text:
Advisor wants to put his name on my paper when I did all the work and found the idea
During my master's work, when I was trying to solve the problem the advisor assigned to me, I solved another problem. I got an idea and it worked, I tried to talk to him about it, he refused. So, I went to present it in a prestigious conference and now I will send it to a journal. Now, the advisor knew and offers to revise it and put his name on it. I don't need revisions!
If I told him no then, I might not get recommendations when I apply for PhD programs.
What do you advise me to do?

If you know how to write papers, and get it accepted, the paper will be your reference. That being said, upsetting an advisor is not great, but if they had absolutely no part in shaping the problem, question, methods, paper, they - by rights - should not really be a coauthor. Perhaps talk with a trusted person in the department or an ombudsman?

"I don't need revisions" - if you're a master student, I'd be very skeptical of that part.

I am not sure about talking to someone in the Dept. Academics are conformists they will advise me to put his name on my work just to get to the next step in my career.

If you were put down when first discussing the new problem and/or solution to it, and then s/he suddenly got interested on it just after you have presented it at a prestigious conference (which presentation? All is already a big achievement for a master student) then you seem to have the right to go solo. Still, s/he can probably help on writing the paper for submission.

Depends on the field. I've heard life scientists say If you're in my lab it's a joint publication. Is the group paying for your conference participation and the publication's page charges?

@Aruralreader that is always the same story, about ethics and founding. The latter alone shouldn't be in principle a reason for coauthorship but we know in some fields is the norm. And one should know each case for details,too.

My first bit of advice is to suggest that you recognize (as I think you do) that you may be being abused here. I would need to know more to be sure, but "male domination" kind of sticks out a bit here.
If the advisor has something to add to the paper (and you agree that it does) then co-authorship of a revised paper would be proper and possibly even advantageous to you, depending on the general reputation of the the advisor. But if the "revision" is just "moving the chairs around" then it is clear abuse to insist on co-authorship.
But, my second, and more important, bit of advice is that you do what you need to do to make the advisor happy enough that you get a good recommendation and get away from his influence if the request is, in your view, improper.
You suggest that you don't want to press it to higher authorities. I can't disagree with that, though I think it would be a proper course to do so. Sometimes you just need to protect yourself and your future career.
While a sole author paper is good, any paper at all is also good and can be a positive point in getting your career going. Think long term. Think strategically. Don't take any action that will come back against you. Life ain't fair in many ways. People with power often abuse it. In Tai Chi we would rather side-step an attacking opponent than counter attack. The point is to remain safe.

Caveat. In some fields, advisors are accepted generally as co-authors. I don't particularly like that standard, but it happens. People in that field understand what is going on so it is, in that world, acceptable. A contributions section in the paper can, then, be used to clarify who did the work.

Definitely heed the caveat. Some advisors (thankfully, none of mine!) will take first authorship on all their students' papers, too, which is... a little hard to stomach.

Yes you got  that right, I am a female and I feel like I am being used.

I really don't understand the need of bringing the M/F issue into the discussion. The whole Q will be indistinguishable if the username was, eg, Alchimista. With the caveat that Alchimista had absolutely no freedom (economically & scientifically speaking) of submitting a work related to his Master thesis (equivalent of) without discussing with his F supervisor. Please reserve the attention to this delicate issue, that of M/F relationship on workplace and academia, for when needed.

I've seen similar conflicts between students and advisors here before. Sometimes the question seems along the lines of "should you sacrifice your career to spite an abusive/unethical advisor?" You can certainly choose to submit the paper by yourself, but is it best for your long-term goals? For an established professor, missing out on coauthoring one more paper is a minor loss. For you, your advisor being a coauthor is expected in many fields (I don't know about yours) and carries no disadvantage. I know you don't believe you need revisions, but positioning a paper in context is often as important as the results, and a MS student is usually not yet an expert on publishing. Getting a good recommendation letter is helpful for your future too. In summary, I think there are several advantages to working with your advisor here.
Overall, only you can decide what the best choice for you is, but my advice is to weigh the long-term advantages and disadvantages in your decision.

I once had a colleague who was in a similar situation, he did all the work and his advisor asked for his name to be put on the paper without even revising it then, the paper got rejected the first time so the advisor told my colleague to remove his name and that he needs to find another idea, my colleague then sent it again to another journal and it was accepted. It was a new result.

And a very important one, despite that, when he applied to many top unis, he was not accepted but was also admired by the committee. So, idk maybe PhD advisors don't like  master's students who publish on their own because this signifies independence and  they are looking for someone to implement their ideas so they can be the first authors

@Nadine There are many fish in the sea. And traditions are very different in different fields. Biology labs typically require the funding "master" to be on the paper or else the funding will dry out. Is that fair? If the core direction comes from the lab chief, perhaps yes, if not, probably not. But, the incentive system induces such a behaviour, ideals or not. In math, it's a different story, but we have no idea in which field you are....


text:
How to study a field on which no professors specialise in your university
I am currently an undergraduate student in math, but this question is already bugging me, because I am about to start an undergraduate research project that will likely become my Masters degree as well.
I learned Algebra on my own, and really seemed to enjoy Galois theory. I've even made an inquiry on Math.SE (Is there active research in Galois theory?) to see if I could still study it more in depth. The thing is, not a single professor on my university works on this area or anything related directly to it. Since I also loved the rest of Algebra, my project will be on something else (ring theory, linked to a research group on the topic), but I still can't shake away the desire to learn more Galois.
So how do I actually go about studying something nobody else seems to be studying at my university? I know this can be done, because every research group began at some point with a first person interested in the topic (in fact, I know about professors who have created their own research groups relatively recently), but I really just don't know what I can do as an undergraduate/early graduate student.
Thanks in advance!
This is sort-of (but not entirely) related to the following thread, which inspired me to write this one:
How realistic it is to change to a different field of mathematics after PhD?

I think my answer at https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/145120/is-it-reasonable-to-do-number-theory-without-active-good-prof-in-uni/145125#145125 might be relevant

It's not really ideal to be studying a subject at a university where literally no-one else studies that subject.

Is your university large enough to offer a masters degree in math, or small enough that you don't have an algebraist that can get you started?  In a separate comment, you mentioned some professors helped you set up an algebra sequence.  Do they have an opinion on how to study Galois theory?

The research topics in the linked answer seems fancy, but to be honest, in my opinion, they are bit above the undergraduate (even masters) level. If you happen to a professor with a knowledge of category theory you can do a decent project on Galois connection. For example Nullstellensatz  is a Galois connection in the ring theory context. In fact, this will prepare you better for higher studies.

One issue that will arise in talking to mathematicians about whether they do research in "Galois theory", is that the contemporary sense of "Galois theory" is exactly as a reference to the basic theorems that will be found in standard algebra texts. Does not refer to any active research area. Or, maybe "Galois theory of number fields", which then is part of "algebraic number theory", which is an active research area. Or, more fancily, "Galois representations", whether part of Langlands' Programme or not, is a topic of current research. But "Galois theory" does not usually refer to these...

@Teepeemm It is the best and largest university in my country, so it does offer graduate+ programs, and has a quite sizeable algebra department. None study Galois theory specifically, though, even though many have taught it before (and some still do).

@paulgarrett I see what you mean - it is probably due to my limited undergraduate view... In fact, it makes me a bit happier to know that there are many topics one doesn't even hear of before a PhD - it means that even at that level of education, there is still a lot of possibility for change

@Bumblebee Thank you, I'll take a look!

@Gauss, oh, yes, I would say that even a very solid undergrad curriculum gives very little idea about "what mathematics there is", and "what mathematics is currently being done". For that matter, typical "textbook style" math has always seemed very dreary to me. :)  Further, the labels one sees in undergrad turn out to be inadequate/inaccurate for describing contemporary things. :)

This is harder to do for most undergraduate students since they don't have sufficient experience to get by without feedback on what they study. Normally learning requires both reinforcement and feedback. Reinforcement comes from applying what you study in some way, exercises for example. Feedback normally comes from a professor evaluating what you produce. Both of these seem to be missing, so the task is harder.
But, people can, and do, study and learn on their own, using books, say. Galois theory is well represented in the literature, but you need to find one or more that provide some way for you to apply what you learn. Professors learning a new topic will do this, but they will also seek out others with whom they can raise issues.
Perhaps one of your professors, while specializing elsewhere, can answer your questions as they arise and give you feedback on some of your attempts to solve problems or pose questions. Perhaps they have an external colleague that is more specialized and who they can put you in contact with. That has value in its own right, actually. But you will need to depend, primarily, on existing works, but not on reading alone, which provides too little reinforcement to give deep learning.
Eventually most mathematicians learn to do this. You are starting a bit early and from a smaller base, but it is possible.
Alternatively, focus hard on what you can get the most help with (Ring Theory, say) and delay some of the other topics of interest until you have more experience and the opportunity for more help. You don't need to learn everything this year.
You can also keep a notebook of questions on what you study. Review it periodically to see if you now have answers to those questions. Such a notebook can also be a source of ideas for research as you get more experience.

Thank you so much, I think I get the gist of it. For reinforcement, I have purchased a couple of books specific to Galois theory, in order to delve deeper (maybe not this year, but still good to already own them) - one of which has a lot of exercises to practice. As per feedback, I’ll talk to my professors; many of them have taught undergraduate courses on it, so maybe they can help, at least in the beginning. Again, thanks a lot!

Let me emphasize: it's quite likely that one or more of your professors themselves knows quite enough about Galois theory to advise you on undergraduate/early graduate independent study. There are many more research mathematicians who can do that than there are research Galois theorists.

The Short Version:
Question:

How do you study Galois theory at a university where no-one else studies Galois theory?

Answer:

You apply to attend a different university and switch schools after you complete your bachelor's degree

The Long Version
Use Google to find living experts in Galois theory.
Get these people's email address. Talk to them.
The best way to get into graduate school is to find a professor you want to work with. You can ignore most aspects of the school itself.
Also, most professors can sponsor admission of graduate students. I do not mean that professors will pay money, or pay a student's tuition. I mean that after you fill out an application, the office of admissions will say "yes." Your SAT scores, etc... will not matter too much if their is a professor who says, "I want Joe Shmoe to be my student."
Tuition is not usually a problem, because graduate students are paid a stipend to work as either:

teaching assistants
research assistants.

The higher the tuition, the higher the stipend. For example, Notre Dame is a very expensive private school located in Indiana (There is a different Notre Dame in Ireland) pays graduate students (masters students and Ph.Ds) more than 30,000 US dollars per semester.
After you finish your bachelor's degree, begin studying at your new University.
You cannot transfer credits per se. However, if you finish the baccalaureate degree, then you will not have to transfer credit hours.
If you only need 6 credit hours to complete a bachelor's (baccalaureate) degree, then you will NOT be able complete the remaining 6 credits somewhere other than where you started.
You cannot usually complete a baccalaureate at the University you've barely began studying at.
You do NOT need to transfer credits if you finish the baccalaureate degree. After that, it's like starting from scratch, but for a masters or doctoral degree.

Find an advisor (at a different University) who studies Galois Theory.
Email the Galois Theorist.
Finish your baccalaureate degree at the University where you are now.
leave your Alma Mater and make a new home at the University with people who study Galois theory.

Find a university with more than one expert on Galois theory. That way, you can switch advisors if you hate the first person you work with.

I didnt know there are universities that do not offer a module on algebra which includes Galois theory, this seems a bit troubling.
Generally: don't do it. Pick only a topic which is known at your university or switch to a different univerisity. Your argument that new research groups are founded is not valid, since this either happens by hiring somebody from somewhere else (where there was a group) or it is a new subject. In a new subject a trained researcher can make progress. In an established subject you cannot. You need guidance about what is an interesting problem on which you can work on and you need to have meaningful discussions.
Also no professor will give a topic for Galois theory if no one is working on that. (Lets assume for a moment somebody will though, then how is anybody grading it?)
Long story short: change topic or university.
PS: just to add: it is great you found a topic which is highly interesting to you.

To clarify: there are modules in Galois theory - one course in undergrad level and one in grad level. There is just no researcher who does research in the subject

@Gauss thanks, but then why did you learn it own your own? (This doesnt change my reply though)

It’s a long story, but basically, I wanted to introduce myself to the three major areas (Algebra, Geometry and Analysis) and, since I loved algebra so much, I talked to some professors and together we decided I’d study the equivalent of an undergraduate sequence in algebra on my own so I could begin my undergraduate research on a higher level. Said undergraduate sequence included some Galois theory

Hah my undergrad is notoriously bad for algebra. We barely got up to polynomial rings at the end of the one semester of algebra we have.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
How to find mathematicians in a given field?
This is essentially a continuation to my previous question here. In one of the answers, it was proposed that I find people who did active research in the field I wanted to study and contacted them. My current question is, thus: how do I do this? Just googling "researchers in 'X area'" hasn't yielded many results...
Evidently, I can just search for random/prestigious universities, look up their research departments, and see if someone happens to have research interests which align with mine. But is there a better way?
Is there some sort of mathematics database of researchers by field of research, number of publications, university, etc? I'm finding it tough to discover good researchers on a field which my professors don't have a lot of contact with...
Thanks in advance!

Do you read papers in that field?

@BryanKrause This is actually one of the issues of not knowing the field well: not knowing the fundamental papers in the field. Looking on ArXiv (at random, admittedly) I mostly found highly specific papers, which are, frankly, impossible to read for someone with little background. I try to get a general view, but anything deeper requires a lot of studying per paper...

It seems bizarre to me to have interest in a field, but not know interesting papers in that field (then again, math as a general field is bizarre to me relative to my own area; I've learned a lot about the field from this SE site but some aspects I can't grok). How do you know you're interested in this area? What brought you there? Can you follow whatever that material is that brought you there? (for example, what recent papers cite that work)

@BryanKrause Mostly, what I have studied as an undergrad (i.e., books, not papers), which I can follow quite well. In math, however, I feel there is quite a big gap between "undergraduate book" and "research papers" in 99% of areas...

I assume you want to do graduate study. What country (countries) are  you looking at?

Yep, "hot papers in X area" is not a confidence-inspiring Google search prompt indeed... Sorry, could not resist. The issue between the undergraduate vs actual research gap is hardly unique to math, and can get pretty bad these days. Unfortunately, the realization of the difference between big problems and daily routine of working on them comes late for increasingly many, and overall success still largely hinges on someone being able to show you the ropes. Academia is rigid and often not very welcoming to stranglers; it might take a while before you can follow your own path :(

@Buffy I’d say the “cliché” countries: USA, Canada and wherever in Europe that speaks English

@Lodinn I agree - not my most clever prompt :D. My main fear is that, in math, at least, everything is so ridiculously wide that it’s impossible to learn it all and people tend to over-specialize. In particular, changing fields to what really gets me going after studying much seems to be very hard (although I may be wrong - the problem with being an undergrad is not really having any knowledge of the “reality” of things…)

Here is one approach, assuming you have access to MathSciNet.
MathSciNet allows you to search by MSC2020 code (MSC stands for Mathematics Subject Classification, it is a system assigning codes to each mathematics subfield). So you can find the code corresponding to your subfield, and then do a MathSciNet search for all papers published in the last 30 years or so with that classification code (use the "MSC Primary" search field), and then order the search by number of citations. I did this with my main research area's code (47B36, for "Jacobi (tridiagonal) operators (matrices) and generalizations") and the top papers in the search are authored by people like Barry Simon, Artur Avila, Svetlana Jitomirskaya, Rowan Killip, Christian Remling, and David Damanik, who are definitely people that I would consider the most important in my research area.
Here is a link to MathSciNet, and here is a website you can use to search for your subfield's MSC2020 classification code

There is a large list of number theorists at Number Theory Web.
The greater problem seems to be finding important results and contributors in your area of mathematics of interest though. You could also look up survey papers and go through the mentioned people or through the authors in the references.
This isn't ideal, but crawling through links on Wikipedia or Math Genealogy searches (once you have some significant topics, results, or people in mind) will probably give you more.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
How important is it to avoid a duplicate name?
I am about to publish my first paper in a few months and, as many on this site have already done, I am pondering which name to use. I happen to have multiple surnames, like say Abel Burton Cürtis Zumba. Due to a non-ASCII character in one of these middle names, I was considering just abbreviating everything in the middle and just use Abel B. C. Zumba (I’ve read conflicting positions on diacritics in names, but would rather avoid all the hassles that I can).
The problem is, both my first and last name are relatively common. This means there already exists one “Abel B. Zumba” listed on mathscinet, who just started publishing too. Granted, he publishes in another area from me, but I’m still wondering: is just one extra middle initial enough?
I know the choice of name is very important, and, while not definitive, I really just want to avoid as much of a hassle as I can with author identification (and misidentification), citation tracking, etc…
Also, how important is it to use a name that “bumps you up” the author list? Is there a case to be made for ignoring the “Zumba” and using one of the middle names as last name?
Thanks in advance!

Is it literally the difference between "B. C." and "B."?

I strongly recommend you get an ORCID ID - that will solve many of your issues here, in making sure that your work is correctly attributed to you and not another A.B. Zumba.

@AzorAhai-him- While I obviously used a fake name to illustrate above, yes, it is literally the same first name, middle initial and last name (but different person and no second middle initial)

@WhatTheDuck I do have an ORCID ID, but I just don’t know how Mathscinet uses indexes papers. I am unsure whether ORCID is sufficient to avoid all the trouble

I think you are focusing on the wrong issue here. Anecdotally: I have a letter in name that only exists in two languages in the world and it has not once been a source of problems for me. Unless it offends you if someone occasionally removes your special diacritic, my recommendation is that this isn't worth spending much time on. In contrast, figuring out where the surname starts in a long Spanish or Portuguese name has repeatedly been a headache for me, and I imagine much more so for actual holders of such names. People often do not even know that the whole multiple surname thing exists.

Okay, next question. You have four names. You have said in two places you have multiple surnames and multiple middle names. This can't be true, is Curtis a middle name or last name?

@AzorAhai-him- by surnames, I mean everything. So everything but Abel is a surname, with the two in the middle (AKA, not Zumba) are the two middle names

@AdamPřenosil Can replacing a special letter for an ascii character cause issues with citations, though? And, as for your comment on long names, I understand it to mean just to avoid spelling out middle names fully, is that correct?

At least in the Anglo tradition, which most journals are going to follow, these are mutually exclusive categories. Do your siblings share all three names?

@AzorAhai-him- What I mean is, both in the middle would be considered “middle names” and the last would be considered the “family name”

"Can replacing a special letter for an ascii character cause issues with citations, though?" Like, if someone cites your paper and forgets about your diacritics? No, I would say this is unlikely to cause any issues (but see Buffy's comment on ORCID). "And, as for your comment on long names, I understand it to mean just to avoid spelling out middle names fully, is that correct?" No, I am just saying having diacritics in your name is a non-issue, the real issue you want to give some thought to is the multiple surnames thing. I am not making any recommendations on how to handle this.

@Gauss Gotcha - that's not the same as having multiple "surnames."

For Mathscinet, they make great effort to correctly distinguish authors with the exact same name (you can also link ORCID), and they also identify when the same author publishes under different-looking names).  However other databases do not.  And if there ever is a mistake, you can send them a correction.

This is not an answer to your literal question, but practically have you considered using "Abel Burton Curtis-Zumba" as your name on publications? It seems like this version would solve your issue as long as you're ok with a slight mutilation of your name...

@user2705196 My fear of using an unabbreviated name in full is the aforementioned diacritics and the issue highlighted by Adam Přenosil with long names. Out of curiosity, is there a practical difference between what you propose and “Abel Burton-Curtis Zumba” (i.e. hyphenating the two names in the middle)?

You could potentially drop the Burton and be Abel C. Zumba, which I would guess is less likely to be confused with Abel B. Zumba than Abel B. C. Zumba would be. But of course that depends on whether that would feel right to you. I wouldn't worry too much about the non-ASCII character, although I don't have one in my name so maybe I'm not aware of the problems it might cause.

You could also consider "A. Burton Zumba"

I have friends with 3 middle initials, and they use all of them. One Iranian colleague had more trouble with his two surnames - he now publishes under his 'last last' name and uses an initial for the penultimate name, so he's 'Zumba, ABC'. Not correct, but harder to mess up. I also replaced the special character in mine: 'ss' for 'ß'.

For two people in the same field, having the same name is an inconvenience. For people in different fields it isn't much of an issue. I share a name with another academic in a very different field and so internet searches turn both of us up in results. But no one is confused. Your case is more difficult as you share fields as well as names.
You can (should) also get an ORCID number that distinguishes you from all others. Include it somewhere in your papers, even as a footnote.
In pure math (and some other theoretical fields) choosing a name like Aaron Aardvark to get yourself listed first is tacky and will be recognized by colleagues as such. And in pure math, where alphabetical listing is the "norm", no one will pay attention to author order as representing much other than spelling, but will look to acknowledgement statements when distinguishing contribution is needed.
If such choosing of names became common I anticipate paper with six authors all named Aaron Aardvark.
Note also, that you have limited control over the presentation of your name if you give it several parts or several initials. Publishers and those who maintain databases of scholarly work won't always follow what you write. In particular, Abel Burton Cürtis Zumba is fairly unlikely to be preserved. This is especially problematic for those whose family name is Cürtis Zumba when the database will only accept one word and may choose the wrong one, depending on the culture of the author.
Keep it simple and get an ORCID ID.

You say sharing a name with someone in the field (in this case, mathematics) is an inconvenience. I agree, but one of my doubts is whether having a second middle initial as a differentiator is sufficient to avoid the issues that arise, or whether it would be better to opt for some alternative (say, using a middle name instead of the last name, or using more than one fully written surname)

Again, note that you don't have control over how your name is listed in collections and databases. Whatever you write can be undone by others. If someone has the paper in hand, they probably see your preferred name, but in a search it isn't so straightforward. My spouse's first name is two words. That was fine when she was born, but lots of systems fail in that case.

Obligatory link to Falsehoods Programmers Believe about Names.

My name is tragically common. But I have yet to have my (limited) legal research get too mixed up with the writings by the other Timothy Wiseman in historical journals of . I did frequently receive emails and letters for LTC Wiseman when I was 1LT Wiseman, but that is different and always got straightened out.  In short, I agree, this is a minor inconvenience and solved by something along the lines of an ORCID number.

Ah, but you do have to be slightly careful across fields in very limited scenarios. Consider Michael I. Jordan (statistics) vs Michael Jordan (basketball).

@user176372, hmmm, does Michael Jordan (statistics) have branded basketball shoes? Asking for a friend.

I won't be around for a few days, busy getting my name changed to Aaron Aardvark.

@cag51, Aaron Aanya Aardvark?

An example out of my personal drawer: Pablo A. Ferrari and
Patrik L. Ferrari happen to be widely recognised mathematicians working in closely related subfields of probability and occasionally citing each other. Both authors have ORCID profiles and systematically use their middle names' initials.
Senior experts in the respective subfields know this fact and thoroughly check whom they are citing. Based on the fact that they have the same initials, almost everybody else occasionally confuses the two. Somebody confuses them systematically, somebody identifies them as the same person.
That is to say that homonymy happens even in the same areas, and adding initials is generally not sufficient to be correctly identified.
Personally, I would strongly recommend to:

get an ORCID ID
get an arXiv author identifier
whenever possible (e.g. in the arXiv author field) always specify your affiliation as a further identifier
add initials of, or preferably your full middle names or even the full list of names, cf. this question
claim your preprints and publications via widely indexed scholarly profiles (especially Google scholar), cf. this question
depending on how flexible you are with writing your name, use at least two surnames connected by a hyphen, even if this is not the usual way you would write your surname, as suggested by Azor Ahai in his comment. The hyphen is necessary in order not to incur in other problems (e.g. this and this questions), and gives you more control on how your name will be rendered. (As noted by Buffy, this too is an issue.)
For publishers, repositories and websites, diacritics are not really a serious problem anymore, cf. e.g. this question
be consistent in the choice of your academic name and use the same name, with the same spelling, diacritics and hyphenation consistently for every purpose that is related to academia, including profiles and personal website, slides, abstracts, etc.

None of these suggestions alone will be very effective in preventing misidentification, so it best to combine as many of them as you can and/or are comfortable with.
Finally, in my opinion concerns about changing the order in which your name appears in the author list by choosing to use one of your surnames are a non-issue. Firstly, in mathematics you will probably not have that many coauthors, which makes the relative position of your surname in the author list much less apparent. (Aaron Aardvark will not be competing for first place with Aaron Abart). Secondly, it is your (sur)name (and in some cultures it is already fairly strange to use your last surname rather than your first surname), so just go with that.

I can't give advice about the diacritics issue, but about the other things:

How important is it to avoid a duplicate name?

More important than "not important at all". Setting aside considerations like automated citation tracking, you are mostly dealing with human psychology here, so technocratic solutions like ORCID ID are not going to solve the whole problem. Over the course of your career people will be googling you, trying to remember your name after reading your paper or seeing you speak at a conference or being introduced to you over lunch by a colleague, etc. There will be plenty of occasions where people may be at small but non-negligible risk of mistaking you for someone else if your name is similar (even if not identical) to someone else's name; more so when that person is also in the same discipline as you. The fact that that person works in a different area than you makes this a bit less of an issue, but still not entirely a non-issue.

This means there already exists one “Abel B. Zumba” listed on mathscinet, who just started publishing too. Granted, he publishes in another area from me, but I’m still wondering: is just one extra middle initial enough?

I'd say it's not enough to eliminate the problem of potential confusion between you and the other Zumba. Maybe adding another initial would still not be enough, I'm not sure, but having two initials would probably help.

Also, how important is it to use a name that “bumps you up” the author list?

Not important at all. Mathematicians expect alphabetically ordered author lists and don't infer anything from the ordering on such lists. If you decide to use one of your other names instead of Zumba, doing it to avoid the conflict with the other Zumba may be a good reason to do that, but doing it to affect where you end up on author lists would not be. (By the way, there might be some good reasons to stick with Zumba: "Z" is one of the least common first letters of a last name in Western countries, and I personally find "Zumba" to be a much more distinctive and memorable last name than "Curtis", at least without the diacritic.)

I agree with the general sentiment - probably adding another initial is not enough. Some systems may only take two names - and then both A.[B.]Z. and A.[B.C.]Z. collide, or a system will take B. C. and then initialize it to B.. I deal with something similar in my own name. Depending on how flexible OP wants to be with their name, I would consider publishing as Curtis-Zumba (w/ or w/o the diacritic - no input from me).

I would try to publish under a name as unique as possible because of sites like Google Scholar, where both you and your 'doppelganger' from whatever field might be mushed into one profile.
For one, it's confusing if someone wants to get a quick overview of what you have published (I find it very handy with seminar speakers), and secondly, metrics like Google's h indices are still widely used in academic evaluation, even if everybody claims they don't check them. My name is not common, but I still use my middle initial, just in case.

Sometimes this isn't possible. There is another person with the exact same Given Middle Family combination as me, living in the same city as me. I assume there are probably many others of us throughout the world. Plus, some countries have a handful of different family names that are shared by much of their populations. For example, China has 100 million people named Wang, another 100 million named Li, and another 100 million named Zhang.

Sure, that's why I said 'try' - and the OP seems to have options. We can't single-handedly reform Google Scholar, can we?


text:
How to cite GDPR and AI Act?
How to properly cite these two sources?
In the AI/ML literature I am finding many non-homogenous citations of these two documents, with some of them wanting to specify a chapter and others the whole book.

Is there a canonical citation form for these two documents? (There can
be more)
Is there a Bibtex entry?

Furthermore, the question has been closed as opinionated on Latex SE.
This question can also be extended to more non-EU regulation frameworks.
I believe this is a recurrent question that will show up recurrently in the following times.

Do you have to follow a specific citation style (e.g., for submission to a journal)?

I always considered the BibTeX entry to be general, and then the latex compiler does the styling. I might be wrong

It depends on the citation style you need to use.
Official title
If you want to find out the 'official' name of an EU legal text, you should consult the EUR-Lex.
Accordingly, the official name of the GDPR is:
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance)
It was published in OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1–88 (OJ = Official Journal of the European Union, L = the Legislation series).
However, the GDPR has been amended since its first entry-into-force. If you want to cite the current version, you could cite the 'consolidated' text:
Consolidated text: Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance)
.. which carries the Document number 02016R0679-20160504.
Scholarly citation: example of OSCOLA
For scholarly referencing, you usually need the information of "who, when, what, where": who is the author, when was it published, what is the title, and where can it be accessed.
The specific implementation of this principle of "who, when, what, where" depends on the citation style.
For instance, OSCOLA (Oxford University Standard for the Citation of Legal Authorities) - an oft-used citation style for legal publications - requires you to name "the legislation type, number and title, followed by publication details in the OJ" when citing EU regulations like the GDPR.
If you use OSCOLA, the GDPR could be cited like this:

Text: Regulation 2016/679 (but you could add General Data Protection Regulation or GDPR in parenthesis thereafter to indicate that this is how you label it in the subsequent references - - which is certainly not wrong given that the official name of the Regulation contains this shorter version in its title)
Footnote: Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) [2016] OJ L 119/1
Subsequent footnotes: Reg 2016/679 (or: GDPR, if you introduced it as such)


text:
When should a CV be included in an introductory email?
I'm inquiring with professors about brief (~1 week) rotations in my post-bacc research programme. Our coordinator says we don't need to include a CV in our intro emails, but another advisor says I should. When should or shouldn't I include a CV in an introductory email?
Professors I'm inquiring with haven't previously seen my application information, and if they accept I'll potentially be working with them for up to 2 years.

If they accept, will you rotate in for a week (virtually pointless IMO) or 2 years? Am confused

Rotations to see if a lab's a good fit are <1 week. Once I decide and reach back out to my program coordinator to confirm the placement, I stay there and work with that professor for 2 years.

It seems like in this case wisest to listen to the person closest to the program (the coordinator), if professors are expecting people form this program to email them. It sounds as if they'll just say "Sure, I don't have one of you guys this week, can you do that one," rather than doing a complete evaluation of you.

Assuming that the professors are expecting these emails, it should be fine to include a CV, but a short one might be better than a long one. Focus it on the job at hand and things that might apply to that.
But a CV in a blind first email is probably wasted effort. I never looked at them. A blind contact should be just an introduction, expressing interest, with an offer to send more information on request. That might get read, while a long mail will get trashed too easily.
And, in either case, offer to send more information on request, provided you have it.

I generally recommend including a CV in any introductory email in which you're seeking to join a lab or work under someone, but it should not be necessary to look at the CV to understand who you are and what you're looking for.
You can find other answers providing more detail on this, but a good introductory email briefly (in one paragraph) notes your relevant background, any preexisting relationship (in this case, that you're in the rotational programme), and what about the lab interests you (ideally noting the connection between your background and these interests).
Including a short CV or resume provides additional detail if they need it while avoiding a back-and-forth: remember these are busy people with overfull email inboxes, so reducing their cognitive load is in your favour. Also, depending on your CV this can be a kind of humblebrag.


text:
Is it okay to use old letters of recommendation?
I have letters of recommendations from my professors and employers which I had asked for last year while applying to colleges. Due to some circumstances, I decided not to go and apply to colleges again this year. Is it okay if I use the letters of recommendation which they had written earlier? I think asking for them to write another recommendation will be getting on their nerves, since they are busy. Also, my old recommendation letters of last year has the dates of recommendation on them. Will this be a problem if I apply with those dates?

Where? I think they are fine if they are only a year old, especially where recommendation letters are just a formality but some countries give them more weight in the recruitment process. In the EU, I have reused 18 months old recommendation letters without problem.

Where are you located in the world? Were these letter of recommendation sent to you rather than to where you were applying?

I don't see much problems as for there shouldn't be a reason for the writers to have changed idea about you and because the letters serve the same purpose.


text:
How do I indicate deleted text from a manuscript?
I had a manuscript accepted with major revision. I have now revised it and will resubmit shortly. The editor requested that I highlight any changes in the text, which I have done in yellow. However, I have also simply removed certain parts of the manuscript. How do I indicate this?
The editor specifically stated that the results should be reduced to X pages and discussion to not exceed Y pages, so using strikeout feels inappropriate. Can I resubmit with track changes? Or is there a better way to indicate?

There will be an accompanying letter in which you detail the changes. In principle you are requested to shorten the paper without affecting its sense.

No one who is not on your editing team is likely to read the details.
However, you can be nice to your editors and offer multiple levels of detail:

the shortened manuscript
a list of essential changes (listing not every detail, only the important ones, possibly with rationale if relevant)
a file with the complete set of changes, e.g. latexdiff/MS Word tracking if it's not overloaded.

This gives the editors the choice of level of detail they seek.

You have to find a reasonable compromise between readability and making all changes transparent. Therefore, I would advise against using the track changes function in MS Word exclusively to present your revisions. You would primarily reduce readability to an unacceptable extent.
Usually, it is fine to explain in the letter that accompanies your revision which parts you removed without making this transparent in too much detail in your revised version. In my experience, this works very well. Especially of you basically rewrite/shorten large sections, it is enough to write something like "section XY was rewritten in order to stay below the limit of Z pages, as requested by the editor". Then you can highlight the new/revised text, and you are fine.
In some cases, journals also allow to upload a specific version only used for review that includes highlighting of the changes, in addition to a non-highlighted version. In such cases, it might be appropriate strike out parts of the text or even use the track changes function because the fully readable version is also available to the reviewers.

If I was you, I would use tracked changes for all the changes, and add yellow highlighting to all the changes.
And in case the editor views it with the changes visible and thinks you have not reduced the number of pages, explicitly tell them "I have reduced the results to X pages and the discussion to Y pages, as you can see by viewing the final version with no markup in Word."
You might want to add a "Microsoft Word" tag to your question, if that tag exists.

For me, the track changes mode in MS Word is a nightmare in terms of readability. If I got such a document as an editor, I would send it straight back to the authors asking them to think about a better way to present their revisions.

@Snijderfrey I really dislike MS Word, but if the journal already accepts MS Word submissions, and want a detailed changeset presented, what would be the so-called "better way to present their revisions" than the standard? It is unreasonable to demand authors to use a tailored way of solving an editing problem if there is a standard way to do so. I have put journals on a "do not submit list" for having unreasonable/nonstandard formatting/formality demands (admittedly wouldn't do it for the very top ones, but they can afford it). Authors' time is no less valuable than editors/reviewer's one.

@CaptainEmacs, we both stated in our answers to drop some detail in the presentation of the revisions. This is a reasonable approach if you want anybody to follow the important changes. Simply switching on the track changes function will achieve exactly the opposite.

@Snijderfrey I understood you that tracking should not be used, not even for the detailed resolution. If you see no such restriction, I misunderstood and agree with you.

@CaptainEmacs, I think it is safe to say that we agree then. I just would not expect that any of the reviewers or the editor really looks at that level of detail, and therefore relying on that exclusively will most likely cause irritations.


text:
Earth science major with math minor scope
I am enrolled in a undergrad program of natural sciences. Basically I can major in Physics, Chemistry, Math, Biology, Earth Science, Materials.
I was very interested in mathematics before I joined the program and wanted to have a mathematics major. Later, I understood, the rigor that math courses required, I am not built that way.
I have taken courses in applied math related fields. Ex: Mathematical Finance, Optimisation, Machine Learning, Linear Algebra etc and I absolutely love them. On the other hand I hate (yes! I hate!) courses like real/complex analysis, algebra, Calc-II, etc ( I found Calc-I pretty interesting!)
When I say I “hate” those courses, I mean I either don’t understand those abstract things or I just dont feel like studying those topics and end up getting grades like B/C. Whereas the courses I mentioned as “I love” I almost never get below A/A+.
My undergrad math major at my university doesn’t have any such applied courses in math. Most of my courses are very very abstract.
Now I have completed my minor requirements of math. I can continue this to get a major or can get a major in a completely different field.
Now I have a feeling I might fail in more advanced math courses which are part of the major curriculum. On the other hand I don’t want to do Physics, Biology, Chemistry all over again from start!
From what I have understood I like stuffs like math modelling, optimisation, etc.
Now my question is if I take a major in earth and environmental science with a minor in mathematics. What is the scope / research fields where I can work on applied math related field in earth science (with the combination available to me that seems to be the best alternative to me now)
PS: I want to do a PhD and continue with higher studies in a applied math related field.

Unfortunately, looks like a shopping question. As I happen to have some experience in the field though - most of modern Earth sciences heavily use math modelling (seismology, meteorology, you name it). Feel free to DM for some clarification.

Other universities might have more interesting course offerings if you are willing to switch

@FelixB. I would. But I won’t think switching universities in the third year of a 4 year undergrad program is a good idea. Won’t that lead to a waste of my first 2 years?

@user925032 hard to say - if you can get credit for the courses you did so far this should be no problem. You could probably ask the university that interests you before switching. But in the end this requires sitting down with an excel sheet and counting credits

shopping question but i also have some relevant experience. My institution has an earth sciences specialisation available in the Master of Data Science specifically because subject matter knowledge combined with data science is really useful

I think there is hope for you. For two reasons.
First, the minor reason. Don't be terribly concerned that some parts of math are harder for you to gain insight than others. That is pretty natural. I had great insight into analysis and topology, but very little in abstract algebra, despite the structurally similar axiomatic basis. But insight only comes from hard work and if you need the insight then you gotta' do the work.
The primary reason though is that some (maybe a lot) of earth science research can benefit from both mathematical and computer modeling. Long (long time) ago, I worked with a geologist on a project related to wave action at the shore. We didn't make a lot of progress at the time, but it gave me an appreciation for how math can be applied in the real world.
But, I hate to tell you that analysis (calculus and beyond) is probably an important modeling tool in a lot of earth science. Not all, but quite a lot - especially dynamic systems.

What would you recommend to someone who finds courses like analysis and algebraic structures very difficult but courses like optimisation very interesting? I agree I should have done engineering instead but now being “stuck” at a natural science degree what would be better— going on with the math major or having it as a minor and doing an earth science major?

@user925032 I understand - and can relate to - not liking things like series convergence and other "math-y abstract things" a lot, but PDEs, spectral analysis, linear algebra, integration pretty much are applied math in natural/earth sciences. It is possible they teach it in bit overly-abstract way for you. Consider taking some computational math to make sense of it: maybe if you see what say Cauchy problem is in the real world, it'd help to understand what do different parts of its math formulation mean.


text:
Is it normal to ask a reviewer to reconsider his evaluation score?
I am in the process of writing a rebuttal response for a conference submission. Unlike others, a reviewer who only looked at the first 3 pages stated that there is a fundamental error (that he explained) and he rejected the paper without looking at the rest. I will explain to him how he missed a key part.
My question is: Is it normal to ask him explicitly in the rebuttal letter to reconsider his evaluation score? especially since his score becomes very important to the overall scores.

Just say that there has been a misunderstanding.  Then rewrite/organize to ensure it does not happen again to a future reader.

There is no error reviewer spoke off; or there is the error but you believe/know it shouldn't influence the later results?

Do you know the identity of the reviewer? If not, be careful about assuming that they are male.

Talk the point through with other people first and maybe find some source/citations which prove your point. In my opinion it is more likely the other reviewers missed the mistake than the current one being wrong about the mistake.

Your job is to address the reviewer's comments, not the reviewer. You don't ask the reviewer to change the evaluation.
You should explain in your response to the editor that what the reviewer thinks is an error is in fact correct - give reasons that  directly address what the reviewer said.
You cannot know that the reviewer stopped at page 3. If the reason the supposed error isn't actually an error is addressed on page 7, just say that. Do not say the reviewer didn't read it.
If the explanation you want to give to the reviewer calls for material that is not in the paper, then the reviewer is right.
You can note that the other reviewers found no error. Clearly there was something you did not explain to that reviewer's satisfaction. If you can, add wording early on that would keep a reader from misreading your paper and thinking it wrong.
Thank all the reviewers and provide the extra material in the resubmission.

Thank you for the answer. The reviewer himself mentioned that he was not able to continue after that issue (understandably, this would have been the case if that issue was indeed wrong), but as I mentioned I am pretty confident that he missed something important there, the other reviewers looked at the entire paper without even worrying about what this particular reviewer considered as a fundamental error.

@AvaaAli See my edit. Always give the reviewer the benefit of the doubt. After all, your readers might come to the same false conclusion.

No. You might not even get assigned the same reviewer should the review go for another round, and in that situation that direct address makes no sense whatsoever. As a rule of the thumb, never argue with a person, deal with the points they make instead. Otherwise, it often derails to something dangerously close to ad hominem arguments which are somewhat legitimized by political debates, but not in academia. Don't focus on what and how the reviewer or opponent is thinking, rather the essence of what they are saying - and let everyone else judge for themselves.

The slurring reference to political debates is itself an ad hominem...
(well, it's a more general well-poisoning, but fundamentally the same)


text:
Is it normal for a conference to let the submissions modifiable long after the deadline?
Is it normal for a conference to let the submissions be editable on easychair website by the authors (and still be able to submit new papers) after 3 weeks of the hard deadline and only one week before the notification of acceptence? I thought they will disable these options once they assign the reviewers.

Are you a submitter or reviewer?

I am a submitter (to a scientific conference).

Are you just curious, or wondering if you should hold off on editing?

Well, I think it is ok to be able to edit a submission during (say) the first week after the deadline, but now after 3 weeks (and still), I started to wonder if that is normal?

In CS, the PLoP conferences actually require it, since the review process is open and the authors work with a "shepherd" (a bit different from a reviewer) to improve the paper before the acceptance/rejection decision. I doubt that is what you mean, though.

@Buffy Oh, I see, but isn't that cause a conflict with the reviewers who have already started reviewing the manuscript while the author may still edit it for changes?

Not for these conferences. The normal "review" is replaced by "shepherding", not in addition to it. Ultimately the shepherd makes a recommendation to the chair. Most papers get improved substantially. I've had to recommend rejection only once and acceptance many times. In my rejection, it was because the authors refused to correct a fundamental error and repeatedly let it stand.


text:
Related to current status and status date
I had submitted a paper to Elsevier journal on 2/8/2021. While I am continuously following the paper,  it has come to my notice that the status Date is 8/8/2021 and current status is required reviews completed.
I am not getting why the status date shown is of one and half month back.
Any help in this regard would be greatly appreciated...

See: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55665/what-does-the-typical-workflow-of-a-journal-look-like

Thanks for your reply...I had checked it...But I am not getting the relation between status date and current status in my case..

the status Date is 8/8/2021 and current status is required reviews completed.

This means that on 8 August 2021, the status of your paper changed from whatever (most probably "Under Review") to Required Reviews Completed.

Yes ...I understood  that ...but my paper was submitted on 2/8/2021 and in  only 6 days it shows required reviews completed....Isn't it's strange...

@paru you got an exceptionally fast review, which is not necessarily strange, since it can happen (e.g. if the reviewer just happens to be free).

Ok....thanks for your reply..


text:
Poor College Grade on Statement of Purpose (SoP)?
I am applying to master's courses in theoretical physics. I see that good grades, especially in foundational courses, are important when it comes to having a good application.
I have had good to great grades throughout except that I had a fallback in my Statistical Physics course during my exchange semester. My grade translates to a B in the American system but a C in the college I went to the exchange for.
I think I should address this drop in grades since Statistical Physics is an important course. Of course, I have learned the subject better since then and have made up for the disruption. I would like to mention that.
On the other hand, I do not have any real reason for the drop. I spent a good amount of time traveling around Europe during my exchange and missed classes as a consequence. I had a decent hold of the concepts but lacked any practice leading to a B in the course.
Should I address this drop in any way? If yes, what might be a better way to put it across so as to minimize the negative look on my application.

While you might address the drop elsewhere, the SoP is not the place for it. It isn't a place to make excuses or explain past lapses/failures. It is a statement of plans for the future (in the program and beyond) and how you intend to get there.
At most, a short phrase (less than a sentence) that leads into a statement about the plan: "Despite a low grade in ... ". And only do that if that particular course is vital to your future plans. Otherwise a low grade is just a low grade.
But, since the SoP is likely limited in length, use it for its intended purpose. The CV and such detail the past. A personal statement (not the SoP) can explain things if needed. But make the SoP entirely about the future and how you intend to get there.
You don't say where you are applying. In the US a single low grade is extremely unlikely to derail you. Especially if it was in an exchange semester where your environment has changed. And a B isn't a bad grade, just not an excellent one.
Again, if this is for US, the selection process is very broad, not just GPA, or even GPA in major subjects.

Right. I get your point. But I am applying across Europe and they do not ask for a personal statement separately. At least in the programs I am applying to. That is why I don't have anywhere else to address this. In that case, do I just not address it since it is not that major a fallback?

If interviews are part of the process, just be prepared to discuss it if asked. Otherwise, I'd try the "short phrase" approach in the SoP, and be very careful that the sentence in full is supportive of future plans, and future success. If everyone's record had to be perfect, grad schools would be pretty empty.


text:
Childhood "story" on my master's SoP?
I am currently preparing my applications for various theoretical physics/physics master's programs in Canada and Europe. Canadian institutes typically require you to write a 1000+ words SoP. Now I am mostly certain about what to include in my SoP and how to do so. However, I am in a dilemma regarding my introduction. In particular, is beginning with a childhood story of how I was inspired to pursue the subject is a good way to start or not?
Some sources like this call it "cheap talk" whereas some sources like the one here stress having a narrative and gripping the reader from the first line on.
The two suggestions might have an intersection but the latter source particularly encourages beginning with an impactful childhood experience.
In my case, the story goes as follows:
I happened to tag along with my father to an ophthalmology conference in the US. While my father was busy, I was left with this engineer colleague who was relatively free. He spent the next three days talking to me about some interesting areas of research in modern physics. We spoke about topics like QM, dark matter, LHC, and gravity. Of course, it was more of a first popular science introduction to things but it sparked my interests and genuinely led me to pursue physics. This was 7 years ago.
Now, I wish to mention this in the introduction and spend about 60 words doing so. I am unsure as to whether the above comes off as something unprofessional or unnecessary. Any help would be appreciated.

Relevant: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/36725/can-an-emotional-letter-of-motivation-be-harmful-in-a-phd-application

In physics culture, most people do not care what inspired you.  Telling stories (in the sense of a narrative with a sequence of events) is not a popular activity among physicists.  I would not include an inspirational or motivational story in an application for anything relating to physics.
Your statement should describe what you want to do (your purpose) and why you are able to do it, with factual evidence.

In the context of the question, yes. These stories make for some interesting talk... After you've spent some 15 odd years working together.

Thanks! I shall refrain from doing so. You provide a convincing answer.

"In Physics culture", most people do not care what inspired you. Huh?? Motivation is always required. If someone don't know why should we do it, can not be a good researcher in mathematics and natural science.

@MAS Scientific motivation is not necessarily the same as personal inspiration.

@MAS You certainly need to have motivation, how/why doesn't matter on the professional level and is hard to assess for a non-psychologist.

One border case that could make sense to include (feel free to pick it up if you agree): if a story explains why you came into contact with the subject exceptionally early on or deep into a particular area. But then keeping the story part short is imho essential. E.g. "my father was a pilot. That got me hooked in aviation and I started already looking into more complex aviation simulations in middle school. I won this and that competition in this area and would love to look more into topic X and Y to improve plane fuel efficiency" (if it fits with the research direction).

@FrankHopkins, yes agree

NO!!!
Telling stories about your childhood will not "grip the reader from the first line on," it will put them to sleep. Possible exception if something truly unusual happened during your childhood (e.g., being hunted by the mob), but chatting with your father's friend does not rise to this level. Moreover, this is a professional document in which you are asked to state (and justify) your purpose; telling inane personal stories is not a reasonable way to answer this question.
I'm writing this so emphatically because this is such a common mistake. And it's understandable -- writing the first sentence of a statement of purpose is not easy, and including such stories is often encouraged during grade school English classes. But now is the time to make the transition to professional documents written for an audience of your peers, and that means providing logical thinking with factual evidence rather than cute stories.

I'm an undergraduate in the US (admittedly not in physics), and I wouldn't be surprised if people do this based on their ugrad admissions experience (where, to my understanding, this kind of thing is basically required).

@JoshuaGrossoReinstateCMs This underscores one of the differences between undergraduate and graduate admissions.  At the undergraduate level, the essay is there (essentially) to ensure that you are (1) literate and (2) an interesting and/or engaged human being who will contribute to the "culture" of an undergraduate cohort.  They want to know who you are as a human being.  At the graduate level, you are (essentially) applying for a job---they want to know that you have the skills and interest to do that job.  It is a bit reductive, but no one cares if you are a person at that level.

It was okay to mention colleagues/relatives/family friends getting you interested in some particular topic during the initial assignment at the university right after high school, at least where I'm at.
By the time of writing master's SoP, however, one is expected to know lot more about various areas of modern physics. Writing about "inspirational" childhood experience actually would undermine my confidence (as a hypothetical member of the admissions committee) that your understanding of the field has increased enough since that story's time, which is supposedly way back in high school - before you have actually gotten all your advanced education in physics.
So, ultimately my advice is the same as in the Anonymous Physicist's answer:
Do not do that.


text:
Is a painting a text?
Can any piece of media be described as a text to be discussed in academic research?
I have found several conflicting definitions online. Those that disagree seem to be working on a different definition of what constitutes a “text”, referring more to what could itself be published rather than what word would you use to describe non-written media.

Can you be more explicit about what you are asking? Is it only what word to use? Or are you asking a legal question? Or an ethics question? Or how to properly cite other media?

Check out text.

Conceivably it could be a "document"?

No, a painting is not a "text" but it is a "work". In particular a "creative work" and thus subject to copyright protections. The same is true of (some, at least) photographs and even graphs in a paper.
A "text" is just one kind of "work" for purposes of copyright.

Besides what the other contributors have mentioned, there are some academic fields in which paintings can be analyzed in a similar manner as texts. This kind of analysis is often found in material culture studies, and in art history, especially in the domain of iconographical studies (which showcases some parallels with the methods of "close reading" used in literary criticism as well as hermeneutics, not to mention philology).
For a quick example, see the Chapter "Philology and the History of Art", or "Paintings as Objects of Discourse Analysis: Two Case Studies" or "Iconography and Iconology as a Visual Method and Approach"

In the language of library and information science, a painting is an example of a cultural object:

An artistic or architectural work, or other artifact of cultural significance. The category includes both physical objects and performance art. The Visual Resources Association (VRA) Foundation sponsors Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO), a data content standards initiative for the cultural heritage community. The primary focus of CCO includes but is not limited to paintings, sculpture, prints, manuscripts, photographs, built works, installations, and other visual media. CCO also covers many other types of cultural works, including archaeological sites and functional objects from the realm of material culture.

Reitz, J. M. Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science. https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_about.aspx
Other terms you could use in this context include information object and cultural heritage object.


text:
Adding Start-up package and yearly funding to CV?
I am an assistant professor at an Institution that provided me with a continuous yearly funding plus a start-up funding package. The values are substantial.
Is it common practice to add these values to your acquired funding in your CV?
Would this be perceived as unnecessary or as a show-off?
Any comments are appreciated.

A demonstrated ability to acquire funding is often a requirement for an academic position, so it should absolutely be added to your CV. Stating the amount (or other details) of the funding package is a way to clearly state the facts, which is also highly desirable on a CV.
The whole idea of a CV is to "show off" your achievements and there is no reason you should be reluctant to add any of them.

But if a start-up package and a baseline funding are taken for granted at the given institution I am at, should I still add them to my CV? Every other assistant professor will have the similar funding levels, I suppose.

You never know who reads your CV, and if they are aware of this fact. So I would advise to add the information.


text:
Who to ask for a letter of recommendation
I graduated with my bachelors recently and started working full time for the employer I had while I was a student. My employer has offered to pay for my tuition if I want to go back to school for my masters degree at the local university, but I have a slight dilemma.
I made a fatal mistake as a student by not developing a close relationship with any of my professors. I need to provide 3 letters of recommendation for my application. I'm comfortable with asking several people I work with/for (I've worked with them for about 3 years now), but there are probably only two professors that might remember me at all, let alone know enough about me to write anything specific in their letter of recommendation. Would it be best to just provide letters of recommendation from my coworkers/supervisors with graduate degrees in my field, or should I try to ask one of my previous professors as well?
It's just a state university that's not very difficult to get into, and I graduated with a really good GPA in my undergrad at the same university, but I don't know how heavily they weigh the letters of recommendation in their decisions.
Thanks in advance

"I made a fatal mistake as a student by not developing a close relationship with any of my professors. " - That's usually not a fatal mistake. Developing a close relationship may help, but from my experience professors are willing to write letters of recommendations even if they do not personally know you. As suggested in the answer below I would ask anyway and perhaps add at the end of the letter that you offer to meet with them (that way, if they feel like they do not know you enough, they have a chance to do so now).

Talk to the two professors anyway. I'd ask them if they're comfortable writing a recommendation letter for you, and if not, for suggestions about what to do. If they both don't remember you, approach the head of department. No matter how long ago you graduated, professors at your alma mater can help you apply for graduate studies. In your case as well, 3 years is not that long.
That said, since you need three letters of recommendation I'd be ready to approach your work colleagues. Given they have graduate degrees, they will have some idea what is necessary to succeed and can therefore write effective letters. They might even be able to comment on how your studies will help your work, which would add a dimension to the "why do you want to do graduate studies" question that's almost standard on most applications.
I would expect your eventual application to have one letter from your alma mater, and two from your work colleagues.

When asked for a letter from a student I do not remember, I would look in my records about how well they did in my class; my letter would report on that.  If I know nothing else about the student, then of course my letter would say nothing else about them.

Firstly, LORs are hugely important especially if this is a research field. They can make or break an application. Definitely reach out to faculty members at the University you got your degree at. LORs from faculty members often outweigh all other sources, because it is faculty members who will be responsible for advising you. Including LORs from current supervisors isn't a bad idea, but I would avoid co-workers and stick to those who oversee your work and mentor you as a professional. Strongest LORs come from those who have evaluated you by the same metrics that a prospective advisor would. Whether they have a graduate degree is less relevant than their current rank and their relationship to you.


text:
How do editors choose referees?
Do editors have 3 of 4 simple rules they typically fall back on when selecting referees?
Such as picking candidate among recent citations in the submitted paper, or recent citations that appeared in their journal, picking close colleagues? ...  are there any likely generalities?

In practice, probably yes. But I would also bet the rules vary from editor to editor (and possibly from discipline to discpline).

Remember that the editors of journals are experts in their field and typically only get papers that are at least within the margins of their subject matter expertise. So:
Rule 1: If the paper is in an area you (=the editor) knows well, then you will also know all of the major players in the area and pick people from among your professional network as reviewers.
Rule 2: If you don't know the specific area well, ask around among your friends for the names of potential reviewers.
Rule 3: If you don't even know who to ask, go through the list of references at the end of the paper and try to identify the key papers; then use web searches to find out which of these key papers' authors are the key players. Contact them.
For 80% of papers, rules 1 and 2 are good enough.

If it gets to three and none of the editors know who to ask then the paper is probably outside the scope of the journal (I'm assuming the other editors are in the set of people you know to ask).

Yes, that's generally a good rule of thumb, though in practice it is difficult to really cover all areas a journal publishes on the editorial board.

There is no hard and fast rules but…

Many journals have a database of referees and associated keywords.  It’s easy to search referees from this database,
Some journals will ask authors to suggest referees,
one can look at the bibliography for recent publications on the topic,
One can use - say - Web of Knowledge to do keyword searches,
One can use GoogleScholar to find who usually cites results from this group, or related groups in the same area,
and of course personal experience and knowledge of the field.

Asking authors to suggest referees is something journals really shouldn't do, especially in "contentious" fields.  This has resulted in several failures of the peer review process in the field of climate change where obviously incorrect papers have been published because this approach allowed "pal review".

@DikranMarsupial well... it's not inherently bad to suggest referees, but it's up to the journal (or the associate editor) to do due diligence and make sure "pal review" does not occur.

In addition to the guidelines given by Wolfgang Bangerth and ZeroTheHero, there is also:

The reviewers might be suggested, e.g. if we invite A using the other methods, and A declines, recommending B instead, then we are likely to invite B.
The reviewer is not currently reviewing some other paper for the journal (or had reviewed several papers recently for the journal).


text:
I am continuing with my Master's thesis on the same topic I worked on in my Bachelor's thesis. How much can I reuse to avoid self-plagiarism?
In my Bachelor's thesis, I implemented four new compression algorithms into a small Java library developed at my university (used only internally for teaching purposes). In my actual Bachelor's thesis (as in text), I described all implemented algorithms in sections: Analysis, Design, Implementation and Testing.
My question is regarding the Analysis section. In the beginning, I had a subsection called "Basic notions" where I defined basic terms used further in text. That included for example: symbol, alphabet, string, code, compression, compression algorithm, compression ratio, etc. It all summed up to about 3 pages. Everything was properly cited.
Now, I am continuing with my Master's thesis. I work on the same library and part of my task was to rework it from the perspective of data flow. Compared to my Bachelor's thesis, I did not implement new algorithms, part of my task was to focus on interfaces and data flow between those already implemented algorithms.
I am now writing the text and I want to define terms that I will need in the following sections. These terms are overlapping a lot with the section "Basic notions" that I had in my Bachelor's thesis.
My question is, how much if any at all, can I reuse from my Bachelor's thesis? Can I copy out what I need if I properly cite it as I did in my Bachelor's thesis (as I won't cite my own Bachelor's thesis, but I will cite books and papers I originally cited in my Bachelor's thesis)?

I'll assume that you bachelor's thesis was "published" in some form, even if only by your university. As such, it is an existing work that should be cited, and can be used, like any other work.
I'll also assume that you didn't give up copyright to the original, though you might have if it was formally published. If you hold copyright, then you can copy longer sections of it (with citation) than you can if it is the work of another.
But, the ideas in the original are free to use, by yourself or anyone else. So, you can capitalize on your libraries, and such.
Just don't copy verbatim or even paraphrase without citation. You can, however, do something like citing the early work for a long section of the original, probably paraphrasing, without specifically citing each statement. As long as it is clear you aren't self plagiarizing.
Note that the purpose of prohibitions against self plagiarizing are a subset of the prohibitions agains plagiarizing others. A researcher, reading the later work, wants a link to the early work so that they can get the full context of the new work, including those things that were only written in the early one. You can't "steal ideas" from yourself, but you need to keep the chain of context unbroken.
Note, also, that, with the exception of quoting longer passages, others can do the same thing and need to follow the same rules. Cite what you use and make it clear what is new and what is derived.

Your advisor will probably give good advice about the limitations on how much you can quote. Paragraphs might be fine. Pages might raise questions and probably should. For someone else, paragraphs might be too much, but that is a copyright issue, not a plagiarism one, as long as citations are made.

Thank you for your explanation. To my knowledge, I hold the copyright claim, but my faculty can use my thesis for teaching and research purposes however they want. That is the default at my faculty, other options had to be approved by the dean.

Unless you have formally signed away copyright it is yours. Likely they are assuming that they have a perpetual license to use the work of students. And for joint work (professor as co-author), you jointly hold the copyright. But it might be worth checking with the dean to see what they are really assuming. But, even if they claim copyright, you can still use the work. The only restriction is on how much you can properly quote. The copyright is about the expression, not the ideas.

Thank you for finding the time and explaining this to me.

I'd argue it benefits no one for sections on notation to be as much as paraphrased just for the sake of it (although it might be helpful to re-read them and consider whether some changes are warranted), but this is exactly a kind of thing to be cleared with the committee. Many would prefer for the work to be self-contained to an extent an expert in the field does not have to follow the citations to understand the thesis, and some would yet require these introductory sections to be completely rewritten. It may feel like a pointless torture so am personally very against this practice, YMMV :)


text:
Do US universities with rolling admissions evaluate an application only when they receive all the recommendation letters for that application?
I recently submitted an application to a PhD program at one US university. One of my former professors, however, who initially agreed to recommend me, have not yet submitted to the university her recommendation letter for me. Fortunately, two of my other recommenders already submitted theirs. My question is - if the universities with rolling admissions evaluate applications as early as they receive them, does that mean that they will not evaluate applications with one missing recommendation letter?

Have you asked this question to the university that you applied to as well? Because if anyone knows for sure it is them.

I find the practice of rolling doctoral admissions in the US to be pretty unusual. Normally decisions are made by committees who meet to make decisions. But it isn't impossible.
However, it is impossible to make precise statements about policies of "all" US universities as they normally make their own policies. Even within a given university, such policies might vary by department. There is no national higher education system, and even within an individual state there is no system containing all universities. There are regulations, of course, but no national system.
I'd suggest that some universities will act on incomplete applications without prejudice. This is independent of the rolling admissions question. Admissions is generally based on a broad measure of the student's likelihood of success. Letters of recommendation are relatively important, but it is common enough that they don't arrive in time for a decision.
The danger with rolling admissions, for the student with an incomplete application, is that other students are being considered and eventually the maximum number of admissions might be reached, even if it isn't a hard number. But, if everything else spells "success" then an early decision might be made. It is up to the committee at that university, to decide.

(+1)    At my university, applications were sent to the graduate school, with requisite fees. Only when the application was deemed complete by the grad school did the packet get forwarded to the relevant department for consideration by their grad admissions committee. We never saw incomplete packets or status reports on such packets. If an applicant contacted us, they were referred to the graduate school for information.


text:
Withdraw paper before conference
I have a paper that was recently accepted for a conference. I have already submitted the camera ready version and accepted the copyright terms etc. However, I now believe my design and results are not brilliant the more I look into it. This might invalidate the main claim and conclusion. Am I still allowed to prevent it from being included in the conference program and proceedings? I realize this is not a good situation given the time and effort spent by everyone involved in the review and administration process. But surely it is preferable to withdraw it before publication if you find issues with your paper? I would prefer to go back to the drawing board and resubmit at a later date with a stronger and reliable solution. If I want to withdraw it who should I contact?
Thanks!

Results are not required to be "brilliant", but valid. Maybe this is some form of the imposter syndrome - your expectations towards yourself and your achievements might be higher than warranted.

Whether it is possible to completely withdraw the paper is up to the committee, its policies, and how far things have progressed. It may not be possible to "stop the presses" on the production process. Of course, you could just not show up, but it might affect future attempts to participate.
But it may also just be a case of "buyer's remorse" where you know more than you did then about the things you say in the submission. Having second thoughts isn't uncommon, especially if you are actively pursuing an elusive subject.
There is no reason that you can't, in a presentation, give a more up to date picture than what appears in the proceedings. Some conferences will let you file an updated version of the paper after the conference for a more permanent (journal) article. I don't know how common that is, however.
But, the fact that you have learned some things, assuming you aren't self deluding now, since the paper was first submitted, is a good thing.
FWIW, a lot of writers look back on their early work and cringe a bit. That is a sign of growth.

There is no time for corrections at this stage unfortunately. I prefer to improve the paper and resubmit that go ahead now. Maybe I should contact the chair? I guess the last resource would be to not attend forcing the paper to be rejected from the proceedings but that's not the intention. I would very much prefer to do it using the correct channels.

Even not attending may not avoid the paper appearing in proceedings. It is a matter of production scheduling. Conferences have firm schedules, unlike journals which have more (but not complete) freedom. I suggest you let it lie and just say in any talk that you have fresh ideas...

First, I want to say thank you for replying, your comments are appreciated. Yes, I think proceedings can be issued before the conference so I would need to act quickly. I am almost certain the conclusion in my paper cannot be validated. Gosh, I am a bag of nerves right now.

How did it pass all the reviewers? it maybe good enough for the conference  (unless you are really sure it is not) let it be published and work on an extended version for a journal publication.


text:
Google Scholar says profile "was not found on this server"
I have 2 publications on my google scholar profile. I recently found that I had 2 google scholar accounts and deleted the old one. Now when I'm trying to search for my name on google and go into google scholar I get
404. That’s an error.  The requested URL /citations?user... was not found on this server. That’s all we know.

If I go on google scholar and search for my name I can find my profile, but not through actual google search.
How can I fix this?
I found this SE question similar but could not find how they solved it.

How long ago did you delete your other account? Could it be that you just have to wait a bit until Google figures it out?

Maybe 2 weeks ago?

Is your profile public? Have you added a verified institutional email ID?

Profile is public and email is verified

Are you sure the link you are clicking on Google Search is the correct one? You said you deleted one profile, perhaps Google Search had indexed that one and is still trying to reach it, and has not updated its index yet?

That's what I'm thinking as well. But it's been a couple of weeks already so I'm not sure what to do

You can just check the URL you are clicking on Google compared to the URL of your profile, are they the same?

Nope. Different users. It must be the old one then


text:
How can I get my idea published as an undergrad student with no professors at my University whose research areas line up with my idea
I am an undergraduate computer science student. I have come up with a new machine learning algorithm which I would like to get published and I have no idea where to start. The research areas of the Computer Science professors at my University do not really line up with what I would like to get published.
I do not know how to write an academic publication either. I am very new to the world of research and publication and I have no idea what to do or even where I would want to publish my paper.
My questions are as follows:

What should I do?
Would it be wrong to try connecting with a professor at a different University for help?
Would it be wrong to ask a professor at my university for help even though it is not within their research area?

Thanks in advance.

Consider talking to someone at your university anyway. And read the answer below, of course.

It sounds like you did not talk to any expert about your algorithm. I also infer that you haven't read many papers in the field, since if you did, you would have some idea about how they are written and where they are published.
It may sound harsh, but if this is indeed the case, it is very likely that your algorithm is not new, or flawed, or worse than the state-of-the-art. It is not necessarily the case, but given the odds, the first thing you should do is mentally prepare for this.
Then, you should try and read as many publications in the area of your work and related ones, to try to find out whether what you did is new and worthy, trying to be impartial and fully prepared to learn that it is not. Think of it this way: if you do write a paper, it will need an introductory section explaining what's the state of art and how you improve no it, convincing enough for the editors and the referee. So this is a work you will need to do anyway.
On 2-3, it's perfectly appropriate to try and ask people for help, but I would not expect a lot out of it. For people you don't know and outside your university, the best you can hope for is to get answers to pointed questions about their area of expertise. People in your department are also unlikely to be interested if you just ask them "I have an idea outside your area, can you teach me how to write a paper out of it." They might know someone who knows the subject and re-address your questions to them, or to ask them to generally evaluate the idea, or tip you off which conference/journal to submit the paper to.
But the thing is, to efficiently ask people for help, you would need to communicate them what you did, and the only way to do it is to already have some manuscript written up.


text:
Small unintentional plagiarism issues found after years of my Phd thesis. What can I do?
I finished my PhD in early 2018. I immediately sumbitted an hard copy at the dept. library and a pdf copy on the online database (open-access), a few weeks later as per Univeristy rules.

at the time I found some mistakes - probably due to the stress of the moment- (typos/syntax etc.) and some quotations (directI/indirect) either not cited correctly, or not cited, but bewteen quotation marks and so on.
So, being as honest as I could, I prepared an erratum to be added to the harcover and another one to be uploaded with the pdf online.

And I was satisfied and happy.
2)After 4 years I had to read again my old thesis to do some future publication.
And there I found other - well 4 to be exact -  words and/or senteces missing quotation or quotation marks without the ref. I guess I was more stressed, exausthed and distracted than I Thought.
I had my manuscript checked on a plagarism scan and the outcome is between 3-4 %, that counts most of the correct citations (i.e. indented paragraphs and/or italic), and some common used wording; so the percetuange it is surely lower.
However, thanks to that tool I found this 4 missing quotations.
These issues are normally right after a directly or indirectly quoted paragraph of author X,Y,Z.
So, after many years I can guess I was rearranging parts and some got lost. I guess we may consider it "plagiarism in good faith"or simply unintentional. I know, it is still palgiarism.
Ah! "the mistakes of youth".
So, I really do not know what I can do now.
Sending another Erratum could be suspiscious or creating Drama in an University I wouldn't go back to not even under torture (ahha!). Right?
Do I have other options?
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

To cite E. of Arendelle [2013]:

Let it go!

This is the best advice you can get. There's not really anything you can or should do. It is a PhD thesis, not a published article. It is not published, except at the university which means that probably nobody looks at it. You've already added some corrections, which is probably more than most would.

Also after a bunch of more years it will probably not bother as much anymore. It's funny how some distance makes everything seem small.

Personally I find that, after some time, the fears that once controlled me can’t get to me at all.

I love that this answer has a proper citation in it!

Aaha! Jeroen, I will for sure :) thanks

@Dawn, I hope I will get there too soon. I am about to start my first position as an assistant professor, so I guess this is one of the reasons for my "impostor syndrome".


text:
Get exposure on different topics before choosing one for a PhD
I started my PhD in computer architecture in 2017 and after one year I left it to start working for an information security company. I have been in the industry for 4 years. I now want to go back to academia but I would really like to try something different before I decide what I would like to do my PhD on. I generally have a very wide range of interests and not nearly as much exposure. After so long away from academia I don't really have that many connections to it any more.
How would you go about getting some exposure on different topics assuming you don't have unlimited time/funds?

What country do you intend to study in. What is your highest degree?

@Buffy I live in Cyprus which is in Europe, but I would consider going outside as well. I have an MEng in Electronic and Electrical Engineering and an MSc in Computer Science and Engineering.

Given the constraints, I doubt that much is possible unless you want to be an old person when you get your degree - which a few people manage, actually.
But rather than getting direct experience before you start there is at least one thing that might be open to you if you live near a larger university. Go talk to a few people at the university about what your life would be like if you were a student or, later, a professor in their field. If a place isn't too strict about visitors you might be able to hang around the coffee room (hopefully there is one) and attend a few lectures.
You might even be able to wrangle yourself an opportunity to give a talk on your own current specialty as a way to meet a few people and get invited.
But, you may just have to choose an initial direction to get in to a doctoral program. It will set your direction for a while, but many people broaden or change direction after completing a degree. You might think about which field would give you the shortest path to a doctorate, though that might not be ideal in a particular case.
And, there are some programs that are interdisciplinary. You can search a bit for those, say a degree that combines two "interesting" fields in your judgement.