one can take something from it. and require students to place their work in the box/container. All what I need to do is to **count the submissions and write down the count before I dismiss the class.** If you want even more reassurances, tell the students the count (the latter will have the extra benefit of highlighting how may submissions are missing with out pointing out anyone or spending too much time verifying). After grading, I know how many I had and how many I graded. If the numbers match, I haven't lost anything. So, that solution **should take you about 60 seconds to implement** and no one can possibly claim that their work was lost as long as your numbers match. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_14: **Simple is best** The simplest solution is by far the best: Keep an 'attendance sheet' on you for them to sign whilst they give you the assignment. If they don't sign the sheet, the assignment was never submitted. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: One strategy I used is that I gave them a sheet of paper with an encrypted confirmation code for each assignment, that was unique to each person and each assignment. I declared if I lost their homework and they had the receipt, they would get full credit. This worked for a small course, and I was very organized to know everyone's name and kept them in a mini filing cabinet that I would take to the course. I forced them to turn everything in by hand to me directly. It is the only thing that has worked with 100% success for me. This is not a tractable solution for a large course. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_16: In my teaching jobs in the past, this is what we did, and never had the problem regarding lost work: * Remind the students that it is their responsibility to make and maintain a backup of their work. * As the student submits their work, they sign and date a master class sheet. * I always have the work stored in a labelled document folder (or small box depending on the size of the submissions) - placing each submission in as the students submit it. Ticking each of the names off. * Immediately store the document folder in a filing cabinet, with other assessment folders - this is on you to maintain this organisation. It was suggested to me that if possible, make a photocopy of the submission (or have the student submit a second copy with their original copy) - but this was never necessary as nothing was lost. Following these steps, I never had the problem of lost work, nor had I been successfully accused of losing work. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_17: Well, easy, and has always worked for me: Have a simple table for the assignments. The students hands you an assignment, you make a checkmark in the table. The table is simple: one line per student, one column per assignment. For instance I have a table for checking the attendance anyway, so I would make it one table: the ones handing me an assignment are the ones present; if someone is present but does not hand an assignment, I'd have a special mark for it. **Make it clear that it is the student's responsibility to wait for you to note the assignment in the table by the checkmark!** Now, the student can say that you made a second version of the table and omitted this one checkmark. However, that pushes the student from saying you made a mistake to saying you made a deliberate action against the student; this would be a very hard and a completely different blame. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_18: I would just ask for an additional copy, either physical or digital. I had an undergrad class where each semester the professor would have a two binders, one to be graded and one for record keeping/reference. You'd personally have to put your hole punched paper into the binder rings, after the class he'd zip the binder close and put in his office. When someone challenged him on having lost a paper he'd just pull out the binder and ask them to find there paper. A majority would "remember" that they didnt turn it in after flipping a few pages. It was also helpful as future classes could see other project ideas that were presented, page layouts, etc. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_19: How about using a low-tech, old-fashioned receipt book? Requires no electronics,a and all your receipts will be in one place. Students hand in assignment, and can fill in the "from" and "for" spaces in your book. You sign them all toward the end of class, and hand out their copies as they leave. [![receipt book](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8GEon.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8GEon.jpg) Upvotes: 0
2017/05/01
648
2,798
<issue_start>username_0: I noticed that many, if not all, journals have two main type of papers: 1. A short self-contained original research article of 10 pages or less, focusing on a particular result that does not provide enough material for a full-length contribution. 2. Full-length original research article of more than 10 pages. What is the actual difference between the two? What does *does not provide enough material for a full-length contribution* mean? In particular, I have a paper which is (or can be easily made) 10 pages. How should I know if it qualifies as a note or an original article? Note that in most journals there are original contributions with less pages than some papers appearing as notes. There are few other related questions, but none really answers (as far as I have checked) these issues. I am talking about applied maths,TCS.<issue_comment>username_1: From what I can tell, there's no set standard (although I'm talking about this from a broader basis than just App. Maths) - it all comes down to what the editor/editorial board considers to be 'full-length worthy'. If you're thinking of submitting it, you can always ask that it be considered as x, and the reason why you think it should be. If you have submitted it (hence the question about 'What does...mean', then I'd suggest that they think it needs to be filled out more. I doubt you'd have got that response if they thought it wasn't good enough to be included, just that it might need to be padded out with further explanation and background. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this is one of those things that "you know it when you see it". Very roughly, the distinction in my mind is that a full paper ("original contribution") should actually advance the state of the art in a specific, intentional way. A note is more along of the lines of "I noticed this thing, it seems interesting and I think the community might like to know about it too." Maybe it doesn't fit neatly into a larger research program, or its implications aren't immediately clear, but you think it is worth having in the permanent literature. As you've observed, an original contribution can be short, if you have made a significant advance that just doesn't take that much space to write. So the distinction isn't really about length per se. Notes do tend to be short, mostly because the author may not want to spend a lot of time writing something massive (thus distracting from their real research program), and also because the simplicity or brevity of the result may be part of its appeal. I think the distinction becomes more clear with experience. So if you are not sure about your paper, try showing it to someone more senior in your subfield and asking their opinion. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2017/05/02
1,704
7,061
<issue_start>username_0: I got accepted to a top PhD program. I did not expect this to happen, but I am quite happy about this. A certain professor A voted for me (e.g I was accepted to a program because he liked me during the interview and voted for me). He expects me to work with him when I arrive. But, I am not sure if I want to work with him. I know nothing about the area he works in and most of his students did not join academia after graduation (which is bad for me). I would like trying to work with professor B, but I am not sure if this will work out either. Professor B might not want to work with me, or I might fail in his lab (the work that professor B does is harder and expectations are higher). So I afraid that if I try working with professor B - how will I explain this to professor A? What if I will not succeed with professor B, then most probably I cannot expect to work with professor A again, since nobody wants to feel like a back-up option. How does it usually work for students in PhD? Can students easily try working with different professors and then choose the one they like? Is switching advisors/ coming back to them easy? Or most often students stick to the professor who accepted them? Country: US, field: CS<issue_comment>username_1: I think this greatly depends on the school and it's corresponding funding model. In some CS PhD programs (like the one I attended), your advisor pays a portion or maybe all of your tuition each semester, plus a stipend for living expenses on top of that. My advisor paid for roughly half, and the remaining came from being a student apprentice (e.g., helping to grade in undergrad classes). In other terms my advisor paid for all of my funding so I could dedicate more time to my thesis. If this situation applies to you, then an advisor that is accepting you is also going to be paying for you, so if you know secretly that you aren't thrilled to work with them long term, it may come off as dishonest to accept their offer and then later ask to switch. It's not impossible to switch advisors and sometimes it happens for legitimate reasons. E.g., you think you're interested in X but later find out that you're really not, and want to work on Y instead. In this case switching advisors to an advisor in topic Y might be totally agreeable to all parties. The best advice I can give is to be up front about your uncertainty and your plans so no one feels betrayed or let down later. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: To give a different perspective, though this is not from CS, but probably still relevant since it is unlikely that all CS programs, especially top ones, follow the model where advisors fund PhD students from their own budgets. It is possible that you do not officially commit to an advisor until after you pass your quals. Which is about 1-1.5 years into the program. In fact, you are not even officially a full PhD student until then. So you can use that time to investigate the options by asking other students and building relationships with faculty members (also beyond A and B). The latter can be done through coursework, discussions of their papers, etc. And also pay attention to interpersonal dynamics, not only research topics. If you feel uncertain which case you belong to, you could ask the program to connect you with other students and also give information on the structure of the program and advisor selection process. Also, to the point of prof A supporting you. In the case where funding is not an issue, voting doesn't necessarily mean they are really dying to have you. If advisors are selected at a later date, I wouldn't rush into declining their lab. Wait until you are on campus, ask to meet (and thank for supporting in person). They'll probably ask you about your research interests at which point you can tentatively say that your interests are x,y,z (such that x,y,z are aligned with B) and they may actually suggest you to talk to B anyway. But also give A a chance - the reality on the ground may be very different from what you perceive at the moment. And overall, I'd recommend reading this book: [https://www.amazon.com/dp/082183455X/ref=cm\_sw\_r\_cp\_awdb\_GdxczbYQWFSMD](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/082183455X) it's meant for mathematicians, but a lot of tips apply across the board and it very well written. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: *[Background: I'm a full professor in a top-5 American CS department. My answer is skewed toward standard practice in theoretical computer science, but I regularly give the same advice to **all** incoming PhD students in my department.]* As others have said, practices vary in different departments, and in different sub-fields within each department, but as a general rule: **It's *your* PhD. *Of course* you can switch advisors!** Professor A voted for your admission, but he did not admit you. The *department* admitted you. Prof A's vote does not oblige you to work with him at all. It's natural for Prof A to *anticipate* that you will work with him, but he has no right to *demand* that you work with him. (These are all shadings of the word "expect"; I'm not sure which meaning you intended.) If you prefer to work with Prof B, you do not need to justify your preference to Prof A. (You should still *communicate* your preference to Prof A, of course, especially if he asks you about working with him.) More generally, you should never feel constrained to *only* work with one professor, just because that professor happens to be your advisor or happens to be paying you. Nothing prevents you from working with *both* Prof A *and* Prof B, provided you are meeting the obligations attached to your funding. (Exclusivity is not a reasonable obligation for a research assistantship. Progress, yes. Good-faith effort, definitely. Results, sure. Exclusivity, no.) In my department, faculty in my research area strongly encourage entering PhD students to work with multiple faculty — in the first year, to help everyone make more informed advising decisions, and in later years, so that students develop a more diverse research portfolio, and to provide a backup in case research with one faculty member doesn't pan out. Yes, even the students I am supporting from my own grants. All that said, it's best to approach the situation under the assumption of good faith. Assume that Prof A and the other faculty in your new department have your best interests at heart, and approach them to discuss options under that assumption. Be clear with Prof A that you are not sure you want to work with him **and why**, and ask for advice on how best to meet your professional goals, including approaching other potential advisors. If Prof A objects, or tries to guilt-trip you into working with him, or tries to convince you not to even talk with other faculty, then congratulations, you've identified someone who does *not* have your best interests at heart. Best to learn that early, before you waste your time working with them. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2017/05/02
1,671
6,929
<issue_start>username_0: I am not a people person, and therefore I usually work alone. I'm quite content with this, and I have actually been able to achieve some wonderful results (to me, anyway) working this way. However I worry that nobody else will really care about my research. Are there examples of modern day mathematicians who have been successful (as recognized by the mathematical community) working alone? How can I get more people to be interested in the problems I'm interested in, without being able to connect on a personal level? Even if I'm not able to collaborate with anyone, I'd like to create some level of dialogue between other mathematicians and my publications. That is, I'd like for them to perhaps answer some of my questions, and for them to pose new ones that I could possibly answer. So far, I have failed to achieve this.<issue_comment>username_1: Plenty of mathematicians are introverted, quiet, and typically prefer to work alone. (Also, plenty of mathematicians are extroverted, boisterous, and prefer to work with others -- but I believe the profession does a reasonably good job of welcoming various personality types.) *All* successful mathematicians whom I know spend some of their time and energy engaging with the mathematical community. Going to conferences or chatting with colleagues are good ways to do this. There are also ways such as [MathOverflow](https://mathoverflow.net) to interact with mathematicians online. And simply reading the (contemporary) work of other mathematicians is also a form of engagement. If you want your work to be appreciated by others, then I recommend taking the time and energy to appreciate others' work. For example, are there any questions asked by others, for which your work gives any insights? If you can help people answer questions they are interested in, then it is quite natural that they might take an interest in your own work as well. Good luck! Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer your first question, here is an example of a highly successful mathematician who never collaborated with anyone: <http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/search/author.html?mrauthid=177585> (<NAME>). It is worth noting though, that collaborations are just one aspect of participating in the mathematical community - one still needs to give talks, write papers, get hired to an academic job, be on committees, be chair of the dept, .... Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think this is among the most philosophically troubling and challenging questions in mathematics research. I wish there was a clear answer one way or the other. The majority of mathematicians are, I think, working very hard to achieve publications and collaborators. Many will say that networking at conferences is crucial. In fact, some will argue that the whole essence of a mathematical proof is that it is [a social construct](https://mathbabe.org/2012/08/06/what-is-a-proof/), and that the very best strategies are to [work with others and explain it to others](https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/07/11/proving-a-proof-is-a-proof/). However, I can't help but recall a number of researchers in recent years who did work almost entirely alone for many years: Wiles, Perelman, Zhang. And in fact these are uniquely the figures who broke open the pinnacle, hard, long-standing, important problems: Fermat's Last Theorem, the Poincare Conjecture, and the Twin Prime Conjecture. Personally I have an outstandingly hard time reconciling these observations. As far as how did those lone figures get attention: By working on, and solving, such incredibly hard and famous problems that no one could ignore their results. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The questions in the body of your question are quite different from the one in the title. I will address the titular question > > "Can I be successful as a lone wolf researcher in mathematics?" > > > by going out on a limb and predicting that the answer is, simply, **No, you cannot**. It's true that there are people like Perelman, Wiles, <NAME> and other notable (and less notable) examples of "lone wolf researchers" who have become very successful. But the fact remains that those examples are few and far between. My experience is that among ordinary, "mere mortal" working mathematicians, it is normal to see people producing the occasional solely authored paper, but one hardly ever encounters a researcher who has not had coauthors on at least, say, 50% of their papers (my own ratio is about 50% coauthored papers, and I've been told that that's an unusually high proportion of solely authored works). What this suggests is that by limiting yourself to not collaborating at all with others, you are confining yourself to such a small group of people that most of us professional mathematicians here have trouble naming more than 2-3 people (all of whom are extremely famous) belonging to it. Unless you know something about yourself that we don't that leads you to believe you have a reasonable shot at being the next Wiles or Perelman, I don't think I'm taking too much of a chance by predicting that in fact you aren't (and that's not an insult in any sense since obviously I'm not either), and that your chances of making a successful collaboration-free career in math are very close to zero. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: *I will take the following to be your question, rather than what appears in the title: "How can I get more people to be interested in the problems I'm interested in?"* I suspect that if you imagine some other mathematician working in a solitary fashion, but wishing for some professional interaction, you might surprise yourself, with your ability to find a solution for him or her. Wouldn't you suggest that s/he make the first move? And not be discouraged if the first attempt doesn't get you anywhere? Some ways to take the initiative to connect with other mathematicians: * Math SE * write to the author of a paper that interests you * you might need to compromise and branch out a bit from your own niche * go to talks, chat with others over cookies afterwards * go to conferences -- again, here, please don't limit yourself to your own niche * visit another university, and write to someone there ahead of time to say, "I'll be in your area in the month of *x*, may I give a talk about my work while I'm there?" followed by a very short description of your possible topics, along with links to publications * volunteer to tutor math undergrads who are having some trouble with a class -- this will help you get out of your shell, and help you improve your math communication skills; also, it will make you more visible and attractive to other mathematicians. I recommend that you do some reading about how others with limited people skills have negotiated this in their lives. Congratulations on taking the first step. Upvotes: 3
2017/05/02
2,276
9,655
<issue_start>username_0: I'm supposed to present a poster in an well-rated Computer Science conference, or rather in a workshop within that conference. This is the first time this workshop will have posters (the larger conference has had them for a while). However, I've not received any information about the logistics of getting the poster printed and delivered - just a general note, after my inquiring about it, saying that I'm at liberty to design it any way I like and in any dimensions I like. In a previous conference at which I presented a poster we were told to submit a PDF of dimensions X x Y by a certain time, and that was that - the poster was printed and set up someplace. The opposite case seems strage, ridiculous even: For 10 or 20 (or 100) people, coming in from different countries, to each have to arrange for the printing of a poster and either bring it from overseas in a special container or to have to coordinate with print shops in a city they don't know. The conference is held in a couple of weeks and I'm getting worried... of course I've contacted the workshop organizers about this, but - was I wrong to expect this to be taken care of? Is there some kind of other option of arranging this which I'm missing?<issue_comment>username_1: *I'm answering from an HCI-related subfield of CS:* **What you describe - attendees print and bring their posters themselves - is completely normal.** While I do not rule out it exists even in my specific field, I have never encountered a conference that would print posters for you. Any time I have participated in, or just looked at the CfP for a poster session, attendees were merely told the available board size (and thus, the maximum allowable size for the poster) and asked to prepare their poster in time for the poster session. Typically, attendees then have the poster printed at their home institution (and get compensated by the institution as a part of the conference attendance cost). This has the nice side-effect that, at least in smaller places, you might already get in touch with a few conference attendees at the airport, because you notice the people walking around with poster tubes. At some point before the poster session (depending on the conference, already at the beginning of the conference), attendees will take a few minutes to affix their posters at the boards they have been assigned (or just at any boards, if the poster space works in a first-come first-serve manner). The poster belongs to the attendee/their employer and they are free to do with it after the poster session what they like. A possible procedure that has been followed by many people I have been in touch with is to take the poster back to one's home institution and place it on some wall in or near one's office. A word on your impression: > > The opposite case seems strage, ridiculous even: For 10 or 20 people, coming in from different countries, to each have to arrange for the printing of a poster and either bring it from overseas in a special container or to have to coordinate with print shops in a city they don't know. > > > In a way, that's true. But then, note that poster printing (well, any graphics printing) comes with a certain deal of variety and "risks". Colours might be messed up, the size/margins might be unfitting ... add to that that different regions of the world are used to (and thus base their poster templates on) different paper formats. Thus, it is desirable to see the poster when there is still some time to make some corrections. As for the special container - any university institute I have encountered owns several of these, for exactly this purpose. Note that if you want to bring back the poster (as described in my text above), you need such a container anyway for the way back, so there would be no point in carrying the container there without anything in it. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: A conference, or workshop where the posters are printed for you is **very exceptional**. It sounds reasonable to print all posters for the presenters locally **but** * you can print posters much cheaper at university than in any copy shop, because its subsidized * some prefer a cheap preprint, others are willing to pay for the nice glossy high quality print. * the posters are often created with **very different software** such as LaTeX, Inkscape, Corel Draw or even Powerpoint... Even if one requests an PDF version xy file: They all interpret the PDF standard differently. [PDF/a](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDF/A) tries to solve this and [PDF/a verification tools exist](https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/18161/is-there-free-or-open-source-software-for-checking-pdf-a-compliance), but hardly any program (and user) knows about it. NB: A higher version number in PDF represents more complexity (Javascript and the like) but not better compatibility. * some guests will try to send a 1 GB file, because they use a fancy bitmap background picture, others do not want to hand out the digital files. * most people prefer to have a **final review on the printed poster** and have a final chance to improve colours. Especially Windows users in our institute have often broken symbols in diagrams (black box ■ instead of µ). * additional staff (expensive) is required to print, to discuss with attendees about file standards, and to hang up the posters. * people often **meet and discuss already when hanging up** the posters (this is an additional poster session for free ;-) (thanks to username_1 for the comment. I share his experience.) This is why posters are usually printed individually, if it is not a in-house workshop. However there are conferences with presentations on large screens instead of paper poster too. Travelling with a poster is sometimes difficult and I have seen **fabric** printed posters very often, but also patchworks of many DIN A4 sheets to get one A0 poster. [![Travel Fabric Poster](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BOcJS.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BOcJS.png) Image source: <http://depts.washington.edu/uwposter/product/travel-fabric-poster/> Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Hello from the biology field! It's very common for us to print our own posters (I've actually never seen a conference where they do that for you, although I'm sure they do exist somewhere). I wanted to add a small point to the other detailed answers: if the posters are printed in the attendee's institution, they then belong to said institution, and can be re-used at other conferences (which definitely lowers the cost and environmental impact!) and/or displayed in the corridors and other "social" places - in each lab I've worked in, we had walls covered in collections of previous posters, reminding people of past work, past colleagues, and helping explanations to visitors. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Speaking from the Applied Mathematics/Earth Science divide, the closest I've seen to the model that the question implies is where a conference [will](http://www.egu2016.eu/guidelines/presenter_guidelines_poster.html) [advertise](https://orders.copycentral.com/agu/) a partner commercial poster printing firm, which will then have a physical presence at the conference, from which your poster can be collected. Actually placing the poster in the correct location remains the duty of the presenter however, and prices don't really seem all that competitive. This tends to be linked to *very* large conferences, with multiple poster sessions per day, and to conferences which repeatedly use the same facilities year after year, and thus have built up enough repeat custom for both sides to keep up the relationship. When conferences are smaller, or cycle between multiple venues without revisiting, then it's possible a local member of the organising committee might have a recommendation of a local firm, but often, particularly if it's being held on a campus site, it's just left up to the individual presenters. Having said all that, in the modern age it's fairly trivial to find a firm which will print and deliver a poster via snail mail. If you can arrange to get it sent to your hotel (for a large conference) or a friendly member of the organising committee (for a smaller one) then the same effect can be produced. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm adding an answer of my own based on the reply I got from the workshop chairs and information I gathered from other sources. First - as others suggest, it is indeed at least very *common* for conferences not to print posters themselves. It's apparently just as common for there to be *absolutely no support* from the organizers for poster printing. But what was just as interesting was the following: Up until not so many years ago, there were no/very few posters in the conference + workshops overall. More and more tracks and workshops of the conference started "amassing" poster sessions - but apparently it has not dawned on many people that this is now a "many posters conference" (I estimate over 100). In fact, the reply to my question about the possibility of the conference doing the printing was, that there are no resources allocated for it, but that it "would be a great because XYZ". So, apparently nobody has brought up the possibility of the conference organization including the centralized printing of posters. So my bottom line is: **Sometimes, the option of "conference prints" has simply not been considered; and thus is the *default* rather than the *norm*. We can make a convincing case in its favor - especially in large conferences - and make it more *common* as well.** Upvotes: -1
2017/05/02
1,213
5,098
<issue_start>username_0: I'm approaching the end of the first year of my PhD and I really am struggling to find what my research question is. I'm slightly panicing that I don't know what I'm doing yet and I get very little support from my supervisor. I've spent time exploring the literature and I have a few broad ideas of potential areas. The problem is, when I discuss the topics with my supervisor, he gives me no advice or guidance about how to develop these ideas into research questions or whether these ideas are even valuable/ could make a PhD. We meet fairly regularly (maybe once a month). But in most of our meetings it's just me bringing him up to speed on the research I've done and some ideas, and I really don't get any feedback that is constructive to me narrowing down a topic and really developing it. I've tried to be more direct, and specifically asked 'what topic do you think has the most value?' to which he'll reply 'what topic do YOU think has the most value?'. He doesn't do a lot of independent research either as he spends a lot of time teaching, so it's difficult for me to just attach myself to something he has worked on. I'm really not sure how I can get some feedback on my work and find a topic. Any advice? **Edit:** Thanks so much to everyone who has responded to this question. Your advice has been really helpful and constructive.<issue_comment>username_1: Several things come to mind: First, know that this is frustrating for many PhD students and it is normal for people to feel anxious if they aren't on a set course for their dissertation at the end of year 1. Second, is it possible that your advisor is not a great match for you? My dissertation chair was not an expert at all in my dissertation topic (no one in my program was), but he was an accomplished scholar who could help me develop skills in identifying appropriate literature and narrowing down a topic. You may want to consider if someone else in your program is a better fit and switch advisors. This happens sometimes. It's normal. Third, this is why PhD programs have students assemble dissertation committees, rather than just work with one person. If switching advisors is not an option, find someone else in the area you want to research and meet with him or her. Invite him or her to coffee or lunch. If they are at a distance, ask them to talk on the phone. Many researchers would be flattered that you are interested in their area and want to pick their brain. This may help. Finally, does the literature indicate that there are specific topics in this larger area that need to be explored? Maybe you are not consulting with the right literature or there is a lot more out there to consult with. Hope this helps! Good luck! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are several advising 'styles' if you can call them that. The spectrum probably runs from 'do this project now' to 'let's meet repeatedly for 6 months until something materializes' Professors are not usually trained in project management, so you might need to step up here and take control of your destiny. He or she is probably not going to give you the direction you want. Rest assured, if you pick the project that interests you the most and you work hard, you'll turn it into something tangible. So, change your tone from 'should I do x or y?' to 'I'm doing x starting Monday unless you disagree'. Perhaps your advisor will be very helpful once you have more targeted questions, which you'll get once you start the project. However, I am worried about your 'regular monthly meetings'. You should be meeting weekly or more. If your advisor just isn't engaged in what you're doing, move on. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As username_2 has written, there are many styles and his seems to be firmly in the 'you must reach the answer within yourself' category. Yes, it's very true that students can be influenced into doing something they weren't 100% in love with and therefore end up being disillusioned, but they are there to guide you and the ideology of 'no interference' quickly can end up being 'no helping'. I had what I thought was a 'pursue your own path with my guidance' supervisor who just ended up being aloof, useless and completely uninterested in my research. Worst of all, when I tackled them about it, they berated me for wanting to have my hand held etc. I'd therefore suggest you tackle the problem head on in case yours is similar. **What to do:** As others have recommended - state what you need in concrete terms and set up a weekly meeting till you get over this hump. Lay out the options and go through each of them in detail - have a list of actual questions about each topic, and don't settle for vagueness. If you're looking for topic worth, you need to state it more directly; which of these topics was recently a big issue at x, why does topic y matter now? Point blank say 'I'd like your opinion really' if asked the question back. If they aren't able to deliver that then you need to look else where, even if you feel it might be disruptive. Upvotes: 1
2017/05/02
1,123
4,399
<issue_start>username_0: 1. Assume I attended someone's seminar talk which I liked a lot. Also I heard that yet another expert X also said that the talk is interesting. Is it ok to say to the lecturer that the expert X and I liked the talk, or should I not mention another's opinion? 2. Now assume the opposite situation: the expert X and I did NOT like the talk. Is it ok to say to the lecturer that X and I did not like the talk, or again should I not refer to other people? 3. [**update**] Now assume that the lecturer explicitly asked me if I heard what X said about his/her talk. Can I tell the lecturer X's opinion (assuming X did not ask me in advance not to do that)?<issue_comment>username_1: Definitely NOT ok. the second option is definitely not ok. The first one is more acceptable, but it's definitely not usual. I don't see why you would do this. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: X, being an expert in the field, can presumably find ways to communicate their opinions to the speaker, publicly or privately, if they wish to do so. Often, opinions communicated between experts will be much more complicated and mixed than a simple like/dislike. "I agree with you on points A, B, and C, but I think point D is contradicted by Y's research. I'll send you a reference." is much more likely than either extreme. If you just heard X talking about point D and Y's research, you could get the impression X disliked the talk. If you just heard X talking up points A, B, and C you could get the impression X liked the talk. Neither impression would be fully accurate. Unless X has positively authorized you to speak on their behalf, you should not do so. If asked directly, indicate that you are unsure and, as suggested in a comment, encourage the speaker to talk to X directly. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The golden rule is: **'never speak for someone unless they cannot speak for themselves.'** This applies here as well as everywhere else. If the lecturer asks you what they thought, tell them to ask the person as you wouldn't want to guess their feelings. That being said, you can always say 'I believe a lot of people appreciated/enjoyed the talk' or something similarly encouraging. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: This is science, not theater. What you should communicate isn't 'I liked it but X did not at all'. Rather, you should say 'I liked your approach to ...' or 'nice talk but I'm not convinced of...' If he/she wants to know what X thought (barring confidentiality), say 'he/she was critical of your interpretation of ...' Can you offer other attendee's assessments? I don't see why not, but I'm not sure offering names accomplishes much. It should be about content. Of course this assumes substantive comments. I've seen my share of good data with horrible delivery and boring demeanor. That's harder to convey with tact. Saying 'professor x thought you were boring and also thinks your suit is ugly' doesn't help anyone. Just stick to content and I think you'll be ok. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Regarding (1), you could safely say something general and vague, such as > > "The talk was very well received, congratulations." > > > Regarding (2), simply speak for yourself, unless you are the expert's assistant and are paid to speak for him. Regarding (3), I recommend using a question, for example: > > "Have you asked him/her?" or "Would you like me to introduce you to him/her?" > > > Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In this particular case, even if you thought that X thought the talk was nice, but actually he thought it was bad (or viceversa), I don't see why it would do any bad if you tell the lecturer what you think X thought. Unless the lecturer was very happily expecting to hear X's opinion, then it's ok. Of course, what I would do is to say to the lecturer exactly what I heard coming out of X's mouth, or whatever you've been told about X's opinion (in case you didn't even hear him personally). If the case was that the lecturer was really trying to impress X, then even if you make the mistake of telling him that X thought it was great, but he actually thought that it sucked, then the lecturer wouldn't get mad at you or something like that, basically because he would realize hours or days later, and much less is the chance of him getting mad at you if he doesn't know you. Upvotes: -1
2017/05/02
612
2,325
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing an MLA research paper for a school assignment. When citing a source in-text, is it appropriate to use an acronym? For example, I'm citing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Would it be acceptable to cite the source as (CDC)? If I'm citing the source at multiple points in the paper, could I cite it with the full name the first time and with the acronym for any subsequent citations?<issue_comment>username_1: First time in full with the abbreviation in parentheses, then use the abbreviation to your hearts content. (In longer works it may be advisable to reset for each chapter, but I doubt that's the case here). Spell out in full for the works cited unless abbreviated original in the title by the source. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: From the 7th edition of the MLA handbook. > > Abbreviations are used regularly in the list of works cited and in > tables but rarely in the text of a research paper (except within > parentheses). In choosing abbreviations, keep your audience in mind. > While economy of space is important, clarity is more so. Spell out a > term if the abbreviation may puzzle your readers.... The trend in > abbreviation is to use neither periods after letters nor spaces between > letters, especially for abbreviations made up of all capital letters. > > > The following points are from a [MLA style guide](http://www.docstyles.com./library/mlalite.pdf) on the doc scribe site. * If an acronym is commonly used as a word, it does not require explanation (IQ, LSD, FBI, ESP). * A term must be fully written the first time it is used, thereafter just the acronym is used. * If an acronym is not familiar use an expanded abbreviation; for MLA write Mod. Lang. Assn Also from the same source (Page 8) > > The common practice in research writing to spell out the name or > phrase to be abbreviated followed by the acronym in parentheses. > Thereafter, just the acronym is used. For example, the Modern Language > Association (MLA) publishes a journal. The reverse is also works—the > MLA (Modern Language Association) publishes a journal. > > > So in your case Centers for Disease Control (CDC) or CDC (Centers for Disease Control) for your first citation and CDC afterwards should be fine. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2017/05/02
654
2,548
<issue_start>username_0: I am submitting a revision to paper I submitted to a IEEE journal. 1. When I wrote out the letter addressing the revisions, I included some graphics in my comments as well. But when I look at the ScholarOne website, it seems like the letter to “Respond to Decision Letter” is a text only format. Does anybody know whether you can submit a word document/pdf to respond to the decision letter instead of submitting a text-only letter? 2. Do you typically have to submit a new Cover letter if you revised the paper/letter? Or should I just keep the cover letter the same as the cover letter that I used to submit the original paper?<issue_comment>username_1: First time in full with the abbreviation in parentheses, then use the abbreviation to your hearts content. (In longer works it may be advisable to reset for each chapter, but I doubt that's the case here). Spell out in full for the works cited unless abbreviated original in the title by the source. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: From the 7th edition of the MLA handbook. > > Abbreviations are used regularly in the list of works cited and in > tables but rarely in the text of a research paper (except within > parentheses). In choosing abbreviations, keep your audience in mind. > While economy of space is important, clarity is more so. Spell out a > term if the abbreviation may puzzle your readers.... The trend in > abbreviation is to use neither periods after letters nor spaces between > letters, especially for abbreviations made up of all capital letters. > > > The following points are from a [MLA style guide](http://www.docstyles.com./library/mlalite.pdf) on the doc scribe site. * If an acronym is commonly used as a word, it does not require explanation (IQ, LSD, FBI, ESP). * A term must be fully written the first time it is used, thereafter just the acronym is used. * If an acronym is not familiar use an expanded abbreviation; for MLA write Mod. Lang. Assn Also from the same source (Page 8) > > The common practice in research writing to spell out the name or > phrase to be abbreviated followed by the acronym in parentheses. > Thereafter, just the acronym is used. For example, the Modern Language > Association (MLA) publishes a journal. The reverse is also works—the > MLA (Modern Language Association) publishes a journal. > > > So in your case Centers for Disease Control (CDC) or CDC (Centers for Disease Control) for your first citation and CDC afterwards should be fine. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2017/05/02
1,113
4,958
<issue_start>username_0: During my PhD I had an awesome collaborator that taught me a lot in an area that my main advisor had no experience at all. I have a paper draft with him that's getting more than 3 years to get published. He is extremely perfectionist and always wanted to add one more little detail here and there. With that, I don't mean from a writing standpoint. He actually asks for new calculations and analysis which usually takes months to finish. I read papers in this area which presented much fewer results and details than my paper. It's frustrating because I'm applying for faculty positions and I need this paper to show as a record of a very important part of my research plan. I explained it to him, many times. I also like him very much and would like to have him as a collaborator. So, I don't want to make pressure in a bad way. In short, he doesn't need this paper, he doesn't need the collaboration. He is a very accomplished researcher. Also, he didn't have any formal responsibility for my graduate studies. But still, I need the paper. We are in different countries, so I cannot have a one-to-one conversation with him. My former advisor cannot do much as well. My question is simply: what should I do? **Edit**. I talked with my collaborator and everything went pretty well. I submitted my paper this morning!!! Thanks for the feedback. I think just the act of writing here, in addition to the feedback I got help me a lot to leverage. (I also followed some Carnegie's rules)<issue_comment>username_1: You tried to persuade him already many times, to no avail. Now you need to bargain. Explain once more that you're under publication pressure, and that you believe your paper is long ready for submission​. But now also mention that you will have no other choice than to pull out of the collaboration soon and to publish your part of the work separately as a single-authored paper. This of course presupposes that your contributions are separable and that you are prepared to upset your co-author. (Regarding the latter: he upset you already and after this experience you probably don't count on working with him in the future anyway.) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You mentioned that you explained your situation to your collaborator many times, but you didn't mention the most important part: after you explain your situation, you ask for something specific and actionable, with a specific deadline, and you listen to what they have to say. Outside pressure requires leverage; internal pressure requires *agreement*. The situation is asymmetric, as you describe - you need the publication, they don't. Nothing you can do really changes the difference in your needs. However, they hopefully have their own interests: they might be interested in helping you in your quest at this crucial time in your early career, and they might look forward to continuing your collaboration (hopefully they've enjoyed working with you). The question is: what are you asking for, and are they willing to agree to the plan or not? There needs to be a clear answer here, an unambiguous commitment, and you also need to start considering a plan B if they are simply unwilling to agree or follow-through. I would suggest an in-person meeting if at all possible, or at least video-chat. You can explain, but most importantly you have to make it clear that there is a real deadline you can't put off. For instance: "we would need to submit this by Date X, as I have to change my focus to application deadlines, and won't be able to work further on this. I think we've done great work, and it would greatly add to my own chances of getting a permanent position, so I really don't want to just let this just die, and I'd like to work with you on more things in the future after I get a position, but personally I either have to push towards publication by the deadline or just give up on it." You should ask how they view the situation. Is this just something that's been put off to continue to improve because there was no reason to rush, or do they have some more fundamental concern about publication? Acknowledge their concerns, and try to find common ground. I doubt they want to lose you as a collaborator entirely, and if they can just keep polishing and putting things off they could very well do so indefinitely. Most importantly, you need to come to a crystal-clear mutual agreement on a plan. If they just aren't willing to, so be it - at least you know and you can switch focus to Plan B. But if they can, then follow up in writing with the plan you both agreed to and thanking them for working with you on this, etc. They might still fall through - not all collaborations end up as productive ones - so you should still consider that Plan B anyway (especially as rejection is still the most likely initial result, but obviously "submitted" or "under review" is better than "in preparation"). Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2017/05/02
1,836
7,614
<issue_start>username_0: I am in a desperate situation. I made a mistake and committed academic misconduct. I have submitted my article to two journals in parallel, let's say in j1 and j2. Once I received acceptance from journal j1 I wrote a withdraw email to j2. However, after the article came online it was found by the reviewer of j2 that the withdrawal article was actually a parallel submission. I am 3rd year PhD student and my professor was unaware of this act. How can I handle this situation? Should I write an apology email to j2? If j2 accept the apology, will j1 keep the article or still it will be retracted? What is the best way to come out of the situation? \*I am reviewer of both journals as well.<issue_comment>username_1: I can't speak for how these journals will react, but i can say that as a conference program chair the course of action was to reject from both venues. My expectation would be for j2 to contact j1 and for j1 to rescind the acceptance. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your best course is to write your professor, both journals, explain your reason sincerely, and let them handle the situation as they see fit. Everyone make mistakes, and sometimes they are bad mistakes. In my opinion, trying to hide these mistakes or covering up would cost you more than the mistake itself in terms of academic reputation. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are a seasoned reviewer you should know the rules, so falling back on being an inexperienced graduate student probably won't hold water. So clearly this was less a 'mistake' and more of a 'gamble'. You should pull the article from both venues and state -unequivocally- that your advisor had no knowledge. You didn't mention if your advisor was a co-author on the submission, but if he/she was, the infraction is even worse, because not only have you submitted without consent, you risked damaging their reputation with the journals as well. The best path forward is to own your mistake wholly and apologize. On the positive side, it's not like you committed the mortal sin of fabricating data or plagiarizing - you violated a rule (and likely the terms and conditions of the journal). Probably not grounds for dismissal but you might be on a leash for a while. Don't do it again! The rule is in place for several reasons, not the least of which is respecting reviewers' time and effort (reviewers' time is precious and usually pro-bono. We can't have every journal reviewing the same work). Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: **TL;DR: Come clean with your advisor and coauthors first and hope that they help you.** Concurrent submission is a big no-no, because it means you are wasting the time of the reviewers and editors by creating twice as much work as is necessary and you are effectively queue-jumping by doubling your chances of acceptance, which is unfair to other authors. Unless you have a good excuse, people will be very unhappy about this. You will need to talk to your advisor and coauthors before taking further action. They will find out sooner or later and it is best if they hear it from you first. You must explain what you did, why you did it, that it was a terrible mistake, and that you sincerely regret it. Hopefully they will decide to help you resolve the situation. Your advisor and coauthors will need to help you apologize to the journals. Everyone makes mistakes. The important thing is that you must rectify them as soon as possible. If you appropriately apologize, then hopefully it can be forgiven and you can move on having learned an important lesson. Concurrent submission is nowhere near as serious as, say, falsifying data. I hope that you are able to learn a lesson from this and that your reputation can be recovered. Good luck! Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I think you have already got proper answers; however, the outcome of your apology depends on several factors. 1- if both journals belongs to same publisher I will expect a warning letter and maybe no further action will be taken. 2- If journals belongs to different publisher than you are in tricky situation. First you need to apologise to j2 and inform your apology to j1. If j2 rejects your apology I will expect strong action from j1; at least retraction of article and possible ban. However, if j2 shows flexibility and just issue a warning than there is a high possibility that j1 will endorse the warning issued by j2 and matter will solved. My recommendation to is don't hide or don't try to play smart. Apologise and you should mention about your services to journal. Might be Editor will show little flexible behaviour based on your voulenteer work. Finally, never repeat such mistake. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I tend to disagree with everyone here. One fellow noticed you submitted in parallel. So? That's not a problem yet. Were you allowed to do that? Probably not. Should you have done it? Absoulutely. Currently journals gamble with us. They take your article, hold it up for months and reject it in the end. Why shouldn't we do the same? You can apply dor several jobs or schools at once just as schools and employers can consider a lot of options at once. The same should be true and acceptable for journals. The fact that it currently isn't is not your fault but the fault of journals displaying their power. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: Like it was stated in the other answers, your co-authors should be aware of the current state of this situation and the fact of parallel submission itself. In terms of informing journals j1 and j2, as I see it: you may write a brief message to j1 (editor?) just informing that the (accepted) article has been also submitted to j2 due to *your* neglect but it is withdrawn from there, and write an apology letter to j2 (it would be good if you specifically indicate that it happened due to your mistake, neglect, etc.). By writing to j2 (reviewer) you 'pass a ball' to j2. So, then it is up to j2 whether to accept your apologies, escalate it to the next level (e.g. by contacting j1 and asking them to withdraw your manuscript) or do something else. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: You came here to ask an advice on how to handle this issue. But actually, you have no option. Let your supervisor know, and he/she will tell you what you should do and how to handle it. For me, your university has a bigger responsibility than you. Your university should educate you regarding the scientific community before it allows you to submit a paper in a scientific journal, and not by giving you just a booklet with some info of Do and Dont. However, I am not removing your responsibility. Your supervisor and both journals are the real victims of all this situation. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: It might not help you much right now... But a more tactical approach is to send two versions, differing by as much as you are comfortable in explaining the differences if this happens. Obvious obligatory differences: 1. different **titles** 2. different **focus on results** 3. **explaining** your method differently, example: many fields today are a mixture so researchers have literally each toe in a different field. Each field have their own journals and expect you to write things which are readable by their audience. 4. different **comparisons** to previous work done by others. Voila and you have almost a whole new paper. Yes some extra work required, but not nearly as much and probably not nearly as stressful work as risking being pointed out as a cheater. Upvotes: -1
2017/05/02
1,301
5,640
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on a hard problem in computer science. The problem is NP-complete. Untill now, the fastest algorithm for this problem runs in $O(3^n)$ time and I came up with an algorithm with a time complexity of $O(2.82)^n$. Yet the paper, in which I described my approach, was rejected in three A\* conferences. I am wondering why. 1. First conference: They asked why I did not compare my algorithm with algorithm X. They appreciated my algorithm and have not found any fault with it. 2. Second conference: Now I compared my algorithm with algorithm X. They asked me why I did not compare it with some parallel algorithm Y. Again they appreciated my algorithm and have not found any fault with it. 3. Third conference: This time I compared my algorithm with algorithm Y. They did not find any fault with my algorithm and said that it still is exponential and that for large input number it will take much time. The paper was rejected. But isn't 2.83^n a clear improvement over O(3^n)? I'm at a loss. What should I do next to publish my result in a good conference?<issue_comment>username_1: Since I do not know details about the problem you're working on, the reasons come to mind can be various. But based on your question and comments, I think the reviewer tells you that your improvement is not significant. If they require you to test your algorithm with bigger inputs, that means they are looking for a reason to pick your algorithm over the other one. Sometimes, even your algorithm has slightly less complexity in terms of running time, the first described algorithm might be a standart and neat one. Another reason might be that the algorithm you're competing with is just a naive algorithm to give solution to the problem. Maybe authors of that paper prove some other result. Not every correct algorithm is to be published, and not every improvement is significant. For instance, [merge sort](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merge_sort) was developed in 1945 with worst-case time complexity Nlog(N), and [shellsort](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellsort) was developed in 1959 with the same worst-case time complexity. But one cannot argue that shellsort is insignificant. All in all, to answer > > Please share your advice what to do next to publish my result in good > conference. > > > Try to write **what** do you improve and **why** would it be important for scientists to know about your improvement very clearly. If you're not convinced it is a considerable improvement, then there is a good chance that audience of conference will not either. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From reading your question, I'm guessing you failed to articulate the significance of your contribution and problem. One aspect that you need to understand is the interest of the community. Take the matrix multiplication problem as an example: when a recent paper (2014) claimed a 'small' improvement in the bound by a few decimal places, it was big news. Why? Does your problem fall in this category? If not, then it will be hard to get into top conferences. Another problem is that your slight improvement may be 'obvious' to the community, and hence, it is not interesting. In summary, rewrite the significance of your problem and discuss why the 'small' improvement is very significant. Why should the community care? Was the method used innovative? Does it have wide ranging application on other NP-complete problems? If you can't make a case, then it is time to look for lower-tier conferences. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Since you are describing an algorithm paper, I assume you are submitting to algorithms conferences, and the "A\*" description refers to the [CORE ratings of CS conferences](http://www.core.edu.au/conference-portal) originally developed by the Australian Research Council. The only A\* conferences in algorithms are FOCS, STOC, and SODA. I've served on the program committees for all three. These three conferences are *extremely* competitive, and standards for acceptance are extremely high. It is not enough for your algorithm to be correct. It is not even enough for your algorithm to offer a significant improvement on the state of the art for your specific problem. At STOC and FOCS in particular, papers are judged on their likely impact on theoretical computer science research *beyond the scope of the specific result*. For algorithms papers, that means either that you're describing a significant advance on a problem of central interest to the field, and/or that you are introducing new techniques that are likely to generalize to many other problems, and/or that the PC finds your result both surprising and technically impressive. I would not expect these conferences to accept a paper that only describes a faster exponential-time algorithm for an NP-hard problem. We've seen lots of those before; yet another one is not that surprising. Unless you are proposing a strong general technique, or the specific problem you address has resisted significant progress for a long time, I would recommend aiming for a lower-tier algorithms conference: ESA, ISAAC, COCOON, WADS, LATIN, .... All the advice in the other answers still applies when submitting to those penultimate-tier conferences, of course. It's still not enough for your algorithm to be correct. You still need to clearly explain your precise contribution and its importance to the research community. You still need to give a thorough comparison of your algorithm to the state of the art. You still need to convince the PC that they should trust you and care about your results. Upvotes: 5
2017/05/02
1,057
4,651
<issue_start>username_0: I've just started to apply for faculty positions and received an invitation for a phone interview scheduled for next week. I am not in rush at the moment to accept a faculty position. Earlier this year I had a friendly conversation with a chair at a school who I had an opportunity to work with in different capacities and discussed with him a potential faculty position at his department. He is the hiring person and it is a school that I am interested in. He suggested a few months ago that I can fit into a number of projects that are ongoing at the school. Back then I was not as advanced as I am today in my Ph.D. studies and since then I've defended my proposal and expect to graduate in seven months. However, I expressed my interest in a faculty position and indicated that I expect to defend my dissertation in August this year. Few days ago, I've informed him that I've received an invitation for job interview and indicated that I remain interested in a position at their school. He stated that as of now, there might not be a position because they expect two new research hires and doesn't know how this will impact the school`s budget. Then he stated that if I don't like what I would be offered or don't receive an offer, we can discuss a position. Just a small update, eight months ago I asked if I could receive a post-doctoral fellowship position at their school. My question is: I didn't respond to him yet and I am confused how to understand this last statement that he made?. is this part of the negotiation process?. I prefer this school over other schools for now until i find something better.<issue_comment>username_1: FYI I am not in a medical school, but this seems relatively straightforward to me. Hopefully someone will correct if there is a different norm in those departments. Most departments receive authorizations to hire faculty positions ("faculty [budget] lines") from entities that are higher up the organizational hierarchy, such as a dean or other central administration person. So even if this person is a department chair, they may not have the authorization to create new lines. They may have the authorization to create post-doc positions, since those can come out of shorter term pots of money. This person may be implying that a non-faculty (post-doc, perhaps) position would be possible, depending on how much of the budget gets sucked up in the two new researchers' salaries/packages. They seem to think you would not be a great fit for those two new research positions. But they won't know about the post-doc until later. They also assume you will also not be able to decide on this until you have explored your faculty positions, since, for most people, permanent/faculty positions dominate post-doc positions. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I have served on search committees in the medical field and, like other fields, it can be a very slow process, so a phone interview may be months (and months) away from an actual job offer down the line. It sounds like this person is interested in having you work in his/her department. However, there are many other factors at play here. For instance, it sounds like he is unsure if there would be a faculty and/or post-doc line available next year. Although a post-doc may be preferred at this time, the competition for post doc and faculty positions is fierce. If you pass up other opportunities and cannot be hired by your colleague, do you have a plan for the meanwhile? Also, your colleague may be able to wrestle some money to fund you for one year at his/her institution, but expect you to secure funding for future years if you will stay (many medical schools are increasingly using this model). Are you in a position to support yourself from year 2+? In my opinion, accept opportunities for phone and campus interviews that you are given, if they are places you wouldn't mind working. Then, if an offer is made (or not made at the end of the season), it sounds like your colleague will have more pull or incentive to advocate for some support for you from the upper administration. Remember that you can always take a job at another institution and transfer later if a job opens up elsewhere. Good luck! Hope this helps. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I`m finished with the phone interview. I just received a phone call from the committee extending an offer for a visit to campus and face to face interview. I honestly didnt expect the process to move so fast but it turned out that the department is hiring a lot of faculty members because they are expanding both research and teaching. Upvotes: 0
2017/05/03
902
3,814
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student, and I am applying to be part of a cohort of graduate student researchers who will be using data from a national survey (that everyone in my field wants to get to) to answer policy questions. The dataset will most likely be a part of my dissertation. The application requires a cover letter that needs me to explain certain parts of my research. Here is what i wrote: > > My current research interest is concerned with the interactions > between families, students, teachers and staff in Head Start programs; > specifically families who frequently encounter structural barriers due > to their race, ethnicity and/or limited English proficiency. This work > is important because of many reasons, but to name a few: the current > climate of uncertainty experienced by families from diverse > cultures/ethnicity/nationalities and how it pervades the education of > their children, the forecasted minority/majority shift our population > is going under and the overall right to equal access afforded to every > child in the United States. I believe my work will contribute to a > better understanding of the barriers these families confront on a > daily basis and to a dialogue about practical solutions in the form of > policy changes in order to ameliorate said barriers > > > I asked my adviser for feedback, and she said > > You have said why the work is important and how you will contribute. > But from what you have written, I do not know what it is that you are > doing that will contribute to the field. What is your research, > exactly? Why is your study, specifically, important? > > > I am really not getting it. I have been grappling a lot but i end up writing things like my methods. Any way you can illuminate will be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Your advisor's critique is exactly right. You've made a convincing case that your subject is important, but not that your work is important. This: > > My current research interest is concerned with the interactions between families, students, teachers and staff in Head Start programs > > > is the sort of vague writing that a lot of academics are prone to (I'm always trying to beat it out of my writing). Being "concerned with the interactions" is a very abstract, high level statement that doesn't actually say anything. Concerned with how? Which interactions? Finding out whether teachers say "hello" or "hi" more often to family members is an investigation of the interactions among the people you describe, but it's an utterly uninteresting one. Start concrete, with the specific research questions you plan to ask. Think about what *you* excited about your research. How would you describe your work to a non-academic? What's the story you that keeps you excited about how your research will actually matter - the line of causation from the work you're going to do to actually making people's lives better? Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: When PhD students are narrowing down their dissertation topic, I often tell them this is a two-step process. First, you need to consult with enough literature to demonstrate that it is important to study. Then identify what about that topic has not been studied. From what I know about research on Head Start, there are findings that exist on many of the issues you identified. What exactly will you be asking about this topic that will produce new or more specific knowledge. If you cannot answer that, you may need to find additional literature or review what you've read more critically. Another source of support may be from organizational reports or government reports/evaluations. What are specific issues they are seeing that haven't been studied? Hope this helps! Good luck! Upvotes: 2
2017/05/03
451
1,915
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper revision (1st revision) to an Elsevier journal 3 months ago. The problem is that last week they apparently changed the journal's editor-in-chief. My paper status was previously "With editor: 50 days", and now it has been reset to "With editor: 2 days". What happened to the revision process? Does it mean that the 3-month wait was in vain?<issue_comment>username_1: Most likely, nothing changed. The previous editor was probably waiting for referees responses and the new editor is probably now waiting for the same referees to respond. Only if the new editor strongly disagrees with the choice of referees (which is very unlikely), he would ask for new ones and you would have lost time. But you are probably safe. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I had something similar happen with a recent paper. We had already received reviews and submitted our revisions, and the Associate Editor approved it...and then it sat with the Editor-in-Chief for months. After two months at that stage--which was unusually long for that journal--we emailed both EICs and the journal's administrative contact to ask whether there were additional revisions they'd like us to make. The new EIC responded relatively quickly to let us know that the old EIC was handling it, and within a week or so we had gotten editorial revisions back and were on our way to getting the paper accepted. This worked out for us because: * We were professionally acquainted with both the old and new EIC (so we had enough rapport to push a bit), and * The paper was already quite far along in the process. If your situation is like ours, then unfortunately, yes, it does seem that your 3-month wait had no practical function. It might be worth contacting the editor(s) just to be sure you have not fallen into a situation where each party thinks the other is handling it. Upvotes: 0
2017/05/03
117
470
<issue_start>username_0: I recently got a paper published in IEEE, but on IEEE Xplore it is listed to be in *volume pp, issue 99*. What does that mean?<issue_comment>username_1: This simply means the volume, number, and pages have not been assigned yet. When your paper is selected for an issue, these will change. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: That is what they temporarily use for "Early online" papers that have not yet been assigned to an issue. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/03
868
3,784
<issue_start>username_0: I'd like to move out of my comfort zone and do research on a topic that I know very little about, but is closely related to topics I have published papers in. Specifically, I have an idea from some of my previous papers that I think can be applied to this new area. The trouble is, I don't know what the community in this new research area considers interesting. The literature in this new topic is vast, and I don't know anybody who works in this topic. I have gone to Mathscinet and tried tracking down what seem to be the important papers in the area, and I have cold-emailed people whom I think are the experts in the field for help finding references related to my idea (I have gotten one response, which was very helpful). Nevertheless, I still feel my understanding of this topic is very shallow. I think my idea, if it works, would be interesting to people in this field, but I am not confident in my ability to connect it to previous work and to explain to the community why they should find it interesting. (I am not concerned with the possibility that my idea has been worked out before, I have reasons to think this is very unlikely) This is the first time I am venturing this far away from the topics in my PhD thesis, so I am not sure if there is more I can do to familiarize myself with this new field. **What do the rest of you do when you are preparing to do work in a new, unfamiliar research topic?**<issue_comment>username_1: Be sure you read the relevant articles you can find so that you know what has already been done. Then go to the relevant conferences and see if you can talk one of the senior people into giving you 15 minutes for a discussion of your ideas over a cup of coffee -- and if that turns out to be productive, see if they are interested in collaborating in a paper. You will likely do the majority of the work for the paper, but the senior co-author will make sure you stay on the right track, and point you at other papers that you may have missed by yourself. He or she may also introduce you to other researchers in the field who have thought about connections between fields such as the one you have in mind. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: > > What do the rest of you do when you are preparing to do work in a new, unfamiliar research topic? > > > If you are at a university where there is some institute that roughly deals with the general field you are interested in, just pay them a visit. I have always used such opportunities to get in touch with people from (thematically) further-away institutes. Even if they cannot help you now, you have established a contact that may prove useful in the future, when there is another opportunity for collaboration - either directly with you, or by someone else in your group who is interested in a given topic. In any case, if you do not actually know the other institute, it does not matter much who you talk to first - just pick any one of the researchers there whose general field seems to be related and ask them which one of their colleagues you'd best talk to about topic X. They will then either forward you to someone who is proficient about the topic, or recommend a way how to obtain some information from external sources. In my opinion, it is only after you have established such a contact that it makes much sense to read papers about the new topic. Otherwise (at least if the new topic is truly in an unfamiliar (sub-)field), too many aspects are usually unknown to you to find a worthwhile selection of papers to read: You do not know the primary venues, nor the signs that a venue is highly-regarded in the unknown field, nor the conventions of what is considered "thorough" or "exciting" in that field etc. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/03
552
2,390
<issue_start>username_0: Many journals maintain a preface in their print versions (usually available online) where they list those people who acted as a referee for the current issue. Does this compromise the anonymity of the peer-review process? As an author you could get a good guess who reviewed your paper from such lists even though you cannot pin it down to a single individual. Why are such lists maintained? Is there a reason not to bother about it?<issue_comment>username_1: Bear in mind that many papers are reviewed without being published, and that no one knows everyone who could potentially be a reviewer of their paper. So you may guess, but you really can't do so with certainty. I think a bigger issue in this regard is the shepherding process done in some conferences, in which one person who served as a reviewer interacts directly with the authors to verify that concerns from the reviews are addressed. Now you know who a reviewer was, just not which review they wrote. Such conferences often have 5-7 reviews per accepted paper, but I've seen it done with as few as 3. In either case, I think the possible unblinding of a reviewer is a minor concern. You really ought to be writing the public portion of reviews as though the authors know exactly who is reviewing (this came up in another question recently) and some reviewers choose to sign their reviews explicitly as a matter of principle. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: > > Why are such lists maintained? > > > To recognize and express gratitude to the reviewers, who contribute a substantial amount of their time to review papers, typically without pay or any other direct reward. It might also serve to help readers see that reviewers really are well-known experts in the field (assuming that they are). > > Does this compromise the anonymity of the peer-review process? > > > Maybe a little bit. As you say, it makes it somewhat easier to guess who your reviewer might have been. But the reviewers still have plausible deniability - nobody except the editors has *proof* that any given reviewer worked on any given paper. In small subfields, it is often not too hard to guess who reviewed your paper anyway. It's a judgment call by the editors to decide whether this risk outweighs the benefits. Some journals decide to do it one way, others the other way. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2017/05/03
3,689
15,328
<issue_start>username_0: I know the title sounds terrible, but it's not as bad as it sounds so please hear me out. I am an undergraduate and have set up an independent study for this fall about topic X. The professor doesn't work too much with topic X, and she has told me that she may need to review the material a little bit herself before we start. I read the preface of the book we will be using, and I noticed there is a section dedicated to instructors. This section contains a link with advice on teaching this book. Is the professor likely to read the preface and find this link on her own? Would it be rude of me to send this link in an email?<issue_comment>username_1: To show that you're an independent learner, I'd suggest don't just send the link, but read the materials in the linked page and summarize them to your professor, tell her if you think it may be useful for the directed studies. For instance, instead of: > > And here a link (URL) provided by the text on how to teach this book. > > > Try: > > I also found a link for teacher and read up a bit (URL). I think the > suggested chapter sectioning for a 7-week syllabus seems suitable to > our directed study time frame, please let me know your thought. > > > Or something along the line. I think you're quite lucky that the professor was being so up front about her lack of background knowledge, it should be a good directed study experience. But in turn, you'll need to bear some of the self-teaching responsibility, and don't expect that she can read some pages about how to teach the subject and then magically be able to teach you. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it is (very, IMHO) rude, and yes, it is exactly as bad as the title makes it sound. I am sympathetic to your concern that your professor may not end up doing the best job she could due to not being aware of good advice. Nonetheless, it is not your place to tell her how to do her job, and sending her a link with teaching advice falls into that category. At the same time, it *is* your place, and well within your rights, to communicate to your professor your needs as a student, so it would be perfectly appropriate to send her an email and let her know about any action she could do that would be helpful to you as a student (I mean an action that is directly related to the course and how she teaches it, not an action like "study the material of topic X so that you know it better"). But as I said, PLEASE do not send her a link with teaching advice. Also, if during the course you find that the professor is doing an especially bad job and does not address any requests you made of her to teach in a more effective manner, it would also be appropriate to complain to her department chair or other superior. But I would reserve such a measure for truly extreme circumstances. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think it depends what kind of relationship you have with your professor, but considering you're asking then it is probably not appropriate. It also depends what kind of personality the professor has, some may not take it well, while others would be happy you helped them out - but since we don't know the professor, nor do we know you or your relationship with said professor, none of us can say for 100% if it is truly rude of you - because those factors will determine the rudeness your actions. I have been fairly close with some of my professors and I feel like if I found something like this I could tell them about it, although it should be done so carefully and casually. You don't want to come off as if you're telling them how to do their job - only just trying to share something you think they may appreciate. As I said previously, the fact you're even asking that questions implies you may not have a very close relationship with your professor. So I would keep it to yourself. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are assuming that your professor just might not have seen or read the section, then you would come across poorly to suggest it. However, almost every legitimate course will offer every student a chance to review the class. If the professor does not do a good job and you care one whit about the professor or your fellow students then you should give honest feedback at that point. Just keep in mind that your perspective as a student is vastly different than your professor's perspective - and you might be wrong. Always allow for that possibility (that you are wrong) and you will be okay. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: It would be less problematic if you mentioned it in passing (in person). Something like "How's it going planning the class?" and then "Did you see the tips for teaching this class? I think all textbooks should have this!" Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: If the professor's told you that she may need to review the material, that generally means that not only is she aware that there's a need, but that she's intending (time permitting) to deal with it. Depending on her personality and the dynamic you have with her, she may or may not take offence if in the meantime you email her some resources that are genuinely intended to help her out, but I would be very cautious about it - at least to some extent, you're implying that she won't find those resources on her own, i.e. that you think you know better than she does. If you genuinely do know better, and you're dealing with a professor who's very open-minded and can recognise that, she may accept it and thank you. On the other hand, many (very many!) people don't enjoy admitting that people whose current status they perceive to be lower than theirs know more than they do about something, and if you're dealing with one of those people then there's a real risk that she might take offence. A safer way to tell her, if you must, might be to say that you've been looking at book X, and ask her (without mentioning the teaching guidance!) what she thinks of it as a reference for the course. That will make her equally aware that the book exists (if she doesn't already know about it), without implying anything. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I do not think it would be rude to send the link to her, as long as you provide a little context. e.g. "Hello Mrs. [xxxxxxxx], I noticed a link in the preface of the book that I believe would serve as a valuable resource and I wanted to share it with you in hopes of strengthening the course material/curriculum". Perhaps you should justify to her why you believe the link provides relevant material to said course. The goal is not to come off as condescending or supercilious but rather to appear genuinely concerned and interested in the content and direction of the course. I believe that will be a positive sign for professors and the only ones who would find offense with it (provided proper context and justification) are the ones who perhaps are too full of themselves and their own ideas to actually serve and do right by the title of "Professor". Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: Firstly, as an undergraduate, I think if possible, you should tell your professor about the advice, since it would benefit other students as well. (At worst, it would do nothing.) Secondly, I think BigDataLouis's advice is very good. Meet your professor in person in their office hours, don't use email. Email can easily be misunderstood, it is easier to sound rude. When chatting in person, your facial expressions and tones should help avoid sounding rude. Thirdly, I think you should talk about it inside some other conversations. Say you ask your professor some questions about your study and then before you leave, you may say, "I find out that the book contains some advices, it says [*summarizing*]... It sounds good to me, what do you think?". Finally, this answer of course assumes your professor is reasonably nice, approachable, reasonable and loves answering students' questions. But most professors I met are of this type, so I think it should be fine. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: In the situation you described it would be rude, and possibly damaging to your relationship with you professor. If the professor is willing to inform you that she needs to review the material herself then she almost certainly has the matter in hand. The message you'd be sending could be interpreted as you think she's an incompetent who can't do her job correctly. Female faculty take an immense amount of grief from students and are often judged for more harshly than their male colleagues. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: It all depends upon your relationship with the teacher. If you know them well, and you know they wouldn't mind, or you know enough to know it won't offend them, then no, it is not rude. But, since you asked the question on the Internet, you are indicating you do not have this kind of relationship. So, you are taking a chance. Some will be offended, some won't care, some won't even read it. You just don't know the person well enough. Because of that and because of the way people are so easily offended, you are being rude, very rude, to send it. You are asking for trouble, regardless. If you are that worried about it, as other(s) suggested, bring it up. Perhaps, > > "I looked at that textbook and read the teaching suggestions. I would > not want to be you. That looks hard. I wouldn't want your job for nothin'(g)." > > > Or just ask, > > "Teacher, Are we gonna get to study x this semester? I hope so. I > really wanted to learn that." > > > That is true and you won't look bad asking, more than likely. You will still risk offending someone because you are going to have to work very hard not to sound condescending or concerned. People are not (too) dumb. They know when you are not sincere. It will be difficult for you to hide this. Or, maybe you're good at this sort of thing. Who knows? But guess what, no matter how hard you try not too, you will offend some people at some time or another. People get their feelings hurt easily and are insecure. Some people you simply cannot win with no matter what. They read into things ranging from email, Facebook posts, and phone conversations. I know this firsthand because I'm a fallen human. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: There are already more authoritative answers here. I am not an expert, so take my answer with a pinch of salt. Environment: I am an Indian graduate student studying in the US. While you should definitely not tell/ hint a professor on how to teach, most professors are open to adjusting the curriculum based on the background of the class. So just make the professor aware of your academic background, your inspiration to take the course, and ASK if it is possible to modify the aspect-X of the course (not Prof.) to better help you achieve objective-Y. I am not sure what exactly is that you want to convey, but here are a few polite (IMHO) examples: * I am unable to figure out X in the given time. I have tried A, B, and C. Could you please give me a direction where I can look (narrow your area of study), or loosen requirement Y or do "advice\_from\_your\_link"? * Most of the students already know topic X; could you please emphasize topic Y more? * (In CS courses). I don't have much experience of working in this domain. Could you please give a few examples of applications, so that the theory is more relatable? * If possible, please give assignment requirements early in the semester. As other answers said, don't send the link. Phrase what that link says in 1-2 sentences so that it sounds like what YOU wish to achieve from course, NOT what the professor should do. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: I feel emailing a link from a book the professor has is rude and risky; it is best to approach this topic in person, use proper academic titles, be genuinely humble about your respect for your professor's greater experience, and openly express your own wish to learn. With this foundation I believe you will achieve a more rewarding response than an email and avoid a possibly negative attitude from your professor. Also, remember how personalities and daily mood swings play a part in whether something is perceived as rude. Face to face is safer. Please read on for more perspective. In my experience as a doctor and professor, I have always responded better to students who show respect for my position and title; I worked long and hard for them. Keep in mind that even the most humble people can be offended by being treated as an equal by those who have not proven the same level of effort and accomplishment. This is largely at the root of your question about rudeness. Remember you are an undergraduate and your professor is, well, a Professor. Until you have done what she has done to gain her title and position, you cannot truly understand her point of view. That you are asking this question shows you have some comprehension of this. IMO, it is not just rude to send an email with a link on how to do her job, but it is putting yourself in a risky position regarding her opinion of you. Respect is key here. Respect must go both ways. I respect my students who are serious and I expect them to respect my position. Do not address your professors on a first name basis until you have first established your respect for their title and their position in the academic hierarchy, and have gotten some hint from them that first name reciprocity is acceptable. Even once this is established, always remember who is the student and who is the professor! In the academic setting, there should be a peer to peer relationship between students and professors, but there are limits to this relationship; students and professors are peers in that both are academics, but professors have (hopefully) greater understanding and their role in the process is considerably different from that of the student; this fundamental difference should always be kept in mind, no matter how smart we are. The best situation is that teachers and students are always learning from each other, but reality is that the institution and human nature combine to create a bit of a gulf between us. It is our job as striving humans to overcome that gulf. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_13: Nothing wrong with making an observation, context helps, for example..... I observed these notes in the reading material you provided, I would like to understand why your teaching method differs so I may understand your approach a little better Also, remember, at the end of the day, it's your job to teach yourself, the professor is just there to help you Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_14: Yes it would be very rude. You are there to learn, not to tell your superiors how to do their job. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_15: It' obviously an old question, but generally there are of ways to phrase such an e-mail in a way that would not be rude: "I've looked out of curiosity into this section for teachers and I'm wondering (some specific question about whether the course will be like in this advice) OR (some form of teaching mentioned in this advice would work well for me, could we have that for extra credit) etc. But there's always a question of cost/benefit. Upvotes: 0
2017/05/03
1,327
5,782
<issue_start>username_0: I have been asked to review an article for an academic journal for the first time. The accepted answer to [Scope for the role of peer reviewer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/498/49583) as well as [this post](http://www.phd2published.com/2012/05/09/how-to-write-a-peer-review-for-an-academic-journal-six-steps-from-start-to-finish-by-tanya-golash-boza/) have given me a good idea of what to include and how to structure my review already. What I find not mentioned in either post (but somehow seem to have it in the back of my head) is, **whether I should include a recommendation to the editor about accepting the paper or not?** I.e. a short line such as *I deem the paper [not] suitable for publication in [journal name].* Or is this more complicated and I should include such a statement only if I have a strong opinion for or against the paper I review and otherwise leave it up to the editor? In my case there is no template or instructions for the review given by the editor/journal. The field, if it matters, could be mathematics or economics.<issue_comment>username_1: Remember that the final decision is always up to the editor regardless of your recommendation. And (hopefully) the editor reads your entire review, not just the recommendation. I usually include a recommendation in my reviews, but I always try to justify it thoroughly, so that the recommendation itself is essentially a redundant summary of what I have already said. If I do not have a strong opinion either way, I will say so. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am in a different field, but what I usually do is start off with a brief summary of what the paper is about, within this, I would include a sentence something along the lines of: > > ... Therefore, it is recommended that the manuscript is within scope, hence suitable for publication in > [publication] > > > (or the negative, if necessary). This is a clear and direct statement of recommendation. Similar can be written if you do not have a strong opinion, such as: > > The manuscript appears within scope and could be suitable for > publication. > > > Then the following sentence, leading into your actual review: > > However, there are a number of issues that need to be resolved before > it is published. > > > Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm in the social and health sciences, so I'm not sure how different this would be for your discipline. The easiest ways to make a recommendation that won't go directly to he authors is to select "accept," "major revision" and so on if there is an online system, like Fred indicates above. Some online systems also have separate response sections for the editor and authors, where the authors won't have access to your comments you make just to the editor. If you need to write your recommendation directly to the authors, there are a number of ways to phrase this. For example, "In its current state, this manuscript is not ready for publication, though here are some ways it could be improved..." Or (more enthusiastically), "This paper addresses a very important issue and I have offered some suggestions to prepare it for publication." Hence, you can say something is not ready to be accepted without fully rejecting it, which is the role of the editor anyway. However, if you read something that doesn't seem salvageable, you can also say, "This manuscript does not appear appropriate for journal XYZ and here are the reasons why..." Hope this helps! I don't know if there are more common things to say in mathematics or economics. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **Short Answer:** Provide your formal recommendation about acceptance to the editor and not in your comments to the author. --- In my field, most publication systems include a multiple choice question where reviewers indicate their recommendation to the editor (e.g., reject, major revisions, minor revisions, accept, etc.). I generally find that most reviewers do not include a recommendation in their review that goes out to the authors. Instead, the explicit recommendation is usually made using the recommendation check box in the editorial system and may be combined with additional information supplied in the "comments to editor" box. There a few reasons why a reviewer may not want to place their recommendation in the "comments to author" box. * It is the reviewers role to evaluate the quality and importance of the manuscript. The editor is responsible for the decision about what is suitable for the journal, all things considered. * By not putting a recommendation in the author comments box, the editor has a little more flexibility in how they frame the response to the authors. The editor can choose to share the reviewer recommendations about acceptance with the author or not. For example, the reviewers might both recommend major revisions, but the editor decides to reject. The author sees all the problems identified by the reviewers and may more readily accept the editor's decision. Of course, the review that goes to the authors may be suggest what the reviewers recommend. Most reviews involve an initial paragraph that (a) summarises the reviewer's understanding of the manuscript, and (b) provides an overall synopsis of whether the topic is important, interesting, and suitable for the journal, and whether the paper is of acceptable quality. More detailed comments will also imply the degree to which the paper could readily be refined (i.e., suggestive of revisions) or has fundamental shortcomings (i.e., suggestive of rejection). As an additional note, I generally try to keep any note to the editor quite short. I like the transparency of as much as possible of my review going to the authors. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/03
930
3,803
<issue_start>username_0: I am in a situation where my PhD funding runs out in 5 months and I need to have secured a job regardless of whether I have submitted due to having a family. Although I think I may be close to submitting by then, it may take longer. Is it worth applying for postdoc positions or would universities not consider you until you have completed the PhD? I assume that the pass rates of PhDs are very high if the candidate has got to the submission stage. Edit: This question is aimed at the people that are are the submission stage but haven't yet defended their thesis. It is not a question asking if I can get a post-doc without a PhD.<issue_comment>username_1: Groups seeking postdocs will absolutely consider you as an applicant before you have completed your PhD. They will, however, want to be certain that you have completed the entire process and all its requirements prior to officially beginning your new job, as the comments above have said. Be as honest with them as possible about when you expect to finish. Universities will vary in terms of how they expect you to prove you've completed your PhD: some will accept official letters while others will want a photocopy of your physical degree (I was asked for the latter and found it rather, er, surprising). Luckily, none of that is likely to happen during an interview. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Apply now!!! In my experience (sciences in US), postdocs are usually interviewed fairly far before they finish. I think I applied in December, interviewed in February, defended that summer, started the next fall. (This was a pretty early start, and it's possible to go faster, so don't panic yet.) Getting a postdoc offer also serves as pretty strong encouragement to your advisor to ensure you can defend and leave in a timely manner. If you can defend prior to your funding running out, that would obviously be the best. However, there are other options: 1. Your advisor finds more funding - nearly as good. 2. You find a nonacademic job, and finish your thesis in your spare time. Possible but not great (common in humanities PhDs, which is why they can take ten years). 3. You could start with your postdoc group prior to graduating - they might be able to hire you as a "technician" before you finish. You could then write up your thesis in your spare time. Some groups will be OK with this, since they get a PD-level person to start out at a lower salary - but others will object to not having 100% of your focus, or will have grant funding that isn't flexible on this. Options 2 and 3 are going to be much much easier if you don't have much scientific work to finish - i.e. you mostly need to write up and defend, with maybe some additional computation/analysis. They will be near-impossible if you have additional in-lab work to finish. (I do know of one unusual case with a super nice postdoctoral advisor, where the student finished some of their thesis work in their new advisor's lab. This is very much the exception to the rule.) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: > > would universities not consider you until you have completed the PhD > > > You should take a look at advertisements about postdoc/researcher positions to have an idea. What I have seen so far is only "*close to finish a PhD*". I started applying for postdoc as soon as my advisor said my contribution was enough to graduate. However, I kept track of open positions long long before that. I did onsite interviews with 2 groups, and got one offer before started writing my thesis. At that time, I was so scared that I would blow my chance, so I nervously [asked this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44898/what-makes-one-fail-a-phd-viva), but everything was OK. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/04
858
3,602
<issue_start>username_0: In the comments to one of the answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/88952/should-a-peer-review-for-an-academic-journal-include-a-recommendation-for-accept), the asker points out that he is asked to submit his review of a manuscript for publication via email and that there is no formal online system with checkboxes or text boxes. This struck me as strange, as having reviewed papers for several biology and math journals I have never been asked to submit my review via email to the editor. Even for very small journals published independently, I have always been asked to use an online system, where all contact is viewable by the editor-in-chief and other parties at the journal. Do reputable journals ever ask reviewers to submit their reviews via email, or is such a request a red flag that you are being asked to review for a scam journal? Do all reputable journals have online reviewer systems?<issue_comment>username_1: I have interacted with several reputable math/TCS journals, both as author and as reviewer, entirely via email without the involvement of an online submission. I have even witnessed senior members of the community expressing the sentiment that they never agree to the semi-automated referee requests sent by online submission systems, but only to referee requests sent "by hand". **Summary:** Yes, there exist reputable journals conducting peer review entirely by email. Now whether or not a journal soliciting peer review without an online submission system is more likely to be disreputable than one that does, I do not know. I see no particular reason to assume either way. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Not long ago all reviews were handled not by email, but by paper mail. I submitted my first paper in 2003 and at that time submission was still by paper. However, I got an acknowledgement that the paper has been received via email, but the response of acceptance from the editor was in paper again. An online system was not in sight at that point. I would say that there is nothing inherently bad about email communication with the editor. It may just be that he or she is just old fashioned. These days I still get asked by some editors from reputed journals for reviews in personal emails and send my response via email, too. Nothing bad about this. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: My experience (in pure maths) is that this is normal for journals that are run out of a university - which includes some very good ones - and only the for-profit publishers have polished online interfaces. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Supplementing the other answers: I myself tend to be suspicious of the legitimacy of automated requests to referee, with someone I know listed as editor... since there are many bogus journals that claim several genuine scholars (for me, mathematicians) as "editors". Some of these requests are indeed bogus. A few are not. When I receive an automated request, I email the purported editor to ask whether everything is kosher. If they say it is, then I do the refereeing. I think it is not a good thing that refereeing gets automated, and all still without pay, of course. So that traditional publishers need fewer employees, while yet profiting from the good-will volunteerism of academics. That is, I don't think the issue is "transparency", but, rather, whether or not we (collectively) willingly become cogs in an automated machine that doesn't pay us anything, but charges us (or our libraries) to see the outcomes of our work. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/04
564
2,467
<issue_start>username_0: In one part of my paper, I give a reference to a one-page article published in Science from (AAAS). There are some quantitative statements in this one-page article. However, I could not find any reference for these quantitative results presented in the article. There exists a DOI number of the article. My question : Is it acceptable to cite this kind of article in a paper to be sent to a peer-review journal ?<issue_comment>username_1: Journals may have differing opinions about the what exactly you may be allowed to reference. However, in most cases, I would expect that there would be no explicit prohibition on citing sources other than traditional academic references. Obviously, if possible, you should cite something peer reviewed, or (failing that) an academic preprint. However, sometimes such things are not available. I have come across a number of useful citations to things that would not be considered normal academic sources. Sometimes people cite conference presentation slides containing of preliminary results, which have not been published, but which somebody managed to capture a picture of with a smart phone camera. Sometimes a result may be announced in a press release by a laboratory, well before the scientific details are made available to the research community. (A short news piece in a journal like *Science* would be of a similar character.) These are perfectly reasonable things to cite, if they are the only available sources of information. Sometimes, I have seen even weirder citations. In one paper my advisor published (which was a topical review relating to some work that had gotten a fair amount of media exposure), he cited a number of reactions to the subject in non-scientific media. That included a comic strip, the Web site for a cult, and a statement by <NAME>. So even pretty outlandish things can occasionally be cited in legitimate (if somewhat less serious than usual) academic publications. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: > > My question : Is it acceptable to cite this kind of article in a paper to be sent to a peer-review journal ? > > > I have cited a popular science article (specifically, an article in Scientific American) *as well as* a citation to a fan-maintained video game Wiki in one of the best medical journals in the world. If it's the most appropriate source, it is acceptable - and essentially - that it be cited. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2017/05/04
402
1,564
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder whether we can withdraw a manuscript after its acceptance but before it has been published online.<issue_comment>username_1: It may depend on the tacit agreement between the journal and the author(s) that you agree upon when submitting the manuscript. However, if you motivate soundly this choice (eg quoting errors in data or analyses), most journals will unwillingly accept the withdrawal. However, this may largely undermine your credibility with the journal, its editors, the specific reviewers, and the publisher. UPDATE There is a related post here: [Is it ethical to withdraw a paper after acceptance in order to resubmit to a better journal?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21742/is-it-ethical-to-withdraw-a-paper-after-acceptance-in-order-to-resubmit-to-a-bet) And for those submitting to Elsevier journals, this publisher has some specific guidelines on how to handle similar cases: <https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal> Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As noted by @Joe\_74, it is possible but very bad form. If there is not a good reason for such withdrawal, the authors are subject to poor reputation at a minimum and sanctions (such as a ban) at a maximum. You haven't said why you wish to withdraw. As Joe said, if there is an error, it is unfortunate, but withdrawal is probably best. If it's like another recent post, and it's because of simultaneous submission or some other less ethical behavior, you would deserve whatever comes your way. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/04
483
1,784
<issue_start>username_0: French higher education system is quite singular: besides traditional universities (following Bologna Process scheme with Bachelor (3 years), Master (2 years) and PhD (3 years)), there are so-called [*grandes écoles*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandes_%C3%A9coles) – mostly in the business and engineering fields. To enter a *grande école*, one must traditionally attend [*classes préparatoires*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_pr%C3%A9paratoire_aux_grandes_%C3%A9coles). One distinctive feature of these *classes prépa* is the significance of frequent *colles* (1 every two weeks per student and discipline – sometimes also written *khôlles*), which generally consist of 1 hour oral examination, where a couple of undergrads solve a problem in front of an examiner – the so-colled *colleur*. *Colleurs* are mostly professors teaching in *classe prépa*. However they can also be university assistant professors, high-school teachers, PhD-candidates, or post-doc lecturing on their part time. **Question:** What is the most appropriate translation of "*colleur*" into English? ("TA" or "tutor" both seem too broad in my opinion.)<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest using the official title and then adding a brief sentence describing the job duties. This way you provide ask the information in an accurate and accessible way. Having to look up a job title is not a big deal when evaluating foreigners. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In English universities, the equivalent exam is usually called a "viva", short for ["viva voce"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_exam). We do not have a specific word for a person who assesses oral exams though, I'm afraid, so "viva examiner" is probably the best you're going to get. Upvotes: 1
2017/05/04
563
2,508
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper for an English class on a topic that I know well. for this paper, there is a minimum requirement for cited sources but I did not meet that requirement and was able to meet the length requirement for the paper.<issue_comment>username_1: Ask yourself: why did the Professor put this requirement? It is almost certainly not just to make your life difficult. A more likely explanation is that your professor wants you to not only provide your own analysis, but to back your analysis up with others' research and analysis. So if you were to cite a source without using it, your mark won't likely go up, because your arguments are no better supported. Any good marker will see this. So if you're trying to increase your grade, you should add a source, and incorporate it into your arguments. In any case, I suspect your paper needs work to meet your professor's expectations. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not wrong however you have to consider why you are using that source. Are you using it to fill up space in your bibliography/works cited? Best practice is that if it wasn't your own idea you cite it. Hope this helps. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As a professor, I look at the bibliography of students' papers and I penalize students for including sources in their bibliography that are not cited in the paper. First, this could mean that they used ideas from that source, but did not credit the source for the exact material used in the paper. The other meaning is that they did not use the source, but just wanted to add to the bibliography. Personally, I would view this as academic dishonesty, because the student misused references to fraudulently meet requirements of the assignment. I don't know if your professor or others would view that the same way, but that's how I typically view it. Another scenario is that a student puts a citation in-text and in the reference page, but the material cited has nothing to do with that reference. This would be more difficult to catch, unless the professor is an expert in the area the student is writing about, but this would be considered academic dishonesty, too. If you have additional sources available that are relevant to the topic, it seems that finding material from the source to include somewhere in your paper and editing the paper would be easy and resolve the problem anyway, so why not just incorporate something (a sentence or two, even) into your paper? Upvotes: 2
2017/05/05
864
3,662
<issue_start>username_0: I’m a PhD student travelling to the US for a conference and my supervisor has contacted a former colleague to arrange for me to visit his lab. Under the current circumstances, I only have 2–3 days available for the visit, which means I won’t be able to do any meaningful lab work. They do some interesting techniques that I’d like to learn, but again, I’m not sure if there will be enough time – and I don’t want to be an annoyance for busy staff/students who’d rather just get on with things. So, for such a short visit, what are the expectations? I’ve offered to present my conference talk at the lab meeting (met with somewhat of an “if you really want to” attitude), and I”d like to see their lab and chat to fellow students about how they do things differently to me... but I don’t think I need multiple days to do that. How long should a visit without any actual research be? I also don’t know what to expect from them; as a visiting student and not a PI, I don’t think I can expect them to arrange meetings or visits for me, but for the same reason, I’m unsure about reaching out to others at their institute – should I be arranging to meet other people? Is that rude? Is it expected? I don’t want to waste an opportunity – or embarrass my supervisor, and be a nuisance to a research group that I respect. Should I limit my visit to a single day? Any advice would be great!<issue_comment>username_1: Ask yourself: why did the Professor put this requirement? It is almost certainly not just to make your life difficult. A more likely explanation is that your professor wants you to not only provide your own analysis, but to back your analysis up with others' research and analysis. So if you were to cite a source without using it, your mark won't likely go up, because your arguments are no better supported. Any good marker will see this. So if you're trying to increase your grade, you should add a source, and incorporate it into your arguments. In any case, I suspect your paper needs work to meet your professor's expectations. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not wrong however you have to consider why you are using that source. Are you using it to fill up space in your bibliography/works cited? Best practice is that if it wasn't your own idea you cite it. Hope this helps. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As a professor, I look at the bibliography of students' papers and I penalize students for including sources in their bibliography that are not cited in the paper. First, this could mean that they used ideas from that source, but did not credit the source for the exact material used in the paper. The other meaning is that they did not use the source, but just wanted to add to the bibliography. Personally, I would view this as academic dishonesty, because the student misused references to fraudulently meet requirements of the assignment. I don't know if your professor or others would view that the same way, but that's how I typically view it. Another scenario is that a student puts a citation in-text and in the reference page, but the material cited has nothing to do with that reference. This would be more difficult to catch, unless the professor is an expert in the area the student is writing about, but this would be considered academic dishonesty, too. If you have additional sources available that are relevant to the topic, it seems that finding material from the source to include somewhere in your paper and editing the paper would be easy and resolve the problem anyway, so why not just incorporate something (a sentence or two, even) into your paper? Upvotes: 2
2017/05/05
797
3,419
<issue_start>username_0: So far, my master thesis had an initial plan, and I would keep in contact with the PI as I need. However, now that the academic course comes to an end, all the students in the lab (3) we have to finish our projects. He is also applying to grants that have tight deadlines and supervising 1 PhD thesis that will be presented in a month, together with addressing the reviewers of two papers and supervising a new one (with part of my work :). This is a lot of work (I am sure other people are more stressed though) and sometimes I feel I am not given all the advice I could due to poor project management of the lab and projects (yes, I tried more frequent meetings but they keep being postponed). I would like to start a PhD soon, and later to have my own research team; what project management skills should I learn for a successful PhD/career? Some skills I thought as important are: * Time management I found useful answers here at the tag [time-management](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/time-management) * Multiple (parallel) projects management My current project started as to analyze some data and ended up analyzing data and developing, testing and prove a new method. (That's another reason why I consider my project was poorly thought out.) * People management * ? And more importantly, how can I learn them through the master thesis and PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: **Time management:** I recommend to everyone the book *Getting things done* by <NAME>. It is briefly summarized in different [YouTube videos](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=getting+things+done) and is about personal organization and stressfree productivity. **Project management:** For project management and a good visualization of your process (e.g. of publishing a paper) you might want to look into [IT Kanban](http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Kanban_(development)) and use a real Kanban board or a software like [Trello](http://trello.com). If you work in a team on that project, look into *Scrum*. Also, shared calendars are helpful (e.g. [Google calendar](http://google.com/calendar)). **People management:** For teams, it could make sense to use a team collaboration tool like *Slack* (or *Mattermost*). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are various ways to approach project management, so what works for some people may not work for you. So, take advice for what is is - advice and not a formula for success. That being said,there are many resources on leadership and management that may be helpful, as suggested by username_1. A good start is to develop and maintain good organizational and people skills. The latter can be difficult for academics, because we tend to work in isolation for a good portion of the time. However, using organizational and communication tools that are available to you will help with managing projects. For instance, google docs and calendars are tools that can help a team communicate project goals and timelines with one another. Also, check with your university's research and HR departments. They often offer courses on research project management and management in general. For instance, I once took a workshop at my former institution on research budget management. If you are able to enroll as a student, you can gain the skills you want in a more formal setting than just reading a book. Good luck! Upvotes: 0
2017/05/05
5,713
23,508
<issue_start>username_0: Here is what I feel whenever I find something interesting and feel like pursuing it : 1. Oh so I like **X** (Computer Graphics), let me read up papers/books about it. 2. Ok let me begin with reading up **Y** (OpenGL) 3. But **Y** needs **W** (Linear Algebra) 4. Well reading up **Z** (Probability) first makes more sense. 5. Umm, you shouldn't jump to **Z** without learning **U** (Permutation/Combination). 6. And how come I forget about reading **V** (Number theory) 7. And what not.. I always end up searching and reading up "Best books to begin A/B/C/D.." instead of actually making myself begin somewhere. This consumes all my energy and I never really start. **Q.** Have others faced this ? **Q.** How do you handle this and actually begin somewhere ? Any help would be really appreciated. **Background** : I am a working professional, with Masters in Computer Science (fascinated with Computer Graphics etc). Its been two years since my masters but I still kind of miss academia, my thesis work and other interesting stuff I did there. My current work is also pretty interesting and partially overlaps with my interest areas. However, other than work, I would really want to continue doing things related to my masters side by side (and MAY BE take up a Phd somewhere down the line). But the never ending feeling of not knowing anything takes over. Its not that I am being forced to study any of this. Its purely for my personal interests that I want to pursue it. --- Update 1 : Thank you so much everyone for such overwhelming response. I really like several answers and points raised but haven't marked any yet because I am in the process of trying some and would update if something actually works for me. Meanwhile, I also found this talk really helpful : <https://www.ted.com/talks/tim_urban_inside_the_mind_of_a_master_procrastinator><issue_comment>username_1: **This is a common problem.** Self-directed learning, with no boundaries or focus, can easily become aimless and unproductive. **To overcome it, try to find some sort of replacement for the structure that would come in a formal education program.** This could take various forms, but here are a few examples of things you could try: * **Make a plan for yourself.** You could start off by brainstorming all the related topics you are interested in (sort of like you did in your question). Then take this list and start prioritizing. What are the topics you are most interested in? How much time do you realistically have to spend? Whittle it down to a list of a few books or resources that you hope to complete within the next few months. * **Set a concrete goal.** This might simply flow from the plan you have made: "I will read these four books this summer". Or it could be a starting point for your learning that sets the direction you choose to take. "I will learn how X works." It could be a project, like "I will create a small working example of software that does Y". * **Use online learning resources.** There are many free online courses on computer graphics and related topics. Alternatively, many college professors post their syllabi online, which you could simply use as a reading list. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Dan's answer is very good, and I want to add one more point: **Accept that on the first pass you will not be able to fully understand the topic.** Appreciate that there are decades and sometimes centuries (for the math, at least) of research supporting the topic you're learning. Thinking you can "get to the bottom" of it in a few months, let alone a week or two, is not realistic. Choose a topic and try to understand that as much as possible. Keep notes on other interesting topics along the way, but don't get distracted by them; just accept them as assumptions as this point and move on. You can get back to them later. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: Like <NAME> said: > > "[T]here are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know." > > > It is important to know what you don't know. Engineers, e.g., work with a lot of formulas and approximations without questioning every single fact behind it. If you want to work productively, don't question all at once. You don't need to be an expert in number theory if you want to be good at computer graphics. But you might need Linear Algebra basics and good knowledge of OpenGL. **So your numbered list could be used as prioritization.** If you pursue your PhD, your goal is to be an expert in your field. And the thing in your list above that interests you most might be that field. Not all at once. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are actually new to a topic then the papers on it are probably out of your reach. When I want to open a truly new topic I would start with the lowest level textbook I can get. Perhaps I find that a first year undergrad textbook is not challenging enough to be interesting, but its worth checking each chapter to see if there is anything new. If there is new content then it will definitely be possible to understand without any prerequisites. Then I move on to a slightly higher level textbook, etc. This should bring you smoothly up to the level of papers, and any periphery knowledge (from other subjects) needed will probably be presented at a level that is easy to access. (full disclosure, I have only ever done this with topics in maths, perhaps it doesn't work well elsewhere) Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Any answer to this question is necessarily going to be somewhat subjective, as it's ultimately about motivating particular behaviour in yourself. I certainly wrestle from time to time with "reading vs doing" - reading about new things is fun, but ultimately it's not very helpful (and, to be honest, results in fairly superficial understanding) unless you're doing something with that new knowledge. For me, what helps with that is choosing something specific I'm going to do with that knowledge. (Let's face it; "Learning about X" isn't a very well-defined task.) Now, sometimes it takes a little bit of casting around to figure out something interesting to do in that area, but I can generally find *something* interesting and tractable-seeming without getting too lost in the weeds. It could be: * Reproducing the work in some paper which seems interesting * If the paper authors already have made code available, playing with it and trying to extend it in some straightforward way, or fix a bug in it * Committing to teaching some people about a package/technique/paper - coworkers, give a talk at a Meetup or a [Papers We Love](http://paperswelove.org) event, or the like * Choose a set of well defined topics (overview of a couple of recent related papers, a technique, a package) and commit to writing some blog posts about them *etc*. Then it becomes much clearer to me how much time I have to spend digging into related material: "will this help me write the code/patch the code/write the tutorial/write the blog post?" An added benefit of especially the last three items on the list is that you're now contributing something to the wider community, and making useful contributions is a good way to establish yourself in a research area if you *do* decide to pursue a Ph.D. or even just do further work. And yes, paper summaries (particularly compare/contrast recent papers), tutorials, bug fix PRs, etc *are* useful contributions - just look at how many citations review papers get, or how many people follow <NAME>'s tireless work on [The Morning Paper](https://blog.acolyer.org). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: My strategy when I want to learn something new: 1) Think about what you want to accomplish (have the end in mind). For you this might be an animation or game, etc. 2) Go as far as you can on your own. At the beginning this might be nothing, and that's OK. 3) Learn only as much as you need to get to the next step, then go back to step 2. Repeat the cycle. I find that spending too much time on learning background material results in excessive cognitive overhead. It's often best to start simple and approach learning as a "just in time" process (borrowing from the lean manufacturing principle). Perhaps this is slightly oversimplified, but you probably get the idea. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: **Create something and learn in the process** If I want to learn a new programming language or framework, maybe I'll do a quick tutorial but then I immediately have to find something useful and/or fun to do with it. There's no end to the knowledge that you can get on any topic, but if you don't **do** something with it, at some point you'll just stop. If you create a *need* for yourself to learn in order to create something specific, chances are you'll get farther. It also serves as a stop gap, when you have *enough* knowledge to achieve your goal, you continue working on the project until you get stuck again. Maybe this is less suitable for very theoretical fields but certainly it works for practical fields like computer science, certainly computer graphics. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm facing this problem in computing all the time. My personal approach is to decide on something **really** reasonable I want to achive (like printing "hello world" on screen), chose things that help me towards the bigger goal. Then I pull all available sources to make that work first. Sources are books, tutorials, stackoverflow searches, youtube videos (a great resource!) or asking someone to help me do it (while I document all steps so that Ican redo it on your own). If I need outside help to solve the problem, I will redo it again from scratch once the person who helped is away! This gives me either a quick success - or a quick reason to delay or give up! If I manage, I now decide to attempt to either understand what I did or I set the next goal. Ususally getting things to run involves using code I don't fully understand. I don't mind for the time, because I now have a cookbook example to fall back to. Usually, if I re-read book on the topic after getting something to run, I understand why it's working. Having working code is also helpul if I want to talk about this with somebody else who might be able to help to improve it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I totally experienced the same thing both in academia (MSEE) and work life, especially early on: 1. **Life is not an academic knowledge competition, so no need to feel inadequate**. There will always be people smarter or more knowledgeable than you in any specific topic/niche (see 6. below), with more letters after their name. Go for breadth-first, not depth-first (as @NateEldredge said). 2. Be guided by **learning the minimum you need to know to get a specific task done. Always have a specific application in mind, and skip everything that's not relevant to achieving it** (Be strategically lazy, in a goal-directed sense). If you don't have a goal, you will just go in circles. You can always bookmark the paper/documentation/textbook and come back and read it later as/ when/ ever you need to know more. Don't try to memorize anything you don't need to, which is 99.99% of what you will ever read. 3. **Papers**: Textbooks can be better than papers. Webpages can be better than papers. Online tutorials can be better than papers. Webinars, whitepapers, sales demos (the good ones, at least) can be better than papers. Going to a Meetup or talking to a smart friend over a drink can be better than papers. Often, papers are a posturing exercise in showing how clever, name-dropping or connected the writer is (or even bragging about their funding or the size of their servers), not in delivering concise timely accessible information to a lay audience (and I say all this as someone who published papers in my MSEE, and read/skimmed at least 10,000 papers from multiple disciplines). Even when the writer is genuinely attempting to get to the point, they may still not be as good at communicating as the other channels I mention above. If I read a paper and the author starts throwing dense jargon at me for no particular reason and citing bookshelves of erudite publications, I ask myself whether it's worth my while to dig into it, or try to find a dummy's notes, or even poll Google/citeseer/Google Scholar for the wisdom-of-the-crowd on whether a certain technology/algorithm/API/whatever is useful, relevant, applicable and competitive. 4. Ten 5-minute lightning talks or poster sessions can be better than one 1hr talk. Often, **information density is proportional to log(duration)**. Commercial conferences can be better than academic ones (sometimes). Hallway conversations can be better than lectures. 5. **Use the right resource.** Mailing-lists, user forums and asking your question at a Meetup event are all great ways to source a quick wisdom-of-the-crowd opinion. As long as you show you've done your basic homework first and you're not a help vampire. (Conversely, give back, too, whenever you can) 6. **Find strategies to deal with information overload/impostor syndrome.** In general, become aware of and reject all of that, inadequacy, guilt, grief, existential angst, information overload for not reading all the footnotes and citations and wading through the proofs line-by-line. Information is being generated orders of magnitude faster than we can ever process in our lifetime, and accelerating. All we can do is filter the ever-diminishing sliver we need to get on with life. *"I will always choose a lazy person for a difficult job. Because, he will find an easy way to do it" - <NAME>*. Personally I know one guy who trained an ML suite to automatically summarize the 10,000s of pages of quarterly technical reports he had to stay on top of in his field (IT security). He's a brilliant guy. This wasn't even in his job description. Always try to cut corners, automate, generalize, abstract, use third-party open-source libraries. 7. **Friendships, professional acquaintances and contacts matter**. Get to know smart people and shun useless people ('lazy' != 'useless'). Work your network. Never eat lunch alone (TM). And so on. Now you can tap on 1000 people all distilling information and experience. Again, don't overuse it, give back as much as you take, and keep a running note of what you can do to help each of those people. A fresh pair of eyes, support, encouragement, or even some relaxing activity getting your mind off the problem, or exercise, all add up. 8. **Perfectionism. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good**. Surprisingly often, the 'right' way to do something is not apparent or documented, or it's moot, or context-dependent. You have to strike a balance between trying stuff out, prototyping ("code beats arguments"), breaking, failing and learning quickly, vs researching the answer. Academia tends to bias us to the latter and away from the former. v0.1 code is not usually about optimality (although in the occasional cases where near-optimality can be simply and quickly achieved then we should strive for that). By all means come back and polish/simplify/generalize the code as necessary, later, as priorities allow. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_10: I used to get this problem when I was first learning programming. I still get it now sometimes because I have a tendency to want to know everything about a given topic all at once. Over time though, I've found that the best approach is to learn as little as you can possibly get away with in each subject and then iteratively refine your knowledge as you go. Your current thought process is > > 'I need to know all of **V** before I can learn **U**' > > > implying you think you need to learn these topics sequentially and that you think you need to learn each topic in depth before moving on. What I am proposing is to learn parts of the topics simultaneously or in rotation, i.e. > > 'I will learn a bit of **V** and then apply that knowledge to **U** to > learn how the two things are related' > > > For example, you want to learn computer graphics so you decide to focus on OpenGL. OpenGL requires knowledge of vectors and matrices. Vectors consist of many sub-topics (addition, subtraction, dot product, cross product, scaling) as do Matrices (addition, multiplication, determinants). Instead of learning all of these topics before attempting OpenGL, learn a sub-topic and then apply that knowledge directly to OpenGL. Learn what a vector is and how to add/subtract them, then define a vector using OpenGL and test out some addition and subtraction. Move on to the dot product, test in OpenGL, learn about the cross product, test in OpenGL etc. By connecting the two parts at each stage, you end up learning the implementation alongside the theory in small chunks. By the time you get halfway, instead of knowing all about vectors and nothing about OpenGL, you know a bit about vectors and how to apply that knowledge in OpenGL, meaning you can do more earlier. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: It's rather simple: * Take an introductory textbook on X. * Read it (and do the exercises). * Hard part: Don't switch to another textbook/online guide/etc on any underlying or related subject until you're done with the book. It contains enough of what you need. Now, choosing a good textbook is not always an easy task but that's a subject for another question. Perhaps get a knowledgeable friend to recommend one that covers underlying/related subjects to some extent so that you wont feel you're learning in a "contextual vacuum". Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: A key point is to realise that you can never understand everything and that, to understand a particular topic, you don't need to fully understand its prerequisites. Your approach is to say that you want to learn A, but A uses aspects of B, so you will learn B first. And then you find that B uses aspects of C, so you will learn C first. Oh, dear, but C uses aspects of D which uses aspect of E which... You don't need to fully understand B to understand A. You probably just need the basics of B and maybe a couple of sub-areas in more detail. To understand those, you probably need hardly any of C and so little of D that you can, for now, just consider the couple of facts you need there as being knowledge given to you by the gods, which you might never understand. Notice that we've turned the divergent series A + B + C + D + ... into the convergent series A + B/10 + C/100 + D/1000 + ... . Later on, if you want to do actual research in A, you'll probably find you need to know a bit more about B, which might mean you need a tiny bit more about C, and maybe you'll have to ask the gods to reveal to you a couple more of the mysteries of D. It's very unlikely that you'll ever need to know that E even exists. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_13: As a different take on it, this also describes classic ADHD (ADD) behaviour (not saying that's you, but its how that condition typically affects people as well), so there are also coping mechanisms from that direction too. A good book on managing distraction might have helpful tips. Maybe as simple as a post-it? Basically, you have to decide if you are doing these because you need them, or because they interest you. Most people don't *need* linear algebra to use or enjoy computer graphics code. If you want to, or its for pure interest then more power to you, let your focus wander where it likes. But if you want to do a specific topic, and this is a distraction looking back, then draw a line at some point and know whether or not you want to follow "wherever it goes" or to learn and do something at the first level. If you have 2 topics (graphics and linear algebra) then you might find you don't *need* to learn one or know "how it relates" to the other. If you feel you need this to learn a subject, then the advice given by others is also good - pick a specific target task, and do only what's needed to achieve it. This will teach you some aspects of the toolset you need. After a few tasks you'll get quite adept with tools without distraction. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_14: Yes it does happen all the time - it happened to me a PhD, an academic career, and an industry career notwithstanding. Please realize that the main value a formal academic training provides in our days of online resources is exactly what you are struggling with here: creating a workflow from learning the basics to gain control of the advanced stuff - all the while juggling inter-dependencies - that will lead you to master your desired skill. However, it is clear that if you wanted to go back to school, you would already have done so. So you'll have to go the way we all go after college: start from the very end and practice the simple stuff of the skill you would like to master. Realize you don't really know what you are doing, study it a bit and try cracking the nut again. You'll think you got it, while all of a sudden a new problem will have you face the harsh truth there's so much you don't know yet. Back to a book, crack a new problem, hit the wall with another one. Live, die, repeat. Don't obsess with going over all nine hundred pages of computer graphics bible. You'll probably need only two or three chapters anyway. That's the way it goes in adult age. Luckily with computers-related problems, there's plenty of companies that are willing to pay for you to learn all of this. Unlike academia :) Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: This is meeeeee, oh, man. I'm such a dilettante. I forgive myself for it if it's hobbyist stuff and it just turns out not to be a real passion. It doesn't always feel good, though, and I get you. When I'm doing that, I also complicate matters by holding myself to the standards of what I think other people can do. For instance, I keep trying to tell myself that, if I were really interested or capable, it should be easy to make myself do it and stick with one thing. That's not true, though, so I've learned to treat it differently. Pick a very specific topic that interests you. Go ahead and do some Googling, but sit down and tell yourself, "I'm going to find a good book to learn about [that very specific thing] and buy it." Don't put it on your Amazon wish list. Go ahead and order it. Then, when it comes, make yourself a rough plan for how you want to go through the book. Come up with at least an idea of how often you want to work on it, and be conservative so it's easy to maintain. Then, dig out a bag, get yourself a clean notepad and pen or pencil, and put those and your book in the bag. That's now your school bag. Nothing else goes in it except your wallet, phone, and keys. At the times you've set out, take your bag and go to a coffee shop or library for a limited period of time (plan on an hour the first time and see how you feel, but decide the period ahead of time and stick to it). People like us have a tendency to burn ourselves out, both in the planning and in the execution, so if you work on avoiding burnout, you'll go a long way towards being able to accomplish your goals. I'll add that I've also had a lot of success with MOOCs, because they keep me on track. Upvotes: 0
2017/05/05
1,075
4,924
<issue_start>username_0: I'm heading a group of engineering students (from different fields) which need to build a robot (which performs tasks autonomously) as part of their courses. There are 10 students in this group and they are divided in three or four subgroups which work on different engineering aspects. As the time frame is pretty short (2.5 months) and the students have a lot of other things to tend to, I wanted to optimize their work a bit by using some tools for project management and communication. As I have recently been around a lot of IT people, I got to know about some of the methods and tools they use in the organization of small to medium-ish sized(startup) companies. So my question boils down to: **Is it advisable to manage short term - medium/high workload student projects using productivity and management tools(e.g. Slack?) and techniques, or could this actually be of little use to the project(especially if the supervisor has no experience using them)?**<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, but don't overdo it. Using one or two services such as Slack (the one I have the most personal experience with) can be really helpful in the sense that it can facilitate and organize communication. It's easy to share files, and to collaborate and make progress even when everyone can't be in the same place at the same time (an issue with busy students). It's also good to have some kind of central communication system, where any and all meeting times and information are announced, such as goals, deadlines, progress reports, etc. However, for it to work, everyone has to be fully aware of 1) what service(s) the team is using 2) how to sign up for and access the service (Does it have an app? Does it send alerts? Emails?) and 3) what is expected from them in terms of the service (How often are team members expected to check it? What are they supposed to report on?). Make sure that if you decide to use some service, that you have a meeting where every member of the team gets together, signs up for the service, configures anything necessary, and discusses expectations. If everyone isn't on the same page, then you're not really going to see any benefit from using it. Also, limit yourself when choosing your tools. There's a lot of cool team management software, and organization tools out there, but for a 2.5 month project, you probably only need one or two that are most essential to the tasks at hand. Make sure that you have some tool for communication, because effective communication between busy team members is what will ultimately keep the project on track. If you use a tool for a week and find that it's either hindering productivity or not increasing it, then either choose a different one to replace it or just scrap it totally. Don't persist in using something that isn't helping. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this is potentially a good idea for two main reasons: (1) the tools are likely to be helpful for project management in their own right (which is why they are used in industry); and (2) in addition to learning engineering, the students get some practice using project management systems they will encounter in subsequent professional work. As with any new tool, there is an initial time-cost to learning to use it; in the case of programs like Slack, etc., you will need to allocate some time to help your team get set up with these programs and learn the basics of how to use them. If you are serious about this then I recommend allocating some of the course time and marks to successful learning and use of these project management tools (e.g., have a 5% mark allocated to project management, which is assessed on the basis of demonstrating competence in using this system). Also, as in any industrial/professional setting, you should ensure that your use of project management tools is suitable for the project and commensurate with the complexity of the project --- i.e., use these tools in a way that makes project management less complicated, not more complicated. (For the purpose of looking at trade-offs here, you can reasonably ignore the initial time-investment to learn the tools; pretend that you are all working inside an industrial firm where this set of tools is used for all projects, so that learning them is mandatory.) Like any potentially good idea for innovative teaching, there is no guarantee it will work out. It might turn out that the time needed to learn these tools is excessive, and cuts too much into time spent on substantive engineering work. It might be too hard to assess the competence of individual team members in using the project management tools, and it might be hard to diagnose the causes when problems arise. Still, it is a good enough idea to be worth trying out --- if it is successful then it is something you could potentially build into all future student projects for these courses. Upvotes: 0
2017/05/05
850
3,712
<issue_start>username_0: When applying for academic jobs, it is common to apply to multiple positions and use essentially the same cover letter for all the applications. The danger is that you might forget to change some of the details from one cover letter to the next. I realized that I have done this recently. How bad is it? Specifically, I applied to a call in area X by saying I'm applying to area Y. (Thankfully, I got the name of the university right. And X and Y are not very different.) Perhaps someone who has experience on hiring committees can tell me how much of a detriment it is to an application to have the wrong details in a cover letter. I assume this is a reasonably common mistake that is largely overlooked, but it gives the wrong first impression.<issue_comment>username_1: I have looked at a lot of things. When I see references to the wrong project or company, where it is supposed to have my project or company referenced, I don't let it stop me from reading the rest of the proposal or application. People make mistakes, and it is natural for them to look for employment or sales options. It tells me they missed it in proofreading (by computer or person). I don't like it, but I don't automatically stop and throw it away. I might miss something very good because of some silly "rule" I made up. It's not Scripture. If I see *lots* of them, I start to worry. In an application, I am apt to let it slide, as long as it is not a lie. You lie. You out. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Sometimes mistakes like this happen. Also, faculty search committees recognize that candidates are applying for multiple positions at one time, so it wouldn't necessarily send up red flags. Most candidates will use a template for their cover letter and change things around. I've chaired search committees and will say that having the university name correct, but the area (you mention it is related) incorrect would not be a fatal flaw for a candidate. However, I might be extra careful at looking at his or her other content/materials for fit and would be more likely to view any additional typos or mistakes as basic sloppiness. However, it also depends on how competitive that specific position may be. If there are a number of stellar candidates and one made the mistake, it would be easier to rule that person out to make decision making easier. I do not suggest contacting the faculty search chair or members. It will only emphasize that you made the mistake. Maybe to boost your hopes...I searched for my first faculty position during the recession and applied to 120 positions over a two-year period (many schools lost funding for positions after they were posted, so it was advised to apply for EVERYTHING). One school called me for a campus visit and I was excited. To prepare, I reviewed the cover letter I sent them...only to realize that I wrote the wrong university on the cover letter! With 120 applications, I gave myself some grace for the error. However, it didn't stop me from getting interviewed for the job - the rest of my application made up for the error. Good luck! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I see this frequently in applications for faculty positions. It creates a bad initial impression (it suggests that you're careless and didn't put any thought into the application), but if your CV otherwise would be of interest, I'm not going to throw your application out on that basis alone. This becomes a much more serious matter when we start doing telephone or skype interviews with candidates. At that stage, you should be clear about the name of the institution you're interviewing with, its location, and other aspects of the position. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/05
2,161
9,060
<issue_start>username_0: I am half way through the first year of my PhD (physics) and I find myself faced with the following problem related to research discipline and learning new techniques while doing a PhD. The problem is probably specific to my personality, but I am hoping that some people can relate and provide their experiences/advice. Essentially I find it hard to *actually learn* anything new, especially when it comes to techniques. Let me clarify by describing how I read a paper * When reading a paper I usually read just enough to 'understand' it on a functional level. I.e. afterwards I know: **a)** What has been done **b)** How it fits with some other things I know **c)** If it is useful for the research my group is doing and the projects I am working on. When c) applies I read 'in more detail'. That usually just involves following the derivations on a functional level. I.e. afterwards I would know **a), b), c)** for every part of the derivation. The problem is that I don't actually learn any techniques this way. I could not **sit down and do** what has been done in the paper, even though I could **tell** you exactly *what* has been done in the paper and (for the ones I read in detail) *how* it has been done. That isn't too bad if you want to come up with new research ideas, I even found that you can solve some problems this way, but you can't actually write the solution down. The latter unfortunately is very necessary if you want to write a paper. I have a similar problem with textbooks that I was going to describe here, but for the sake of brevity1 I will spare you the details. To me the situation is a bit worrisome, especially because that did not happen to me during my undergraduate. When doing supervision work and exercises I always felt like at the end I understood things on a level where I could do them again. When people asked me questions about it I could not only tell them how to do the question in principle, but also point out technically details that you encounter along the way. I am worried that I will never reach such a level of understanding in any new areas the way I am approaching it at the moment. I suspect that one of my problems is that I have become really impatient somewhere in between feeling the pressure of trying to produce valuable research and trying to learn things as quickly as possible. This creates the feeling that I am unable to **'sit down'** and **'actually do something'** 2 . So, reading my question above again I don't feel like I have pinned the point down very well at all, but this is my 3rd try, so I'll go with it and see if people have some advice. The title question is going to be: **How to deal with impatience when starting off in research?** --- 1 Really not an appropriate description of this question anymore... 2 Don't get me wrong, I am not procrastinating. I am doing a lot of work and I also enjoy the work very much. It is just not very effective and when I think after each day what I have achieved, there is a lingering fear that I just wasted a lot of time.<issue_comment>username_1: A lot of this just sounds like the transition from undergraduate work where the solutions are relatively obvious (i.e., apply the theorem we learned this week...oh look, beautiful solutions with round numbers everywhere, huzzah!) to actual research that requires a bit more creativity. Have you talked to your advisor/PI about this? It just sounds like you need a bit of a push/direction to get started, and that's a big part of what your PhD advisor is for early on. Also, I don't know what types of problems you are working on, but although I'm a wet biologist by training, I spend most of my time in research choosing the right algorithms to analyze a particular set of data. In that area, often your progress is measured less by "how many problems did I solve today?" and rather by "how many approaches did I rule out for this one problem?" Perhaps you will feel like your time is better spent if you recognize that a lot of the background work you are doing is also important. Maybe paradoxically, if you are working on problems that are easy to solve, you are probably wasting your time because if they are easy, they were probably solved already. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From what you describe, i.e. preferring learning by doing rather than first getting strong theoretical foundations, you seem to be more a *hacker* than a *academician*. From [Hackers and Painters by <NAME>](http://www.paulgraham.com/hp.html) (whole essay is about this difference): > > The fact that hackers learn to hack by doing it is another sign of how different hacking is from the sciences. Scientists don't learn science by doing it, but by doing labs and problem sets. Scientists start out doing work that's perfect, in the sense that they're just trying to reproduce work someone else has already done for them. Eventually, they get to the point where they can do original work. Whereas hackers, from the start, are doing original work; it's just very bad. So hackers start original, and get good, and scientists start good, and get original. > > > In my personal case, impatience brought me from academic science to startup world and data science [What I do or: science to data science](http://p.migdal.pl/2015/12/14/sci-to-data-sci.html). If I had know about my psychological traits, I wouldn't have dove into the academic world (it's not only about intellectual skills, but also patience... and ability to deal with hierarchy). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As per request in the comments, I am posting an answer about my experience since I asked this question about 3 years ago (time flies...). I think the first advice I would give my past self is: **Calm down, it is all going to be fine!** and **Find your own way to do research.** Parts of the problem were probably caused by my personality, other parts are quite common problems in my experience. Some younger PhD students seem to struggle with the same issue. The main reason is that when you start out in a new field, there is simply **too much material** to learn everything on the level you were used to as an undergraduate. **With time that will change.** That said, I think it is useful to give some advice and strategies on how to get to that bright future. Here is my take: * **Have a goal, create your niche**. If you want to learn a technique that you find cool or useful, cast it into *project* or a *problem to solve*. If you want to become an ''expert'', you have to choose what to actually become an expert in. I personally chose a very particular goal that kind of acted as a guiding thread through the literature, making it easier to also understand other topics. 3 years later I am still not an expert in the whole field, but I can quite confidently claim that there are few people in the world that know more about my mini-niche than I do. * **Learn by doing**: This has also been mentioned in the comments and other answers. Just *reading* a paper cannot get you to the full level. You have to *do* the calculations or implement the results in one form or another. For example, I just started redoing plots from some papers I found interesting in python. Often, one may even find someting interesting that way that the authors did not realize... A new research direction! * **Find your own style**: Finding the right balance between reading and doing, inventing new stuff and implementing old works, creating and documenting your own results etc. etc. is largely personality dependen and on how you learn. I think the academician vs hackers analogy from username_2's answer is too simplistic, as also alluded t in the comments. There are many ways to achieve progress in science! Don't let yourself get locked in by what others say. Find your path, persue it with confidence, but be critical about how to improve. * **Get back the patience:** That said, once you have a goal and your style and maybe an overview of your field, sometimes is important to just sit down and understand that entire pesky paper from the 80s that you have been staring at for a while. This is where to start the "Learning by doing" strategy and "do" the whole paper. However, *choose wisely* which papers/textbook chapters etc. you want to do that for. * **Be bold:** This one is largely personality dependent. I find that I can learn stuff much better and in a lot of detail if I make a conjecture or have a goal that is very bold. I always fail to achieve it, but in the process and by understanding why I failed I learn the subject and crate my own perspective on it. * **Ask for feedback:** Advisors are there to guide you. Ask them what you can do better. Tell them what you have problems with and ask how to improve. Some advirsors give very useful advice on that, others don't. That's it. Most important point is probably the **Find your own style**. Don't take the rest too seriously, I'm still a PhD student and have no clue what I'm doing really. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/05
948
3,969
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a computer science graduate student (Master degree), I have done my thesis defense, and it is accepted. So, the problem is that I want to publish a paper based on my thesis but the advisor wants her name to be the FIRST name! Claiming that she has done enough work to be as first author. So, here how the research has been done: * At the beginning she didn't have any good idea to be done as thesis. Thus, I had to go through existing research for couple of months until I came up with a new idea. * As any new idea, it develops with the time. What I mean is that she suggested few things to be added. However, I added much more things to enhance the algorithm (my idea) and achieve better results . * I wrote the whole thesis, but she revised almost all of it (except Related work and conclusion) because English is not my first language. * She did the mathematical proof ( I mean she found the equations to proof that our algorithm is better) * However, I codded all the simulation programs, and I did the simulations and collected the results. * Also, she stayed in contact with me during the summer (one Skype call a week) I spent almost two years working on this research, and I don't want to be unfair with her. I would like to have your opinion<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, in CS, **it is rare but not unheard of for a professor to be first author**. Usually I think that is really when it is the professor who has taken lead, both in **running a project and in writing the text**, and typically it is when it is a group project where each student has a moderate contribution but it's the advisor who pulled it together. This is often the case when the paper is an overview of the project as a whole. In the case of your project, it certainly sounds like you're getting a raw deal and should push back. But without seeing the professor's side of the story, it can be hard to tell. They may have a different view of the relative contribution. IMHO, even if it's 50-50 or 60-40, the student should get priority. There's a tipping point where it's more understandable, but from your description, you're nowhere close to it. Good luck! Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: More data seem necessary in order to clarify what's going on there, but if your report is accurate, take for granted her behavior is highly unethical. A thesis is (should be) the result of individual research, and a publication based on it definitely should have you as the first author. That being said, many research groups are infamously well-known for being run as communist states. That is, research is not mainly an individual task, but a constant "groupal collaboration guided by the leader", where the leader is the one that distributes credit, depending on a plethora of criteria (helping the weakest/oldest student, personal interests, old favors, etc...). If this is your case and you accepted a lot of help (like your professor writing for you a crucial proof, or doing a full copy-edit of your whole thesis), you got credit in other articles from your colleagues, etc... then sadly you'll have to give in, because you implictly accepted participating in that system. Did this only happen to you or is it common? If this does not apply, your group is run based on meritocracy, and your professor just did important but limited work, then discuss it with her and expose why you should be the first author. Although, from what you have described, and in my experience, I don't have much hope this would work. I also know a research group where the supervisor signed as first author in every paper produced and there were only two options: accept it or leave. The supervisor is there to supervise, guide and advise, not to collaborate or help in your thesis. In the future, be very wary about "receiving (excessive) help", because this is what eventually happens: you'll have to pay the favors back. Upvotes: 0
2017/05/06
1,874
7,787
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a physics graduate but have written a number theory paper as a hobby. A couple of professors have read it briefly though it is not their field they gave positive feedback and suggested I send it to professors working in this area. I sent it to 8 professors and none has replied to me. I asked the original professor what's going on and he said probably the following: The nature of the paper (Fermat's last theorem) and being an amateur mathematician it will invoke memories of all the failed attempts on this problem over the centuries. Even if it is correct that doesn't matter they will throw it in the bin without reading it. He suggested I may have to pay a qualified reader to evaluate it so I'm wondering how do I find a qualified number theory reader. There are no listings for maths readers and I don't want to email everyone on the number theory web until I find one. Thank you for any advice.<issue_comment>username_1: I commend your modesty. Many people, in a similar situation as you, seem angry that the mathematical world has not recognized their genius. Your attitude is much more modest, and you seem to be willing to do whatever is needed to get your paper read. I recommend addressing your question to a graduate student rather than a professor. At least if you are in the United States, now (early May) is a particularly good time to do so: final exams just ended, and many students are a lot less busy and would like to earn some money over the summer. Moreover, I would frame your request as seeking out a private tutor. You can often find these by Googling. For example, [here](https://www.math.wisc.edu/tutors) is a list of math Ph.D. students at the University of Wisconsin who have made themselves available for (paid) private tutoring. Hopefully you could arrange this with someone within driving distance of wherever you live, so that you can do this in person. I would send a brief e-mail something like the following: > > Dear XXX, > > > My name is ZZZ and I'm an amateur hobbyist mathematician. I believe that I have found an elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, and one that covers further cases as well. Since I'm an amateur, I understand that I could have easily made a mistake -- and indeed that this might well be the most likely outcome. > > > I'd like to hire you to discuss my paper with me, to check my arguments, to point out any logical flaws that you see, and to offer me your advice. I'm happy to pay $60/hour and to meet with you at your convenience, and to send you my paper in advance if you like. Would you please be in touch if you're willing to do this? > > > Thank you very much. > > > Possible reactions will vary. Most people will ignore you, so be prepared to e-mail multiple people. Some might ask to see your paper; if it is logically coherent but contains a mistake, someone might point out the mistake and tell you not to worry about payment. If you managed to hire a tutor, and if you have, in fact, come up with an elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem (as you claimed in the comments), and if moreover you have explained it clearly and without mistakes, then whoever you hired will likely refuse payment and bring your work to the attention of faculty members. Good luck to you! Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, I am a professional number theorist, so let me give you some feedback that you don't seem to have received yet: **Your paper containing an elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is wrong.** This is what I think, and I am confident that this is what more than 99 out of 100 professional number theorists would think. Here by "wrong" I mean as a real person would use the term: i.e., *probably wrong*. I obviously don't *know* that it is wrong, and I couldn't without reading it, but in real life there is almost nothing that one *knows* is right or wrong: we *have* to go based on probability. Let me try an analogy: suppose I am an amateur aerospace engineer. I claim that I can walk into anyone's home and, using only the materials that are already there, build a ship that can safely carry me to the moon and back. Wouldn't you say that I'm wrong? Wouldn't you say that, if anything, the fact that we have been to the moon and back gives us a better sense of the resources necessary for that, and that gives you more confidence that my estimation is wildly off? That while it's of course *possible* that I'm right, if I were I would have to be in possession of such vastly superior knowledge and expertise that I could easily provide evidence of it on a smaller scale? That's pretty much how we number theorists feel. Let me make one point about amateur mathematicians: it is exceedingly rare for an amateur mathematician to solve a problem that has been worked on unsuccessfully by the mathematical mainstream, but it *has happened sometimes* (more or less depending upon what you mean by an amateur mathematician, but if for instance you count brilliant young people without a college degree: sure, it has happened several times). However I know of *no examples* in which an amateur mathematician has solved a significant mathematical problem *without having done other substantial mathematical work already*. So...is this your first math paper, or the first substantial piece of mathematics you think you've done? If so, I *really* think it's wrong: that's just not how success in any field works. Nobody picks up a tennis racket for the first time and discovers they can play at the professional level. On the other hand, if you do already have published papers, then *certainly mention that* in your correspondence: it will make a big difference. Anyway, if you want to find out why your proof is wrong, then yes: I agree with the other answers who say that you should pay to enlist the services of a tutor. If you go to any math department with number theorists and say that you have reading and thinking about FLT and have some ideas you'd like to clarify and are willing to pay, say, $30 an hour to get one-on-one tutoring, I think you're very likely to find some takers. Let me say finally that my goal in writing this answer is not at all to crush your dreams. Rather, I hope that you actually like mathematics enough to move past your thought that you have proven FLT and engage with the subject matter more deeply. Mathematics is a lot deeper and richer than I think you know...in some wonderful ways. Good luck. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Have you thought of soliciting feedback on [MathOverflow](http://mathoverflow.net)? E.g., you can post your proof on some publicly accessible location on the web and post a question on MathOverflow requesting feedback. If you offer to pay as some other people were suggesting that may increase the chance that you'll get help, but if your proof is written in clear and readable language and interesting to examine it's completely possible that knowledgeable people will offer you some useful advice free of charge. Good luck! Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: An alternate approach would be to formalize your papee in a mechanical proof system, like Coq or Agda. This has several advantages: * If your proof is correct, it is undeniably correct, and others will take you seriously * It will make the assumptions you have in your paper explicit to you, so you can possibly spot where you've made mistakes * If your proof contains tedious but repetitive parts they can be automated. (This is especially true of Number Theory, where induction is common, as opposed to real analysis) * If all else fails, you will have learned a fun, interesting new tool These tools have helped some results, like the 4 color theorem, gain more acceptance in the community. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/06
1,821
7,636
<issue_start>username_0: More generally, what "workflow" do people suggest when dealing with web articles in research? I used to always save useful articles as PDFs to my Documents folder, and maybe copy and paste useful information I found to a word processor document. I have realized this is inefficient for a number of reasons, and found simply bookmarking useful articles and organizing those bookmarks in a nested file system (in Safari) to be a more elegant, clean work process. Is there any similar minimalist process for annotating those web articles? I know Evernote and others have a web annotator, but I'm hesitant to deal with external software... a feature integrated into Safari would be ideal. Can anyone recommend how they deal with web articles when researching?<issue_comment>username_1: I commend your modesty. Many people, in a similar situation as you, seem angry that the mathematical world has not recognized their genius. Your attitude is much more modest, and you seem to be willing to do whatever is needed to get your paper read. I recommend addressing your question to a graduate student rather than a professor. At least if you are in the United States, now (early May) is a particularly good time to do so: final exams just ended, and many students are a lot less busy and would like to earn some money over the summer. Moreover, I would frame your request as seeking out a private tutor. You can often find these by Googling. For example, [here](https://www.math.wisc.edu/tutors) is a list of math Ph.D. students at the University of Wisconsin who have made themselves available for (paid) private tutoring. Hopefully you could arrange this with someone within driving distance of wherever you live, so that you can do this in person. I would send a brief e-mail something like the following: > > Dear XXX, > > > My name is ZZZ and I'm an amateur hobbyist mathematician. I believe that I have found an elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, and one that covers further cases as well. Since I'm an amateur, I understand that I could have easily made a mistake -- and indeed that this might well be the most likely outcome. > > > I'd like to hire you to discuss my paper with me, to check my arguments, to point out any logical flaws that you see, and to offer me your advice. I'm happy to pay $60/hour and to meet with you at your convenience, and to send you my paper in advance if you like. Would you please be in touch if you're willing to do this? > > > Thank you very much. > > > Possible reactions will vary. Most people will ignore you, so be prepared to e-mail multiple people. Some might ask to see your paper; if it is logically coherent but contains a mistake, someone might point out the mistake and tell you not to worry about payment. If you managed to hire a tutor, and if you have, in fact, come up with an elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem (as you claimed in the comments), and if moreover you have explained it clearly and without mistakes, then whoever you hired will likely refuse payment and bring your work to the attention of faculty members. Good luck to you! Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Well, I am a professional number theorist, so let me give you some feedback that you don't seem to have received yet: **Your paper containing an elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is wrong.** This is what I think, and I am confident that this is what more than 99 out of 100 professional number theorists would think. Here by "wrong" I mean as a real person would use the term: i.e., *probably wrong*. I obviously don't *know* that it is wrong, and I couldn't without reading it, but in real life there is almost nothing that one *knows* is right or wrong: we *have* to go based on probability. Let me try an analogy: suppose I am an amateur aerospace engineer. I claim that I can walk into anyone's home and, using only the materials that are already there, build a ship that can safely carry me to the moon and back. Wouldn't you say that I'm wrong? Wouldn't you say that, if anything, the fact that we have been to the moon and back gives us a better sense of the resources necessary for that, and that gives you more confidence that my estimation is wildly off? That while it's of course *possible* that I'm right, if I were I would have to be in possession of such vastly superior knowledge and expertise that I could easily provide evidence of it on a smaller scale? That's pretty much how we number theorists feel. Let me make one point about amateur mathematicians: it is exceedingly rare for an amateur mathematician to solve a problem that has been worked on unsuccessfully by the mathematical mainstream, but it *has happened sometimes* (more or less depending upon what you mean by an amateur mathematician, but if for instance you count brilliant young people without a college degree: sure, it has happened several times). However I know of *no examples* in which an amateur mathematician has solved a significant mathematical problem *without having done other substantial mathematical work already*. So...is this your first math paper, or the first substantial piece of mathematics you think you've done? If so, I *really* think it's wrong: that's just not how success in any field works. Nobody picks up a tennis racket for the first time and discovers they can play at the professional level. On the other hand, if you do already have published papers, then *certainly mention that* in your correspondence: it will make a big difference. Anyway, if you want to find out why your proof is wrong, then yes: I agree with the other answers who say that you should pay to enlist the services of a tutor. If you go to any math department with number theorists and say that you have reading and thinking about FLT and have some ideas you'd like to clarify and are willing to pay, say, $30 an hour to get one-on-one tutoring, I think you're very likely to find some takers. Let me say finally that my goal in writing this answer is not at all to crush your dreams. Rather, I hope that you actually like mathematics enough to move past your thought that you have proven FLT and engage with the subject matter more deeply. Mathematics is a lot deeper and richer than I think you know...in some wonderful ways. Good luck. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Have you thought of soliciting feedback on [MathOverflow](http://mathoverflow.net)? E.g., you can post your proof on some publicly accessible location on the web and post a question on MathOverflow requesting feedback. If you offer to pay as some other people were suggesting that may increase the chance that you'll get help, but if your proof is written in clear and readable language and interesting to examine it's completely possible that knowledgeable people will offer you some useful advice free of charge. Good luck! Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: An alternate approach would be to formalize your papee in a mechanical proof system, like Coq or Agda. This has several advantages: * If your proof is correct, it is undeniably correct, and others will take you seriously * It will make the assumptions you have in your paper explicit to you, so you can possibly spot where you've made mistakes * If your proof contains tedious but repetitive parts they can be automated. (This is especially true of Number Theory, where induction is common, as opposed to real analysis) * If all else fails, you will have learned a fun, interesting new tool These tools have helped some results, like the 4 color theorem, gain more acceptance in the community. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/06
248
1,142
<issue_start>username_0: For the publication of a paper each of the joint authors needs to sign a publication agreement with the publisher. Instead, only one author can sign as an 'authorised agent for joint authors'. Ignoring the specifics of this particular publisher, how does an author become an authorised agent generally in this respect?<issue_comment>username_1: They're taking the word of the person who signs, that they're allowed to speak for everyone. Or, in some contexts, the person is authorized by their own institution. For instance, a VP of a company signing for all employees who were authors, Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not nearly as complicated and formal as it sounds. Usually what it means in practice is you email a copy of the agreement to the other authors and ask if it's okay with them. If they all say yes, then that is your authorization to sign on their behalf. As Fred says, the publisher doesn't usually require you to prove that you have the authorization of the other authors; but if you sign without their authorization, you could in principle be sued later. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2017/05/06
950
4,082
<issue_start>username_0: I’m writing an academic paper for a B.Sc. We only have the professor and a PhD student from another university plus random friends and volunteer collaborators helping us. We were not specifically assigned a TA for our project. I think that it would be much better if we had a PhD student as a TA who could help us instead of only meetings with the professor. My professor has eight groups in the course and a TA maybe wouldn’t have that many groups. Can I just write to a PhD student in the faculty and ask for help? I was already rejected once when I asked another professor.<issue_comment>username_1: Certainly there would be many benefits to having a TA assigned to assist with your project, and in a perfect world that would be great. The main problem is most likely: **money**. TAs need to be paid, and typically a university allocates assistantships based on the number of courses that need to be taught. TAs for independent studies are almost certainly not in the budget. You might argue that the cost would be offset by savings in the professor's time. Ah, but professors are salaried, and very often they are asked to supervise independent studies on top of their regular teaching and research duties, for no additional pay. So that savings in time may not translate into any savings in money. You can certainly ask a graduate student if they would like to help you, just out of the goodness of their heart, but unless your project is exceptionally interesting, I think they'd likely say no. Grad students have lots of responsibilities that are directly tied to getting paid and staying on track toward finishing their degrees, and your project isn't one of them. If there is a grad student with particularly relevant expertise, you could ask to have just a single meeting with them. Requests like that are more likely to be accepted, when a limited amount of time is involved. Or, you could offer to pay them by the hour (out of your own pocket), as for private tutoring. In any of these cases, before requesting any kind of help from a grad student, make sure the professor advising you knows and approves. They may give you guidelines on how to make sure your work remains your own, and that your consultation isn't considered to be cheating. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Where I work there is actually some part of what you want implemented. Professors have assigned teaching duties for their group, which usually include supervision of bachelor and master students. This means we have to supervise X students per term to meet the requirements for our group (I have no exact idea what happens if we don't, but I think it will end in a reduction of our budget.) Compared to what we "earn" for teaching a lecture of one hour per week, the assigned points we get for supervision of one bachelor student though are ridiculously low, basically accounting for less than 20 minutes spend per week. Also, if we have more students (which we usually do), we do not get additional budget assigned. How much time you spend with a bachelor student depends a lot on the stage they are in with their thesis, but also on the needs of the student and the type of project they do. It has always been more than 20 minutes for me. I am not sure, how you would account for this with a TA. Also, they would not necessarily have the in-depth knowledge of a topic that is needed for good supervision. Quite often, universities offer short courses or even "counseling" hours for the general writing and organizing you work part of a thesis. You might have to look out for that if that is what you need. Sometimes there are even senior students setting up "bring your work and we will all talk about the problems you have" hours for bachelors (or people having trouble with academic writing in general, also before starting their thesis work). Because re-reading your post, I think you are actually doing your first writing (course report, academic homework, something we would call "seminar work") and not your thesis. Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
2017/05/06
2,360
9,374
<issue_start>username_0: It has happened on several occasion now, that I read a paper, understand 95% of it, but there are some niggling details which I simply don't get. I ask around, I ask my advisor, and nobody is able to help (either because they don't get it themselves or they are too busy, which is completely understandable). I have often felt like simply writing to the author of the paper, asking clarifying questions. But these are all busy people, currently on the job market, interviewing everywhere. And another thing is they also know my (rather famous) advisor pretty well. Would it be weird to write to them? If so, should I mention my advisor at all? I don't want to put my advisor in an awkward situation, at the same time I don't want to seem like I'm hiding some information. I am just not comfortable asking such a stupid question to my advisor, hence asking here. Thanks so much!<issue_comment>username_1: If you are worried about making your advisor look like an idiot, I would ask him/her the question first. If they cannot answer it or they do not have the time, then, by all means, reach out to the corresponding author of the paper in question. More importantly, you shouldn't let your advisor's popularity get in the way of you doing great research, so don't do that. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it's perfectly fine. They publish their research because they want other researchers to know about it. Maybe they will ignore your question, or maybe they will answer - in any case, it's not weird. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: > > Is it appropriate > > > Yes it is. Science is about exchange of information. Unless the other researchers are on a rival group that hate you, I see no reason for you not to ask them. Put yourself in their shoes, and you will see it is actually in their own interest to help you. Two things that might go through their head: > > 1. Someone is asking me about my research! I will help them so they can cite me, my h-index will go up and I will be promoted sooner! > 2. Someone is asking me about my research! I will help them so they will invite me to their next symposium/colloquium/workshop to speak > about the subject! > > > By asking them a question, you are not making the impression that you do not know. Assuming they help you, you should know afterwards. You are learning, and people also learn by explaining themselves. Maybe your question will make them think of something they didn't before? This starts a discussion and opens up new opportunities. Who knows? You might even collaborate in the future. This discussion is also beneficial if you meet them later on, let's say in a conference. Instead of saying "hi, I'm convexityftw" followed by an awkward silence, you can start with "hi, I'm convexityftw and we talked before on the subject of...I did this...got that...". You're getting your name known, and this is just one form of networking. > > If so, should I mention my advisor at all? > > > No, in my opinion. Being a PhD student means you're being trained as an independent researcher. It's a matter between you, researcher A, and the author(s), researcher B. Your advisor should not babysit you or give you the answers. It's your job. > > asking such a stupid question > > > 1. There are no stupid questions. 2. I don't know in how many seminars and conferences you've been, but I've heard so many "stupid questions" from senior professors, so I don't worry about it anymore. I'm in good company and we're all asking stupid questions. I will finish with some anecdotes from my own experience (a last-year PhD student in the earth sciences): I send these kind of emails all the time. My advisor doesn't even know or care that I do. I never got a negative reply in the form of "I'm busy I don't want to answer you" or similar. I was ignored only three times. I don't even remember how many positive responses I got - several dozens? Some were more useful than others, but positive nonetheless. I met some of these "important" people at later conferences, and we had good and productive discussions. Now they know me as "the guy who knows X and is good with Y". Only good can come out of this. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: First of all, I believe that you could try to "acquire" the technique by yourself and to spend more time on the paper(3-4 months). After this, if you don't see any improving and don't see the answer, you might ask for help to the authors. Don't be afraid to ask questions, it happens to all of us. A few months ago, I send an e-mail for the authors of one paper asking about an erratum(they write proper eqs. in a follow up paper, but haven't published an erratum to the original paper). These eqs. and paper was the basis of an analysis I have done recently which have been published, and I needed the correct eqs. before submission. After some exchange of e-mails, I work in a joint project with one of these authors. The tip would be to find a more relaxed author, like a PhD student. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes it is - papers are often ambiguous, and hard to follow. It is only sensible to ask polite questions about points that you don't understand. However, you are right, most people are busy, and while they will almost always welcome your interest, you do need to put in some time on the paper first. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: As a professor, I've received many emails from graduate students at other institutions over the years asking me questions about my research. *Not once* has any of the following thoughts *ever* crossed my mind following such an email: 1. This student is doing something "inappropriate" by contacting me at my publicly listed email address. 2. This student is "stupid" or is asking a "stupid question". 3. Oh, this student mentioned their famous advisor. Their ignorance reflects poorly on their advisor. I will make sure to complain to the advisor the next time I see them. 4. Oh, this student didn't mention their advisor. Something's fishy here. I need to know who their advisor is, and preferably know it's someone famous who can help me in my career, before I dignify their email with a reply. 5. Etc etc, i.e. any other bad thought that suggests the student has crossed some invisible line separating lowlifes like them from (supposedly) important, powerful people like me. Instead, here is a sampling of ways I *actually* react when I receive such an email: 1. Oh, how nice. Someone at [name of cool university] is thinking about [name of my paper]! 2. Oh, how nice. A student of [name of famous advisor I am friends with] is thinking about [name of my paper]! 3. Oh, how nice. This student pointed out a weak point in the presentation of one of my proofs. I hadn't thought of the question that way, it's quite interesting! Seems like a smart student, would be nice to meet them some day. 4. Hmm, I'm kind of busy with lots of other things so this email stresses me out a bit. Oh well, I'll find time to reply to it some time in the next few days. In the meantime, how nice that someone is taking an interest in my paper and has interesting things to ask/say about it. As you can see from these two lists, basically the whole premise assumed in your question about the mindset of a professor receiving an email of the type you are thinking of sending is deeply misguided. Professors (the vast majority of them at least) are simply *nothing* like the scary, classist, pretentious, easily offended, thin-skinned people that a lot of students and other people seem to think they are. They are busy, yes, but the main thing that makes them so busy is that they are passionate about their work and usually cannot pass on an opportunity to discuss it with someone, regardless of their academic rank. So, good luck sending your emails! I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised by the replies you get. :-) Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: You probably don't need to mention your advisor at all. That said, it would probably be worth asking your advisor's advice on phrasing: they might suggest you're obsessing about details, or be pleased they've got a particularly careful student, or suggest ‘don't admit you don't know X’, or... As a PhD student you're an apprentice academic – by the end of your PhD you should expect to be working and talking with other scientists as a (junior) peer – and this is the sort of professional communication skill you can only learn this way. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: *(turning my comment into an answer after giving it a thought - it may help you to make up your mind)* My wife, when preparing her MSc, contacted the authors of a paper and they were so glad that someone actually read it that they not only responded, but pointed out interesting ramifications and provided a copy of their software so that she can test hers. They ended up, years later, to write a few papers together after her PhD. Ah, and the jury highlighted the fact that she went the extra mile to contact the authors (during her MSc defense) Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: At times, it might be appropriate to look up co-authors who are also graduate students. That way you can speak directly with a peer in your own field, and have a good networking opportunity as well. Upvotes: 1
2017/05/07
541
2,315
<issue_start>username_0: I am a fresh PhD graduate looking for a job. Is it a good idea to write directly to professors/group leaders, asking if there are any job openings in their group? If yes, how long/detailed such email should be? I haven't published any papers during my PhD so I feel that my chances of getting a postdoc position are pretty slim. I would like to start somewhere as a research assistant to gain some experience, make connections with people, etc. I know that quite often RA positions are not advertised because professors just offer them to their own PhD students.<issue_comment>username_1: Your question is rather vague -- what does "is it a good idea" mean? If you're asking if you *can* write to professors? Sure; there's nothing to lose, and there may be people looking for lab technicians. (I've been in this situation of looking for someone to hire in the past.) Go for it! If you're asking if it's *likely* that you'll get a positive response: no, for all the reasons you state. As for how long/detailed such an email should be: you should succinctly (in a paragraph or two) state your skills and goals and possibly point out abilities that are particularly useful for the group you're writing to. Attach a clear CV. I should point out that the statement "I haven't published any papers during my PhD" is rather worrying, and it may be a good idea to explain this when writing. Good luck! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a very vague question, but I had few friends with similar experience who used some tricks: 1- Do some deep research about the groups you wish to join, see if you can define a project which they have an interest in and you have some expertise in. 2- Try groups which seem to be rich. such groups have a higher interest in recruiting people who are defining new exciting projects. 3- Ask around and check if you can find someone who knows someone who knows someone... Details of email depend on you. You could start by pointing out a seemingly challenging area(yet not too challenging) in their research field and mention how you project would yield probable developments in this area. Afterward, mention in one or two paragraphs your background and abilities and attach a detailed CV and other documents which you find essential. Upvotes: 1
2017/05/07
1,311
5,605
<issue_start>username_0: Do publishers care if a book manuscript was freely posted online (e.g., made open-access with a CC license) before submission to the publisher?<issue_comment>username_1: The question is probably too broad as every publisher may act differently, and also differently in different cases, but I have one point to add: I've been contacted by one publisher and asked if I'd like to submit one of my lecture notes that has been freely available on my homepage for publication as a book. I did just for fun, got some reviews back, reviews were positive in general, but asked for more material and I did not continue to work on it up to now. So the answer is: **Ask the publisher.** Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, they care because it reduces the market for your book and thus their potential profits from sales. But some publishers care more than others. There are four classes of publishers: vanity presses, print on demand, trade presses, and academic presses. **Vanity Presses** earn profits by charging you up front for the publishing costs. So they don't care if the book has been published before, as long as you're willing to pay upfront. They may hide these costs by calling them production costs, editorial costs, or by requiring you to purchase a certain number of books ahead of time at 'discount.' **Print on demand** essentially have no overhead as they only print a copy of your book if someone buys it. They usually don't provide any advertising or production support. Since their overhead is zilch and they profit whenever a copy is sold, they would be willing to take your book. Amazon's CreateSpace is an example of a print on demand publisher. **Trade Presses** earn their profits solely off sales of the book. They won't be interested in a volume that is available elsewhere for free. You've effectively undersold your own market. **Academic Presses** used to be subsidized heavily by their universities, which allowed them to print low-volume academic treatises, but this is no longer the case. They are increasingly being required to show profit and thus they are increasingly less likely to choose books that carry neither prestige or sales volume. They would shy away from a book that has already been released CC unless you were a Very Famous Person®. There are some presses such as UCal Press which are experimenting with Creative Commons books that are also available through print-on-demand, but they are the minority. tl;dr: Try selling your book to a vanity press or print on demand press as they are the most likely to take a book that's already available for free. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Data point: within the last two years, Cambridge University Press made a deal with me, without fuss, that will allow me to put a PDF of a forthcoming monograph on-line without any waiting period ("embargo"?). The deal was that I forego "e-book" sales. The general philosophy was explained to me by the acquisitions editor as "we're not *for* profit, but we try to not *lose* money". Another enterprise whose implications I've not thought about too much, is the Amer. Math. Soc.'s relatively recent program to have lightly-vetted PDF "books" on their site, to invite comments and so on... most likely toward eventual publication... but without any apparent obligation from authors. I was solicited to put some of my notes into that machine, and, even when I commented that many of these would never become any sort of physical book (mostly because of all that entails, but also because of the paywall/editorial-corruption, ...) the acquisitions editor said it didn't matter. Yes, that is what I would have said, too, if I were an acquisitions editor trying to engage established writers-of-notes, but, still, ... As usual, these situations can be evaluated by the "value added" criterion, where "value" of course includes, status, money, etc, and the relative value of those things to the parties involved. The value added of a physical book is ever harder to understand, but to many it is still considerable. Indeed, having committed to CUP to make a physical book (beyond on-line PDFs), I did feel compelled to put a great deal extra effort into minimizing flaws... which are essentially uncorrectible in a physical object, but are endlessly correctible in an on-line document. I think that, unsurprisingly, we're still in a crazy transition period while publishers figure out how to cope with the internet, and academics figure out that literal "publication" is no longer bottle-necked through "publishers". That is, acquisition of "status" points enough to get tenure or get grants once was *only* possible through conventional publishers (and whatever procedures they hit upon), but now there are choices. In many peoples' minds, "publication" has inherited the archaic sense of "published through conventional publisher, with whatever vetting (in some peer-review sense) procedure they declare, as opposed literal publication. Perhaps unimaginably, once-upon-a-time, there was really no such thing as publication *other* than that now-archaic one. The habits and conventions of it permeate academe, along with self-perpetuating mythologies and traditions. Happily, some publishers (maybe not the ones panicking at loss of traditional high profit margins) have caught on to the fact that the internet "is a thing", and that many modestly technically savvy people can create PDFs that are as good as anything their own "typesetters" can create. Rather than pretending otherwise, they're adapting. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2017/05/07
1,679
6,593
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student in computer science. I'm currently working with 2 co-authors in revising a paper for resubmission (I'm not the main author). They act very respectful and open to criticism, but they seem to dismiss my concerns without realizing that they are doing it. I'm going to use a fictional example to illustrate the spirit of our conversations: Me: "I don't think 2+2=5 as you said." Them: "But we've addressed that concern before. Maybe you should explain yourself better so that we can understand." Me: "I've already explained it 10 times in different emails and in person. There was even a claim that said 2=1 that I refuted." Them: "We're not doubting your arguments but we need some time to figure out if that's true. Now let's consider 2+2=5... Oh, yeah, if 2=1 turns out to be true, then..." At that point, it would make sense to me to ask about how I refuted 2=1. They *want* it to be true, I'm saying it's *false*, but they go on with their own trains of thought, assuming it's true. If someone in your team has a piece of information that can be decisive for something you are *very interested* in knowing, why would you ignore it? I've been told I have to learn how to explain why something is important in order to get my message across, but in this case it is important for everyone (and they know that) and yet they are not willing to make an effort to understand. They have even told me that they have answered my questions when in fact they haven't, and then *I* have to explain what it is that *they* don't understand and why, and it's getting frustrating. 1) Am *I* doing something wrong? How can I tell if it's a lack of skill on my part or laziness on theirs? 2) How can I refuse to collaborate on future works with the same team? I have a feeling that they will ask me to prove that it's not my fault and will keep arguing that this "happens all the time when doing research".<issue_comment>username_1: (1) This question could only be answered by reading your drafts and discussion carefully. (2) If they invite you, politely decline. (If there's more going on here, for example, a debt of gratitude, complex relationships with a third party, funding ramifications, etc., please explain.) Now I'll pose and answer the question I thought you were leading up to. Question: > > How can I deal with their stubborn refusal to read my comments carefully and give them fair consideration? > > > Answer: > > When you are the low man on the totem pole, it is all too easy to fall into an unproductive communication game with such people. The key is to use an authoritative but not disrespectful tone, write in a neutral tone with no emotions showing, repeat yourself as needed, and time your repetitions carefully. Note about the timing: don't reply right away. You may draft an email response right away, but send it after an interval of time has gone by. > > > There are two ways to repeat yourself. You can choose whichever one works better for you. > > > (a) The succinct approach: "I responded to these points in draft *number.letter*, submitted on *date*." Or: "Please refer to comments submitted by email on *date, time*. *Notice "comments"(not "my comments"); "submitted" (not "which I submitted"). Depersonalizing the language you use with them helps your messages sound authoritative.*) > > > (b) Copy and paste from the previous draft or email message. > > > There must be no hint of frustration or sarcasm in your messages. You can be a broken record, as long as you don't show you're aware that you might sound like a broken record. And you must not show you are annoyed, because with people like this, showing annoyance is paradoxically counter-productive. It might be easier to adopt this tone if you pretend you are the right-hand man of an expert in the field, drafting a response for the Big Researcher. (This is analogous to being a legal clerk to a big name judge.) Write your comments and email messages as though they will be signed by that imaginary senior researcher (which might be you twenty years from now!). These tips bring no guarantee of success. But at least you'll have minimized the time and energy you've put in. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'll try to extend the answer given by username_1 by a small but important point: Give constructive critic. Taking your example, if possible don't say "I think 2+2=5 is false, we should reconsider," but rather take the reconsidering into your own hands: "I have appended a correction of claim X and proven that 2+2=4. By changing our paper slightly in the ways I list below, we can still keep the main result intact." By doing it like this, you don't force your co-authors to think about why 2+2=5 is wrong and how to correct it. Instead, with the work you did for them, they only need to verify/accept it. Furthermore, they are more likely to *look closely at your proof* (because they want to find an error to show that 2+2=5 is still true) than they are to *rethink their own proof,* which they assume to be correct. If they still say "Well, we showed 2+2=5 and thus your proof has to be wrong, so we won't bother to look at it -- find the error yourself," then you should consider pulling out from the project. Of course this needs quite some effort from your side, so be sure that 2+2=4 is true and that you really want to publish this result (maybe consult an external expert on the field and discuss with him what 2+2 should be). If you can't come up with a proof of 2+2=4, try to find a question. Say "I tried to apply our theorem of 2+2=5 when I tried to count these apples, but it just doesn't work out. Could you maybe look through this example with me and tell me how to properly apply the theorem?" Once again, they might be more likely to look for an error in your computation of the example than to look for an error in their proof. If they are also too stubborn to help you with that, you should really consider how to not work with them again or how to prevent the wrong result to get published. And last but not least: Try to talk in their language. Depending on your fields, you might have rather different points of view on certain problems and questions. Maybe they are from number theory and thus 2+2=5 is a special case of some very important theorem, and you are from combinatorics and thus count 2+2=4? In this case, they are more likely to listen to you if you manage to come up with an example from their field or to at least adjust to their language and point of view. Upvotes: 3
2017/05/07
470
2,073
<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to apply for a PhD position in Computer Science but haven't decided yet which country to study in. So far I found interesting universities / research groups in Germany (where I am currently studying), Denmark and Sweden but the structures of PhD programs seem to differ widely. Therefore I was wondering if these differences also result in a quality difference. Up to my current understanding the systems and differences are as follows: (Please correct me if I'm mistaken.) * In Germany Computer Science PhDs are usually unstructured, without course work. Only published papers and the thesis count. Exchanges semesters are not usual (at least at my current university). PhDs usually take up to 5 years. * In Denmark and Sweden PhDs are structured and include course work and usually an exchange semester at a foreign university. * In Denmark PhDs take exactly 3 years and in Sweden about 4 years. Do these differences affect the overall quality of the PhD and the experience/ knowledge you gain from it? For example, Danish PhDs are much shorter than German ones and include additional course work and an exchange stay abroad. I get the impression that Danish programs are much more guided than German ones but that you have less time to do research. Does this imply that you learn less or are students in a guided environment more productive?<issue_comment>username_1: In **Germany**, there's a huge variability in the quality of PhD theses. The quality of a particular PhD and the benefits gained from it are mostly determined by the quality of the workgroup and its supervision culture. To identify the good workgroups, you can simply look at the research output of their PhD students, in particular, publications at good venues. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The "quality" of your doctorate is in your own hands. You can hear as many additional lectures as you like and have time for. You can spend a semester abroad in the typical German "Individualpromotion", if you want to and have a convincing goal. Upvotes: 2
2017/05/07
412
1,730
<issue_start>username_0: As supervisors, many times we are asked to write recommendation letters. In my case, I have been recently asked to write one for a student, who is looking to enroll in a Ph.D. program. Due to the short time working under my supervision and the lack of results, it is not easy to highlight their strong points. In fact, It is also difficult to emit my recommendation. What would you do if you were in my shoes?<issue_comment>username_1: Either decline to write it or get them to write a draft. The other option would be to engage with the student and have a conversation with them about the "job" and see what their reaction is to what you think the qualities are that would make them successful. Do they have those? Can they convince you that they do? Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Decline on the grounds that, indeed, you've worked too little together. However (and actually adding to username_1's answer), a discussion in order to understand why they chose you might be useful -- meaning that usually one asks for recommendation from people with whom they've worked longer. If their background and intentions don't seem suitable, maybe also tip them that another career path would be better? Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If you wrote a lukewarm letter, you probably wouldn't be doing your student any favors! So here's my suggestion: > > I'm excited to hear about your interest in pursuing graduate studies. But at this time, I don't have enough information to write a strong letter. If you're still looking for a recommendation next year [next semester], I'd be happy to revisit this decision. > > > I recommend delivering your decision in person. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2017/05/07
404
1,736
<issue_start>username_0: Is publishing a single page erratum to arXiv an acceptable practice? And does it violate the copyright of journal who published the original work?<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe it's not exactly an objective answer for your question, but it's the closest I could find by now (a feedback in the comments so we can improve it later would be great). The problem in doing so is that people searching for your research may find the original one and not find the erratum. In that case, your goal of getting people to know your typo would fail. About the copyright, laws may change from country to country, so it's hard to determine. Yet, if you somehow include a large amount of the published work it's likely a copyright violation. If it's not the case, just a small part, I don't think it would be a problem. Finally, It's not the most appropriate form of proceeding. I know the editor refused to fix it, as you said in comments, but once you submitted to that journal you have kinda agreed that the journal's editor is the best one to make this kind of decisions. So, I would follow the editor even if I disagreed (and in that case I totally disagree). Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Has the original paper been posted on the arXiv? If so, I suggest updating it with a corrected version, and communicating **clearly** in the Comments field that this new version is a corrected one. (Also, I'd change the Journal-Ref to indicate that it doesn't exactly correspond to the publication.) In terms of copyright, this *may* be in a grey zone in case you've signed away the rights to your preprint to the publisher. But if so, it is a grey zone academics have been comfortably treading for years. Upvotes: 1