text:
I haven't spoken with my advisor in months because of a personal breakdown. How do I reestablish contact?
I'm a second year computer science PhD student. I switched research areas during my third semester and did an independent study with Professor X. He basically gave me a bunch of papers and textbooks to read so I could get up to speed on the field and told me to ask questions as they come up. Things did not turn out too well because (1) everything moved online (COVID) and (2) I had a breakdown, ultimately resulting in me barely communicated with Professor X. I'm in a small reading group he leads, so he knows I still exist, but we have not actually exchanged speech in months.
To briefly explain the breakdown: I grew up with alcoholic and abusive parents and had everything under control for years, but my emotions just exploded out of nowhere. I've been seeing a therapist, and I am faring much better now.
I did read the papers and most of the textbooks, but it took much longer than it should have because of my breakdown. I also came up with a few research questions I'm interested in pursuing, but I don't know how to proceed after ghosting Professor X for months. I want to hear what he thinks of them, and if he thinks they're good, ask if he has any advice. However, I imagine he does not have a favorable opinion of me right now. I'm not sure if a professor would want to work with a student after something like that, and quite frankly, I feel horrible. I emailed him to see if we could meet, saying that I fell off track last semester and want to make better progress. I haven't received a response yet, and I do not know if this was the right way to proceed.
What can I do to help this situation? How should I explain my lack of communication without providing personal details? Will I have to find a different professor to work with? If anyone can offer any advice/insight, I would greatly appreciate it.
Note: Professor X is not technically my advisor at this stage, but I use that term in the title for brevity.

"I'm not sure if a professor would want to work with a student after something like that" - just to be clear, "something like that" from your advisor's perspective refers to your lack of communication over several months? Or is it that by "emotional explosion" you are referring to something outwardly, rather than inwardly, directed - perhaps towards this advisor or among others in the lab?

I'm referring to the lack of communication. It was quit unprofessional of me. When I say "emotional explosion," I mean regularly crying in my apartment by myself :)

If they were repeatedly trying to contact you and you brushed it off and ignored them, that's one thing and you would owe an apology. Quite different to just be uncommunicative. In addition to Buffy's answer I'd suggest just worrying a lot less about it and moving on with the future in mind.

If this is really Professor X, then I'm pretty sure that he already knows how you feel.

I agree with Buffy that there is no need to divulge personal details, but there is probably far less of a stigma about it than you might fear if you do. Professors are used to dealing with students who hit a rough patch during their studies, and most of them try to be empathetic. This is especially true now, given COVID. I can't speak for all professors, but I've seen many of my students struggle this past year, and I haven't thought less of them because of it.

Your professor knows that there's currently a global pandemic of a lethal virus.  Your professor knows that students sometimes have medical issues, or personal issues, or whatever.  Stop overthinking this, and go talk to him.

Professor X is not technically my advisor at this stage, but I use that term in the title for brevity.  It's more confusing than anything.  If you haven't spoken with a collaborator in months, that can be normal.  If you haven't spoken with your advisor in months, that's a big problem.  Have you ignored Professor X's attempts to make contact, or have you simply not had any contact with them?  A collaborator won't necessarily "check up" on you like an advisor will.

It should be enough to explain your absence with "I've been ill for several months, but am better now". You don't really need to go in to details. If asked, just reply that it is very "personal".
The professor may need some assurance that you will be effective going forward, but really has no need to know details.
And, of course, you should say you've been somewhat (at least) productive in the interim.
And keep contact with the professional counselor through any necessary transition.

Just to add on, you should do this right away.  I know it can be tempting to avoid difficult things; your advisor may very well require some soothing.  But delay makes it worse, not better.

Do this unless your therapist says do something else; then follow therapist's advice.

It's also worth saying: this is definitely a smaller deal from the professor's perspective than it is from yours. The professor has almost certainly (a) not spent much time thinking about it (b) seen/heard of similar situations before. It's scary for you, but be aware that some of that is just your own perception of an objectively more minor situation.

The only correct answer from your supervisor should be sympathy, understanding, and support to rejoin your work. If they need "soothing" or reassurance of your ongoing productivity even while ill, that would be quite pathological. When a field or industry as a whole regards this as normal we call that whole working environment pathological

I agree with this course of action because (a) it provides an understandable explanation about the cause of previous absence, and (b) it focuses on the future and accomplishing work together, which is what is important.

I'd also go through some channels at your university that offer support to students going through difficult times in their lives. Having referred yourself to them will lend you some support in case things get hairy, because it will (partially) legitimise your lack of communication. That said, I disagree with Buffy, in that you shouldn't hide the issue so much from this professor. We're all human at the end of the day, and it would be a welcome approach to just be a little more candid with what you've gone through. This doesn't mean you have to reveal every detail, far from it in fact, but don't just say that you had "personal issues". That sounds like a copout and may make you look like someone who's just finding easy excuses for their lack of progress. Finally, I'm sure that them seeing you being able to overcome your issues and be ready to get to work again will display you in  a positive light, as it will highlight your determination and desire to continue your work. I've seen people quit PhD's over far less.
You're a trooper, stay strong, chin up. There's always a light at the end of the tunnel. As someone who has suffered from depression for numerous reasons (partially down to parental issues as well), I can only empathise but at the same time remind you that no matter how hopeless the situation may feel, it's never the end of the world. :)

A very similar thing happen to me in my 3rd year (of 5), but I was able to go on to complete my PhD with my advisor nonetheless.
If reconnecting directly is too uncomfortable, try reaching out to your program coordinator, trusted fellow PhD candiate, or friendly professor to help start the conversation back up again. PhDs are hard, and pandemics are also hard! It sounds like your heart and your efforts are in the right place, and better than that, you are taking steps to fix this! There's no reason you can't reconnect!
My story: My advisor went on sabbatical for a year to another continent, and I had my research problems to figure out. I became quite dejected with my studies, and stopped communicating with my advisor for maybe 9 or 10 months. I continued with my own studies, but struggled to make progress and gain traction with any particular topic. In the end, another professor (to whom I am very grateful) reached out to me to see where I was at, and help me reconnect with my advisor. It was an awkward first conversation, and I was put on probation by the program coordinator (a well-deserved kick in the butt for me!) but soon things were back on track.

A few months isn't that long on typical academic timescales. In my experience, a few months of silence between collaborators on non-urgent matters can happen, and are not a big deal at all. I am currently waiting to hear from some people I've sent stuff to months ago, and there are even more people I really ought to get back to[1].
When reestablishing contact, a simple "Sorry for the delay in getting back to you" or "My apologies for the long silence, I had stuff going on" is enough. If you are confident that you'll be back to quick response times from now on, you can add something like "Things should be better now, and I'm keen to get back into our project."
There are two caveats where some[2] remorse would be in order:
One, if your silence led to missed opportunities mattering to the collaborator. If you had planned to submit results to a conference as a joint paper and missed the deadline, or a grant application couldn't go ahead. Pointing out that you just couldn't would be appropriate.
Two, if you ignored "welfare check" style emails. In this case, thank the person for their concern and apologize for having caused them worry.
[1] If you are of them, and are reading this: My apologies for procrastinating here.
[2] But not too much. Based on how the question reads, half of OPs current remorse is definitely enough.

First of all you are paying for your tuition, so ask about and use whatever support channels are open to you.
Speaking from experience of abuse, my biggest challenge was the need for acceptance and a lack of self esteem.

You will need soft skills to succeed as a programmer, so treat thesis a learning opportunity.
In 2 to 3 years having gained your degree, this motor bump in the road will seem like that, not like the mountain it feels like now.

I am looking back form a perspective of almost 40 years, I have been programming for 20 of that.
If you give yourself the freedom to heal things will get better, focus your goals and how you want a better life for your children.
I was able to give my son many of the things I did not have.
He came out of univ. with a Masters in Physics and a Masters in intelligent Systems engineering.
You can do it, just be gentle on yourself and don't worry too much, within reason, what others think.

"First of all you are paying for your tuition" - it's pretty unusual for a PhD student to pay their tuition. "You will need soft skills to succeed as a programmer" - there is no evidence that OP wants to succeed "as a programmer" or that soft skills are what they are in need of. It really looks like you've written an answer here for a completely different question.

Welcome to Stack Exchange Academia! Please don't be too discouraged by the down votes and criticism of your supportive message.Unlike other online communities, answers are supposed to be very focused, responding specifically to the question that was asked (how to approach one's advisor).


text:
Writing a recommendation letter for student with low GPA
I have an undergraduate student who has been working in my lab for quite some time, doing relatively advanced work and has even been able to mentor other students in getting up to speed in the workings of the lab and the methods we use. I never had this student in a class, but they approached me in their second year asking if I had any opportunities and I was happy to provide an unpaid opportunity and the following year a student job for them after seeing their exceptional work.
This student is now applying to graduate school and has asked me to write them a recommendation letter, and I said I would be happy to do so since the student has demonstrated competence and has even started asking quite interesting research questions related to our work. As part of the recommendation process I always ask for the application materials, including transcripts, personal statement and so on. Upon looking at the transcripts I found out the student has a very bad academic history and has even recently been on academic probation. They got C's in classes closely related to our subject (but taught by people I don't know well in the department). I'm not sure what to think or whether to include that as part of my recommendation letter, or to ignore it overall?

Can you ask the student for permission to discuss them with the other faculty? But, in any case, if you think they have the knowledge even without the grades, you can certainly say that. You might also ask the student about the grades, of course. There may have been external issues you don't know about.

This is exactly what recommendation letters are for is so that the evaluators can learn more about an "exceptional" student beyond grades, which of course can vary widely between faculty, departments, universities, countries, and continents.

@Buffy Yes, I can do both, but going into that conversation I'm not exactly sure what sort of questions I should ask - if there are circumstances I don't know about, should that effect my letter? And also should I advise the student that their chances of admission are very low given their grades despite their clear research ability?

You made a mistake in asking for the transcript, and they made a mistake giving it to you. You job is to speak from first hand experience. You're not a part of the candidate filtering process. Now you'll have a tough time speaking in an unbiased way.

As others have said, you should probably sit down with the student and talk about this.  One topic of that discussion should be strategizing his application package.  This student may fare better applying to a Master's than a PhD, because there's less of a risk that extensive resources will be put into them.

In your situation, I'd write that I'm aware of the student's poor grades but that what I've seen in my lab is very different. I'd go on to provide the information in the first part of your question, with more details about this student's work. Your offering a paid job after seeing the first year's performance is, I think, important because it's tangible evidence that you're not just saying nice things in the letter; you've put your money where your mouth is.

I think you should change this in future. Do not ask for material that would be evaluated nevertheless. You have been wrongly doing (not personal, I see that your aim was positive). The point is that a recommendation letter should be potentially able to reverse a verdict. That is why it is asked or welcomed in an evaluation process.

You comment based upon your interaction and you don't speculate beyond that.

When I write letters for undergrads (in math, in the U.S.), I usually aim to speak exactly and only about things I know from first-hand experience. For that matter, transcripts (whether high-GPA or low) are usually part of the application, so second-hand comments from me add little.
Now and then, I am surprised to learn that a student of whom I think quite highly has had some rough spots earlier. I can only infer that they've done a great job of turning themselves around, and I'm happy to vouch for the positive things they're doing.

I was very surprised! The problem is that it was poor performance throughout, the grades didn't really get better.

@RJWilliams, hm, ... Does not bode well. Still, I somewhat prefer the evidence of my own eyes... Well, bad grades throughout will be visible in the transcript, so you/we don't have to "pile on". I'd just not refer to that and let the admissions cte reach their own conclusions.

@RJWilliams It might be worthwhile talking to the student about why their performance is poor.  Perhaps they are the kind of person who cannot motivate themselves to write up and submit their homework, but nevertheless studies hard and learns the subject well.  I would say a low GPA in this case is indicative of a failure of grades to measure learning, not really any fundamental flaw in the student themselves (other than an intolerance for work they do not find meaningful, if that can be considered a flaw).

As a student, I second the comment by @StevenGubkin that grades don't say as much about skill in the topic as they say about skill in getting good grades. I have always said that the reason my grades were just a bit above "sufficient" was that I preferred learning interesting stuff over what I know they will test. This semester I have tested that hypothesis by aiming for good grades instead (wasn't as fun though) and I got two perfect grades and another one higher than all of my previous grades, yet feel I learned less overall.

@RJWilliams As someone who has graduated with a low GPA, there are several people (including me) in my college (very competitive one) who joined FAANGs (Google, Apple, Facebook) graduating with 2.x GPAs. These people (including me) consistently focused on things apart from academics which paid off in the long term (research, CP). My advice would be to recommend based on your experience with the student. He might be relying on you to give him a glowing recommendation, having focused on your lab. I suggest you have a frank conversation with him and understand what his priorities are.

I can only infer that they've done a great job of turning themselves around Or that they just didn't put effort into coursework.  It's possible to learn the material well but score poorly simply by not turning in assignments.  Especially in courses with a 70% or 80% weight for the final exam it doesn't really make sense to do a semester's worth of assignments when you can walk away with a B- or C for just three hours' work if you don't particularly need the tedious exercise of doing assignments in order to learn the material.

This answer may be limited to the US and other places where letters of recommendation have quite a bit of importance. I realize that this isn't a universal.
If you think that a student is performing beyond what the grades would indicate you could, and should, say that. You don't need to explain bad grades, nor assume that the student's chances are lessened necessarily.
Some students do relatively poorly in situations in which there are high risk tests determining the grade. They might actually know the material, but just have issues about testing.
With the student's permission to discuss them with your colleagues, you could ask if they have any evidence that the student can (and probably will) perform past what the grades might indicate.
If you talk to the student, ask why they think their grades are lower than you would have expected.
But graduate study and academic research beyond that isn't about getting grades, but about having the knowledge, skills, attitude, and perseverance to do good work. If you see that in the student you can say that the student has shown performance beyond that indicated by the GPA. Some students, of course, even have learning difficulties that make high grades much harder to achieve, even if they have the knowledge.
I would occasionally write that "I would accept this student for any research task without reservation." That can mean a lot, provided that it is actually true.

Definitely true that I trust them to handle research tasks. I'll talk to my collogues to see what they think. Should I be worried about it reflecting poorly on me as a junior rank to recommend someone who has such a poor academic record? The programs they would be applying to include many senior people in my subfield.

If you are sure of your judgement, then state it. But be aware that your recommendations affect what you can say in the future. I once recommended a student with poor scores to the doctoral program at Georgia Tech and he did marvelously well and is now faculty at an R1. OTOH I once highly recommended a top student who failed out, but I didn't realize at the time that he was dying of AIDS. I had to deal with that aspect so that my future recommendations were properly evaluated. Fortunately, I knew the faculty that received the recommendation. Not every story is happy.

@Buffy Are you saying your recommendation was substandard because the student was dying of AIDS?

@GregoryCurrie My understanding is that Buffy's recommendation was good, but the student unfortunately could not keep to her/his standards due to serious medical situation. And this had later to be explained to those who did not know about it.

@GregoryCurrie, he was an excellent student in all ways and the recommendation (to a top school) reflected that. But he declined in health soon after, struggled through a year of grad studies and then died. He came back once to visit so I got  to say goodbye, at least. We lost one of our department staff to AIDS at about that time also. Sad age.

"But graduate study and academic research beyond that isn't about getting grades, but about having the knowledge, skills, attitude, and perseverance to do good work. " -- to a degree, but an admissions committee will also be very interested in whether the student will flunk out based on coursework.

@ScottSeidman but that info is already available to the committee

@Buffy Re the student who passed away: are you saying that had you known what the student was going through, you'd have not recommended them? I'm trying to figure out how them failing out due to no fault of their own (at least on the face of it) was somehow a bad thing: they obviously wanted to do academic work as much as they could to the end, and presumably that exactly has happened? I'm trying to get what your recommendation would be in such a case... Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but knowing if you'd have done anything differently had you known would be useful info.

@Kubahasn'tforgottenMonica, the recommendation would have been the same to the university, but my recommendation to him would have been to focus everything on staying alive. But, actually, I'm not sure that he even knew the prognosis at that moment.

@Buffy Thank you - that makes perfect sense.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to formulate a REVIEW paper in true sense?
Many thanks in advance for taking time to read this question.
Recently, as a group of students, we reviewed a certain topic in Machine Learning. The supervisor asked us to prepare a survey paper on the topics that we have read. We have gathered the required content, reviewed individual papers and made a report. Now, we have touched around 50 pages, whereas the supervisor wants us to shorten the stuff. The journal which we are targeting, says that the survey papers/review papers should be less than 21 pages. The journal is from IEEE, and has two column format.
The content itself is heavy in terms of equations. For instance, If we write a review of a single paper, its going to take more than half of one page where we explain the underline methodology. That is, how they did the stuff. For remaining part of the page, we explain their experiments etc. For some papers, the methodology discussion takes bit more space, due to equations. It took us around 30-35 pages for reviews only. We also created a section for Background Knowledge, which covers around 8-10 pages. The total length goes to 50 pages, after we added analysis and discussion part.
Some of us have published papers already, however this particular field is a bit different for us. We understand to shorten the content, but we really dont know how to deal with this kind of papers having dozens of equations. We however have already picked the key ones, and left out the others. For instance:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314026953_Variational_Relevant_Sample-Feature_Machine_a_Fully_Bayesian_Approach_for_Embedded_Feature_Selection
Questions:

My first question is related to Background Knowledge. Upto what extent one should describe a certain term. Are there any rules which should be considered while designing this section? like 20% of the whole paper?

My second question is particular to a single review (explanation of an article in my review paper) like the one I have shown above. For instance, in this particular paper, the author used an additional prior to handle feature sparsity. Now, I can put a single sentence to explain this, however, I believe that I put the equation there so that its clear, how they did it. In the same way, few more equations like likelihood definition, posterior form, and estimation equations might take some space. The whole thing swallows up. If there are like 20 such papers, obviously, it will end up with 35 pages, like it has happened. Should I leave out the equations? My question, is how should I setup the review format, what to include and what to exclude.

While reading the above, please note that I understand that in review papers, people are mostly interested in tables, comparison sheets and analysis stuff. However, we are still required to present enough review of papers.
Regards.

Ask your supervisor!

As I said, there is very little communication. So I am trying to handle this myself, somehow.

Look at other review papers, especially in the journal you're interested in, and observe how they handled this issue of length restriction vs. detail.

I found not many examples in this regard. It boils down to the spacing the equations eat. If there are like 100 equations in the paper, it swallows up everything. The journal says you can't cross 21 pages. Looks like I should remove all equations.. but how will I explain everything in absence of equations, that remains a question.

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


text:
Contacting POI regarding status of my application
I applied for admission for a PhD at a university in the US well before the deadline. A potential advisor contacted me saying that he is recommending my application to the department. I thanked him for it. However, it has been almost one month, and I still have not received the official letter from the department. Should I send an email to the professor enquiring when I can expect the official letter?

I don't think a lot of US universities use "rolling admissions" anymore and release all acceptance decisions on the same date. Often it is April 1.

@Buffy April 1?? That's very late, maybe it's field dependent but most admits I hear of are at least early March. I guess it could also depend on interview schedules

The professor's recommendation to the department is not a promise of admission. You can ask the professor about when you might hear from the department one way or the other - particularly if you have other positions you need to decide about. You can't reasonably expect an official letter at this point.

It is unlikely, in the US, that anyone will hear prior to April 1, actually. See: https://www.ivywise.com/blog/regular-decision-notification-dates/. There is some variation, but this seems to be pretty typical.

I probably should have mentioned it in the original question itself, but in the email, the professor had said "I hope you will accept this offer when it
arrives"  and had also mentioned that I will most likely be offered a TA or a RA position. These things led me to believe that I should expect an official letter.

@AnonymousAsker, perhaps, but, again, in the US a professor doesn't normally have the authority to accept you and especially not to offer a TA. Don't burn any bridges prior to April 6. Good luck, though.

If a professor tells admissions he wants a particular guy, there is no way admissions would reject that. Why would they?


text:
Filing a patent which my research advisor will found a company on it
I'd appreciate your advice on my current situation a lot!
So I'm an international phD student getting close to graduate.
My research advisor got so interested in my recent project and he's working on filing a patent out of it with the institution's office for the related work.
Seems like he'll start the company as well based on the project.
Followings are the questions I have. As I do not have the experience or knowledge on such a situation, I'd appreciate your help so much in advance.

To guarantee any potential rights that I can possibly claim as a co-inventor, is there anything I need to make sure with my PI during the patent filing process? For instance, although I am not gonna accept his offer to work in his company, would it be still possible to secure my equity as a co-inventor or so?

In case my PI wants to exclude me out of the patent filing or any financial benefit created out of it, is there any way I can claim my portion?

Thank you so much for your time checking this, and any advice would be appreciated.

Disclaimer: I'm not a layer so the answer is not an advice but a collection of thoughts based on my experience. And each particular situation can have many facets which one with limited knowledge may not foresee. Also intellectual property law varies from country to country, so additional details would help answering.
I start from last question:

No, your supervisor can not exclude you from the patent as you are a coinventor. If she or he files the patent without you, you can claim against it in front of the patent office. Make sure you have some proofs of your authorship. If you had exchanged emails with your supervisor on this topic, it can be also useful. Note that in patent right public disclosure of invention leads to loss of patentability. In simple words if you tell someone (non-inventors) about invention and they can prove it, the patent application can be rejected.

The first one is the more difficult question. Here it strongly depend on your relations with your employer and country laws on intellectual property. In some countries having a contract with your employer would mean that intellectual property (IP) generated within this contract belongs to the employer. Depending on country you may keep parts IP of it or get only a bonus from employer. In situation you describe, it is difficult to give you an answer without knowing details of your contract and IP laws of the country. In any case typically the patent can be licensed to whoever wants to use (the startup company in your case) it by IP owner (inventors or/and your employer).

Hope it helps to proceed with more detailed search.

Right, thanks! "Assignee" - this is exactly how it is called in patents.


text:
Is there a standard to understand what plagiarism is exactly?
Let's assume I learnt what plagiarism is on different websites such as university webpages, wikipedia, dictionary webpages, articles that can be reached Google Scholar, blogs, etc. and wrote about it.
As you predict my words, sentences, paragraphs will be similar or same what I learnt from them.
Is this considered plagiarism?
Is there a standard to understand what plagiarism is exactly?

If you don't cite your sources, that's plagiarism.

Academia does not have standards.  https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4471/academia-varies-more-than-you-think-it-does-the-movie  The meaning of plaigiarism is not very controversial.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/31315/what-is-the-difference-between-plagiarism-and-copyright-infringement

Are you asking about professional plagiarism or what gets called plagiarism in classroom situations. The latter can be a bit broader than the former.

Wikipedia knows all. Wikipedia tells all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism

The most commonly understood definition of plagiarism is presenting someone else's work as your own.
When writing general background for a thesis or article, it's possible that you present common facts and methodologies without citing every single detail, but even then it should be clear that this is not your contribution.
When whole sentences start to resemble previous work, you need to take a step back and look at what you are saying.
Are you briefly mentioning Pythagoras' theorem? Maybe throw the word "commonly" in there.
Are you presenting someone else's findings? Cite them.
For example "The equation is given by Smith et al. as ..." or "The dates are canonically given as 450BC to 430BC [1][14][22]."
When in doubt, cite. I've yet to see someone told off for providing references to their claims.

A correct definition of plagiarism would include self-plagiarism.

In the first sentence, if you replace "work" with "ideas" you get a better statement, I think. Plagiarism is about ideas.

Being about ideas, you don't avoid plagiarism by paraphrasing. Only by citing.


text:
I'm international PhD student and I may get terminated soon. Advice urgently needed
Apologies if this is not the right place to ask this question, but I absolutely need advice.
I am currently third-year international PhD student living in United States on F1 visa and full funding. So far I have been performing quite well, I finished almost all coursework with good grades, completed most of other requirenments, and had pretty good standing with my advisor. However, for the past couple of months I have been struggling A LOT and unfortunately, due to different reasons, I was unable to pass my Comprehensive exam last fall. My dissertation proposal was a total mess, and unfortunately, it only got worse from there. In few weeks I have to submit new proposal which is still terrible, and today I found out I have to basically re-write everything from scratch. Moreover, I am not sure if I will be able to pass the part of exam which I failed in fall (although I do feel way more confident).
It is truly difficult to explain the shame and guilt I am feeling right now. Especially since my University gave me a chance. I do not want to quit, but I feel like I may get terminated. If I get terminated, I may have to leave the United States. This will destory me, especially since I have mypartner here. I know all of it may sound silly, but I am panicking right now. I though I will be able to push through this spring, but I have panic attacks every day now.
Therefore, my question is: What happens if international student gets terminated from the program? Do you believe, if I fail comprehensive exam once again, my department may give me once more chance? What would you do in my place? Can I still transfer/change my major on my F1 visa? Should I just master-out and apply for OPT? Is it even possible?
My university does not give me any specific answers. My advisor knows I am struggling, but not the extent of it.

Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.

How many chances to take a qualifying exam are extended to you depends on how much support you have in the faculty - how much they, or at least someone, believe(s) in you. I’ve seen people being counseled out after one failure, and others passing in their third try. Even if it’s nerve-wrecking, you should treat every exam as if it might be your last chance.
As to “mastering out,” if you went through the entire coursework and were given at least a second chance, they quite possibly would offer you to leave with an M.Sc. anyway, if it comes to that.
Finally, as to changing fields, that depends on how much work you have put in in the field you might be thinking about, and if you have connections in a different department. You could also switch advisers, but from what you write here, your adviser sounds supportive and not the source of your problems.
You’d probably have to leave the country if you’re here on an F1, but for now I’d focus on passing the field exam coming up.

Thank you so much. The simple thought of leaving the country right now is so distracting that I fail to focus on the most important things. I just need to prepare myself for every possibility and try my best to pass this time.

I completely understand. Despite the fact that he’s old, I’d do as @EthanBolker suggested and sit down with your adviser too for some pat on the back, and whatever advice he has to share, then throw myself entirely into preparing for the field exam.

I will do it. Thank you once again :)


text:
Papers published during undergraduate degree: can they form the basis to a PhD?
I'm presently finishing up my undergraduate degree in Mathematics, and have written a number of papers, three of which have been published in reputable combinatorial journals (think journals published by Elsevier and Springer). From these three, I am the sole author on two of them.
Given that I have invested so much time and energy on 'extra curricular activities' (as my head of department calls them), can they serve as the basis to a PhD thesis? Which is to say, can a considerable part of a thesis consist of previous work which has not been used to obtain any other degree?
This final remark is important, I feel. A fourth paper with my supervisor is in the works, but the material presented there will appear in my undergraduate dissertation. I am then of the opinion that this material should not be used toward another degree.
If it helps, I attend a northern European university, and intend on doing a PhD in Europe/UK/USA.
Edit: I would like to perhaps mention the motivation for asking this question. I have heard stories of people doing research in their private capacity, then doing a PhD in quite a short period of time (a year or so), since they had a lot of material already. I cannot imagine this being the case however. What are your thoughts on this?

However, the situation is perhaps somewhat different. Looking at the edit history and replies to the question, the original author did not mean journal publications when mentioning research, but rather self-study on topics of interest and writing a literature review.

In the U.S., if you are admitted to a top-tier PhD program, to just use it to "cash in" your prior work would be a severe under-utilization of the resources of that program, I think, in any case. Comment?

@paulgarrett you make a valid point there. What sort of resources do you mean? I have a number of PhD student friends at my university, and in terms of resources they hardly have any. Of course, at top-tier universities, you would have access to some of the leading academics in a field, which cannot be underestimated -- that I understand. One reason why I asked was because sustaining myself abroad for 4 years is one thing, while for 2 years is another, in financial terms. I see finances to be a great hurdle which might actually hinder me from following a PhD program.

About money: in the U.S., in math, a PhD student should expect to be supported by a stipend, as well as having their tuition paid. Yes, possibly some teaching-assistant work, but with a little practice the latter is not onerous. True, you wouldn't be living in luxury, but also not going into terrible debt. So money (unless you have many dependents) should not be a decisive issue.

I don't think this is impossible, but I doubt that many doctoral programs would permit it. Not zero, but not many. That is up to your university and an advisor.
You have published some papers which is good and will likely win you a slot at a good place, but there are "papers" and there are papers. If you have proof of some hundred year old conjecture that Erdős et al failed to prove then, sure.
But, since you seem to be good, I'd rather suggest that you spend the time it might take to earn a doctorate to do some even better work, ending up with a truly awesome CV and professors who will strongly support you in your career. I think that most places will still make you pass comprehensive exams, showing that your knowledge and skill isn't too narrow.
In the US, finances aren't a problem (unless you need to support a large family) as you will normally have a TA (or more likely an RA in your case) so that you get both a tuition waiver and a stipend.
But the early work you have done can certainly form the basis of what you will need to do for a dissertation. You might find the faculty of the right institution helpful in extending it, or not. But the experience would be a much more solid basis of a career than taking, what I think is a minimal path.
And, if you are as good as that then I'd think your path won't be all that long anyway. And the opportunity to get a bit of teaching experience as well will give you a better career base.
So, possible? Maybe. Advisable? Not so much.

Oh no, my work is definitely not of that calibre! I have published jointly with my supervisor, and they are very well respected in their field (they have worked with the likes of Harary etc). But I don't think this is very important, albeit it might play in my favour.
I have read another comment which also stated that in the EU, many PhD programs take the form of a paid job. This is encouraging to hear and eases pressure from me re. finances. I enjoy what I do, so I don't actually mind a 4 year program. In fact, I'd rather stay a student for as long as possible :-)
Many many thanks!

PS. I'm not counting on my publications for admission, only as a basis. I have a friend of mine who had a paper with the same supervisor before applying for a PhD abroad. The really top tier universities did not accept them after the second interview. So I'm definitely not betting on my work for admission.

My mathematical "ancestry" is pretty impressive, but that doesn't really reflect on me. And, since you bring it up, you have the disadvantage of people worrying about how much assistance you got from your supervisor. Better to prove yourself, I think, so that no doubts arise.

Precisely, I agree with you completely. I worry about that sometimes, even if I know what my contributions actually are. Thanks for the good advice.

The US  and EU (Germany, at least) have very different admissions criteria. Hard to get into a program without an MS in some places in Europe.

Hmm, that is something I should consider. I have the option, under a government scheme, to follow a Masters (taught or by research), at zero cost at my local university. I know on paper this is a no brainer, but there are certain personal matters due to which I wish to move away, at least for some time. Need to weigh this option well.

If you follow up on that, you should also make some applications to doctoral programs. There is and advantage to moving and getting exposure to the ideas of a wider range of people. I'd recommend directly joining a doctorate if you can find a good one.


text:
The role of a good collaborator
I'm midway through a PhD in Physics in the United States. In my short time in academia so far, I've had several distinct kinds of collaborations. I've collaborated with peers who are working on understanding a new area together, with folks in other department who are doing applied work, and of course with my advisor.
Each collaboration has had its own unique structure. For example, in some of the applied work, my collaborators were interested in learning more about the details of my area, and in others my collaborators were just interested in getting results from me to plug in to their work. In some of the work with peers, each of us handled a distinct aspect of the work (and we understood little of the each other's aspect); in others, we worked together on the same problems and batted ideas back and forth.
Many of the collaborations have had the same kind of issue for me, though. Sometimes I feel like my collaborators owe me a certain amount of attention. (For simplicity, please consider that the collaborator is at the same level of seniority as me.) For example, once I was on the verge of a "breakthrough" and talking through it with someone would have made a big difference, but my collaborator didn't want to engage. For another example, once I was very confused about a particular question in an applied collaborator's area that was relevant to our project and they brushed me off when I asked for help.
Almost every collaboration I've had would have been improved in my eyes if my collaborators were more generous with each other. However, I know that there must be a line. The famous Hardy-Littlewood rules have an Axiom 2 which states that "There was no obligation to reply, or even to read, any letter one sent to the other". Clearly, other established researchers could feel differently than me.
My question is intended to elicit responses which flesh out the role of a collaborator, with a particular eye towards interactions with others on the team. When a researcher (student or established) agrees to be a collaborator with someone, what responsibilities are implicit in that?

"breakthrough" or "burn-out"? from the context is not clear.

Your sense of things seems to be correct, but you can't control others. It would be "nice" if they shared more, but it may not happen. So, you need to assure that you aren't exploited, but, beyond that, your example might even serve, over time, to change things.
However, as you build a career and build a circle of collaborators, you can, then, have discussions among yourselves about sharing. Being the sponsor/leader of a research group, for example, gives you some "standing" to influence the rules. Those rules should revolve around authorship among other things.
Generosity is a good thing, but not everyone will contribute. This is especially true in high risk high reward situations, which can, unfortunately be the case in academia.
You are responsible for your own behavior. You have some, but limited, influence over that of others. Setting a good example helps as long as you don't get exploited.

PhDs are expendable: only official advisors have somehow some kind of responsibilities towards them, other collaborators are usually in the mood "let's see what this PhD can bring me".
Even the very generous collaborators will be able to help you only in a maieutic way, by making you posing yourself the right questions so you can find yourself the answers.
If you are discussing about practical issues, then it is even simpler, it boils down to "do something, spend x time, who pays for the manhour?". It is the academia, but these aspects are nowadays very close to the for-profit world were every working minute must be accounted (and paid somehow).
PhDs is a solitary endeavour, and it requires patience. I understand that with financial and time constrains imposed by the modern PhD's programs that it is very difficult to give (take, to say it better) yourself the time to sail to the final goal.

I think your collaboration experiences are quite typical: some turn out a success, some not, and sometimes one has to deal with "free riders" who want to take credit without working for it.  I will address your emphasized question and also another question that I find relevant in this context.

When a researcher (student or established) agrees to be a collaborator with someone, what responsibilities are implicit in that?

There are no implicit responsibilities. Therefore, it's a good idea to have a conversation in the early phases in a collaboration to figure out the responsibilities and make them explicit.
If that doesn't happen, there's still a chance that responsibilities  will emerge naturally. That especially applies if one person acts as the "driver" of the collaboration and has  a good idea of what they need from everybody, and everybody acts in a cooperative way.

How do you avoid free riders?

Free riders are collaborators who want credit without doing anything, even when prompted to do so. Two ideas for avoiding them:

Work with collaborators who already have been collaborators of people from your "trusted circle". That way, you can ask your friends about the collaboration behavior of your potential collaborator.
When working for the first time with someone new, don't immediately start with a big project that will take a huge effort. Instead, either choose a project with a limited scope, or become part of a bigger collaboration where your own responsibility will be small. That way, you can get a first-hand impression of everyone's collaboration behavior.


text:
What software tools to use for creating publication quality system diagram?
So far I have used powerpoint to create system block diagram or System overview diagrams and convert it to pdf to add in overleaf. Working with powerpoint is tedious. What other softwares are recommended for creating publication quality system block diagrams?

Try Inkscape.  It's free.

Since you are working in overleaf, the LaTeX tikz package would seem to be a natural choice.
The learning curve is a little steep, but there are probably system block diagram examples you can modify.
You can embed the tikz code in your document, or include it, or use tikz standalone to create a pdf.
https://www.overleaf.com/learn/latex/TikZ_package


text:
Access to good research communities without being in the university
I'm interested in research in the field of educational sciences. I may enroll in a Ph.D. course in the future. But right now, I'm not a student anywhere and I want to do research in my interested field even without being in the university.
I think one of the most important benefits of being a Ph.D. student is access to scientific community. You have access to professors and other students, and you can engage in a group scientific research work.
My question is that what are the possibilities for an independent researcher (in a developing country) to have access to scientific communities? To have discussions, get reviews, etc. ?

Where are you based? Where I'm from, you need to have both a bachelors and a masters degree in order to start a PhD, and doing a those would already integrate you into an academic environment.

I have gotten my BS many years ago and in an unrelated field. My MS is relatively new, but it was not from a good university and it doesn't help me about the above concerns.

Also, important question: are you a teacher? Most schools should have someone in charge of professional development.

No, I'm not a teacher. In addition, in my country schools do not provide such opportunities.

One of your best bets would be to find some active SubReddits, Discord, and GitHub communities. Without university infrastructure, it’s a very steep challenge. Even with my suggestions, you become increasingly limited by what you’re able to do.

GitHub communities?

Yes. GitHub communities exist. For example, Ethereum is a decentralized blockchain network that has active research from a wide variety of people. Keep in mind, there are insanely intelligent people who also look at serious academics with derision. What matters is the quality of the content that is produced, everything else is just administrative.

My question is that what are the possibilities for an independent researcher (in a developing country) to have access to scientific communities? To have discussions, get reviews, etc. ?

To get reviews, you need to submit manuscripts to journals.
In addition, setting up a profile at scholarly 'social media'-like sites might help, e.g. ResearchGate. Some people have concerns against such profit-oriented (but free-to-use) platforms, but it might help with finding a small initial network.
To discuss with an informal "community of attention", well, many scholars are on Twitter. You could see what is discussed under the hashtag #HigherEducation, and follow like-minded people to exchange ideas. You can tweet about novel papers you read in your discipline; the authors will notice that and thank you for spreading their ideas (and thereby raising their Altmetric Scores).
Some Twitter accounts are specifically designed to introduce 'earliest career researchers' into the community, e.g. @AcademicChatter.

It is possible, but difficult. Possibly very difficult. On the other hand, if you can get the process started it can accelerate moderately quickly.
The problem is to make the first contact and convince someone that you have interesting ideas and who will be willing to communicate with you over the long run. Blind emails to people are a poor strategy, since people are busy and it is hard to convince them that working with you will have any value without personal contact.
If you can work independently then you can submit papers to appropriate journals and conferences and make contacts that way, but working alone is, as you say, difficult in itself.
If you can use other social contacts to get you in touch with some academic, and the people recommending you will vouch for you, then you can get started. But, once it happens, make expanding the circle of contacts and even collaboration a major effort. Co-authors, for example, will be happy to introduce you to others.
Note that publishing in academic journals doesn't require that you be associated with any academic institution. The review process tends (most cases) to focus on the papers themselves, not the affiliation of the author.
But, find a way to make some personal contact. Find a way to interest them in some idea you have for research/publications. Expand from there. Not easy, though.

One silver lining of the pandemic is that most conferences and workshops have gone online, eliminating travel expenses, and cut registration fees, doubly reducing barriers to entry.  You could look for some in your field to keep abreast of what is happening, present your work, and network.


text:
Can I fix error in submitted conference manuscript after submission due date
I recently submitted a manuscript to a conference but I found there is a formula error. Now it is about 2 weeks after submission due data. Should I email the chair asking whether I can update? Or should I just wait?

These things vary with the conference, but it is likely that you can make the change now if you contact the program chair or other conference official. There will usually be a later date at which final versions are required for accepted papers.
But if the paper hasn't been accepted yet, then contacting them might prevent a rejection. In any case someone like the "program chair" will give you the necessary feedback.
You might help yourself a bit if you prepare an explanation of where and why a change is necessary so that if a paper is already with a reviewer then they can quickly catch up to the current version.


text:
Visiting Assistant Professor before a postdoc position?
I am considering a 1 year visiting assistant professor position so as to have employment upon my defense in the next few months. However, after that time I would seriously consider other options including postdoc positions, but I wonder how difficult this 1 year "gap" would make obtaining a postdoc position. I would still be able to collaborate with the research group I am currently in and would also look to develop some theoretical/computational aspects of my research abilities during this time. I also have a paper to be published likely after my defense. Looking for any insight or if anyone else has been through this same situation.

What field roughly?

Don't take a teaching job unless you really want to teach.  It's not good for students to have unmotivated teachers.  The pay is rarely good anyway.

What is your actual question? “Looking for insight” is not on topic for this site.

In mathematics in the US, VAP positions are often considered to be a kind of postdoc, most useful for people who want to go into college teaching at regional comprehensive universities or community colleges.  It is possible to move on from one of these positions to a research postdoc, but don't expect that you'll be doing things during your year as a VAP that will improve your chances of getting a research postdoc- you'll probably have no time for research.

I am considering a 1 year visiting assistant professor position...after that time I would seriously consider other options including postdoc positions A visiting assistant professor position is surely higher ranked than a postdoc position: Why take a demotion? I wonder how difficult this 1 year "gap" would make obtaining a postdoc The visiting position doesn't seem like a gap, especially when you would...collaborate with the research group I am currently in and would also look to develop some theoretical/computational aspects of my research abilities during this time

If the alternative is a gap year then it is a good idea to take it or, at least, consider it.
Presumably a visiting assistant professor, if you don't hold an academic position elsewhere, is just about the same as a post-doc but under a different name, since it isn't tenure-track. It would, of course, depend on what is expected of you.
If the duties are very heavy on teaching, then it is more like a better paid adjunct. You probably want to avoid that. If it is similar to an ordinary faculty position, with some teaching and some research then it can have long term advantages for an academic career. But consider, also, what courses you would have to teach and how much support you get in doing that. And, some post-docs do teach.
If you are doing research (successfully) during this year as a non-student, you have the opportunity to change the relationship you have with the faculty, building up a circle of collaboration that can be advantageous for your career.
Overall, though, I'd think that it gives you more, not fewer, options.  And certainly more options than being unemployed for a year. But if this is the first option that pops up, don't neglect to look for others before you commit.

And who knows what the world (and job market) will look like in a year. More graduates chasing fewer (?) positions overall is not great. But a (likely) multi-year post-doc might be better if it can be found now giving more time to ride out Covid-related weirdness.


text:
Is it possible to get a book category based on ISBN?
Libraries organize non-fiction books in category with sub-categories, using a hierarchical system, that makes it possible to find books on a specific subject.
Is there some lookup service, for example web page or database, that can provide category with sub-categories based on a books ISBN number?

What do ISBN lookup services not provide already?

ISBN lookup, e.g. https://isbnsearch.org/isbn/055380457X, only provides title, author and publication information, but there is no characterization of the contents, thus no information about how the book could be organized in a library.

The Google Books API offers a category-field.
Example: https://www.googleapis.com/books/v1/volumes?q=isbn:055380457X (Business & Economics being the category).
Another example would be WorldCat. Just type in the ISBN in the search for books, and you will find categories or topics associated with that book. (They also have a machine-readable API, but you will need to register, as far as I know.)
But note that normally every library uses its own curated hierarchy of tags.

Thanks.  Your comments made me look up how big libraries handles this, and it appears that two systems are widely used; Library of Congress Classification (LCC) and Dewey Decimal Classes (DCC).  Some lookup services provide this info, like http://classify.oclc.org/classify2/ with your book as http://classify.oclc.org/classify2/ClassifyDemo?search-standnum-txt=055380457X&startRec=0.  Also https://openlibrary.org/ has this info.


text:
Is it ok to record a conversation with a professor without their knowledge and can it be used as evidence?
If a student is being harassed or expecting to be harassed, can the student record the meeting with the professor without the professor’s knowledge?
Additionally, could this recording be used to create a case or as evidence against or the professor for misconduct either at the college/university level or beyond (e.g. in court)?

I think you should consult a lawyer, not random people on the internet.

Is it possible to ask you to explain more about the word "harassed". Thanks

@user0410 harassment mostly tied to academic performance or conduct of the student. Can include reduction of mark or unjustified grading (lowering GPA or even causing the student to fail a course), bullying (false accusations, dismissal, gaslighting, etc.) or any others.

I am trying to think of what makes this question specific to academia. That is, what difference would the academic context make, as opposed to a general professional environment. No thoughts so far.

It can backfire. See "entrapment".

First, the legality varies. Legal in some places, but not in others. A lawyer can give legal advice.
Second, a recording might be ruled inadmissible in any proceedings. The "chain of possession" is an important consideration for evidence in legal proceedings in many places.
Third, and, perhaps more important, recording someone without permission might be perceived by them as a threat, resulting in a dangerous situation. So, I don't recommend this as a course of action.
If you have actually been harassed then report it. If you think you might be harassed, then find a way to avoid the situation in which it might occur or take some action to protect yourself. For example, not meeting the potential harasser privately, especially behind a closed door, for example.

Thank you for your answer, now what about the fact that most schools have an image to uphold, so siding with a professor might be their preferred approach? And if a professor makes false accusations against the student, how should the student protect him/herself?

Actually, part of that "image to uphold" is (most places) an unwillingness to be associated with monsters. There are a few exceptions, unfortunately, for superstar monsters, but even some of them have crashed and burned. So, it may not be as bleak as you fear. But if you have accusations against you, then a lawyer's advice is probably worth the money unless the normal university process is adequate. The "Dean of Students" or the "Ombuds" might be a useful intermediary. Some places have formal student unions.

thank you! I’ll keep that in mind.

Could you elaborate on your third point? I find it very unlikely that a potential perpetrator would behave more aggressively when suspecting they are being recorded. A prospect of having a strong evidence of a wrongdoing is a good reason for not breaking any rules. As I understand, we are talking about a professor in a department, not a mobster on an abandoned street.

@Buffy is correct that the legality of making a recording depends on the local laws, but there should be no problem with admissibility in evidence. Since you were part of the conversation, you can authenticate the recording by your testimony.

@Neithea, that depends, also, on the law. I wouldn't want to assume it is true. If it were recorded by a third party and the "chain of possession" were strictly maintained then, yes, but in general, not so obvious. Consult a lawyer. And assume that everything will be challenged.


text:
When does NSF update the status date?
I have submitted a proposal to NSF about 9 months ago, and the status of the proposal in Fastlane is "pending" with the last update being the day after it was submitted. Does it mean that it has not been reviewed yet? I have heard that when a proposal is reviewed by a panel, the status date gets updated even though the status might remain the same.

Have other awards been made in response to this solicitation?


text:
Should I put an experimental experience from master' degree as a skillset in my CV after a computational PhD?
I am applying for mechanical engineering and materials engineering postdoc positions. I mostly apply for computational research positions but sometimes I apply where they are looking for experimentalists with some computational experience as well.  Can I mention the following as a skillset in the CV without being misleading?
My PhD was in computational materials science where I did not do any experiments. However in 2013, I completed master's degree where I had done quite a significant amount of experimental work. I did scanning electron microscopy, xray diffraction experiments and mechanical testing. I did not do those during my PhD. I remember how to analyze the results, but I don't remember how to operate the machines anymore.
Under such scenario, should I mention experimental methods as an experience in my CV?
Currently, I mentioned these in following way:
>     Research Skills
>     Computational: Experienced in nonlinear Finite Element Analysis (FEA)....blah blah blah
>     • Tools: Python, Fortran, blah blah
>     • Packages: Scikit-Learn, blah blah
>
>     Experimental: Proficient in metallurgical polishing and mechanical testing; Experienced in materials-characterization methods: Scanning
> Electron Microscopy, Electron Backscatter Diffraction (EBSD).

If you were put in front of one of those machines, would you only be able to stare at it blankly?

Yes, I won't be able to operate them on the fly. But I would be able to learn it quickly, know the technicalities and somewhat interpret the results (though not expertly).

Then I see no issue. Machines aren't all the same anyways.

In general it is a good idea to list all positive/relevant experience. But if you are worried about it being misleading, just put a date on the item, listing when the project ended, or the start and end dates. People can do their own math.
But leaving it out entirely seems a mistake to me.


text:
Ask for reference letter for applying graduate school, professor agreed, but no more follow up
I am currently preparing for the graduate school application. I was asking for reference letter from one of my Math professor who knows me well. I took classes with him for twice, went to his office hour frequently, and we were talking to each other for many different things other than the class/grades. He was very caring and helpful all the time. I asked him if he will be willing to write me a ref letter for graduate school programs, and after nearly 2 weeks, I got an reply said yes, he will be very willing to. But he reminded me that he is a very slow people and I will need to remind him at least two weeks before the deadline. After that, I sent him about some supplementary materials such as my CV/personal statements to help him write the ref letter and ask if he will need more information from me, I have been waited for more than two weeks, and I repeatedly sent reminder emails for three times, but I still got not reply from him. I went to his office, but because of the pandemic thing, he was not there. I am so nervous and concerned and not sure what sure I do next? I was calling the Math department secretary to ask her to send an email to remind him to check the email, but I also did not get any feedback from him yet. Does anyone have any suggestion for me??? I will be really appreciate for that! Also, if I got reply from him, should I politely ask him to give me his phone number in case I might not be able to contact him through email again. I am not sure if this is polite but if he cannot reponde me in time in particular when the deadline gets closer, that will be very awful :(

I suspect that he knows of your concern and will come through, though at the last minute. But "repeatedly sending reminders" is also "being a bit of a pest". Most people will forgive you for that, but not all.
But, he has other things to do and needs to think about what to write on your behalf.
Phoning him will just make it worse, interrupting his schedule.
So long as he knows of the deadline you should be fine. A message a few days before the deadline wouldn't hurt, mentioning your eagerness to know.
But replying to constant reminders just slows down the process, so they are often ignored. It is a mistake to make him less efficient than he could be. Relax for a bit. There is little incentive for him to rush it unless the deadline is immanent.

Thank you for the advice! My current concern is that since he hasn't reply me back for any of the emails and I haven't sent him the invitations of reference letter from each schools, should I wait until at least he reply me? or should I directly let the schools send him the invitations?

It is hard to say from a distance. Perhaps he is waiting for the formal invitations. Is there a reason not to have them sent?

Maybe, no I can definitely just let the schools send the invitations, my concern is just since I will be applying 10-12 schools, so there will be around 12 invitations sent to him. Since I am not sure if he was being busy with dealing with other emails, I am not sure if now is the right time to send the formal invitations since I am worried that he probably will ignore them again... which is not a good thing.

If you've been "a bit of a pest" it is easy to ignore your mails. It is less likely that he will ignore formal invitations. But with a lot of schools you have to expect a single letter, rather than one tailored to each school.


text:
Is it alright to ask recommendation letter from the same professor more than once?
Background: I was applying for grad school last year, and asked my professors for a lot of rec letters(likely 15 programs which made the work really tedious). They kindly agreed and send all the rec letter much earlier before the due date, and the outcome is really good, I had been admitted by almost all the excellent universities which I thought I won't had much chance, so I suppose my professors' recommendation helped a lot and I am very grateful.
However, the problem is, due to complicated reasons I had to reapply this year, and I'm not sure whether it would be appropriate to ask professors who already helped me once again since I already troubled them too much last year. And I didn't contact them after I send them a thank you letter which made me feeling like the only thing I did after graduate is keep asking rec letter from professors. I could find enough rec letter from my intern supervisor since I had graduated for a while but my friends told me universities really value the rec letter from undergraduate professors so I better at least have one. My current plan is that I would ask them if they still have the rec letter they wrote for me last year and if so, I will awkwardly ask them again. I really appreciate what my professors already done for me and I really don't want trouble them. It appears to be a very hard time for all universities and professors because of the CVOID situation, so I'm not sure if I should even bother them at this point. Please let me know if my plan would be culturally appropriate or not. I graduated from an american college if it matters.

The work of writing letters of recommendation is in the composing, not the sending. That work has already been done. It is no real burden to send out letters once written. Ask.

Thank you so much for your answer!


text:
What is a "series volume no"?
A journal asked me to add the "series volume no" of a book in my list of references:
[10] P. Buser,Geometry and Spectra of Compact Riemann Surfaces, Modern Birkhäuser Classics,Q11Reprint of the 1992 edition (Birkhäuser, Boston, 2010).
From  "mathscinet" i get this,
@book {MR2742784,
    AUTHOR = {Buser, Peter},
     TITLE = {Geometry and spectra of compact {R}iemann surfaces},
    SERIES = {Modern Birkh\"{a}user Classics},
      NOTE = {Reprint of the 1992 edition},
 PUBLISHER = {Birkh\"{a}user Boston, Ltd., Boston, MA},
      YEAR = {2010},
     PAGES = {xvi+454},
      ISBN = {978-0-8176-4991-3},
   MRCLASS = {58J50 (30F10 32G15 58J53)},
  MRNUMBER = {2742784},
       DOI = {10.1007/978-0-8176-4992-0},
       URL = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-8176-4992-0},

but i don't know where is the "series volume no".
Tanks for any discussion or answer
}

One possibility if you can't get an answer that satisfies the journal is to cite the 1992 edition, which is likely easier to get ahold of anyway for many people because library budgets were probably a lot worse in 2010 than in 1992, plus libraries may not have bothered to purchase the reprint of a book already on their shelves. Of course, if you do this, you'll want to double check any actual quotes and assertations you make to ensure that everything you say is correct for the 1992 edition, but most likely nothing had been changed, even typos (for those Birkhäuser Classics volumes).

I just realized that most people (reading Academia) probably have access the book digitally, which I suspect libraries are much more likely to have than a physical copy. I didn't initially think of this because I don't have such access (unless I'm on-site at a nearby university library and also fill-out a "community access request form", which for me is more bothersome than simply checking out a hardcopy of the book itself with my community library card, which only needs renewal once a year, not every visit), and most of the books I make use of are physical copies of books on my bookshelves.

@DaveLRenfro thank you for your comment, what do you think if i put that:  Peter Buser, Geometry and spectra of compact Riemann surfaces, volume 106 of Progress in Mathematics. Birkhäuser Boston, Inc. Boston, MA, 1992.    ||      i found it cited like that in an other article

@DaveLRenfro or like that for example:    [10] P. Buser,Geometry and Spectra of Compact Riemann Surfaces, Modern Birkhäuser Classics,Q11Reprint of the 1992 edition (Birkhäuser, Boston, 2010), (Originally published as Volume 106 in the series Progress in Mathematics).

Regarding your suggested versions, I don't know. This is something probably only the journal can tell you, as it likely pertains to their specific style rules. But those classic reprints are fairly well know (Springer has such a series also), so surely this is something they would have dealt with before.

First of all, let me state this, because this does not seem to be understood by the OP but none of the other answers actually try to clarify this confusion. "Series volume no" is an abbreviation of "series volume number", i.e. the number of the volume in the series. The journal is asking you what the position (number) of your book (the volume) is in the series "Modern Birkhaüser Classic".
I have another volume from the series Modern Birkhaüser Classic in my hands. No number for this volume is to be found anywhere. Nothing on Springer's webpage either. None of the usual bibliographical databases (mathscinet, zbmath) mention any kind of number. My university's library search engine does not make mention of a number either. If such a number even exists, it is useless to anyone.
Simply tell the journal that despite being part of a series, there is no number attached to this volume. If the journal is somehow adamant on having a number, then your other option is to cite the original edition from 1992, if you are certain that the content is exactly the same, but this sounds pointless.

+1 This is what I thought too, but did not have the patience you took to confirm it.

Indeed, the whole purpose of including this information is to make the referenced material easier to find. Even if a number exists, as some other answers suggest, if it's this hard to find it isn't useful to anybody. In my experience, this task of checking references for missing information is either automated or done by someone who is checking against a very strict list. It's normal to respond "this doesn't exist/doesn't apply". For example, I've run into journals asking for different information for software citations that just make no sense; it's never been a problem to explain politely.

Since the book is part of a series, it must also have a series number - its position in the series.
Unfortunately enough there are 109 books in that series, and Springer's website does not order them in series number (which would be expected to roughly correspond to chronological order). If you have a physical copy of the book you might be able to find the series order in the front matter of the book, possibly on the copyright page. Otherwise you might have to ask Springer for the number.

I found this on worldcat.org by searching the title
Geometry and spectra of compact Riemann surfaces : "Reprint of the 1992 edition.". - "Originally published as Volume 106 in the series Progress in mathematics"--

But the reprint appears to be in a different series called Modern Birkhäuser Classics. So the reprint probably has some other series volume number.


text:
Correcting mistakes in my first article!
I published my first article in a journal, and for a final (typographic) revision, the editor sent me a mail with some remarks and said:
"Please insert the corrections directly onto the pdf proof using the annotation tools incorporated within Adobe Acrobat Reader. Using the cursor select the text for correction, right click and use the most appropriate single tool (i.e. 'Replace', 'Cross out' or 'Add note to text')"
But these last functions don't exist in adobe reader (pdf), do you think that he wants to say "adobe reader with paied version"? how can i do that ? do i have to pay or there is other solution ?
Thanks in advance

These tools should be available in the free (of charge) version of Adobe Reader, but you might have to "activate" them first. Quoted from here:

Open your PDF in Adobe Reader XI.
Click the Comment button (top right), or select from the menu bar: View > Comment > Annotations. The Comment pane will appear on the right of the screen.
Select an annotation tool listed under the Annotations heading, then click on the document where you want the annotation to be made. To draw lines or shapes, select the tools listed under the Drawing Markups heading.

Also make sure to download an up-to date version of Acrobat Reader.

@Monica thank you for your answer, i found these tools 'Cross out' or 'Add note to text' but there is no "replace" ? for me replace means to modify PDF and this seems to be not available !!  how can i replace a world by an other world for example ?

Select the text and use the replace tool. See here: https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/using/mark-text-edits.html


text:
How to broadly assess the state of research for a topic?
This is coming from a non-PhD, please help me out:
If I have a broad interest in a topic, and I want to assess what are the current (in the last 5 years I guess) high-impact research done in said topic, where are the places I should look, and some general tips on how to search?
Eg: say I'm interested in application of AI/ML in education, or what are the key factors impacting engagement in MOOCs, for instance. What search engines should I try, and any tips on how to search? I'm specifically asking about scientific research searching and overview, not general articles. If this can't be answered in general I can also try to provide some specific fields of interest.
Many thanks.

Welcome to Academia SE! Your question is quite a good one, but similar questions have been asked and answered in the past. Here are a few that might help you: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42475/how-to-locate-most-important-literature-in-an-unfamiliar-area; https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/132844/how-to-find-related-work-in-academic-writing-in-the-most-time-efficient-way; https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3420/how-can-i-do-a-literature-review-efficiently.

You can use any academic search engines such as Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, or LENS (these three are freely available) or scientific databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, or Dimensions (these three require an [institutional] access for full use) and limit the time range of publications to the past years.
You could also add the word 'review' or 'survey' to your query, or, better yet, limit the search results to the document type 'Review' in order to specifically fetch articles that serve as reviews of a given research field.

Thanks. Those search engines are what I need, and the hint for adding "review" is very useful


text:
Forced out of an abusive advisor relationship, how to find an advisor in another university?
I'm posting for a friend in the interest of anonymity.
For context, they're in the third year of a US mathematics PhD, and are currently without an advisor following the failure of an 18 month academic relationship with a highly prominent senior faculty member. What can be said of their academic relationship was that it often consisted of generally unhealthy behaviours (e.g. frequent extended yelling) from the advisor. The decision to terminate the relationship was taken by the advisor, and the official position is that the cause of its failure was personal incompatibility and diverging research interests. The advisor officially is available to provide strong recommendation letters to potential alternative advisors.
My friend intends to remain in the PhD program, but the problem is that there are no other professors with a similar research interest at their institution. They currently have a new internal co-advisor, and the department is generally on board with supporting an external arrangement. The alternative would be to start from scratch in a radically different research area at a somewhat late stage in their degree.
The question is, how should they go about cold-emailing potential advisors from other universities? Their interim advisor has suggested that the most important aspect of such an email would be addressing the double red flags associated with having an previous academic relationship fail and their stated research incompatibility with any of the many other members of their department. My friend believes that it is necessary to clearly address the situation (in neutral terms without negative language) in such an email, and that not accounting for their work over the past 18 months is not an option.

Halfway through third year is late to start with a new advisor, but it’s not that late.  I’d be inclined to just find an advisor at the same university but in a different subfield.

Do the universities you're interested in applying to require you to have contacted a potential advisor before applying for their PhD program, or would you be able to just apply for a position there and then work out your advisor afterwards?

I think your friend is better off starting over in some other PhD program, in particular one where there are several potential advisors.

I don’t see how “cold-emailing” faculty you don’t know at all could work out. Off-hand, I see three options: (1) faculty at your current school contacts a friend/collaborator at another school and tries to get them interested in you, (2) you stay at your current school and work in a (slightly?) different field (as you say it would mean changing fields) which, being early in year 3, wouldn’t be the end of the world, or (3) you re-apply for a new Ph.D. elsewhere.

(Written as if directly to your friend.) Depending on where you are, "starting over" may not mean starting at the beginning. In a new program you would likely be already more advanced than you once were. In particular, you may be much closer to passing any necessary comprehensive exams. And you have a more sophisticated view of research in the subject.
But, to remain where you are, with your current co-advisor, I'd suggest that you first try to work through that person rather than cold-emailing people and having to explain a difficult situation. While the blame for the current situation might lie completely with the former advisor, it won't necessarily be interpreted that way by people you contact yourself. "Why would I want to work with someone who ...?"
But your co-advisor has contacts, I hope, and they can contact others. The explanation of what is going on and your potential for success will be better believed coming from a third party.
Of course, there may be other faculty level advocates you can also use.
But at least you should explore this possibility with the co-advisor. Likewise, the possibility of moving can be discussed and the co-advisor can also help with that if necessary.

Thank you for your response, my friend has found this and the other comments very helpful.


text:
My affiliation after I moved to another institution for Ph.D
I did my Master's in A university and then moved on to B for my Ph.D.
Covid outbreak started about the time when I was wrapping up my project, I had most of my manuscript done and was pending for iterative feedbacks from my advisor at A university. Due to COVID, my project got pushed back from priority and now, as a Ph.D. student at B university, I'm re-working my manuscripts to submit to an academic journal.
I don't know what to do with my affiliation in this situation. Should I list mine as of B university? Or should it still be A?

Most of the work was done at affiliation A and your adviser for that project was at affiliation A, and now you are at affiliation B. I disagree with Buffy's answer, which is to list your affiliation as B rather than A.
The most common approach is to put affiliation A with a footnote that says: "Present address: affiliation B", or to put both affiliation A and B.
You might also like to ask your advisers at affiliation A and B whether or not to include those affiliations on your paper, so that neither adviser can get angry at you for doing what they don't want you to do or not doing what they do want you to do.

This may be field dependent, but in my field you definitely always put your current affiliation and add a footnote if the majority of the work was done elsewhere.

In my field (physics) we put both affiliations and we do not necessarily specify which is the current one, which I guess is not very smart. This would probably be acceptable

Leo Yoona,b
aPrevious affiliation, bCurrent affiliation
Email: leo.yoon@affiliation.current.edu

So they know where to find you and your former institution gets proper credit. Depending on the field it could also be appropriate to just acknowledge your older affiliation in the acknowledgment section in the end, but normally we leave that for grants, conferences or short visits.
In any case, you are a PhD student, so the correct answer to your question is: ask your supervisor ;)

Generally your affiliation is the institution with which you are currently employed or a student. University A is a "prior affiliation", unless you still have some formal relationship with them.
Your dissertation/project/manuscript may need to acknowledge A for any support for research leading to a paper, but your affiliation should be B.
The acknowledgement can, of course, take the form ... "much of the work was done when I was affiliated with A...".
The same would be true if all of the work was done at A. You were affiliated with them. But no longer.

If people want to find you, they want to start looking at the place you list as your affiliation. Going backwards in time is much easier than going forwards since B may not have an easy way to point people to you at A. But listing prior affiliations as needed helps go in the other direction.

Hmm, in contrast - Unless it was quite a long delay (several years)  - in my field I would expect that students or postdocs would use the affiliation of the institution where majority of the work was done or was supposed to have been done. Then, use a footnote that specifies the current address. In any case, if there are senior co-authors, it is best to talk to them. They may have strong opinions, particularly if they were funding the work.

@Carol +1 for your comment. Did you see my answer about 8 minutes before your comment? I mentioned the same two things: (1) usually the affiliation where most of the work was done is used, (2) but it's best to also ask the supervisors.

See Carol comment and especially the other answer. That it is the way, unless same strategy playing of the supervisors/universities.


text:
I have publications in one area but I want to focus on another one for my PhD? Could it go wrong?
My previous published research has focused on teachers' psychological characteristics (e.g., motivation). However, for my PhD, I want to change my focus to student learning. Thus, although the broader area remains the same, the participants (teachers vs. students), the specific topics (teachers' psychological make up vs. student learning), and maybe even the methodology (non-experimental vs. experimental) will be different. Is this a legitimate move or in any way common in academia, especially within the social sciences?
As I have previous publications in the former area, is it possible for the potential supervisor or the graduate admissions committee to think that I had better stuck to the area where I have actual research experience rather than try to enter a new one with new participants and methodology?
I, myself, believe that I can do it and I have become really interested in learning alongside my original interest. However, I am not sure whether this move is common or, on the other hand, if it could seem counterproductive and reduce my chances of acceptance?
If the latter, then I can save a lot of time by focusing on my original area of interest and keep student learning for later. So, I really appreciate any guidance/advice in this regard.

I don't know about social sciences, but in physics moving between very closely related topics within a discipline is extremely common. The best times to do it (although it's possible any time) are either in the transition from undergrad/Master's to PhD or from PhD to postdoc.

Thank you for your perspective. As I am at the transition point between MA and PhD (although I want to start my PhD after some research and work experience), maybe moving between areas will not be seen as a problem in my field either.

I think you should be fine, provided that you find an advisor who agrees that you are ready.
The research skills you have are just about what is needed in the "new" field. You may lack some background on what has been done and on the open questions, but that is true of every PhD candidate.
Actually your existing research/publications may give you some perspective that will be valuable in the new research area.
You need a literature search, of course, and you may need to obtain some understanding in the new field, but an advisor can help guide that initially. But the techniques used in the two fields are about the same.

I do appreciate your helpful response. So, I will continue my literature review to become fully familiar with the previous findings and also find the "open questions". You also mentioned that the potential advisor could help guide me. So, If I come up with some narrowed down topics, would they help me finalize one of them? Or, is it better for me to write a completely worked out proposal before contacting them? Thanks.

That depends on the place and field. For me, the advisor was a very important source of ideas. Good to have some ideas, but also good to be a bit flexible.


text:
Does the admissions committee contact potential supervisors again if they start considering waitlisted students?
A professor showed interest in my PhD application (Australia, educational sciences) several months ago. He interviewed and recommended me. However, the university kept my application for the next round, telling me that they did not have enough time to review my case so they wanted to review it for the next round. I assumed this meant being waitlisted. Now we are getting close to the release date of this round (two weeks to go). If they consider my case again more seriously, will they contact this professor to ask whether he is still interested?
I ask because I want to know if I need to contact him again and express that I remain interested. Or is the fact that my application is still lodged in their system (I had the option to email them and withdraw it), proof enough that I am still considering them?

This is likely going to be very specific to the specific university. However, you don't lose anything by contacting the professor in question again to express that you are still interested.


text:
Should I send a critical position paper or an empirical study as my PhD writing sample?
For PhD programs in educational sciences/studies, which is a better writing sample? A critical position paper which applies a theory to other researchers' published data and comes up with an alternative interpretation as well as suggestions for how future researchers could test this alternative view or a quantitative study using structural equation modeling (SEM) on data that I have collected myself, which is proposing and testing new links among variables?
The position paper, I believe, is very critical but does not have its own data and analysis. The SEM paper, on the other hand, is a full empirical paper that fills a gap in the literature and is also critical but maybe not as critical as the former.

If your critical position paper would be considered controversial by anyone (anyone!) it might be a mistake to use that. You don't want to be upsetting people you don't know, but have some influence over your future, at this point.
A research paper is more pertinent to the evaluation of a doctoral application.
But, it may be that one of them is much more "readable" and accessible and even better written than the other. If there are no red flags for the position paper, then either should if they are otherwise of equal writing quality.
The purpose of the sample is to evaluate your language ability primarily and your ability to express ideas. Keep that in mind.