text:
Am I stuck with the topic/advisor that recommended my admission?
I am doing a PhD in the USA. I already have a masters in France and a 5 year bachelor. I didn't think it was a bad idea to take courses again in the US, as I am changing of area. My acceptance was recomended by an advisor who is paying partially my  stipend (I receive 73% of my stipend from my government, who also covers muy tuition and partially the health insurance. The local University (not advisor) completes the health insurance cost). This year taking undergrad courses I haven't felt very challenged, and in a paper reading and discussion group I have found some professors with a more interesting (for me) approach to things.
Am I stuck with my advisor even if usually students pick a topic after the 1st year? How can I approach this topic with whom? The graduate advisor? My PI is also the chair of the department.
Another thing is that I know some people that do not have funding at all in this department. I wouldn't want to be stuck in this situation as the rent takes around 2/3 of my income and I have my wife living with me.

I would talk to your fellow students and the director of graduate studies in your department. Perhaps this is known as a “graduate advisor” in your department.

This is ultimately dependent on the policies of your department. The basic issue would be that if you switch to another advisor, the other advisor would presumably be responsible for covering the remainder of your stipend. The big question is if you are free to choose both advisor and topic, or if it's expected you'd stick with your advisor, but have freedom to choose the PhD topic.
The right point of contact is the graduate advisor, who will be well versed in the procedures of your specific department.

I think that the only thing that makes this a difficult question is that your PI is also your department head. My own background had some similar issues to yours. I didn't feel that my advisor was sufficiently supportive because he was seeking tenure himself. I was also only partly interested in the same things he was. Complicating this was the fact that I was, at the time, too insecure to force the issue with the department head (in this case a different person). There was another faculty member who would have been ideal for me in every way, but I didn't have the nerve to ask for a change.
Instead, I changed universities and had a much better experience. But it cost me three years. Worth it in every way, however.
As to the funding issue, you may have to seek an alternative (not absolutely clear). If you aren't currently teaching as a Graduate Assistant that might be a possibility. It is what funded my last three years. Since I was at a large university I was also able to take advantage of very low cost housing intended for Graduate Students. The pay was abysmal, but it was enough, and the housing situation also provided friendships with many others in similar situations, so there wasn't any social isolation. I had two children by the time I finished.
But the most important issue, I think, is that you are comfortable with your advisor and your topic. My advice would be to find the faculty member that you most want to work with and speak to him/her about changing. That prof may have some options for you. You can then approach your current PI/head with a definite plan.


text:
Impact of PhD cgpa in academia and industry
I'm a Physics PhD student in a US university who qualified for the PhD level and waiting for the comprehensive  test.
In the first year of my PhD, I wasn't able to cope up with the pressure and  that caused bad grades. The result from first and second semester is below:
A, B, B ;  A, B+, B+.
In the second year,  I eventually  understood  the pressure and was able to cope up the  coursework pressure along with the  research pressure. And, eventually I did well  in the second year. My result is:
A, A, A  ; A+, A+, A
My question is how bad influence will my overall score appear to the academia and industry?
NOTE: My supervisor is pretty happy with my research work.

See also: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107685/why-is-phd-gpa-considered-irrelevant/107689#107689

My advisor told me something that influenced me greatly during my PhD career. She said "If you are not getting B's, you are not challenging yourself or leaving your comfort zone."
From my own experience, I can safely say that the B's I got in advanced statistical and computer science courses were meaningless compared to the skills I gained in those courses in securing a postdoc at a prestigious university.
Honestly, I believe I had one of the lowest GPA's in my department (social science) of doctoral students but I also took the most stats courses. In short, using those skills gained to publish papers demonstrating advanced statistical knowledge meant something. The B that I got didn't.

I quite like the sentiment, but depending on course offerings and one's own line of research, I think taking easier classes and learning challenging things on your own is also a viable option.

This statement is quite strange -- does this imply you should avoid doing courses useful to you if rhe profesdor grades nicely?

Academia and industry largely do not care about your grades as a graduate student. The only exceptions are certain large corporations that have cutoffs for the GPA for graduate as well as undergraduate studies. [I have worked for such a corporation, so this is not idle speculation.] Even then, such cutoffs are not absolute—if a hiring manager wants you badly enough, they can petition for the requirements to be waived.
Academia does not care about your grades: your promise as a successful researcher and colleague is the primary consideration in getting hired as a postdoc.

And, I guess, a disastrous GPA wouldn't allow you to graduate from graduate school...

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Personal statement vs letter of intent
I am applying to PhD programs in different universities and while for some universities it is asked that I write a personal statement (PS), for other universities I have to write a letter of intent (LoI). I have already written a personal statement. My problem is that I do not know whether or not there is a difference between PS and LoI (some websites state that both are similar while some other ones state the opposite).
So are PS and LoI the same thing or not ?

It depends on their content. Read on what the schools want.

In my case, it is a PhD position published on INSPIRE hep and where the only sentence related to "letter of intent" is : "Application material should include cv, a letter of intent, and university grades (undergraduate and master), and the name of three academic personnel who agreed to write reference letters upon our request." Therefore there is no specific information about the letter of intent.

Then they're equivalent modulo specific schools' requirements.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
find papers that are based on another paper
There is a paper on my field that I like very much(machine vision). I have implemented the solution it proposes and it works well (not flawless obviously).
However this paper was published in 1991.
Is there a way that I can search relevant and more recent papers that use this paper as its basis??  -I mean it is rather easy to the opposite, just check the references, but how about the other way?)
(Talking more specialized jargon, this papers deals with one (of many) ways to implement a machine vision operation. I like this method rather than others, and I would like to find papers that propose improvements to this method-rather than go to other direction)

Google Scholar is a possibility. Another possibility is Web of Science (WoS), if you have access to it. It allows you to access a list of all papers citing the one you are interested in via 'Times Cited' (click on the number). Of course only WoS-indexed sources will be included. On the resulting list you can perform all refinement and sorting actions that WoS allows.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Endnote: inserting page number at the end of the citation
What is the proper way to insert an in-text citation using Endnote X8, where you first cite the author, year, following with the quote, and then with the page number in a source? (see an image attached for the example of the formatting). citation example

Can't you add the page number by hand as normal text? Then, the [Author (Year)] part is a normal reference.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it pertains to a specific software

@Mark I sure can. I was hoping there is a way to do that in such a way, that these two references count as one, rather than two separate references of the same source (I. e., author, year, and page number).

@AntonK I would not add the page number as reference. Besides that, mentioning the same reference multiple times doesn't count as multiple references, as far as I would say. Where do you count?

@Mark If I insert author and year first using Endnote, write direct quote, and then put a page number (also using Endnote), this counts as two separate references (in the Endnote Word Add-in). I wanted to automate the process with Endnote and make it count as one reference

@Mark if you check the screenshot in the question body, you will see what I mean. I'm putting a page number after a direct quote to indicate the end of the quote better.

I haven't used Endnote for a while (for many reasons), but I would do the following: {Author (Year)} "quote" (page xxx) with the part in {} being Endnote reference. The quote text and page numbers I would add as normal text.

@Mark thanks! That's most likely the way to go. Appreciate your help!

You asked a slightly different question earlier (here) but this one differentiates your goal to separate the citation and page number.
I prefer to do as @Mark mentions in the comments, I add an endnote formatted citation for the author and year, then manually type in the page number. You can type field codes for the citation to list the author in-text by putting {jackson, 2017@@author-year}. Depending on the reference style you are using it might be appropriate to put the author, year, and page number before the quote, which you can do with the field code {jackson, 2017 @1@author-year}. Lastly, you can put a citation with just a page number by excluding the author and year from the reference (right-click or go to the "Edit & Manage Citation(s)" menu) yet entering the page number in the citation. If you know the record number the field code will simply be {#616@3}.
Here's a summary:
{Jackson, 2017 #615@1} turns to

(Jackson, 2017, p. 1)

{Jackson, 2017 #615@1@author-year} turns to

Jackson (2017, p. 1)

{Jackson, 2017 #615} said “quotations are important” {,  #615@1} turns to

Jackson (2017) said “quotations are important” (p. 1).

Whether you insert the citation multiple times from Endnote, as long as you are referencing the same record you'll only see 1 reference in the document or in the manage citations menu. For example, I have a document with the all three combinations and it has 4 citations but only 1 reference.
The main reason why I manually enter the page numbers is the difference in citation formatting for page numbers. If I end up submitting to a different venue, thus changing the citation style in Endnote, I've had page numbers disappear. So I prefer to have a little more manual control over that aspect.


text:
Endnote: citing highlighted text from a PDF as direct quote
In Endnote X8 for Windows, how can I use the text I've highlighted in a PDF (stored directly in the Endnote library) as a direct quote in my Word document, and cite it properly?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it pertains to a specific software

You asked a follow-up question later (here) but this contains a specific aspect - pulling a highlighted citation directly from the PDF for an in-text quote. There is not a way to automatically pull highlighted text from a PDF so I would recommend the following:

Open the PDF and find the quote and page number. Type the quote carefully so that it is accurately represented.
Insert the citation as normal following the quote.

For an APA example you might have:

"This is an important quote which justifies my research" (Jackson, 2017, p. 1)

or with the field codes visible the citation would be {jackson, 2017@1}.


text:
Can I improve a paper peer-review using ChatGPT?
Can I improve a paper peer-review using ChatGPT?
The goal is not to generate content. This is to improve my review of a conference paper in terms of harmful content moderation (things that authors might find offensive) and the overall narrative.
Let's say that I write a review such as:

The paper does A, B, and C.

It does not evaluate A in X methodology
The B section has strong assumptions.
C is a good experiment.

The paper is a good contribution ready for publication. The above changes will make it stronger publications.

Then I run on ChatGPT, read the answer, to modifications on the response and submit the answer.
Is this ethically okay according to reviewing principles?
From my side, I often get very bad reviews that are hard to review, and more often that I will like to assume I find them offensive. So personally, at this stage, I wouldn't mind if someone provides me a review following the above methodology.

To be honest, I much prefer receiving reviews that consists of a list of concise, clear single topic comments i can then work through when formulating a reply, than getting a long rambling text, where I have to extract the same points first, in the hope of not missing anything.

Let's avoid the discussion about the content/quality (of Chatwhatever AI) and let's stick to the formal part.
Probably the worst thing you are doing is uploading some text that should be confidential (your review) to a service over the web on which you have no control nor you know where/how it is stored.

Very good point. But I dont upload the paper. Only my review, which is my own content. Does this issue still persist?

@CarlosMougan I explicitly wrote "your review". Yes, you review is confidential and that is the problem.

Many thanks! I see your point!

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


text:
Is is appropriate to call a prospective PhD advisor?
Here's the general situation. I'm a prospective PhD student and there's this professor (say, professor X), that is very well established, is from a great institution, and works on a topic which is very appealing to me. I've sent an email a few weeks back, but I got no response.
I feel like this is natural, since this professor probably gets a lot of emails, and I'm an unknown student from another country - I don't even know if the email got through the spam filter...
I'll probably send another email (instead of a reply to the original one) in a few days, if I still don't get a reply by then. That said, already considering the possibility that there's no reply from that one, I'm left wondering:
Is it inappropriate to call a professor's office number (as displayed in their webpage and in the webpage of the department) in order to establish a first communication?
On the one hand, I feel it may be seen as a bit pushy or unprofessional, as is noted in one of the comments of this post. On the other hand, I feel it may be seen as showing persistence and determination, and I don't really have the option of going in person and knocking on the professor's door to discuss in person, as some of the locals could do.
In short, would this be something that is basically sure to black-list me, or could it actually yield a positive outcome?
Thanks in advance!

Does this answer your question? Prospective PhD contacts potential supervisor but receives no answer after 2-3 emails, what to do?

Make sure you know all information for prospective PhD students given on the professor's department's website and the professor's website if existing. This may explicitly encourage or discourage you from contacting the professor.

What do you want to tell or ask the professor? If it's just information that they can clearly also get out of your CV when you officially apply, it's a waste of time.

@ChristianHennig, according to the department page, it is pivotal for a prospective student to contact a potential advisor before applying. They do accept applications without a specified advisor, but also say it isn't generally well received...

@user438383, not really. I read the post and the responses, and there was one brief comment about what I wanted to know, which is why I decided to create a proper post to elaborate on it.

"On the other hand, I feel it may be seen as showing persistence and determination" Calling a professor on the phone is 100% not what anyone means when talk about PhD applicants demonstrating persistence and determination. The categorical imperative is a good guideline here: do you think that, as a general rule, it's feasible for all students who want to work with this professor and don't get a reply to their email to call them on the phone? If you don't, then you should refrain from doing it yourself. (If you do, then you should consider other possible downsides, listed in Buffy's answer.)

I strongly recommend against using the phone for such things. First, your call will probably interrupt something. That won't please the person. Second, they have to get some information from you, requiring time that they may not have to give at that moment. And, they aren't going to make any decision or even wade through a long list of emails to find the ones you sent. It just seems negative all around.
If I were the recipient, my only response would be that you follow ordinary procedures, whatever they are and you will learn something eventually. Good Bye.
One reason you may not get a follow up is that the professor decided early on that there was nothing to be gained by responding. I used to get (retired now) lots of emails from people who obviously knew nothing about me or what I did. I didn't respond to those as they just felt like "bulk" emails.
If they are busy then they will take a while to respond and may set aside time every week or so follow up on promising requests. But, again, interrupting important (to them) work isn't something they happily do. Likewise if they have no open positions, they have little incentive to respond.
If you think there is a reason that you aren't getting a reply, you could email the department and ask them if the professor is available and accepting students. And for some places (like the US) most applications are made to the department, not individuals, and so it is fruitless to ask.
Finally, use the phone only for calling people that you already know and for things that can't be dealt with in other ways.
One way to get a response from a "well established" professor is to do it indirectly through one of your own professors. An email from a colleague, recommending you, will probably be answered. It can ask how you can best connect with them. Ask one of your professors if they would be willing to do this on your behalf.

What I dislike about not getting a response at all is that I don't know if, as you said, the professor doesn't want me as a student, or if the email was just not received/read. I did email the department, stating I tried email and got no response, and all they did was suggest I try again. As for asking a professor to do it for me, I have to ask: does this professor have to know/work in the same area as my prospective advisor? I ask because I'm slightly changing fields, so this prospective advisor probably won't know anyone at my university...

This is of course a nice answer from the professor's point of view, however using a public phone number is not a crime. From the candidate's point of view, if they believe they can show that they connect really well to the professor's work, the expected gain, even if very close to zero, may still be positive. To all professors who don't want to be called: Sacrifice the two minutes to respond to such emails. People who are thoroughly interested in your work deserve it!

I'm a professor at a top uni in the US and I get over a hundred of these emails this time of the year. About 2/3 are clearly from people who didn't take the time to understand what I work on. Those I delete. Among the others, I only reply to those (< 15) students who have research experience that is an excellent fit to my group and perfect or near-perfect GPA. Are you among those people for this prof?
If the answer is yes and they are still not replying, then it could mean that they are thinking about sabbatical, retirement, have no funding, or not on top of their stuff. If it's the latter three, maybe you should not work with them. If they have a big group and are thinking about sabbatical, it might be worth finding out. Giving them a call is neither good nor bad.

From comments: "according to the department page, it is pivotal for a prospective student to contact a potential advisor before applying."
In that case I'd call. It's not a crime to use a public phone number, and this information on the website is a good enough reason to do it, even though other professors here may hate me for saying that. ;-) Forget about "demonstrating determination/persistence" in this way though.

If the professor has a secretary then that could be a reasonable compromise. Calling professors directly is indeed not a crime, but there is a very large chance that it will actually reduce your chances.

@MaartenBuis "there is a very large chance that it will actually reduce your chances" - I doubt this. What's your evidence? Is any evidence you have from places where prospective PhD students are explicitly encouraged on the website to contact prospective supervisors? Honestly, I may not be happy if somebody calls me at the wrong time, but this is easily forgotten, and for sure I wouldn't (and nobody should) use this as a reason to not take on an otherwise good candidate!

I second this answer. A professor who prefers not to be contacted should not make the phone number publicly available, or should at least make sure the call is redirected to a secretary or similar. I would add that it is important to be well prepared in case the professor wants to test the applicant a little.


text:
How to get started on doing a research internship or a project in Mathematics?
I am an undergraduate student pursuing a Bachelor's degree in Mathematics at an Indian University. I want to get involved in a research internship,  or a project in Mathematics.
I don't know where to start.
I haven't got an impressive or a remarkable CV/Résume.
My professors have no idea of what a research internship or  a project is! Actually, we don't have the "culture" of doing a research internships, or projects at our university. No one does it. Again, when someone asks them about it, they just say, that we should focus on only mainstream academics like the course.
So, things are getting difficult for me. So, I am kinda feeling helpless. I am an inexperienced lad. I need some help.
I know nothing about research. I have seen some of my peers do some research and getting their papers published. I don't know, what they do? Do they select a research topic, read about it, build a problem for themselves that no one ever solved and then they try to solve it, they solve it and publish it. But these steps looks intimidating although they are very simple to write. I really need some guidance.
I have a life long dream of getting an admission on master's degree course on Pure Mathematics at some US university with a good amount of scholarship. I have heard that the scholarship process is really competitive and hard to get and doing research internships or projects puts you ahead in the competition. So, it seems to me kind of a necessity to engage myself in projects or internships.

What do you mean "My professors have no idea of what a research internship or a project is"?

@BryanKrause Well actually, we don't have the "culture" of doing a research internships, or projects at our university. No one does it. Again, when someone asks them about it, they just say, focus on only mainstream academics. So, things are getting difficult for me.

My understanding is that actual undergraduate research in mathematics is quite rare; unlike an empirical science, it takes longer in mainstream studies to get to the "edge" of knowledge in mathematics (the "edge" may be closer in some applied areas, where math and empirical research come together). So, it's not clear to me whether you're running into that aspect of mathematics or whether it's really a cultural thing. But, it seems vanishingly unlikely to me that you'd be successful just taking off on your own; research is hard and requires mentorship.

With your background you are nowhere close to being able to do math research.

@MoisheKohan What to do? Advice me so that I can fulfill my dream of havin' an edge to get admissions in a masters program in US for mathematics

Forget the research, focus on strong foundations, like real and complex analysis, general topology, abstract algebra.

@ThomasFinley I would expect for a masters program in the US in mathematics you need good undergraduate grades and to be able to afford to pay tuition. You should not expect any funding or scholarship for a masters program in the US.

It sounds like your school doesn’t offer internships. See if local businesses do.

I'm answering here mainly to rebut the comments that claim it's extremely difficult to do mathematics research as an undergraduate.  That's simply not true; undergraduates do original research in math all the time.  In the US there are organizations like the Council on Undergraduate Research and the NSF has a whole program called Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU), and these both include math as well as numerous other areas of research.
There are similar programs all over the world; I work at a graduate-only university in the middle East and I've mentored a dozen or so undergraduates as research interns over the years, in applied math (under the KAUST VSRP program).
Like in any other field, undergraduate contributions to research may be different in some ways from contributions made by people at a more advanced career stage, since it is necessarily limited by the background you have.  Certain subfields of math lend themselves much more easily to undergraduate research; I think it's fair to say that these include some areas of discrete math (e.g. graphs, combinatorics) as well as computational math (e.g. numerical analysis), among many others.  And within those subfields it's certainly non-trivial to identify reasonably interesting problems that can be tackled -- with guidance -- by an undergraduate.
Of course, you need to be both highly motivated and very bright, and most importantly you need a mentor who is a research mathematician.  It sounds like you have the motivation but don't have easy access to a mentor.  I'm not very familiar with the Indian educational system, but you might consider transferring to another university where the professors do research.  You could apply to programs in other countries (a quick search reveals many possibilities), but without anything to distinguish your application that's quite a long shot.

I do think it is important (and fair!) to observe that, in mathematics, the "research" done by undergrads with modest backgrounds will be different from the "research" done by grad students... and, again, possibly different from the "research" done by more senior people. But/and we can "allow" the term to refer to all of this. In the undergrad case, I think the most important aspect is to get across the idea that people should think for themselves and not just "learn the rules and follow them", unlike some images of mathematics.

For that matter, a word that is less burdened with volatile stuff is "project"... in contrast to a (traditional) "class". And maybe not thinking constantly about grades. :)

@paulgarrett Yes, that's why I wrote "undergraduate contributions to research may be different in some ways from contributions made by people at a more advanced career stage".

Actually, the issue isn't undergrad research per se but undergrad research without guidance. Your first paragraph applies almost entirely to those who have expert guidance. And, obtaining guidance by switching institutions is (very) fraught for many reasons, among them is the time it likely takes to get recognized as a good candidate at a new place.

In mathematics, without guidance, this is very hard. What you need is an unsolved problem and those are both hard to find and difficult to solve. That is why advisors with more experience are helpful/essential to the process.
However, there is one thing that you might think about, and it might lead to a reasonable project.
Take something that you know well and think about what variations there might be in that. What change in a definition or a formula might lead to something "interesting" that you could follow up on. At the undergraduate level it doesn't need to be a major thing, just something different enough to be new.
Note that fields built upon axioms (analysis, algebra, topology...) all have definitions of things that provide the "interesting" parts to study. For example, the Peano Axioms don't talk about a "less than" relationship between integers, but giving a definition of that provides something interesting to study. Ultimately, it gets you to Calculus and beyond. But there is no reason that variations on definitions might not also be "interesting" and worth exploring.
Still hard, but at least it is the way lots of mathematicians think about things. Good luck.

Thank you for your answer! But I have edited my question a bit. Mind taking a look at it, please?


text:
How does one approach a professor to volunteer in his/her lab?
In particular if one has little practical experience with research in the field (neuroscience), and has limited research experience in another area though did not fit well (computer vision).
What does one put on the email?  Classes taken?  Experiments done?  Skills (reading primary literature, matlab, statistics and writing)? Or just a request for a meeting?
Should I mention in the email my major research requirements that specify I must work in the same lab for two semesters with paperwork (which my advisor suggested volunteering in first to see how I fit)?

You email list of items is appropriate, but for me, one gauge is: enthusiasm & interest. Convey that as honestly as possible.

Whenever approaching a faculty member relating to research, I recommend that early career students offer them a resume/CV and some concrete example of research interest (a question about a recent paper, how you heard about the lab and why it interests you, demonstrating drive by reaching out to the current lab members, etc).
In the email, state your discipline, the research requirements, any potential references they may already know (like your advisor). Ask for a meeting with a specific length of time (10-15 min) with a clear objective (to get a tour, hear about the research, get more involved in the lab,etc ), and if you don't hear back within a week -- follow up.

mention in conversation any hands-on experience/ programming experience/ (In experimental science, someone who has accumulated some common sense or experience  through hands-on hobbies or summer jobs can translate into the advisor feeling more confident about the totally newbie student being a successful catch for the team.


text:
Which would be more beneficial when applying to theoretical physics PhD programs, Math M.S or experimental physics M.S.?
I am graduating this semester with a bachelors in physics. My goal is to do theory in my graduate level course work. The problem I am in now is that I missed the deadline to take the physics GRE (I'm taking it in April) so I also missed the deadline to apply to most graduate schools. Fortunately, I was accepted to pursue masters degrees by both the math and physics departments of my current school. My plan is to do one or the other and apply to other schools next semester. My question is which one will be more beneficial to me? Our math department is all around phenomenal... but it won't say "physics" on my applications. Our physics department is good, but it is completely geared towards experimental nuclear physics, which is not my interest (and there is no non-thesis option). Every day now I have been swinging back and forth; math... physics...etc. So, which one would be more beneficial when applying to schools with top theory programs, Math M.S or physics M.S.?

Related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/32981/19607

What country?  If USA, then I advise neither.

You did not specify what discipline the PhD would be in.  It implies physics, but does not say that.

yes physics was my thought

but I may be just as happy with a math PhD. I just want to explore our universe to the deepest depths possible.

@sluddani "I just want to explore our universe to the deepest depths possible." is not an answer. I'd suggest having greater clarity to what you want to do. I could use those same words to describe wanting a PhD in chemistry, biology, or oceanography. Getting a doctorate degree is inherently a deep dive into some aspect of the universe.

Yes, I understand this. I Don't think it is relevant to my question.

Theoretical fundamental physics topics (as I can see you are interested in from your questions elsewhere) such as quantum gravity are of highly mathematical nature, and indeed there are both physicists and mathematicians by education working in such fields. So I would go for the degree in mathematics, and if you are very curious to already learn about some cool physics too,  you can still do so on your own whenever you have time for it. Best wishes!

If your MS in physics will be experimental and you want to do theoretical physics, the math route could work. But we are basically guessing at how an admissions committee will see your application;  so I encourage you to keep asking. Hopefully other answers here will help.

Thanks. I wish I could guarantee all committees were proponents of the mathematical universe hypothesis: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0704.0646.pdf

I'm not a physicist (I'm a philosopher of science who loves mathematical perspectives), so my opinion doesn't count, but here are things to consider.
You may want to think beyond the immediate challenge of getting into a good graduate program.
What possible drawback could there be to a masters in math in your situation?  It's not physics, but deeper knowledge and improved ability with math can only help you as a physicist.  Surely physics admissions committees will see that.  @MartinArgrrami's answer is a good reply to this argument, though.  Perhaps certain kinds of experimental physicists will be more impressed by a physics degree with experimental emphasis.  On the other hand, deeper experience with math may facilitate additional insights and theoretical opportunities even in experimental research.
The fact that you're even considering a math MS, and the paper you linked, suggest that your orientation to physics will be such that math is not merely one among many tools.  If it's the more mathematically inspired corners of physics that you love, then why not work toward that orientation (even if you think you'll exercise your mathematical interests in experimental contexts)?


text:
Is it commonly accepted to refer to a Master Degree in Statistics as M.Stat.?
I have recently obtained a Master Degree in Statistics from Tor Vergata University of Rome.
Can I routinely use the term M.Stat., which has the strength of being much more specific and informative, or is it more appropriate to use the generic M.Sc. term?

'MSc Statistics' or 'MSc in Statistics' I'ld say

I see. The issue is that typically I sign already myself as Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD. Should I add to MD, also MSc, or MStat, or MSc Statistics?

You can only use the degree that is displayed on your certificate. I am not aware of any case in which one can make up one's own academic degree just for convenience. The only case of something similar would be when it comes to international adaptations (e.g. the German "Dr." is equivalent to a PhD (except the Dr. med.)). By using "M.stat." you would imply that you received this specific degree, which you did not. In my opinion this would be fraud.

Note that in Germany, you cannot simply use a "Dr." if you have a Ph.D.

The problem is that in Italy neither MSc nor MStat is given in English terms, so I have to translate it. As it is a Master in Statistics (Master in Statistica), I was wondering how best to convey its focus and scope, not trying to fool anybody.

Stephan Kolassa, I am afraid that this is not entirely true. In your citation the person did not have a PhD! The German law allows "Dr." to be used for a wide variety of international PhDs: https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/pdf/ZAB/Gradfuehrung_Beschluesse_der_KMK/20150626_KMK-Beschluss_Beguenstigende_Regelungen.pdf

Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai: What is commonly done is to write the degree in its original form (i.e. Master in Statistica) and then either indicate the length of the studies (e.g. "five year degree") or indicate the anglo saxon equivalent, which in your case does not exist as far as I am aware.

@Chris: I actually found some evidence that an M Stat exists in other countries, eg http://statistics.rice.edu/Content_MStat.aspx?id=2147483904 in the UK and http://www.isibang.ac.in/~statmath/courses/mstatbro.htm in India. That's why I would favor using it.

@GiuseppeBiondi-Zoccai: An MStat in the UK is not only not the same as an MSc in statistics, it's actually a less valuable qualification!


text:
Can I still try to publish my work if my algorithm's results are not as good as other algorithms'?
I've written a classification algorithm that does a pretty good job at classifying some datasets.  However, I compared my algorithm to other classification methods, and their results exceed my results by a little.  For instance, when classifying a dataset from a repository, my algorithm is getting 95% correct while another algorithm usually gets 99% correct.
Should I continue to publish my results although 1) my algorithm is a little slower, and 2) my algorithm's results are not as good as the other results.
I'm a little torn.  I'm excited as my paper and results are a contribution to the classification field as the algorithm is novel.  Also, I'm of the stance that you can't beat EVERY algorithm.  If we only published algorithms that could (loosely) beat other algorithms either A.) we'd never have new innovations, or B.) eventually every dataset would be 100% classified each time, or C.) every algorithm could instantaneously classify a dataset (speed).
I hope that my algorithm will continue to grow and others will pick it up and extend it.  I hope that one day -- with tweaks -- my algorithm can reach 99% too.
I'm afraid of being rejected by the journal again.  Yes, my first submission was rejected.  One of the reasons for the rejection was that my dataset was small.  However, when the dataset was small I was beating the other algorithms.  Now, as the dataset has grown, the other algorithms are now beating me.  I'd like not to be rejected again.

I don't mean to be cruel, but if the state of the art is 99% correct and your algorithm is 95% correct, a reader's reaction won't be that your algorithm is correct 96% as often; it will be that your algorithm makes 5x as many errors.

This is, statistically, the correct reaction, too.

It's simply not true that we'd never have innovations if we only published things that are improvements on the state of the art. You need to give people a reason to care about your algorithm. "If people cared about it, they'd make it as good as other algorithms" isn't a reason for people to care about it: it's a hope about the consequences that will follow if people do care.

The fact that your algorithm does not perform as well based on accuracy is important because people are usually interested in accuracy, BUT what else does your algorithm bring? Does it only learn with 95% accuracy but can it do it in 30% of the time it takes the other algorithm to learn to 99%?
What redeeming qualities does your algorithm have? Otherwise, if it takes about the same time and is less efficient, unless there is a specific lesson to be learned, then I do not think it would be accepted for publication in a journal. A textbook author may find it interesting for algorithm analysis.

I'd say the paper is interesting nonetheless, because it contributes a new insight on the performance of algorithms. Also, if you don't publish it, the next person who has the same idea will need to investigate it fully, probably with similar results.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because this will be very specific to your field.

Just because your algorithm has inferior performance, doesn't mean its discovery is useless. The fact of its existence may be insightful to theorists, and others may see improvements upon yours that propel it to much better performance. You should try to emphasize any aspects it may have besides speed and correctness that are somehow interesting.

When the 486 came out, it improved upon the 386 which introduced many multitasking features.  Parallelism was considered inferior because there was cost to multitasking.  Now, multi-core CPUs benefit greatly from parallel computation.  Just because your algorithm is currently clocking in slower with current hardware doesn't mean that it has no unique characteristics.  Unique characteristics have often been usefully exploited, sometimes not at the time of initial creation.  (I agree with @Superbest's comment.)

You say that your algorithm is inferior.Well it has a lower GPA .This lower GPA is measured on standard Key Performance Indicators .If your algorithm is better in ANY aspect it has a place .Even if you have to broaden the KPI to show some merit .I have lots of hardware stuff that is not the be all and end all but has merit in specific areas.If you can find some merit in your algorithm then you have a useful tool that can go into the toolbox and then I think you can publish.

95% is different by a lot from 99%.

I assume that you're doing something new, which is why you want to publish, some sort of new approach. The first iteration, I should think, shouldn't necessarily be expected to blow everybody else out of the water. That's not how science works. There is no magic bullet that works 100% of the time in all possible cases. There is great value in coming up with new ways of doing things.

How many of the cases that the established algorithm that gets 99% right get's wrong does your algorithm get right?

If you want to get technical, in general no learning algorithm performs any better than any other.
The question then, is what can be learned from your algorithm.  In your question, you speak of it as a fond intellectual child that you wish to grow and nurture, and you speak of your personal concerns about acceptance and rejection.  Here is the thing, though: none of that matters for a publication.  What matters is this: what new knowledge or capability is brought into the world with your work on your algorithm, and how can this be objectively evaluated?
Here are some possibilities that I can see:

Your algorithm may perform better on an interesting and useful class of problems, and thus be of practical interest.
Your algorithm may perform worse, but have some other desirable property, such as executing very quickly or using very little memory, in which case the performance comparison just needs to show that it is sufficient, and you can show much better performance with regards to those other properties.
Your algorithm may perform worse, but do so in a way that is enlightening, e.g., taking a more human-like approach, or showing how something can be accomplished by a very unusual and unexpected route.  In this case, the performance comparison is simply showing that your algorithm does not perform too badly to be interesting, and the narrative should focus on the path taken to achieve your results and why that is interesting.
Your algorithm may only have taught you personally some interesting things about classification and scientific research, in which case you should mourn the passing of a fine research idea and move on with your life.

Only you and those who know your work well will be able to tell which category it truly fits into.

+1 for a good categorisation of what useful results could be.

I'd add another category. You think your algorithm might provide a foundation for other algorithms (it introduces a novel concept). Even if it doesn't pass the first three tests, I'd say at a minumum put it up on ArXiv, who knows what others may find it good for (it might be the foundation for an algorithm in a totally unrelated field). Let others see it, if it is indeed novel.

@WetLabStudent That is really covered by point 3, is it not? "it introduces a novel concept" ~ "showing how something can be accomplished by a very unusual and unexpected route"

To add my five cents. I've been to a conference where someone presented an alghoritm which didin't really get better results than state of the art ones but it was so robust, concise and innovative that I was marveled at the pure idea and I could implement it from scratch there and then whereas I can't implement those better alghoritms without any reference which of course takes time to read and process. Take sorting for example I know complexity of sorting alghoritms but then again I usually go with bubble sort because I can implement it fast and go on. The results are not always the key.

Another important category: The resulting model is more straightforward to interpret than models from competing algorithms (many learning algorithms are essentially black-box models), or that the model uses some domain-specific information/assumption which could make it more relevant to that domain.

@SokPomaranczowy, insertion sort is almost twice as fast and equally simple. Shellsort is somwhat more complex, but quite a bit faster.

@SokPomaranczowy: Bubble sort is the worst possible example you can come up with, because in any decent programming language there is a library that can perform O(n*log(n)) sorting for you in one or two lines of error-free code whereas bubble sort is Θ(n^2) on random input lists.

@user21820 I fail to see why is that bad example? I never said that this solution is preferrable, that I would use it in enterprise code or that it has better time complexity. All I said was that bubble sort wins with other alghoritms despite having worse result purely because it takes less of my brain to implement and the question is about publishing less then optimal results.

@SokPomaranczowy: I understand, but your last sentence is precisely where it is completely wrong, because it takes even less of your brain to use the standard libraries to implement sorting.

@user21820 There are cases where you can't use standard libraries. Besides this conversation and your arguments have nothing to do with OP case.

@SokPomaranczowy: Yea I agree that this conversation has nothing to do with the question at hand. If standard libraries are out of the question, then I agree that bubble-sort or insertion-sort are the simplest you can get.

Simon Richter wrote in a comment:

I'd say the paper is interesting nonetheless, because it contributes a new insight on the performance of algorithms. Also, if you don't publish it, the next person who has the same idea will need to investigate it fully, probably with similar results.

If "this idea doesn't work as well as one might hope" is the main conclusion then I also see value in publishing it, but you need to consider carefully the venue. Is there something like a Journal of Negative Results in your field?

It seems like the author isn't convinced that his algorithm is a dead-end and thinks that future work on it might produce good results.

Let's take a look at a very common and studied problem: sorting. There are lots of algorithms, starting from very inefficient ones, such as bubble sort up to more efficient ones such as quick sort or merge sort. Of course, in practice, I would like to use the most efficient one, but there are some reasons for which I might choose another one. For example, merge sort might be more appropriate for a machine with sequential access memory. Also, even if I would never use it in practice, there was a point in my life when I studied bubble sort, since it created a softer learning curve for me. Also, I studied merge sort initially not for the actual problem that it solves, but for the method it uses.
Bottom line is, there are many reasons why an algorithm is interesting for somebody, even if it has a lower average performance in practice. Moreover, somebody might find some application for your algorithm where it is better than others (for example, bubble sort is quicker than quicksort on sorted lists).

See also http://cs.stackexchange.com/a/53228/46778 on sorting.

Accuracy is not the only measure for an algorithm: yours may work blazingly fast, be implementable on a microcontroller, classify in real-time or online, serve as a good preprocessing to other algorithms, be robust to noise, who knows. Perhaps it is just very elegant. With a little wit, you can find a way to assert its efficiency.
Many of nowadays standard algorithms (for instance in sound/image compression) contain parts that where not quite state-of-art when published first. But work great in conjunction.

I'll have a go at this with a softer perspective. You write:

I'm afraid of being rejected by the journal again.

What is the worst consequence of being rejected?
Most of us get rejected from time to time, and you are not alone in being worried about that: How do I overcome fear of rejection when writing academic papers?
You obviously have a logical mind. My guess is that if you put that good head of yours into thinking about the Worst consequence, you will find that it isn't that bad. You might even learn something useful along the way. Life will go on.
If not not in the sphere of academia, several famous writers have been rejected:  Agatha Christie,  J.K. Rowling, C.S. Lewis to mention a few.
Close your eyes and press send! (and if you get rejected: blame it on someone else, that helps ;)

Research is not always writing about how your experimentation works perfectly.  It's about contributing to the global body of knowledge.  Such knowledge can also include what was attempted and why it did not work.

A lot of good points supporting publication have already been listed but one seems to have been missed, even if it might not be relevant for your algorithm: that it is a different algorithm.
I'm working in the numerical department from time to time (for fun, not profit) and just now I'm implementing a function to compute a big-integer nth-root. Although the algorithms I use had been proven to be correct sveral hundred years ago any implementation will have errors: tests are mandatory.
I could have used a second library with a well tested implementation but to avoid errors in the translating of the data types I just implemented two different algorithms: a recurrence (Halley) and a linear function (binary search). The chance that both err in the same way and outcome is very low because the two algorithms are sufficiently different[1].
If your algorithm is also sufficiently different it, too can be used to verify the results of other algorithms. That is not the worst thing, to say the least.
TL;DR: publish!
[1] NB: you may use both for large integers because the binary search algorithm is not very fast for small indices and the Halley recurrence is quite slow for large indices starting at about 300 bits radicand size with my implementation. So your algorithm might even be useful in production, although that point has already been made, if I remember correctly.

It is possible that your algorithm isn't quite as good as other published algorithms right now, but it may have easy improvements that other people could find that makes it better than other algorithms.
If you publish it, someone might figure out such improvements. If you don't publish it, they won't.


text:
Should I tell my co-authors that I don’t have any energy left for an undergrad dissertation that is taking forever?
I have been working on my undergrad dissertation (which is a joint paper with two other authors) for about 7 months now. I have written a manuscript, but I keep on discovering bugs. Basically, I have no energy left for this project because of three reasons:

bugs
nothing I do seems to be enough to impress my advisors/co-authors
I am the only undergrad in the group and my co-authors take on more of a mentoring role (general advice and ideas but they don’t write with me). So it gets really isolating and lonely at times because I’m basically working alone.

My co-authors have invested a good amount of time advising me, so I feel bad about the thought of giving up. I would continue if I had someone else to work more closely with me.
My question is, is it bad if I tell them that I don’t have any energy left for this project?

Your thesis is your own to write, you can't expect someone else to write it with you (although you should be some relevant feedback on it). On the other hand, if you mean that there is some joint paper that you are writing and your co-authors aren't contributing to it, then you should make that clearer in your question. In any case, the natural first step is to let your advisors know that you are struggling. It's not like the only two options are "continuing to suffer in silence" or "quitting the project".

My dissertation is a joint paper with two other people.

I suggest editing that information into your question. In any case, the key is communicating about your situation with your advisors.

Is the dissertation a requirement for you to graduate?

Regarding "not enough to impress" - are they actually saying that it isn't adequate (for graduation, publication, etc)?  Or is it that you're hoping for enthusiastic praise which they aren't giving?

Regarding "basically working alone": for better or for worse, this is pretty common for collaboration in mathematics.  It would be great to sit down with your co-author and tackle a problem or write a section, but logistically, you usually simply can't find enough hours in the intersection of your schedules.  So often instead you split up the project into chunks that you can write independently, and in your precious meeting time you focus on how the chunks should fit together.

What sort of program requires a months-long dissertation at the undergraduate level?

@JohnGordon: Mine required a yearlong project, either an individual thesis or a group "clinic".  It's not unheard of.

All non-engineering majors at Princeton require two ‘junior papers’ (one per semester) and a senior thesis to graduate. These are carried out under the supervision of an advisor.

The dissertation is a requirement for me to graduate. But I already submitted it and got my grade. However, I was not required to solve the entire problem in order to graduate, I only had to make good enough progress, which I did. Now, I am trying to refine my work and arrive at a complete solution in order to publish a paper. @NateEldredge

I was hoping for some appreciation of the time I spent working on the problem but I got none whatsoever @NateEldredge


text:
Is it fair to have follow-up interviews after a test following suspicions of cheating?
We recently held online midterm exams at my institution, where I am a manager. (We were forced online just before the exams.) The exams included a range of subjects, and were typically less than 2 hours.
There are indications of cheating (e.g. exam scores much higher than offline performance, answers that seem to be copied from each other, etc.). So I am planning to send the following message to the students:

During the next few days, some students will be informed by subject teachers that there is indication of academic dishonesty in their midterm exam. The student will have the option of responding to the teacher's message to schedule a confidential teacher-student video interview of approximately 15 minutes, in which the teacher will determine whether the student's exam score is reliable. If the student schedules and passes the interview, then their midterm exam score will be accepted. Otherwise, their midterm exam score will not be counted in their semester grade, and their final exam grade will count as both their midterm exam and final exam grade. If the student would like to know details about the indication of academic dishonesty, these can be discussed after the interview.

During the video interview, the students will be given oral questions about the topics covered on the midterm exam, to assess whether their exam score is reliable.
Question: Is this fair?
As far as school policy: Before the midterm exams, the students were given a set of rules and consequences about the midterm exams: camera and microphone activated, hands visible, etc. But these rules cannot completely prevent cheating. (A student's hand could be briefly off-camera, and it would be unreasonably harsh to give them an automatic zero for that.)
My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.
UPDATE
I decided not to do the follow-up interviews, because they are not in the school policies. (If they were in the school policies, then they would have been fair, to the extent that standard anti-cheating policies are fair.)

I have edited out the information that this is pertaining to a highschool. Highschool education is off-topic here, but everything else about the question seems to be equally applicable to university education.

@Arno OK, thank you.

What kind of exam was that? Written multiple choice, written free text, oral?

@Martin There were many exams, across a range of subjects. Some were essay responses, some were short-answer, some had multiple-choice sections, etc.

Long ago, I typically got results slightly above median in my results. When the crucial external exams came I studied far more than usual. The success metric used was top four subject gross score. I topped the class.

Cheating always happens. Cheaters take a big risk, they'll get caught eventually. Or not. They are (not) learning for their own life anyways. Just accept that you lost this round and don't be a bad loser. There is nothing you can do now.

And btw. I'd recommend anyone who gets such an email to send their lawyer to the call instead of going themselves ;).

The best way to deal with this is just to make the tests 24 hours and open-book. Then make them harder. That way everyone is on a level playing field and they won't be able to pass if they don't know what they're doing.

In my university, there is an explicit rule that allows the teacher to do an oral exam to any student, after the written exam. This does not require the teacher to blame the student for cheating.

@ScottishTapWater What if a student gets help from friends, or uses the internet?

Well it's open book... So they're allowed to use the internet... I don't see that as a problem given you can always look things up online in real life and the difficulty should be in the application of the theory, not just memorising easily googleable things.
As for help from friends, then you've just got to go with the standard means of spotting collusion that comes with any coursework

@ScottishTapWater And what if a student just pays someone to do their work?

@Dan - That's an argument against any sort of coursework, any sort of dissertation, any sort of non exam conditions work... It's ridiculous. Quite frankly, if you can't tell the difference between work written by one of your students and someone else, then you've not been paying enough attention to their work. I could quite easily say what's to prevent a student bribing a faculty member from giving them foresight of the exam paper

@ScottishTapWater Hence the motivation for some kind of one-on-one conversation with the student, to verify authenticity.

@Dan Here's the thing: If I cheated on the midterm I won't really care if the mark gets thrown out because easy come, easy go. It's not a real punishment. But if I did not cheat then I would care because you just tossed out my work and made me put my eggs in one basket.

@DKNguyen I think some of the caught cheaters would care, because their very high midterm score would get tossed out, leaving them with very low scores in the other grade components. And it would be very unlikely (but not impossible) that non-cheaters would get called out.

@Dan: That’s still not a punishment for cheating. It’s only negating the benefit of cheating. It’s the equivalent of making a thief return what they stole and nothing else. Sure the thief doesn’t like to return this, but the net cost of thievery is still clearly non-negative (and most likely positive because you won’t catch the thief all the time). Also see my answer.

You sure can be glad I'm not your student. If I was asked to redo a test because there was an after-the-fact problem with the method of testing I would tell you in no uncertain terms the inefficient nature of your test is not my problem and I cannot be expected to be inconvenienced because of any institutional incompetencies.

I think it's worth mentioning that this problem is entirely created by your school and not the students. Did they shut down in-person learning? No (well, maybe they're very well-organized and persuasive, but unlikely). So at some point you need to just accept the fact that if you shut down a school and still give midterms, you'll have some problems. You may as well ask how to prevent a car crash after removing your brakes.

Question: Is this fair?

No. What would be fair is for you to assign grades based on the grading policy described in your course syllabus, and based on your university's general policies — nothing more or less. I assume that subjecting students to a mandatory post-exam interview that puts their exam grade at risk of cancelation based on your arbitrary decision that their interview answers are not consistent with their written exam performance is not a grading methodology that is either described in your syllabus or condoned by your university's policies. Hence, it is not fair and not reasonable.
If you have evidence that a student cheated, you should deal with it according to your university's standard procedures for dealing with academic misconduct (for example, at my university that would mean referring the student to our Student Judicial Affairs office, giving them the evidence and letting the office handle it from there). The evidence would either be strong enough to find the student guilty of misconduct and mete out a grade penalty or other disciplinary consequence, or it wouldn't be. In the latter case, you're out of luck — as strong as your suspicions may be based on vague "indications of academic dishonesty", you have to grade the student based on their exam performance and nothing else.

My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.

This is noble and commendable, but irrelevant to the question of whether your approach is fair.

I agree (+1). But I also think that doing nothing about these almost-certain-but-not-provable cheaters, is unfair to the honest students. Is that something we'll just have to live with?

@Dan “almost certain” is a far higher level of certainty than what you need to punish students for misconduct. In the United States you typically need to find the student guilty of cheating according to a “preponderance of the evidence” standard of proof. So again, the standard university procedure should be all you need in such a case. And if you can’t meet the standard of proof that your university requires, then yes, obviously you’ll just have to live with it.

OK, but "preponderance" could be very subjective and thus problematic. I signed up to be a teacher, not a lawyer :( Anyway, I appreciate your input.

@Dan "I signed up to be a teacher, not a lawyer": This is exactly why many universities have offices like Dan Romik referred to, so that the people employed there can make those subjective, problematic judgements, and teachers don't have to.

@DanielHatton if it’s mentioned in the syllabus, and isn’t disallowed by university policies, then it sounds reasonably fair. At least, while I can think of some theoretical objections, in some situations it would be appropriate and reasonable, and in any case if it’s allowed and the students were given fair notice that it could happen then it’s hard to criticize the instructor for doing it.

@MarkMeckes But merely referring the case to such an office and thus launching a formal procedure is sort of the nuclear option already (at least at some institutions). An "almost certain" case can then either give an innocent student the stigma of a suspected-but-unconvicted cheater, or it can get a student kicked out of the school just because they made one bad mistake. Neither of those feels necessarily "fair".

@TooTea: Well, at the institutions where I have interacted with such offices, they have handled things very well.  As for "fair", that's a vague term with too many meanings.  Another main reason such offices exist is so that cases can be handled more uniformly across the institution than by individual faculty each implementing their own policies; in that sense it is more fair to refer the matter to that office.  If, as you suggest may be the case, the office's policies are excessively harsh, then I don't have a good recommendation.

@MarkMeckes I suspect it might also be a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. If only the most egregious cases tend to get referred to the office, the average punishment is going to be much more severe than otherwise. It might also be a cultural thing; I can imagine that in some cultures the mere act of referring a case to the office can make the student view you as their enemy, pretty much destroying any prospect of a reasonable working relationship.

Agree with most of your answer, but I find the motivation quite ignoble... see my answer.

@Dan  >> I signed up to be a teacher, not a lawyer - but isn't that what this question is all about?  ie, you trying to do justice?

Indeed, and thank you.  I won't 'at' you again for fear of making it worse  :)

This is a fraught situation.

Is this fair?

I think you know it is not completely fair. For example, consider a not-so-far-fetched student named Bob. Bob isn't doing very well in your class, so he works hard and gets an A on the midterm. But precisely because his grade is so high, he gets this e-mail from you. During the interview, he's nervous and can't think clearly and has forgotten some of what he learned. So, you tell Bob that his A was "unreliable" and so you will not be accepting it. Bob really got screwed here: you have called him a cheater (even though you're not prosecuting him for cheating), and all his excellent work is for naught.

My motivation for doing this is to protect...the honest students from being disadvantaged....

So now we come to the real question: is this fair enough? In other words, are the downsides of this scheme outweighed by the advantages? I say no. I understand your willingness to accept a few false positives or false negatives if your scheme works most of the time. If this were a research dataset, it might be a good idea. But since this is essentially a judicial process, the burden of proof is much higher. If students cheat on an exam despite your reasonable countermeasures, that does not reflect poorly on you, whereas falsely accusing students of cheating absolutely reflects poorly on you, even if most of your accusations are correct.
So how do you protect the honest students from being disadvantaged? The exam design itself. Perhaps you give all students different questions, or a different subset of the questions. Perhaps you change the numbers in each student's version. Perhaps you can avoid exams altogether in favor of projects. Perhaps you can make this oral interview a part of the exam, rather than something that's done after-the-fact in an arbitrary way. Most of these solutions entail more work for you, but they are likely to cause fewer problems in the long run.
Edit: For more on my reasoning, see my related answer here. In particular, my assertion about the burden of proof is based on the fact that OP is inventing this procedure after the fact and is playing both judge and jury. On the other hand, if OP's institution's policies already endorse this investigative procedure, then my answer would change considerably.

Thank you, but none of your suggestions about exam design (except oral interview) prevent students from collaborating, which seems to be the main method of cheating in this case. Giving an oral interview to each student is not feasible.

Of course not: cheating has been a cat-and-mouse game for centuries, no one here has the secret to changing that reality. All you can do is design the game in a way as to make cheating as inconvenient and detectable as is possible given your constraints and resources.

Indeed, fair enough.

@Dan I did most of my BSc during the COVID online era, and one thing that always worked against cheating was time. The classes where nobody cheated had exams where time was so tight that nobody had time to search up online answers or class materials. Combine that with camera+mic and then the students can't be in a call with each other either. That's probably your best way to avoid cheating, still won't filter our 100% of them (ppl could send their exam to outsiders to solver while pretending to do it themselves on camera -> randomly ask students to screen share during the exam, to scare some

to scare some to attempt this. This is probably the best way. Nothing is 100% tho, even in offline exams people find ways to cheat.

@JohnFire Well, it was what one of my professors did, and despite being an honest student myself, I absolutely despised it. Unlike the exams that I used to have while in high school, the university exams demanded more thinking from me, and the exams were designed with time so tight that it almost became impossible for me to answer it, unless I have already solved the question earlier, or somehow memorized it before.

@JohnFire: In any reasonable exam (not only at university, but through school), copying the solutions should take far less time than solving the exam. Otherwise it is just a task of how quickly you can write or perform tasks under enormous time pressure. If people want to collaborate, they simply need to sit in different rooms of the same house with a third person (who needs to have no subject expertise) passing solutions between them. Video surveillance is only a mild deterrence to this, but you can trap people by varying tasks in multiple irrelevant aspects (if your subject allows for that).

One could argue that if the example "Bob" student did not know the material before the exam and also did not know the material shortly after the exam, an A is not the grade that best reflects his learning outcome... but of course, this is irrelevant to the question because fairness requires that the rules not be changed in the middle of the game based on unproven suspicions.

@Wrzlprmft Yes, but if you make the time tight enough, there won't be enough time to copy the solutions with all the back and forth communication added.

Another vote against time pressure. The only justification for a tightly timed exam is when facilities and invigilating staff are a limited resource. Otherwise, the fastest (most rewarded) students are those most apt at regurgitation. Anecdote time: for a job application I had to complete a "numerical literacy" test with unrealistically short times (set to let the majority of applicants fail, so they would have fewer to interview), and my then partner, a lecturer in Maths, scored a 0, because his greater domain knowledge meant that he could see much more complexity in each question than me.

@wimi That argument cannot be made in good conscience if you at the same time do not correct for students who score lower on their exam than their intuitive understanding of the course material reflects. Exams are notably a bad marker for long term knowledge, and this is not remediated by giving those who pass the exam another hoop to jump through under the guise of "not in the spirit of learning the material", while already having disadvantaged those who did comply with the spirit of learning the material but failed to prove so during the bad marker exam.

@wimi: To put it differently, in order to follow your argument in good conscience, you would need to meet with all students, gauge their knowledge, and adjust their scores accordingly, both positively and negatively, and then the prior exam has mostly just been a waste of time because you just reinvented the oral exam.

After the online teaching and online exam experiences that the covid pandemic has forced upon the world, I, as a teacher who has grappled with similar issues, have strongly affirmed the conclusion that I held even before the pandemic: it is impossible to certify that students do not cheat when doing online exams. The numerous "tips" given to try to minimize cheating usually cannot prevent a dedicated cheater (e.g., scrambling questions). Even worse, not only do they fail to prevent dedicated cheating, but many of these tips stress out honest students to the point that they perform worse than they would without such artificial restrictions (e.g., reducing time for the exam to give less opportunity to cheat). Personally, I have chosen to draw the line there: I refuse to apply any "anti-cheating" measure that unnecessarily stresses out honest students, and I am willing to accept online cheating as a consequence.
I have reconciled myself to the accept the following:

Only an in-person exam with human surveillance provides the highest confidence of cheating prevention. (This includes computer-based exams with secured computers: they still need human surveillance.)
When an in-person exam with human surveillance is impossible (e.g., because of covid safety restrictions), then we teachers are unable to certify the honesty of any exams we administer. That is covid's fault, not ours.
In that case, then as a teacher, my responsibility is to do my best to give the students the best learning experience possible with a course adapted for online delivery. It is possible to give them the full learning experience despite online restrictions.
With this scenario, the students who seriously and honestly want to learn can receive their full-quality learning experience. However, we cannot certify their learning with a grade (that is, with the dubious assumption that grades are even able to certify learning). For students who are willing to cheat if they have the opportunity, then covid gives them the opportunity. Whether and how much they learn is their responsibility, not ours.

So, for your situation, I recommend that you do not risk falsely accusing any honest student of cheating and simply accept that with online restrictions beyond your control, you are not able to prevent some students from cheating. Blame covid, not yourself.

I am not completely sure what you mean by scrambling questions, but in my experience, having tasks vary in multiple (!) aspects (actual numbers, variable names, order of choices, type of vehicle running over a cliff) is surprisingly effective to detect collaborators, the reason being that it’s quite difficult to copy a solution while paying attention to multiple things you need to change and cheaters overestimate their ability to do so. Mind that I am not under the illusion that this makes cheating impossible though and I pretty much share your philosophy on online exams.

the other problem with time restrictions is that it's completely trivial for well-resourced students to get around that with a doctors note.

@Wrzlprmft scrambling questions means shuffling the question order.

@eps the converse problem with the "doctors note" is that many (most?) students who have a genuine disability that makes time pressure disproportionally punitive do not have a diagnosis or medical document, or may have not managed to navigate the University's accommodation system. Time pressure on exams rewards almost exclusively meta test-taking abilities (correctly picking the easiest questions, strategising effort to output efficiently etc) and certainly not depth of knowledge.

@justhalf From my exams i remember one professor that used the student ID number as a variable input into the task (some were keyed to last digit odd or even, others used a specific digit of it). that way exams had differences automatically. Do a copypaste between neighbors and those cause a mismatch

Question: Is this fair?

No. Not only is it unfair, but it would be perfectly legitimate for a student to refuse such an interview and demand that, unless you have specific evidence of them cheating, you stick to your published grade derivation scheme.
The fact that some students may have cheated does not grant you the right to treat arbitrary students as criminals and subject them to interrogations.
If cheating on exams bothers you so much, avoid exams in which people can cheat, or avoid exams, or avoid giving out grades.

My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.

Your motivation is inappropriate and invalid. It's invalid, because as mentioned above, you're hurting the students who did not cheat, not protecting them. If you think that ensuring a lower grade for cheaters "protects" non-cheaters - you're mis-identifying their interests.
Which brings me to the point about propriety. You're a teacher. Your motivation should be for students to learn, broaden their horizons and deepen their understanding and perceptive skills. Grades are an artifice of industrial mass processes, either in academia or in the commercial economy; and what numbers students get as grades should be of a secondary consideration to you - if at all.

"...treat arbitrary students as criminals..." The students are not arbitrarily chosen; they are chosen because there is indication of cheating on their exam. "... or avoid giving out grades...“ I teach in the real world, not in Utopia. "... because as mentioned above, you're hurting the students who did not cheat..." I'm not sure what you're referring to here. "...and what numbers students get as grades should be of secondary consideration to you - if at all" Grades are of secondary consideration to me; they are of primary consideration to most students.

@Dan "arbitrary" is because you have only suspicions, not evidence, that anyone in fact did cheat. And quite likely some honest students' exams will look suspicious, and it is those students who are getting hurt the most.

@Esther The problem is, how can we draw the line between "suspicion" and "evidence"? For example, if the exam is an essay response, and two students' essays are 99% identical, that's evidence of cheating, right? OK, what if they are 80% identical? 50%? 10%? Where do we draw the line?

@Dan it's an indication that cheating happened, but not necessarily of who cheated. Possibly one student was doing their best to be honest and the other student copied off of them without asking/being obvious about it.

@Esther How could the other student copy off of them, without the first student allowing them to? We're talking about online exams here.

ok, true. Online exams are different. But if that's enough evidence for you, flunk both of them on the course and move on (or whatever the policy for cheating at exams is). If it's not enough evidence to consider that they for sure cheated, there is the possibility that they were honest and are getting hurt by this process rather than helped.

"Grades are of secondary consideration to me; they are of primary consideration to most students." <- And it is part of the challenge we face as teachers, to help our students value the knowledge imparted and the learning process above the numbers. Or, at least, to alter the balance of their consideration in that direction. "I teach in the real world, not in Utopia" <- There are pass/fail courses in the real world. There are oral exams in the real world. Also in the real world, students might get you brought up on disciplinary charges for this kind of stunt.

I don't think you have a good likelihood of success with this or with other similar processes. You will have both false positives and false negatives in your analysis, being unfair to lots of people. Some who did well on the original (honestly) will do worse on a face to face interview if they think it is accusatory. Some who did poorly will do a bit more study. You don't have any control.
The problem is your methodology, not the students per se. Yes, some will cheat but you don't have an effective way to detect it or prevent it. Technology has blinded you to that fact. You don't actually have evidence, apparently, about any individual who cheated, nor any way to back it up. You have a "feeling". The solution is not to accuse everyone implicitly and make them prove their innocence. Some of your best students will be offended. It is likely to show up in course evaluations.
If your overall grading scheme is competitive in any way, such as curving, then you have already got an impossible situation.
My best suggestion is that you admit to yourself that you've made an error and just wipe the marks from the book altogether. You could give another exam under more reliable circumstances or find some project that students could do for some marks. I don't care for basing the entire grade on the final but that may be all you are left with.
You don't have to admit your error to the students, but you might want to give them a reason for wiping the marks, making everyone equal again. Discovering that the test was unreliable as a measure of learning is a good reason. If your grading isn't competitive, then this isn't really unfair to anyone. Yes, some will be disappointed that they still have to prove themselves, thinking they already had.

Let me add a personal note. As an undergraduate, long ago, I took a required course outside my math major. I found it very hard. There were five exams during the course. My grades, in order, were F, D, C, B, A. I worked very hard and made progress over the course, of course. Luckily for me the prof didn't just give me the average grade. Even better, he didn't question my honesty just because I improved.

Wiping the marks is unfair and likely a violation of policy as it significantly changes grading from the syllabus. If I were a student, I'd argue that you can't deviate from the syllabus, especially based on unproven suspicions. If somebody else cheated, you need to fully investigate and hold the cheaters accountable according to university policy, not give them a free pass while disadvantaging the people who were honest.

@Buffy Thank you. What error are you referring to? Giving an online exam? Is there an alternative that prevents inappropriate collaboration?

@Dan I think you need to specify what subject or kind of exam it is. Anti-cheat measures for, e.g. math vs English are very different.

@user71659 I have editted my question according to your suggestion. Thank you.

"If your grading isn't competitive, then this isn't really unfair to anyone." - Wasting the students' time and discarding their work seems unfair to those who put in significant effort.

@user71659, in that case, leaving the grades as initially marked is a solution. But, starting an inquisition is not a valid solution, especially when the system itself is flawed. That failure of the system should be the first concern.

@RutherRendommeleigh, students studying intensively isn't really "wasting their time" unless the purpose of the course is marks rather than learning. You don't "discard their work" (i.e. studying), only the, possibly invalid, marks.

@Buffy That reasoning essentially leaves the value judgement of the course up to the students rather than your own, and I doubt the students will see discarding their marks the same as you do. After all, it's their marks, not yours.

@Buffy, since the goal is learning and not marks, why try to stop cheaters? You don't learn by cheating, do you? You only get marks which don't mean anything according to you.

@gnasher729, but the way to stop it is in the exam design, not afterwards when you discover you have a poor design. Insulting some fraction of your class because of suspicion isn't good design or good practice.

I will focus on your mitigation measures here because the ship of exam design has already sailed in your case.
Your solution may sound adequate in theory, but I see some considerable problems in application, which also affect fairness. Some of these depend on the subject, how your student body is composed, etc., so you need to be your own judge whether they apply:

How related is your oral exam to the actual exam?
One extreme would be to check whether the student can explain the solutions they submitted, but then that’s much more easy than coming up with the solutions and they can easily prepare for that.
The other extreme would be to ask general questions on the subject (unrelated to the exam), but then you have an increased variability due to
favourite topics, daily performance, nervousness due to the pending cheating accusation, etc.
And I don’t see things becoming much better in the middle ground between those extremes.

In a related manner:
Where do you draw the line for somebody’s exam score being not reliable?
Letting somebody fail in a short oral exam is a tough decision to make.
How will you decide when somebody is close to the threshold, because that will very likely happen?
This is something you should clearly think about beforehand, and even then it might be very unreliable.
By contrast, evidence of cheating can be very clear cut.
Also consider how likely it is that any of your interviews will allow you to identify a cheater with reasonable certainty.
If I would do something similar, I would expect that chance to be very low, to the extent that I would just avoid the hassle and rather spend my time on something else (e.g., finding solid evidence for cheating in the exams I have).

It appears that you only plan to annul the exam if you detect cheating.
Retrospectively, this may be seen as validating cheating as a strategy.
If you are a bad student at the time of the midterms, cheating in the midterms gives you a free shot to improve your grade.
If you get detected, you either get a bad grade in the final exam (neither winning nor losing) or you get a better grade in the finals (because of learning better, luck, etc.).
Either way, you can only win by cheating.

What about students who underperformed in your online exam, e.g., because they were under constant video surveillance (imagine doing an offline written exam, with the proctor standing right in front of you staring at you the entire time), apparently even with rules about where they could put their hands (some students will spend a considerable amount of their mental capacity on paying attention to this)?
Could such students request an oral exam to annul their bad midterms?
Or could they even benefit from retrospectively admitting to cheating, although they didn’t?
Why have the midterm exams at all, if you only count them if they confirm your offline assessment (or are worse)?
Why not use whatever your offline assessment is?

My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.

Unless you are grading on a curve, the main possible practical disadvantage to honest students will be that their degree or grade is devalued by being obtainable through cheating.
Now, depending on the structure of said degree, cheating at one exam is not getting you the degree, but rather setting you up for bigger failure later (e.g., because you don’t have the prerequisites for more advanced courses).
The problem only arises if a relevant part of your exams is online or if everybody gets the degree and it’s mostly about grades in written exams (which is problematic anyway).
Mind that there are some potential group-psychology issues here if some people cheat and get away with it, but this is really for you to estimate and can be avoided by a clear statement that cheaters did not gain much and you want to avoid extra hurdles for the honest students.

I think in most cases, the only reasonably fair options are (minding that those may be horrible options for other reasons):

Only penalise those where you have clear evidence for cheating with the regular punishment for cheating at an exam (which is hopefully more than annulling the exam).
Annul the exam for everybody.
Make oral exams for everybody and have only those count.

Thank you, I think you make a lot of good points. As far as validating cheating as a strategy, at least there is the fact that many students will have to request confidential recommendation letters from instructors that speak to the students' integrity, so this may limit to what extent students try to game the system for good grades.

Do recommendation letters make it any better? You only shift the problem from grade and degree to recommendation letters (which are after all only a symptom of a system where the degree and grade do not speak for themselves – due to grade inflation, etc.) Is it fair to refuse a recommendation or report cheating in one without allowing the student to react to accusations in due process or they performed badly in your oral degree-validation? Is it fair if a student has worse recommendations on account of performing badly in an online exam because of excessive but pointless security measures?

Good questions. Institutions that students will be applying to sometimes ask teachers to assess the student's integrity with a tick box. How confident do I need to be that a student has or has not cheated, in order to tick anything other than "Do not know"?

I don't see how your first paragraph squares with your last one...

@einpoklum: And I fail to see your dissonance. In the first paragraph I basically state that I won’t talk about what the asker could have done better retrospectively (since they can’t turn back time). In the last one I talk about possible ways to progress in the situation at hand.

Frame challenge: why would you even care?
Mid-term exams are normally a guide to how well students are currently doing. They're just one of several assessment tools, albeit one which lets you put numbers to that assessment instead of just a "gut feel" in the classroom. But they aren't actually something which affects teaching or learning. Nor in most cases do they contribute anything to the student's final grade for the year.
So you screwed up and set them a test which they could maybe cheat on. It happens. There's no long-term consequences though, so suck it up and move on.
You've got the rest of the term to carry on teaching this module. If your gut feel tells you that the exam was unrepresentative of class progress so far, rely more on your gut feel for class progress when you're teaching the rest of the term. And when it comes to the next exams which do count towards their grades, you've learnt a useful lesson in what does and doesn't work.
If the midterm results do count towards their grades though, then of course some people have got a little boost they don't deserve. But then these results are just a small fraction of the final grade, and performance in future exams is going to bring their net result more in line with reality. Over the long term it's not going to help them that much.
But what's really not going to help is a witch hunt. At that point the entire class, to a student, will turn against you. Many students will lodge formal complaints, so your colleagues will also turn against you. If you're really unlucky, you may even get into trouble with whatever governing body oversees your exams or education system. There is literally no way this can end well for you or your institution. All for a crappy little midterm test which doesn't matter.
Why would you even consider this a hill to die on?

I care because the midterm exam is 30% of their semester grade. It seems like you're saying that setting "a test that they could maybe cheat on" means "screwed up". If you know of a cheat-proof online testing method, please share.

@Dan So even they got 80% instead of 40%, for a totally incredible difference, that's only 12 percentage points up or down on the final grade. Enough to get them a B instead of a C, sure, but no more than that. In comparison, if you follow what you plan then the entire class will, guaranteed, hate your guts and you're guaranteed to put off their entire year group from choosing your subject ever again. So again, is that a hill you're prepared to die on?

@Dan And sure I can solve your exam problem. Every student turns their PC or phone camera on, and leaves it on for the duration of the exam, pointed at their face. How has this not occurred to anyone at your school in 3 years of working online?

@Graham it sounds like this is exactly what was done, and OP suspects cheating anyways (which is of course possible, since the students could have been in a chat program with classmates, using Google, using their phone out-of-frame, etc)

This looks very much like preventing piracy in the media industry.
Using a harsh kind of DRM has an ill-fated design as it mostly only annoys honest consumers.

During the next few days, some students will be informed by subject teachers that there is indication of academic dishonesty in their midterm exam

That does not look fair to me. As the selection will always be tainted with your bias. It isn't humanly possible to do without. And you'll even think that you'll be more fair to honest students.
A fair way might be to tell your students upfront that there will be a survey of 30% randomly chosen students that will have an extra oral interview to explain their paper.
Therefore, each student will need to understand what they are writing, even when cheating. And that is the desired outcome anyway!
Just be sure to have a very provable non-biased random selection process, that you can show in case someone complains. After the fact, you don't even need to interview 30%, but a smaller number if time doesn't permit.
The fair idea being that every student shall have a reasonable doubt about being subject to be interviewed later.

I like the deterrence aspect of this approach, but requiring a random subset of the class to pass an oral exam in order to keep their written exam result doesn't strike me as "fair". It's like randomly choosing a runner in a race to wear a heavy backpack - "fair" in the sense that everyone had an equal chance to have the obstacle, but not so "fair" from the perspective of the person actually chosen.

Well.. to me it is as fair as the fact the exam itself is only a survey of all the knowledge of the program... And if it was me and a one off, i wouldn't even bother doing the oral

As far as school policy: Before the midterm exams, the students were given a set of rules and consequences about the midterm exams: camera and microphone activated, hands visible, etc. But these rules cannot completely prevent cheating.

You were aware that the rules - as in place - cannot completely prevent cheating. Unless you have proof or at least a strong, reasonable suspicion ("They always had a bad grade, now they have a good one" is not enough - "Ten people wrote the same 100% identical sentences several times" probably is) to call a student you would be very unfair to them.

It most certainly is not fair. If you think someone has done something against your schools policy you bring evidence forth and you give him/her a chance to defend him or herself in whatever tribunal your institution has for dealing with academic dishonesty. You don't have the right to expect people to prove there innocence to you.
It just seems like you want to make accusations but you have insufficient evidence so you want to fish for an admission of guilt. I hope you are willing to explain at the discrimination hearing that will inevitably follow why if you had evidence of misconduct why you did not use the appropriate channels that are there to deal with it.


text:
How does PhD funding work in the UK?
I am an undergraduate who is interested in doing a PhD in the UK in the future. I am aware that there is funding for living costs, tuition fees and travel costs. But if a PhD student is self-funded, do they fund their own research too? Or will the university pay for the research cost?

The answer is that it totally depends on the institution, department, study area etc. get in contact with some departments and get a flavour that way

Although the exact answer depends on the Department, in general, self-funded students do not have automatic support from University or Department in relation to their research expenses. In the UK, PhD studies are considered training and hence a service to the student. PhD is not a job, but a period of learning. The contributions that students make to the Departmental research are not usually appreciated or properly considered in policy-level discussions. As a consequence, self-funded students often are not supported at University level. They may be supported by their Department or supervisor, on an individual level, rather than systematically.
Depending on the field, the supervisor might be able and interested to cover some of the research expenses incurred by the student. For example, if a PhD topic heavily rely on computations, access to HPC would be required. Some Universities charge academic staff for access to their computing resources (after charging overheads to grants won by academic staff). The student could struggle to pay these fees due to admin and financial constraints. A simple solution would be for supervisor to cover these costs from their own grant or computational budget.
Other expenses, like conference attendance, are also considerable, but often not something a supervisor would cover.

Universities/departments often have internal 'grant' schemes that students can apply to for small amounts of money to support travel and other research expenses. However, this is usually quite limited - a typical grant might be in the £1-5k range.