text:
Should I publish my statistical model derivation as stand alone statistics paper?
In a current project of mine, I analyze a certain probability distribution to model a biological process. This probability distribution is not "mainstream", but it is relevant enough to have its own name (general projected normal), and it is acknowledged to be a very complicated distribution.
In this project, I had to derive analytic expressions for approximating the moments of this distribution (actually, of a slightly more general version of the distribution). I also spent some time converting the messy resulting expressions into nice matrix formulas that can be computed efficiently, and implementing them in code.
My question is that I am not sure whether the work I put into the statistical model should be buried in the supplementary of my computational biology paper, or whether I should try to publish it separately.
The biology paper will be focused on explaining how these formulas relate to the process in question, and relating their behavior. The formulas would be highlighted in the paper, but, for example, the name of the distribution (projected normal) would not make the title, and maybe not even the abstract. The derivations would be in the supplementary. Thus, I'm worried that if these results are a useful contribution to the statistics literature, they would be difficult to find.
On the other hand, although my derivations were very involved for me as a non-statistician, I'm not sure what is general interest for these formulas, and I am not sure whether the "difficulty" of these derivations would merit an independent statistics publication.
How can I tell whether publishing this analysis in two papers, one for the statistics derivations, one for the biology applications makes sense? Or whether I should publish everything in one paper, and risk having a useful statistics contribution go unnoticed.

Check paper and journal, "On maximum likelihood estimation of the general projected normal distribution", Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation
Volume 91, 2021 - Issue 16

You have to be careful and check for related work regarding your derivation, lest you become another biologist who discovers integration

@user4052054 The post you linked to was from 2007, and mentioned that said article was at the time cited 75 times. Now it has 553 citations in google scholar.

Here's hoping that most of those citations are disparaging, though.

Yes, publish as two papers. It is more likely that someone in a field unrelated to yours would succeed in locating the model in a statistical journal than in a journal related to the applied domain of your work.
The issue I think will be to choose an appropriate statistical journal for the statistical model. A few journals only seem to publish work that breaks entirely new ground, but most journals in most fields publish what one might call incremental results. Phrasing matters in that way should not be taken as a denigration. Most work is incremental rather than earth shattering ... and it is frequently very useful to find a paper that fills in a gap in one's own knowledge.

This should be a separate statistics paper
What you have described is a substantive contribution to statistical theory and so it would be reasonable to publish the mathematical/statistical analysis of this distribution as a stand-alone paper in a probability/statistics journal.  This will allow you to develop the theoretical analysis in detail as the main focus of the paper and put this work within the relevant theoretical context with an appropriate literature review of the statistical area.  Your biological analysis in your existing paper can then reference the statistical material from your other paper using standard referencing.
Separating these things into two papers has the advantage that it allows each paper to focus on the substantive thing of interest without being side-tracked with long and complicated matters that are ancillary to the main subject matter.  What you have described here sounds like a contribution to statistics that would be useful and would ---in principle--- be publishable.

Actually, publishers control what is published, not authors. You can submit one or two papers and decisions will be made.
However, from your description, submitting two papers seems reasonable, assuming that you can justify the significance and applicability of the model on some problem. Then you need to decide if the biology paper, using the already published paper makes a significant advance in that field.
I think I would try that strategy (two papers) first and if the model paper is rejected, combine them into one and try again. But, you may have to wait for a decision on the model paper before it makes any sense to submit the biology paper. All of that can take a while. That may work for you or not. I suspect that the journals for the two paper strategy would be different.
Any paper you submit will be judged on its merits.

Thanks. Maybe I wasn't clear in my question, but I am well aware of how publishing works (e.g. I don't get to decide if something gets published). My question is, given how time consuming it is to write and submit a paper, what are some tools I could use to evaluate whether it makes sense to write 2 different papers. Mostly, how can evaluate whether the statistics paper would be interesting for the statistics community

This is the constant struggle of working in interdisciplinary research.
Let me ask you another question - what is your ultimate career trajectory? Do you want to be known as a computational biologist who is very statistics savy? Or a statistician that tinkers in biology? Realistically, you can only pick one, and it'll help you determine what types of venues you can focus your efforts on.
It takes about 2 years to publish a statistics paper — so you could either spend time wooing two sets of reviewers (with conflicting agendas), or you can reinvest it in your next paper. Regarding visibility, I wouldn't worry too much. There are enough statistics-focused folks in biology that will jump to the supplemental methods. If your method has proven value and very large improvement over competing methods, you will get visibility eventually.


text:
When applying to a second master’s degree , can my first master compensate a low undergraduate GPA?
I have a 3.31/5 GPA in mechanical engineering undergrad but got work as a software engineer, 4 years have passed since then, i have had promotions in my work as programmer and I also Will graduate in the next months from my first master degree in software engineering with a 4,6/5 GPA.I want to pursuit a second master degree in computer science, can my undergrad affect me from getting accepted?

yes it can compensate but at around the 5th master's degree it stops working.

It is impossible to predict with certainty as systems differ, but it seems unlikely. Your most recent degree normally ranks higher in the calculations and it is closer to the new field.
But I wonder why you want a second masters. There will be a fair amount of overlap. That, alone, might count against you if people in the decision process think the slot might better go to someone else. That might depend a lot on country, though. Make sure you can justify this in any application.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Applying for a PhD during master's year or taking a year out?
I am a third year UK student on a 4 year Integrated Master's (MSci) course looking to apply for PhDs in the US (STEM). I am on track to achieve a first class degree (apparently equivalent to a 4.0 GPA?). However, I have limited research experience during my undergrad and don't think I can get very good letters of recommendation for my PhD application as I am not particularly close with many profs in my department.

If I apply for a PhD in the fall of my master's year my supervisor will not have too much to write about in my LOR (having only worked me with for a few months at best) and I will not have much research experience to talk about in my application.
If I apply after completing my MSci I will have much stronger LOR and research experience (i.e thesis and maybe publication). However, this means I would have to take a year out after my degree, essentially losing a year.

So really my main question is:
How important is research experience when applying to PhD programs in the US and how negatively will a lack of solid letters of recommendation affect my application?

This is probably answered here: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/176909/75368

There is little advantage in taking a year out. It won't necessarily improve your chances. Note that the norm for doctoral admissions in US is from bachelor's degree holders with little if any real research experience.
But you can, in the short term, improve your application by dealing directly with the LoR issue by speaking with a few professors and letting them get to know you. Asking them for guidance in doctoral study is a good way to break the ice and show them that you are serious. They will ask some questions. Ask them in return about research ideas in their field.
If you are currently taking classes, ask questions of them about the material. I was once thought to be better than I was because I asked a lot of questions. And, if you have a question it is likely that others in the course do also, but are reluctant to ask.

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


text:
Must I have publications in an area in order to list it as an academic interest on my personal website?
What is the etiquette on listing your academic interests on a personal or academic webpage?
For example, if I list "optimization" as an interest on my webpage, but don't yet have any publications in mathematical optimization, and am not an expert in the field (but perhaps do have personal projects and coursework) will this be looked down upon? I don't want to accidentally give the impression that I am an expert by listing it as an interest.
I am a graduate student getting started in a new field.

The few people who will look at your website will not jump to conclusions about your actual expertise.

The answers here are helpful but there is one small point to be made which may help you. It is not a question of following rules here. If anyone looks at your site it will be a human being seeing what sort of human being you are. So - you, yourself - spend some time looking at personal websites similar to yours. What impression does a site give you? You will find yourself distinguishing sane from insane, expert from amateur, “genuine interest” from “let me add this keyword”. It’s like reading a dating site profile. Then look at your own site with the same eyes.

I doubt anyone would look down on you for making a statement of interest. I assume you aren't intending to say anything that suggests expertise. Most mathematicians have interest in one (or a few) special areas. It is fine to say that. Your CV will make it clear where your expertise lies.

Having publications in a particular field is not necessary to be able to write that area on your interests. This is especially applicable when you are just starting to work in a specific field, which is exactly your situation. Your interest implies that you are dedicating time and effort to exploring that topic and aspire to make contributions to the field.
It's worth noting that while many individuals have publications within their area of expertise, this is often because they have worked for long time on that area and they are not beginners.


text:
Consulting potential postdoc positions: Good idea to avoid the email being ignored
I'm planning to consult a potential future advisor for a postdoc position. However, they do not put up any advertisement for postdocs, thus there is a large possibility that they cannot afford a postdoc. However, even if they cannot afford any postdocs, I still prefer them to read my email, as our work are close in some degree and I do not wanna lose the opportunity for them to point me to someone else. For this reason, is it a good idea to not mentioning postdoc position upfront in the subject and only mention it much later in the body of the email?

@DSVA If I were a professor, I won't read such an email unless I know this version. In my view, applicants are supposed to show the connections between their expertise and the position, which cannot be done in 2-3 sentences. Professors are just too busy to figure out the connections for each applicant.

Consider a title such as: Postdoc on [subject]
Body:
[Greetings]
I am PhD student / postdoc working with/at/on institute/advisor/subject (whichever you judge would interest the advisor). I am interested in your work on [subject] and maybe mention a particularly interesting article. Would you happen to have open postdoc positions or other funding options I could pursue?
I attached my CV and here is a link to a related publication of mine that I am proud of, or my homepage etc.
Maybe mention a concrete research idea here, if you have one.
[End matter]

I would not expect the potential advisor to work as a recruitment service, but if they answer positively but do not have positions open, you might ask if they know someone working on related subjects who could hire you.
Also, if you are willing to co-operate even without, or before, getting the position, you might want to mention that and maybe even add it to the subject.

Professors are often very busy. Sometimes they receive more than 100 emails per day, not including automatic messages. An email from a stranger without essential information in the subject field / first line is not likely to be answered.


text:
Question about Proof Details of a Preprint Paper
I am an undergraduate majoring in mathematics and I am currently working on a paper with a professor oversea.
I found that there might be a proof I cannot understand on the statistic paper on arxiv he asked me to read, and he was not sure if the author is correct as well.
I wonder what should I do now. The proof is a bit long so I can barely discuss it with students around me. Should I look for discussion related somewhere, or write an email to the author directly?
thx in advance

Reaching out to authors is always a good thing to try. Some can be REALLY helpful. Also you should check to see if there is a published article for the preprint. If there is then you may find additional explanation.

Does this answer your question? What can I do if I don’t completely understand a paper?

You should start by talking to the professor you are working with.

There are three things you (and your advisor) can do. First, yes, you can ask the authors for more detail saying that you can't connect the parts they show.
Second, you can try to provide your own proof, using what they have as an outline, trying to connect those parts.
Third, you can try to find a counterexample to the overall statement. It may be that they got it wrong.
The last two might be frustrating, but they might also improve your mathematical skill and insight. It is how mathematicians work, of course, once they have an idea for something that might be true.

Adding to this: it is certainly possible that the authors assumed something they didn't mark down, making the theorem statement false as written (but true under some restrictions).


text:
How many times do people ask the same referees for reference letters to get a postdoc position normally?
When you look for a postdoc position, how many times do you ask your references to write a letter?
I know it depends on the working place, but what do you think in your region?
I sometimes feel it's bothering my supervisor of the Ph.D. course or an advisor of the current postdoc position.
In my experience, I was looking for a postdoc in math in Europe.
It took around 20 times a challenge to get it. (but only three or four times to ask to write a letter at the moment)

People ask as often as they need to. It is hard to apply otherwise. Advisors recognize this.
But when you first ask, mention that you don't know how often you will need to ask. If they are smart enough they will have a letter that can be resent to a new place with only minor revisions.
Some people will have available staff at the department that can prepare and send a letter, requiring only a signature. And desktop printers make it easy enough. Ask if you need to.


text:
Publication versus courses for a PhD application
I am currently a second year Master of Statistics student at a university in Asia. Next year I will start my first year of a doctoral degree in Statistics at the same university, however, I will also be applying for PhD programmes in Biostatistics in America and Canada (it is common to do this at my university, and the faculty here supports it).
During this year, I basically have two options:

Try to extend the work in my Master's Thesis to get a publication, take only 1-2 courses, be a TA for 1 course.

Take 3 courses each semester and TA 2 courses.

Which option will be better for my PhD application? There is no guarantee that I would be able to get a publication if I choose option 1, however, I would be doing 'real research' and I would hopefully develop skills. If I choose option 2 I would be taking courses that could be useful later such as Advanced Survival Analysis, Optimisation, Randomised Algorithms, Nonparametric Estimation, Design of Experiments, Time Series.
What I fear is that I try to extend my Master's Thesis, it doesn't work out and it will appear like I haven't done much during that year. As of now, I cannot tell if the work in Master's Thesis will be of publishable quality, my supervisor isn't sure either.

I can't answer for Canada, but in the US it wouldn't make much of a difference, provided you do well in the option you choose. A masters isn't required for entry into a doctoral program here. Most applicants have only a bachelors and little real research experience. Advanced courses might get you closer to the point of taking comprehensive exams. A "taste" of research is a positive.
The other aspect, however, is that entry is competitive and so you need to do well and get good letters of recommendation. Don't apply to only top institutions. Cast a broad net.
But either path is viable here (US).

Note that even if you do the research, a publication within a year isn't especially likely in a reputable journal. That takes time even for a good paper. You might have something publishable and in process, but not likely "published". But that is still a good thing.

So I could just write in my application that I had done 'publishable' research that hadn't been published? Wouldn't that seem odd?

A section of the CV titled "Work in Progress" is valuable to have in any academic CV. Find a title for the work and list that, perhaps with a (very) brief explanation. If it has been submitted and is under review you can mention that. You can't make the judgment that it is publishable, but you can say that it is ready for consideration. And a work is "in progress" until it has been accepted or rejected. And even if rejected it can be sent elsewhere.

@NoppaweeApichonpongpan you can list those as projects or research that was not published. You may not self certify research as "publication grade" since that is the job of journal peer reviewers.

You need to gauge your funding. If your advisor and department have funding, you should focus on publications first. If your advisor and department have limited funding, you should focus on academics (near perfect grades).
Although there are rare instances of free journals such MIT's JMLR, making publications is an expensive process these days. However, note that publications will make your resume stand out if you are applying to US or Canada based universities. Now, you should note that your publications must be somewhat useful. There are published authors who have many publications, but all of their publications are mostly survey reviews. Survey reviews are useful but not as useful as other types of publications.

I don't understand what this has to do with funding.

@NoppaweeApichonpongpan making publications is not free. It costs money. I am confused by your comment that states funding is not relevant to your question.

Sorry, I didn't know it was expensive to publish a paper.

@NoppaweeApichonpongpan no worries. Every academic published author thought the same at one point. I should say that if your field includes machine learning, MIT has a free journal, but it is highly competitive. Other than that, finding a free journal is rare.

I think this must be heavily field dependent, because what is written makes approximately no sense from my perspective as a mathematician. Both the comments about costs and the comment about authors with many publications writing mostly surveys.

@NoppaweeApichonpongpan It is good that Full Array has brought up the issue of finding a right journal.  If you write a paper, make sure that it appears in a sufficiently high-rank journal. There are plenty omnivorous journals out there, which can publish just anything, if you pay them. Never deal with them, because a paper published in such a journal may not improve but spoil your CV.  This equally pertains to conference proceedings. If you choose to attend a conference to report your work, make sure that the conference is bona fide.

When applying for PhD programmes, it is useful to directly get in touch with the professors who may potentially be interested in taking you.
Writing to a professor, you may want to explain why exactly you would like to join their group (probably, because you are fascinated by their research). This, however, will not be sufficient, because you also have to persuade the professor that you can contribute to their work.
Your application will therefore look better in the professor's eyes if you already have some research experience -- especially if your experience is of relevance to the professor's work.  Hence an advantage of doing research prior to applying for PhD programs.  Having a paper published in a respected journal would be ideal.
Good luck with your applications!


text:
IP protection when showing preprint work
This question is in line with What is an effective way to copyright my teaching material? but about preprint work, not course material.
I produced a huge original database during a COVID break (sans any financial support) on my PhD which will not be used in the thesis, since the subject changed when I returned. It is about to be published as a book, but work on this is slow.
A prof from another department is asking to see the material to use in a class on that subject. Which I may participate but I'm not counting on this. I have no reason to distrust this other professor, but at the same time my colleagues keep reminding me of previous cases of stolen research and topics and materials that happened on that department and are widely known (from other professors, but recent, verifiable, and largely unpunished).
Just to be safe, what are some ways I can protect my work? I have under a month for preparations on this. I do not mind about my material being used as coursework, or being credited (but would be nice if it is possible to enforce somehow). I do wish to protect from competing publications.
I'm thinking about just slapping a copyright right notice at the footer and keeping a recording of the first online call where we will talk about the material/database.

What IP are you concerned about protecting?

Plagiarism and IP protection are sort of orthogonal concerns. If you are only concerned about credit, you should probably just ask that (XY problem). Aggressive IP protection will generally make others reluctant to use your work to do further research, which would be harmful (both for your career and for humanity generally).

This is a remarkably complex topic. You may wish to consult with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction (or perhaps the jurisdiction you are most concerned in if that is different).

IP = intellectual property, presumably? Not immunoprecipitation or IP address.

If you are in a country that is a signatory to the Berne Convention you are pretty safe. Your work is automatically copyrighted from the date you "fix" it in some media. It doesn't need a notice, though that is a convenient warning, nor does it need to be registered. Most of the world, with few exceptions is part of this compact as detailed at the link.
The only issue would be verifying that your work actually existed in some fixed form as of a certain date. There are a lot of ways to do that, including preprints, formal publishing, etc. If you have a record with a fixed (unmodifiable) date on which the body of work existed you have a claim of priority.
The Berne Convention gives you certain, but not all, rights. In particular,  others may "use" your ideas in further work (though not "derived work"). You don't "own" ideas. But you have a claim against plagiarism by "fixing" the work in some media and getting a date attached to it. You don't need to hide it to maintain your rights, though for things that can be patented, it might be wise to keep it private as patent rules are different from copyright rules.
Additionally, I think most people are honest and ethical. If you have an established date for your work, there is little risk of sharing it. And, for use in a dissertation, make sure that your advisor is up to date on what you have done and what you intend to do. Even a draft of an incomplete work is under copyright when created. Keep records of conversations to assure the history exists.
In fact, I think that being open about your intentions with the professor, using dated communications, is a good guard against IP theft. It is clear to them what and when your ideas existed. Hiding things could lead to parallel work that might step on your future publication. And, a professor has a reputation to protect and IP theft and plagiarism is a pretty serious offense.

How do you know, the person resides in the Czech Republic? I guess they reside in the US as they are asking in the linked thread about their US college. But even if they would live in Czechia and work/study in the US I am not sure it would apply.

@Juandev, see their user profile

doesn't see it, but it probably doesn't matter.

@Juandev, sorry, bad day. I clicked on yours, not theirs. I'll make an edit. Regards to Charles U and Prague. My advisor earned his degrees there and was once a professor at Charles (... Then the Russians...)

I don't agree with that. If there is widespread theft in the country and the legislation is not fine-tuned, it may happen that you will be on trial for several years, and at the moment when you win all the courts, the opposing party will already be in the position of your superior, who will then fire you and you can be on trial for another 20 years that your dismissal was illegal.

university is in the US. There was a previous case of plagiarism were professor didn't care. A high profile US institution had a legal team review the situation with their affected fellow, they said it was obvious but hard to prosecute, this is the main reason i'm thinking of all this. but i'm not a fellow of that same institution to consult with them.

Short answer? You probably can't, and even if you can, enforcing that right will be hard.
BUt I'm not sure that means you shouldn't share it - you need to think what the consequences of saying no are to someone more senior than you - you are basically accusing that individual of not being trustworthy, unless you can come up with a reason other than "I don't trust you not to steal it".
The long answer is complex, and probably requires a lawyer (IANAL).
But somethings to consider are that facts, measurements, and other objective truths are not subject to copyright. The compilation of a dataset can be subject to copyright, but only if judgement/creativity is involved in the compilation (and then its the compilation that is protected, not the individual facts) - any compilation that aims to be exhaustive or complete cannot be protected (as then no creativity has been expressed by the compiler).
In the UK and EU, but not in the US, databases are protected by something called "Database rights", where a database is defined as:

"a collection of independent works, data or other materials which ---
(a) are arranged in a systematic or methodical way, and
(b) are individually accessible by electronic or other means"

What exactly is protected, and what the rights are varies from country to country, but generally someone has to extract/use the entire dataset, or a substantial part, of it for an infringement to have taken place.
Something can be a serious breach of professional ethics without being illegal, of course, and getting things up on a proper repository and slaping an CC-BY-ND licence on it might help with professional (as opposed to legal) complains against someone.

This probably depends on how easy you can enforce the law in your country or in your workplace. If not so easy I would not release it to the teacher.
But in both cases, I would get a DOI identifier and call it a version. This identifier will prove in the future that you were the first to create it.
For example, the Zenodo repository provides an option, to release the database to the public with delay. So you can release it under a free license right now and provide it also to the teacher, or keep it hidden for a certain period (that's an option at Zenodo). In both cases, you are receiving a DOI, which indicates you are the original author.

first time hearing about Zenodo! seems like a good solution for this.

You do not need to share work-in-progress
Given that this is work in progress, it would be perfectly reasonable for you to decline to give this information to others on the basis that it is not yet reviewed and reliable.  You don't have to mention any IP issues or any concern about work being "stolen".  Just let people know that this work is still in progress and in an unfinished state that is not yet reliable, so you are not comfortable sharing it with others at this stage.  This can be framed entirely as an issue of academic/scientific rigour --- it is preferable to wait until work is in a reliable state before it is proliferated through academic channels.
This approach will give you time to get your work up to a state where it is publishable and you can then publish a reviewed and reliable version of the work.  This may include publication of your COVID dataset and publication of any associated papers (or preprints of papers) that use that data.  At that point you will be free to share it with others with the expectation that your original work is properly cited.  This would include citing your COVID database if other academics use that data for their work.

As mentioned in another answer, protecting raw data legally can be tricky depending on jurisdiction. Depending on the goals for how the data is to be used in the course, you can provide a modified/fake version of the dataset. Options for doing this include:

modifying or obfuscating some values such that it's still usable for demonstrative purposes, but not suitable for publishing.
Adding random noise to values in the dataset such that you can still get a result that's interesting for educational purposes, but not necessarily a correct one that would be suitable for publishing
Generating fake samples
Removing some portion of the samples to make it an incomplete dataset for publishing
Generating a statistical result, then generating a new fake dataset from the result that can reproduce the said result.

I've done, or have encountered, all of these. I've seen obfuscation for sensitive data that can't risk being released publicly. I've generated quick fake datasets from my own unpublished real data to provide more interesting educational examples, like demonstrating how to perform an analysis. I've also generated pseudorandom data to provide interesting test datasets for software testing, documentation, and tutorials.
This approach might not be suitable if a goal of the course is to specifically explore/discuss the data in detail.
Also, make it clear that when sharing this data that it is not a valid dataset. Don't try to hide it. And in your case, discuss with the professor beforehand your concerns about sharing unpublished data and whether this would be a suitable alternative.

Here's what I would do
Just like you thought, putting a copyright notice everywhere on your work tells people it’s yours.
When you share your stuff with that prof, have a quick chat about how it’s cool for class but not for them to publish as their own. Maybe even write down that agreement..
Having a digital copy saved with a timestamp (like an email to yourself) can be a handy backup to prove it’s your work.
Look into Creative Commons licenses. They’re an easy way to let people know how they can (or can’t) use your work.
Keep all your emails or messages about sharing your work. Just in case you need to show proof later.


text:
"awaiting reviewer selection" since the next day of submission-journal of sex research
Does it mean my manuscript will be sent out for review? -passed the initial screening of the edictor?thanks!


text:
How would I correctly cite one of Polybius' Histories
I want to cite one of Polybius's Histories for a paper I'm writing, but I'm confused as to how the citation will work due to processing through multiple works.
Specifically I want to cite this: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/1*.html
Would I cite only the original work by Polybius himself? Would I cite just the most recent source being this specific webpage? Or would I cite Vol. I of the Loeb Classical Library edition, 1922, as that is where part of Polybius's work is published that the webpage link reproduces (It's referenced at the top of the link's page).
Thank you for your help in advance!

This would be governed first of all by the customs of your discipline. With historical texts like this, it is helpful to know the edition you were using, especially if you were to not cite the original text but a translation. But even if you use the original, knowing the edition might be helpful as a book that has been passed on by copying by hand might have (or almost certainly has) textual variations.


text:
Reaching back out to PIs of interest to inquire about PhD application status
I'm a senior undergraduate student awaiting (physics) PhD program application decisions. I spent a chunk of last summer writing to and, occasionally, informally interviewing with PIs of interest, and I ended up applying to about 18 programs. I unfortunately have not yet heard positively from any of them, and people around me are starting to suggest that this is bad news at this point in the cycle.
I understand that some of my peers have had success reaching back out to PIs of interest whom they had previously written to or spoken with to inquire about their application status (one, for instance, wrote late last night and as a result received an informal acceptance this morning). There are three or four schools, and five or six specific PIs that I am particularly interested in working with, and to whom I have previously written  (all responded with some variation of "yes, I am taking students this cycle and encourage you to apply"). I'm considering writing them again to ask whether they have identified students of interest, and whether I can reasonably expect that there remains some chance I could be admitted this late in the cycle.
Would it be advisable to do so? I can imagine arguments for and against. It might show initiative, and/or remind them of my interest and existence. I know that PIs typically do not make final admissions decisions, but they often play a significant role in who does or does not make the cut. On the other hand, one could imagine that it might be seen as an annoyance. I know that professors have a lot on their plate— particularly those serving on admissions committees —and are perhaps receiving a significant amount of email from other prospective students.
It is incredibly important to me that I am admitted to a graduate program, and I'm trying to do whatever I can to make that happen. I love conducting research, am convinced that this is what I want to do with my life, and recognize that being able to do so in the subfield(s) I am most interested in and at the level I would like to is highly contingent upon receiving a PhD.

In the programs you applied to, do they admit students to an overall program or to specific professors? If it's a program-based admission, then even if you've indicated interest in working with specific professors, those professors aren't the ones admitting you.

@BryanKrause As I understand it, all admit students to the overall program, not to specific advisors. At at least one, however, I'm told that advisors are asked to select their top choices (sufficient to fill however many positions they have "open"), and this is then taken into consideration when making admissions decisions (although it is not the final word).

They're not going to make admissions decisions based on who asked or didn't ask about their application, they're going to make admissions decisions based on who they think is fit best to get a PhD in their program among the applications they receive. There isn't any cost or benefit to asking with respect to admissions.
Probably a better target for your inquiry is the graduate program rather than individual professors. It's not the role of the individual professors to communicate admissions decisions. I'm not sure how much value there is in asking, though, either: once decisions are made, they'll communicate them. Until you've heard positively and accepted an offer, you should be considering other plans for next year anyways.

Would it be advisable to do so?

You can always ask! I do not think it is likely it will affect the outcome for you one way or the other, but it is possible. At the very least, it should give you some additional clarity on whether your application is seriously being considered.

I can imagine arguments for and against. It might show initiative, and/or remind them of my interest and existence.

Yes, this is correct. Many professors may not keep a careful log of students who have reached out to them and/or applications to their group, so it is possible that they will see your email and reconsider whether they want to take you.

I know that PIs typically do not make final admissions decisions, but they often play a significant role in who does or does not make the cut.

This depends very much on the university and program. For example, in my university, it is solely the PI's decision to admit individual students in their group, with essentially no input from a general admissions committee.

On the other hand, one could imagine that it might be seen as an annoyance.

Also correct, but there are ways to reduce the chances of this. I recommend keeping your email brief. If you are polite and do not sounding demanding (you are just letting them know that you are still interested), it is unlikely it will be misinterpreted.

It is incredibly important to me that I am admitted to a graduate program, and I'm trying to do whatever I can to make that happen.

I applaud your enthusiasm and I encourage you to not lose hope. If you do not hear back this year even from your "safety" schools, you may want to reconsider your application and experience, it is possible you need to do a bit more work on building your resume before re-applying in the future.

all responded with some variation of "yes, I am taking students this cycle and encourage you to apply"

Finally, this is overall a good sign! As many professors get too many emails and would not respond at all.
Good luck! :)

In the highly competitive and intense process of PhD program applications, especially within fields as demanding as physics, it's understandable to feel anxious when you haven't heard back from programs as quickly as you'd hoped. However, it’s essential to recognize that the admissions cycle can vary greatly between different institutions and even from year to year within the same program. Thus, not having heard back yet does not inherently signal bad news.
Reaching out to PIs you’ve previously contacted can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it demonstrates your continued interest and initiative, which can be favorable if done with tact and consideration for the professors' time and commitments. On the other hand, there's indeed a risk of coming across as overbearing, especially considering the high volume of inquiries PIs and admissions committees receive during this period. It might be beneficial to craft a polite and concise follow-up email, confirming your interest and briefly restating how you believe your goals align with their research, without pressuring for a direct admission status update.
This approach respects the process and the professors' time while keeping the lines of communication open and reminding them of your application.


text:
How do I remain more focused in studies?
Background of the Question:-
I am a JEE aspirant , and I have loads of work to do.. But now I have been observing a common trend everyday. I just dont study anymore.

I try revising stuff, but get demotivated on seeing I have forgotten
whatever I had revised so many times
I get demotivated upon seeing others working so so hard for the same exam while I am doing nothing
I keep on getting distracted

Eventually , due to constant stress ( I think this is the reason , not sure though), I have lost my  interest in studies.. and now that's posing me a problem.. I waste the entirety of my day and then fall into guilt when I am about to sleep. I want to work hard because this exam can literally change my life.
I have approximately 8 months left for the exam.. but the problem is that I have to manage my school exams in between , revise the entirety of my 11th class (That's how the education system works in our country , for those who don't know) , and prepare for this entrance exam side by side, which will be including approximately 60 + chapters , to be tested for deciding which college a student goes to.
Main Question:-
I seriously need to work hard , and I also want to , but I am lacking focus.
Please suggest something that can help me staying focused.

"I am lacking focus".   If this is severe enough that you are asking here, then: you should perhaps consult a counselor or medical professional to get a diagnosis in your particular case.

That Wikipedia article indicates the Joint Entrance Exam is for undergraduate admissions. Undergraduate admissions is unfortunately not appropriate for this site.

@Ian the main question is oriented about how to focus and study, which can be applied to any type of postgrad study as well (https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/754/undergraduate-questions). The JEE is more a context here, but the answer can be given without that in mind. It is however, a duplicate to common question I'd say

Does this answer your question? How does one remain focused while studying for the GRE?

Also you may want to look at the accepted answer of this (off-topic) question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/208625/how-do-i-reduce-my-sleeping-time-so-that-i-can-work-for-longer-hours/208658#208658 which explains how to balance studying hard with life to be efficient

Thank you @JackRed

Thank you @Anyon


text:
PhD scholarship applicability for low GPA in Bsc and good grades in Msc
I have done my Bsc.Eng ( civil and environmental engineering). In first 2 semesters i got good GPA 3.64 and ranked 9th from 250 students and selected to civil and environmental engineering program. But after that i lost my track grades went down. ( Because i involved too many society works and political works during study time ). Final result 2.85 ( out of 4). Then i started my Msc Eng program and got good grades 3.42 ( out of 4) in water and environmental engineering and i have one international publication.my work experience 6 years as a civil engineer and planning Engineer. My question is am i eligible to apply
for full scholarship for Phd program in Australia. ?

@Buzz Are the answers for Australia (which OP asks about) the same as for the US? Anyway, I think this depends too much on individual factors.

It is impossible to give an exact answer to your question, because one cannot predict how highly the Admissions at one or another university will rate your MS grades as compared to your BS grades. This may vary from school to school, and may even depend on the opinion of a particular person in the Admissions.
I am afraid, though, that you are approaching the problem from a wrong end.  When applying for a PhD programme, the most reliable way is to contact directly the professors who might be interested in working with you. Don't be shy, because you are not asking for a favour, but have something to offer.  Along with practical experience, you have a published paper -- which will add you points in the eyes of any professor whose research area overlaps with the topic of your publication. (Put yourself in the professor's shoes.)
To conclude: wherever you apply, single out a professor (or professors) from that department, who may be interested in your paper -- and send it to them, along with a short letter adumbrating the overlap of interests and indicating your desire to work under this professor. This strategy will boost your chances.


text:
How does finishing my bachelor's degree in 4 years affect my academic career?
I started university early and some unexpected events happened and my first year wasn't so great, however, I have high scores like +100/110 and a very good CV with work experience and research papers.
I don't think I'll finish my degree in 3 years, maybe 4 at the most.
At the end of the 4th year, I will be 21 years old.
I wanted to know do I have a chance with good universities in general like the top 10 or IVY LEAGUE in the USA.
Thanks.

How do you plan to fund your master's degree at an Ivy in the US (I assume from your choice of tags you're looking for masters not PhD)? 4 years is a normal bachelor's in the US. If it took you longer because you failed a lot of classes, the thing holding you back will be the failed classes not the time.

And, frankly, given the state of the world for much of the last 4 years (i.e. Covid), many students are going to have transcripts that are going to look different than in previous times (and, hopefully, future times).

I started a bachelors degree in the fall of 1999.  I completed a bachelors degree in the winter of 2009.  I now have a phd from a University of California (not the best UC, but it is a UC, nevertheless).  No one actually cares how long it takes you to complete a degree, as long as you do so, and can get good letters from people you worked with (or have other experience which is relevant and interesting to a selection committee).

Most people in the US take four years for a bachelors. That isn't a problem. Taking four years may actually be an advantage if it lets you take a few more advanced courses in your field. And, it is even better if you can get a bit of research experience with a professor. And most folks are about 21 when they finish. No problem there either.
Also, most students in most fields don't earn a masters before starting doctoral study. A doctoral student with a TA is a resource to all R1 institutions since they help support the undergraduate program. That isn't open to most masters students, who are almost always self funded. If you are that good, think about doctoral programs.
But there are no guarantees about admission to top 10 or even top 30 US graduate institutions. For some of those the number admitted is small and the competition is intense. While I don't discourage applying to such places it isn't optimal to apply to only those places. Cast a wide net. Cover the top 50, at least. You may get lucky, but there is an element of luck in getting admitted to such places.
There are excellent advisors and excellent opportunities at almost all R1 institutions in most fields. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


text:
Presenting unfinished research as a Master's student at a conference
I am currently in the second semester of my Master's and will be graduating in about a year. I submitted an abstract a few months ago for a conference in my field, and recently found out it has been accepted for an Oral Presentation session. I am new to my field (I did not major in it in undergrad) and have only attended one conference in my first semester.
This other conference, which I have never attended, is in about two and a half months and while I am excited and happy to be presenting, I am terrified. My research is not at the point I want it to be and while I will do my best to work on it as much as I can until the conference, I am worried that my presentation will not be fleshed out enough to be of interest. My PI asked me to submit the abstract so I know they are expecting me to present and work hard until the deadline, which I will do.
I was hoping to use this as a jumping off point and get a lot of good feedback from experts in this field, as this work is going to be my Master's thesis. But I am not sure what the norm or etiquette is for oral presentations. Is it common for Master's students to have oral presentations at conferences? Should I talk to the session head about my research progress? Also, do you have any advice for presenting an in-progress project with limited results? Thank you in advance, just hoping some fellow academics can offer some words of encouragement.

If you have any opportunity to listen to a lot of presentations before you present, I'd try to take advantage of those opportunities. You don't have to assume everyone presenting who is more senior than you necessarily is a good presenter, but you'll get an impression of what works and if you go to enough talks you'll definitely find some that discuss work in progress.

First, I'll assume that you were accepted with the committee knowing that the work is unfinished. In some conferences there are special sections specifically for such things. People talk about what they are doing and why. They talk about the current state of it and what needs to be done. They even ask for advice and ideas, though these often come in between sessions.
The advice is to be honest about where the research stands. Even mention things that you know need work.
And the advice about the presentation is not to be overly pedantic or use overly dense slides.

Yes, Masters students can and do have oral presentations at conferences. The fact that your presentation proposal was accepted is a sign that it is of interest to meeting attendees and beat out other submissions to get accepted. So bravo on that.
Do get advice from your advisors and any experts in your field who are available to help you about what to present. Many people present work in progress. Don't undermine your presentation by being overly apologetic that the work is not complete or better or whatever. The conference reviewers think it is good enough to present orally, so you should value the work similarly!
In your presentation, do ask for input on aspects you would like input on and leave time for audience members to give you the input!

I was hoping to use this as a jumping off point and get a lot of good feedback from experts in this field, as this work is going to be my Master's thesis.

Yes that can certainly happen, it's a reasonable aspiration.
But that should not be written in big letters on your first slide.
First of all, make a note of who the session chairperson will be. They will (hopefully) be your friend during your presentation, and might help if you get confused or struggle, or chime in with a question if nobody else asks.
Before the session begins, find them near the front of the room and introduce yourself and if you like, mention you are presenting incomplete work. But I don't think that's necessary.
Your talk should have the form of a regular presentation;

Title, name, date, affiliation (1 slide)
a little back ground on the topic (1 slide)
a little background on your group and/or it's work (1 slide)
a description of the problem/question (1 slide)
previous attempts by others (if any) to address the problem/question (1 slide)
your approach and how it's different/better/unique or otherwise distinguished from others' approach (2 slides)
anticipated technical challenges to overcome, experimental, data reduction, ambiguities, noise, etc. and how you plan to address those (2 slides)
"Thank You" and your, and your group members' names and maybe a nice photo of you all

...and you have already passed the 12 minute timer buzzing. You now have 3 minutes for questions - look carefully at everyone with their hand raised, make eye contact, say out loud you'll stay around at the end of the session for further questions or suggestions.
Make sure to:

practice, practice, practice, and time yourself.
try to write the main point of each slide as it's title, or in a few SHORT bullets. The audience has only 60 seconds to listen to you and take in the slide, make it easy for everyone by making the words on the slide very similar to what you are saying, so that either one is informative. It also helps you remember what to say without delay.
make sure there's a slide number displayed in the same place on each slide, so that if there's a question it can begin "On slide 7 you show..." and no time is lost trying to figure out what they are talking about.
make sure your contact information is available on the first and again last slide (if you want to)
practice, practice, practice some more
Even consider making that on your last slide "Questions? Helpful suggestions? I'll be available at the end of the session for further discussion":


text:
Senior Research Associate in Germany
I came across a Senior Research Associate position at a German university. This role is permanent and is classified within the E14 TV-L salary scale. It is situated within the department head’s group, which includes PhDs, postdocs, and technicians. The requirements include a PhD and at least 3-4 years of postdoctoral experience. Responsibilities entail supervising PhD students, postdocs, and technicians, writing grant proposals, assisting in grant writing, and overseeing two projects. It seems that the role also requires direct involvement in project work, either through laboratory work or by supervising students in their laboratory activities. Would you consider this position equivalent to that of a group leader or a senior postdoc?

Postdocs, pretty much by definition, are not permanent positions. I would also not say it is a 'group leader' position. That position would be research staff.

Thank you for the answer.

Well, I'm not an expert on the German system. There are other questions here (search on "TL-V" above) which give some insight. Postdocs are 13, maybe 14. And "group leader" appears to have a different connotation that I would use here in the US.

Regarding the third sentence: I'm wondering what a "department head" is at a German university. Could you add the German notion?

I found ''Leitung'' written under this person name. German medical university(Universitätsklinikum) job roles:
You will develop or assist in developing scientific projects, write grant applications, and scientific papers.
You will establish new methods and teach these methods to other lab members.
You will lead and supervise the Postdoc, technical, and student personnel in laboratory duties and research, and maintain laboratory operations.
You will apply for your own grants and pursue your own line of research."
The position is Senior Research Associate (pay grade: EG 14 TV-L).

This is most likely what in other countries would be called a "lab head" and/or "project manager". You would be running the lab, managing externally funded projects, perhaps supervising everyone who works in the lab from a technical perspective, and probably do some of the project work yourself.
But -- at least as part of your principal role -- you would not independently apply for external grants, come up with research projects, or write your own papers separate from those that the lab produces. Of course, in practice, the boss might allow you to work on some of your own projects for part of your time, but that will not be your main responsibility.

These are the job roles:

You will develop or assist in developing scientific projects, write grant applications, and scientific papers.
You will establish new methods and teach these methods to other lab members.
You will lead and supervise the Postdoc, technical, and student personnel in laboratory duties and research, and maintain laboratory operations.
You will apply for your own grants and pursue your own line of research."
The position is Senior Research Associate (pay grade: EG 14 TV-L).

A postdoc is a temporary position, typically meant to provide additional training and experience to qualify for a faculty appointment later. Thus, this position is not some kind of postdoc position, as it is permament.
Calling a position group leader emphasizes that there are subordinate researchers, and that directing them is a significant part of the responsibilities. However, a group leader would also be expected to be independent, to set their own research agenda. The position described here is about directing others to execute an agenda set by the professor in charge. Thus, it is not some kind of group leader position.
Overall, this kind of position isn't really located on the trajectory to professorhood. While it involves most facets of a permanent faculty appointment, the person will probably remain in the shadow of the professor as their second-in-command. This can make it difficult to get enough of the credit to be a strong enough candidate for professorships. However, for a someone less interested in personal glory it can be a very satisfactory job in itself - provided they get along very well with the professor.

These are the job roles:

You will develop or assist in developing scientific projects, write grant applications, and scientific papers.
You will establish new methods and teach these methods to other lab members.
You will lead and supervise the Postdoc, technical, and student personnel in laboratory duties and research, and maintain laboratory operations.
You will apply for your own grants and pursue your own line of research."
The position is Senior Research Associate (pay grade: EG 14 TV-L).


text:
Can anyone help me understand the concept of M2 in french masters? If i already have a 2years masters in a subject
I have a 3yr BSc and 2yr MSc in mathematics and I've done some work related to signal and computational mathematics but always wanted to do research in Astrophysics. Now in this case am I eligible to apply for M2 Astrophysics course? Omitting M1? Because I already have 4+years before. Please help me in this if someone has idea on this.

What question are you asking exactly? You are mixing question and affirmation which is not 100% clear.

A master in France is done in 2 years. M1 refers to the first year, while M2 refers to the second.
ECTS are used in university to facilitate migration between establishment and formation. You likely need to validate a certain number of them to be eligible for a second year course. If you have, then yes, you can likely directly do the Astrophysics course.
You can also be admitted into a M2 on direct application (it may depends on your university) and they will evaluate your profile. (candidature sur dossier)
You will likely receive better insight by the university you want to apply to (on how to apply, what are the requirements, etc)


text:
Switching advisors after they got a grant
I am a third-year PhD student, and I have lost interest in my research area; after finishing up a recent project, I have had trouble for several months coming up with a new project in my advisor's research area that I am excited about working on. They have suggested that if I am no longer excited about my topic that I should find one that I do want to work on, potentially with a different advisor if necessary.
However, my advisor has recently gotten a somewhat large grant based on what I was working on; it is in a fairly niche area, and they don't have any other students working on the same topic.
I am worried that if I switch advisors, it would have some sort of negative repercussions for them as this grant would only have 1 paper published under it (I am no expert on this, but based on the number of years of funding and grant size, I'd imagine the grant is sized for 4-5 papers).
Is this something that I should be worried about?

The grant isn't your money to spend and correspondingly isn't your problem to worry about. If they're advising you to consider switching, then it seems unlikely you're going to generate bad blood with your adviser.
Just as an aside, switching PhD advisers tends to slow a student's graduation in my experience. Even when the switch is amicable on all sides. If you can't figure enough material with your current adviser to graduate, so be it. You mention "excitement", however. If you have some serviceable projects available and just don't feel like doing them, perhaps you should consider the benefits of simply executing that work and getting done with the degree.

I guess that makes sense; they wouldn’t have suggested switching or mastering out if this was an issue. In terms of “excitement”, I’m still trying to figure out for myself if I lost interest just because I hit a wall, or have truly lost interest. But I think I would not enjoy my next few years unless I come up with a better project idea than what we have, and I have some ideas that align with a specific new advisor.

It is important to understand that the only person you owe anything to is you. Yes, technically, your advisor ... advised you, paid your salary probably, etc. At the end of the day, though, this is your life, and any decent advisor will emphasise this: we have jobs to go to, you don't yet.
Remember: life happens. People have kids, fall ill, have falling outs, whatever. (Just an example: I have a postdoc who was supposed to come to work with me, fully funded, but who just decided he cannot make it work on the family side.) As PIs, this is something we have to factor in. Your supervisor will have to rejig a few things, but he should be fine. And, as I was saying, this is not your problem anyway. It is good that you worry about it, but it's his name on the grant and unless you were named a co-PI or something (which you would know because you would have had to give your approval), then your main problem is to finish your PhD.
And it seems your supervisor is okay with you switching. As remarked in the other reply, switching is disruptive in terms of time to completion of your work, so this is not a decision to be taken lightly. I have had 2 PhD students and 4 MSc students who switched over to me from other supervisors. Things I have learned in the process:
The most important thing is to see if the putative new supervisor is okay with your academic program this far. Technically, even if you already satisfy the course requirements, a new supervisor may decide otherwise and request that you take course X, which all of her/his students take as a prereq to working with them..
Also, try to understand how much of your present research work you will be able to use in your thesis. That's where having an amicable switch is particularly useful: one possibility is to keep the previous supervisor as a co-advisor or on the thesis committee, which means that the committee would have a hard time saying no to that part of the work.
And for both of these points, it may be good to make sure you understand departmental dynamics. (I am assuming you mean a new supervisor in the same department.) Make sure there is no long standing feud between the current and putative supervisors. A PhD is not a vaccine against idiocy and there are some pretty spiteful people out there..


text:
Determining first authorship for a shared project
There is a project (STEM field, R1 university in the United States) on which four graduate students have been working for approximately one year. Although all members joined the project at the same time, one person, who is a senior student, was training the others for the first month. The group does not have a distinct division of tasks: after the initial training period, all members have worked closely, sharing equal responsibility for performing lab work, studying literature, analyzing data, and contributing hypotheses. None of them has been part of other simultaneous projects for the work's full duration.
Much experimental and analysis work remains before they start writing a paper summarizing their results, and the group has not discussed authorship yet. I would like to know how authorship for such a project is determined.
Should a sole first-author position automatically go to the senior student who trained the others in the beginning? Should co-first authors be designated based on a discussion of whose contributions were most significant? Should author order be determined based on time committed to the project? Or, since all members have been working full-time on this project, does that mean they should all automatically be made co-first authors? Are there any other factors that would need to be considered in such a situation?
You may assume that all potential journals for the publication allow shared authorship, and the students' research advisor will be the corresponding author.

Why does there need to be "first authorship" at all?

I assume the question is for a field where authorship is based on contributions; see this question for a discussion of conventions in various fields.

the group has not discussed authorship yet

Then the group would benefit from going ahead and discussing it. Waiting until the end and everyone getting different ideas risks causing disappointment, resentment, and conflict. This is perhaps especially the case when you have coauthors at different stages, where one of them might need first authorship more than the others for career or graduation reasons, and the project is started with that in mind. Better if junior student #3 knows that this is the plan from the start, and determines their investment in the project accordingly.

Should a sole first-author position automatically go to the senior student who trained the others in the beginning?

Not automatically, no. Training someone else does not even automatically qualify for coauthorship. On the other hand, perhaps that senior student didn't just provide standard training on how to use a piece of equipment or software, but also designed a suitable approach and analysis protocol, which could be a significant contribution.

Should co-first authors be designated based on a discussion of whose contributions were most significant?

This is confusing. Co-first authors usually come with a footnote stating something to the effect that "These authors contributed equally". If you have a clear ranking of whose contributions were more significant, why are you considering joint first authorships?

Should author order be determined based on time committed to the project?

Absolutely not. This would mean that someone who didn't contribute anything of value to the paper could claim first spot just because they had time to waste, while another author who had all the ideas and did all the work could be punished for working effectively.

Or, since all members have been working full-time on this project, does that mean they should all automatically be made co-first authors?

Again, not necessarily.

Are there any other factors that would need to be considered in such a situation?

The most important factor is intellectual contributions. You say that everyone is responsible for contributing hypotheses, but whose ideas are actually going paying off? This can be on different fronts, including experimental design, approach to data analysis, modeling, interpretation etc. Which contributions are producing the most scientific value in the project? It's certainly possible that the individuals contributing can't be clearly separated, in which case shared first authorship is recommended.

Thank you very much, this is very insightful. By "co-first author," I was (as you guessed) referring to a statement of equal contributions. And yes, this is a field in which the last author is the advisor, and the first author(s) are assumed to be the junior researcher (postdoc/grad student) who was assigned the project.


text:
Defending my PhD thesis in interdisciplinary work (mainly social sciences) in a life sciences college
I am a PhD student in a life sciences college. My PhD project is in collaboration with another research institute specializing in Biomedical ethics and religion. So my PhD work happens to be more of social sciences than life sciences. The thing is I have to defend my PhD thesis in front of the college soon. The audience will be mainly biomedical scientists and students. I am getting the jitters just thinking about this. How do I defend my work in front of such an audience and remove the feeling of inadequacy that I am currently feeling, not to mention the imposter syndrome? Help!!!

The audience is quite likely to be interested in your defense, else they would not show up. And the real audience for the event is your committee - everyone else is there to support you.

Have you gone to other PhD thesis defenses before?

Thank you @JonCuster ..i guess i am afraid of being judged? Or my work not valued? I am not sure.

@Questor Yes i  have attended loads of defenses.. and none of the works were like mine.. guess thats what's contributing to the anxiety


text:
Wait time for interview process
I was one of the final three candidates for a tenure track position. How long does it usually take for the final decision to be reached and an offer sent out?  It has been about two weeks since my interview and I was the final candidate brought on to campus

Usually, the committee makes a decision quickly after the interviews are completed. Moreover, towards the end of the interview the committee usually informs the candidates about the next steps, i.e. on which time scale they will hear from them etc.
In your case, I presume that an offer was made to another candidate, who has not yet accepted. The fact that you haven't heard implies that you're still in the running should the favorite not accept the offer.
It may well be that an offer is followed by lengthy negotiations regarding the conditions and salary. In this case it would be only fair if the committee informs any second-choice candidates. In any case, it does not harm to just send them an email and ask for clarification.

Although two weeks to go from search committee to department chair to dean to HR might be pushing it. They might not have gotten an offer out yet.


text:
Capitalize the name of software library in the heading or not?
I am writing a thesis in Computer Science. I want to have a chapter there about technologies used, with sections on different packages and libraries I used. (It is quite standard to have a structure like this for implementation thesis at my school.) It makes sense for such section heading to be just the name of the library, e.g. "BioPython".
In case of software library such as "pandas", do I capitalize the first letter for the heading or not?
It seems that pandas library is strictly lowercase in every official source. In the official documentation or on their GitHub page, they have the name lowercase even when it starts a heading.
My question is: Is it alright to have a lowercase name of heading in thesis? Or should I capitalize it to "Pandas" even though the library is never referred to by this version of its name?

“The pandas library” works too.

Brand names should follow the capitalization style of the brand. iPhone and eBay are common examples of this in literature.
As pandas is officially written in lowercase, you should refer to it that way as well. Though in order to avoid confusion with members of the Ursidae family , you should refer to it at least once using a more complete name, such as the one used on the website: "pandas - Python data analysis library".
Also note that pandas has official citation guidelines: https://pandas.pydata.org/about/citing.html
See: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/9063/how-do-you-capitalize-a-proper-noun-such-as-iphone for more examples of this.

I would love to see a context where "pandas" the library could be plausibly confused with "pandas" the bear.

@AzorAhai-him- Me too! I'm now imagining a paper announcing the discovery a hidden subspecies of hyper-intelligent pandas who have a love for data science.

Perhaps there is data pertaining to pandas and data pertaining to grizzlies analyzed in Python and R, and you have the "pandas pandas data" and the "grizzly R data."


text:
How does Admit into unstructured Phd in Psychology in Germany work?
I have a specific interest in studying about alexithymia. I have also drafted a research proposal and emailed it to professors from various universities across Germany. But I haven't received any reply even after 4 months of writing to them. I would like to know if I am falling short somewhere and if there is a way to improve on the PhD pitch. Is there anybody who can share your experience in applying for an unstructured PhD position in Germany?

To add some context to my answer: I am a Phd student in Germany, albeit in a computer science (CS) related field. I studied at a different university before my Phd, and got my position by cold-e-mailing group leads, whose work I found interesting. By cold-e-mailing, I mean that in most cases, there was no open position being advertised. Whenever possible, I included personal references, e.g. having met the recipient at a conference, or being referred to that person's work by my thesis advisor. I tried to keep it short to save their time, and included references of where my prior work meshed with their research. I had some publications at workshops and local conferences at that time, which made it possible for them to check my claims, although showing knowledge about a topic in your e-mail may also be possible. Through this process, I received one referral to an open position with a different professor, which ultimately didn't quite fit my interests, and two invitations to an interview, one of which led to my current position. Some people did not react to my e-mail. I have tried to extract some of what helped me in the following.
First, in my experience, professors supervise Phd students in their own area of interest, and also based on the projects they have funding for. So, the professors you have e-mailed may either not be interested in alexithymia, or may have a grant to work on different topics, even if they are interested in it. So, your focus on a very concrete topic may be hindering your application.
Additionally, many of the Phd students I know had a prior connection to their current advisor, either studying at the same university, or studying with a colleague of the professor, or otherwise receiving a recommendation from someone the professor trusts. Professors receive many e-mails with requests, so yours might be getting lost in the heap, and they don't know anything about you besides your e-mail. Having a recommendation from someone they know can provide a signal that it is worthwhile for them to further spend time with your application, e.g. by asking their contact about you. That recommendation can be from a co-author, former student who is now a professor elsewhere, or someone from the same field, who attends/publishes at the same conferences as the professor you are interested in working with. This last recommendation is probably mostly relevant from a CS-perspective, as most of our publications are conference publications, so you get to know people from there, and a recommendation from someone I talked with at a conference would be a signal of trust to me. I would talk to some of your own professors to see if they can refer you to some of their German colleagues.
Finally, you also mentioned writing to "professors from various universities across Germany". How well are your e-mails tailored to the professor? Like I wrote above, professors get lots of e-mail, and you need to show that you want to work with this person specifically, that you have read their research and that your research proposal or research interests fit into their profile. An unstructured Phd in Germany is to some degree a personal (work) relationship between you and your advisor, so it needs to fit. Some professors also post requests on their websites that you include some specific phrase or word in your e-mails or the subject line to show that you have taken the time to research them. Ensure that you do that.
tldr; Tailor your e-mail to your recipient and their research interests. Get a referral from someone your recipient may know or trust, if possible. And be prepared to work on a topic that is different from what you have proposed.


text:
What is the academic culture like in Spain for PhD candidates (Work-Life Balance)?
I tried to search for the tags of "Spain" and "PhD" but found nothing.
I'm thinking of maybe doing a PhD in Spain due to ease of access to medical care that would be far more complicated to continue if I had gone to Denmark or Netherlands. Germany is up in the air.
I am currently a Master's Student in Hungary, studying computational modelling of protein/enzyme reactions and structural elucidation using IR, NMR and XRD - so I'm mostly curious about experiences of Physical Chemistry department folk.

I'm pretty sure that if you are an international PhD student in the Netherlands or in Denmark you will have access to local medical care. Even in the US, PhD students usually get a decent health insurance.

@quarague for the US, depends upon the University and State. Some states make their students buy plans on the ACA marketplace.

@RichardErickson I won't claim it doesn't happen but I think that would be extremely unusual for a funded student in the US to not have health insurance included (but also yes, likely that students are required to have some sort of health insurance which would involve buying insurance if they do not have it from some other source).

@quarague I am trying to remain vague about what manner of medical care I need due to it being highly politicized.  Retaining the "polite society" approach, I will simply say it is a matter I've made focused effort in getting information from people who have similar needs as me. The primary issue is not affordability, but rather regulation/gatekeeping/restricting access. In this, the U.S would be be superior for some states due to informed consent. Unfortunately, ease of immigration means I'll stick to EU.

@BryanKrause this varies state-to-state. I'm on a grad committee for a student in Minnesota and that student has a nice university insurance plan.  Conversely, I'm on a committee for a student in South Dakota and their state removed university graduate insurance for students after the passage of the ACA.  It's something someone from outside the US, and, based upon your comments, inside the US would not think of asking about unless they had seen it. Only 48 more states if you like to check for a complete policy check :-)

@RichardErickson Yikes, that's unfortunate. Yeah, my advice to someone outside the US (or inside the US) applying to a PhD program would be that if they have an offer that does not include health insurance that they should not consider it to be a "funded offer" (though a deduction of some of their stipend to partially cover insurance should be expected).

My not very wide experience suggests: the group/university will have a mayor impact in the answer of this, academic culture in Spain has more extremes than other places. You'll find the worst and the best withing the country.

If your reason for considering Spain is the free medical care, you should be aware that doctors and medical staff in Spain often do not understand English at all. If you need access to an expert, you should also expect waiting times of at least a few months. In my experience, doctors in Spain are competent, but may lack the equipment necessary to perform tests for diagnosing many conditions.
I have no experience from physical chemistry, but have found academics in my field competent and hard working. The environment may however be soured by the fierce competition for resources. As an example, the University where I worked would prioritize reimbursing the expenses of the students with the most influential supervisors. For the rest, even funding secured through personal grants would be confiscated by the University and it would take them months or years to reimburse expenses, if they were reimbursed at all.
This being said, I believe there may be huge differences between Universities. If you find a group that you would like to join, I recommend asking other international students in the group about their experience.


text:
How to deal with potential nasty issue of asking for PhD opportunity within the same topic from two different supervisors?
I'm not from Europe, but about to finish my masters there.
Through my thesis, I was introduced to the wonderful world of topic A, where I was tutored by the research group G. My supervisor and I were happy with the thesis, and are currently applying for a PhD grant. My supervisor spent significant effort preparing this application with me, of which I'm grateful for.
However the grant is by no means guaranteed, and I still haven't received a clear answer on what happens if we don't obtain it. As an international student, I will have to deal with the nasty question surrounding my visa. I can't wait until the grant decision before making my next move. In fact waiting for the grant decision itself is already a risky move for me.
Thus I would like to hedge my bets. In another country in Europe, a group H is also working on the topic A (though the projects are different from group G). I'm thinking about contacting this group to also ask about a PhD (again applying for a grant with them), but several questions bother me:

Tell the new potential supervisor that I'm also applying for a PhD grant with group G? Not letting them know feels really wrong to me, plus might spawn questions as to why I didn't apply within my own group. On the other hand, letting them know might lead to me not being taken seriously?
Tell my current supervisor that I'm applying for other positions as well? However I don't want to damage my relationship with him. On the other hand I would probably have to submit a recommendation letter from my current supervisor. I already did this once for another position within the same university, and judging from his reaction I don't think he appreciates it (though the recommendation given is still genuine).
In the unlikely event that I get both positions, which will I choose? Another professor pointed out that I will have to answer this question. This one is not a question per se, rather a consideration that I will have to take into account.

I'm hoping that someone can point out whether my worries are valid, and other unseen pros/cons. Perhaps I shouldn't even contact the other group?

Normal supervisors understand that normal prospective PhD students apply to multiple positions. This is a non-issue and will not make any normal person "not take you seriously" or "damage your relationship with them".
There are of course a small number of advisors who do feel pathologically possessive of "their" students, but if your current supervisor does not give out this vibe, then there is no reason to assume that they are (and indeed, if they are, that's all the more reson for you to pursue other options!). Just because they invested their energy into helping you with a PhD grant application does mean you shouldn't also pursue other options in parallel. To do so would be to misunderstand how PhD applications work.
"In the unlikely event that I get both positions, which will I choose?" Whichever one you like better. You don't have to decide beforehand.

There are lots of stories here from people who went to work with a supervisor they came to not trust for whatever reason and kept working with them and now 5 years later they have a problem.
I don't think anyone here can tell you the right answer for your situation, it depends on all the personalities involved. But I can tell you that if you don't trust someone with this sort of information, I think you're mistaken to trust them to be your PhD advisor.

Firstly, I apologise as I am not sure if your PhD is based on a publication, position in the field or your own research project. It seems like you are considering more than form, but I am sure my answer will still be relevant to you.
From my own experience of making PhD applications, most respected Professors assume you will apply to a range of grants in addition to numerous institutions as the places for PhDs and its prospective funding are immensely competitive.
While I was applying, one of my potential supervisors encouraged me to apply to every institution which could support my research because "you might receive generous funding with a different university" and then continued to inform me of other supervisors in the field. The potential supervisors who interacted with me were very professional, supportive and friendly. From what they said, it's normal for potential supervisors not to become too attached to the idea of working with a particular potential PhD student. Remember, they ultimately give support to all potential students, but some may choose to study through a different institution due to funding or the university's reputation for their subject area. Alternatively, they may not receive a place at all.
However, you do not need to tell them as they already expect you to apply to multiple opportunities. However, if you do inform them without good reason then you could potentially cause offence to the supervisor or waste their time. I understand that it seems very unusual, but you do not  need to remain loyal to one particular institution or supervisor unless you have confirmed an unconditional offer. Personally, some of my potential supervisors knew about the others because they recommended them, or I applied for funding which would permit me to work with multiple supervisors from two or more institutions. It did not cause any problems, and I am still awaiting some responses.
This is only causing emotional disturbance because you are new to the process, but I wouldn't tell them about the other potential supervisors without good reason. At this stage, you should definitely consider applying for more than place and numerous funding providers.


text:
Can I use references when I am responding to Reviewer in Revisions
I am trying to respond to comments from a reviewer (Major Revisions). Is it weird to use references in my responses?
For instance I might try and prove a point. Can I cite papers to do that. I know I have to play it carefully and not do it in a way to insult the reviewer.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/204904/citing-articles-while-writing-a-reply-to-the-referee-editors-reports-do-i-need Does this answer your question?

Yes, you can use references in your response, and it is common to do so. It is not weird, as long as the papers are relevant and support the point you are making.

Is there a reason you believe you shouldn’t? Insulting a reviewer with a rational response?

It is common to cite references in a reply to reviewers comments. Whether or not the reviewer or editor finds you response insulting (hopefully not!) will simply depend on the tenor of your reply.
Sometimes a reviewer will miss an appropriately referenced sentence in your paper that addresses the issue of concern and there is nothing objectionable about politely repeating the information in a reply (not by rubbing their nose in the fact that you are repeating yourself).
More often, however, the fact that you need to introduce a reference into a reply will, itself, be a pointer to the fact that something might not have been sufficiently explained or referenced in the original paper. In that case, it is appropriate to directly address the concern of the reviewer in a letter to the editor, and also to introduce additional material (sometimes just a reference, sometimes a sentence or two) into the paper. If you do that, then you should tell the editor explicitly that that is what you have done. For example, "Reviewer A asks about whether XYZ could account for the data we have obtained. The issue has previously be considered, and rejected, by two previous research groups (Smith & Jones, 2019; Xeno & Phobia, 2020) and we have introduced a sentence at page n, line l for clarification."

For me the general guideline to this question would be: the purpose of a review is not to discuss with (or enlighten) the reviewer but to make the paper better.
Even if the reviewer misunderstood, it means the paper lacks clarity or important intermediate steps are not spelled out explicitly. The paper should then be improved to avoid the misunderstanding (the reviewers are usually experts in the subject so other people likely have even more difficilties understanding).
Hence, in my opinion it is not useful to provide a reference only in the response to the reviewer (of course a clarifying reference to the text is completely different story).
I would really recomment to resist the temptation to start a discussion with the reviewer. This is in my understanding not the point of a review. In fact a disussion attempt could make them angry because they may consider the process as inefficient and as a waste of time. The review is a courtesy to the author(s) and if a paper got "major revisions" (instead of "reject") this means the reviewer thought the work has value (but the authors need to put some additional work in it, which the reviewer has no obligation to take part in).
So take all comments of the reviewer seriously and address them by doing appropriate(!) modifications to your text. It does not mean you have to do everything the reviewer demands literally, you more need to find out the underlying issue and address that appropriately.
If in case a reviewer seems to be malicious and intentionally write a bad review, please inform the editor.


text:
IT Professional interested in research
I have Bachelors of Engineering degree in Electronics & Communication from India. After that I have 5 year 9 months of experience from India and 2 year 2 month experience in Germany. I am interested in going in IT research or pursuing PhD from Germany or Online. But, I don't have masters degree neither I have time to pursue master's agree. Can somebody guide me to how to proceed and is there any possible way to proceed in research?

Does this answer your question? How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in Country X?


text:
How To Handle Asynchronous Multiple Faculty Job Offers
I've seen a few threads about handling simultaneous offers
How do people get simultaneous offers?
How to negotiate multiple tenure-track offers
But what about potential job offers that may materialize at different times within a span of month and half?
My situation is I interviewed at one university (a non-Tiered university in the USA) yet has some recogntion in their department (locally or statewide). They plan to offer a letter relatively soon within a few weeks. After said few weeks, a Tiered university will invite me to their job interview, and depending on the outcome of the interview, may present a job offer letter later. So in this situation, two job offers but at different times. N.B. I am in a "Right to Work" state in the USA.
Would it be alright to take the first job offer and wait and see what the second job offer might be? And if I do like the second job offer, presumbly I can rescind my acceptance of the first offer?

If this comes to pass, you'd be dealing with What is the recommended option for a faculty applicant after accepting an offer and getting another better offer? or Can I back out a tenure track faculty offer?.

if your user profile is your real name, you may want to change your name here.

First of all, congrats on the offer. It's hard to get a permanent position so count yourself lucky!

But what about potential job offers that may materialize at different times within a span of month and half?

This situation is extremely common. The standard advice is: when you get your offer from university A, you can write to university B to explain that you have an offer and must respond by a specific deadline. They can then give you an indication of whether or not they were strongly considering your application or if they can speed up the process. You can also ask university A to give you a longer clock, but there is no guarantee that they will. Please remember that university A needs to hire someone or their courses will be understaffed in the fall semester. The longer you sit on the offer, the more chance their other top choices will accept jobs elsewhere and be off the market.

My situation is I interviewed at one university (a non-Tiered university in the USA) yet has some recogntion in their department (locally or statewide).

The status/level of the university is irrelevant to the ethics here. You applied to the job and your decisions now will affect whether or not their search succeeds or fails. Even if they are "non-tiered" that does not excuse behaving unethically towards them.

They plan to offer a letter relatively soon within a few weeks. After said few weeks, a Tiered university will invite me to their job interview, and depending on the outcome of the interview, may present a job offer letter later. So in this situation, two job offers but at different times.

Ok, so actually you do NOT have a firm offer from University A. You have a verbal commitment that they plan to make you an offer. Until they do so, you are free (and wise) to keep applying to other jobs and interviewing. However, once they actually make you an offer and you actually sign it, then backing out would be unethical because it would leave them in the lurch, looking at a potentially failed search and not being able to staff their courses for the fall.

N.B. I am in a "Right to Work" state in the USA.

Actually, this is irrelevant to the ethics of the situation or to the etiquette (as your question is tagged). There are plenty of activities that are legal but unethical and which could hurt your career. Generally speaking, accepting an academic job then backing out to take another job, is the kind of thing that can harm your professional reputation, for the reasons I explained above. Long-term, professional reputation matters a lot.

Would it be alright to take the first job offer and wait and see what the second job offer might be? And if I do like the second job offer, presumbly I can rescind my acceptance of the first offer?

I strongly recommend against this behavior. In an academic setting, rescinding your acceptance is unethical for the reasons I listed above (where by acceptance I mean you signed a contract). Once you sign a contract with university A, you should back out of your other searches and tell university B you are no longer on the job market. This way you don't waste their time and resources bringing you for an on-campus interview. This is why it's important to alert B when you get the offer from A, so that they have a chance to make you an offer before you accept A's. However, if it does happen that B makes you an offer after you've already accepted A, one thing you can do is ask B if you can start one year late. That way, you could go to A for a year (thereby not leaving them in the lurch without someone to teach in the fall) and shift to B after that first year. Once B agrees to let you start a year late, it would be appropriate to tell A, and then they can decide if they want to free you from the contract you signed and go back to their applicant pool right now, or just run a fresh search next year. Either way, they need to know as soon as possible, so they are not left without sufficient staffing the year after you leave.
I know it's not an ideal process and it's very annoying to deal with this situation of not having all offers at the same time. But that's just how it is in academia, and the realities of the hiring cycle, teaching, and university budgets make it so that in academia it's not so easy to change jobs at the drop of a pin. Every professor you know had to navigate the same thing, and I'm sure you'll be able to manage it. One thing that might be helpful is to ask yourself what you really need to be happy, and only aim for jobs that check those boxes. Always climbing for a "better" job is not great for long-term happiness. I advise you to try to become a satisficer instead of an optimizer. Anyway, now at least you know you are very hireable and if you are not happy at A after all, you can probably go on the job market again and find something else.


text:
International Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Research
I am going to publish my research article in above journal. (ISSN: 2455-6939). But when I check impact factor, 2023 is not indexed and 2024 shows as under evaluation https://sjifactor.com/passport.php?id=20227
Can anyone help me with this? Is this good journal? this is my first article.

We do not offer reviews/rating of specific journals here.


text:
letters of recommendation computer science masters
Would it be appropriate to request a letter of recommendation from a faculty member who taught me a course outside of the computer science domain, given that my bachelor's degree is in biology and I am applying for a master's in computer science? Alternatively, would it make sense to seek a letter of recommendation from the principal investigator from a biology lab, even though their research area differs from the field I am pursuing in my master's program?

Your both options are from biology? What is the difference between the fields of your options? Do you want to select only one of these two options?

Yes, definitely. There's a whole branch of computer science that is computational biology. Such a letter could show that you really understand the biology side, which would lead to better research (even without that connection, such a letter could show that you have generally strong skills as a researcher and as a student). As a very simple example, think about the computer science that went into mapping the human genome. Obviously, lots of expertise from biology was required, and it was essential to have people who understood both the biology and the computer science. So such a letter could make you a much stronger applicant, depending on the program.