text:
How to cite from a paper using a different citation style?
When writing a paper where you are citing from another paper which uses a different citation style, how should one cite portions of text that contain in-text citations? For example

“Malnutrition has often been referred to as “the skeleton in the hospital closet”, as it is often overlooked, under-diagnosed, and untreated [69,70].Despite this, the negative consequences of malnutrition have been widely reported..." (Barker, Grout & Crowe, 2011).

An alternative format would be

"Malnutrition has often been referred to as "the skeleton in the hospital closet" , as it is often overlooked, under-diagnosed, and untreated (McKee, 2011; Busby, 2008; in Barker, Grout, & Crowe, 2011). Despite this...."( Barker, Grout, & Crowe, 2011).

This seems an awkward and redundant solution. Would this be considered correct for APA style? What about other citation styles; MLA,etc.?

Are you quoting their text verbatim?  If yes, is [69, 70] going to be of any use to the reader?

Coming from the standpoint of logic, I'd translate the quotation's references to your own style and put those references in your bibliography.
The other option could be  to say "Citing Smith (2011), Barker, Grout & Crowe (2011) state that 'malnutrition has often been referred to...'. Thus, removing the awkward references from the quotation.

Echoing the other good comments and answer, I'd encourage you to think in terms of "forthrightness", rather than compliance to semi-random formal criteria. Think of the function of your citations, and thinking of the idealized version of scholarship and such. The goal is not conformity to style guides, but useful contributions to human knowledge, blah-blah-blah, ;) But, yes, that should be the way to think about such questions.
To my taste, citations in-line should be sufficient so that the reader does not have to "flip to the end" to see what "[46]" is. The space spent on fuller references is a good investment!!!
That is, yet again, if one thinks that the function of one's writing is to help the reader, all in-line references would be optimally helpful, as opposed to "proper-and-possibly-unhelpful".

Why not rephrase it, and quote each source properly? Like this:

McKee (2011), Busby (2008) and in Barker, Grout, & Crowe (2011) wrote that “Malnutrition has often been referred to as 'the skeleton in the hospital closet', as it is often overlooked, under-diagnosed, and untreated". To this, in Barker, Grout & Crowe added that "Despite this, the negative consequences of malnutrition have been widely reported...".

In a way, you are quoting McKee at al., so it is only proper to cite them properly, and thus have them in your references.

If you use the right bibtex package, you can instead do the second citation as Barker, Grout & Crowe (2011) automatically. It reads better.

@Suresh  I'm not so sure that the OP is using TeX.

Nevertheless, "(McKee 2011) wrote X" is (common) bad style for "McKee (2011) wrote X". How to support the right style with software is a separate problem. I've queued up an edit.

@Blaisorblade My answer kept the OP's citation style, which is not the topic here. I think that changing it drags some of the attention away from the point of my answer.

@VedranŠego That's the same citation style; in that style, some rephrasings (like the one you did) require adjusting citations. The OP's citations are correct. See answers to https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/16598/8966.


text:
Responsibility/ethics of startups during graduate studies
It's a common meme that people often embark on and develop business projects while in graduate school. However, it's unclear how frequently this actually happens in "real life".
More importantly, how responsible/ethical a choice is it, in say, a funded PhD program? I know that typically there is a guideline for hours worked for such a position, but that's almost a joke in comparison to implicit requirements like standards of research quality and publication rate.
Assume that you are a student earnestly engaged in both the PhD topic and an unrelated side project, and you want both the PhD and the business to succeed (i.e., graduate, publish, launch side project as successful startup). To me it seems like the worst-case scenario in that situation would be running into a tough problem in research, while still putting in occasional hours on the side project, as that would look terrible.
I'd also like to hear about the details. How/when to disclose? How to maintain rapport with advisor? What are the ethical concerns? Is this feasible? How do these goofballs in the success stories get away with this? ;)

I can't really provide a well-informed answer, but presumably this will only really work if your business and your thesis are very, very closely related. That is, your thesis is basically the core product of your company.

Also, is this a "common meme"? Here in Europe, I would consider it extremely uncommon to found a company while still in grad school. Most startups /spin-offs here get launched by senior staff, afaik.

It may not be a common event, but it's sure a common meme. Evidence shows it's penetrated Japan as well; the KDDI business plan competition has a section just for those matriculating simultaneous to their dev work.

Well, I did something like that, and I must say it eats up all your time. As said in one of the comments, it is only likely to succeed, if there is a close relation between thesis and company, otherwise you won't find enough time for both of them and fail.
If your thesis is closely related, you should inform your advisor very early in the process, because most advisors think all ideas emerging from their institution are their ideas or at least inspired by them. Despite of that, a good advisor could open some doors and be of help.
Legally, you might even be forced to do this (depending on the situationin your country), e.g. in Germany most contracts do not allow side business without anouncement to your employer. Of course, as long as it can be considered a hobby, noone can sue you for that.
You do a great job if the PhD-programm can sell it as a success story, because their funded project resulted in a new start-up.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Any way to get credit for publications that I drafted as a fellow for a law professor?
Since I graduated from law school almost ten years ago, I have been working as a fellow for a law professor at a US law school. In that time, I have drafted over 25 articles and book chapters, but only been listed as a co-author on 8. I don't begrudge this split: The Prof has the established name and, in every instance, she has sat me down, outlined what she wants to cover, and then made comments and requested revisions on every draft I produce, but I have always done 90% or more of the actual writing. I greatly appreciate the confidence she has shown in my writing abilities and am just not sure how to convey this on my CV/job applications. My position is ending and I'm applying for new jobs that, in many cases, are looking for expertise in areas on which I've researched and written extensively, just not under my name. Is there any accepted way/format to mention publications one has drafted/contributed to without receiving formal authorship credit?

What you are describing is actually ethical misconduct. If you were the primary drafter of an article, then you should have been listed as an author on those papers; the fact that you have not is inexcusable on the part of the professor. In the scientific world, such a revelation coming to light would be sufficient grounds for retraction of the articles in question.
So right now, the problem is that if you try to claim ownership, you may be creating a lot of problems. I don't know what the right solution is, but you should definitely talk with someone at your law school such as an ombudsperson before talking to your advisor. The last thing you need right now is having a former advisor who can "spike" letters of recommendation.

TED, I agree with aeismail is an ethical misconduct, but it is difficult to judge your professor: even you wrote the paper, it depends from your contract; eg if you were payed as "ghost writer" or "technical professionist" or "translator" and you didn't partecipate to research or discussion, you can not expect too much. I do not think it's your case ....
Anyway: yes I have seen in some cv a sentence like

"I participated in the works and project a, b, c as a technician expert and/or reviewer "

He was a fellow, which would make him a staff member, not a "hired hand." In the sciences, it would be like a research professor or post-doc.

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


text:
Does timing of emails matter?
I wonder: everyone in academia handles a lot of email, on all aspects of their work. I mean, emails about conferences, emails about journals and papers, emails about research, teaching, supervized students, and so on. So if you have a big announcement to send to many people (eg seminar or conference) does it matter WHEN you send it? I mean, is it better to send it on Wednesday afternoon (middle of the week) rather than Saturday evening (middle of week end)? I imagine if people receive the email at time they are busy they possibly will overlook it.

First, I don't think it makes much difference. Researchers deal with information, and a lot of that information is communicated through emails nowadays. So, most researchers I know are very careful about their emails and read them thoroughly. Especially if you write to people who know you, your name should be enough for them to read your email through anyway.
But, I can understand if you have an important announcement to make to a large list of people (who don't all know you personally), you may want to “micro-optimize” this. I have done it in the past: having a call-for-papers email ready on Saturday, and waiting ’til Monday afternoon (US time) to send it, thinking people who read it with a fresh mind, and not alongside the batch of “week-end email” that they might triage on Monday morning. (Some people stay connected during week-ends, of course, and for those it makes no matter.)

Marketing experts advise to send emails on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. They also advise to send the email early in the morning, so that they will be at the top of the pile for those that check their emails right after waking up/arriving at the office.
Sunday afternoon is also a good choice. If the receiver reads emails during the weekend, you will be one in a very few, and if the mail is read on Monday, it will be at the top of the pile.

My short answer is that I only send important email within working hours avoid early morning late afternoon hours. I usually get a very high reply rate with this technique as opposed to send email at midnight.

Is it reasonable to expect the recipients of "big announcement ... to many people" to all be within the same timezone? It is always midnight somewhere on this earth.

@WillieWong Technically, you're right.  However, if you are sending a conference announcement (for example), you are most likely targeting primarily either North America or Europe or Asia or Australia...  You will not get everyone, but often 80% of your target audience will be in a handful of timezones.

@DanC The handful of timezones is actually around the globe. My time zone is Asia Pacific, UTC + 8. Monday morning 11 am US East (EST) is my Monday midnight. My current time 11:30 am is UTC 3:30 am.


text:
Can a master's thesis still be good if it lacks demonstrable results?
I am currently writing my master's thesis, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it will not be very good. This is partly because I have been unable to test the system I propose in the thesis properly, because testing it involves test cases that has to be manually performed, and I simply haven't got the time/resources/mental sanity to do more than a handful of them.
The problem is that having little testing could be viewed as a large, weak point in my thesis, and is easily attackable when I shall defend it.
My thesis is about detecting malware that requires human interaction (hence the testing difficulty), and by looking at some indicators I can determine what is malware and what is not. But my fear is that these results won't be very generalizable because of the small sample size. So my question is then: can a master thesis still be good if the presented results only cover a laughably small sample size?

Aaaand if someone were wondering, my master's thesis did actually turn out very well, and I got a nice grade. :-) It seems that the sample size was not an issue after all.

My Masters project (synthetic chemistry) didn't actually generate results other than failure and black goop (so nothing novel!) until the last two weeks of time I had in the lab, and even then, there was insufficient purity and quantity of my compound to do a complete 'standard' panel of analysis. It was the 4th year of an integrated BSc/Msci course, was graded including a viva and I achieved a mid 2.1.
The main purpose of a research Masters, at least in chemistry, is to accustom you to 'proper' research methods, while allowing you to pursue something novel and to demonstrate your ability to conduct research to a sufficient standard. In my cohort there was typically a tradeoff between novelty of project and quality of results, where one forgave the lack of the other.
As long as your thesis is written with an awareness of its deficits (aims far loftier/broader than the time/resources available sounds like a good start!) and you write good further work and conclusion sections where you tie this awareness in, making sensible conclusions and observations on the few cases you have achieved, I think it is definitely possible to write a good one! As Paul indicated above, you should discuss these concerns with your supervisor and possibly head of class (or equivalent). I am sure they will have dealt with someone with your concerns and circumstances before.

Usually, there is not enough time during a Master to do a full proper analysis. You should prove that you are capable of doing the work, and show that you know the problems and how to overcome them. Consider that in many cases, a master's project is used by the supervisor to check if there is potential for a PhD, where it would be done properly.

Good enough to publish your results: Most likely no.  Unless low sample sizes are typical of the research papers in the same field trying to collect similar data, you can't expect lack of results to be publishable.
Good enough to still pass with your masters degree: maybe...  It's up to your committee to decide.  You need to discuss this with your advisor and committee members ahead of time.

can a master thesis still be good if the presented results only cover a laughably small sample size?

It might be, if you can show a significant improvement over existing methods for said samples. If you can't do anything special with your "labour intensive" technique, it seems to have little merit.

The technique itself is not "labor intensive," testing it in the scenario it's designed for (human interaction) is.


text:
What are the things one should consider while defending a PhD thesis, especially when the two examiners have completely different comments?
I am a completing Ph.D student. I submitted my thesis 4 months ago and have recently received the comments from the examiners. But to my surprise, two examiners have provided entirely different comments. One of the reviewers has appraised my thesis and congratulated on my work while the other has given intense/critical and harsh comments saying that the thesis may need some more work to be of a standard quality. I learned that the second reviewer who has provided extended comments will be attending in person for my oral exam. Could you please give me tips on how to appear confident and prepare in the best way possible. Most of the comments seem genuine but there are comments where he is beyond the objectives of my study.
Your help would be highly appreciated.
Thank you.

You talk to your thesis advisor and do what s/he says. S/he'll be responsible for leading (or at least framing the) oral examination and working with the examiners to make sure that you get final approval.
None of us know you or your research or the needs of your university or department, the character and reputation of the examiners involved, and so forth -- you need a local expert.

Yes, I had a discussion with my primary supervisor and it looks that keeping calm and providing justification with confidence is the way to deal during the defense. However, I was wondering about some of the starting phrases while responding to the examiner's questions. Especially, when the it is a difficult question or the examiner identified something that I missed to include in my thesis.

The format and nature of the oral examination vary enormously by country. RoboKaren's description of an oral examination would be very unusual in the UK (where it is customary for the supervisor to not be present, except maybe at the very end when the examiners deliver their verdict).
To answer your question: you should be candid about the weaknesses in your work, and prepared to explain why you made the decisions you made. You should also be prepared to explain in detail why you did not pursue a particular methodology or why you did not give much attention to a given perspective. Examiners will almost certainly ask "why did you not consider X?" or "Y is really important; why did you mention it only once in the whole thesis?". Possible approaches to answering such questions:

explain that your data and sources are insufficient to enable an authoritative answer;
explain that you do not have enough space to explore the topic X in a thesis primarily about topic Z;
explain that you were concerned that a superficial treatment of topic X might come across as too polemical/biased, and might end up being misused as a political football (or result in others attributing approaches/beliefs to you that you do not hold) -- you are determined to avoid bias, and do not feel that your research qualifies you to tackle topic X with reasonable objectivity;
demonstrate that you realise that topics X and Y are important, but only two among many important topics that could have been mentioned -- outline some more examples A, B, C, D, &c., and explain you could not see a case for why X and Y had to be included in detail;
explain why topics X and Y are beyond the scope of the research questions you articulated in the thesis (and promise to add a footnote mentioning them briefly, plus a few cross-references to the literature).

Part of writing a coherent thesis is circumscribing the topic whilst also signposting other potential directions.
And finally, where you encounter weaknesses, find ways to make them interesting and turn them into strengths (e.g.: the data were inconclusive, but they raised some interesting questions on how we define success in phenomenon P).

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


text:
Negotiating mathematics postdoc salary when having an offer with higher salary
I recently won an NSF mathematical Science Postdoctoral Research Fellowship at University 1. At this University, the math NSF postdocs have a have a much lower salary and benefits than regular "named postdocs" (XYZ Assistant Professor)and during their 2 years of half-time NSF support teach two thirds the amount (despite only half the salary coming from the university). I did not get a regular postdoc offer from Uni 1.
At the same time, I have a 3 year postdoc offer from a fancy institute at US University 2, with significantly higher salary than regular postdocs at Uni 1 (which is already much higher than NSF postdocs at Uni 1), more travel funding than the NSF MSPRF, and NO teaching unless I want to.
Research wise, Uni 1 is a better fit.
Would it be reasonable for me to leverage the Uni 2 offer to perhaps convince Uni 1 to raise my salary during my NSF postdoc there to the level of their regular postdocs and maybe give me the title of a regular postdoc at Uni 1 for one or two years when I am there?
Or perhaps reduction in the number of courses I have to teach?
If so, does one go about it?

While I like the question, I would propose to make it more general. E.g., the underlying problem seems to be: "How to negotiate with University A using a better offer from University B, given that you actually want to go to A", right?

Are the two universities in places with similar costs of living?  If not, the salary difference might not mean a whole lot.

I think if you negotiate by leveraging a higher salary somewhere else, you need to be prepared to actually leave. Don't make empty threats. The extra salary and other pluses must be worth for you to go to the other place (taking all possible downsides of changing) if Uni 1 does not budge.

@CaptainEmacs -- absolutely correct. First rule of negotiating -- you have to be willing to walk away. If you're not, and your adversary sees this, you have no real negotiating power at all, so all you can do is bluff and hope.

Try it and let us know what happens.

I think that there is a difference between University 1 wanting you, and having you because you come with an NSF. That makes a huge difference in whether you can leverage for a higher salary or not.
The fact that University 1 did not offer you their regular postdoc title sounds like a hint to me that they will probably not be up for negotiation. Though, it doesn't hurt to try.

Yes, you can try to negotiate but be prepared for the possibility that your requests won't be met and you'll have to resort to accepting the offer from University 2.
The simplest way to start negotiations is just to write to the department chair at University 1 (possibly with a cc to the professor you are interested in working with) and to say that you are very much interested in going there (with a clear explanation why) but, "regrettably" would have to accept a better offer unless the terms are at least partially matched, then to state explicitly the terms of that better offer and stop there. Then the headache of deciding how much to upgrade the offer will be theirs and the only message you'll be sending will be that the current terms are not acceptable for you (which, from what you've said, seems to be the case anyway). The rest depends on how they respond (if they respond at all).

I question the "fit" with uni 1. The postdoc is a glorified teaching job, with a load that seriously compromises academic output i.e. further career prospects.
Uni 2 on the other hand seems to have everything going for it.
Without wishing to seem rude, I suspect the "fit" here consists of factors such as: partner lives in that town, want to stay there; research is same topic as PhD; really like the idea of working with academic X... Such considerations can all have some legitimacy, but they are factors young academics systematically overrate.


text:
How to write a teaching statement without any classroom teaching experience?
I have a friend who is applying for teaching positions in biochemistry with no teaching experience. She has a strong research background, with several publications as a grad student and post doc, but is interested in transitioning into teaching (partially to gain employment and solve a two body problem, but also out of genuine interest). The position she is applying for asks for a "Statement of teaching interest". While, I think I can give good advice for someone who has taught before, what should someone write about if they have never taught or TAed a class. She does have some background tutoring and showing faculty, grad students, and undergrads how to use various machines in the lab. But that is about it. So
(1) What is a "statement of teaching interest?" How does it differ from a "teaching philosophy" or a "teaching statement"?
and
(2) How does one write this statement without any classroom teaching experience?

@BenCrowell I generally agree with this comment, but it should be noted that at many of these so called "teaching schools" a person with say 2 publications and extensive quality teaching may be looked upon worse than someone with 10 publications with no teaching experience. It even says on the website, we highly encourage our professors to continue doing research (despite this being a "teaching school"). Unfortunately, the way things are headed, many teaching schools are starting to view the research as a first priority and the teaching as a second priority.

(1) What is a "statement of teaching interest?" How does it differ from a "teaching philosophy" or a "teaching statement"?

I would guess that all three quoted phrases mean the same thing.  The "teaching statement" is not as formalized a genre as the sonnet: there is a range of reasonable responses, and to my ear all three things are asking for the same range.
Of course, if one is especially interested in a specific teaching position it would be better not to guess but to inquire what they mean.  I don't see any reason to be shy about that: just ask politely.

(2) How does one write this statement without any classroom teaching experience?

Others have given some advice on this.  It is certainly possible to literally write a teaching statement without any teaching experience -- one talks about one's teaching philosophy, teaching goals, and so forth, while not mentioning the experiences that one hasn't had.  It's not like they're asking for the secret masonic handshake: anyone who has gotten a PhD has certainly experienced enough teaching to be able to write about it intelligibly (let me assume that someone who has gotten a PhD has learned to write intelligibly on academic matters!).
However, isn't there another key question here?  Namely:

(3) What are the chances that someone who has absolutely no teaching or TAing experience whatsoever will be seriously considered for a faculty position with emphasis on teaching?

I can answer this question from the perspective of a math department at a research university: it is very likely that I would not seriously consider any such candidate.  Let me explain.  "Even" at a research university, teaching is a big part of the job -- roughly half, according to university directives -- and someone who is a truly unsatisfactory teacher is going to be an eternal liability and problem.  Well, you say, what if they are a truly outstanding researcher -- can't they learn to teach?  It doesn't really work for me.  If by "truly outstanding researcher" you mean that they've proven the Weil Conjectures, then they deserve to be at a truly top place which can afford to have faculty who literally never teach, or who only teach graduate seminars to their own brilliant students.  Any candidate like that is not going to come to my public research university, and if anything still less is she going to go to a teaching college.  If someone is simply a strong enough researcher that I would otherwise be very pleased to hire her, then her complete lack of teaching experience creates an insurmountable fairness issue when one compares her to other candidates with similar or moderately worse research profiles but who have devoted a substantial amount of time and energy over the years to teaching.  Even serious research mathematicians work hard to be competent teachers: it takes time and energy.  Sometimes people have less than stellar teaching, and it really can ding them a bit even at a "serious research university".  Someone with no teaching has to get a zero averaged in to her total grade, so to speak.
I explained how it goes for mathematics at a research university.  The OP's candidate is changed twice: from mathematics to biochemistry, and from a research university to a teaching college.  From what I've heard on this site, teaching experience is valued significantly less in the non-mathematical sciences than in mathematics.  On the other hand, I happen to know that teaching experience and credentials are valued way more highly in teaching colleges than at research universities: though I think of myself as a "serious teaching guy", when I visit a colleague at such a place I feel like I am hiding in a foxhole doing math all day compared to them.  Moreover smaller places are smaller, so the "ethos of the college" is something which is more strongly felt by all, whereas being a scientist at a research university is almost a different job from being a humanities professor at a research university.  My best guess: there is little chance that someone without any teaching experience will get any real consideration at a reputable teaching college.
So I would say to the OP: if your friend wants this job, it's not about how to write the teaching statement, it's about how she can acquire some actual teaching experience.  One semester of good evaluations in any reputable post high school academic institution would make a world of difference.  If she's not willing to acquire that, is she really that serious about a teaching career?  Compared to the other candidates, I mean?
Two final points:
I. I do not want to leave the impression that one should write a "teaching statement" that hides the fact that someone has no teaching experience.  Although this should come out elsewhere in the application -- e.g. on the CV -- in my view it would be dishonest not to at least remark on this in the statement itself.
II. Others have counseled that a teaching statement should "[l]ook at what the professionals say about teaching" and "use pedagogy literature".  This is good advice, but it can be misapplied.  Namely, you need to have real understanding and ideally mastery of anything you talk about in these job applications.  Most people know not to talk about locally ringed topoi in their research statements if they do not want to get asked what a locally ringed topos is in an interview.  However, at least in my line of work, it is something of a cliche that young people "use pedagogy literature" to the extent of absorbing some trendy buzzwords, which they then misuse.  If you talk about flipped classrooms, IBL and so forth and reveal that you don't fully understand what these terms mean, that is so much worse than not using them at all.
In fact at my research university (it is a bit different at teaching colleges, I happen to know) most of the faculty are not familiar with the pedagogy literature, and if I'm honest, some people pride themselves on the conjunction of that ignorance and their superior teaching.  I don't think pedagogical literature is BS (or not all BS, anyway; every branch of academic literature has some BS), and I do believe that if you actually learn these ideas and articulate them properly and well it will be to your credit.  But be careful.  Also be aware that the trendy technique that one committee member might like might make another one roll her eyes.  So a good teaching statement succeeds independently of its use of this kind of terminology and ideas.

It should be noted that chemistry is very different from math. For example one college has a position open in both math and chemistry. The math job posting is much more teaching centric than the chemistry one. In fact the chemistry one explicitly says "Postdoctoral and/or teaching experience is preferred", while the math one says "Experience teaching courses in undergraduate mathematics with evidence of strong teaching/pedagogical skills, required."

In math most colleges would expect you to teach almost any undergraduate course the department offers. In chemistry you only teach a single upper division course in your specialty (at least at this school).

@MHH: I agree that chemistry is very different from math (I included that in my answer).  Is your friend really only applying to one school?  (Yikes.)  If so, it might be helpful to name a cognate school in a different part of the country.  When you said "teaching position" I assumed you meant "teaching college" or "liberal arts college".  I just checked that the Chemistry department at Willamette University (a good, small liberal arts college that I visited) has about the same number of faculty as the math department and the faculty there teach a wide range of courses.

If by "teaching position" you just mean "position at a research university that has some teaching obligations" then some of what I said certainly doesn't apply in this case.

By the way, I'm not sure whether it matters but "In math most colleges would expect you to teach almost any undergraduate course the department offers." would be true at a liberal arts college but not a research university.  If by "upper division" you mean junior/senior level courses, then the number of distinct upper division courses I've taught in eight years at my university is...1.  (Next year, 2.)  Number of courses that I suppose could teach if I really wanted to but would make everyone happier if I never did: at least 7/18.  (I didn't take any of these courses as a student.)

yes, while the few colleges she is applying for are teaching colleges, they seem to feed into medical schools and bio-medical research, so it's possible that at these few schools the chemistry/cellular biology departments are more like a research university, while other departments are more like liberal arts schools.

Well, as I said this is outside of my direct experience.  I have to say that "Postdoctoral and/or teaching experience is preferred" sounds almost vacuous to me: will there really be any applicants who have neither postdoctoral nor teaching experience??  Well, if it's an adjunct-type position where liasons to industry could be directly helpful, perhaps...Anyway, I've tried to be clear about what I know and what I don't.  That's all I can really do here.

will there really be any applicants who have neither postdoctoral nor teaching experience? — I see that you've never run a faculty search.  Yes, there will be utterly unqualified applicants.

@JeffE:  I've read well over a thousand tenure-track job applications.  I remember one applicant whom someone wanted to consider, and it turned out that he had never been an instructor of record. That was the end of that.  Disposing of applicants to our department who had no teaching experience whatsoever and no postdocs would remove less than one percent of our applicants.  Putting something in your job posting that more than 99% of your applicants satisfy does indeed seem "almost vacuous".

I do take universal quantification seriously.  I almost wrote "many", but I couldn't recall even one such application.  Upon reflection, it seems likely that there is probably such an applicant every few hundred times or so...but these are not the applications that get read thoroughly enough to catch points like this.  "I see that you've never run a faculty search."  No one faculty member in my department runs the search, but I have been very active over the years, and I am now the chair of our Personnel Committee.  If you want to know about my experiences, please ask.

@PeteL.Clark Hmmm ... I was going to hypothesize that the difference might be the level of the university you review the applications for, but both of your schools have very good math departments, so I am a bit surprised by the difference.

@MHH: If you are comparing UGA and UIUC: JeffE is speaking about the CS department.  Only in my dreams is the UGA math department anywhere near as highly ranked as the UIUC CS department, but I have learned recently on this site that the amount of pre-tenure track teaching preparation that is standard in mathematics is much, much greater than for other STEM fields, including CS.  That strikes me as the most likely explanation for the difference.

Answering 2 (though perhaps this is more relevant for a teaching philosophy statement): there are a number of resources you could use, but the key challenge is writing something that feels right for you. I would do the following:
1) Write your own version of a teaching statement. What do you feel about teaching? How would you approach it? What does it mean to you? What teaching experiences (as a student, for instance) have really influenced you?
2) Find out what other teaching statements say. You can readily find teaching statements by googling. Lots of people looking for jobs have theirs online. Highlight phrases that appeal to you. (Avoid copying at all cost.)
3) Look what the professionals say about teaching. For example, a book like Teaching for Quality Learning at University  by John Biggs and Catherine Tang gives one very modern view on how it should be done. The approach differed significantly from how my lecturers approached teaching.
Perhaps even consult latest research. I always get surprised and get ideas when I read the teaching research literature.
4) Revisit the teaching statement you wrote in 1).


text:
Is there such a thing as too much work for a Master's Thesis?
My thesis  (Canadian Research Based, Computer Science), collects three separate research projects (with a tenuous connecting thread).
While collating these projects into a single document, I have looked into other theses coming out of my university and others in my field, and have realized that it's looking like my thesis is going to be very large. Probably twice the average length of others in my field.
Which makes me wonder: Did I do too much work for a thesis? Should I have pushed my supervisor, cancelled the final proposed project (#3) and graduated on the strength of the first two?
I'll be graduating 6 months after my target deadline, with multiple publications, and so burnt out that my initial plan to pursue a PhD has collapsed. Can't change the past, so I'm asking here mostly out of curiosity, and for other future students.

Never judge the amount of work by the pagecount. Also, even say you had been able to push your supervisor to graduate you on the strength of the first two projects, you'd have lost a valuable learning opportunity which will presumably serve you well at some point in the future.

It is not clear how to judge the "size" of a thesis (page length or word count is probably not very good), but one can clearly do too much research for a Masters or Doctorate. That said a factor of two difference is not really that big since there is always going to be a healthy overlap between the "largest" Master thesis and the "smallest" PhD thesis. If your Masters thesis is larger than the average PhD thesis and larger than the vast majority of Masters theses, then it is possibly too large.
As a student you need to be asking yourself why you are getting the qualification. Most students put in much more work than that which is required to simply graduate. You should make sure you push your supervisor to help you achieve your goals.

Indeed. I don't feel like it was a bad choice to pursue project #3, but I was more curious if I over-committed.

It is hard for me to understand some of your thinking. If your MSc thesis has already resulted in "multiple" publications, that means that you are actually closer to getting a PHD than most of your co-students, who have to start from scratch. A few weeks of rest, should be sufficient for you to actually recover from your "burnout", although it is quite unusual for students to actually refer to burnout from a MSC thesis. As multiple others (before me) have stated, the stress in a REAL job could be several orders of magnitude larger than the stress related with a bachelor or MSc degree (PHD is another case altogether). Also, the fact that a MSc thesis has provided multiple publications is also a good indicator that a) your supervisor knows what he is doing (which is a huge PLUS) b) you probably have what it takes to actually be successful in a future PHD.
Still, if you found the work for your thesis boring, stressful or simply too much for you, perhaps a PHD is not for you (and vice-versa). So, think it over (after some weeks of rest) on what you actually want. I am sure you will make the right choice (whatever that is) for you.

As with many questions in academia, the answer is "It depends."
Too much is a subjective term, but I think it probable that you did not put too much work into your thesis, in that the extra work should not cause the work to be of lesser quality, nor should you be judged negatively on the basis of having a larger than average thesis. Although there are limits as to how much extra work is beneficial and how much may be perceived as an attempt at padding; in general, having done more research will be a plus no matter what your plans for the future.
However--and this is the 'it depends' part--you have probably put too much work into the thesis if the following apply to you.

You have lost the continuity and focus of your work. (How tenuous is the connection between your several projects? Is it a long stretch to connect them in the same work, or are they just  different views/portions of the same problem?)
You had to neglect other important aspects of your life to complete the third project.
You have done research that would better have waited for the PhD program. (This point is debatable; the amount of work that is needed for a successful PhD thesis is a hotly debated topic, and it is not clear whether it is generally an advantage to have done doctoral level research now.)
You are facing a long-term burnout as a result of over-work during your Master thesis. Don't jump to this conclusion too quickly--take some time off, and give yourself permission to do absolutely nothing except be lazy and have fun. Even a week of this total vacation can do wonders to relieve the stress that we over-achievers put on ourselves!

Ultimately only you can decide whether or not you have put in too much work on your Master's thesis. But before you decide that this is the case (and also before you give up on attaining a PhD), take a break, recuperate, and give yourself a chance to see the world through less-stressed eyes!


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

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

Is your source recreating a form that is already very common?  Then you don't need to cite it, as you could have taken it from a dozen other places and it would have looked the same.  You might want to search for the original invention of the representation, although if it's very common this becomes somewhat exaggerated (I cited Mollweide (1805) for the Mollweide projection, but most people wouldn't).
Is the representation that your source uses a new one?  In other words, is it original work created by the author of your source?  Then you should cite/acknowledge it or you might be accused of plagiarism or even copyright violations.
When in doubt, I would cite the source.  If you cite where it wasn't really necessary, consequences are minimal.  At worst people will think “why did she add a citation for something trivial/obvious?”.  However, if you fail to cite where you should have, consequences could be quite severe.

The general form (using this type of representation) is quite common, the specific form (color scheme, shapes used) is not. I believe that my source created their images themselves, but they did not come up with the idea of the representation.

@LSchoon If you needlessly cite them, worst that can happen is that some people will find it an odd citation (Someone cited a paper by my colleague for an extremely generic statement like clouds have spatial structure).  If you don't cite them where you should have, consequences could be far worse.  So in doubt, cite.

In my thesis, I drew some figures (diagrams) and created some tables based on published figures.  The caption in each case ended with something like "Based on a table from reference 42." or in one case "Based on figures from references 23 and 42."
There's never any harm in giving credit where it's due; there's often harm in letting people think you did stuff yourself if you didn't.
To contrast, data figures where I didn't collect the data were generally scanned from the source publication and cited clearly in the form "Figure from reference 17."  One or two data figures were obtained directly from the author electronically, and were similarly cited.


text:
First impressions: CV or research statement?
When hiring PhD students, what document is used most frequently for a 'first impression': the CV or the research statement/statement of purpose?
Context: I am currently in the process of applying to several PhD positions. A constant factor seems to be the necessity to submit both a CV and a research statement-like letter. As I can imagine professors who get a lot of submissions cannot read all submitted documents entirely, I was wondering which document would be used more as a first impression, and which one as a more detailed insight into the candidate?

My guess is that it would depend on the individual. Some prefer to look at CV, others at the statement, and others prefer whatever happens to come up first. Personally, I think I'd look at the main degree and university on the CV (to give me a quick impression on the candidate's background), and the statement second.

I have to admit that I can't stand statements of purpose. In the past, they were totally unknown in my country, but nowadays, sadly, they are becoming increasingly common in the PhD admission process. Sadly, because I don't think there has been any improvement in the selection process after the introduction of the statement of purpose.

Not posting as an answer because I haven't done academic PhD student hiring, but in industry the CV is by far the more important document. Half of the "statement of purpose" documents that we get sent are simply ignored, and the other half glanced at. The CV is the universal document used to advertise oneself. Again, though, that's industry. Not sure if that's the case in academic hiring.

The first impression is, ideally, when you first talked with a prospective adviser and/or researchers in the department or lab before applying. Some people have small interviews (such as by phone or Skype) before application time, and it varies by person whether or not anyone will have even seen a statement or CV before/during this process. This naturally varies by region and field, but this is not uncommon in the US.
Naturally this is not always possible, in which case you'll just have submitted an entire application packet and have no control of the first impression - so literally anything you submit with the package could be  the first thing a member of the admissions committee sees.
The typical routine is that an administrative department (generally "admissions" or a "graduate studies" coordinator) collects all the materials and puts all the information into files. Admissions committees then generally split up the applicants into sets and distribute them to individuals on the committee, with usually 2-3 people reviewing each applicant. It seems this particular handling of the process is very common (I've heard it from dozens of people in different fields throughout the US).
The first read varies by committee member, and it seems that absolutely everyone has their own weightings and order in which they review packets. Some professors say they think the  personal/research statement is silly and the first thing they look at is the reference letters. Meanwhile some say they look at the reference letters last, as they want to see what the candidates own words are and then only see if the reference letters agree with that image. Some people think the CV tells the true story, while others think the CV is little more than a laundry list and nutshell reminder of what's listed in the other materials. Some professors have been reported as saying "I only accept people I've already worked with in the past" so the application materials are really just there to make the bureaucrats complain less, and pre-selected candidates need to just not screw up too badly on anything.
So in the end, in writing your materials you cannot assume any proper ordering whatsoever - everything has to be suitable if encountered first, last, only, or not at all!

In my opinion, I would say "list of publications" (for PhD students as you have stated) which is generally found in the CV. When I think of hiring a PhD student, I think of a student who was able to publish 1-3 journal articles (maybe same number for conference proceedings) during his MS. A student who knows how to design/conduct an experimental testing (or at least was a part of one) and have a good grasp on his field. keep in mind that different students have different background and each field is different (for publication purposes). But, a good work at the MS level can result (most of time) in publishing in 1-2 journal articles. Even if he or she have had some help (most likely they would) from their adviser in writing and publishing. At least I know that they know the process and "been there, done that". For me, a student at PhD level should somehow be able to think independently and has his/her own scientific charisma!
I'm not trying to disregard an industry experience (which is very valuable, depending on the field). However, it is my preference to see solid proof of academic achievement. I tend not to weigh academic awards such as "outstanding student of department X award" that much since a lot can goes into that. However, I would weigh other awards like "Best paper in a conference" more heavily. I would also like to consider students who I have interacted with or know their advisers.
Also, I would not weigh GPA that much, especially at undergraduate level. I'm an example of a student with an undergrad GPA of < 2.6! Been admitted under probation couple of times too! But, in grad school, I was a completely different person. I would like to work with a student that can "think, analyze and be passionate about research" than working with a student with 4.0 GPA that can not figure out "stuff" if they are to be different than a text book example. I would not dare to generalize this statement, I would rather agree to the fact that there will always be that "odd" student who breaks the general norm.
Still, I would read his/her research statement and consider it to some extent. As you can not be really sure if s/he wrote it on his/her own, had somebody to go over it etc. If you were to take your chances and only judge a 1-2 page research statement (that has been edited multiple times by couple of people to perfect it), rather than list of publication (if the student has any), awards, personal connection (that I trust and value a lot) and recommendation letters, you might not end up with a sound selection. I think one should evaluate the student as a "full package" rather than focusing on independent criteria.
I'm interested in seeing what others would post and share. Especially with different prescriptive and fields.

In my opinion and experience, the CV is always more important than the statement (in some countries and specialties the latter is not even required). The CV appears in fact more objective, it is multidimensional, and it summarizes much more stuff than a statement.
In addition, it is difficult (or impossible) to fake most of the stuff contained in a CV (unless you have an identical twin), whereas a statement could have been written by somebody else).
The statement remains useful and may provide an original perspective, but it is mostly there to leave room for failure, in my opinion. In other words, I would never hire someone who presents a poor CV but an excellent statement, whether I could still consider someone who has an excellent CV but a poor statement (it could possibly imply bad communication skills or extravagant ideas).


text:
Citing a 'co-student's Bachelor's thesis
I am currently in the process of writing my bachelor's thesis. Another student is working on largely the same subject as I am, with a slightly different focus. Is it acceptable for me to reference his thesis in mine? If so, wat would be the proper form for this.

BibTeX has the data type mastersthesis for a very similar purpose.

Thanks, that will be useful should I decide to include the reference.

Of course it is acceptable as long as you know what you are referencing.
So as long as you have read her thesis (or the part you are referring to) and you think it belongs in the literature review of your thesis: Do it.
However, if you want to use a result derived by her, I would advice against it, as you can not be sure if it really is correct. If it is not possible to avoid using it you should talk to your supervisor about it.
For the proper form:
@masterthesis (as @Wrzlprmft already pointed out), @thesis (with type = {Bachelor's thesis}  or @unpublished could be an option for you.

If the OP uses a result of the other thesis, the only way not to cite it is to avoid using this result altogether. But that most likely is no option in the given situation. Also, the readers (i.e., most likely the supervisor and a co-supervisor) will be aware of this situation and can evaluate the reliability of the other thesis themselves.

Sometimes it might be possible, but you are right I have not thought about that at all. I added an additional sentence to include your point.

Thank you! I will talk to my advisor. I would +1 but I don't have the rep; consider this my upvote.

I disagree with your second paragraph.  I think it is fine to rely on a result derived by the other student, if you can convince yourself that it is correct.  Indeed, this is the same standard that should be used if you rely on a result from any other published or unpublished source.  If you cannot satisfy yourself as to its correctness, then either work with her to fix it, avoid it, or state your result conditionally: "If, as is claimed by Alice [3], all blobs are cromulent, then..."  In the latter case your work should also explain your doubts about her result.


text:
Referencing equations in/from appendix
I am currently writing a thesis in which a lot of derivations are moved to the appendix. To make these derivations readable, I sometimes write sentences like "As we saw in equation X...", where equation X is present both in the main text as well as in the appendix.
My question: should I, while writing the appendix, reference the instance of the equation in the main text, or the one in the appendix?

In general, it is always easier if your cross-reference is relatively nearby—flipping between multiple parts of a text makes the whole thing harder to understand.
So I'd lean towards referencing the version in the appendix, all other things being equal. However, if you are referencing a whole series of equations in the main text, including one duplicated in the Appendix, then it would be OK to preserve the main-text reference.

I would reference the appendix number in the appendix so as not to break the flow, but you might also footnote a cross-reference to the place where it appeared in the main text if it helps remind the reader.

My approach is usually to write something like

"... and we arrive at
(A3) E=mc^2
as in equation (42) of the main text. Now, substituting for m in (A3) we obtain..."

etc.


text:
Is Notes and Queries peer-reviewed?
Notes and Queries is a very famous and very long-running humanities journal, noted for its pioneering question-and-answer format.  It's spun off a number of regional editions, a series of anthologies, and given rise to countless imitators.
I'd like to know whether (and if so, which types of) contributions to Notes and Queries are peer-reviewed.  The journal's own website is silent on the matter—the only reference I can find to the review process is a short statement in the guidance for contributors that professional editing can help non-native speakers of English "ensure that the academic content of [their] paper is fully understood by journal editors and reviewers" (emphasis mine—and note that this statement refers only to "reviewers", not "peer reviewers").  And third-party sources give conflicting or incomplete information on the journal's peer-reviewed status.  For example:

The journal index of the MLA International Bibliography lists Notes and Queries as peer-reviewed, but doesn't indicate whether this applies to all types of submissions.  (Maybe only the peer-reviewed submissions get indexed.)
Various author-contributed reports on the English Literature Journals page of the Humanities Journals Wiki mention a (sometimes lengthy) review process for submissions, but they never mention whether this is peer review or editorial review.
An informal but fairly lengthy review of Notes and Queries by Richard Rohlin (then a graduate student at Signum University) states that the journal is not peer-reviewed.

So what's the story here?  Notes and Queries clearly has some sort of review process, but is it peer review?  And if so, which of its four types of contributions (Notes, Queries, Replies, and Reviews) are peer-reviewed?

Having just had a piece accepted for publication in the journal, albeit without having received copies or even mention of any reviews, I decided to ask the editorial assistant, Alicia Black, whether submissions to Notes and Queries undergo peer review.  This is her response in full:

N&Q is a peer reviewed journal.  Your Query has been reviewed, though Queries do not always need a detailed review.

Notes and Queries is listed in Web of Science's Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI). This fact indicates that the journal's "primary research articles must be subject to external peer review" (according to Web of Science's evaluation criteria).
As Web of Science regularly evaluates its journals, one can probably trust that Notes and Queries indeed has a peer-review procedure, at least for its "primary research articles".
On the other hand, if you look at Publons' page on Notes and Queries, one cannot see any confirmed peer reviews yet (it says "< 10" [less than ten] reviews are confirmed, but that can be a range from zero to nine).

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


text:
Opinion on accepting a grad school offer after having already accepted another offer
I applied to graduate schools this year, and at the tail end of February, my first pick school sent me an email that to me, sounded like they had filled all the available TA positions. So naturally I chose my second pick school (that did offer me a TAship).
Today (April 16th), I receive an email from my first choice school saying they would like to offer me a TAship (apparently somebody declined their offer).
The graduate adviser at my second choice school had told me before that sometime she made offers to candidates in the summer, so I am thinking if I were to contact her and ask to be released from my agreement, she might be OK with that. (I realize there are formal rules that apply)
Would it be such a bad thing to ask my second choice school to release me (if they say no it will be somewhat awkward for me and if I just walk out on them, I am not sure what they can do).
TIA,
GB

Regarding if I just walk out on them, I am not sure what they can do - for schools in the U.S. that support the April 15 resolution (most schools in the U.S.), "an offer by an institution after April 15 is conditional on presentation by the student of the written release from any previously accepted offer." If your 2nd choice doesn't want to release you, they can tell your 1st choice, who are then within their rights to rescind the offer.

@ff524 is correct in this regard, but I've also never heard of any university actually doing that.

Neither have I :) just pointing out what they can do.

It would be particularly uncool of your first choice school to have sent you an offer on 4/16 if they are participants in the 4/15 Resolution without telling you so, btw.

@BillBarth participants in the 4/15 resolution (i.e. most US grad schools) routinely make a an offer or two after 4/15 - that's when they know how many of their first choice students have declined.

@ff524, sure, of course, but they should tell candidates that they are signatories to the 4/15 resolution when they do!

I've also never heard of any university actually doing that. — ...because if school A refuses a request from school B, inevitably school B (and possibly schools C, D, and E) will refuse future requests from school A.

@ff524: in fact, they not only are within their rights to rescind the offer, the April 15 resolution says they must rescind the offer. Echoing the other comments, I've never actually heard of any case where a university refused to release the graduate student from their previously accepted offer.

Something to consider is that certain academic disciplines are quite small. Pulling out after the April 15 deadline may burn bridges, which might impact future collaborations with individuals at your 2nd choice school. Or, it's possible you could still collaborate with individuals from your 1st choice school while attending your 2nd choice school, and resigning may not be necessary. It's something to keep in mind, in order to be as professional as possible while navigating your potential resignation.

You have to know what you want to do. If you want to go to your 1st choice school, perhaps you can come to an agreement to have the 2nd professor as your copromotor? Or didn't you pin down your supervisor and your topic yet. In that case, just go for the first school definately.
Take a look at your contract or contact the administration. They will be able to help you with the more technical details of resigning.
But do what you feel you want to spend the next 4 years doing!

Take a look at your contract — "Contract"?  What "contract"?

In that case, if you are like a "civil servant" of the government, you indeed do not have a contract. But check the reglementation for the phd program and the statutes of the employment position, they will serve as "contract" : )

At least in the US, graduate students are not employees of the university they attend and therefore do not have an employment contract.  (On the other hand, many US graduate students hold assistantships, and at some US universities, those assistantships constitute formal employment.)


text:
How do I know which company sponsored which academic conference?
Is there any easy way to figure out which companies were sponsoring which conferences ?
I mean, in an ideal world, I am looking for such table :
Company   | Year  | Conference
-----------------------------
Amazon    | 2021  |  C1,C2
Tweeter   | 2022  | C5,C6
Microsoft | 2018  | C2

But, I am not sure, if such thing exist. So, how do you know which company sponsered in which conference ?

Sponsors are listed on meeting advertisements, abstract books, websites, etc

It is tedious to do it, but if you have a list of conferences you may be able to generate it.
In the modern era conferences tend to have web sites. Many of those sites are long lived. They probably list their sponsors fairly prominently.
For example: http://www.oopsla.org/2005/ShowPage.do?id=Home
A simple google search of conference name and year can turn it up. google: oopsla 2005

A custom web crawler could take a list of conference names and years and (at least) turn up the links to those still-existing pages. Parsing the pages for the required information is more challenging, of course.


text:
How can I know which academic field is hot now?
I am trying to write my own Ph.D. proposal and I wish to know what are the hottest topics in computer science and data science. By 'hottest', I mean: on which topics were the most papers published?
My questions are:

Can I use Google Scholar to figure out what are the hottest topics?
Is there any other service beside Google Scholar which can give me some suggestions?

Why do you want to know this? To go there or to avoid it? Hot areas are dangerous actually when you don't know what the world will be like it 3-6 years. It increases the chances that you get scooped on anything you work on. Beware. And what is hot now may be passé in a few years.

@Buffy i wish to know it and go in those fields, because this is the only way that i know to choose a topic.
But, if you have any other solution to choose a topic, please leave an answer.

The usual way is to work with an advisor to choose a topic. But it might help to know where you intend to study. And, if the US, what degree will you have when you start.

See the answer for Germany at the following for some guidance, though not a complete answer. https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/176908/7536. Note that potential advisors in "hot" areas are also likely to be overloaded with applicants. You are walking blind into a minefield, I fear.

A naive question: why not try to work on what you find most interesting?

@EthanBolker Yes, i know what i am interested in. But, i am afraid, that no one in the field does not like my research question. So, at the end, there will be no demand for it.

First, to answer the question as posed, it is probably enough to watch the major news and popular literature, along with the popular scientific literature. What is 'hot' will get reported generally, whether it succeeds or fails. If an area is reported in the BILD (or the New York Times) it is probably pretty hot. Even looking at the titles in indexes in journals in your field will give you a sense of it.
But, let me give some caveats about working in hot areas. There are many.
In hot areas there is a lot of competition. Potential advisors will have lots of applicants and can be choosy about who to accept. They may also be overloaded with students and be less able to give the advice you need.
Also, if the area is only recently hot then those who know the most about it might be in the early end of their careers. They know a lot about some things, but less about academia in general, and may be the most busy of all and mostly focused on their own productivity. Established academics who are new to an area might be less knowledgeable about the newest stuff but most able to promote your career.
But perhaps the most important issue is that of parallel research in hot areas. Lots (and lots) of people may be asking the same questions and pursuing the same answers. It is far more likely that you get scooped in a hot area than in one that is more established. And, depending on the institution, getting scooped can potentially set you back to zero.
It is also possible that today's hot area will be ice cold by the time you finish a degree in, say, three years or so in Germany, and potentially much longer in some other places. Again, this might be the result of a lot of activity finding success in a short time, but it might also be caused by economic changes and needs. Robotics is pretty hot at the moment, but who can predict the future needs of those who depend on robots.
Finally, it is probably more productive to follow up on what you already know, whether hot or not. Your professors in your masters can give you guidance and, perhaps, help you find a suitable advisor. You will have an opportunity after you finish your degree and get established to be more choosy about what you want to study.


text:
How do I cite / write about something someone has just said during a presentation?
I once attended a scientific conference with a few hundred participants. There, the CEO of Frobcorp, Inc.1 gave a keynote speech on what their product is about and how they accomplish certain things.
There is one piece of information that was mentioned during the keynote which is quite important to me. I would like to include it in a paper that I'm writing. (Or in my thesis at a later stage.)
Now, this being a keynote, there were just a few slides with stock photos on them, so I don't have a physical reference to what was said there. I do however know that hundreds of others have heard the same piece of information (unless they were just checking e-mails during the talk).
How should I include this?
Does a sentence like the following make sense, or could it be dismissed for lacking a reference?

As explained by the CEO of Frobcorp, Inc., during a keynote speech at the ... conference, they do ... to improve their Frobber™ product.

I of course understand that this may depend on whatever field of science this is going to be published in, what the conference or journal is, and what my supervisor thinks.
1 Yes, this is completely made-up.

You might as well cite your high school Math class for every derivation.

@ÉbeIsaac No, because this follows basic principles of math that can always be proven. (And anyway, it wouldn't hurt to cite that if I used math in a field that otherwise does not use it much.) Saying that someone does things like this and that would be a claim without proof, which is why I'd need to cite it.

You could contact the company (if not the CEO) to confirm the statement and whether there are any papers or a website that you can cite.

@mkennedy: State your comment as an answer to so I can up-vote it.

I'd use the form for symposia, adjusted slightly to reflect that it's a keynote speech with only one speaker.
For the APA style, see the second block in this blog entry:

Symposia
A symposium is a bit like a live-action edited book: Several authors come together under the leadership of the chair to pool their knowledge about a topic.
Krinsky-McHale, S. J., Zigman, W. B., & Silverman, W. (2012, August).
              Are neuropsychiatric symptoms markers of prodromal Alzheimer’s
       disease in adults with
         Down syndrome?
   In W. B. Zigman (Chair),
       Predictors of mild cognitive impairment, dementia,
         and mortality in
       adults with Down syndrome. Symposium conducted at the meeting
       of the
         American Psychological Association, Orlando, FL.

Personally, I would contact the company--possibly the CEO directly or more likely press/media relations--and ask about the statement. Is there a published paper about it? Has it been published in a company magazine or newsletter or on a website?
If you can get a written confirmation, even by email, you can then cite it as a personal communication.

For a potential reader there must be some way to go back and see an authentic source you are referring to. I find no meaning in referring to something that only exists in a few minds, possibly with different interpretations for the same thing. Edit* As mentioned by @mkennedy in the comments below, it is possible to cite interview type communication as personal communication.
One way is to create a source, with due permission from the mentioned CEO and then cite it. If possible and everyone attended the meeting agrees; the minutes of the conference may be edited with an addendum stating why it is done so.

I've seen plenty of "personal communication" type of citations so there does not necessarily have to be a source that accessible to anyone but the author.

@mkennedy Interesting. Could you share an article referring to one of those?

Here's no entry in the reference list, just an inline citation. Here's one reference

This is an interview or a personal communication. Quotes are different from interviews

Yes, but you implied in your answer that there has to be an "authentic source" that's accessible to the reader. Personal communications are not accessible to the reader. That's what I'm trying to get at.

@mkennedy Thank you for the clarification. Can I add the above information in the answer?


text:
How can I anonymously store supplemental research data that I submit with papers?
I'm writing a contribution for a double-blind submission system.
Since I would like to supply more data than I could show on a small number of pages, I'm looking for a way to reference supplemental data in my manuscript, such as software scripts, figures or databases.
I could upload on GitHub, RPubs, Figshare and Zenodo, but all of these would expose my real user name (and I don't feel like making a throwaway e-mail account with a new repository for every anonymous publication that I intend to write).
Is there any way to get the above services to do what I want? Or is there a similar service that would allow anonymous hosting of research data?
It would be even better if I could later (e.g. after publication) declassify the information, with the link from the manuscript still being intact.

This sounds like a question whose answer is "arxiv". But I assume you are in a science which does not see that as an option? I think you should specify the science then, as it does matter.

It's computer science, more specifically multimedia and user experience. Can you elaborate on why arxiv would not be an option?

I am not saying that! I am saying that if arxiv is an option (and arxiv is an option at least in the mathematical parts of computer science, so this is worth a try), then arxiv is an answer. You can upload your ancillary along with the actual paper on arxiv.

If an author is very concerned about keeping their data private and anonymous until the last moment before publication, the workflow would be like this:

The authors deposit their data in a private repository while they are finalizing the manuscript, before submission. They ensure that the documents and files they upload to the repository do not have their names on them.

The authors obtain a 'view-only' link from the repository. This link will give anyone access to their private repository in a way that hides the repository metadata so that the authors of the repo are not visible to people using this link.

The authors insert this view-only link into the text of their manuscript, for example in the data availability statement. Then they submit their manuscript for peer review. Their data remains private on the repository.

Anyone with the manuscript, such as the editor and peer reviewers, can click on the 'view-only' link in the paper to download the data. The peer reviewers can anonymously inspect the data on the repository, and they do not see the names of the authors on the repository.

Once the paper is accepted, the authors switch their data repository from private to public, and the 'view-only' link is removed from the manuscript, and replaced with the DOI to the public repository of the data. The editor or copyeditor checks that the paper now has a DOI, because the 'view-only' links typically expire after a few months.

The repositories that I know support this workflow are:

Open Science Framework
Figshare
Dataverse
Zenodo (not exactly as I describe above, but very close)

There may be others I don't know about!

OSF link: "The page you were looking for doesn't exist"

@JohnVandivier Thanks, fixed it now, new page is here: https://help.osf.io/hc/en-us/articles/360019930333-Create-a-View-only-Link-for-a-Project

For Zenodo, you can get a closer match to the Figshare/OSF approach by using the "Restricted access" option and then requesting a link yourself (source and more details https://github.com/zenodo/zenodo-docs-user/issues/56). Zenodo will not disclose uploading user, so putting "anonymous" as author of the Zenodo record, should work for hiding your identity.

What you could do is to host your data on Dropbox. When you try to share a file, you will get a link that you can put into the paper. It seems as if the recipient of the link has no way to see the dropbox user account name/e-mail address of the person who shared it. After acceptance of the publication, you could move the file to your institutional website.
Equally important, when using Dropbox it will be clear for the reviewer that you cannot see any server logs -- if you referred to a link on a server that you manage on your own, you could use the information to de-anonymize the reviewer (to some extent).
Other cloud service providers may also be suitable. I have no experience with them, though.
EDIT: This answer is indeed partially outdated, as noted in a comment to this answer. If you open the shared link anonymously in a browser, then you can click on any shared file and on the right hand-side click on "File Information". This shows the sharer's name. It may be necessary to open a new Dropbox account with a proxy name.

Dropbox links appear to be non-anonymous: https://www.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/igt2id/ysk_that_if_you_share_a_link_from_dropbox_your/

Most journals allow (and even expect) you to upload supplementary data with your submission, which can be accessed by the reviewers.  If you are submitting to a journal, this is the best way to make it accessible as part of the reviewing package, as well as to ensure long-term storage of an archival copy of the relevant data.
On the other hand, if you are submitting to a conference (which typically have strict page limits and discourage supplementary information), it is often considered sort of cheating to have your paper depend critically on supplementary information.  The reviewers would be acting reasonably if they did not choose to read your supplementary information in any case.  I would thus recommend for a blinded submission to not include it, but instead say "[link omitted for blinding]" in place of the archival URL you will use for the final submission.

In this case, it's a conference. As mentioned in my question, I consider the data supplemental. It's not strictly needed to understand the paper or any of the conclusions therein, but just a nice-to-have addon for both interested readers and reproducible research.

@slhck Since it's not needed for the reviewers, I would recommend leaving the links out for the initial submission, then putting them in for the camera-ready.

If you don't need the reviewer to see the data during review, you can use zenodo's reserve doi feature. Here you can reserve a doi (so you can put the url in the paper) but it's not public untill you decide the publish the data so anyone following the url doesn't know who reserved the doi (untill you want them to).

If your "supplemental data" can fit in a Github repository, you could use Anonymous GitHub, which allows you to create links to browse the contents of a Github repository while making it anonymous and censoring certain information.
It doesn't work with files larger than 8 MB, so this is mostly intended for code rather than large datasets.


text:
How do I go from Math BS/MS to Exercise Physiology PhD?
I'm graduating with a BS in Math in April 2014, and I'm starting a Math MS program in September 2014. I realized (a little late) that my true passion is in Exercise Physiology. How do I get from a Math MS program to an Exercise Physiology PhD program?
The only relevant courses I've had are freshmen-level general biology, junior-level chronic disease prevention, and senior-level plant physiology.

The way to get into any PhD program is to apply to it.  If you are interested in staying at your current institution, you can seek out faculty in Exercise Physiology (assuming there are any; I must admit that I know nothing about this particular program, including how common it is) and ask them whether your coursework so far would make you a reasonable candidate for the program, and if not, how much more you need to do.
One obvious question: are you interested in using your mathematical training in a significant way in your future career in Exercise Physiology?  If so, then continuing on to get the MS is math could be an advantage: I imagine that relatively few Exercise Physiology PhD students have that much mathematical training, but like in most academic fields there is always room for people who do have that training and want to use it.
If you are having a real change of heart, I have to ask: why begin a master's program in math if you have decided you don't want to use mathematics later in life?  Why aren't you trying to take courses in Exercise Physiology?  Also, I am a mathematician, so I can say that getting an MS in math is not a triviality: it most typically takes two years, and if your heart's not really in it, it could drag for longer than that and really not be fun.


text:
Consequences of applying to both research and staff positions at the same school simultaneously
There are some well-known universities, which I considered applying for several positions at each school (as a recent Ph.D. graduate). The potential problem is that, at each school, some of the positions of my interest are true research positions (either postdoctoral, or research associate), but some are staff positions, despite being closely related to teaching and/or research, i.e., teaching and research assistant (or manager) for education technology platforms (course development), graduate program institutional research (which includes data analysis) and some others.
While I certainly would strongly prefer a true research position, today's tight competitive environment forces me to approach the situation pragmatically, rather than with cautious optimism (my circumstances additionally push me in that direction - I don't have time to apply first to research ones and wait for response, before applying to the staff ones). Therefore, I am thinking about applying to all positions that I see fit, regardless of whether they are true research of staff ones.
Questions:
1) are there any significant reasons against applying to both types of positions simultaneously;
2) will simultaneous applications hurt my chances to be hired on pure research positions?

@Roland: It is sad that such a smart person, as you, cannot read between the lines. I mentioned circumstances that prevent me to wait, thus, one could imagine that it is indeed due to serious life circumstances. Yes, I am desperate (to a degree) at the present time and I don't think it is a sin or that I should be ashamed of it or that makes me any less passionate about research than you (or anybody else for that matter). My educational resilience during a long period of time and consequent achievements, despite extremely difficult situations, IMHO prove that. (to be continued)

@Roland: (cont'd) But, even if my situation would be different, my decision to apply to various types of positions might be due to my broad interests (which is indeed the case, too) or desire to (temporarily) explore other options. By your logic, all those fine researchers, who deviated from science to industry or other domains and later returned back to academia, were not passionate about research. That it is a faulty logic. By the way, I've never said that I'm applying to "all kinds of positions" - I clearly said that alternative positions are related to research & teaching as well.

@Roland: Re: your first comment: Fair enough and point taken. Re: second comment: Thank you for the link. However, I've seen here at Academia SE, at least, several times, statements that, due to high level of competition in academia, submitting multiple applications to multiple schools are not frowned upon and is considered absolutely normal. With that in mind, in context of showing that one wants "this job", I don't see essential difference between multiple submissions to schools and the same within a school. Simultaneous applications to multiple schools don't support the "this job" thesis.

@Roland: Fair enough. Thank you for clarification. While I don't see anything that would substantiate that assumption (one very well might apply to very different positions and potential employers wouldn't know that), I guess, this is the best they can do in that regard.

At the same school, it would depend on how closely related those two positions are and how likely the same person is to see the same positions.
Let's say you are a biomedical scientist. Let's say that Professor Smith is hiring a postdoctoral researcher in your field, but the Center for Awesome Research that he works in is also hiring an administrative research role (let's say a grants coordinator) that you're interested in. The chances that Professor Smith sees both of those applications is significant, although how high it is depends on how involved in the administration of the Center he is. This could be bad. Professor Smith might think that you aren't really serious about research if you are applying for administrative roles. Likewise, the person hiring for that admin role might think you're only applying as a backup and that you really want to be a scientist. Net result is that you get neither interview.
(Now, of course, that might not happen; Professor Smith might not really care because you are excellent or reason that you are simply trying to keep options open; the admin position hiring manager may decide that this job is your true passion. Or neither may see the other's application. But it's a risk.)
Now, let's say that you apply for a biomedical research scientist position at the medical school but you also apply for a position in institutional research at the main campus. The chances that the hiring managers for those two positions will find out that you applied for the other one is probably really close to zero. So that would probably be ok.
In general, you should probably try to apply to those admin/staff positions at different institutions from where you apply for the scientist roles, but applying to admin/staff positions that are pretty separate from the science roles in terms of administrative structure would probably be fine.

Excellent advice - exactly what I was looking for (+1 and accept). I appreciate your time and effort for writing this answer.


text:
Simultaneous working papers strategy
Reviewing advertisements for junior faculty positions, I noticed that it is a relatively frequent occurrence, when there is a requirement (or strong preference) for candidates to provide three working papers, along with other materials. Thinking about that aspect and considering the often lengthy process of reviewing papers in decent enough journals, I am considering a strategy of splitting my short-term future efforts (real efforts, not just on paper!) into three more or less related (perhaps, but not necessarily, adjacent) areas of study and preparing three working papers on topics from my research agenda simultaneously. I realize that due to parallel efforts the progress on each paper will be less than, if I would focus on a single topic, but, again, considering lengthy academic review process, following this strategy would allow me to have at some point three relatively developed working papers, which can be listed in CV, presented at conferences or workshops or to hiring committees and, ultimately, transformed into full-blown research papers.
Question: What do you think about such simultaneous working papers strategy? Please mention advantages, disadvantages as well as other potential considerations of my suggested approach.

If you work with coauthors, who will all have their own conflicting responsibilities, there will frequently be times when someone cannot work on a paper and the others cannot meaningfully proceed. In such times, you switch your attention to a different paper you are working on (alone or with other colleagues).
So, unless you work alone (not recommended), the "parallel working papers" strategy is less of a choice and more of a necessity. I personally am currently trying to juggle a textbook, two coauthored and one single-authored paper.
The same will apply to grant writing.
And even if you do work alone, there comes a time in a project when it's useful just to take a break and do something else for two or four weeks, then return to your initial project with a fresh mind.

Thank you for fast and nice answer (+1) as well as for encouraging words. Unfortunately, I don't have any co-authors at this time and I'm not sure about how best to approach this problem. I mentioned my desire to collaborate to some limited number of people, but, I guess, my limited experience or somewhat different interests have not sparked a significant interest so far. I plan to continue my efforts, collaboration-focused or alone, but another issue is that I might need to deviate to work in IT industry for some time due to personal situation.

Given that a mix of both single-authored and coauthored papers is probably best for your career, maybe you want to open a new question on how best to find coauthors?

Thank you for suggestion. It is a good idea, which I briefly considered. However, then I thought that it is a rather simple question with a most likely and obvious answer to it is simply to intensively network, interact with relevant people and publicize your own ideas, thoughts and projects (in other words, build your academic "brand"). Did I miss anything?

All that does make sense, and once you have done that, people will start approaching you and proposing collaborations. A remaining question would seem to be: having built up some credibility, are there any important points to consider when you want to approach someone for collaboration yourself? Any red flags to look out for? Then again, all answers to this may well just be common sense...

Thank you for further clarifying points. It seems that asking the relevant separate question still might be beneficial - will post it shortly.

I would consider working on several things at once to be pretty normal. As Stephen Kolassa said, it's good to have different things to think about when you get stuck on one for whatever reason.
However, don't do it purely because you think that's what hiring committees will want. I don't have direct experience, but what I've been told would suggest that a paper in the hand is worth three in the bush.

Thank you for your insights (+1). As I said, one of the problems with achieving the "a paper in the hand" goal is the lengthy academic review process, so you might end up with a single "in review" paper for a long time. Plus, as you and others said, an ability to switch focus mentally is IMHO often a very useful approach.


text:
Hiding M1 grades or first year of master grades
I had obtained my bachelor degree with first class of honor then I pursued my master studies in France. During the first year of my master (M1), I had pretty bad performance. I failed a course but I passed the semester since my average grade is higher than 10/20. Also, there was a project which I barely passed. I applied to another school for M2, I passed it with good grades (in french standards).
If I apply for a PhD, is deliberately hiding my M1 grades a violation? Given that M2 GPA is independent of M1, I could've been admitted directly into M2, and M2 courses are more geared towards research topics while M1 consists, mostly, of general courses.

Yes, 'hiding' any grades you are asked to supply to support an application is an ethical violation.
It seems like missing M1 grades are going to be a pretty obvious omission, and their dubious absence is likely to hurt you much more than their unappealing presence.

There are several existing answers here covering how to deal with and explain sub-par grades, or whether anything needs to be done at all.
How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students?
How do I make a bad semester not look bad during my scholarship application?
How much will a poor first semester affect my grad school chances?
Should I explain a single bad grade in my personal statement?
Thoughts on Student with Bad Grades in Easy Courses and Better Grades in hard courses

Some universities specifically require the grades of all course works, while it's not clear for many others.

Use your personal statement to demonstrate that you have changed and developed, and are substantially distinct from the person who got those grades, and that there will be no repeat of that experience.

Really? How curious.


text:
How much will dropping out of a Master's program hurt job prospects?
I am extremely dissatisfied with the Master's program I just began and plan on dropping out ASAP. I currently have no interest in finding another graduate program and instead wish to pursue a job outside of academia. As I see it my two choices are to either stick it out for the rest of the semester and just try to maintain C's, or to simply walk away from it and accept the F's because the drop deadline has passed.
The main question I have is how much more damaging is the option of just walking away mid-semester?
I realize that certain employers will view the situation differently, but I am just seeking opinions here. I have no idea of what industry I would want to work in or how that might affect your answers. Or if anyone has advised students in similar situations, I would greatly appreciate similar advice.
As for my records before this program, I got my BS in applied math and graduated with honors. I am hoping that I can bank on this earlier performance and explain the reasoning behind dropping out to potential employers.

I would stick it out and get the best grades I can.  I would try to monitor my stress level and do things I enjoy as well.  The important thing is to finish things in a clean way and not let yourself get to the point where you drop everything and leave.
The job market is extremely competitive these days.  A master's degree can have a big effect on what pay you receive and how far you can go in certain industries.  You might not feel like a master's degree is worth it now, but you might want to go back to school for a different degree or even to complete the same degree.  It's hard to predict what the situation will be for you in 5 years or 10 years.  Bad grades now can restrict your possibilities for years to come.  Who knows? You might be thinking about getting an MBA in a prestigious program in 10 years and find yourself stuck having to explain some bad grades from years before.
Your first one or two years of work, people might ask about your GPA as well, and leaving the graduate school off might be tricky as it might leave gaps in your employment.  Although, I have seen it work to just not put what year you got your undergraduate degree.

I am going to have to disagree with some of the answers stating that dropping out of programs does not look bad.  I have been on many hiring committees for a government agency.  In general there are way more qualified (to over qualified) applicants than there are jobs and we are usually looking for reasons to take people's resume(CV) off of the stack.  In my mind someone who has committed to a program and then quit shows me that they are willing to quit, whereas someone who only has a bachelors only means they have not really done anything yet.  Don't get me wrong, there are lot's of reasons someone might leave a program, but you will usually not get the chance to explain what yours is.

I am a little surprised your professors won't work with you to allow you to quit gracefully.  If it's for you and you're just moving on I would think they would accommodate you.
The shorter your time in grad school the less bad it looks for quitting, assuming the employer cares at all.  If you have, say, all complete coursework and just didn't write your thesis/dissertation, that may be looked upon less favorably than just quitting after a semester.  This might tell an employer you can't finish things.
Many more people walk away from graduate school than finish it, and figuring it out quickly won't reflect negatively on you if you can frame it as if you were moving on, instead of failing out.  You can better form the "it wasn't for me" narrative if you've been decisive about that.  It's good that you've figured out its not for you so quickly.
Unless you want to work in specialized fields or teach something, a Master's degree isn't required.  Employers will nearly always take relevant experience over credentials when applying for a job, and I find they tend to prefer experience, with the credential being a nice plus.

I am a little surprised your professors won't work with you to allow you to quit gracefully. — what makes you think (1) that they won't, and (2) that OP wants their help?

It's important to understand the advantages of pursuing a postgraduate qualification especially in a quantitative subject like mathematics. The truth is the job market is very competitive and whilst an undergraduate degree shows that you are hardworking and you've been through formal education and can think logically, it doesn't necessarily equip you with all the skills you need to thrive in industry. Hence most undergrads still need to be retrained on the job. This largely depends on what type of job you are aiming for but most mathematical jobs in industry require additional skills like programming and advanced numerical skills which not all undergraduates have enough time to develop. I guess you must ask yourself the question "what additional skills will I possess by completing this masters degree?"
Employers are not only interested in a string of degrees on your cv, they are interested in the skills you have to offer their enterprise. I agree that quitting a degree is not a good attribute for the cv and you should have a strong reason for doing so.

Dropping out mid-class is a red flag. It marks you as somebody who has left unfinished business behind, with no clear, compelling reason. I would hesitate to hire you, as you might do the same in the middle of some critical task.