text:
Finding a PhD supervisor as an experienced professional working outside of academia
I am looking to apply for a PhD position at a UK university but I desperately feel I am in a catch 22 situation. What I've read online, is that supervisors are very busy and receive many such emails so before contacting a PhD supervisor, I need to get familiar with their research.
I contacted several supervisors, becoming familiar with their research beforehand. One had no PhD students and said he does not take PhD students. Another had 2 and said he's not looking to take more. Another supervisor with 5 students said he's at maximum capacity. The picture continues.
It takes me awhile to become familiar with a supervisor's research. In addition, it is not like I don't have anything else to do and I feel I am shooting in the dark here.
I am an experienced professional, I've got a good level of academic knowledge and commercial experience, an undergrad from the top university in the country and I am looking to self finance a PhD - in effect to pay to work. I don't understand why it's so hard.
Do you have any advice for experienced professionals applying for a PhD?

It's hard because a lot of people want to get a PhD, and because it's a lot of work to properly mentor a PhD student. That means a battle for limited advising resources. Self-funding isn't much of a carrot to offer, and I do hope you've considered the advice on one of your previous questions that a PhD is typically expected to be a full-time commitment.

Building on what @BryanKrause says: prospective supervisors may be seeing red flags. Self-funded -> will you run out of money and give up? While working -> Will you make progress? Even if you do, how long will it take? Are you still going to be my problem a decade from now? From the supervisor's perspective, it's a buyers' market, and "sorry, full" is an easy excuse.

Which field are you interested in going into?

@avid I am an adult, I can budget. I will not run out of money and it is in my self-preservation interest not to run out of money so I won't be applying of there was a chance of this happening. Will I make progress - I'm 35 years old, I come with experience and habits that should make making progress more likely than a 21 year old undergrad.

@s5s Sure. But a prospective supervisor knows nothing about you specifically. You are just an unfamiliar risk profile. Perhaps the key point is this: PhD students are - on average - fairly neutral in terms of their benefit to the supervisor. So the fact that you would be a 'free' PhD student for someone is not as big a selling point as you might think.

Which subject do you want to do the phd? Personally I would say, if it is STE (not the M though), dont go for self-funded. Take on of the recent papers of the possible supervisor, work through it for 3 days, and write an email 'dear.. I graduated with a bachelor in .. from .. and I have been working in Industry for a while; I read your paper "..." , and I am wondering if you have some time to discuss possibilities for research in this direction.  Kind regards      //
I am not familiar with the current situation in the UK though.

In my experience (at a UK institution), the calibre, quality, and motivation, of externally-funded students is usually much lower than those which apply for, and eventually get selected for, one of our competitive PhD positions (competitive in the sense that the candidates go through an interview, often chaired by their potential supervisor). Working with a bad, or even a mediocre student, can be a lot of work, which is sometimes not rewarding. You're not asking to work for free -- you're asking the potential supervisor to commit while not knowing how much work they'll need to invest in you

@s5s: How have things progressed for you in the last few months?

I know that academia sometimes resembles a closed union shop: you need to be a union member to get a job, but you can only get membership in the union through having a job in the first place.
What you describe is normal. It is common for professors to have a full lab, not be taking students at the moment, etc. It is also common for famous professors to receive many emails from strangers saying things like "My dream is to get a PhD from Prestigious U., would you take me as a grad student?", and answer those emails with "not taking students now."
What you need is a way to narrow down your list of prospective professors to only those that might be taking students, and then to try get an introduction. A few ideas:

Speak with your professors at your undergrad institution, tell them about your academic interests and ask if they know anybody looking for a good graduate student in the subject. If they don't know, ask if they can recommend someone who does.
When you first contact a professor, just say that you have interest in their subject, and if they can recommend any other person in the field who might be looking for graduate students.
Attend a few conferences in the field, and approach people with interesting posters, and introduce yourself as a prospective graduate student. Again, ask if they know anybody who has graduate student openings.

Once you have a reference, write to that person saying that so-and-so said they might have an opening for a graduate student, and that you'd like to learn more about the research they are doing.
Remember that just like in any negotiation, this is a dance. You send feelers out there to see who's hiring students, and professors send feelers through their network asking for students who might be looking for a PhD position. Once the two meet, the professor tells you a bit about the deal, you tell them about your interests and goals. If you both like what you hear, you go on to the next level and visit the lab/research group, etc. And so on.

I would also recommend open days. We hold regular open days (organised by research group) for prospective PhD students.

1st sentence you said twice the same thing, I think you meant to swap one: "you need a job to become a union member".

@MarcGlisse fixed it, thanks

In the UK, a very large portion of PhDs (particularly externally funded ones) are on a reasonably strict schedule, and must be externally advertised and filled through a (semi-)formal recruitment process. So it's relatively uncommon for a supervisor to have a funded PhD in their back pocket that they could offer to a cold-calling candidate.
Instead, it's worth looking at advertisements - on university websites, Jobs.ac.uk and particularly FindAPhD.com for positions which are coming up. This will at least guarantee that the potential supervisors both have an interest in supervising, and the resources to do so. You should also bear in mind timelines - most PhDs are aimed to roughly align to the academic year, so starting September-October, and will have already recruited for the upcoming round.
(This advice may be less relevant in some fields where funding and projects are more student-led, as in some areas in the humanities.)

If I understand the question correctly, the questioner can fund themselves and doesn't need funding. When I was in the UK (Statistics) I could take on self funded cold-calling PhD students that fulfilled certain minimum requirements, and occasionally I did, if I found them promising after some exchange.

Ah, you're quite right, I misread that bit of the question. That makes it a bit more surprising they're having such difficulties, but it does mean the above is only indirectly useful then. Job listings can still give pointers to people who are actively recruiting, even if you don't need that particular job.

The (home) fees for a PhD in the UK are only about ~£5000 pounds a year. (If you are an overseas student, then all bets ar off.) Depending on the subject, that might not even meet costs. It also doesn't generate any more time which is what most supervisors lack.

I am an experienced professional, I've got a good level of academic knowledge and commercial experience, an undergrad from the top university in the country and I am looking to self finance a PhD - in effect to pay to work. I don't understand why it's so hard.
Me neither! And I led a large STEM research school at a top UK university.
Assuming the above in italics is all true, it really should not be hard to find a position, and you should feel no hesitation in contacting academics who evaluated your work in your final year at uni - they may be able to advise on who might be a good fit for you, and willing to take you on.

OP finished their MSc 1.5 years ago, so this advice is very good. They will even remember them!

The alarm bells for me at least would be your self funding. You need to expand on this in your contact emails.
How exactly is this going to work, will you have a full time job alongside a full time PhD? This will not be attractive to a supervisor and verges on impossible.
Or does this money already exist? Just the other day I had a request for supervision from a student with funding from the Saudi government, we get a lot of these of varying quality (and I'm not yet a group leader so this one really had not done their research) so you'll need to stand out from them.
Is the money just to cover your fees, or are there other costs involved in the research you're not even aware of? Lab PhDs for example will need bench fees, consumables, and potentially other overheads that the university charges for support staff etc.

As someone that walked away from my PhD despite getting funding from EPSRC and doing the full 3 years, I would like to highlight some alarm bells here. I chose not to submit my thesis.
I have to explain away all the different reasons of why I don't actually have the final PhD when I apply for contracts/jobs but that's actually gone down ok. There is a big threshold in Data Science for candidates to have a PhD and I'm literally having to work in the opposite direction to explain why I, effectively, failed mine. I'm doing ok from this.
My concern here is that you're scatter-gunning to try get a PhD for the sake of it. "Oh, you study flimflams? I can probably get behind that; can I be a student of yours?". There's nothing in your question that suggests you have some burning desire to study a specific thing, and that probably comes across to the academics for someone of your age, and I question the utility of the qualification unless you're looking for a career shift into academia.

Your situation does indeed sound frustrating, because from your end, it is the ideal scenario. You want to work for free, and you already bring in a set of experiences and a useful background, so why does nobody want you?
Perhaps if I can offer some perspective as to why you may be encountering these issues.
#1 as faculty, I get about 5-10 unsolicited PhD inquiries per week, with 1-2 postdoc ones. Sometimes this just gets overwhelming and admittedly, on days when I get 3-4 of these, and I already have 200+ emails for the day, I will just ignore them, or they slip through the cracks. This is the downside of everyone cold-emailing faculty all the time for positions, it makes you a bit numb to it.
#2 I often find myself at capacity, as do others. Personally, I keep a medium group, but others prefer small groups so your odds are naturally lower to get into one of those.
#3 Are you sure everyone you are emailing is research active and not teaching faculty? The latter will obviously not be taking on doctoral students.
#4 Self-funded can go either way, and some have been burned by poor experiences. It can be an eager self-motivated student that doesn't require salary (which is usually the biggest part of the funding drain, especially in the US where it's about 65K per year for faculty). Alternatively, it can be someone who you cannot rely on. You ask them to do something, but they are on their own dime and their own time. Unreliable group members, even if "Free", are a big drain (space, time, resources, and general frustration for the PI). I have personally only ever delt with the latter, though I certainly hold out hope for the former.
My best advice, as I believe another poster here alluded to is to reach out to contacts from your undergraduate and ask for advice, or help making connections. This may ease some of the apprehension noted in point #4. Alternatively, have you considered attending relevant conferences to network with potential faculty directly? There you can explain your plans and what you can offer in person which will very likely lead to better outcomes.
Good luck!

Here’s how I did it—though I was (and am) in the US and was already enrolled at the university. I just started taking a fairly broad range of courses that would help me eventually pass the qualifying exams anyway and, more importantly here, struck me as really interesting and exciting to study. In this way I also got to know the faculty members who taught them, and they got to know me.
Unless you must have a relationship with a supervisor locked down before you leave the starting gate, I warmly recommend this approach. The faculty member who eventually became my advisor had by then concluded for himself what my abilities were. And another benefit was that when it eventually came time to enlist the members for my dissertation committee, I had more than enough great choices of individuals who knew me, my work, and the fields to which it was relevant.

UK universities do not allow general enrolment, you have to enrole for a specific degree that will dictate what courses you can take

That much, anyway, is the same in the U.S. for graduate programs. I was in a computer science program, accepted to work for that Ph.D., and that’s the point when a grad student in the U.S. needs an advisor. It’s only our undergrads—seeking bachelor’s degrees—who can exist without a “major” for even a year or two. (But obviously, if our systems are too different, then my comments can’t be of a whole lot of help.)

How is that applicable to someone who is no longer an undergraduate as is the question? If your not an undergraduate you can't take courses without first getting enrolled.

Yes, that’s exactly the same here. You must enroll in a Ph.D. program in a specific department. It’s in selecting and taking these graduate-level courses, I’m suggesting, that one can arrange a match with the faculty member to serve as one’s advisor. Myself, I thought I would do my Ph.D. In computer graphics, but in taking courses in combinatorics and graph theory (both important in theoretical computer science), I ended up meshing with my eventual advisor and working in a more mathy topic than many of my fellow comp. sci. students did.

In the UK, the expectation is you start with a supervisor from day 1. Thus you need a supervisor to be able to take PhD courses.

Ah, specialize early and commit. Got it.


text:
No publications after 2.5 years in PhD
I started my PhD in solid state physics in 2019 here in US. Due to covid, our labs were closed for about 8months. After that, I could not get any results in 2021 and its been more than 2.5 years into my PhD with no publications.
I wanted to ask the community how concerned should I be. I do freak out sometimes when I think about it. Have other people gone through/going through similar situations? If yes, how did you cope with it?

What do you have in progress? What are the prospects for upcoming publication?

Depends on your research field. I know people who graduated with 0 publocations. Don't let this discourage you, but also: work hard and publish something soon.

Have you talked about this lack of publications with your thesis advisor?

Would add to @user1271772 point, I know people who graduated with 0 publications, and went on to post-docs. This was a theoretical physics student. Your field is probably key to the answer for this question.

The last few years have caused many of us to consider freaking out about life in general, much less professional successes. Time for a chat with your advisor, a reset on your mental situation, and a fresh start in the lab working on cool stuff.

"Have other people gone through/going through similar situations?" Well, yes, practically everyone's research was interrupted in the past two years.

The answer depends on whether your research is enjoyable and promising and whether you are young and financially happy. If yes to all, then relax and do what @JonCuster says. If no to all, then abort your PhD and do something else.

It's perfectly normal for a solid state physics research project to take 4-5 years from start to publication.

I do freak out sometimes

You should talk to a mental health professional about that.

The last few years were difficult for everyone and you shouldn't put pressure on yourself by comparing your work/outputs to what you could have done before the pandemic. I am not sure whether how universal this is, but in my field (marine science) you can graduate without peer-reviewed publications. So I would first investigate what the rules of your university are regarding graduation and keep working away at your own pace.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can I include my contribution to a internationally recognized research project in my college apps, if I wasn't part of the presenting team
I am from a non-US high school, facing a dilemma about mentioning my involvement in a successful research project (Project A) on my college applications. I contributed significantly to Project A, which has been selected to represent our nation in international science fairs like ISEF and Regeneron Talent Search. However, due to a rule at our national science fair that limited students to submitting only one project, I submitted a different project (Project B) and thus am not officially recognized for Project A. Our inquiries to include me in the official presentation team for Project A were denied. Given this situation, can I mention my Project A's accolades in my college applications? If so, how should I go about it and how would it be looked upon?

Sorry, questions about undergraduate applications are outside the scope of this site. https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3300

Have a teacher mention it in a letter of recommendation.

You absolutely should mention your involvement in the project and how exactly you contributed to it. However, as Buffy says, this needs to have some corroborration beyond just your say so, ideally in the form of one or more letters of recommendation mentioning this.

You can certainly say specifically what you contributed to that project.

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


text:
How much help should one expect from their PhD advisor to get a job (academic or industry)?
How much help can one expect from their PhD advisor to get a job (academic or industry)? Is it true that graduates often get positions just by having their advisor make a "phone call"?

AFAIK, most advisors will write recomendation leters.... The rest is technically on you.

PhD advisors don't have these powers. They are flat out keeping their own jobs. Your job is up to you.

Is it true that graduates often get positions just by having their advisor make a "phone call"? - It has happened, and the frequency of this probably depends on various things such as locale, but in the US now, it is uncommon.

I think your PhD advisor may or may not help to a greater or lesser degree, but from I've seen from other people who have obtained postdoc positions, you basically treat it like it any other job application process, you have to search out a suitable job yourself which you think you will be able to get, you will have to go through interviews and all the usual stuff as you would any other job.

I think it's reasonable to expect a PhD advisor to make introductions but not to place you into jobs.
They should help introduce you to people at conferences, both directly 1 to 1 or by supporting you in getting opportunities to present.
They should introduce you to visiting professors when they come to tour your space/give a talk to your department.
They should involve you in collaborations, to expose you to more ongoing research as well as researchers.
When it's time to apply for a job, you should make the phone call (or often an email). The introductions you've already had let you start the conversation with something like:

Hi, I'm Professor Maxwell's student, we met at the Demons Conference last year. I'm graduating this year and looking for post doc positions...

For industry jobs, I think it depends on your lab and your advisor. For some labs, your advisor has industry as well as academic contacts, because you collaborate with industry or work in a field where industry researchers are found at the same conferences as academics; in that case, all of the above still applies. For others, I would expect you would need to do more outside networking on your own, and I would look more to the rest of your institution for the same sort of networking support, through job fairs and such.
In some locations and cultures, yes, maybe a phone call is all you need, but in others people would be offended by that approach. The phone call that is more important to get you a job, though, goes the other way: it's when the future employer calls your advisor after hearing from you, and asks them what they think of you.

Some universities specifically tell supervisors that helping students find a job is not part of the supervisor's responsibility.
Most supervisors will give advice.  Some may provide more help than that.

Is it true that graduates often get positions just by having their advisor make a "phone call"?

This would be extremely rare.  Some might consider it a sign of corruption if it were an academic job.  Academia has a tradition of open competition for jobs.

Can't see why this was downvoted, it's true... Some may not like it and feel that they should have their hands held all the way...

Most supervisors will give advice and since everyone is a doctor and a football coach they may give you completely wrong advice outside of their field. I would take the "industry" advice with caution.

My advisors wrote generic recommendation letters and uploaded them to Interfolio, and that was pretty much it. That said, my relationship with them was very transactional and so I never felt comfortable asking for anything other than recommendation letters.
Personally, I think advisors should help with the job hunt, and should take the initiative to offer help if they know you're looking. If they don't, there's nothing wrong in asking. I'll be repeating some of the already given advice, but I would expect this help to come in the form of recommendation letters, reviewing job application materials, introducing you to people in their network, advising you on interview prep, and - before all of these things - mentoring you over the course of your academic program and encouraging you to do things that'll make you a good job candidate (like presenting at conferences, collaborating on research, encouraging you to publish, giving you opportunities to gain more relevant experience when possible).
As far as jobs on silver platters are concerned, I'm sure there's the occasional graduate who gets a job purely because of who they know. It's probably very rare though, as most places aren't going to hire someone they think isn't right for the position. The more likely scenario is that a particularly influential/well-connected advisor might tell search committee members, "look out for X's application, they'd be great for this job" and maybe talk them up. That might cause a search committee to perk up to X's application and maybe even interview them, but in the end, the job offer will most likely go to whomever they view as the most qualified/best fit.

Mentioning what Interfolio is would improve the answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfolio

It very much depends on two factors:

your relationship with your advisors
how influential they are in the area of your interest

And then it depends on other factors like:

How comfortable are they with recommending people aggressively
How does your actual skill-set and experience look like
Have you worked with the prospective company / department of your choice before?

Even the most influential people with the best intentions can't place someone completely unqualified into a job / position (hopefully).
On the other hand, if you already worked on a project with an external company and would like to work there in the future, an additional recommendation from your advisor might just be the edge you need to "place you in the job with one phone call".
I think you can see where this is going.
It's not uncommon that advisors introduce you to new contacts or speak out a recommendation in your favor. That counts for industry as well as academia contacts, at least where I am from (Austria) and what I have witnessed so far. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.


text:
Would taking the GRE (when it is not required) be likely to help my application?
I want to go to grad school for Applied mathematics, and I have a high GPA in my undergraduate of 3.56 in Applied Mathematics. I wanted to take the GRE. However, they are very costly around $200, which I am not sure if it is worth paying that much to take the GRE. I plan on applying for Graduate Assistantships. If I do not take the GRE, will that decrease my chances for getting into Grad school and a Graduate Assistantship even though the schools I want to apply to do not require the GRE?

If the school you are applying for does not require GRE than it is extremely unlikely that it will make any difference.
Certainly take a look at the discussion on the importance of GRE scores for graduate school admissions; as usually GRE scores most often are used to perform "cut-offs", not as a competitive measure (or at least with relatively low weight). Thus, if the school decides not to make GRE mandatory it does not make a lot of sense to submit one (especially, if you don't have one ready for other applications).
Some exceptions probably will apply if the assistantships/scholarships have a separate set of requirements (I am not aware of specific cases that would require GRE, but can imagine such to exist) or when GRE is an optional application package item and one wants to strengthen their borderline submission. Even though in the last case, I would spend more effort in writing a better statement of intent.

Even if a grad program in math does not require the subject test GRE, the fact that you will have had the sense to take that exam will be a positive indicator about your sensibilities and understanding of the grad school application game.
In my grad program (at a U.S. R1) the grad admissions committee (on which I've served as member and/or chair for 30+ years) we do not use the math GRE subject test score as any sort of decisive indicator for admission. Yes, we do wonder about an applicant who hasn't somehow realized that many programs do care about it... and why the applicant's advisors haven't told them what this little game is.
All in all, the expense of it is a reasonable investment, even if not quite in the way that people might think.

I don't understand. Are you saying that even if a department doesn't require a math GRE subject test score, applicants should still submit one? I was talking with some professors at a conference and one of them said that his departments puts little stock in those scores out of suspicion that many applicants cheat.

Yes, although I and many of my colleagues do not care much about GRE subject test scores, we know that students should know that some places do. Yes, we are aware that there is some cheating... and outside the US there's a lot of "practice", while people in the US apparently rarely do this. Lots of goofy aspects... But, yes, all other things the same, better to submit one.


text:
How should I proceed when a (famous) professor says I'm not good enough for research?
I am a PhD student in a Computer Science department, doing research of a mathematical nature. Some of my research problems drifted from my advisor's area of expertise, so I reached out to a researcher from my department about it (who is a world expert in this field). This professor is well-known with many achievements in this field.
The first meetings went well, I learnt a lot, got valuable feedback and I was so happy I had the opportunity to talk to this guy. However, after a few meetings he started with "let's have a meta-talk about you". Then, he brutally attacked me: he said I am not good enough for research, that I can get better but it would never be good enough for research career, that "people are born with the ability to know if their proofs are correct" and since I made some gross mistakes in what I sent, it is clear I "don't have it" and basically I shouldn’t  expect to get as good as people with a research career.
Since then, he mentions it in every talk we have. It can be in "minor" comments (e.g. "you have to be realistic and understand you can't really do it", "if you do it alone it will be difficult for you", "it is like chess, and you just don't have it") or in bigger conversations.
As you may understand, I felt horrible after the first time (and I still do, after each of these meetings). I really appreciate him and his opinion, so I took it really bad.
How can I know if he is right? How should I proceed? His words really made me think that maybe he is right.
RE the exact words used: I actually recorded the meetings, so my quotes are accurate.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment.

I recommend you read this letter that Feynman wrote to a former PhD student.

I am sorry that it happened to you. This is not a pleasant experience, and frankly it's a shame that toxic professors and supervisors are still common in academia.
Academic research is broad and multi-dimensional. Some people excel in writing proofs, others design and set up wonderful experiments, collect useful data and find beautiful dependencies within. Some people propose fantastic theorems, which take hundred years to prove, others prove or disprove them after hundred years. As a community, we do research in a variety of exciting ways, which mutually support each other.
No single researcher is equally excellent in doing all these things. We have our strong areas and our blind spots. But saying that someone is not fit for research based on a couple of shortcomings in their proof is completely unfair, unjustified, ridiculous and unkind. This is opposite what a University professor should do, in my opinion. A good supervisor would encourage a student to try different things to identify where their strength and passion are. A toxic person would identify a single error and draw far-reaching conclusions from it to undermine student's confidence and make them feel bad about themselves. This is an extremely short-sighted and unprofessional behaviour.
Please try to disregard this person's opinion. Find someone else to collaborate with. Academia is large and although toxic and self-important people are still common, there is also a plenty of kind and supportive and truly generous colleagues around. Don't hesitate to share your experience with others to prevent someone else from having the same negative experience as you just had.

"Some people excel in writing proofs, others ..." - I think this kind of misses the point. It implies "you're bad at writing proofs and you always will be, but there are other things you can do". There might indeed be other things you can do in research if you're not interested in writing proofs, but I think the better counter-point to what the professor said is "you might be bad at writing proofs now, but there's no limit on how much you can improve with enough time and effort".

@NotThatGuy yes, and: How can this professor judge with such perceived confidence OP's talent? Does he have the gift of foresight?

I think for Leo, by the sounds of it, this is also a really important life lesson. Leo needs to grow a thicker skin, but when he does, he'll remember this experience with a certain sense of gratitude.

@Frank: NO. Irrespective of whether the Professor's assessment that the OP is out of their depth is correct or not, the Professor's expression of it is just intimidating and bullying -  Leo should not "need to grow a thicker skin" to survive it. Part of being a senior academic is about dealing with struggling students in an appropriate manner, and this person is obviously failing badly with that.

@LouKnee I don't disagree the professor is clearly an asshole, but Lou definitely has some growing up to do

@Frank I have had a teacher who, at the time, I considered to be way to strict and harsh.  Over the years I have come to understand his methods and am grateful.  This guy seems to be someone who has no patience for anyone who doesn't already know what he should be teaching them.   I can't see the OP, no matter how thick-skinned, ever having any gratitude for being told how stupid and untalented they are.

+1 @Frank , PhD is like the boot camp in FMJ, the sargent is clearly an asshole, but after a while you realize there is no malice in him and all he is trying to do is make the thinner skinned people quit because there is no use for them in Nam. Having said that I would suggest not talking more with the guy and move on with your career which may or may not involve science.

I agree with both Frank and Lou. The professor was being a bully and an asshole, and should not exist in a position of power over students if they hold such extreme opinions and cannot distinguish between realism and cruelty. That being said, people like this do exist in academia, and "grow a thick skin", while seemingly harsh and insensitive, is still good advice to live by. If your whole career gets unraveled by one mean person's unsubstantiated comments, then you probably need to find a different career anyway.

Interesting meta-discussion... some people are calling other people assholes and are saying that they should not exist. What, they imply, should exist are the people who are calling other people assholes and saying that they should not exists. Does not look toxic at all...

Thank you for your kind words @MatthewWells. You're making this world a better place.

@Ark-kun You missed the "in a position of power" part of the context there...

@Abion47 "If your whole career gets unraveled by one mean person's unsubstantiated comments, then you probably need to find a different career anyway" - you can probably find mean people in every career path, so I don't think finding a different career will help much more than just finding better people to work with in the same career. I also wouldn't recommend trying to not let other people dictate your future, especially not when they do so by being mean. One could make an argument that it shouldn't get to you if there isn't any truth to it, but I just don't believe that's true in general.

The OP signed up for PhD study in Computer Science, not a tour of duty with the infantry. Encouraging self reflection is good - the study process is an opportunity to learn and change - but is something distinct from bullying someone into self-doubt.

@Abion47 I'm not sure the person, who has been taken advantage of and deprived of the most precious asset on Earth (time) with zero compensation, has any power over the OP or the trigger-happy lynch mob here. That person can do nothing. Like a Jewish professor in a 1930s Germany. He's powerless. On the other hand the young people here wield the power to make him not exist. I'm not sure I want these people to be in a position of power.

There are two aspects to this, the claim that you are producing proofs with gross errors, and the claim that the problem is unfixable short of being born with different genes.
The second claim reveals a weakness in the professor, not you. Some people are "naturals" at some activity such as singing or drawing. Some naturals have so little understanding of the process of learning their skill that they are useless as teachers of that skill. Take his advice on the topics on which he is expert, but ignore anything he says about the process of learning to write proofs.
You do need to consider whether you are producing too many errors in your proofs. If so, you should study writing and evaluating proofs. To some extent, practice helps, but you may need a mentor to look over your proofs and discuss where you went wrong. That mentor has to be someone who, unlike well-known professor, knows people can learn, and is able and willing to teach. Maybe your primary advisor can either be that mentor or recommend someone.

Addition about the naturals. It may be a feature of particularly endowed people not to have honed the patience that people learning through toil and labour develop. So in a way they are incomplete learners because they did not actually went the multi-staged process of learning and never had they to conquer the (un)desirable difficulties of overcoming ignorance. And bad learners may be often bad teachers, as we see here, and, simply because teaching is one of the best way to learn, this reinforces the feedback, alas.

Some of my research problems drifted from my advisor's area of expertise, so I reached out to a researcher [this Professor] from my department.

It sounds as though you are still formally "signed up" with your original advisor, who should have some responsibility for your wellbeing. Maybe you could have an informal chat with your advisor about the nature and the manner of the professor's comments, and ask them to be present in any future meetings?
In my opinion the quoted comments are unprofessional and deserve a reprimand, but the way forward will depend on your institution and its internal politics. Maybe having someone else present will be enough to make him behave like a grown-up.

+1 All of this. The other guy is simply bullying the OP. He isn't even the OP's advisor, so his comments also reflect on the competence of the OP's advisor in taking on the OP in the first place. Both are deeply unprofessional. There should be a quiet conversation between the OP's advisor and this guy about "what you're doing could warrant disciplinary action, but we're fine if you just stop doing it".

Could it be that since this big shot professor is not in any way formally responsible for OP, he figured out that for whatever reason he doesn't want to work with him and tries to make him quit?

@ii.iiii The professor has no need to discourage the OP. He could just say "I'm sorry but I no longer have time to work with you.".

Exactly - the professor should be capable of disengaging gracefully if he doesn't want to be involved any more. Note though that the OP's top priority right now should be on protecting their PhD and hence I suggested they start by talking to their advisor, especially if they feel they're struggling in general.

"people are born with the ability to know if their proofs are correct"

Aside from this statement being utter and complete poppycock, even if it is correct the conclusion your professor draws from it that you cannot be a successful research mathematician is a non sequitur. I know many successful mathematicians who are, to put it mildly, not good at writing correct proofs or at spotting the weaknesses of their own written arguments. And I know famous papers solving important open problems that do a poor job of communicating the ideas in the proof, to the extent that someone trying to read and understand the proof has to do substantial independent work to verify the arguments and fill in many of the logical and conceptual gaps.
In other words, even if your professor’s statement is literally true (and of course it isn’t), many and perhaps even most mathematicians in academia do not belong to that group of innately-endowed proof-wizards. And yet they somehow manage to make up for it with hard work, creativity, and various other talents and abilities that are complementary to (and, I should think, ultimately more important) than proof writing.

How can I know if he is right?

This is the question every grad program admissions committee would love to have the magic answer to. But there is no magic answer. The only answer is: keep working on your research and you’ll eventually find out if you’re good enough. The rest of us certainly can’t predict your eventual level of success, including Professor Know-It-All here.
A final thought: academia famously has the structure of a pyramid that gets narrower as one advances up the career hierarchy. That means your professor likely teaches at a less prestigious graduate school than the one he himself went to. Aside from his sounding like a generally toxic and unkind person, it seems possible that when he says you’re not good enough, in his mind he’s comparing you to his super-brilliant peers from the famous school he attended, some of whom probably ended up even more successful than him, causing him to be envious and somewhat bitter. It may be that you are not quite at their level of brilliance, or even at his level - statistically that would be the case for most graduate students in a comparison with their advisor/mentor - but again, to assume that this means you cannot have a successful and rewarding research career because you’re not one of the absolute best people one can find out there is illogical, cruel, and probably wrong.
Hope this helps, and good luck!

@user2258552 well, even excellent researchers sometimes have human flaws and hold irrational beliefs about things outside their area of expertise. So I disagree.

Complementarily to @Dmitry Savostyanov's excellent answer I'd like to point out that you need to be very careful about impostor syndrom.
Some people might be toxic for bad reasons (lack of empathy, need to denigrate people to shine, narcissism, ...). This should not make you think that you are unfit for research. If you feel like an impostor, your thesis will likely be very hard mentally. It will also be harder for you to work correctly.
It can be hard but try to take a step back. If you have been admitted in PhD, it probably means that you were among grad school's top student. Hence, if you work correctly there is no reason you cannot do a decent thesis. I don't know how long you have been in thesis but once you'll have published one or two paper, it will be easier to feel legitimate. Don't feel low if your paper is not accepted at the first time though, as conference typically accept 15-30% of submitted paper, having a paper refused doesn't mean that there is a problem. On the other end, having a paper accepted generally means you are on the right way.

"need to denigrate people to shine" identifies a recurring situation pithily

+1 for pointing out possible imposter syndrome. Even big shots that you respect as academics have no right to make you feel any less worthy as a person. But when you rely on external validation, it can be very difficult to see that. I personally found talking to a counsellor very helpful.

There are two key points which need to be addressed here, although the other answers cover things.
1.) You do not need to be a 'genius' to contribute to any subject.  The notion of 'genius' is not necessarily a useful one and it would actually probably be detrimental to a subject if everyone who went into that subject was a 'genius'.  Certainly in the long run, there are some people you might perceive as being 'geniuses' who actually did harm to their subject.  Please read the blog post by Terry Tao on this matter.
2.) Life is too short to be dealing with toxic supervisors.  There are other people who you can work with.  For example, ironically I have been in a different situation to you where the supervisor was saying that I was not fit to contribute anything to any subject because I was not good at writing up computer codes and doing smooth, pretty presentations (even though he knew I had been teaching graduate level pure mathematics modules).  This is clearly absurd.
My advice is, the supervisor is not going to change their personality, biases or opinion about you.  The easiest solution is to change supervisor.  Now, when you speak to whoever you need to about changing supervisor, you can say that you do not get on particularly well with the current supervisor, that your skills are different and that you have different ideas about things and different abilities.  But also as part of the pitch, try to make it clear that your way of working and the research you would like to do is much better aligned to the new supervisor who you are proposing to change to.
Also, this is off the record, but in my experience the supervisors who often use bullying or undermining behaviour like this are often relying on other people to do a lot of the work for them, so they have a kind of kneejerk reaction when they perceive any weakness from a student.  Check their papers from the last seven years and see if they have written any papers by themselves, likely they have not.

See also Terry Tao's article What is good mathematics?.

I like @Xavier's observation that the professor's notion of inherent ability in individuals badly reflects back to him as a teacher.
That said, probably all of us know people who we felt were not good at what they were learning and should rather try something else. I'm drawing from my surely limited experience as a computer science tutor in the college lab. There were a few students who showed talent but also a few I believed would never be good IT professionals, at least not technically good. And don't think that I was naively impressed with nerdy males and their previous knowledge: What I see as an indicator for a perspective in the field is an attitude, the general excitement about and the ability to solve problems and puzzles.
It is probably an — unpleasant — service to give the "untalented" students feedback and encourage them to try something different. I suppose that's what your professor is thinking. (I'm glad that was not my role then; I simply supported everybody with what they needed.)
It hurts to see somebody pursue something they are struggling with and which does not bring them joy.
And that would be my litmus test: Does what you are doing bring you joy? If you love Mathematics, by all means stay in it. Passion and joy arise from meaningful interaction with the subject matter and the people. Passion and joy are indicators, however subjective, for understanding, succeeding, achieving. They are, in a feedback loop, also very strong motivators which usually produce results. The cases where people are really irrecoverably bad at something and still enjoy doing it full-time are rare.

This is an excellent answer, especially the last paragraph. It's what finally convinced me I'm not cut out for a research career. I like toying with problems, and with math. I was working on a PhD in Operations Research and was given similar feedback to this. The reason it was true, I've finally concluded, is that while I like playing with toy problems, I don't really care about math or doing research. I'm very glad others do, but I don't find enough joy in the nitty gritty details to apply myself with all my heart at it. And so while I was a strong student, I was a poor researcher in training

So OP needs to first decide whether they love research (and make sure of course that they correctly understand what research is; I didn't). If OP loves research--every bit of the process--then they will naturally apply themselves even harder to learn and grow. But if they find they don't really love research, then it's a good idea to move on and find out what they do love doing. In my case I moved on to a fulfilling career as a software developer, doing professionally now something I've loved doing since I was 12. It's been 10 years since I moved on, and I'm still happy about my decision.

So I'm not saying research is bad or good, but OP needs to decide what they want to do.

There may be various reasons for what he says and what you hear. There is no particular order in the points below.
The professor
He may be an asshole
Some people have a huge ego and they feel like the masters of the world. They do not care about others and thrive on making them miserable. The extreme case is a psychopath.
→ my advice: find someone else
He may be neuro-atypical (I am not sure how this is correctly called today - feel free to correct with the right word)
He wants to say: "In my opinion you may not be fully suited for research because it seems that you do not know how to count and this is going to be a problem in the long term"
He says "you suck at research"
→ my advice: find someone else, except if you want to account for his behaviour
He may be from a different culture
My friend from the Netherlands tells me things straight away and it took me some time to understand that this is how it works in his country. It is a country close to mine (France) and the difference will be even bigger across the globe.
→ my advice: if you want to continue with him you need to get used to that
From your description it seems that this is case nr 1 and I would just find someone else and spend these years in a more mentally suitable environment
You
Make a 360° review (well, a 180° in your case) - requesting genuine feedback:

ask some other teachers what they think of you
ask your peers
have a look at yourself and say loud three good and three bad things about you

Based on that you need to decide if you are suited for academia.
You may be good enough - not everyone will be the next Einstein. You can flourish in something else than pure research (such as teaching)
You many not be good enough, but there is no measurement for that. I saw brilliant people who barely made it to visibility, and complete idiots who were everywhere and, let me check your question, ah yes - were perceived as world experts in their field.

Upvoted for pointing out potential cultural differences. The person sounds like an emigre professor from another era: I'd associate that level of bluntness with brilliant but eccentric (and usually elderly) Israelis, Russians, or Eastern Europeans: "If you cannot prove such an easy lemma, your education has been a waste.".  Of course, that demographic has likely dwindled over time in US research universities.

people are born with the ability to know if their proofs are correct

What people are really born with is the desire to learn. And this goes for all people. What is research really if not the process of learning on a subject? We do this every day with every aspect of our life. Granted, academic research has evolved to have some very strong guidelines, but the truth is that a new revelation can come to anyone by chance (penicillin), rigorous experimentation (The light bulb) or any other way.
To me, the fact that you are pondering if you are good enough for research given his remark is, in itself, research of yourself. So apparently you are a natural. Congrats!

I really appreciate him and his opinion, so I took it really bad.

This guy may be a very good expert in the subject matter. But being good in a certain research area does not make you a good person, a good advisor, a good leader, or a good person. It sounds to me as if he is either trying to make you feel bad in order to push you forward, or he generally does not believe in you. The first one is pointing low self-esteem for him and in my opinion, is a very bad way to push your subtenant. The second one is ok. Not everyone gets along with everyone and it is a clear indication for you both to carry on without the other. If the second one is true there is no reason for criticism or insults and you should ignore him and carry on.
You should take this situation to improve yourself. You will, no doubt, meet some more poor bosses, advisors, managers, and other unpleasant people. Use this opportunity to teach yourself how to cope with these people and come up as a better person.

Research can be very frustrating. You read all the works around you and talk with your colleagues about what they are doing. These works are well-rehearsed and organized showing only the good side and "selling" the work and these colleagues are the sellers and are experts at describing their work as good. While you can only see your failures and bad directions it seems as though everyone else is doing much better than you. It is like the Instagram effect for the academia. It shows only the good side in others emphasizing your failures. You must remember: A research is bound to fail a couple of times before it succeeds. You are definitely not the problem. I went through a similar feeling myself on my M.Sc. eventually I found a cool and elegant solution to a problem and was proud of my work but not before much frustration.
From other answers here which probably comes from other researches, it sounds like the research world does not want to lose you. So please don't despair and stay as one of us. I wish you luck!

If people are born with the ability to be leaders and educators, this professor is  out of place. Sorry for the lack of further elaboration [*], but I really think that the argument can be so easily reverted that I feel sorry for him. Taking your story at face value, and assuming it is not just an episode, I would start to think that this person cannot be solely well known for his/her publications.
In my view this is an attempt to make you feel guilty about anything, something, and give you the burden to find out the best guilt you have. Any random guilt you pick would do to justify his stand. Any guilt goes.
Stand tall, take a step back, look at it as something really weird, and keep on reasoning.
[*] See other excellent answers.

Initially, Heisenberg wanted to study maths but the professor in Munich asked him about the books he already read and based on that, he told him, that he won't be able to succceed and he will not allow him to enter there (however that process went in detail, I read it in a book from Heisenberg "Physics and beyond").
And Einstein? His marks were so worse that he couldn't find a job for a while. And later, even when he worked as a patent specialist and set up special theory in his free-time, his boss couldn't believe, once he published it, that Einstein did that.
Sure, these are very special cases but it seems that even cracks are not seen as what they are.
Finally, I wouldn't worry about that jerk, even if he is a world class researcher. And even if you won't be, that doesn't matter. You don't need his opinions to continue what you wanna' do.

Contrary to popular myths, Einstein was an excellent math student. See https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/956/was-einstein-a-poor-student

I think it is quite clear that he couldn't have been that bad. But all the answers there relate to his school diploma while the scientific landscape refers to his academic skills. I'm quite sure they were still outstanding compared to almost everyone else, but for a genius like him it seems they were rather poor. From what I know is that his wife helped him a lot to describe his theories mathematically. For me, that doesn't lower his results at all. And Einstein contributed a lot more to science than "only" the ART/SRT, it's very astonishing.

well, ok, it's more or less what some there mention as well :)

I'd say this is psychological assault. When someone attacks your fundamentals in such a way it tends to be part of a manipulative scheme, whether to dissuade you from doing something or to goad you into doing something. This kind of unprovoked cruelty usually aims to overwhelm your defenses so to speak. You should ask yourself what might the other person actually want or what you can give them they see.
I do not think him calling you not cut out for research has anything to do with the impression you give at all, besides just being a student. You are a graduate student and put that professor on a pedestal based on his reputation, which is probably something he is used to or even something he came to expect at this point in his career. He probably knows a line like "You are not cut out for this, think about what else you can do" would work on most students, if coming from him.
It could be something said during a heated conversation about you pestering him so much, but since you are still interacting with him, that does not seem to be the case. So what else do you have? Time to put in for a pet project of his? Being an unwitting part of some mind game for his amusement? Or something more personal? If you decide to keep working with him after such disrespectful treatment, you should pay attention to what he might try to goad you towards in between lines. Does he occasionally go off tangent about some other work, like industry or part of some community, or try to invite you for a dinner with family? I would not be surprised if something like that pops up, except of course if it is just psychopathic amusement.


text:
Can I re-apply for a new PhD position of a better university if I am currently full funded international student of another university(both in US)?
Can I apply for a new PhD position of a better university(Stanford, Berkeley) in coming fall semester if I am currently international full funded PhD student of another university (both in US)? After acceptance I will leave the previous university.

Yes.  Not much to say.

of course you can, but is it advisible? that depends

If you leave one supervisor to go to another, will the new supervisor expect you to dump them as well? what happens to trust?

@SolarMike Students should not be "loyal" to supervisors.  They should act in their own interests.  The new supervisor should be offering a good deal to keep the student.  Students rarely find that supervisors are loyal to students.

Yes: You can drop-out, give-up funding, and start-over with a new supervisor.
Albeit, that's probably ill-advised given the current climate.

Is it a law to give-up funding?

Not directly, but surely contractually: Why would your current university fund you to study at another? Something else to consider is whether your visa (if applicable) is tied to your current university: If you leave, does that invalidate your visa?

This is partly wrong.  PhD students who transfer in the US normally do not start over from the beginning.  If the funding is external it will not need to be given up.

do not start over from the beginning: True, credits for taught courses may be transferable. I merely meant start over with another supervisor. I'll edit. If the funding is external it will not need to be given up: That really depends on the funding structure. Generally, I'd assume funding is tied to a university.

@user2768 In the US, a visa gives you the right to ask for permission to enter the country.  It is neither needed nor sufficient to stay in the country. Transferring to a different PhD program will probably invalidate the visa for the next entry (in case it is a multiple-entry visa), but it will not prevent you from changing the PhD program.

@user151413 My understanding is that it's typically not a problem to enter the US on an unexpired F-1 visa with the old university's name on it. In any case, it's something to verify with the International Office while going through the SEVIS transfer process. If admitted on a J-1 visa there are more restrictions.

@Anyon Fair points, but in either case it does not matter directly whether the change of institutions invalidates the visa: If the visa under which one was admitted to the US allows change of programs, everything is fine, otherwise, well, not. But whether this invalidates the visa (i.e. it cannot be used for future entries to the country) is potentially a different question.  (It is completely legal to be in the US on an expired visa; citizens of some countries even get single-entry visas which expire after just a few months, yet then can legally stay as long as they have a valid contract.)


text:
How can a software engineer become competitive for a PhD position in computer science?
I'm looking to apply to grad school once my wife finishes her PhD next year. She has a post-doc lined up in Canada and I'm thinking during that time would be a great time for me to finally start mine (PhD).
My issue is that I do not have any research experience and I'm about 4 years into industry as a practicing software engineer. I have a bachelors and masters in computer science and I'm currently about to publish a paper with my wife that is a mix of CS/Biology. Given that she is going to Canada, I'm wanting to try to get into University of Toronto, which seems highly ranked. What things can I do starting today to get into this school given my experience?

You may want to reach out to a professor ahead of time and inquire if they’re going to be accepting students during the period you wish to apply. It’s by no means a sure fire way to get in, because you could be beaten out by competition, but it’s a good start. Apart from that, you’d be best to get all of the documents together on time and submit it before the deadline. Maybe try to exploit your network, work on getting solid recommendation letters from past professors or people who can speak to your ability to do research.

Thanks for the response. As far as competition goes, is there still opportunities to get into grad school at the PhD level without prior research experience?

@Ryan how can you be about to publish a paper if you don't have prior research experience? Seems contradictory to me.

OP also mentioned they have a masters, but it may have just been a course based masters without a significant research component?

It is a course-based masters with little research. My wife is a PhD student and we are currently doing research together. This experience is my first actual research experience. The publication will be submitted to a different field than the field that I am interested in. I am the second author assisting with the technical aspect of the experiment.

I do not know about univ. of Toronto but in general, if you are full fee-paying student universities usually accept you as a PhD student more easily compared to the ones who rely on funding/scholarships.
Since your wife has already done (almost) her PhD I am sure you know about the requirements for application etc.
As mentioned in another answer getting in touch with the prospective supervisor is a good start. Try collaborating with your previous professors. Read the papers of the prospective supervisors and try to identify your research direction. Think of your PhD research proposal. I believe you would be required to give a PhD Qualifying exam. Why not start preparing for it?
Your paper with your wife might not be considered seriously unless you are the primary author. Are you? If not then try to work on another paper which you could be the primary author.
Best of luck! Univ. of Toronto is a great university.

Why you should not self-fund: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/29509/13240

@AnonymousPhysicist Not every university is so expensive. Some of them cost $20K per year and the Ph.D. candidate gets tutoring positions from the second year covering the fees a good extent. By the third year, you start getting into funded projects. If you cannot or your Professor is not supporting, then quit the PhD, because it wont end well. (IMHO)

@kosmos Not every University is so expensive, true, but it is not just about the tuition cost. A funded PhD typically also covers your life expenses (how much would you spend on rent/food during 3 years?), conference and other travel expenses, lab equipment. Even if the tuition fees were zero, just living and eating for 3 years is quite expensive.

Also, consider fairness as well as money.  The linked answers go into some detail.

@Anonymous Physicist If the OP wants to get a PhD position at the said University without serious publication record and research background, he has no choice.


text:
Ethics about hiring writer for partial research paper writing
I want to hire someone to do partial research writing for me, particularly the introduction section. I will do the rest of the work. All the practical work is completed. This is non-graded work. It's not related to university or college work. It is just an independent work.
I want to know if this is ethical. Should I add the writer as a co-author for this minor contribution?

But ... why would you want to do this?

i just want someone to roughly do it, as I am working on the rest of paper, I will inline the introduction with that. it is just a workshop paper and I am suffering from severe allergy, so I think if I can get a helping hand to submit it on time

The introduction of your paper situates your work in the broader literature. In your introduction you make intentional decisions about which works to highlight as influencing the rest of the paper, and frame what you've done in a broader context of the field you are writing in. It isn't minor, it's a key part of a whole paper.
I don't see a practical way to "farm" this out to anyone else. To have someone else write a good introduction for you would take way more effort than it would to write yourself, regardless of language challenges.
It's fine to hire someone to do copy editing; an introduction of a paper is not copy editing and isn't minor. If your work is worth considering by someone else, it's worth writing a proper introduction for. Do it yourself.

Is it silly and/or stupid? Sure, but unethical? Not really. We're all paid money to write introductions, eventually.

@AzorAhai-him- Yeah, this is one where I'll stand by my frame challenge. It's silly/stupid enough to have someone else write your intro that if you do it you're either wasting your money, publishing a bad paper, or both, so I don't see much value in questioning the authorship issue. There's no good time to do it, so don't.


text:
Check plagiarism before submitting to journal

Last year, I submitted a paper to the WISA2019 journal. Unfortunately it was rejected. So if I submit that paper to other journals, will Turnitin’s result show a high percentage of plagiarized material? I mean, my paper is already in Turnitin’s database (the WISA2019 editor checked papers by Turnitin).
As a student, if I check my new second paper by Turnitin in my professor’s class (he will give me the class id and enrollment key), will it increase the plagiarism result when I submit my new paper to a journal? The purpose is to know the plagiarism report before submitting to a scientific journal.
Are professors able to see every assignment submission that is submitted by the student? For example If I submit an essay the first time, then after resubmitting an edited essay, will the instructor be able to see the first essay which is erased by the "resubmitting process".

For 3, ask your prof.

One question per post please.

Does this answer your question? What is the acceptable similarity in a mathematics PhD dissertation when checking by Turnitin?

I'll answer question #1: No. Let us not worry about Turnitin specifically, but plagiarism is if you take someone else's text and present it as your own. That is not the case here: You wrote the manuscript, and you remain to be the person who came up with both the ideas and the actual text. It is not plagiarized, and Turnitin will show it as not plagiarized.
There is also no other issue: Since the paper was not accepted by the first journal, you continue to be the owner of the copyright in the paper, and are free to submit it again wherever you want.

I think this covers #2 as well.


text:
Can I add a new reference to my accepted paper?
My paper was accepted and the journal asked me for corrections before publication. After corrections they will give it a doi number. Can I add a new reference at this stage or is it a risk?

I doubt that it is more than a tiny risk unless it introduces something fundamentally new or different to the paper.
Ask yourself whether it is really needed. If so, then add it but also give the editor a note that you have done so.
I think the main risk would be for a short delay.


text:
Can I add a GitHub Pages link to an IEEE paper abstract?
Can I add a GitHub Page link to an IEEE paper abstract? The page has videos, photos, abstract, codes links etc. Is there any restriction for that?
Example:

We provide real robot video demonstrations on our project page
xxxx.github.io/paper-title.

Normally, it is not advisable to add any reference in the abstract. You can, however, add it in the paper after abstract.

I don't know if it's allowed, but you should use something that is more permanent than GitHub for scientific publication. For example, you can archive your repository with Zenodo and generate a DOI. If you connect the repository with Zenodo you can archive all different releases as well.


text:
Best tools to create figures for papers/journal
What are good tools to create figures for papers/journals similar to the figure below which is both clear and well designed? Which tools can I use to create similar figures?
Features: Smoothly bended arrows, shadows, layers, numbering, shading

Whichever one you are most familiar with.

I am not familiar with anything

What are some tools available for drawing good figures for computer science research papers and presentations, Software to draw illustrative figures in papers

If you have $: illustrator, if you have time: TikZ. Inkscape seems to be in the middle but might fail to perform some complex task

This question will be closed because it's a software shopping question and not a good match for this site because the answers will be useless in a few years... But fwiw, right now a good answer is "Affinity Designer 2" which is extremely similar to Adobe Illustrator but costs only a fraction ($50 right now on sale - that's a one time payment. Not a subscription!). It's very powerful and runs on MacOS and Windows. If I were you I would give it a go (currently 6-month free trial).

I haven't used Affinity Designer 2 but others like it a lot, and right now it's $US 35.00 for a permanent license. https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/designer/#buy

@user2705196 Software is excempt from the shopping questions ban, so the question is actually ok

This question is similar to: Software to draw illustrative figures in papers. If you believe it’s different, please edit the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem.

A common way to produce scientific figures is to draw it using a general-purpose drawing software, then save it in an appropriate format to import into your paper/poster/presentation etc. If you don't have any art or graphic design background, the learning curve might be quite steep initially, but you should get used to it quickly.
Inkscape is free, works on Windows/Mac/Linux, and quite powerful.  Adobe Illustrator is another option, although probably not worth paying for unless you already have access via your institution.
The drawing tools inside Word/Powerpoint are also good, and by far the easier to use. They are certainly sufficient for simple figures with lots of text boxes and arrows.
If you already use LaTeX, TikZ is good for simple figures.  Note that it is not a drawing software, but rather a method to "program" an image with Latex code. Some might consider it easier than working with drawing software.
Many fields also have specialized software for drawing pictures common to that field.  Ask the people around you.

Aqualone provides some good options. I'd just remark that depending on what the final destination of the figure is, you need to think about the resolution. Because powerpoint was designed for screens it defaults to a resolution of 72 dpi which is too low for print (where you need 150 dpi for line art and 300/600 dpi for other graphic elements). So I'd steer away from powerpoint if you can and invest in the steep learning curve of whatever program you choose. Many you tube tutorials exist.

PowerPoint is very useful in creating figures. It’s very easy to learn.

If I had to draw a figure like you show in the question, I would go for Google Slides. No need to install anything, quite intuitive, and has all the features you need to draw what you show (as far I as I saw).


text:
PhD without any direction
I am a PhD student in a third world country in Mathematics in my fourth year. I have some serious concerns regarding my PhD. My advisor is very little involved in my things. I have some small results, but whatever I do he always says it's not good enough. As per his rules, one is not allowed to collaborate with any of his other students or students in related areas.
I now feel hopeless everyday. We meet once a month for max. half an hour. He doesn't respond to calls or messages and now I am in my 4th year without any clear direction or problem to solve from his side. Everyday I am going into deeper depression and turning anxious. I am starting to think about other career alternatives. But as I wasted 4 years, I want to get the degree but have no idea how to please him. Changing advisor is not an option here at my place.
What can I do?

Has this four years been mostly coursework or mostly research? Where do you get problems to work on?

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/211135/what-should-i-do-if-my-advisor-is-incorrectly-advising-me Does this answer your question?

@Buffy I found out problems on my own basically something was done in one setting and I was trying to do in other setting that's all. First two years were coursework

Out of curiosity, in which ways do you believe ‘in some third world country’ informs this question?

"Once a month for half an hour" sounds seriously inadequate to me. I usually met with my Ph.D. students once a week for at least an hour, and I think most of my colleagues have similar schedules.

@AndreasBlass not even that. There were instances where we didn't meet even for anhour as he always says he is busy so mostly like half an hour. In half an hour it's difficult to even express my ideas . So basically nothing happens in that time also. I don't know at times I feel extremely frustrated and anxious.


text:
Asking a professor at another university for a reading course
For context, I am an undergraduate at a T20 school. My summer plans fell through and I am currently in the process of figuring out what to do. For personal reasons, I would like to spend the summer at home, and I noticed a professor is researching a topic I am interested in at a university in my hometown. Would it be frowned upon to cold email them asking for introductory papers/ a possible reading course on the topic over the summer? At my university, such reading courses are not unheard of, and I was wondering if it would be out of line to propose such a project and if this is a common occurrence. I know situations like this are not uncommon for laboratory research, but I understand reading courses are very different in terms of professor engagement.

Does the professor have an open REU?

What exactly do you mean by “reading course”? Are you in the US?

@CameronWilliams Wouldn't be discouraged due to the lack of one. My advisor had hordes of undergrads each summer and it was never advertised and almost never through a formal REU.

@user71659 Oh indeed, I was more directing OP's attention to this possibility.

@CameronWilliams the professor does not have an REU and has not advised undergrads since 2019.

@cag51 I am in the US. At my school a reading course is where a professor and student read material for units. I think at others schools it is called an independent study.

Is this professor older? Not advising students in that long of a period of time suggests that they are no longer taking on students entirely. Generally in my experience, these faculty are nearly emeritus status.

I don't know how common this is, but I can't imagine why anyone would object to your doing this. I think it shows a lot of interest.
Professors in the same field know each other. They read each other's papers, they go to the same conferences, etc. Depending on how narrow your reading list is going to be, they may know each other well.
The only potential pitfall (and it's kind of remote) that I see is if the t professor you write to  really hates a professor at your school. This does happen. But even then, I'm not sure what bad things could happen.

You can certainly ask for a reading course or an independent study. However...
Cold emails from students at another university are easy to ignore. So...
If you can make a visit in person for the ask, then it is more likely you will be heard. Take some document that gives details of your qualifications. Something like an informal CV on one page would be fine. Or...
Ask a professor at your own institution to introduce you to the other person and make the request on your behalf, perhaps sending that short CV as well. It is much harder for people to ignore mails and requests from colleagues than it is from students.
Most universities have procedures for independent study. And most have a way to accept a course taken elsewhere.

Perhaps the other professor should be approached by your own professor (where you are enrolled).
I think they would be more likely to agree to a request to take you on for the summer from a colleague at another univeristy, rather than a cold request from some student they never heard of.


text:
Confused by formatting requirements of a journal
I intend to submit my first research paper to European Sport Management Quarterly but I'm really confused about the instructions.

Manuscripts should be compiled in the following order: title page;
abstract; keywords; main text; acknowledgements; references;
appendices (as appropriate); table(s) with caption(s) (on individual
pages); figure caption(s) (as a list).

when it says Tables with captions should be a section, does it mean I have to refrain from inserting them in the main text and just show them in its own specific section or it is Ok to also include them in the text?

Tables with captions should be a section, does it mean I have to refrain from inserting them in the main text and just show them in its own specific section

Yes, that's correct; they'll be in their own section. You will refer to the table in the main text but the table itself and its caption will be separate. Same for figures.
This is a typical submission format. Yeah, it's stupid, but also standard. Normally the final paper will be assembled differently, this format is just for the submission.

Thank you, sir. Figures/images are fine to be included in the main text then according to the instructions, right? I just have to write the captions of the figures in a different section.

@MmdLyon Hmm, I guess that's unclear. In my experience they are most often separate, but the text you include here does not actually specify the location of the figures themselves. It is likely there is an entirely separate section of the submission process to add the figures, and they probably do not want them in the manuscript document at all. That would be most consistent with my typical experience. Look for the "instructions to authors" page on the journal website and read through them carefully; for a shortcut, do a search for the word "figure" and see what they say.

Yes, at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=resm20&page=instructions#mp_figures see "Figures must be saved separate to text. Please do not embed figures in the manuscript file." - there are then further instructions for how to format figures.

Yes, I missed that part. Thanks again. have a good day.


text:
Colleague presented poster of our shared work at conferences without my knowledge or express permission
My colleague presented two separate posters, one at a domestic conference and another at an international conference, based on the work both of us have been collaborating for past 1.5 years.
Before submitting the abstract or the poster, they did not seek my approval. In fact, I was not aware of this until recently.
In the poster, they put themselves first in the author list and me as second. Apart from the fact that poster submission was not disclosed, the authorship order was not explicitly discussed.
In the poster, they included an elaborate set of their contact information, even (non-traditional in academic publishing) details such as tweet handle and other auxiliary information, when clearly there was space to include the rest of the authors information.
I am offended by this. I am not sure what the universally accepted academic code of conduct in such instances is?

Related: Rules for notifying co-authors about re-presenting a project at a conference.

What discipline is this occurring in? (Are you in a conference-driven field or a journal-dominant field?) Also, what are your respective current career statuses?

'I am offended by this. I am not sure what the universally accepted academic code of conduct in such instances is?' Although this features a question mark, does not strike as a fully formed question. Would be worth rephrasing.

Echoing @aeismail, what field is this?

Ultimately there isn't a single valid approach here. The appropriate level of response depends on several factors, including the field in which the work is being performed, the nature of the conference, the status of the work relative to publishing practices in the field, and so on.
For instance, if you're in a field where posters are peer-reviewed before a conference, then it's a much more significant issue than presenting a poster at, for instance, a Gordon Research Conference where posters are explicitly considered to be "for discussion only" and are not intended to be used for publication. As for the author order, some societies (for instance, the APS) expect that the poster (or talk) be given by the first author as listed at submission—whether or not this is fundamentally the way it would be listed in a paper.
Looking at the ethical issue—has the work been published already somewhere or otherwise public? If so, your co-author may have thought it was OK to present a poster on the material; after all, you've already consented to publishing it elsewhere. On the other hand, if this is the first time the work has been presented, then it absolutely is ethically wrong to present the work without your consent.
The level of your response, though, should be scaled according to both the level of the offense and your desire to continue the collaboration. If you're angry that it was done but still want to work together, a somewhat measured response (the "sternly worded letter" approach) is probably best. If this has poisoned your relationship to the point where you can't see continuing to work together—and you want to have your colleague punished for the transgression—then you should make that clear. But I would hope the opening salvo here should be open and forthright dialogue with your colleague rather than a report to an ethics committee.
(Also, this advice can't really be generalized to large-scale collaborations where it simply is not possible to obtain informed consent from every participant on every paper produced as part of the collaboration.)

Let's assume that OP's case is indeed that of the peer-reviewed conference, with no previous publication. If it were a low-profile for-discussion-only affair, or a re-publication, OP would probably not have been so pissed and anyway the first case is the more interesting for us to address.

I am not aware of a "universally accepted academic code of conduct". Based on your description, your coauthor's behavior was unethical (by my standards), but they did not break any laws (I am not a lawyer, just guessing).
The first point I would check is your coauthor's institution's Academic Code of Conduct or similar document. If they violated their employer's guidelines, you can notify their employer if you wish.
You can also check the conference submission guidelines for requirements on author order and contact details. Again, if they violated these, you may let the conference organizers know. Other than that, I do not think you have formal ways to punish the coauthor.

You're confusing "breaking laws" with a legal liability. If unfairly hurt your interests, you might be able to sue me for compensation - in a civil rather than criminal procedure - even though the state can arraign me for any sort of criminal act.

@einpoklum Thank you for clarifying the law - even better would be a reference to the legal code of some country that backs up the statement. The qualifier "unfairly" in hurting the interests is a bit vague, presumably the law or the court determines what is unfair hurting of interests, as opposed to, say, legitimate competition.

What constitutes "unfairly" or "unduly" differs among legal systems of course, even putting judicial discretion aside.

There are regulations which are not state laws that are likely to have been broken.


text:
What does "Awaiting SE Preliminary Decision" mean for IEEE transactions journal?
I have a manuscript with IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology under peer review from early Jan 2020. Today, there has been a status update on the journal's ScholarOne online portal which says "Awaiting SE Preliminary Decision".
What does this mean?

What does the 'SE' stand for?
Why is the decision to be made by the SE classified as "preliminary"? Will there by further non-preliminary decisions made at the editorial office?

@Azor Only partially. I am looking for answers to the two numbered questions in my post.

@AzorAhai I think it doesn't. The question here is about the contents of the box labelled "editorial decision" in the typical workflow.

A reasonable guess would be "section editor", that is, an editor responsible for a thematic section.
The wording suggests that there will be a further check. In some journals, there is a final check by the editor-in-chief for every article. Normally, you can expect that the outcome of this check is positive, as editor-in-chiefs are usually very busy and inclined to trust their editors.