text:
Is it normal to feel like I bought my way into graduate school after being rejected and then accepted when I was awarded an external fellowship?
I initially got rejected by the two schools I applied to (horrible pGRE scores, lackluster GRE scores, and only did research at my undergraduate institute), but then I got an NSF fellowship, and was almost immediately accepted by both schools.
I feel a little hurt by the whole acceptance process. I feel like I was essentially told: "you are not good enough to pursue space physics in our program, but because you have money we will let you in".
Question: In this situation, is it normal to feel like you essentially bought your way into graduate school? Or that people will always look at you as not good enough?

Yeah, it's just a sour way to start a 5-6 year academic career in my opinion. But I think I will take Drecate's advice, to the best of my ability( I'm only human, it'll take some time for me to be confident in myself.)

@User001 As someone whose taught every semester of their graduate life, trust me they got a benefit.

How did you manage to get an NSF fellowship given your "horrible pGRE scores, lack luster GRE scores, and only did research at (your) undergraduate institute"?

@JeffE, to be honest, I am a first generation student (my family is originally from ethiopia) so there was a lot of pressure from both my family and my school to go to graduate school. I (very naively) thought, I have a better chance applying to the field I've done research in than any other field and I was desperate to get in somewhere, so as not to let those people down (and meet everyone's expectations). The only reason I even applied for the NSF was because all my professors told me to (kind of pressured me to), I never thought I was actually going to get it though.

@Did, I have absolutely no idea how I got an NSF fellowship, although, I also won the Barry Goldwater scholarship, and one of the professors I did research under (and that wrote me a recommendation letter) has a pretty big name in the field I applied to in the application, so maybe those helped me.

From what I've heard the NSF fellowship is not an easy one to get, and having one seems to carry some sort of prestige. Sure, the program may have accepted you on the ground that they don't have to pay you, but the fact that you have an NSF fellowship may have changed the admission committee's perception of your ability, which could be what tipped the balance in your favour. No matter what, there is no point in dwelling on the past. What matters is how you perform in the program now, not how you got in. Don't be the college freshman who keeps talking about his high school athletic achievement; truth be told, nobody cares.
As for your lack of passion for the subject, I want to point out that passion usually does not precede mastery of a subject. Rather, people usually develop passion after they become good at something. So I don't really think lacking passion at this point is a deal breaker. I'm sure astrophysics is large enough for you to find something that you are good at and can develop a passion for. Of course, if you can't see yourself doing research, teaching, or anything science-related in the future, you might want to rethink about your decision to go to graduate school in the first place.

+1 for "people usually develop passion after they become good at something". I found this to be true myself. As long as you have a basic level of love and interest for science, you will get to like your subject more, the deeper you get into it.

First, congratulations on doubting yourself. That you doubt yourself will make you a better researcher. You will check your findings and take more care in your work. A little self-doubt is important in the world of research. Alas, it is a weakness in the world of promoting your research, so there is certainly a balance.
Second, congratulations on the NSF Award! That is very prestigious! Consider that the NSF Panel which reviewed these awards had more information about you and more time to consider each specific application than members of the admissions committee. They literally made a more informed decision. And that decision did then influence the admissions committee to update its own decision.
And yes funding matters. You did not buy your way into graduate school. You earned your way into graduate school. Getting a NSF Award is the hard way.
Yet while funding does matter, no one will take a "free" student they are not interested in. Every PhD student is a significant commitment in terms of time if nothing else. Graduating doctoral students is the core of what we do, and why many of us are professors. They would not have admitted you if they did not expect to want to work with you. You made it possible for the school to afford to admit you.
In every admissions committee I have ever worked on any serious application is read by at least one committee member. That committee member then makes a recommendation for further review, so some applications are reviewed by only one faculty member. In my experience nearly completed doctoral application is see by at least one faculty member. Unreviewed cut-offs for test scores alone may actually occur, but I have not seen it. It is, at most, quite rare. So it is likely  you were reviewed by multiple faculty members, put on an alternate list, and then everyone else they asked did accept. Then when your funding came through, acceptance was possible.
You will find your passion. Did you know that the current lead of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, John Holdren, started in astrophysics? He was a lead in the Paris Climate Accords. And stop calling it "space physics". Sec. of Defense Ashton Carter, who just appointed the first openly gay Sec of the Army, started as a physicist. Physics is your five year plan.
If you look at my cv I started as a Math/EE in a nuclear plant, went into computer generated holography, wrote my dissertation on the then-imaginary idea of Internet commerce, worked at Sandia Labs in CS, moved to Kennedy School of Gov, then moved to an Info/School. I probably have at least one career left. You will find your passion.

"who just appointed the first openly gay Sec of the Army"  What does that have to do with the subject at hand?  Does it somehow seem unbelievable that a physics major would do that?

"It's not about you, it's about them."
This is a good thing to remember whenever you feel like this. The vast majority of the time, what people do and say doesn't have much to do with you personally, and is instead just a result of them doing the best they can with the knowledge and abilities they have.
In this case, think about it from the acceptance committee's point of view. They have a presumably large stack of applicants, and only a few openings. "Openings" in graduate school are created when a professor is fairly confident that they can secure funding for a student for at least 5 or 6 years. It's kind of a catch-22 in that you need the students to do work to get the funding, but you need the funding to get the students. So there is always an element of risk where you think you will be able to provide support and that you will be able to find students to work on your project, but you aren't completely sure.
When application season starts, the department tries to predict how many funded positions there will be, given the number of awarded or likely-to-be-awarded grants, teaching assistant positions, and fellowships provided by the school. They then try to select a number of students to accept that is a little larger than that (because not everyone who is accepted will end up joining), but not too large.
Given these constraints, you can see how important it is to correctly guess which of your applicants will have the skills needed to succeed in the program and also have interest in one or more of the available funded (or likely to be funded) projects. How do you do this, given only GRE scores, transcripts, reference letters, a CV, and a statement of interest?
When you need to quickly cut down a large stack of applicants to a much smaller number, the easiest way is to filter based on some pre-established criteria. GRE and GPA are probably not the best measure of potential success as a researcher, but they are a proxy measure for the basic skills you need as well as an indicator of an ability to do what you are supposed to do when you are supposed to do it. For those reasons, they are often used as a first-pass filter to reject applicants. Most professors I have talked to know that in doing this, they are potentially rejecting people who would have made very capable researchers, but this is a game of odds - you are trying to predict how likely a person is to succeed without knowing much about them. A pool of students with high GPA and GRE scores is more likely to contain a higher number of successful researchers than a pool with low scores.
There is no way of knowing (unless they tell you) whether you were rejected because of this filter or not. Usually a department will tell you up front what the range of GPA and GRE scores that they accept is, so that applicants don't waste their time. Since you got in with an NSF fellowship, let's assume you were at least past the minimum.
Now the committee has a smaller but still too-large pool of applicants that they are betting has a higher chance of success. The next step is to go through and find the best candidates. One way to predict future research success is if you have a record of previous success - that's why undergraduate research experience is so valuable for a graduate school application. You said you have that - so as long as you had a good letter of recommendation from your PI, that probably helped you. Letters of recommendation carry a lot of weight at this point, because they are the only way that the committee can get a sense of what it is like to work with you. A lot of very capable people don't have great letters of recommendation because they didn't interact much with their professors. Even if you did extremely well in a given class, if the professor doesn't know you very well, they can't say much besides "this student made good grades."
The last thing they look at is your statement of interest. Remember - they are trying to match interested and capable students to funded positions. If your statement of interest doesn't communicate a strong match to one or more of the areas that have openings, then they might not want to risk accepting you over someone else who is interested.
Notice that in all of these scenarios, at no point were people making a judgement about how "good" you are as a researcher - they were instead making a bet about whether or not you would be more likely to succeed in their research program compared to other candidates. For whatever reason, they decided that based on the information they had, the other candidates had a higher chance of success.
Remember that the two constraints which made estimating these odds so important were a limited number of funded research positions and the fact that not every student is interested in every project. Once you secured NSF funding, you changed three very important things:
1) You created a new funded position
2) You proved that you were interested in working on that project
3) You got the equivalent of a strong letter of reference from the NSF
Once you add these things to your application, you are practically eliminating  risk for the department. As long as there is a professor who has the capacity to advise you and an interest in the project, you would be very likely to get into any school.
Thinking about it this way, hopefully it is clear that it was not that they thought you weren't good enough before, but now that you are bringing in money you are. It is more likely that you were too risky a bet, and now you are not. In that sense, it wasn't that you were not good enough, but that your application was not convincing enough. Those are two very different things, and I believe that most professors understand that. The application and the NSF fellowship are just two different types of keys letting you into the same door. Once you are through the door, you will be judged by how well you do in your classes and (more so) by your research work.

I can speak to this, as I served on the graduate admissions committee of one of the top three ranked astrophysics programs in the United States.  Here are some things to note.
The admissions process does not separate qualified from unqualified candidates.  Typically, about 20-30 candidates are excellent candidates, another 30-40 are marginal, and another 40-50 are unqualified.  Of the 20-30 that are excellent candidates, 8-12 are offered admission, and financial, programmatic, and other considerations play major roles in who is offered a slot, with randomness being rampant.  The fact that that you were granted admission means that you were placed in this first group.
You seem to be obsessed with your low test scores.  Admissions committees are not.  There is no correlation between physics GRE scores and graduate school success.   None.  External and informal internal investigations show this.  There is a very weak correlation between general GRE scores and graduate school success, which is mainly carried by the verbal score.  This verbal score correlation is not present for foreign students like yourself, for obvious reasons.
Finally, some of our most heavily recruited students fizzle out.  Some of the ones who get in off the waiting list win the most prestigious postdoctoral fellowships in the country.  Treat it as a clean slate.  No one really cares about how you got in once you're in.

Too long for a comment:
Don't feel bad -- full stop. Stop thinking about how academia is an emotional roller-coaster or it will drive you crazy. I am also an NSF recipient, I know I earned it through hardwork, and multiple people have told me/implyed that I only got the award because I am an indigenous-mestizo, brown, and/or poor. The idea that "you are only good enough if you have money" is an often encountered feeling/obstacle in academia, so get used to it, and teach yourself to overcome whatever feelings of inadequacy you may have with respect to it; I would actually suggest seeking psychological counseling at your new university if you feel very perturbed by the situation. The acceptance of people based on their economic-resources/merit in an inherently biased world is assuredly a questionable practice (academia is full of them), and we all know that, but there is nothing you can do about it except work hard and get the money/credentials/grants you need to do the research you are interested in. If you have the money now, however you got it, put it towards achieving your goal of a graduate degree. Whatever happened in the past, you are at a great advantage now, don't waste that opportunity fretting about how academia can be mechanistic, inhumane, and unforgiving; that's just the way this game goes.
Feel free to reach out to me: loonuh@ucla.edu


text:
Is it a good idea to have a departmental problem database?
A departmental problem database will work like this: When a professor gives an exam, quiz etc. they upload the problems into the database. When the grading has been completed, they upload the scores. The software will give back some statistics. The goal is that through the years the database will grow in numbers and in quality. This will minimize the effort to create an assessment and maximize the quality of the questions, as (ideally) the professors will be revising the problems based on the feedback they get.
My target field is Mathematics.
My questions:

Is it a good idea to have a departmental problem database?
Do you know any examples where a departmental problem database has been implemented? What was the result?
Is confidentiality an issue?

I think a possible keyword phrase to look for is "question bank" software. These often are used for certifications, GRE-type exams, etc.

Looking around the web I found (1) proprietary questions banks and (2) open-source online examination systems that support a question bank. My running assumption is there is no open-source software that serves the goals described.

the database going to be accessible to whom?

There will be an administrator who assigns privilages. The idea is that the professors will have access to it. The TAs may or may not have access, depending on departmental policy. Same for adjuncts.

I'd consider three key factors.

Are there many faculty members who want to use such a database?  It's probably not worth the effort unless it reaches critical mass.  Taking a survey is a little awkward, since some people may make polite comments that sound more enthusiastic than they really are.  One option would be to ask something relatively demanding.  For example, how many people would be willing to commit to seeding the database by entering all the problems they assign in suitable courses for the next year or two?
Who will serve as system administrator?  Unauthorized access is enough of a cheating risk that it's important to take precautions.  It could be better not to have such a database than to have one managed by an inexperienced system administrator.
Will you be able to work on a scale that doesn't just enable students to cheat by building their own database?  Student groups (such as fraternities) sometimes maintain archives of old exams and even problem sets, nominally for use as practice materials but often in the hope that problems will be repeated.  If you can build a big enough database, then this sort of cheating will be ineffective, but it will work very well for smaller databases.  I think this would be a big problem unless you achieve extraordinary growth, and I'd guess you'd need to work on a far larger scale than a single department.

My take is these are major problems and I'm skeptical about overcoming them.  However, perhaps your circumstances differ from mine.

(1) I think most of the faculty would like access to the database, just because it can reduce the time for making the exam for them. The problem is who is willing to contribute to the database. I think we need a critical mass of problems to attract people to the database. Once they like it and they use, they will be more willing to contribute.

(2) Our department is smaller and people have good relationships. There are many knowledgeable and trustworthy people to serve as administrators. Also, there are no TAs, which simplifies things even further.

(3) This is a real concern. I am not aware of any fraternities on campus that keep copies of old exams, but I would not be very surprised if someone did. Some professors go around this, by not passing the exams back. I am not supportive of this practise myself. At the very end, it comes down to the professors and how willing we are to make it work.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Sealed PhD Thesis
I came across a situation I haven't encountered before this week. I requested access to a PhD thesis from a group this week and was informed that it was not available as it was sealed for 5 years. The group explained that every student had the right to request that their thesis be sealed for 5 years.  The group is located in Austria.
Is requesting that your thesis be sealed from all access really an option? Is this specific to Austria?

You've already established that it is an option and that it's not just Austria. So what is your question now?

@EnergyNumbers Then it would be good for that to be an answer.  My question stands.  The fact that the other question asks why you would do so implies an answer to this question but does not answer this question.

Is it possible the thesis reports proprietary information that public dissemination would decrease the value of? Like a new medical device that the student wishes to develop exclusively?

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


text:
Is it acceptable to seek explicit acknowledgment for code posted to StackExchange which has been made use of in open-source software?
A few years ago as an undergraduate student I wrote a short bit of code (~200-300 lines) to implement a variant of a well-known algorithm for solving a particularly challenging mathematical optimization problem. Somewhat new to writing software at this level, I posted my code anonymously to the Code Review StackExchange site to seek feedback on its clarity and quality.
Earlier today, I found myself searching GitHub for an open-source solution to a similar mathematical optimization problem when I encountered a repository containing software used by a prominent research group which makes use of a slight modification of the aforementioned code. The repository very graciously makes mention of my Code Review StackExchange post, but does not, of course, mention me by name.
I have recently graduated, and am currently struggling a bit to make any headway in the job market. In an effort to make my resume more appealing, and since I'm applying primarily to scientific software development positions and similar, I'm attempting to carefully document my (up to this point very poorly documented) contributions to scientific software. Since very few of my contributions have been to open-source (or otherwise well-documented) software, I'm considering mentioning this code. My questions are:
Would it be appropriate to reach out and ask to be acknowledged by name? I'm concerned that this might be perceived an unusual request, or perhaps even be taken as rude. Or would it perhaps be better to simply identify myself in e.g. my resume as the anonymous account holder?

Posts on Stack Exchange, including Code Review, are licensed under CC-BY-SA. The "BY" part means that redistribution of post content requires attribution of the author.
At the very least, people using your posted code are required to attribute it to the name/pseudonym under which the post was published. Now, oftentimes people default to just including a link to the post so asking them1 to amend it with your name is perfectly fine.
However, the real question is whether you can proof you are the author in the first place. If you can, whether this proof is enshrined in the GitHub project or just your resume is secondary.
The account used here only has a single CR question that does not match the description of the code (shorter and very recent). Very likely you are missing the digital paper-trail to actually claim the initial code as yours, let alone claim acknowledgement for any derived code.
So tread carefully. You have a moral claim to be acknowledged, but you must find a practical approach to get it implemented. By all means do approach the authors of the project for acknowledgement, but be humble and don't be pushy.

1It's a good idea to start by literally just asking them, politely. Licenses are not everyone's friend, so throwing the license-book at people should be avoided unless needed.

The company keeps detailed records of everything that happens on the network (no surprise). It probably wouldn't be too much trouble to merge the original with their current account. See I accidentally created two accounts; how do I merge them? Just be sure to include your justification for the request in your support message and as much detail as possible to validate that the accounts in question are both yours.

Would it be appropriate to reach out and ask to be acknowledged by name?

Yes, this is acceptable.  You wrote the code, therefore it is reasonable to be acknowledged by name.  Nothing bad can reasonably come out of such a request.

But which name - user names on SE are often pseudonyms and tying a pseudonym to one's real name years later raises difficulties. Are they really who they said they are?

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


text:
Would a PhD from Europe, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand be accepted in the US?
I am planning to apply for a PhD program outside of the US but would like to know (I am not going for medical school, and assuming that the programs and universities are accredited in their respective countries) if a PhD from another country would be accepted in the US for jobs/research?
Edit: I am interested in public health, specifically epidemiology. My research interests are cancer epidemiology, infectious disease epidemiology and global health.

I suggest you edit your question to add more context. Are you looking to work in industry (which one) or teach academically? Maybe it wouldn't be that much of an issue for a computer programmer looking for an industry position. But I would say it's harder for an Accountant where the US standard is different than International standards.

@gns100 thanks for the suggestion, I added that I would like to become an epidemiologist, I am not sure if the standard in the US is different to international standards.

One difficulty is that you might have some difficulties attending conferences and meeting people in the US, especially if your PhD program is far away, and in general you want to become known to people who might hire you. So you might want to plan on earning some frequent flier miles.

Yes doctorates from accredited universities are acceptable nearly everywhere but the details matter including your dissertation and recommendations.
Getting a job isn’t guaranteed.

"Getting a job isn’t guaranteed." To be clear this also applies when you get a PhD in the USA.

It is worth noting that the reputation of the school does have some impact how successful you are likely to be. (Again, also true in the US.)

thanks everyone for your answers, I am interested in epidemiology and one of my interests is global health.

Certainly PhDs from non-obscure schools are accepted by US job market. E.g. my maths PhD is from University of Western Australia, and in few job applications I did in US it was never an issue.
It's a bit more hassle at the time you actually need to get an H1-B visa, then your non-US PhD needs an extra certification, called "credential evaluation", done by a member of the
National Association of Credential Evaluation Services (at least it was the case for me). They take your electronic degree transcript (which normally available in Australia), charge you something like US$200, and provide "credential evaluation report" for the prospective employer.

It feels like they are robbing you straight out. I hate these kind out re-evaluation thing

I needed it fast, so I ended up paying for an "express" service. Otherwise it's only half as much, but you'd have to wait, and wait. Anyway, check out whether they have a clear timeline set out, otherwise they sit on it until you pay more for "express". Cheap crookery.

There is no explicit reason why a Ph.D. from an accredited university in those countries (or other countries with a high standard of education in general) would not be accepted.
That said, there are some practical limitations.

When you apply somewhere, people will explicitly or implicitly try to rank the quality of your degree, and will often use (some version of) the perceived quality of your instituton as a proxy. This presents all sorts of complications at the best of times, but like it or not, degrees from less well known foreign universities can get devalued through unfamiliarity. Not an issue if you go to a top-tier foreign school, but it may be going to a less well known one.

People want to hear a narrative as to perceived-atypical choices. So be prepared to articulate why you chose to go wherever you go. It can be that you wanted to work in a specific lab or with a specific advisor, or family reasons, but be prepared. This is of course not specific to choosing to attend a non-US institution, but a non-US institution will tend to provoke such a reaction more often.

You've given no indication about any immigration issues, but flagging that formally/bureaucratically non-US-citizens tend to have an easier time getting the appropriate work visas to work in the US if they have their degree from a US school (I'm not up on the details and if it is of relevance, a more focused question would provoke better focused replies on this.)

I'm an epidemiologist, so I can speak to that specifically.
A PhD from a foreign university is accepted.  A few things to consider:
1 - epidemiologists work in teams and are heavily dependent on NIH funding.  If you go to a university that doesn't expose you to grant writing and that model of research, you will probably be at a disadvantage for research jobs in the US - you'll find it harder to articulate a research plan.
2 - if you want to work in global health, having contacts with the area of the world you want to specialize in will be valuable.  You may not get the same contacts with people in the US, though, which could be a problem for finding postdocs or faculty positions.
3 - it may raise questions about language and visa issues (you don't say that, and you're looking at English-speaking countries, but it's something to make clear in applications)
4 - the reputation of the school and quality of your publications are likely to come under extra scrutiny

Hi Agnes, thank you so much for your insights. You make very valid points that I had not considered. Is there any way we can connect?
I am very interested in pursuing a PhD and would like to learn about your experience with a PhD in epidemiology in addition to any suggestions you may have.

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


text:
How can I get scholarships to study a Master in Europe?
I'm an undergraduate student from Chile in Mathematics and it's my last year. I was thinking about applying for a Masters somewhere in Europe. I tried investigating on the scholarships that Chile has with other countries, sadly most of the Universities that had something in Pure Mathematics only had the scholarship for PhD or DPhil. I don't know anything about this kind of things and asking over here is, perhaps, a good start to expand my knowledge over this.
I'm not searching for an option or something like that. I only want to know how hard is to have a scholarship, or how the scholarships environment works.

It would be better if you ask in your own environment and Profs, specially if they have connections outside of Chile.

Not that "somewhere in Europe" isn’t a uniform place. Even though there are some European funding programs, many scholarships are organised on a national or even smaller scale. Describing the scholarships for each and every European country isn’t exactly well-focused, either.

I don't know how it works in Chile, but many countries' education ministries and universities' international departments keep a record of scholarships that their students can apply for. For instance, you can find the South African DHET calendar for scholarships here.
From the link above, there are upcoming scholarships in Ireland, the UK, and Erasmus.
There are plenty of other scholarships out there. To find one, I would suggest finding out whether your university subscribes to idox or a similar service to streamline funding calls. I would also suggest reaching out to your university's international department, if you have one, or even your education ministry, to see if they can help.
International scholarships, particularly in Europe, tend to be incredibly competitive, so be prepared to put a lot of work into your application. For many of them, particularly for research-orientated programmes, it helps if you already have a contact such as a supervisor in the country or at the university you'd like to study at. Try reaching out to a few academics who's work interests you to see if they are aware of any funding opportunities.
Best of luck!

Thank you for your answer. I will try searching more about it over here and put the best of mine to get one of that programmes.

Well, in some countries the MS is totally free, you just need to fee a small semester fee. But there are so many websites that can help you to find MS program scholarships worldwide, and you can apply correct filters to find ones in Europe or elsewhere. I did the same during my time and it actually worked.

www.findamasters.com
www.mastersportal.com
www.masterstudies.com
www.master-and-more.eu
www.mastersavenue.com

Good Luck!

Please don't encourage shopping questions by posting lists of links

okay, is this why you downvoted my answer?

you can't tell who downvoted. Its anonymous.

@Sursula what if the OP is not very tech savvy and good at Googling. How should we answer such questions?

@NaveedAhmed You shouldn't answer them at all. Such questions are off-topic.

@NaveedAhmed I would suggest to the OP that maybe academia is not the best path for an individual having trouble googling things.

I will try with the links, thanks.
I'm sorry if the question seems like a shopping question, I was trying to find more information of how this works.


text:
CSL style following APA 7th Edition and providing a superscript and a full footnote for every citation
Is there a CSL (Citation Style Language) style that follows APA (American Psychological Association) 7th Edition, and provides a superscript and a full footnote reference for every citation? An example of the intended result is available at https://evelinaleivada.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/if-part-b-document-1_diva.pdf
The closest style I have found is this one, but it groups citations into a single number when there is more than one at the end of a sentence. I tried to modify this style using ChatGPT, but to no avail.

What is CSL? What is APA?

Thank you for the nudge. Added full names.

It is not possible with current CSL. See https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/116373/csl-style-following-apa-7th-edition-and-providing-superscript-and-full-footnote-for-every-citation#latest


text:
Should I explain to the graduate admission committee why I am older than most prospective PhD students?
Firstly, I know that there are plenty of questions here like this one but hopefully this is not a duplicate.
I was born and grown up in Iran and belong to a religious minority (Bahai faith). As you know Bahais are not allowed to attend universities in Iran because of their faith. I was no exception and so could not study at university because of my religious beliefs. Between the age of 18 (when I finished my highschool in Iran) and 24, I worked as a construction laborer. At the age of 24, I together with my family (my parents and sister) travelled to Turkey and became refugees in UNHCR  and two years later UNHCR sent us to Australia. I studied English for two years and after that I repeated year 11 and 12 because Australian universities did not accept my Iranian qualifications. At age 30, I started my undergraduate studies in Bachelor of Electrical Engineering and I will graduate very soon. I am now 35 years of age and would like to apply to be a PhD student in the first 5 or 10 top engineering schools in the world. I have maintained a GPA of 6.9, a WAM of 93 and was on Dean's merit list every year except the first year of my undergraduate studies. There is a possibility that I also get university medal but that is not certain yet.
Should I explain these details to the graduate admission committee explaining why I started my undergraduate studies very late at the age of 30? and what I was doing before that?

No, you did not bore me at all. The second paragraph of your question touched me. I think you can put it into the Statement of Purpose or the cover letter. In my opinion, it will be helpful and enough.

@scaaahu: Thanks for your kind comment. I will then include a brief version of what I described in the Statement of Purpose.

It's a great story to explain how motivated you are to study. But you're not too old.

I will add that depending on field, some or most of your peers may be older than you expect. I entered a masters program in the arts at 25 and was one of the youngest people in my program. I felt a little old when I was applying because I started college just before turning 19 and took 6 years; I was 1-3 years older than most of my friends in undergrad. There were only a very few masters students my age or younger; the majority were in their late 20s through mid 30s, and we had several more students in their 40s, 50s and 60s. I suspect age in PhD program will be even more widely distributed.

Your age will probably not be held against you. In fact, in my experience, older graduate students are often more driven and scientifically mature. I think this will also hold in your case. Good luck!

This touched me. wish the best to you and all Bahais

Your GPA will need some explaining, it seems to be on a non-standard scale.  At least say "6.9 of y.0 possible".

I once worked with a lady who, in her mid-40's, quit her job and went off the get her PhD. Her recently-graduated-from-high-school daughter supported her while she got her doctorate. So older PhD students are definitely not unheard of...

In my day we had some exceptional Chinese scholars that were sent down to the countryside during the Great Proliterian Cultural Revolution- they lost a decade working in menial jobs, and more time emigrating. You're not too old.

@BenVoigt The GPA score might only appear non-standard to someone non-Australian. Though I would argue that 6.9 alone is relatively clear as all GPAs in Australia are graded either out of 4 or 7 (and someone handling admissions in an Australian institution would know this), I agree with the recommendation of including a note with the maximum score in any application if the person assessing it might not be familiar with the system.

You already got plenty of responses stating you should include your story. I want to add my experience: I had some delay in starting college due to war, and people were very sympathetic to this whenever I applied for academic positions or grants. Having this sort of life background shows you have resolve, and resolve is valued in academia, because you need heaps of it when you do research.

This is a great story that, at least at some schools, will actually work to your advantage. Do make sure to include all of the above in your admissions essay. I had no good excuse and am from a western country, but started my phd at 30 only; and the oldest classmate I remember was 42 in her first year (she was not alone: we hade several late 30 first-years). One of my girlfriend's professors dropped out of society for 10 years, and now is famous and teaches at an ivy. You show perseverance, and nothing matters more for a phd. Best of luck!

You should put your story in your application. You'll need to face a bigger challenge after getting admission, which is the age difference between you and your other classmates. Most students in USA universities are 18-22 years old. In grad school and PhD programs, many of them are 22-28 years old. These are people who you will have to  see and interact with everyday for 5 or 6 years. You cannot possibly explain your story to all of them and no matter how nice and open-minded they are, some of them discriminate against you based on your age.

Just signed up to upvote this question. Good luck.

Your determination and perseverance through life obstacles will prove you more qualified than younger students.

@user23872 According to the constitution of Iran, people with all Abrahamic religions are equal (probably except Wahhabi and Bahai people, but that's not in the constitution), and also all non-Muslim people human rights must be respected by the government. But what happens in reality is another story and depends on many other factors. As for your question, that's most probably because no one actually scrutinize people when registering for a university; they've probably not declared their religious beliefs there.

Such information would be relevant. The real trick would be to keep such a paragraph short and to the point. As such the question would be a good draft of such a section. I have two comments:
I would not start the second sentence with "as you know". If a committee member did not know, you make her or him feel ignorant. It is good to avoid invoking negative emotions in such a letter. Especially since leaving that part out does not change the meaning of the sentence.
It was not clear from the text whether it was the Bahai faith that prohibited it's members from going to university or whether it was the Iranian government that prohibited people with the Bahai religion to enter university.

Thanks for your reply. It was the Iranian government that prohibited people with the Bahai religion to enter university.

@user65472: You should definitely turn that around when you write your letter, then.  Something along the lines of "Iranian universities impose a religious test and will not admit Bahai students."  I also agree with Maarten that it's a bad idea to assume the readers already know this, so instead of "As you (do already) know", you could say "As you may know" or "As you may have heard".  But neither of those actually add anything, whether the committee already knew it does not change the facts in any way.

I wish scaaahu had put that comment in an answer so that I could up-vote it.
Perhaps it will help you to know that I started the Ph.D. at age 56.  It wasn't in a top ten university, but neither am I ashamed of my alma mater.  Admissions committees are interested in potential for research and teaching.  Show those and, with your background, you will get offers.
Do include a very brief explanation in either your cover letter or statement of purpose as scaaahu has suggested.  It need not be as extensive as what you posted here.  Just address the committee member who is thinking, "I wonder why...?"  Something as simple as, "People of my faith are not allowed to study in university in my native Iran, so I got a late start."

Thanks for your reply. Your kind words motivated me heaps.

I suggested minimal detail in your letter or statement of purpose.  I note that those who have suggested more detail have far more experience in academia than I.  Listen to them.

I recommend that you put the information you gave us in your statement of purpose for a PhD application.  At least for a US-style statement of purpose (which is usually about two pages) I would not suggest abridging the story you told us.  Rather I agree with @scaaahu that your story is extremely compelling, much more so than what one normally reads in these kinds of statements.
If you can craft this as a narrative of the triumph of your intellectual interest and academic success over the adversities you've faced over a period of many years: look, that's awesome.  If I saw that in a PhD application to my program (mathematics, UGA) then I would be passing your statement around for the entire admissions committee to read.  If the other parts of your application were reasonably competitive, I would be well on my way to pushing strongly for your admission.
Let me end my saying that I was personally touched by your story.  You have a lot to be proud of and will certainly serve as an inspiration to many others.  Academia needs people like you.

DEFINITELY include information on what you describe.  More importantly, though, you are a more mature student, and at your age you should show a very solid understanding of why you need a PhD to pursue your career goals.
"Atypical" students can be great additions for departments, but if I were the one doing the choosing, I would be looking for more than your history, academic or otherwise -- I'd be looking to see whether you understand why you want the degree, and what you intend to do with it.  Give your admissions committee your whole picture.

Can you help me with your last paragraph? I want a phd degree because I want to be an academic, because I want to solve open problems in electrical engineering, because I want to help others. Would that be enough or I need better reasons?

That's a very different question.  With the exception of "I want to be an academic, the other issues are done by engineers, and they don't generally need to spend five or six years after their degree to do them.

There are some people that probably should "dodge" this issue. You are NOT one of them. So an explanation will help you, with very little risk.
You come from what most Western institutions would consider a "disadvantaged" background. You have succeeded in spite of that fact. You got a later start in university life because you got a lot of life experience in what we Americans would call "the school of hard knocks." That's very much to your credit. Most western universities would give a positive weight to "maturity" and sense of purpose in evaluating an application. You have both.
The kind of person who might have something to fear regarding age is someone from a (probably) rich family who had a "wasted" (or misspent) youth. You are not that person.

authors: Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні


text:
A specific term was first coined in a preprint but publication took many years. What to cite?
In my literature research for a paper I am writing I want to state that a specific term was first coined in a preprint from let's say 2000, but the paper was not published until 2005.
Unfortunately other papers I want to cite that were published in the years between used this term since it was known by then from the preprint. It would be strange if I mentioned both, the preprint from 2000 and the published version from 2005, but saying the term was first coined in the 2005 paper would not be correct.
Any ideas on how to handle that issue?
Thanks a lot in advance :)

Why would it be strange to cite both? Surely anyone who delves into to reference list in sufficient detail would see the connection between the preprint and the publication.

Would you mind sharing what the term is (or what it’s relation is to the rest of your paper)?

I guess it's okay to cite both then...Thanks :)

I would try this:

Miller et al. (2000, p. 13) coined the term "underwater spaghetti knitting" (see also  Miller at al. 2005, p. 8).

Or this:

This phenomenon became known as "underwater spaghetti knitting" (Miller et al. 2000, p. 13; Miller at al. 2005, p. 8).

Here, Miller et al. 2000 is the preprint and Miller et al. 2005 the final publication.


text:
PhD Student : Publish Paper with Wife?
I am a PhD student, working on Applied Math while my wife is a software engineer. I plan on going to academia after PhD and will start to job hunt soon.
A few weeks ago, I thought of an idea that hadn't been done before. I wrote a crude C++ code to implement the idea and it worked well. I believed that with my theoretical understanding of the problem and an expert coder, we could make something really impactful and incidentally, my wife knew how to. So, we spent some evenings together writing the code (she didn't know math, but I abstracted each step so she could help implement). The resulting code is fairly sophisticated and does an excellent job. I was wondering, now that I write a paper about it, would it look weird if my wife was listed as a co-author? Her contributions were definitely sufficient to warrant co-authorship by any definition.
Let's step aside the legalese of it (my advisor doesn't care and her company might but let's leave that aside). I am asking more from the standpoint of how it looks on one's CV, job application and possibly, tenure.

It is my guess that mostly likely nobody will ever bother to find out whether one of your co-authors was your wife.

Not a big deal: if you want to enter the History, publish a paper with your wife and at least a lover, and let them decide over first-authorship!

Didn't matter for Patrick and Radhia Cousot...

Lots of husband and wife teams do research together. They will probably assume you met in grad school.

Just another example: May-Britt Moser, Edvard I. Moser. They won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2014...

Sorry, but I can't resist. With wife is ok, with mistress, no! :D

Note that computer coding, by itself, would likely not be sufficient for coauthorship. The authorship is given to acknowledge the research, not the creation of tools. Similarly, we don't add Dennis M. Ritchie as our coathor, even though he developed the C computer programming language. On the other hand, if the paper is about the theory that was only understood or advanced through their addition via the programming process, then the programmer would merit consideration for authorship.

Do it and don't worry about it, and feel happy and lucky that you met a woman with the intellectual wherewithal to not only appreciate your academic interests, but share them enough to contribute to discovering something new. I love my wife to death, but she finds my work miserably boring (like most people).

I can't resist mentioning the ultimate example I know in this vein: ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=2070648 by Kuperberg, G., Kuperberg, K., and Kuperberg, W. I leave it as an exercise to figure out who is who in this case.

Mrs Marsupial is my most frequent co-author.  I've found marriage to be a highly effective means of retaining good research assistants ;o)

Nobel Prize winning couples: Marie + Pierre Curie, Frederic + Irene Joliot-Curie, Carl + Gerty Cori, May-Britt + Edvard Moser (more examples in the Two-Body opportunity)

It is common that husband and wife duos write papers.  Often the maiden name is used, so you wouldn't know without other knowledge.  I can think of 6 such couples off the top of my head, just in departments I've worked in.

"...it's better to have both a wife and mistress - they each think I'm co-authoring my paper with the other one, which gives me time at the lab to actually do the paper!"

I've co-authored with my ex-girlfriend.

Another nice example: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jcp/21/6/10.1063/1.1699114.  Authored by, it would seem, two couples and an awkwardly unpaired guy.

Rather famously four of the authors of the original Metropolis algorithm are two married couples. It seemed to work out OK for them...

It doesn't matter, assuming you have the same last name people might think the other person is a sister, cousin, aunt, mother, etc

Nobody will notice or care, unless you share a last name with your wife, in which case the strongest reaction is likely to be, "aw how cute, a husband and wife published a paper together."

I'd be looking if they are still together as well....

That's my reaction. It's neat when this happens. I hope my wife and I can publish together someday!

@o4tlulz: I currently have 23 papers co-authored with my wife, and we are still happily married.

Plus, there are other familial relations in which two people share surname and are not married to one another. Not only is it no big deal, it's pretty neat most of the time!

Sharing a last name also does not necessarily mean that you are (somewhat closely) related. I have read multiple publications, where I only by chance discovered that some of the authors were married, because they just had very common surnames (in their culture). And my initial reaction was exactly "aw cute".

I STRONGLY suspect this happens more than we realize because there are a number of husband-wife teams that publish but have different last names. Having different last names is especially common in academia because of the importance of name-recognition.

Marie Curie won her first Nobel Prize for work performed and authored with her husband Pierre, and was a key research assistant later on the work that won Irene Curie her Nobel Prize in Medicine.

I have a colleague who has published with his wife, his son and I think his daughter, although in separate papers. He has an ambition to publish a paper with all four of them having the same name. I have also published a paper with two brothers and the spouse of one of them, the paper is by O'Connor, O'Connor, Miles and O'Connor.

This is true up until the point the person assumes they are husband and wife. It is equally possible to assume they are brother and (unmarried) sister.

I know several instances where spouses/couples are co-authors, though often it is not obvious to an outsider if the co-authors are spouses.  (There are also many examples of parent-child and sibling co-authors, so it is not obvious even if the spouses have the same last name.)  Thus it is not a strange thing to happen, particular if non-academic co-authors are common in your field.
There is only one case where I even thought one spouse may possibly be going out of their way to bring up the research profile of the other (academic) spouse, but that is due to some specifics of the situation, and I don't regard them poorly because of this (which may not be true anyway), just am unclear on one of the spouse's contributions.  In your case, presumably your wife has little to gain career-wise from coauthorship, so there is not even reason for people to think this.
If you personally feel weird about it, you can always explain in the paper what each author's role was.  (And, of course, you should never deny a deserving person co-authorship, especially someone you (hopefully) like.)

Good advice overall. A note:  In your case, presumably your wife has little to gain career-wise from coauthorship, so there is not even reason for people to think this. No, but they might think that she is boosting your career. Not that this is anything worth worrying about.

I've seen quite a few textbooks authored by couples; I don't see why a paper would be looked at any more negatively than a textbook.

In terms of relationship with the external world, it need not be any problem.  If you begin collaborating scientifically on a regular basis, however, it is likely to affect your relationship, by making you colleagues as well as spouses.
For some couples, this can be a good thing, as the shared interest and partnership can add a new dimension to the relationship.
For other couples, the stresses of scientific collaboration outweigh the benefits.  Some people also find that they lose a place of refuge from work, as their work life and home life become more entangled.
Bottom line: have fun and publish together if you want, but make sure to have an explicit discussion about how you want to relate to collaboration as a couple, and revisit it from time to time if necessary.

+1, very good points here! I suppose it would help greatly to start collaborating on something that is small and easy to back out of, in case the couple get the feeling that it's not working well for them.

Do you know that one of the most significant papers in Computer Science (nearly 6000 citations) was written by the couple Patrick and Radhia Cousot, and they continued to co-author more than 50 papers.

@LegoStormtroopr apparently the vast majority of papers on this page, some of which actually look sorta interesting...

@LegoStormtroopr It's their 1977 paper presenting for the first time the concept of abstract interpretation.

@LegoStormtroopr It's the one with nearly 6000 citations?

i like to mention about marie and pierrie curie

Goodman, et al wrote a paper on this very topic.

The first and
  most common type of such coauthorship is by married economists with the same surname. Prominent
  examples of this include Romer and Romer (2013) on monetary policy, Reinhart and Reinhart
  (2010) on macroeconomic crises, Summers and Summers (1989) on financial markets, Ostrom and
  Ostrom (1999) on public goods, Ramey and Ramey (2010) on parental time allocation, Ellison and
  Ellison (2009) on internet-based price elasticities and Friedman and Friedman (1990) on personal choice

The title of this paper alone is worth the price of admission.

The title being, "A FEW GOODMEN: SURNAME‐SHARING ECONOMIST COAUTHORS", which is a play on the Goodman couple who were among the coauthors.

@TomAnderson there is no Goodman couple.   None of the authors were related by marriage.

@TomAnderson did you read the paper? It was 4 Goodmans, none of which were related by blood, marriage or affiliation.

Ah a bibliometrics reference, have my vote.

That's the sort of stuff you expect was popped on the arXiv in late March/early April - along the lines of orthographic correlations in astrophysics.

Please revise my comment to 'Goodman quartet', "unrelated by marriage, blood or current campus."

To add to the other answers, I think the fact that your wife does not work in academia makes it even less questionable (from my point of view this does not raise any ethical concerns since you say co-authorship is warranted by her contribution). Since she does not have an academic career, and this paper seems to be a "once-off" thing, I do not think anybody would think you are spuriously including her or, more importantly, she is spuriously including you as a coauthor to enhance your career.
Now, if this becomes a recurrent thing then it will raise suspicion (academia is a competitive world). I know of at least a couple of cases of spouses systematically coauthoring all of their papers. And I know that at least in one of these cases one of the spouses is not doing enough.

The 2014 Nobel prize winners are husband and wife, so it really doesn't sound strange

The fact they divorced a couple of years after getting the Nobel prize could be scary for some people considering researching with own spouse.

I made a special appointment with a professor once to ask his advice about whether a proposed action would be ethical.  He gave me an easy test: imagine a headline in a newspaper, reporting your action.  Is there anything about that headline and story that would look questionable?  If not, it's safe to go ahead with the proposed action.
In this case, we'd have "Woodward names wife as co-author of scientific paper."  Sounds okay to me!  If it were "Woodward pays wife to ghost-write scientific paper," for example, that would be a problem.  But there's no money changing hands in your case, so your co-authored paper is fine!

This is a terrible test. Newspapers, especially of the more tabloid kind, have the power to make just about anything look like the worst crime against humanity to the general public with a sufficiently juicy headline and a modicum of persuasive creative writing. And even if they don’t do it on purpose, neither they nor their target audience have much of an idea about ethics in scientific publishing.

I was in a small university town with one newspaper, which was far from the tabloid kind.  No one in the university would take a second glance at a national tabloid when waiting in line at the grocery store.  I'll define my terms: The test the professor gave me is about imagining something appearing in a non-tabloid-type newspaper. - - In my particular case, the professor's advice helped me proceed with my proposed action with a clear conscience.

But how can the journalist decide which title to choose between "Woodward coauthor a scientific paper with his wife" and "Woodward's wife ghost-writes his papers to advance his academic career"?

@Taladris, if you had written the paper with your spouse, you would know which headline is an accurate reflection of reality.  This test is essentially another way of examining your own conscience.

@aparente001: yes, but the question is how publishing a paper with his spouse will reflect on the OP's CV. So, it is about which headline the reader of the CV would choose, more than the OP's choice.

@Taladris, okay, yes, that is what he wrote.  I inferred he had some doubts about the ethics.

@Taladris Of course the journalist would always choose the second because it's unethical.

NSF calls this the "Washington Post Rule".

In addition to other good answers, I'd advise:

If you're a PhD candidate with very few papers - which is usually the case - try not to present this one as your most significant contribution, since that brings up the level of scrutiny/potential suspicion. Let it be another one of your publications.
if there is a third guy/gal, that makes it look even less questionable; don't just add someone for this reason only, but if you add, say, your advisor, that wouldn't hurt I suppose.

Of course, I could just be over-fearful and it's fine regardless.

I'll go against the grain in this specific instance and say your wife should not be a co-author.  You had the idea.  You wrote a working prototype.  You provided your wife with step-by-step, high level instructions on what needed to be implemented to flesh out the prototype.  Your wife essentially played the role of scientific programmer.  This type of role / contribution is generally mentioned / thanked in the Acknowledgements but is not a co-author.
Those who actually read such a paper may think that your wife is only listed as a co-author because she is your wife.  This may raise some eyebrows and may have some negative impact on your job search.

Whether the OP's wife contributed enough was not the question.  He wrote: "Her contributions were definitely sufficient to warrant co-authorship by any definition." The OP wrote that with full knowledge of the situation, including his specific academic field.  You are questioning it based on a one paragraph summary which describes substantial collaboration.  I don't think you have enough information to weigh in on this issue.  Do you have anything to say on the OP's question?

@PeteL.Clark I've updated my answer somewhat.  The OP's question is complicated because he is asking whether there will be any impact to having his wife listed as a co-author and the answer depends on whether it is justified to have her as a co-author or not.  I'm not convinced, based on the OP's description, that it is justified so I am answering from that perspective.

Your answer is now more relevant. But I really disagree with it: if the person who did the programming were a fellow graduate student, it would be very hard to argue against including them as a coauthor, given that the OP feels that their contribution qualitatively improved the paper. If I were in the OP's situation, I would feel that the more urgent ethical imperative was not to look like I am trying to commandeer someone else's work as my own, not to preempt hypothetical mistakes, especially those with sexist undertones. Since when is authorship decided by what other people think?

@PeteL.Clark Authorship is decided by significance of contribution.  Since the other person is the OP 's wife, this opens the door for a conflict of interest. The OP must be extra careful to ensure the wife made a contribution that justifies co-authorship before making her one. The OP describes the wife's contribution as implementing software according to specifications. This is not research. This kind of work is done by acknowledged scientific programmers and not co-authors,  graduate students or otherwise. To me this is a clear case of inappropriately giving out authorship.

Your claim that coding of sophisticated algorithms cannot be an academic contribution is easily falsified by searching the literature.  If you want specific examples, please ask a question on this site about it.  If you think that what you are saying might be true in a particular academic field or subfield, please identify that subfield so that the claim can be checked.

@PeteL.Clark The OP states "she didn't know math, but I abstracted each step so she could help implement".  This implies to me that the OP's wife did not understand how to implement the algorithm without detailed guidance from the OP.  Programming results in authorship is when the programmer actively contributes to the novel ideas contained in the program, actively participates in the writing process, etc.  This is true of most computer science research.  However, merely helping implement something, the details of which you do not understand, does not constitute authorship.

@PeteL.Clark This is a good example of my point of view here: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43344/are-programmers-usually-included-as-co-authors-in-psychology


text:
How should I ask a potential advisor why they haven't published in the last 3 years?
I'm using a throwaway account for privacy. I know professors are human beings and "I can just ask", but, as this is the start of the relationship, I don't want to seem rude - or to seem that I am interviewing them. This potential advisor has published papers in top journals before, but nothing for the last 3 years.
I know this question is related: PhD with a supervisor who has not published anymore since 2014, but this professor is quite young, so the situation is different.
I think that if I ask them about "their current research interests" they will just talk about the current project that is about to begin - without addressing the issue I'm interested in.

How long have they been a professor? Were those publications from their grad school / post-doc? Do they have students currently, and are they publishing?

They got the PhD in 2006, and the habilitation to direct PhDs one year before their last papers. (So, no PhD students.)
Between 2006 and 2014, they did a couple of post docs and an assistant professorship (with a nice publication record)

What's your discipline?

Make the question sound as if it's your inability to look, not that there's nothing to see. "I've been trying to find some of your recent papers but I can't seem to locate anything, can you point me in the right direction please..."

@alephzero, but no papers of them appear in google scholar. Shouldn't I ask IF they have been doing anything recently? Because maybe they haven't

@JohnDoe General question, did you see  they haven't published anything from their professional website? Most faculty only update that once per decade. You check this in google scholar, right?

@axsvl77, yes, I checked in google scholar (it's in the comment above yours :-P)

Who knows, this supervisor might be more interested in quality than in quantity? It would be a rare find in those damn "publish or perish" days.

@EricDuminil Sure, but in these damn "publish or perish" days a PhD student cannot make the same choice without jeopardizing his/her career, so it's a thing you should consider before choosing this advisor.

Note that many academics only update their CV, website, and Google Scholar when they are applying for a job or promotion. Make sure that you aren't confusing "hasn't published in 3 years" with "hasn't updated anything in 3 years". Use search methods that automatically find papers and don't require the person to update their publication record.

@Thomas, isn't Google Scholar updated automatically? What should I trust?

Does he/she started a new group and/or a new lab? This certainly can be a reason for fewer than usual publications

@Alchimista, yes, but this is not "fewer than usual". It's a long gap.

Ok. Then creating a lab with instruments and machineries can be a tremendous task. This might be at least one of the reasons depending on lab and setups.

Instead of a question that might be insulting, you should probably ask them what they've been working on for the past few years. You need to know that in any case and their answer might give you the reason that they haven't got anything out recently. There may be a lot of work in progress but not yet ready. That sort of thing can actually be an advantage to you and knowing what it is, certainly is.
But if their answer indicates not much research, then you might want to keep looking.
By the way, this is a topic for a sit down conversation, not just an email. The latter might work, but would require more work from the prof and so you might not get as complete an answer.

I think the "lot of work in progress" is an important point. Most professors have a gap in their publication record right after they start their own group: You move from a fully funded and equipped group with many research strands on the boil, to an empty room with no people, no equipment, no funding and no on-going projects. It takes a while to get up and running.

I think in a very real sense, you are, in fact, interviewing potential advisers. It would be rather disingenuous for a potential adviser to believe that he or she is beyond the bounds of accountability for his/her research record. I would say something such as the following:

I am interested in participating in publishing papers. Would we be able to publish papers together?
What types of projects/papers have you worked on in the last few years?
What are some of the current papers or projects you are working on?

A quality adviser would have quality answers for these questions. Moreover, they would know that it would play in their favor to have at least some explanation as to why they have not published lately. These questions will open the door for them to provide an explanation of their research record. If they seem to dodge around that time period, I'm honestly not sure that they should be your number one choice for an adviser.
I would also verify that this is not just a matter of their CV being out of date. Perhaps they have published papers and just have not updated their CV in a while.

Aside: If I can give my personal thoughts on choosing a young, unproven adviser, I would recommend avoiding professors who have not established themselves somewhat. I have seen a number of PhD students who run into issues when they choose a professor who has not yet been given tenure and who is constrained by the "publish or perish" mentality.

I note that in some traditions and communities in my area (pure maths FWIW), supervisors actively avoid publishing with their students during the period of the PhD. Also "accountability" seems a strange choice of word to me

Also, the implication that the length/density of a publication list is the most important measure of the worth of a researcher/scholar is ... disputable in some subjects and contexts, and does NOT mean they would be bad at training someone for research. (My 2cents, YMMV, etc)

@YemonChoi It is hard for me to see how someone who produces no research would be good at training someone to do research. This isn't pro-basketball. I of course do not believe that one must only look at advisers with extensive publication records. However, if a professor has no publications in the last three years, that is a bad sign.

because people don't always get given the time needed to write up their results, because it can take a long time for hard or unfashionable papers to get refereed, and because in pure mathematics there is a lot of value in knowing and understanding the accumulated knowledge and results of the past.

It is also not uncommon in pure maths (well, at least it was this way in the not too distant past) to come across something in one's research and think: hmm, this could probably be pushed further but it's a distraction from the main topics I think about and could be hard to get published in the places my employers wish me to publish in, but it would be ideal as an initial project for a PhD student to learn the tools of the trade.

@YemonChoi What you have described is a bit frightening. I do not want to oversimplify your comments, but it essentially sounds like you are advocating giving PhD students projects which do nothing to further your own academic career. In other words, you don't want to waste time on a project, so you assign it to a grad student to beat their head on. You also seem to want to speak to the entirety of pure mathematics.  (Is this an inadvertent assumption that one's experience is universal?)

Vladhagen, I certainly don't claim to speak for the entirety of pure maths, but the approaches I have described are not just limited to "me and my mates". It is how I and several of my peers were trained; it is how several people both senior to me and at the same level think about training their students. Also, I must push back on "you don't want to waste time on a project". It is more that I am mindful that it can be good to leave more accessible things for PhD students to cut their teeth on, which will spur them to learn & understand new things

Lastly for now: "it essentially sounds like you are advocating giving PhD students projects which do nothing to further your own academic career." Well, certainly not all of my colleagues would agree with me, but yes, when I think of a good PhD (sub)project for a new student, I am not doing it so they can help me with my research, because my research requires a large chunk of the 10 years' headstart I have on my students. I choose a project where I think the student can learn, with my guidance, how to do research, not how to do the gruntwork for my research

@YemonChoi, are you sure it’s a universal habit in pure maths not to publish with one’s advisers (or advisor)?  I am a pure mathematician, but have never heard of such a convention.

@YemonChoi I also have done work in pure maths (group representation theory) and I have never heard of this concept of not publishing with your graduate students. Maybe this was the case 60 years ago.

I am a pure mathematician, and didn't publish with either of my advisors until several years after finishing my PhD.  My wife is also a pure mathematician, and the one paper she published with her advisor was disjoint from her PhD thesis. @LSpice: it didn't look to me like Yemon claimed this was universal in pure maths.  But it certainly is common in some subcommunities.

For a range of views from mathematicians, see https://mathoverflow.net/questions/57337/when-should-a-supervisor-be-a-co-author/57343

@MarkMeckes, good point. I read "in some traditions and communities in my area (pure maths FWIW), supervisors actively avoid …" as "in … pure maths … supervisors actively avoid …", but I now see that "(pure maths FWIW)" was just indicating @YemonChoi's area.

@LSpice But I think in our area of pure math it's a bit worrisome if all of a student's papers are joint with their advisor.  I've certainly had discussions with colleagues about this, even though I know people who've done it and been successful.  It's like how if a tenure-track applicant's publications are all joint with senior people, this can cause some doubt over a candidate.

@Kimball, agreed, but there is a difference between "don't publish with your advisor as a student" and "don't only publish with your advisor as a student."

Given the publish or perish mentality, a (young) researcher that "has published...nothing for the last 3 years" is heading towards perishing, at least, they are in many disciplines.*
Although I agree with Buffy that "[they] may [have] a lot of work in progress but not yet ready" and that "sit down conversation, not just an email" is most appropriate, I feel that nothing for three years is simply too long and it doesn't give much confidence that they can help you churn out publications (to get a PhD).
I recommend rethinking their suitability as a supervisor.
*As noted in the comments, established researchers (or researchers with protected employment statuses) enjoy more freedom.

I'm not an advocate of the publish or perish mentality, but that's the world we live in.

Which disciplines do you have in mind? Also, I guess that your first sentence only really applies to younger researchers in countries/systems that don't have tenure: older researchers in systems with tenure might be risky choices as supervisors, but they need not be "heading towards perishing"

I think it is true across many disciplines, certainly across many of the disciplines I know researchers in. Actually, I can't think of a researcher that I know personally that could "get away" with not publishing for three years. Perhaps I should widen my circle... Regarding tenure, I'm somewhat unconvinced for tenure at a top institute, lesser institutes, sure.

It also depends upon the country, and the status of the supervisor. Notice that Peter Higgs did not publish a lot (and explicitly told that by current -foolish- "publish a lot of useless papers" standards, he won't make an academic career today). In France, J.Pitrat did not publish a paper every year, but was recognized as one of the French pionners of artificial intelligence (and supervised quite well a lot of PhDs)

@BasileStarynkevitch How does country have an impact? (I certainly agree that an established professor has more freedom, but that's not the case for the OP's question, in which the supervisor is young and unestablished.)

In France, once you have a tenured position in a public-sector organization (like CNRS, INRIA, CEA, etc...) your career won't suffer a lot (notably when you are a few years from retirement) if you don't publish several papers per year. I heard that it is quite specific to France. I tend to believe that the "publish" (shitty papers) "or perish" rule could be stronger in the US than in France (for tenured employees of public-sector organizations)

@BasileStarynkevitch Understood, thanks; I've edited my answer to highlight that fact.

Some tenure & promotion boards are starting to look at more than just publishing papers -- public outreach (in person, blogs, TV), maintaining specialized software, maintaining & distributing important data.  The second one might lead to a peer-reviewed publication in fields w/ software & data journals, but it's often just at first release.

Just to point out some possible reasons that may be entirely private and something they don't want to discuss with anyone :

Were on national "military" service (which does not always require you to be in the military, BTW).
Had or has an illness or a family member who was or is seriously ill. ( And this may itself make it impossible for them to be removed from their position depending on the nature of their contract and local laws).
Suffered a bereavement - if you're young and have not lost anyone really close, you need to understand this can be shattering and take years to recover from.
Likes to teach and is good enough at it to satisfy the institute's needs - teaching is a vocation and it's a pity it's not more respected at third level.
Has a permanently tenured position they can't be removed from - rare but possible
Was doing confidential work, e.g. for government or commercial, which can't be published.
Took time off to wander the Earth (or whatever).  By the time you complete a PhD you'll probably need/want to do that too, as it's emotionally, physically and mentally exhausting.
May have been on some sort of parental leave, part time or full time.  Note that in some places men get parental leave entitlement too, so gender may not be an issue.
May be involved in a long term study or studies that requires a lot of work but generates no publishing opportunities.

I'd also caution against dismissing a non-publishing supervisor.  Publishing may be the common goal nowadays but it doesn't mean it's a good idea.  I'd honestly prefer fewer publications of higher quality and real depth than the rush to publish anything mentality we have now.  Not being published does not mean they're not a good supervisor, or even that they don't know a great deal about the field(s) that interest you.  A supervisor is someone who offers intellectual and administrative support and advice to you.  You need a supportive mentor who can steer you through the difficult process of getting a PhD.  Not all research publication orientated supervisors are good at this, IMO.  Is their being published frequently relevant to your getting a PhD ?  That's your decision.
You do need to sit down and discuss your issue with the potential supervisor.  As someone suggested, it's best to think of this as you interviewing them just as much as they'll be interviewing you.  Both parties need to know that the person on the other side of the table is someone who is going to do what they need.
Remember when talking to them that you may be hitting sensitive issues they're not comfortable with, so watch out for negative reactions.
@AlphaZero's comment was very relevant :

Make the question sound as if it's your inability to look, not that there's nothing to see. "I've been trying to find some of your recent papers but I can't seem to locate anything, can you point me in the right direction please..."

Maybe add that you're interested in making sure you're both a good match.

Thank you. Something I don't know is if when looking for a post-doc, someone will look up the publications of the advisor...I think that's also relevant.

I would certainly look them up, however I would also talk to them.  I would never suggest taking a supervisor you have not talked to and got a good feeling for - and vice versa.  A good supportive supervisor is invaluable, and a bad unsupportive one can be a disaster.

Just straight up and ask him.  Short direct question without fencing, apologies, or caveats.  Then shut up and listen to what he says and let him speak at length.  Sort of like how Brian Lamb does interviews.  If you are skillful, you can even use silence from a quick response to compel a deeper explanation.
It's probable that the guy is not right guy to advise you, irrespective of his answer.  But who knows, maybe you learn something to change your mind.  Or just to know what he is up to.
If he says "I'm a p-chemist and have been building a laser for last 3 years", it's actually a good response.  But don't believe him when he says it is about to start spitting out publications.  It will need another 3 years.
If he gets upset, then that is one more learning why to avoid him.  Don't mince around too much with these guys like a mouse.

Frame challenge to your question

I don't want to seem rude - or to seem that I am interviewing them.

This is an abdication of your responsibility to simultaneously interview those who are interviewing you, and an unethical position which privileges those with institutional power to dictate the terms of a negotiation (implying that 'negotiation' should be coercive).
Second, professors live interesting lives with many demands. Were I asked by a prospective student, mentee, etc. "Out of curiosity I while I was reading up on your research, I noticed you haven't published on these topics recently. Are you still engaged with research in this area?" I would feel (1) this person took the time to learn about my interests and engage with me about them, (2) they are interested in knowing about my current research directions, and (3) they want to understand the work demands on a researcher in my area, all of which speak well of them from their side of the interview.

You should certainly ask a potential advisor about what they've been working on. To fully understand a publication gap, it may be important to learn something about their career goals and motivation. These kind of questions can seem a little impertinent if you ask them indelicately. A canned question is unlikely to serve you well here, but realize during the back and forth with this person that you want to understand their motivations. Having worked under someone who wanted to publish every little observation, and also someone who didn't want to publish until we had something earth shattering, it's good to learn these things up front. Both can be frustrating -- more so, if you didn't see it coming.
I'd add, you may be able to learn a fair amount in a sit-down discussion with this potential advisor, but you won't get the entire picture without talking to their students and staff. Ultimately, it is more important to know if this person will be supportive of your developing career and your publication goals.

I think that any real scientist can easily answer any of such questions.
If not, he is not real scientist. Doesn't matter how much he has in publication or any of so-called "scientological" metrics (I am making fun of any "metrics" because those are what bureacracy wants, any real scientist does NOT).
What you are essentially doing is asking the scientist: "Look dude, I'm having this stupid metrics of mine, and this metrics says you have low something. Tell me about this low something please".
Of cause any real scientist will understand and tell you that it is your metrics speaking, but not his works.

Perelman practically didn't publish anything from 1995 to 2000.
Result: Proof of PC.
So maybe it's a good thing your potential advisor didn't publish in the last few years ;)

Unless your supervisor isn't Perelman.


text:
How should I present my under-review works in my CV and profile?
I'm searching for postdoc positions in CS and sending my CV to here and there trying for different opportunities. However, I do not know how to present my under-review works. For instance, should I add them in my CV as under-review papers and mention the conferences to which I submitted?
Then, should I also include the pre-prints in my postdoc applications?
Also, these conferences have double-blind review processes. Hence, I'm not sure whether to include these works in my home-page or not. I like to add them to my CV and profile as they are extracted from the last part of my Ph.D.
Besides, would they (postdoc employers) take these works seriously knowing that they have not been published yet?

As somebody who hires post-docs regularly, the common thing to do is indicate them on your CV as submitted. Giving a current title is good. Where is not as important.
For your on-line profile, I don't look at those - that is what the CV you submitted is for.
Look, I've been there as a graduating PhD with fewer publications than I would like. I will ask you about how your to-be-published stuff is coming, particularly since the interview isn't going to be the moment you submit your application. I will also ask your advisor how things are wrapping up, including the submitted articles.
Further, I realize that not all articles end up in the place they were first submitted.
Don't lie about what is actually submitted. Be prepared to discuss how things are going on the articles. Be prepared to talk about them. Realize there are probably a few more coming in the future (field dependent, I know).

Good advice. In fact, I want to include them also to have the opportunity to talk about them in case they are interested in the topic of the article and if they like to know about the work I did. That is why I said should I also add it to my university web-page to provide more info. regarding the work.

I know a submitted manuscript is nowehere close to a published work. But i want the people to know that i took my work seriously by submitting it to a good conference, and this is the honest part. For instance, i did several other small side-projects but didn't try to publish them as i didn't see them as self-contained publications for good venues.

The other answers address the "should you include" issue.  The "how should I present" part is also important.  The main thing is that you should never list works which are not accepted by a conference/journal under the heading of "Publications."  Even if they are labeled "Submitted" this creates an impression of dishonesty or exaggeration.  List your submitted and preprint works under a separate heading in your CV.

Although generally I would recommend against including anything not fully accepted to a CV, I would say it mostly depends on what stage of peer review they are. When evaluating candidates I personally tend to ignore anything that is not with a final decision.

If you have submitted an article to a journal and has been through
one round of reviews and you are relatively confident that it will
get through you may want to include it, marked as "under revision" or
something similar.
If you just submitted an article to a conference or journal and you  have not heard anything back, I would suggest against including it at all. Anyone can have a couple of articles submitted to a journal by tomorrow afternoon - they might have no chance of getting accepted but they are still submitted, so I see no value in including them in an application

More than on review stage it should depend on career stage. A young researcher might profit to list submitted papers and even papers in preparation, though I would mention the latter in a resume rather than in a list.

I understand that they do not have any publication value before receiving any clear decision on them, but do people simply disregard any work the candidate has done in his thesis but not yet published in a venue?

It might sound a bit cynical, but I do. There is no way to verify any sort of quality or contribution - unless you are already familiar with the work of the author / co-authors.

@Babak of course the work done it is taken into account. If I have to hire a post doc, I am interested to know of possible results yet to be publish.  True is that I would relies on interview and knowledge rather than a list in a CV.

The same way you would deal with it in citations: "in preparation for J. Op. Man.", "submitted to...", "in review at..."* "in press at..."
*For this one, I would probably just say submitted to, for a citation--no need to get into the minutia of if review process started or not.  But for your CV worth taking credit for being a little bit down the path.

All of these things can happen.  The paper can be abandoned.  Can change.  Authors change.  Etc. It is UNDERSTOOD that you are not final yet.  You are doing the best you can, at the time.


text:
Can I retract my name from an already published manuscript?
I'm a co-author on a paper that was published in a Nature family journal some months ago because of my scientific contribution to the work presented there. I've discovered that the first author of this paper (let's call them Pat) has, in several instances, over several years, committed scientific fraud by manipulating raw data in other publications. I have no direct evidence that Pat has done anything wrong in the paper I'm on, but I assume they probably have, given their past conduct. I don't want my name to be associated with their name.
If I ask the journal to remove my name from the author list, will they simply do it?

Digressing discussion moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment.

If I ask the journal to remove my name from the author list, will they simply do it?

No one can say other than the journal, but personally I find your wish unreasonable. The fact that you are a coauthor of the paper is now a historical fact and as such not subject to change in my opinion. Keep in mind that even when a journal retracts a paper, they don’t pretend they never published it, but rather issue a statement saying they no longer endorse the validity of the paper. This preserves a record of the historical events that occurred and maintains a sense of continuity of the picture of reality the journal presents to its readers and to the world.
Similarly, if one of a paper’s coauthors no longer stands behind the validity of the paper, I would expect the journal would at most append to the article a statement saying that you no longer wish to be considered a coauthor of the paper. But it would be dishonest of the journal, and would be doing a disservice to its readers and to historical accuracy, to pretend you were never a coauthor by simply airbrushing your name off the author list.
So, my feeling is that you are free at any time to disavow your implicit endorsement of the paper that comes with being a coauthor. You may not even need the journal’s help to do that - for example, you can post a statement that you no longer endorse the validity of the paper on your personal web page. And you can also ask the journal to post the same notice online next to the published paper - hopefully they will find that a reasonable request, and perhaps it could motivate them to investigate whether the paper contains fraudulent data. But I think it’s dishonest to pretend you were never a coauthor of the paper, and unreasonable to ask the journal to carry on such a pretense.
Finally, keep in mind that “Pat”’s dishonesty is her own. If you unwittingly coauthored a paper in which she committed fraud, that would make you a victim, not a perpetrator, of misconduct. I don’t think it reflects poorly on you that you fell victim to such fraud (if indeed that is what happened), as long as your own work on the paper was done in good faith, and you had no knowledge of any fraud or other unethical behavior on the part of the other authors.
Edit to address the comments about the last part of my answer: I understand some people feel OP is partially responsible for the contents of the paper as a whole including the contributions of their coauthors. That’s true up to the point where OP read the paper, spent a reasonable amount of time informing themselves about what the other coauthors did and how they did it, and were not aware of any suspicious signs that anyone was doing anything improper. That’s basically a very low bar of responsibility to clear in my opinion, and certainly far from what is actually needed to prevent all occurrences of fraud in a paper you are coauthoring. Beyond that, if it turns out that there was misconduct, of course it’s embarrassing to OP and they are right to be concerned and to think about how to protect their reputation, but I don’t think any reasonable person is likely to hold what happened against them, so I don’t think they need to be very concerned.

And, in any case, after a bit of time, your name is preserved in any citations of the paper in other work. You can't change the past.

I'm not sure about the last paragraph of this answer. I think that having your name on a paper makes you somewhat responsible for its contents -- for the parts you didn't do, you have at least checked that it seemed accurate, know how the data was produced, etc. So if there's misconduct, especially if it happens repeatedly and you were e.g. supervising the fraudster, it can look bad. I'm saying this because it often happens that the big names on a fishy paper will just blame misconduct on the student, in which case I wouldn't say that they should be completely free of blame.

@a3nm well, yes, in the case of a supervisor and a student and repeated fraud over multiple coauthored works, what you said makes more sense, but that’s not what we’re talking about here. Also, note the caveat in the last sentence of my answer (“as long as ...”), which is consistent with what you wrote. The bottom line is, OP is responsible for their own actions and for things that happened over which they had (or could reasonably have been expected to have) some degree of knowledge and control, and not responsible for other things.

@DanRomik: I think I mostly agree with you on this. The problem that I see is that the sharing of responsibility among co-authors (who did which part of the paper, who checked what) is generally not visible from the outside. So if the paper is found to be fraudulent and is retracted, there's a risk that casual observers will put all authors in the same bag and that it will reflect badly on OP even if they did nothing wrong. So basically my point is that it's reasonable for OP to worry about having their name on the paper, even if they did nothing wrong themselves.

@a3nm sure, I don’t disagree.

You have to contact the editor, no other answer. Only they will tell you if it is possible for their publication.
You may find this helpful : How to withdraw ones name from an already published paper

I would not contact the editor without discussing this issue before among the authors, contacting the editor is probably the very last option he should choose...imho

They can't, and they won't. Not even if they decided to retract the paper.

I wouldn't take any action unless you actually find a fraud.
The situation would be more disappointing if you were coauthor of a long series of papers. For a single occurrence, and in case of fraud, your reputation won't be affected. It would be clear that you were "a victim" of Pat.
A Nobel prize worthy paper could complicate the scenario, as for special claims need extra care.  But normally we are not supposed to check the honesty of coworkers nor referees are supposed to dig for frauds. At least if everything is soundly and nothing unusual points to suspect.