text:
Re-analysis of raw data that was previously published in a thesis
I am in the middle of an authorship dispute and need some help. Raw data was shared with me by a Master's student, and we re-analyzed the data for the publication. I was going under the assumption that the data were already published. Summary statistics (e.g. mean and standard deviations) are all publicly available in the thesis. We re-analyzed the data so that it we could combine with our own data.
If summary statistics of data are freely available online (and not subject to copyright issues) what does this mean for the raw data? Any relevant links will be much appreciated. Note the dispute is with a previous advisor of the student, not the student themselves.

If a paper was published previously by that group, was the raw data included in the supplementary materials?

If summary statistics of a cohort of students enrolling in an university is available online, does it mean the raw data can always be distributed freely?
You can easily come up with any similar example. The answer is no.
Having access to summary statistics (1) and having (the right to) access the raw data (2) are irrelevant. You can recreate (1) if you have access to (2) but not vice versa.

Even if we used the raw data the recreate the summary statistics of university enrollment?

The point is that you have to get the right to access to the raw data first. On the basis of freely-available summary statistics, it does not grant you the right. People with permission can recreate the summary statistics without any dispute. For example, my supervisor used to show me highly detailed summary statistics (not just basic statistics) of a dataset in class, and he told me that in order to have access to the raw data before doing any computation, I had to sign a 20-page document. That is the point.

Publication of summary statistics implies nothing about the raw data.


text:
Academic job market: applying for an associate or full professor position if I am not an assistant professor?
What does it mean when the posting says they are looking for an associate or full professor? Does this mean that only people that are currently in tenure-track positions will be considered? Would the search committee consider applications from non tenure-track applicants?
Any advice would be much appreciated!

What does the ‘required’ section say? Not the posting title, but somewhere in the guts it should specify. At worst apply and let their HR sort it out.

See https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/171352/if-a-tenure-track-position-has-been-advertised-at-the-assistant-professor-level/171385#171385 for example.

Sometimes people who are employed outside of academia, say in senior industry positions or at research labs, may be hired as associate professors or even full professors if they have impressive enough publication records. There is no requirement to already be an associate or full professor, or to already have an academic job of any sort.
It’s also not uncommon for people who are assistant professors and are just about to be considered for promotion to associate professor at their own institution to also apply for associate professor jobs elsewhere. If they are at a career stage where their own institution would consider them for promotion, other universities would likely be willing to consider them for such a position as well.
In rare cases, someone may succeed in being hired for a tenured position as an associate professor directly from a postdoc position, skipping the tenure track phase. Needless to say, you’d have to have some pretty stellar achievements under your belt for this to be a realistic possibility.
The only hard criterion for being hired as an associate professor is that you must be impressive enough that people will want to hire you as an associate professor.

It could mean a person currently on tenure track, but it might mean, and is more likely to mean, someone who is already an associate or full professor elsewhere. Someone eligible for a mid level or senior position.
If you aren't at least an assistant professor your resumé would need to be pretty extraordinary to be considered. Someone widely known and respected in your field might be considered but the bar would be pretty high. After all, the job is about research and teaching, which are, perhaps, more likely to be skills of those who are already academics.
In particular, a recent graduate with a new doctorate would have almost no chance of being considered unless the dissertation were a solution to a long standing and very important question. It can happen, but vanishingly rare.

Probably 'everywhere' should be 'elsewhere', or it would have to be a truly extraordinary candidate.

@Anyon, yep, good catch. Old eyes and a sometimes unhelpful spell corrector catch up with me pretty often. Fixed.

John Pardon is a good recent example of an exceptional case. (PHD from Stanford in 2015, full Professor in Princeton since 2017.)

Have a look at the corresponding selection criteria.  They will spell out who they want.  For example, I have seen full professor positions going to people with excellent industry connections with very few publications.  In another example, I have seen universities set a minimum requirement in terms of citations before one can apply.  It all depends on the strategic plan of a university.

The locale matters a lot here as well. Germany, until rather recently, basically did not even have tenure tracks or assistant professors. Instead, people worked as postdocs or in other academic or industrial positions until they were sufficiently experienced to apply as professor. With the introduction of "Juniorprofessor" positions this is slowly changing, but I would imagine that even today most people hired as professor have never been a Juniorprofessor in their life.
In other countries, where the assistant-associate-full professor chain is a more well established it may be less common to "jump ranks", but I doubt it's strictly impossible anywhere.

In academic hiring in the US there are several different dimensions that matter including: tenure status, salary, and rank. There are also many different kinds of institutions, so what I am going to say means that it won't apply everywhere.
Normally, where I teach, a position that is advertised specifically for an Associate or Full Professor would be for someone who would be expected to take a leadership role in the department, either as chair, heading a center or institute, or creating a new program.  Most of the time such a person is already at that rank and they would already have tenure and that tenure would transfer (there are different mechanisms for this).
As other people have mentioned, in some departments, such as computer science or business sometimes someone with a lot of industry experience usually also including a publication record will also be hired at those ranks because the assistant professor salaries are not competitive and don't reflect their seniority. However those people would be hired without an award of tenure.
Overall, the advice to read the advertisement carefully is really good.

"Normally, where I teach, a position that is advertised specifically for an Associate or Full Professor would be for someone who would be expected to take a leadership role in the department, either as chair, heading a center or institute, or creating a new program." is far from universal (even in the US).

Hence "where I teach" and " it won't apply everywhere" so I'm not sure what you are commenting on.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Legal to post an image of a textbook for help?
I had a textbook problem that I wasn't able to solve, so I posted the question on a social media platform and got asked to provide an image of the entire page including the question by multiple people, so I did, and deleted the image after the conversation was done. Was this illegal? Is it considered as fair use, since it's for educational purposes?

Better to ask it on Law.SE. Legal stuff

Note that almost everywhere and for most situations copyright is a civil matter and it is up to a copyright holder to make a claim in court. Sharing such material privately is fine (most places) under "fair use", which isn't recognized everywhere.
And, fair use, where it is recognized, is a bit broader for educational use, but not unlimited or absolute. It is a matter of judgement.
However, if your sharing on "social media" is a form of publishing (making public) then it might be a technical violation but extremely unlikely to be charged as it is a small (if any) violation, not worth the effort of filing a law suit.
It is probably best not to do such things, but not something to worry too much about. Sharing off-line would be fine, but most social media sites are open to the public for many things. A private message on a site is likely not an issue.
Note that one consideration in copyright law (which varies from place to place) is whether an act reduces the value of the copied material. That doesn't seem to be the case here, but only a jury (or judge) could say and only if a suit were filed.

Caveat: IIRC there are a few places and some situations in this big world where copyright is a matter of criminal, not civil, law. What you describe doesn't seem to fall in to that category (in the US, anyway).

Re: criminal aspect of copyright infringement. Canada for example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_(Canada)#Penalties

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


text:
Section in review paper with same citations leads to plagiarism
I cited a review article which divided a specific architecture into two categories. For each category the authors of the review paper cite a number of different related paper and explain them.
My problem is that my own section contains for each category some of the paper they cited in their review article. Is this considered as structural plagiarism?
To summarize:
1.) I cited the structural classification of the review article.
2.) For each category I only cited the original work and not that I acquired this subset of related work in the section of the review article.
Should I do that in addition?

Does this answer your question? Structured plagiarism by using similar citations in a paragraph

It's possibly implied a bit that the other papers came from the review, depending on how exactly you phrased things. You might be able to add a few extra words to make this more clear, though, which might look something like:

Simon, et al.[1], characterized woodland creatures as either Elves[2,3,4] or Fairies[5,6,7].

Then, in your subsequent Elves section, you can freely refer to references [2,3,4] individually for their specific content, and do the same for the Fairies section, without needing to refer back to [1] in either, assuming you aren't taking any more ideas from [1] besides the categorization.
I would consider, though, whether you need to present a review of all that work the same way that the previous review did; it's possible it's critical enough to your current work that it is necessary, but I'd make sure you're actually presenting what is most relevant to the rest of the paper and not just recapitulating the review.

Certainly enough of a review to assure that no incorrect claims were being made.

@BobaFit By "re-review" in this context I mean written in the paper; yes, absolutely, OP should check the accuracy of statements they make in the original sources and not merely take the review's word for it; minor mistakes like the wrong year on a paper by the same authors can easily get propagated that way, or sometimes worse.

@BryanKrause: What it be still necessary to cite it as: characterized woodland creatures as either Elves[2,3,4] or Fairies[5,6,7].

@Simon If you haven't actually used the review to find the sources then it isn't plagiarism to cite them without crediting the review, though it is probably safest to acknowledge the review had all those sources, anyways, such as in the manner I suggest here. If it's really just 4 references where 2 are references to canonical papers, it seems extraordinarily unlikely that you'd ever have such an accusation, though, and if it isn't really that review paper that's doing the categorizing (for example, if the references already refer to themselves as Elves and Fairies) there's nothing to credit.

Maybe I should only keep the baselines to be on the safe side and discard the others?

The title of the related work already suggest that they belong to a specific category. Do you imply that I do not need to reference them in addition as you suggested?

@Simon I'd recommend having someone you know like your advisor have a look and help you make a decision. I think the initial wording of your question gave me a bit of a different impression than your comments. It's only plagiarism if you're using ideas from someone else without acknowledging the source of those ideas, so it sounds like there is no issue of plagiarism, which means all that remains is whether there could be nonetheless be a rough appearance of it. I don't think you should drop relevant references, but can't give you advice on which are relevant and which are not.

Thank you for your advice. I will cite the obtained references in addition as you suggested to be on the safe side.


text:
Similar research paper
I am currently working on my Master's thesis in machine learning and recently encountered a research paper that addresses a similar problem to my thesis topic. Both approaches aim to enhance performance using label information from the data, albeit in different ways.
The methodology presented in the paper involves additional steps, which my approach circumvents by optimizing a different objective, potentially making it simpler and more direct. Additionally, the existing method has some drawbacks, such as generating unused data and potential overfitting issues—problems that my method avoids.
Given these differences and the shared goal of our work, I am worried about how to address this paper in my thesis.
Would it be problem to discuss this paper in the related work section of my thesis? Should I emphasize the differences in methodology and the potential downsides of the approach found in the paper?
Or does this not make any sense and I have to find a new topic?
I appreciate your advise.

Though I don't publish in your field, I would take "aim to enhance performance using label information from the data" as descriptive of nearly every paper published in your field, so if you've found only one that is similar either you're not looking very hard/with the correct search terms or your approach is quite novel to only be similar to one other paper.

This happens a lot when you work in a popular area. It has happened to me on several occasions in math and stats.

Would it be problem to discuss this paper in the related work section of my thesis?

It's not a problem. This is exactly the right thing to do.

Should I emphasize the differences in methodology and the potential downsides of the approach found in the paper?

Yes, but try not to be too negative about the other paper. For sure you should emphasize the ways in which yours can be viewed as an improvement, including having less risk of overfitting.

Or does this not make any sense and I have to find a new topic?

No, don't do that unless your advisor says so. Even if you found another topic, as you got deeply into it, you'd probably find related work to that topic, too. This is the nature of research in machine learning. A whole lot of research as been done! A bit of overlap with existing research is not a big deal, especially when you can point to the differences and can argue that your approach can be viewed as an improvement of existing approaches in some way.

Thank you very much for your advice. In this area, several studies try to improve performance in related ways, but frame it differently. How much overlap might be tolerable. The goal is, as I said, similar and we use the same additional information, but the execution is carried out quite differently.

I have seen papers with quite a lot of overlap still get published. I wouldn't stress too much about this if I were you. If you are stressing you can talk to your advisor. They can also smooth the publication process for you once you get to that point.

But if it is only a master thesis, should it be enough?

Hello it is me again. I implemented the related algorithm and found out that it performs much worse. Should I include the discussion of the approach in the main part of the thesis and also give the results ?


text:
First paper submission reproducibility AAAi25
I'm preparing my submission for AAAI25, and I came across the requirement for a reproducibility checklist. I am a bit confused about how this checklist should be submitted. Should it be included as an appendix in the main paper, or is it something that needs to be uploaded as a separate document? Also, if it is included in the paper, does it count for the page limit?
Any insights from those who have submitted to AAAI before or have experience with this process would be really appreciated! This is my first submission, so I am afraid to mess it up.

Can anybody help me with that?

In the first appearance of 'AAAI25' you should give the full name (e.g. something like "AAAI25 (xxx)", where 'xxx' is the full name). Then reproduce the checklist here or provide a link. Also, since AAAI25 and AAAI are (presumably) different acronyms, you should say what the latter is, unless it's clear from knowing the former acronym. I googled "AAAI25", so I think I know what it is, but since what I found is so recent (last 2 to 3 years), I could be wrong, and anyway anything that recent might not be all that standard yet in whatever field you're in, which incidentally you did not tell us.

@DaveLRenfro: Thanks for the answer, but I do not get where to include the checklist. Are we referring to the same thing. https://aaai.org/conference/aaai/aaai-25/submission-instructions/ .Maybe  you can have a look at this. Sorry for that but I cannot ask anybody else. Can I provide an extra document where I can add this list or do I have to include it in the main paper?

Thanks for the answer -- I wasn't giving an answer. I was mentioning some ways that you can revise your question to make it more understandable for others here, "ways" that are very quick and easy to implement (probably only a handful of words added in a couple of places) but which would greatly increase it's intelligibility.

These answers are all wrong.
In OpenReview, when you edit your submission, under "Reproducability Checklist", there is a small text that states "Authors are required to complete a Reproducibility Checklist (https://aaai.org/conference/aaai/aaai-25/aaai-25-reproducibility-checklist/). Please include your answers in your PDF after the references.".
I therefore added the reproducability checklist after my references together with my answers.

Thank you very much. You saved my day.

You are running up against the deadline.
The checklist appears to be supplementary material and you have until August 19 anytime on earth to submit it together with your code.
You should address these questions to the conference, though. I just answer because you seem to have entered panic mode.
Good luck with your submission.


text:
Review not needed after review
After reviewing a paper 1 month ago, I received the following email:
"It has since become clear that I will not need you to review the submitted manuscript at this time."
Has anyone encountered this? What should I think about this?

Did you return your review to the editor?

Yes I got an email that confirmed it. I got this message after the submitted review.

Sounds like somebody hit the wrong button in their software...

But the review was deleted on the website today. Does this mean anything?

Perhaps the editors cat walked across the keyboard. Ultimately, they are moving on without your review, not sure what else to do but let the editor know something was wonky in handling it.

There are a lot of possibilities, among them that the editor made a decision with or without reviews. Another is that the author(s) withdrew the paper making reviews moot.
The timing might just be a coincidence and the editor might not have noticed your review submission. Don't read too much in to it. It is unlikely that it reflects badly on you or your review.

Should I still ask why this happened or leave it as it is?

You could leave it without issue, but if curiosity is killing you, ask. You might not get a reply if the editor is overworked at the moment.

This has happened to me twice in recent years. In one case the very short paper was quickly found (not by me) to be a nearly word-for-word match with someone's (not the paper's author) mathoverflow answer. I knew the editor, so I asked what were the "problematic issues" found by another reviewer (this being before I had gotten around to looking carefully at the paper), since in my initial glance at the paper it seemed correct, but possibly not interesting or profound enough for the journal (neither of which seemed to merit the wording the editor used).

From an editor's perspective, this doesn't look good, and this isn't how the process should be run. "The review is no longer needed" notices make sense in case a paper is withdrawn, or a decision can be made before having received the review (which may be late, but also an earlier review may have highlighted issues that actually "kill" the paper regardless of what a later reviewer could say, such as proof for plagiarism).
It is frustrating for the reviewer to have their review ignored, but also from an editor's perspective it doesn't make sense not to use all available information, i.e., already submitted reviews.
Of course, as others write, the reason may be a harmless mistake, but as editor I would absolutely want to know that this happened, to investigate why it happened and whether there is a reason to review the decision. So I encourage you to write to the editor and ask what was going on.
By the way, editorial work in science, even if often not paid for, is a responsible position and requires a professional attitude. I can't agree with the "let it go, chances are it's harmless and the editor has too much to do anyway" sound of some contributions. Of course you don't have an obligation to chase this up, but as I said, as an editor I'd welcome you to do it.

The simplest possibility would be that your submitted review got lost in the system, or the editor overlooked or forgot about it. This happens sometimes and is of course frustrating: Reviewing a revision, after the original review did not reach the authors
The second simplest reason is that someone misclicked, as Jon Custer notes.
In either case, apparently the editor reached a decision without requiring your review. Since you saw the paper, you are likely in the best situation to judge whether this is good news or bad news for the author(s).
As others write, you can certainly ask what happened. That your review was deleted is indeed strange, I have never heard of that (to be honest, I usually don't hunt for my reviews on the system afterwards), so this might well warrant a polite inquiry.

Thank you for your answer. I will ask to resolve the situation.

They found another reviewer who completed the job. This may happen if you took too much time, but also sometimes, if they just got enough reviews. I wouldn't worry too much.

But I met the deadline, and my review was also accessible on their website long after the deadline.

That's strange. I would ping them and tell them that you submitted your review.


text:
LOR from advisor who hasn't taught me but knows me well
I am applying to math REUs in the United States, which require letters of recommendation. I wanted to ask my faculty advisor for the letter - I get along well with them, they have seen my progress over my entire college career so far, I ask them fairly many questions about graduate school, and they were able to get me a grant to attend a math conference. They are also professor emeritus at my college.
However, I haven't dealt in real math with them, in the sense that I haven't been taught by them or done research with them.
Thus, while my advisor would write me a good letter, I think it would not be from the standpoint from someone who has directly witnessed my mathematical skill?
I am planning on sending one letter from a professor who has taught me in an intensive course. Is it a good idea to ask my advisor for the second letter, or should I ask a professor who has taught me instead?

Having been in the writer's position, I would say the most important thing is whether I know anything concrete that I can cite in support of any statements I make about your character and abilities.
Although having taught someone definitely helps furnish such concrete examples, it's neither necessary nor even sufficient. It depends more on whether the person has distinguished themselves at all and done so in a way I can be aware of. If it's just about grades I don't need to have taught you to consult those. But if it's about whether you show leadership and initiative, I might have seen that in class or I might have seen or heard about that outside of class.
Once a student asked me for a recommendation for an engineering program after I had taught her English. We had a good relationship, but of course my perspective was limited. So I spoke personally to the qualities I had seen that would serve her in any program, and then I asked others who had taught her whether she had distinguished herself in their courses or outside them. Another student provided a resume and answered my questions about things on there that I thought I might want to reference.
Your advisor, if they have watched your progress throughout your career, probably has a lot of concrete things to say about you. But in any case, they'll be able to judge, and there's no harm in asking (and even acknowledging that you understand that they might not be able to).

You should always ask for a LOR from a faculty member who knows you well.

I'll guess that such a letter would be fine. After all, they are in a position to gather information from their colleagues who have taught you and can write a nice "summary" letter if they so choose.
They certainly seem to be supportive. I don't see a downside, given the other things you say.


text:
What is the purpose of publishing in such journals?
I have always been wondering why some mathematics professors choose to publish problems in journals such as Crux Mathematicorum, Mathematical Reflections etc, which only focus on elementary mathematics.
I don't think that these journals are highly regarded by the academic community and I don't see how publishing problems here helps them in their career(of course, they may only be doing it as a hobby, but it seems highly unlikely for those who publish lots of such problems). Such journals seem more suited for high school teachers, even though I don't see how they may benefit from publishing there either.

@SolarMike I've thought about this, but I don't think it is likely. This is why I posted here, to see other opinions.

Hmmm, do you think that everything possible or valuable has already been said/written about elementary math?

I'm not in math so I can't tell if the American Journal of Physics, from the American Association of Physics Teachers, is vaguely similar. Different audience than Physical Review, but useful to that other audience.

@JonCuster very highly regarded journal as a matter of fact.  Anyways: Martin Gardner (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Gardner)  would disagree with the Op.

@ZeroTheHero - I would agree fully. It isn't Phys. Rev. Letters, and is not supposed to be, but has some really neat stuff in it.

Your idea that academics care only about their career and not about teaching, passing math knowledge to the public etc is worrying..

I hope it isn't a radical position to say that math can be "interesting" and "enlightening" at any level. If it weren't then no one would ever study it long enough to reach the edge that the OP seems to prefer. It would just be too boring and uninteresting to pursue.
Unfortunately too many young students find it boring, I suppose, which makes the importance of such endeavors into elementary math more important, and actually gives them added interest.
How can we bring math insight to youngsters who are only studying arithmetic? Algebra?
Math insight is hard gained. But to truly be a mathematician requires it. That insight isn't in the individual statements (theorems, if you like) of math, but in the spaces between the more easily stated things. What is algebra? Really, what is it? How do its parts fit together into a whole?

There appears to be a mismatch between your view of "Math" and what math means to a broader community. Sure, there are those doing leading edge research, publishing bold new results, and so forth. But, there are also those who have a calling to do things like teach mathematics, including dedicated high school teachers. Why should there not be a journal for them to read? And if there is such a journal, somebody has to write for it, and those people are normally professionals closely engaged with teaching (remember that many professors, including in math, are at teaching-focused institutions).
In a non-math context, I would point to the American Association of Physics Teachers (aapt.org), associated with the American Physical Society. Their mission statement reads (AAPT Mission):

Mission:
AAPT's mission is to enhance the understanding and appreciation of physics through teaching.
When the organization was established in 1930, our goal was clear: "ensuring the dissemination of the knowledge of physics, particularly by way of teaching." Decades later, we remain committed to that core value, but with a new emphasis and meaning provided by our current mission statement.
Our vision is to be the leader in physics education. We are committed to providing the most current resources and up-to-date research needed to enhance a physics educator's professional development. The results are not only a deeper appreciation of the teaching profession, but most importantly, more enthusiastic involvement from their students.
The Association has identified four critical issues that will guide our future activities:
Increase AAPT's outreach to and impact on physics teachers
Increase the diversity and numbers of physics teachers and students
Improve the pedagogical skills and physics knowledge of teachers at all levels
Increase our understanding of physics learning and of ways to improve teaching effectiveness
The twenty-first century will provide the greatest opportunities and challenges for us as we take an active role in shaping the future. Our success will depend on the commitment, dedication, and continued input of our members and the physics education community. Join us in this journey to enhance the quality and effectiveness of physics education at all levels.

They publish several journals, the American Journal of Physics and The Physics Teacher, focused on slightly different audiences within their society. Frankly, some of their stuff is pretty interesting (in the spring there was a nice paper on the production of polonium in the Manhattan Project, physics included).

Both of these journals target mathematical educators, math outreach people (e.g., K-12, college, Math Olympiad), and people who have a general interest in mathematics.
Look at both journal's homepages, they describe their journal's purposes:

Crux Mathematicorum is an internationally respected source of unique and challenging mathematical problems published by the CMS. Designed primarily for the secondary and undergraduate levels, and also containing some pre-secondary material, it has been referred to as "the best problem solving journal in the world". All the problems and solutions are fully peer-reviewed for clarity, completeness and rigour by academic and professional mathematicians. Crux includes an "Olympiad Corner" which is particularly helpful for students preparing for math competitions

and

Mathematical Reflections intends to fill the editor’s perceived need for a publication aimed primarily at high school students, undergraduates, and everyone interested in mathematics. Through articles and problems, we seek to expose readers to a variety of interesting topics that are fully accessible to the target audience.

Similar journals exist in other fields. For example, biology has Journal of Biological Education and statistics has the Journal of Statistical Education. The American Chemistry Society also has a webpage of resources with several similar journals.
Academics publish in these journals to formally share ideas and methods they have for education and accessible examples. Reasons might include:

A genuine interest in advancing the field and sharing what they know.
A interest in promoting awareness of their field to recruit more people in it (e.g., teaching people to love math may increase the number of math majors in college).
A professor who's research focuses on educational methods at a research university.
A professor at a teaching institution who is looking for publications and sees a way to publish their methods.


text:
Presenting twice at same conference
I applied to a pretty broadly-themed conference in my research areas, and submited two very different contributed talk abstracts. I suspected one would be downgraded to a poster, or simply rejected. Instead, the organisers told me I could present both talks. Looking in the abstract book, I see that no one else will be giving two talks. Is giving two talks in poor taste?
Specific background: I am an early postdoc, and the conference is in Europe. Both research projects are new and have not been presented elsewhere, and are with completely separate sets of coauthors.

The answer by @Buffy suffices and I also congratulate you. But I could add that at least for poster often a participant gathers few of them. Attending conferences has a cost. One can also present twice or more because a coworker cannot attend, whatever reason. So you won't be seen as an arrogant or something. ....

It depends upon the conference's rules. Some allow it (e.g., SETAC) and other prohibit it (e.g., ESA.

It's totally fine.  I commend your efficiency.
It would not be fine if you submitted two similar talks, or if you submitted a talk under someone else's name so that you could pretend to fill in for them.

If the conference committee thinks it is fine, then it is fine.

Thanks, happy for the confirmation! I was quite clear about it to the organizers, and they were clear in communicating to me that they acknowledged I submitted two talks, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't making a faux pas. Conferences are still a mystery to me! :)

Might be worth adding something to this answer - not for the current asker, but for future people looking at the question - to note that some conferences do not allow somebody to either (a) present more than one thing, or (b) be first author on more than one thing. This one clearly does.

@Flyto I've never seen that myself.  Though I have seen a "only one abstract per first author will be a talk, everything else is a poster" policy.

Well, lucky you ;-) There's a conference I regularly attend that only allows one submission per first author.

@Flyto Richard Erickson add your own answer.

It's feasible, sure. But my advice would be to "downgrade" one to one of the poster sessions.  This will seem more normal...and also allows you experiences in a couple different settings (each mode has advantage/disadvantage).  Choose the one you want to do that with, but I would try to do the poster second, so you get benefit of some chitchat carryover from separate talk, if people loved that.
If it doesn't work because of fitting into themes or the like, fine, leave it as is.  But usually posters have some general-ish sessions anyhows.  If it's a mega-conference (e.g. ACS), than don't worry...there will be thousands of people and sessions, nobody will notice/care.  But if it is a more intimate setting (like a Gordon Conference), I would cut a talk or downgrade one to poster.  It will just be slightly odd otherwise.
I also like the comment below about having a colleague present one topic if possible (not sure why the violent downvote).

Is giving two talks in poor taste?

It isn't ideal, but I wouldn't consider it inappropriate.

Both research projects are new and have not been presented elsewhere, and are with completely separate sets of coauthors.

I think it is better for a co-author to present one of the works.

Why do you consider it inappropriate?

Why would you consider it not ideal?

@JeffE Hearing from different speakers is more interesting than hearing from the same speaker.

@IanTurton I wrote: I wouldn't consider it inappropriate.

I agree it would be more interesting for others if someone else gave the second talk, but unfortunately they cannot make it, since this conference is not a major one, and they live quite far away--I probably should have made this clear.


text:
Publishing expanded supplementary information as separate paper
I contributed to a paper to a journal in the life sciences. The paper contains a lot of field-specific theory, but the main point relies on a result obtained through some new inference method that I worked out. Since the method was not the focus of the paper, I described it in a terse, but pretty general, supplement to the paper. The code implementation was not included.
We think this method and its implementation are of a general interest to the community, and would like to submit a separate second paper which will expand on the supplement, and provide new sample applications. In principle, there would be a lot of overlap: identical text in the derivations, similar notes, etc. Is this plagiarism? And generally, at what point would it cease being plagiarism? Obviously tacking on an introduction and a conclusion would not be okay (or would it?), but what about past that?
A related question is this: New paper which is very similar, but subtly different, from previous paper. However, the difference in my situation is that I won't be making any big additional theoretical contributions.

Plagiarism is using something without attribution, presenting it as your own. Self-plagiarism is related but a bit different. If you use your own past published work but don't cite the original it is self plagiarism but because it breaks a chain of citations that a future reader might need for context. The older work provides some context, including its own citations that are needed by future scholars.
But you can also refer to the older work (of your own) and cite it just as you would the work of another author. In quoting, you can also be a bit more expansive, since you won't be breaking copyright rules, assuming that you still hold rights. But you need to quote, not just copy, so that the origin is clear.
The other question is about publish-ability. That is up to the journal of course, and the new paper will be evaluated as usual based on novelty and relevance. You seem to indicate that you won't have a problem with that, so it is worth a submission.


text:
Submission of a part of a thesis to a conference?
I just submitted a part of my thesis to a conference. But in the document, although in fact it is a paper to be submitted to a journal, I have mistakenly left a few words as “in this thesis, my thesis,.. etc”.  Because of the deadline and some timing constraints, I could not find time to replace them.
Do you think it’s a bad thing to upload a paper with thesis words in it? Would it be a negative consideration in terms of the perspectives of the scientific committee?

This is suggesting copy and paste and if so was a very bad idea.

You should note that hardly any paper gets published in the exact form in which it is first submitted. You will most likely get some feedback and an opportunity to improve the paper according to the suggestions of the reviewers. You can take out the references to the thesis at that time.
You can also contact the conference committee (or the program committee) and ask to update the paper prior to review. They may permit that or not, but in the long term it will probably not matter.

It certainly doesn't look good, but it really depends on the quality of the rest of the paper.

If it's an excellent paper (clear accept), then it will probably be accepted and have a suggestion that those occurrences be removed
If it's a weak paper (clear reject) then it won't make things worse.

The problems is if it's a borderline paper. It certainly seems sloppy to leave them in, as it's a clear indicator that you did not proof read your conference version before submitting, which reflects quite negatively. So if you're already on the borderline, this could tip the balance towards reject when you would have otherwise been accepted.
That said, this is highly dependent on the reviewers, the program committee, the quality of the conference, etc.
Regardless, it's certainly not career ending: it should not have consequences beyond possible rejection from the conference.

TLDR it depends


text:
co-authorship of the unresponsive and careless advisor?
My paper, that is part of my thesis, has been accepted to a conference as a part of the poster session. In the paper, I have mentioned my gratitutes to my supervisors. In fact, an unofficial supervisor of mine who works at the same place with me, acted and helped me more than my actual supervisor deserves all the credits in this thesis. (My main supervisor lives in another city so that we met only 2-3 times, but the unofficial supervisor I mentioned helped me enormously as my official one advised me to work with her, no need to mention, she's not a faculty member but holds an associate professorship..) So it's a basically an unresponsive thesis advisor issue.
In the submission of my final version of the thesis for the conference, I want to make her my co-author if she accepts.
But as there is literally no input from my actual supervisor, I do not want to put his name. (He also said to me once that you made all the work by yourself without me or if she (the 2nd person I work on my thesis, who is not officially assigned for my advisorship) accepts what you did then I'm fine, so he does not care at all what's going on such that I doubt if he reads the final draft of the work I sent.
So would it be okay to not to include his name?
What do you suggest?
thanks in advance!

Do you mean "ethically ok" or "politically ok"? They may not be the same. Would you be kicking a sleeping bear? That is usually unwise.

@Buffy I know he may not be happy when he sees it, but he confesses it as "you were all alone did a good job without me" etc.. But you are right, admittedly.

If he holds power over your completion - beware. There is little worse for a grad student than advisor who wants to end your academic career.

There are so very many times in life where you will want to tell someone to stuff it and "thanks for nothing, jerk!" - but in all my life so far, I have yet to encounter a time when it was actually a good idea to do so. It seems paradoxical, to possess a natural urge to do something one should rarely if ever do; I consider it one of the mysteries of human existence.

This is a common dilemma in academia that can quickly escalate to sorrow. My advice is short and straightforward: once the manuscript is ready from your side, politely approach your both supervisors and ask them directly about their expectations concerning authorship.
I understand the situation may feel uncomfortable and you'd prefer to make this decision relying on everyone's best judgement, but most of the times supervisors are overly touchy regarding merit and authorships.
Thread carefully there and be frank with your superiors. Good luck!

This is a "safety first" suggestion. While there is probably no ethical constraint here, I strongly suggest that you do what is expected and traditional in your field and location. You won't be in such a situation forever, provided that you graduate, and then you can choose according to more personal standards.
At a minimum, however, you should acknowledge the other professor for her help.
You might also, provided that it seems safe, ask your main advisor for advice in this. "I would like to include Y as a co-author, if she agrees, to acknowledge her help. What do you suggest?".
If your advisor provides funding, but not advice, or a lab in which to do the work, then he would normally be co-author in many fields. But if you go against the traditions of your field it could come back to your disadvantage.
Think long term. This won't be your last paper, nor your best, if you stay in Academia. Don't step in front of trains unnecessarily.
Riskier solutions may be psychologically satisfying in the short term, but don't sacrifice the long term for the short.

If your de jure advisor, does not mind to omit the co-authorship, than go ahead.  As for the de facto advisor, please take care of her!
If the de jure advisor expects the co-authorship, than give it to him.  (In theory, co-authorship reflects an actual scientific contribution.  But in practice, these are often given to the PI who just procured funding.  They even have to show them, expect to show them, to continue to get funding. So go with tribal practiced reality, not hypocritical unpracticed theory.)
The one case in which I would consider to omit the de jure advisor is if he wants to be a pain about editing the document, where he is not even a real contributor.  In that case, you need to show a little mettle and tell him that you did the work and will lead the paper, that he can go along or leave (gentler words, but in effect...go along or leave.)  Sometimes these profs feel like this is how they show they are needed.


text:
Thesis jury members selection
Due to having a thesis advisor,Y, that did not reply my e-mails at the beginning of the process of choosing a topic, I had approached to another professor in the department, X to change my advisor. She rejected my request as saying she was too busy. (But I somehow feel this as an excuse because maybe she did not want to takeover Y's student, as they are quite close friends in the deparment..)
We had continued with advisor Y, but it's time to determine my jury members. The professor X's research topic was too close that of mine and my thesis, would it be awkward to invite her? I know my advisor Y will invite her and he mentioned that once (plus he doesn't know of course that once I approached her to change my advisor..). I think X would accept being my jury member but would it be a weird situation to call her, as once she rejected being my new advisor..

I think X would accept being my jury member but would it be a weird situation to call her, as once she rejected being my new advisor..

I don't think it would be weird. This is exactly why people usually decline "politely" (as in: "I'm too busy" rather than "I don't want to") - it leaves the door open for future interactions.
I think if your advisor suggested her, and you think she is a good jury member, you can definitely approach her (or have your advisor approach her, depending on how this is commonly done at your institution).
As a sidenote:

plus he doesn't know of course that once I approached her to change my advisor..

Depending on the conversation you had with X, I wouldn't necessarily rely on this being the case. Have you asked her explicitly about keeping your request confidential? Otherwise I would assume that standard operating procedure is to talk to your current advisor about it before answering, especially if they are good friends.


text:
Submitting a paper to a conference whose scientific committee includes an academic from a grad school you want to enroll
I am planning to submit my paper to an international conference. The level of the conference might be high considering my paper and for my academic background at the moment. My paper can fit in one of the poster sessions though.
However, the scientific committee includes one academics who belongs to one of the top graduate schools in my field, which I want to apply in a few years. In case of a rejection of my paper to that conference, I do have some concerns if that academic person remembers my name, my institution etc. and hold some negative bias during my graduate application (one MPhil programme)?
Should this possibility of rejection of my paper discourage me and should not I submit my paper due to this fear?

A program committee must reject or suggest a poster for many, many papers. Is there anything that would make your paper unusually memorable?

@PatriciaShanahan I see your point. Of course not, it does not include such memorable details leading to a rejection..

The chance that a rejection would have this impact on your graduate school application is extremely low.
First, check how many members the program committee has, and realize that only 1 - 3 of them will look at your paper at all during review. Second, even if the paper is rejected, there is a chance that the person handling the paper will have forgotten about the details after a year or more. Third, even if they remember, they may not hold it against you, especially if the conference is very competitive, but rather look at the positive things you show in your application.
On the other hand, think about how acceptance of your paper would later on increase your chances of getting admitted to this graduate school! This would be something that you put in your application anyway, so there's no problem with it being forgotten, and it will make a positive impression even if that particular committee member was not the one to handle your paper. It is definitely a "risk" worth taking!

Don't worry about it. A rejection of a paper and/or poster to a conference will not change your chance to get into grad school, regardless of who is on the committee. Well, unless it was just howlingly, embarassingly, horrifyingly bad or unethical in some manner (mass plagiarism of a published work can qualify). As an example, I was told a story of a time when a professor looked at a submission that was almost a full-scale copy-paste of that professor's own work. That is not the sort of thing a person is liable to ever forget, because it is just so brazenly ridiculous that you can safely assume that person would not ever agree to take on such a student.
Any serious high-level academic has had so many things rejected that it can beggar belief. A professor of note is almost certain to have had more of their work rejected than you would manage to submit during a whole bachelor-to-PhD process. The only career I've encountered where you have to deal with rejection more than being an academic is sales.
So really, don't worry about the prospect of rejection, it is the norm for everyone. Focus on whether or not your work is well written, sensible, and clear. Then send it out into the world and see what happens. If it is accepted, great; if it is rejected, great, at least you gave it a shot and hopefully learned from the process, and you certainly learn a little bit about what it is like to work in research, because it is not the last bit of work you'll get shot down.

You plan to apply to this grad school "in a few years", so let me tell you how I'd react if I were evaluating a grad school application from someone who had, a few years earlier, submitted a not-so-good paper to a conference while I was on the program committee. If I had seen the paper at the time (not very probable), and if I agreed with the committee's overall decision to reject it (probable but not certain), and if I remembered this person's name (improbable) and my  opinion of that paper (50-50 chance), I'd probably think "Well, (s)he submitted a not-so-good paper a few years ago; let's see what (s)he's done since then. In particular, now that (s)he's reached the stage of applying to grad school, how does (s)he compare with other applicants?" In other words, I know that students often improve as a result of education, and that it would be stupid of me to ignore the possibility that the few years of education after your not-so-good paper might have improved you.

I agree.  People who submit not-quite-good-enough papers can quickly become excellent graduate students.  Certainly better than people who cannot write papers at all.


text:
Really short articles in good journals?
I wonder in some good journals, there are articles that are quite short. Maximum 10 pages. How come such papers, with quite a short introduction with a brief lit-rewiew, are published? They are because of the quality, to do point conclusion and precise findings?

Do you weigh quality by the pound? Indeed there can be short papers of excellent quality... some even led to the Nobel prize! I actually don't understand this question, could you please expand it a bit clarifying your idea?

What field(s) are you thinking of?  This varies hugely between different fields.  There are at least two big reasons, though.  On the one hand, in some fields (eg mathematics), it’s certainly possible for excellent groundbreaking papers to be very short.  Another is that some very “prestigious” established journals (eg Science, Nature) are actually notorious for publishing many too-short and sensationalised articles (as well as some good articles, of course).

In my field, 10 pages is a pretty long paper.

@PLL the field is economics ranging through applied economics to econometrics..

Many short papers come with supporting materials that run dozens of pages long. In some fields, it is very common for the information to not all be conveyed in the main text, especially methods, which can run quite long.

In many journals that have very short publications (e.g., 2-4 pages), a short publication is often effectively a summary of the conclusions that can be drawn from a much larger body of work that is contained in the supplementary materials.
The "glamour" journals such as Nature and Science are particularly notable instances of this. This approach is likely highly beneficial for them in part because their audience is so broad and they are so widely read: the articles are thus essentially executive summaries that are sufficient for the needs of most readers, while those who want more depth can plunge into the sometimes voluminous supplementaries.
A "mid-sized" article on the order of 10 pages, on the other hand, may simply be a complete work that is simply limited in the amount of verbiage needed to present it. Here, the field and sub-field matters quite a bit: in areas that are more focused on experimental data, a vast a of the work may summarize down to a relatively few data points in graphs. In theoretical areas, by contrast, papers often balloon in length because the paper is the work. Other fields, such as engineering, tend to fall more in the middle.
Thus, different communities can reasonably have highly significant papers that vary by more than an order of magnitude in their expected length.

In physics, a lot of “letter” journals or sections of journals limit the contribution to a few pages.  The better known example is Physical Review Letters where the current limit is 3750 words, or about 5 pages depending on figures etc.  (The one recent exception is the initial paper on gravitational wave detection, which was allow to go well beyond the normal page limit).  PRL is currently ranked top physics journal
by Google and its Clavirate impact factor score is also one of the highest for a physics journal.  People read it precisely because it’s to the point and usually timely.

In mathematics and, perhaps, some other fields, a paper doesn't need to be very long to be significant. This is because it is directed at other mathematicians who understand generally what is going on, and already understand the methodology.
It might only take a few sentences and a couple of references to place the new work in context. It might only take a few sentences to point out the significance. Normally the statements of theorems are pretty short. The proofs can be long or short, but mathematicians prefer shorter proofs. In addition, if the audience is already skilled at this, the gaps between stated steps in the proof can be pretty large, though some proofs fail for this reason. But if you expect that the intended audience can fill those gaps, there is no reason to state them all. A presentation to undergraduates would probably require much more detail, of course.
So, a couple of significant theorems with supporting material and complete, if sketched, proofs can easily fit in five to ten pages.
In other fields, none of this might be true. It might take many pages to set the context and several to explain the significance. It might be necessary to explain in great detail the research process in detail as well as specifics of the data collected. Arguments in some fields can be very long, drawing on the expertise of many others. In some such fields, a ten page paper might be seen as impossibly short.
And all of that is under the assumption that the work is high quality. There are exceptions to both scenarios, of course.
Note that Transactions of the American Mathematical Society puts the break between "normal" and "long" papers at 15 pages. It accepts only the long ones. Proceedings is appropriate for shorter papers.

The mathoverflow question Which math paper maximizes the ratio (importance)/(length)? gives several very short papers published in top journals, but the shortest possible paper is probably this non-math paper published in Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.

@DaveLRenfro, good catch. Maybe I should publish "Best Existing Proof of the Riemann Hypothesis prior to 2019". Hedging my bet a bit, of course with the date.


text:
Higher GRE Quantitative score?
Lately, I have scored 165 in Quantitative Reasoning part of the GRE. The schools I consider applying requires scores that fall above the 90th percentile. with 165 Quant score, I am just at the 90th percentile. (just for a background, very good GPA (almost in %1 of my cohort), good academic references, a related job experience etc.)
There is no time to retake it, as the funding deadlines for graduate schools are approaching and I need to use this score to be evaluated for scholarships.
If I have another GRE test immediately, the results will only be helpful for being assessed without scholarships as the funding deadline will be already passed at that time.
However, I wonder what is the difference between a 165 Quant score or 167-68 band? The graduate schools need it from different nationalities than they are, especially to compare candidates. However, do you think higher GPA, good recommendation letters are as crucial as GRE?
I would be quite sad if I am not admitted to the schools I want just because of this low Quant score. Is it really to low?
Btw: department: Economics.

If you do a bit of a search you will learn that the GRE has little predictive value for success in graduate study. Given that, I doubt that a difference of five points has any significance at all.
But how a GRE is interpreted by a specific admissions system is completely up to them, so, again, no prediction can be made here.
Focus your application on other things. In general, a lot of things are likely to be considered. They will be looking for predictors of success. Give them that.

Search: predictive value of GRE


text:
Can I do MS/PhD in applied math after getting BS in physics?
I have taken a couple of math courses other than those required for my physics degree. Also, with leftover 1.5 years at college, I can definitely pursue a minor in math but I don't think I can double major in math.
I am currently working in an applied math lab, and I can safely say that the math courses that only serve to rigorize what I already learned application-based like abstract linear algebra and analysis wouldn't be of help anyways, so I do not really feel behind in that aspect.

also related https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42615/doing-a-phd-in-physics-after-doing-bachelors-and-masters-in-mathematics

There is no generic answer. It depends very much on the programme and university: check their admission criteria and maybe contact responsible people attaching your documents.
For example in Europe we use the ECTS system where you need a certain amount of ECTS points from your bachelor in a specific area (e.g. at least 30 ECTS points in mathematics and 20 ECTS in programming) to be able to continue with the specific master. It will tell you on the webpage of the degree how many ECTS you need from which field. Compare this with your bachelor curriculum (if you are short by just a few points they might still allow you to start the master but you might have to take additional courses during the frist term).


text:
Wrong advice from phd supervisor
My main supervisory is a relatively prominent figure in the field, but as I've gotten to know him better over time, I've discovered some rather critical issues. It's common knowledge that articles often have co-authors, and my supervisor publishes both quantitative and qualitative research. However, to my surprise, I've found from some of our conversations that his knowledge of statistics is actually less than mine... and at times, he even provides incorrect advice on fundamental statistical matters. I'd like to ask how I should handle this situation, as it involves some political aspects. If I were to address this directly, for example, in an email, I'm concerned that my main supervisor might feel embarrassed in front of my other supervisor (who is relatively new). But not addressing this issue could have serious consequences, impacting our research publications. I'm unsure about how my main supervisor managed to publish in those top journals.

please add the "because all emails need to go through supervisory panels" you commented somewhere in an answer. It is very peculiar, and very important to know. Where are you based?

hi Earlgrey i'm in the US. I have three supervisors ,in most cases we made any decision based on the agreement of all supervisors.

I don't know what field you and your supervisor are in, but unfortunately, top journals (especially in some fields) are not immune (and especially were not in the past) from elementary 1st year undergrad statistics errors.

Have you tried just having a proper discussion on specific issues with them? Like you get some advice from them, and if you think this is problematic and should be done differently (with arguments and references), you just tell them this, maybe with alternative suggestion? Without mentioning any general concern regarding their competence? So that you can keep your own work correct without getting into more general issues with anyone. How much independence do you have to make methodological decisions?

Am I correct in assuming that your supervisor practices in a field where statistics is used, but the field is not statistics itself?  (Because that makes a great deal of difference to the expectation of what knowledge he would have and whether gaps in knowledge relative to a student would be embarrassing.)  Can you please add this information (what field are you and your supervisor in) to your question.

In no particular order:

This is when you should talk to a co-superviser. That's why they're there!

Distinguished academics often have a "bird's-eye", wide-ranging view of the field, while not remembering the specific details of a topic unless they're personally researching it at the moment. Their perspective is invaluable mainly to draw unexpected connections, which is vital for innovative research.

By contrast a PhD student will often develop a deep understanding of their particular topic and methodology, since they focus on it for several years at the very start of their academic career.

A good supervisor will know the above two points well, and will be open to your feedback. Furthermore, you need to establish an open and strong communicative relationship with your supervisor, so you need to know early on whether they can handle this sort of feedback and how you should deliver it.

Especially the first few times, it can be helpful to show a bit of deference. I have found the "A/B" technique useful: do it their way, do it your way, and show the difference. (If there isn't a clear difference, then maybe it's not as big a deal as you're making it!) Showing them that you didn't outright dismiss their advice can help them be receptive to you.

It would seem to me to be that his assets are elsewhere and you should look to him for that other advice. Some people are much better at the big ideas than at detail. Einstein, for example, was said to be a terrible (and dangerous) experimenter. Bright enough overall, of course.
But, you have learned something valuable and can look elsewhere, or within your own knowledge for the statistical detail and guidance you need.
I don't see a need to "address" the issue directly. He can probably speak for himself. If others find collaboration with him valuable, you can too, within the limits you have noticed. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses.

Hi Buffy, the issue is that he's my PhD supervisor, and we're working on a dataset related to my PhD dissertation. Without his approval, I cannot proceed to the next step. The advice he gave me is fundamentally wrong, and I must point it out. However, I don't know how to deal with it properly, and I'm not sure if he will 'feel' embarrassed if I point out such basic mistakes...because all emails need to go through supervisory panels which means there’s a possibility he might feel embarrassed in front of his colleagues (who’re much younger than him). ( perhaps  I complex things too much?)

@rorocc we don't know about the context of the question for which you see he is wrong, but I think it is possible to address this issue even within the email to the supervisory panel. Not all the arguments need to be contrastive; you can explain your approach as a potential solution, explain why you think it will yield the results you are all looking for, and still end the argument with a request for feedback. This is a part of training during PhD, to discuss your opinion, and I think your supervisors will eventually appreciate seeing you grow during your PhD.

Don't think about it as an issue over the competency of your supervisor. Think about it as a scientific issue. If the methods your supervisor is suggesting are not adequate, you should be able to have a scientific debate about it with your supervisor, preferable in person.
I've had really good and really bad supervisors in the past, but I've never had one that I couldn't debates science and methodology with.
The debate over scientific methodology should never feel like a judgment on someone's competency; it should be over finding the methods that suits the problem the best. If it's done right, everybody would learn from the discussion.
I learn new things from my PhD students all the time. There is nothing wrong with that.

Hi, I don’t think it’s a scientific issue. It’s a basic logic issue about statistics. It’s more like an issue: variable X (combined with item A & B ) is  positively correlated to Y, but we found A has no correlation with Y when we solely tested it. My supervisor believed A should be deleted from the data set as it has no correlation with Y. First, A has no correction with Y doesn’t tell the truth, it may due to sample size etc.; second, I don’t think it’s ethical to delete data just bc they’re non-significant.


text:
Informal meet after the application of a tenure-track position
I applied for a tenure-track position a few months ago, and I just received an email from one of the members of the search committee. They mentioned the possibility of having an informal meeting during an upcoming conference (a kind of meet-and-greet). However, if it is not convenient for me, they are open to arranging another informal meeting time or location.
May I ask that is there any benefits to attending such an informal meet? Thank you.
P.S. It seems like this email was not sent only to me (as the recipients were hidden, and I can only see the sender and three other members of the search committee).

Well, you have applied and they want to chat with you, presumably to see how good of a fit you might be to then decide to proceed to an official interview. You can either have the meeting, and both sides get relevant information on the application, or you can skip the meeting and not give them more info to make a decision to invite to an interview. Your call.

hi @Jon Custer, thank you. The situation is that I am currently in another country, so basically, I cannot attend the conference. Do you think there's any difference if I request a Zoom meeting before (or after) the conference, or a face-to-face meeting after the conference? (I will be back in the USA a few days after that conference.)

@rorocc - please put in the information that you won't be at the conference

This doesn't qualify as an answer, but mainly a comment about the appropriateness of such an "informal" meeting. Do you know if this is part of their official vetting process? If not, then I would feel uncomfortable about what role (if any) this meeting should play in the decision to interview you. Does anyone else get this vibe from having (what could be) a pre-interview that is unsanctioned by the hiring institution?

@user138719 - depends a lot on actual policy. Telephone pre-screening interviews are certainly sanctioned by my (non-univerisity) HR department in order to better determine fit between the candidate and the posting beyond what is in the standard application submittal material.

@JonCuster "depends a lot on actual policy" -- Exactly. In all of the hiring work I've done, the importance of maintaining equal (and documented!) treatment of candidates has been made clear by university HR departments. Anything done "off script" is usually forbidden to avoid the appearance of rating candidates based on things other than those advertised in the minimum and preferred qualifications. I just wondered if what is being described as "informal" is actually part of the official process, as I'm sure they'd keep notes and forward them to HR, etc. If so, "informal" may be misleading.

hi @user138719, the email said, "We can have a brief conversation to align your faces with your resumes and meanwhile you can learn more about our university" On a deeper level, I felt that it carries the meaning of checking if our auras resonate well with each other. however, they also indicated if you have no time you don't need to make a special trip, you can contact one of them (cc in the email) to arrange another meet time and location. I'm not sure if it's a 'culture' thing in the USA?

I suspect they are trying to save some money by meeting applicants where they don't need to pay for a visit. There isn't anything wrong with that, but it may be less "informal" than you think.
It would be to your advantage to meet with them, and consider the meeting an important one. If you don't and they meet someone "interesting" there, then you will find yourself at a disadvantage.
It also gives you a chance to evaluate them, which can be good. Finding mutual interest(s) can be an advantage.

hi buffy thank you.  I am currently in another country, which means I cannot attend the conference in person. I was wondering if there's any difference between requesting a Zoom meeting before or after the conference, or alternatively, a face-to-face meeting after the conference? (Just to clarify, I will be back in the USA a few days after the conference)

A zoom meet sounds like a good plan. Explain your circumstances if you request it.


text:
What are some good resources to adapt oneself to academia and its customs?
I am an engineer in Academia, coming from a Master's degree that is pretty distant from Academia. I am ten months into my job and I still feel a bit distant about Academia, scientific research and the like.
An example would be yesterday: I had to write an abstract for an upcoming conference. I free-handed something about the project I'm working on, but after giving it to my project leader for review, it was obvious that I didn't know what was expected from me.
I am expected to start a PhD program in a bit more than a year, and I still feel... Unfit for Academia.
What are some good resources to learn about survival in Academia? I am thinking of things like:

Advice on how to shape your work schedule
How to write research papers
How to communicate with people from other labs

There seems to be no "Academia for dummies". I feel like I would have needed such a book.

One problem new folk often don't get is: 1) what you work on, and 2) how you present it, should be two ENTIRELY seperate concepts in your brain. 1) is dealing with all the (seemingly) endless technical details, math, equations, code, etc. whereas 2) is about story, narrative, audience, and framing your research/contributions in the larger scheme of the research community

And as for the communication with others/your own personal work schedule, really it depends entirely on your specific circumstances, and the circumstances of the 'others'.

I get you, I felt lost too when I started grad school. A single thing that helped me enormously is the YouTube channel of the Office of Graduate Research at Flinders University and all the weekly videos made by Professor Tara Brabazon. Even though she is a Professor of cultural studies, most of her advice applied very well for me in an engineering field. You will find videos on all three aspects that you listed in your question. And there's plenty of them.
The videos on improving academic writing have had a tremendous impact on the quality and quantity of my research outputs. The videos on academia in general have helped me so much in understanding the inner workings of an academic life. Really precious resource for a first gen PhD student. To this day (at the very end of my PhD), I listen to these videos as podcasts whenever I have free time.
It's great that you think about this already before starting a PhD. Some of the videos are targeted at people at your career stage. They will help you come to the PhD program better prepared. Good luck!


text:
How to find out to which journal(s) I could hand in my paper?
During my study or even phd I had no chances to draw up a paper as a main author. Reasons do not matter here.
Now I'm already in the industry for a while and I wonder why not preparing some papers based on my phd. I have no external pressure or goal or whatever so I would only do this to simplify other's life. They can probably also figure out on their own but when somebody already did..  in principle it is already published through my phd but.. yeah, published through my university's library, so no one will ever know.
However, the work touches mainly the application of some optimization problems to make use of in a kind of an engineering field. I myself come from the (experimental) particle physics.
So, which journals do make sense?
Computer science/Mathematics not really because I barely improved the optimization problem itself. At least not on a theoretical level. Depends on the pov.
Particle physics not because it is not about particle physics. The devices are just used there. Well, they are used there very often but originally it from solid physics/electrical engineering (photodiodes) and I didn't improve the devices themselves anyway.
Electrical engineering not because I didn't take into account any circuits or similar.
My supervisors were two experimental physics professors, a maths professor as well as a computer scientist professor (who is also a mathematician). Just in case it matters.
So what's left? And/or which journals make sense?
Despite from that: Can I just contact some certain journals and ask whether it makes sense to set up a paper before I take up all the effort for it?

How about the journals that published the papers you cite in your dissertation? Or your lit review?

Yes, as @Buffy says, the journals you cite most heavily are usually good places to consider submission, although you will want to roughly gauge the importance of your findings and select an appropriate tier of journal to match.

Behind a paywall, but I like Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate) for your purpose. You can easily browse journals by topic and this way quite rapidly get an overview of relevant journals by scanning their scopes.

Considering you are talking about publishing papers based on PhD content it would be usual in most STEM fields for your doctoral supervisor(s) to be involved in this. As such, one or all of them would be worth discussing this question with as they're likely to have the best read on what / where is appropriate. At the very least they should be able to consult with or introduce you to a colleague more familiar with your specific work direction. That said it would be sensible to consider where your dissertation / lit review sources were published, as suggested in the comments, and to come up with some possible choices of your own before approaching your former supervisors

That's an obvious yet helpful comment! I didn't take this into account..  my supervisor is a bit strange. He is very kind but when it's not about money for the working group or student exams, everything lies ignored on his table for weeks, months or even years..  I doubt that would work with him in a reasonable periof of time. However, thanks for the very useful input!

The following websites may help you find appropriate journals for your manuscript.
http://jane.biosemantics.org/
https://journalfinder.elsevier.com/

Also WOS Master Journal List from Clarivate
https://mjl.clarivate.com/home


text:
Employee Recognition
I have recently become part of a group at my (european) university, where we are suppose to come up with suggestions for how the "the good effort" can be appreciated and/or recognized by the department managment. The idea is to find ways to recognize the good effort made by individual employees.
In the past we have celebration publications in the "best" journals, but this scheme should have a broader focus, where great teaching, helpfulness, attracting external grants and so on should be recognized. I can find many more or less good suggestions for employee recognition by performing a simple google search, however, all these ideas seem to be targeted towards private companies. My question therefore is, what do you do at your universities to recognize "the good/great effort"? And what would you like, that you did?

My former university department gave out three annual awards, with a certificate and a plaque. The recipients were chosen by an awards committee of faculty. The three awards were for research, for teaching, and for service. The committee would accept nominations from anyone. I doubt that self nominating was ever encouraged, however.
Someone in the administration sends out a "call for nominations" a couple of months or so before the awards.
In addition, occasional special awards were given for something exceptional, such as the design of a new degree, awarded to the members of the design committee.
The awards were presented at one of the "all hands" meetings that we had periodically. Presentation was usually by the dean.
The following are also possibilities. Photos taken, maybe placed on the "wall of honor". An article in the department newsletter. A public announcement to local media.
Note that this was department level. The university can also do similar things at the larger level, both regular (annual) and special awards.


text:
Can I ask a former lab partner for a letter of recommendation?
I'm applying for a summer internship at a big biology research lab in my city. This is such a fantastic opportunity and it would be such a tremendous help careerwise to get this experience. The application asks for 2 letters of recommendation from "individuals familiar with your academic performance." I've asked 4 professors and have gotten one yes, one no, and 2 haven't answered. The application states that the letters of recommendation must be attached to the application so I need to receive the letters of recommendation. Because of this, I think some of my professors are hesitant to write them.
With the deadline 2 weeks away I'm getting kind of desperate, would it be frowned upon if I get a former lab partner to write my second letter of recommendation seeing as they are an "individual familiar with [my] academic performance?" They have seen me in a lab setting and are familiar with my work ethic and technique. I'm not exactly best friends with them but I'm sure they would help me out in a pinch. Is there anyone else I can ask?

No. A letter of recommendation evaluates your suitability for the program by comparing you to others in the field. An undergraduate student, even if dispassionate (which is debatable), does not have the academic maturity to make such an assessment. While I'm sympathetic that "a bad letter is better than no letter," a letter from an undergraduate might not be accepted at all.
I think you should consider other options:

Follow up with the professors who haven't responded, or to other professors. Even a graduate student, while borderline, is certainly better than nothing.
If the "no" was definitely due to discomfort about providing the letter directly to you, perhaps they would agree to provide it in a sealed (i.e., with an institutional seal) envelope? You could then attach the envelope to your application. A little unusual, but shouldn't be a problem.

You can ask, but it is sub-optimal. They may know about your performance, but are not in a good position to evaluate it in such a case. Moreover, peer evaluations might be suspect in any case, if friendship relationships can be assumed to exist.
If "haven't answered" means that they haven't responded to emails, then it is time to go visit them in person. You will be much more likely to get a response that way and you might even learn how strong it will be. Be sure to inform them about deadlines if they agree.


text:
In my statement of purpose, how much should I elaborate on my project/thesis plans?
I’m applying to schools for my Masters in Computer Science and I’m writing my statement of purpose. I don’t really know what I want to do for my project/thesis, but in their prompts, the schools ask for a description of tentative research plans.
I could be interested in researching the intersection of CS with topics/disciplines like psychology, kinesiology, sports, and humanitarian work. That really is me just spitballing though.
I don’t know if simply stating that I’m interested in studying the intersection of CS and one or multiple of these topics would be sufficient, or if I should attempt to come up with more specific project ideas so I can elaborate more.

The success of your application may depend on the ability of the department members to supervise the research you propose. Therefore, before preparing a statement of purpose, it would be prudent of you to explore the interests of and recent publications by the faculty.
For example, if the department is renown for its strength in a particular area, then a research plan residing in or correlated with that area may attract the attention of the people considering your application (especially if it contains direct references to some work carried out at this department).
While the outcome of the application process is largely probabilistic, you will generally improve your chances if you tune your statement of purpose to correlate with the interests of some (ideally, several) faculty at the department to which you are applying.
Good luck with your application!

That makes sense. Thank you!

At the master's level, you can list multiple areas of research. You're application will be stronger if it looks like you have some idea but you're generally not expected to begin a postgraduate program knowing exactly what you want to research unless you already have a master's and are applying for a PhD candidacy. A lot may depend on the competitiveness of the institution. Look again at the prompts, "tentative" is a key word. Focus on why you want a master's and why their institution is a good fit for you. Also, follow @Michael_1812's advice, though you aren't writing a "research plan" but a statement about why you want to study at that level, in that field, at that university.


text:
Not convinced by your own knowledge
I'm 26 and an Bachelor-Student in the Electrical Engineering field.
My interests are Control-Theory and Robotics.
My Grade are good (maybe i get an 1.x Grade for the Bachelors Degree).
My Control-Theory Prof is very convinced of my knowledge and gave me the advice to go to an University.
Im currently studying at an Fachhochschule and want to go to an University for an Master Degree in my interest field.
The Problem is, that Im not very conviced about myself. Im thinking that I have to learn everything (math, physics) from Scratch to be prepared for the Study there.
The Problem is not that Im not ready to invest a lot of time for it (I am!), but I think that i should learn the Mathematics from Scratch again for getting an feeling about whats happening (control-theory is very mathematic).
I can calculate a lot, but developing own Ideas and get behind the Ideas of other People is at some point very difficult and ends often in accepting things. I want to have an intuitive feeling for whats going on, and for that I think I should repeat the mathematics (Analysis, Linear Algebra, Integraltransformation) and start to dive in Functional-Analysis.
At this University the Master-Course starts twice a year, April and October.
I have emailed the Faculty and being told, that I have to complete the Math III Exam with is part of there Bachelors-Degree Course, and maybe another exam which i dont know (maybe theoretical electrical engineering).
My idea was, to spend the first Semester to get skilled in mathematics and consist the 2 Exams, and maybe If the time allows, to finish some other Courses which are held in the first Master-Semester.
My problem is, that Im 26 and I think Im very old. Im working since 2016 as an Working-Student at an Global Player in the Research&Development of Photovoltaic Systems.
If I see other students which maybe starts with me.. they are 21,20..
But I think Im doing right, if I want to employ in that Field, I have to learn. Im living only once, and If that is my dream, I have to forget my age.
What do you think about my Plan?
Sorry if this is very confusing to you.
Have a nice day!

There is no reason to panic.
A 1.x grade in Bachelor is good. Master's programs in Germany in Electrical Engineering tend to be less mathematically heavy that Bachelor's. They also tend to leave you enough free time, which some students use to work for money and you can use it to revise the basics in Mathematics and Physics.
You do not need to start from scratch. If you got good grades in those courses, you will be able to pick up the content quickly again.
It is normal not to fully understand every single idea and have to "accept" some things at the beginning. Intuition comes with time.
26 is not too old. Many students (especially international students) get a job for a few years between Bachelor's and Master's. Starting a Master with 26 is not the most common thing but it is not rare.
You seem to be worried about the switch from Fachhochschule to university. Don't be. Mathematics and Physics are the same everywhere. From what you write, you seem to believe you performed well in your Bachelor's. Your professor also thinks you are ready: listen to them.

In engineering, the two most important skills are:

The ability to sit and think about a problem.
The ability to calculate.

You can get very far with just being able to calculate, as that is often a major stumbling block for many engineers. In other words, they have good ideas but can't formulate a corresponding mathematical problem or solve it. Go find some of those guys and you'll be a hero.
When working with someone who is good at generating research ideas, if you pay attention long enough, you might start to learn how they think and start coming up with ideas of your own.
Contributing something novel, effective, and useful often takes decades of experience. Don't worry about not being there right now. Find the people who are and work with them. You will get there eventually with enough time and attention.
But right now, you can calculate, which makes you useful, which allows you to get in the door. That is more than most people, so you have a huge advantage.


text:
Journals with fast response?
Are there any other impact factor journals for electrical, electronics, communication engineering (or multi-disciplinary) with a very fast response like mdpi journals? I know it is not wise to ask for a fast response as it is normal for the process to take some time. However, I am in a situation where it is very important for me to get a publication in the next 1-2 months.

Google predatory journals, they usually respond very fast and target people that need to publish in such a short time. If you're at it, maybe also read about how they got that name though.

Maybe you can re-phrase your question much more generally, which would be interesting to people. How to know about journal process length?

You can look at https://scirev.org/ , where people can submit there experience with different journals. Quite a few are missing (in my field) but a lot are there.
A nice feature is that you can look by field / subfield and have all the things summarized in a table.
If you look at electrical engineering there is a surprising number of them with fast turnover and considered as "good" by the people who submitted there.

This is an interesting resource, but at least for the pure math journals (where there's not much data yet) the reviews don't seem to be representative of typical experiences.  Maybe this will get better over time though.