text:
Is it okay to just present (without paper) research that is subject to an already finally submitted, but still unpublished conference paper?
I will try to make my question as understandable as possibe.
In the course of a project I belong to as a consortium member, I did research on a particular topic and submitted my findings in form of a conference paper.
The paper got accepted after double-blind review. The final version of the paper (not anonymized anymore) is already submitted. Final submission deadline is already closed.
All I can do for now is wait until the conference starts in 3 months, so I can present my paper at this conference and the paper will be published in the conference proceedings.
Now to the actual part of the question:
The project I'm working in hasn't published any research (besides papers from the consortium members) yet.
As the project is funded by the government, public dissemination activities are obligatory.
Thus, a public webinar-series will be scheduled in about 1 month, where I will also have to present my research findings. The same findings that are subject to the conference paper I already submitted but which will be published in 3 months.
The conference guideline states that the work submitted must be original, unpublished work. Both criteria were met at the final submission deadline.
But now that the webinar-series (which will be recorded and published on YT) will take place before I'm able to present my paper at the conference and before my paper will be published in the conference proceedings, do I violate this rule (original, unpublished) by presenting my research at this webinar?
What I will do of course is to refer to the forthcoming publication in my webinar presentation, so that it is clear that the research I'm presenting is part of said paper which will be first published (at least in form of a manuscript) at said conference 3 months in the future.

Are there two different conferences here?

Why is it not possible to A) wait with the webinar until the conference is over? B) not use your results for the webinar - a conference publication is also dissemination, after all.

And have you asked the conference organizers about it? They might not object if the webinar doesn't go much into detail and rather prepares the issue for a lay audience rather than topic experts visting a conference

Or could at least the YT publication be held back? Don't the other members of the consortium know about the situation? Have you not told them about the conference submission?

I think the "public dissemination" activity required by the government funding agency is intended to address a broader audience, more of an outreach activity. In Austria, for example "science to public" is now a big thing (and one more box to tick).

@Sursula The date is fixed and it is not possible to wait with the webinar (it's out of my control). My results are or at least my argumentation is somewhat necessary for the webinar series, as it is part of the overall project story to be told. The only thing I can do is to focus more on the problem and and less on my final findings/methods/results to just raise awareness regarding the importance of the matter and to adress a broader audience... So I could keep my findings for the conference

I assume that you are in a field where conferences are the main publication venues (and not mainly settings to network and discuss work in progress). I also assume that the "webinar" for "public dissemination" targets a different audience than the conference presentation.*
Only the conference convenors can tell you with authority what they count as an original publication. My strong hunch is that presentations without any written trace are not considered as previous publications. By contrast, conference proceedings, journal articles, book chapters, technical reports, and preprints all are written publications -- although many (most?) conferences do allow preprints.
You probably should not rehash the exact same material anyway, if only because your audiences are different. A generalist audience wants to see the big picture and some interesting stories. The specialist audience wants the theoretical contribution, the methods, and all the technical details.
To be on the safe side, ask the convenors. Think about how you will adjust the framing around the presentation material to address each specific audience. In your inquiry, briefly explain how the webinar differs from the conference, that the results are recorded but not published in writing, and how, as a result, the substance will overlap without being identical.
* Caveat: I work in a field where conferences are not publication venues.


text:
Do links need to be provided for images included in a poster?
I'm a PhD student making a poster for a conference. I'd like to include a figure with two images taken by a NASA satellite. Do I need to provide links to the images in the caption, or would it be enough to just give credit for the images in the way that NASA recommends? Below is the current version of the figure; the links are long and make the caption look awkward.

Why do you think a link is required? Are you providing links to all your references?

@user2705196 I'm not including links for the papers that I cite. I'm including links for the images because my adviser suggested that I do that.

If your advisor makes a suggestion that you disagree with it's a good idea to discuss their motivation behind the suggestion and explain why you disagree! They may have very specific reasons that we're not privy to.

Citing the images is essential. Beyond that, unless the conference has special requirements, nothing is really needed. Give enough of a citation that someone can chase down a link if they really need it. But such links in printed proceedings are unlikely to be followed by more than a small handful of folks.
If the proceedings are online, however, it can be useful to give the link, but not essential. Only proper citation is needed.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Some professors a my institution are asking for "common" spaces in which post-docs are not allowed. Is this ok?
I have been working as a postdoc for nearly a year. In recent months, the university is working to upgrade office and common spaces within my particular building. Some professors wanted a "Faculty Club" which is something like a common space for interaction between scientists to share ideas and discuss problems. However, in the last faculty meeting some professors stated that this should be a space "only" for them and postdocs would not be allowed there, not even to use the coffee maker.
Now I live in a country (Chile) where there is a social rising with people demanding for equality and to stop discrimination between different social classess. In this context, the universities have a role to be an example and to educate people according to the social demands.
However, I see the same discrimination within the university, when you have professors that does not want to share spaces with postdocs like we were second class citizens. I understand that professors and postdocs have different needs in term of office spaces, but I don't think that in the middle of the 21st century you should start to ban people to use certain spaces just because they are "less" than you.
Is this common in academia?

This is more of a rant than a question.

How many professors are there? How many post-docs? How is this about "social class"? Should students also be admitted? Have the professors given a reason or do they just not want the "unwashed proles" near them?

I put this in the context of postdocs, but it is something I see that goes beyond "science people" to the administrative staff. Like saying to the secretary that the coffee machine is only for academics. In response to Buffy, they did not gave any reason they just don´t want "unwashed proles" near them. Sorry, but I think that in the middle of 2019 making this kind of people classification is insane.

Maybe the post-docs, being younger and more spry were just getting to the Jerez first and not leaving enough for the old doddering faculty (i.e. me).

I don't see the issue. You claim it's elitism, but it may simply be practical: A place for the permanent employees of the department. It's not a secret that the permanent employees have a bigger stake in the long-term working of such a space than temporary postdocs, graduate students, or undergraduates. I would gladly leave my professional books in a lounge for professors without worrying that they disappear; I wouldn't in a room that's shared with everyone else around who's going to be gone again in a year and may not feel the same level of responsibility than the ones who will be my colleagues for the next ten years. I would also gladly have a $1,000 coffee machine and pay my fraction of the purchase price and monthly coffee bill for it, divided by all faculty of the department; I suspect such an arrangement would not work if done in a shared space.
I suspect that postdocs would gladly be accepted if a guest of a faculty member, but maybe not by themselves. In the end, I just don't see why anyone should get all bent out of shape over the issue.

The discussion about coffee machines has been moved to chat. Please read this faq before posting another comment.

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


text:
What questions do prospective advisors ask during first meeting?
I'm in a PhD program and I'm preparing myself to meet a prospective advisor for the first time. I want to know what questions do they usually ask students in their first meeting? What do they expect? I've looked at the following discussions and they were helpful but did not answer my question completely.
How do I impress my prospective grad advisor? (first meeting)
Etiquette for an initial meeting with a prospective advisor: What is expected of the student?

From the perspective of the prospective advisor, their goal in the meeting will be to determine whether they want to take you on as a student, so their questions are likely to be based on accomplishing this goal.  This is very much like a job interview with a prospective employer, so you should prepare yourself in the same way.

(1) Make sure you have "done your homework" on the research interests of the advisor, and whatever research group they are in.  This means that you should have read their faculty webpages, read about the projects they have done, and have a reasonable idea of the kinds of publications that advisor has done.  I would expect that you have at least looked at the list of papers published by the advisor, and if you are well-prepared, you might even have skim-read a couple of them.  You might be asked questions about why you want to be supervised by that advisor (or work within that group), and you should be able to respond to these with specifics.
(2) Depending on how this university works, you should either have some existing knowledge of projects that they want to put you on, or if you are expected to come up with your own project, you should have some reasonable ideas for this.  If you are proposing your own ideas, make sure that they are within the expertise of the prospective supervisor, or else consider a different prospective supervisor.  If you have already constructed a research proposal, bring this with you.  You may be asked about your ideas for projects, or broad fields of research, and in this case the most important thing to do is to make sure you can explain your ideas in clear and simple terms.  When a potential supervisor asks you to describe a project idea, often they are just looking to see if you can communicate your idea in clear non-technical terms to someone who has never heard it before.  They want to know that you can communicate about your subject clearly, without falling into a muddle, or giving a stream of jargon.
(3) Your prospective advisor might ask you about your previous experience and courses, to get an idea of your level of existing knowledge.  If you have sent them a CV and academic transcript in advance then this will help to narrow down the questions.  Some advisors like to ask detailed questions about past courses, grades, etc., and others will just assume that if you got into the PhD program then you have the desired background.  This varies a lot, but be prepared to talk about your past education/work, and give some highlights of things you have done well in (without appearing to brag).
(4) You ought to be able to make a plausible case for how you will fit into the advisor's research group, and how you can add value to this group.  Expectations will be modest here, since you are a novice, so they are not going to expect you to have any expertise that is lacking in the research group.  Still, you should be prepared to explain why you think you would fit well into that research group/project, and show that you have the potential to learn the material rapidly.
(5) Make sure you display an attitude of eagerness and flexibility, and are not too rigid in your desire to work on a particular project.  A prospective supervisor will generally look for a student who is able to be slotted into projects where they are needed, and who can adapt to changes in a research project.  At the level of a PhD candidature your supervisor will also generally want you to have a broad interest in the field, rather than a narrow interest only in a particular project.  It is therefore helpful if you can display an enthusiasm and knowledge for the your field generally.  (Some PhD students occasionally ask if it will harm them to show interest in multiple research subjects at once, on the basis that this might dilute their commitment to one project.  Although academics often become highly specialised, this is not an expectation that applies to starting PhD students, and at this early stage it is best if the student has a broad interest in the discipline.)

Initial meetings with a prospective supervisor vary wildly, depending on the attitude of that academic.  For some academics it is treated as little more than an informal meet-and-greet, while others may ask detailed questions and "grill" the prospective student.  So, hope for the best, but prepare for the worst!

The best I can do is to let you know what I ask and want to talk about in these situations. I have worked with 30 Ph.D. advisees in my engineering faculty career to date.
I will not ask technical questions in the same way I would on an oral examination. But, I will certainly bring up technical ideas closely related to my research that I would expect an interested student to know at least a bit about. If the student has something interesting to say on these ideas, then I know that they are seriously interested in my research. I will say that it is better if the student admits that they do not know much about an area rather than "pretend" to be better informed than she/he really is. I'll have to say that I value honesty in these settings above all else.
I will be very interested to understand why the student wants to get a Ph.D., so she/he should be ready to talk about career goals with some specificity. In my view, it is not enough to simply say that they wish to have a career as a faculty member. Why? Where? What do they hope to accomplish?
I'd like to know a bit about their research goals. What types of research are most interesting? What impact do they hope to have with their research and scholarship? What journals do they hope to publish in?
Finally, and probably most importantly, I like to see some evidence of passion about a research problem or subfield or a particular aspect of academic research or the academic career. Students who have a passion to accomplish something and then can set goals that enable them to make it happen are the ones we want to work with most.
I hope this helps!


text:
How do I approach a professor for research
I'm in a PhD program and want to approach a professor that I'm interested in working with. I've already sent him a couple of emails describing my background and asking for a meeting but he hasn't responded yet (it's been a couple of weeks). I've heard that he is very busy but always looks for new students. I also couldn't find his office hours(he probably doesn't have any). Is it rude if I dropped by his office? If I do, should I ask to schedule a meeting or just start talking about my interests?

"very busy but always looks for new students" In my experience, this makes for a bad mentor. YMMV

I've advised nearly 30 Ph.D. students during my academic career as a professor. My advice to you is to be careful here. You've sent him a few emails, and you've received no response. Hopefully you attached your CV to those emails. If he is looking for someone to join his research group and he thought you were an exciting candidate, he should have responded to one of your emails by now (or maybe he still will). Given that you are already in the program, he really should either invite you to meet with him or else let you know that he doesn't have an opportunity for you. Given his lack of responsiveness, maybe he isn't a very good choice as a research advisor in any event.

Or maybe he just prefers face-to-face communication to email.

@JeffE, He at least could provide him with a short answer indicating his willingness.

It is not rude to drop by his office. Office hours tend to be associated with classes so if they are not teaching this semester, they may not have office hours. Show up with a print out of your CV and one of your past publications (if you have one) and be prepared to talk, but also have your calendar available. Introduce yourself, hand over the CV and papers and tell them you would like to setup a time to meet. Go from there.

I did exactly as you suggested. The professor misunderstood my email and thought that I was applying for the program. He scheduled a meeting to go over project details.

@KRL Maybe edit your question to add the contents of this comment, as then it would be helpful to users who read this question in the future.


text:
How would one cite images from Logos Bible Software?
I have done a word study using Logos Bible Software. I have images of how much the word 'agape' in Greek is used in the LXX and NT. How would I cite these images in Chicago Manual of Style?

Are these images generated by you using this software, or are you copying existing images from a published work?

These are images created by myself using the software data.

What's the LXX and NT?

LXX= Greek Old Testament and NT = New Testament

You don't.
You don't cite them, since they're not a part of another published work. They're a part of the current published work that you're producing. The software is just a tool you're using to produce a part of the paper, so you don't need to cite it any more than you'd cite Microsoft Word for being the text editor you used to draft it in.
Maybe you could reference the use of the software in your methodology section, but you'd simply cite whatever paper first introduced the software, if any such papers existed, using the standard format for citing other papers.


text:
What steps should I take if I haven't received responses from potential supervisors?
I am in the process of applying for the M.Sc. Research program at universities in New Zealand. My application will not be assessed unless I secure a supervisor. Despite reaching out to three potential supervisors, I have not received any responses. Do universities in New Zealand typically offer assistance to students in finding a supervisor for their research programs? Any guidance in this regard is appreciated.

How long have you waited for a response?

I have waited for 2 weeks

If you haven't heard in a couple of weeks you can follow up with a request for information. Ask whether there is any more information they would like or need.
As for getting help, let me suggest that you write to the department head and ask for help in finding a supervisor. Mention your general field, and subfield if possible, but you don't need to send everything you'd send to a potential supervisor. Perhaps they can point someone to you.

Thank you for your advice.


text:
Can two people use the results of their publication for their theses?
I've been working on a case study paper with a colleague, who is the first name on the paper. He is writing his PhD thesis and I am writing my MSc. thesis under the supervision of the same advisor.
Is it okay both of us to use the same results/findings of this paper in our theses?
Advisor told me that this is not okay and added that even if the other guy would be okay with that, he didn't accept this.
At the time that I will be defending my thesis, the paper wouldn't be published yet. The PhD guy will be defending after me in the future.
What is wrong with that? People cite other people's work and use them in their theses. Why is it  not accepted for me to use the results of the paper that I am contributing?

I think this falls under "individual preferences."  I am aware of several cases where it has been done, but I imagine many faculty or institutions would not allow it.  In any case, it should be made very clear who did which work.

This depends on your country and university regulations, etc. In general you can use the results of your papers in your thesis but e.g. in my case (Europe) if I would use a paper that I only co-authored I would have to indicate what I did myself and what was done by the other author(s).
On one hand it would not be understandable to me if you could not cite a paper in your thesis (and you should be able to also indicate that you are one of the authors and that you did this and that in the paper). Citing papers in other papers/books/thesis is something you should do to clearly state where the results you are using come from (unless it is a textbook stuff).
If you are about to copy-paste parts of the paper or the whole paper then yes, this may be different and could strongly depend on your university regulations and I expect you would be at least required to clearly state what you did yourself.
On the other hand it is probably never a good idea to go against your advisor directly. Ask him/her about this, say what would you like to do with the paper, hear them out in detail what is the problem with that and propose a solution. If this is a case of regulations then there is no going against it as you would only harm yourself. If this is the case of ethics then your advisor should and hopefully will explain the situation - that is also what advisors are for, or at least should be.
I would like to give you a better answer but at this point I really miss the background and big picture to do so.

The answer is: It depends. The norms around whether the results from a single study can be written up in more than one thesis or dissertation vary by university, field, lab, country, advisor, and thesis committee. There are some places where it is explicitly forbidden. In other places, it is common in at least some form. At my graduate school (MIT), collaborative PhDs are rare but possible.
It cases where it is possible, however, it is up to the thesis supervisor, the thesis committee, the department committee, and the university to ensure that each thesis reflects the work of each thesis author — in both quality and quantity of work done by that individual — to justify the degree being conferred. Sometimes, this means that each thesis must describe a sub-part of the work that each author was the intellectual lead of. Sometimes, this means that each thesis describe a separate extension of the shared work. Sometimes, it means a single thesis with two degrees. Sometimes, it means that it's simply not possible. Figuring this out is subjective.
The only things that always true is (a) that it must be both explicitly documented and well explained both that the thesis contains joint work and what each author contributed, and (b) that everyone involved must be supportive of going forward with multiple degrees reflecting a single body of work.
In your situation, it sounds like your supervisor believes that this is not the case. Why does your supervisor think it's not appropriate in your case? You'll just have to ask them.

in my knowledge in case Indonesia, it's okay to cite your collaborative research finding or result but to use same data of your collaborative research in case put in your Paper it not okay, a collaborative research counted as one research, I think if you use the same data and put in your paper without citing, you can be a plagiary, so you can't use the same data without citing the authors
but overall you should clarify to your advisor "why it happen", it seems your supervisor have a reason for your problem, or ask your second advisor

If I understand the issue correctly, the problem that the advisor has with your using the results is that both of you and the PhD student would be claiming them as "primary contributions" to your respective theses. This is typically problematic since you would both be saying "I added this work to the realm of knowledge in my discipline," which typically defeats the purpose of what a M.Sc. thesis or Ph.D. thesis is supposed to do: namely, document that an individual is capable of doing research at an appropriate level (and in the case of the Ph.D., advance the state of knowledge in the field to a certain minimum degree).
You should be able to at least cite the work that the two of you have done jointly—to not be able to do so would be unfair—but the advisor may not want you trying to base your entire thesis off the joint work.

What is wrong with that? People cite other people's work and use them in their theses. Why it is not accepted me to use the results of the paper that I am contributing?

You have answered your own question. You can of course cite this paper and use it in your thesis as you would do with other people's work. What is unacceptable is, to use the paper as it were your work (and make verbatim copies of text and graphs into your thesis), though you have contributed to it.
You are the second author. First author has a higher potential of using this in their PhD thesis - whether it comes before or after your defence is irrelevant.
You can of course use your contributions to the paper (such as the text that you wrote representing the components that you built by yourself) into your thesis.
In summary, pls follow your adviser's suggestion in this. If you are unclear of what you can exactly borrow from this paper into your thesis, consult your adviser further. It is highly unlikely that your adviser will tell you not to borrow even a single sentence from this paper (unless you contributed nothing to the paper - which is unlikely, given that you are the second author).
Of course, feel free to cite and highlight this paper in your thesis!

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


text:
Designing Tests for Industry
I'm currently designing tests for people working in technology support. I am the current subject matter expert (SME) in my group for these topics.
The exam is essentially open-book multiple choice, 25 questions. I'm trying to design it so that they are instructed as they take the test, as they will have to take it multiple times if they do not pass the first time.
We have documentation, in fact I've written much of it, even if it does not get the attention it should.
I want to ensure I cover all bases for my questions.
As I write the exam, I am finding I want to ask questions about issues I have not yet documented, so I'll need to add those things to the documentation.
What is the best advice we have for constructing these sorts of exams?

Best advice about their use as tools of instruction, or of assessment/evaluation?

In this context, a combination, unfortunately.

I don't really understand the question. You want general advice on constructing an exam? What are "these sorts" of exams? You mean exams that must be taken several times (same exam?) until the person passes? I read the question twice and I still don't understand the main point of the question. Could you rephrase it a bit to make it clearer?

What is the goal of the assessment? A test you take multiple times until you pass seems like an odd concept.

Odd or not, that's how we're certifying people as competent in various technologies. The penalty if you don't pass the first time is you have to take it again in the next test window. (And SME means Subject Matter Expert)

In the comments you state that the exam is used for certifying competency. This means that it should be extremely difficult for incompetent individuals to pass at the possible expense of failing competent individuals. Given the constraints of multiple choice, 25 questions, open book, and the ability to resit the exam, the definition of competency is important. You are going to need a very different type of test if competency means the ability look up information in a book versus the ability to know the information without using a book.
If the exam is testing the ability to look up information, then what you need to protect against is people memorizing the answers (i.e., abacda ...). Having a larger bank of questions, randomizing the order, and randomizing the answer order will decrease the ability to memorize the test. You also want to prevent people from taking the test home with them and probably want to impose a minimum wait between retests.
If competency means knowledge about the subject, your constraints are going to make it difficult. At a minimum you probably want to impose a time limit, but better would be to make the exam closed book. You should also test each concept with multiple questions and choose new question on each exam.

Thanks, since this is industry and they are support, they are used to having the information they need at their fingertips, although it would save them a lot of time to memorize the material in terms of lookups, they are really just being tested on their ability to be minimally competent on what is attempted to be a variety of related concepts and tasks on an entire subject.

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


text:
reliable english editor online?
I am encountering some problems for making my research in English, due that this is not my native language. Even though my ideas are crystal clear in my language I find it extremely hard to express them in English.
For checking issues related to grammar and syntax I have been using Proofread Bot, it is an online grammar and syntax reviewer, but their results are not so accurate. I have been checking some persons that make this task, but their fees are pretty high (almost 200 USD for a 3 pages articles); and I would not like to be paying this amount every time that I want to submit something.
Does anybody knows another software reliable english editor tools online?

I can't testify for the accuracy of the software listed here http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2137/how-to-find-ways-to-proofread-english-in-papers.
However, have you not asked some friends to proofread your papers for you?

Although language can be a problem, comfort yourself with the fact that problems in reasoning are far harder to correct than grammar and spelling.

Bear in mind that in some cases being good at language is not enough - some phrases may be rooted deep in one discipline, or in some cases minute English corrections can affect the content (e.g. , which vs that or that is vs for instance). So, nothing beats proofreading by a colleague (native speaker > fluent but with a different mother's tongue > fluent but with the same mother's tongue).

Whatever spelling or grammar checkers you use, you may rely only on their ability to detect a problem, not on their suggested solutions. Alas, if your paper is not completely trivial, this applies to most human professional editors as well no matter how much they charge or how many years of experience they claim. So, in the end, it'll all come back to you no matter what. I have been writing and speaking in broken English for 20 years and the only people who complained were the undergraduate students who, as far as I can judge, would hate me even if I had spoken with perfect Cambridge pronunciation and Oxford grammar. Just write in short simple sentences and you'll be fine. It will not be an exaggeration to say that, no matter what field you are in and what subject you are writing upon, the probability that an attempt of expressing your thought in an overly flamboyant manner, including all nuances and sideline remarks into a single sentence, and alluding to the arguments described in several previous passages at once (especially when the the latter are structured similarly to the phrase under consideration and the references to them can hardly be called unambiguous), will not throw the reader off for good somewhere in the middle of an elaborate construction you have built with utmost patience and verified against all spelling and grammar tools at your disposal is nearing that of the event that a layman be able to recite a sophisticated ten page legal contract with all details including each and every involved party and covenant therein in a single outpour flowing as effortlessly and graciously as a wide river in a deep valley after a quick look at it, i.e., zero. Just make sure that your thought is clear. Then yor massage wll cam thru evn if wrds r misspld and wrng grmmar.

"Write in short simple sentences" is excellent advice for everyone, native speakers included.  The sentence after that ("It will not be an exaggeration...") was great! :-)

If you can compose a sentence like that long one in your answer (independent of the advisability of doing so), you are no longer writing in broken English.

I can do it with enough effort and concentration, not on the fly. When writing a long paper or standing at a blackboard, I just do not have enough time to check everything and my tongue and hand slip much more often than I would like them to... (sigh!)

I am sympathetic to your problem since I had (and have) it, too, as a non-native English speaker.
Spellcheckers are easy to use and reliable, so use them everywhere you can. Even as I am typing this answer I get a squiggly line below every incorrect word.
Grammar is completely different though. As far as I know there is no easy way to check it in an automated way. Some software tools are listed in this thread on tex.se, but even an intermediate English speaker would find most of them disappointing; they do catch some missing 's', but with so many false positives and negatives that it's hardly worth the effort to go through the results.
My suggestions would be: either (1) find some English exchange student willing to proofread at much cheaper rates, or (2) ignore the issue; it's not so important. I am not a native speaker myself, so I am not in the best position to judge, but your English looks clear enough to me. As long as the paper is understandable to the referees, it shouldn't be a problem if there are occasional grammar errors. After acceptance, the journal's copy editors should make a full grammar check and proofread for you for free as part of the publication process. By going through their correction you can identify the typical mistakes in your English prose and try to improve when writing the next paper.
I work in mathematics; if you are in the liberal arts the situation could be very different though.

+1 for "find a native English speaker to proofread the document", -1 for "ignore the issue". You can ignore the issue at your own peril; if your English is poor, get someone to review it; otherwise you may end up being with to understand text, and possibly even implying things you did not indend.

"After acceptance, the journal's copy editors should make a full grammar check and proofread for you for free as part of the publication process": You are a funny, funny man.


text:
Expired links to open access resources on the sites of the Linguistic Society of America and CiNii
A comment on Japanese SE from a user who has since deleted their account seems to contain some potentially helpful information to me, so I am trying to find the articles suggested by that commenter. Unfortunately said user has disappeared from Stack Exchange altogether and both of the links provided in the comment have apparently expired, one pointing to the Linguistic Society's site, the other leading to CiNii.
How do I find those papers/articles? Or at least how can I find out their titles? I have tried the Internet Archive and Googling with all the clues that I am able to think of, to no avail.
By the way, I think this question belongs here because open access to academic papers is a whole can of worms that people outside of academia are not necessarily concerned with or care about.

This is why people should always post full citations of articles, or at the very least DOIs, not just deep links.

@NateEldredge Couldn't agree more

related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134634/how-can-i-find-an-old-obscure-or-otherwise-inaccessible-paper-when-the-usual-m

The CiNii link contains the ID 110001057681.  Searching for this ID number at https://cir.nii.ac.jp/?lang=en yields one hit, an article entitled "The Japanese Adverbial DOOSE" by 武内 道子, 神奈川大学言語研究 (22), 13-30, 1999.  神奈川大学言語研究センター (I don't know Japanese so I am guessing that this is the bibliographic info.)  The number 110001057681 appears to be its NII Article ID, and it has CRID 1520572360067848960.
The other one is possibly some article in Semantics and Pragmatics, but 354-641-1-PB.pdf doesn't seem to match anything in their current article numbering system.  But their search function returned only two articles whose abstracts mentioned "Japanese", and the total number of articles published is small enough that you could probably browse all of the titles.

Based on archive.org, I think it's more likely the first link points to an article in Pragmatics, but again the current article numbering system seems different. On the bright side, they implemented DOIs!

Maybe, but Semantics and Pragmatics is actually a publication of the Linguistic Society, while Pragmatics does not seem to have any affiliation with the society.

There was an affiliation in the past. Per https://www.linguisticsociety.org/content/elanguage-journal-archive "Volumes 1–21 were made available in open access on the eLanguage platform and are currently published, along with all subsequent content, by John Benjamins at https://benjamins.com/catalog/prag."

Oh, I see.  I wondered if 354-641 could be page numbers, but it doesn't look like they ever published any 300-page articles.

Based on the structure of the archived site it seems 354 is some kind of unique article number across different volumes. There are lots of inconsistencies in the apparent numbering scheme, so it's hard to identify which volume this would belong to. However, the paper "Pragmatics of discourse modality: A case of the Japanese emotional adverb doose" in volume 1 seems like a good match in terms of topic.

@Anyon I was just gonna comment the same thing! Following your helpful tips I realized I could go through all the issues and volumes one by one and check out their content. I am still only half way through but the only one I have seen that seem to match the topic is the one in volume 1 you mention here! Big thank-you to both of you!


text:
Should Chatgpt be used in a software development?
I have been in the software development industry for 12 years. I have used ChatGpt for a while, and I am persuaded that using the AI to write code does not seem right... (especially for new developers).
I believe that having the facility and tool to write the code, deprives the developer (bottom line, junior developers) from learning; in fact, experience taught me that we learn by trial and error. The more we try the less we are prone to make errors, thus building our knowledge base.
My colleague sees the problem from another perspective, and considers using ChatGpt as a means to reduce development time, and optimize productivity. He sees it as a code reusability, on a big scale.
He thinks that my objection towards ChatGpt is a reluctance of adapting to change; while I see his enthusiasm towards this new technology as a momentary euphoria, and strongly believe that we cannot delegate our thinking and reasoning to AI.
Your thoughts are highly appreciated.

So the only way to write code is hand punching assembly instructions into cards? OK, that out of the way, how in heck does one get code that does what you want using ChatGpt?

Cut the sarcasm, then register on chatgpt and feed it with any programming question, in fact; one sample question is "How do I make an HTTP request in Javascript?"
The bot will give you the code, its detailed explanation and test cases. You can also ask him to shorten or optimize your code...

That is all well and good when your question is one with boilerplate answers to a very specific item (or, something StackOverflow likely has already if one only searched for it). Many good development environments already have specific, tested help for such things.

"How do I make an HTTP request in Javascript?" Yes, that's a mechanical front end job which can be done by the bot. I believe it would take decades for the bot to do back end jobs such as flight control software for air planes. Not only it requires complex algorithms, but also advanced mathematical knowledge.

The core of software development is not limited to only "writing codes". AI currently is not at the level to do the "everything else" of software development imo.

Actually, we really aren't at the point yet where it is safe to use AI generated code for significant things. Artificial Intelligence really isn't intelligent. There have been a number of stories lately about bugs in such code that can be devastating if left in place. See Wired for example.
If an AI is used as an assistant to an intelligent agent (i.e. a skilled human) it can be useful, but all of the testing and other verification measures need to be in place for it to be safe to use for anything beyond the trivial.
The problem is that the "training" of an AI as the moment is based on imperfect things and without true intelligence, including the ability to analyze risk and consequences it is, as yet, impossible to trust such things.
Don't believe the hype.
Using such tools for things like documentation, rather than code, might be safer, but only provided that it is, again, vetted by human understanding. Likewise, I could see an AI being useful in generating a test suite from a set of specifications, integrated into something like an agile development process. But those tests would also need vetting. False positives and false negatives are both problematic. But that is different from generating to code itself from the specifications, not the least of which is that "specifications" are often imperfect and, themselves, need human interpretation. Language itself isn't perfect (citation needed).
It is unclear at the moment how far or how fast we will get beyond the current state, but, at the moment, brains rule. Skilled an trained brains, of course.
Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room.

Note that producing the wrong code faster and cheaper isn't an advantage.

It's just a tool for improving productivity. We use these tools everyday, spell check, Grammarly, even Copilot. I work in a RAD environment writing code, anything that gets me to end is an asset but I wouldn't copy and paste from something like ChatGPT, even copilot completions are questionable. Sometimes it's just helpful to use this to get a better understanding of the problem I'm trying to solve if that makes any sense.

There is a very big difference between "using ChatGPT" and "relying on ChatGPT". What you've described is relying on ChatGPT, which is unequivocally bad. However, the OP is moreso asking about using ChatGPT (at all), which would almost be idiotic to say "No, ChatGPT is banned in coding". GPT is another tool, just like stackoverflow and google, that we can use. StackOverflow poses the same problem as you've described if people choose to copy and paste blindly. After all, ChatGPT is likely just regurgitating existing StackOverflow content for a large part.


text:
Journal editor demands changes to article published online two years ago
Three years ago I wrote a manuscript and submitted it to a well-known journal in my field. After a few months, I received the reviews, which were extremely positive, but suggested minor improvements. I made the suggested changes, and the article was accepted. I signed the publication agreement and the article was made available in the "advance publication" section of the journal, with a DOI. The editor informed me that the article was "in the queue" for the print version. I was pleased and moved on to the next project.
Now, almost two and a half years later, I have received an email from the same editor. They write that "once we began editing your manuscript, we noticed a concern". They then list a number of things that they want changed. A few of these concerns are semi-reasonable, although I already addressed them with citations that point the reader to more detailed discussions in the literature. I could add some additional text to the article, however, if that is desired.
Most of the specific issues that the editor notes, however, are irrelevant to my article, and indeed have very little to do with my text. The editor desires, in essence, that I completely rewrite the text, redo all of the tables, and change all of the figures so that all of the results can be interpreted according to a very specific theoretical framework. The editor uses vague and imprecise terminology when making these demands, leading me to believe that they are not especially familiar with this specific framework. The editor's own publications contain nothing about this theoretical framework.
The theoretical framework is familiar to me. It is that of my former doctoral advisor. I disagreed with my doctoral advisor about this theory, as well as some other things, and after I completed my degree, got a job, and had some of my own publications, we no longer have contact. I am fairly certain that my formal doctoral advisor saw the advance publication and wrote a negative letter about my article to the journal's editor. My former doctoral advisor may be unhappy and irritated that I do not cite their work, or perhaps bears a grudge against me and wishes to harm my career. Additional information: Many years ago, my doctoral advisor was the editor of this journal.
I have no concrete evidence for this, but I am fairly certain this is what happened. I would like my article to be published, but I do not want to make the suggested changes, which, in my view, are ridiculous. I do not believe in this theoretical framework. A complete rewrite of the text would also require a massive amount of time. It has been three years since I wrote this article, and I am working on other topics now.
It also strikes me as extremely unusual, and quite unfair, to demand of an author that they make major changes to something that was accepted years ago.
I am not sure what to do. Should I attempt to negotiate with the editor? Reach out to the editorial board of the journal? Should I contact the publisher of the journal? Are there any guidelines about this?

Has the print version appeared? Do you have a letter/email of acceptance?

@Buffy, no, the print version has not yet appeared. The journal is quite slow, and the article "only now reached the top of the pile", according to the editor. I do have the email of acceptance, from two years ago, and the publication agreement pdf, signed by myself and the editor. The agreement stipulates that "publication may proceed without the author's corrections" if the author does not provide corrected proofs. There is nothing in the agreement about revisions after acceptance.

What happens if you don't do it?

@Mark I don't know. Possibly the article will languish in the "advance publication" section of the website for a long time. Possibly the editor will say that they are retracting the article. I have no idea.

I would agree that this is strange. For one, a rewrite of this scope would invalidate all the reviews. Of course, as is often emphasized on this site and elsewhere, the editor can basically disregard reviewers, accepting where they recommend rejection and vice versa... but a process of "review -> changes -> review -> acceptance -> changes requested unilaterally by the editor" is very strange indeed.
There are likely no formal guidelines at that journal that cover a case like this. And even if there were, editors may well be empowered to override any such guidelines. Which may make sense in other cases.
Then again, there is a power asymmetry here. The editor holds pretty much all the cards. Even if you go above them to the editorial board, the board may side with the editor (if only out of tribal loyalty), or may indeed side with your advisor, if your suspicion of what happened is correct - your advisor probably worked with the board for quite a while, which again breeds tribal loyalty.
I would recommend that you push back to the editor. I would not discuss your suspicion of where this suddenly came from. Rather argue that (a) the paper was accepted in the current form, (b) the editor and the reviewers were presumably happy with it, (c) a major change of this scope would invalidate all reviews (ask whether the editor plans on sending out the changed paper for review again), and (d) you have moved on to other projects and would have a hard time making the requested changes. Be respectful in your communication with the editor, and emphasize that you are willing to make stylistic changes short of the major ones requested.
If the editor will not budge, you can think about whether you go over their heads to the editorial board. Be aware that this would burn bridges, at least with this editor, and possibly with the rest of the board, too. After such a step, you probably would not need to submit anything to this editor again - but then again, you probably don't want to do so, anyway.
If the board supports the editor in this position, you unfortunately probably only have the choice of making these changes, or of retracting the paper and submitting it elsewhere. (You might be tempted to try legal proceedings. I do not think this would be successful, plus this would become known in the community and would probably not make a good impression on other colleagues.)

+1 but I'm even less optimistic regarding the Editorial Board approach (depending on the journal) as in many journals the members of the Editorial Board are not really interested in doing anything other than processing the papers they are assigned to (and sometimes not even that). I have seen many names of people on Editorial Boards who needed to be reminded that they even belong there.

@Stephan, thank you for this thoughtful response. I sent an email to the editor stating that I am happy to make some changes in order to clarify a few points and improve the coherence of the text, but I am not willing to fundamentally redo the text and/or to embrace a specific theoretical framework. The editor hasn't replied -- possibly they are conferring with my former advisor.

... or they may simply be busy, journal editors are typically at stages of their career where they have a lot of responsibilities. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you!


text:
Should I choose a research field that I'm not really good at, but have strong interest?
I'm a first year masters student. Currently I'm doing coursework but I'll have research in second year. I find all subjects interesting. I feel better when I'm doing subjects including a bit of mathematics and rigorous thinking. Algorithms in particular.
But I'm not really good at it. I try hard but it's just not happening. Still if I'm given opportunity I want to do research in Algorithms.
This will obviously require mathematical thinking.
Is it good to pursue research career in a subject which I'm interested in ignoring the fact that I do not have strong base and understanding of it? Or should I choose something easier based on my abilities?

Extremely relevant: How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student?

Doing research on a subject is the best way to get a good understanding of something.  Presumably, if you do reasonably well in the parts of your coursework covering algorithms (in the eyes of the professors), you're doing well enough.  Mathematics and rigour are hard, even for most people who are capable of doing good work in the area.  Also bear in mind, humans are subject to the impostor syndrome.  If you find a professor who knows you and is willing to guide you in research in this area, then I don't see a problem.

The question, as you formulated it, is practically impossible to answer with enough certainty to be useful. The difficulty lies in the fact that the problem has many specific factors, such as your personal and professional goals, family situation, mental toughness (perseverance) and others, and only you are aware of them. Thus, only you can figure this out or, rather, try. Therefore, I will address how I believe you could think about the problem, which is essentially common sense.
I think that, basically, you have two options, which, per your question, you seem to understand: 1) easier route, where you choose your research subject and/or topic, based on some arbitrary criteria (for example, based on research interests of a faculty member, which you would like to work with), but avoiding the tough ones; 2) more difficult route, where you choose your research subject and/or topic, based on essential criteria, such as your interests, even if the chosen subject/topic is challenging for you at the moment. In the latter case, you would make commitment to master the subject, despite obstacles, in other words, pushing yourself beyond your current limits. Based on such logical framework, the choice is always yours, and remember that you always have the freedom to re-evaluate your decisions at any moment, should changed circumstances, interests or needs warrant that. Best wishes for whatever route you decide on.

I think that the second option is good if one has a topic which makes one think "That's it!". If, however, the topic is merely a bit more interesting than the other (easier) topics, then the drive may not be sufficient to overcome the problems.

@Nox: It is very rarely, if ever, one has 100% of their interest focused on a single problem or topic and none on anything else. IMHO it is always a question of relative strength of some interests over others and, thus, a question of prioritizing, based on a state of a variety of factors (interest, gut feeling, perceived importance, relevance to work, academic and/or industry environment, interaction with other people, career prospects and many others) at a particular time frame.

This is something that happens a lot to students. I have seen some students coming from all over the place into the Computer Science department, which is a little heavy in terms of the Algorithms skills that is required. A great strategy to go about knowing if you will be okay is through Advisers. It is important that they know the skills you possess. They will normally have a plan for you.


text:
What license to choose for a model which we will freely distribute?
My research team has developed a model, analyzed data, and generated results. We are currently in the process of publishing the results -- the article is in review -- and we are preparing to make our model available (we're talking with the publisher about whether to include it as a supplementary material with the journal).
Regardless, we will retain rights to distribute the model on our own websites. We believe in the principle of free software and want to make this model generally and freely available but request that those who use it cite the paper in which we introduce the model.
Our question is which license -- I know of GNU and Creative Commons, among others -- is best suited to this goal? Is there a answer to this question?

I would like to add a comment that might be relevant to the GNU option. Our code was written in Matlab, which is definitely not "free software." We want to make our code available for use, but probably can't tap into the best of the free software world.

If this type of license doesnt exist, it should be named the academic license; free to use and modify software under the condition of citation

You really should be asking your school's  lawyers to advise you on this.

@keshlam: Maybe.  In many cases, the school's IP policy specifies that the copyrights for scholarly works belong to the author, not to the university.  In that case the university has no say and no reason to get involved.  (Though sometimes "scholarly work" excludes stuff that has commercial value or might be patentable, so that can make a difference.)

The school's lawyers are still available for opinions on licenses; you might as well take advantage of that resource.

@user1938107: Sounds like the Creative Commons CC BY license.

@keshlam: It may be worth a try, but I think if I tried asking my university's lawyers, they'd say something like "It's your intellectual property, not ours, and we can't bill the university for hours spent advising you on your personal legal matters.  Go hire your own lawyer."

@NateEldredge Creative Commons explicitly discourage the use of CC for software; it's intended for artistic works. For software, I'd go with MIT, Apache v2, or GPL v3. The effect is the same, but they're worded to specifically handle software.

If this is academic code, then based on a lot of the academic code I've seen then it might qualify for the Community Research and Academic Programming License...

Remember that there are transitive legalities, if your code makes use of libraries. Here's a good resource for licensing issues: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11033418/library-dependencies-compatibility-for-non-commercial-use

The site http://choosealicense.com/ will probably be helpful to you. The front page of the site offers a simple choice in fairly plain language:

I want it simple and permissive. The MIT License is a permissive license that is short and to the point. It lets people do anything they want with your code as long as they provide attribution back to you and don’t hold you liable. jQuery and Rails use the MIT License.

I’m concerned about patents. The Apache License is a permissive license similar to the MIT License, but also provides an express grant of patent rights from contributors to users. Apache, SVN, and NuGet use the Apache License.

I care about sharing improvements. The GPL (V2 or V3) is a copyleft license that requires anyone who distributes your code or a derivative work to make the source available under the same terms. V3 is similar to V2, but further restricts use in hardware that forbids software alterations. Linux, Git, and WordPress use the GPL.

The site also has a more in-depth page giving more choices, and more detail about the differences between licenses.
I would strongly advise that you don't use a Creative Commons license for your code. Creative Commons themselves caution against this:

We recommend against using Creative Commons licenses for software. Instead, we strongly encourage you to use one of the very good software licenses which are already available. We recommend considering licenses made available by the Free Software Foundation or listed as “open source” by the Open Source Initiative.

More detail in their FAQ.
Personally I use the GPL (version 3) for most of the code I release. For very small programs -- roughly speaking, anything shorter than the license text of the GPL itself -- I tend to use the MIT license. This is partly because I'm less concerned about the fate of such small code snippets, and partly because it feels a little silly to have more license than code in a release.
As a side note -- although you haven't mentioned this possibility -- please resist any temptation to invent a new license, unless you have a really compelling reason. License proliferation is a big problem, and your code will be less useful if people have to pay a lawyer to determine whether your license is legally compatible with some other software they're trying to use in conjunction with yours. In general, I would suggest picking one of the "big three" mentioned above unless you have specific reasons against this.
Edit: I just saw your comment about the appropriateness of using a GNU license for Matlab code. There is no problem here: there is no concept of "contamination" between the license of your code and the license of the language it's written in. In fact, it would be hard to implement such a restriction, because languages as such don't have licenses: only their implementations do. Many programming languages have both closed-source and open-source implementations -- this includes Matlab, although Octave, the GPL implementation of the language, is not 100% compatible with the original version. However, for Matlab specifically, you might want to consider the BSD license, because it's the only one permitted on MATLAB central. (If you never intend to share your code on MATLAB central, this is less of a problem.)

Since I'm not a lawyer I won't try to advise you... but I'll observe that at least one large corporation seems pretty happy with Apache's version of a by-attribution license. And it's hard to beat the creative commons licenses for brevity and clarity, though I can't vouch for strength

The Creative Commons organisation advises against their licenses being used for software.


text:
How to cite (unpublished) data set during peer review?
In the move towards open science, it is becoming common practice to deposit the data accompanying a publication in a dedicated data repository.
Often, authors prefer to delay the publication of the data set until after review of the manuscript is completed.
To facilitate this, many data repositories provide mechanisms to (1) reserve a DOI for the data set before publication, and to (2) generate a private link to the data set for the review phase.
My question is: As an author, what are best practises for citing the (unpublished) data set in a submitted manuscript?
One solution is to put the dataset DOI in the submitted manuscript (although it does not resolve yet), and to communicate the private link through some separate channel that the journal may provide during submission (but that the reviewer may not read?).
Another solution is to put the private link in the manuscript, meaning one needs to remember to replace it with the DOI during the proof stage.
Neither solution seems ideal and I'd be interested to learn whether better ones have been figured out.

This probably depends too much on the field in question and on the publishing venue. What might be recommended by one journal might be forbidden by another.


text:
Can I take master's level courses if I decide to do my PhD in Germany (astrophysics/particle physics)?
I know that it is not compulsory to taking classes during the PhD (in Germany). But if I want to take some classes in subjects that I missed during my master program, is it possible to take some classes 2-3 in the related field that my PhD is in?
I want both take the exam and follow the course

Do you want to take the exam or just follow the course?

Lectures in public German universities are (of course) in general open to the public (as long as space permittes). Is this your question or something else (like if you can do.the exam or if you will have time off when the courses are)?

Why do you care about taking the exam?

Following the course will usually not be a problem, since lectures are generally public. Exceptions are, e.g., seminars with a limited number of places. Also, if the lecture hall happens to be too small (highly unlikely) for all the students, you may be expected to leave.
Check the examination regulations of the PhD program that you would enroll in. Sometimes acceptance for PhD studies can be conditional on taking a few extra courses, depending on what the "Promotionsausschuss" decides. If that can be the case, taking the exam should be no problem, as there needs to be some way to taking the exam in this case.
Getting some kind of certification that you took and passed the exam may be tricky, though. You may have to ask the respective lecturer for a letter stating that, as there are normally no official transcripts for PhD studies.
As already written in a comment, you should check with your advisor if she/he would not oppose taking courses, though - at least if you are not on a scholarship. PhD studies typically works by getting employee status, and using normal employee working hours for such courses may not be welcome. But even on a scholarship, some advisors/supervisors may not like that.

The course that I need is quantum field theory since my master program did not offer that course. And maybe one course in astrophysics (astrodynamics)

I personally feel offended when someone says a PhD student must ask for permission from his supervisor to attend a course. A PhD is ideally done to push the boundaries of science and technology -- and that cannot be done by confining students to the will of their supervisors. Ideally, the supervisor is supposed to be a senior collaborator - nothing more.

@kosmos If the PhD student is an employee of the university (which is the more common case in Germany - scholarships are not so common), he/she shouldn't simply use core working hours for activities (of non-trivial extent) not specified in the working contract without the supervisor agreeing, as this would be a contract violation. This has nothing to do with what PhD studies should be like. Of course, taking a course during vacation would not be a problem, but courses taught in a block are also rare.

@DCTLib Then I politely oppose the existence of such job contracts. Does not make sense to me. A PhD should not be a job contract.

@kosmos I think that you are raising a valid point. It just won't happen here, partially because that would require an overhaul of the complete academic organisation structure. Fun fact: the Max Planck society used a lot a scholarships in the past. But there were too many complaints about this (including from the researchers holding these scholarships), so they pretty much switched to working contracts. Scholarships simply lack the social security benefits, including unemployment money after the contract ended if the PhD student does not have their next income source secured by then.

It would depend on the department and the university's policies. You can check their website or mail the staff regarding it

And possibly on the advisor.

While I was not the one to vote you down, perhaps let me state why somebody may have done that: it would be uncommon to have a policy on this. And surely most likely the staff wouldn't know about this and just refer the question to your advisor - or not answer it at all.


text:
Does it look weird when all my publications are all in the stage of "submitted"?
I am trying to apply for grad school. I have submitted some articles to some journals and I listed them on my resume. Now those articles are waiting for review, so they are in the status of "submitted" in my resume. Does this look weird in the eye of admission committee? Since none of my publications are "accepted", will the committee think that I try to show my research potential in resume by sending "rubbish paper" to journals and list them as publications?
Edit
I am a master student, I have submitted 4 paper in total

@RichardErickson I have submitted 4 papers, and I am the only author.

The solo-author is a larger red flag than all being submitted. Publishing can be very hard, especially as a less experienced co-author. Also, I would question why your advisor is not a co-author and if you're  "team player".

@RichardErickson, advisor as co-author is a very field dependent concept.

@Buffy good point.

Are your papers available to view on arXiv or some other publicly accessible location online? Making them accessible would allow grad admissions committees to view them and form their own opinions about whether they are rubbish papers or not. That would be to your advantage (even if the papers have already been accepted for publication), assuming the papers are not rubbish.

Questions like this have typically been closed as a duplicate of https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12988/how-submitted-to-appear-accepted-papers-are-evaluated-in-a-cv

In principle, you can submit the papers with a confidential banner printed on them, or somehow signalling that they shall be treat as such because not in the wild, yet.

Since CV padding does occur you can't guarantee that people won't look askance at your record. But you can take a few precautions.
First, talk to your advisor to get an independent sense about the quality of the papers. Next, list the papers in a special section of the CV along with the journals and submission dates. If you have already been given feedback and are at a later stage (minor revisions suggested), say that. It looks worse, actually, if they have all been submitted in a short period, or very recently. And the time to publication differs widely.
But, importantly, offer to make the papers available to the admissions process so that they can independently look at the quality. People with experience can quickly get a fairly good idea from just an abstract, actually.
And, you are applying for a doctorate to do more than prove that you don't need one. So, being a bit "unformed" may be fine, though that will vary.

@AnonymousM, it might not help or hurt, but it is honest and complete. That was my only intent.

I would only name the journal if it's passed at least desk review

@AnonymousM I think one can be open if the citations are for applying purposes. This is not as to say to the world "I have a paper awaiting in Science" and then the paper doesn't appear. It is not a conference, but a student application.

Does this look weird in the eye of admission committee?

Given that you appear to be an undergraduate, these seems reasonable. Some schools allow you to upload writing samples. Perhaps you could upload an example manuscript there.

Since none of my publications are "accepted", will the committee think that I try to show my research potential in resume by sending "rubbish paper" to journals and list them as publications?

I would list your target journals on your private resume to people can see you are not submitting to rubbish papers.

As mentioned by @AnonymousM, you should not list the target journal.  It's not a quality indicator.

@AnonymousPhysicist I disagree. submitting to only predatory journals is different than submitting to typical journals in field.

Sure, but "I can tell the difference between a fake journal and a real journal" is not very convincing evidence that someone is a good PhD student.


text:
Postdoc application under review for three months?
I applied for a postdoctoral position at a university in the USA at the end of April, and it has been under review until now (late July). I reached out to the university, and they responded that if I were rejected, I would be notified. However, I noticed that the position has disappeared from the university career page. I am relatively new to academia and unsure what might have happened (before asking my supervisor). If anyone has any insights or information, I would greatly appreciate it.

It is hard to say with any certainty. They might have removed it knowing they would be hiring from among current applicants. It is possible, however, that someone else has gotten an offer and they are waiting on their decision. You will hear from them eventually.
They are unlikely to tell you whether you are the first choice or not, but it seems a bit (a bit) unlikely that you are. There might be internal discussions (arguments?) about offers.
Patience is advised. But there is no reason not to talk it over with your supervisor. I also suggest not giving up on other explorations open to you.


text:
No results for an upcoming presentation in which I am supposed to present results
I have an upcoming presentation in an international conference in a bit more than a month. I wrote the abstract for my presentation in February, in which I said I would present early results. It is even in the title of my submission: "presentation of [project] and first results".
However, I am progressing much slower than I expected and I will probably not have results by then.
What can I do? My coworker (project leader) and I have already paid for the participation and prepared the trip, which is a big expense for our project. Can I just send an email to the conference saying "actually, I will not include results in my presentation" and attach a new abstract? I feel amateur and lame. Or maybe, it is too late for me to change? This terrifies me and I feel miserable.
I read this question and I feel like my case is a bit different because I specifically wrote that I would present results.

are the reasons why your progession was slow interesting enough to present? That is, did you hit any interesting roadblocks and had to apply interesting solutions to circumvent them?

I think most of us have been there before... Do you actually have absolutely no results, or just not particularly good results that you want to and will make better in the future?

You'll have to discuss what you are trying and whether you are close to finding anything new.

Since you don't have results to present, you are going to have to bite the bullet and revise your presentation topic to something else.  The sooner you make this change and communicate it to the conference organisers the better.  You should revise your presentation topic and abstract along with revising the substance of your talk, and do your best to have this change reflected in the conference program.  If it is too late to amend the conference program then the audience is just going to have to live with getting the ol' switcheroo when they attend your talk.
The good news is that audience members are not going to care about this —or think badly of you— so long as you give them a good talk on a substitute topic.  Create a new presentation on some other aspect of your research project, or even an unrelated problem or issue (perhaps a talk on Academic Tips for Dealing with Deadlines in Delayed Research Projects).  Make sure it is interesting and adds value for your audience.  If you can enlighten and entertain then no-one is going to be too worried that the content of the talk did not match the brochure.

Hey, thank you for your answer and sorry for the delay. The conference is approaching. My coworker/project leader told me that it's probably going to be alright by just presenting what we are doing in an accurate and specific way.

HI and sorry agian for the delay in validating the answer. The conference finally took place and... It went very well. I was stressed, stuttering, but I presented my stuff and it still worked out. Nobody told me "you said you were going to have results but you don't have any". I just showed our recent progresses, etc., and it went smoothly. Thanks a lot for the great answer in all cases. Cheers!

That is great news --- congratulations.

I think answers to the linked question are fine. Chances are changing the abstract is no longer possible, so I'd recommend to milk what you have done, what you know, and what you plan to do in such a way that it makes an as interesting as possible presentation. Always think of the audience and what could be of interest to them. You can well say that you don't have some of the results you expected to have when submitting the abstract. This is a not too unusual thing to happen. People are used to something being presented that is not 100% what the abstract says. Try to entertain the audience well anyway.


text:
Can my supervisor publish my thesis including another first author in her group?
I'm in very weird situation. The manuscript of my work was submitted for publication without my consent, and I am certainly opposed to the author order, because I am the second author of the article right now. According to ethical rules, the first author should be the person who contributed most to the experimental work. This study with all the experiments, obtaining data, all literature research, data analysis (except for the miRNA target analysis performed by third author), and majority of the writing process of themanuscript (except for the same part of discussion) belong to me and my master's thesis.
The person who appears as the first author in the manuscript only edited the manuscript and figure names at the end of the writing process and wrote some parts of the discussion. He also sent RNA samples for sequencing  years ago. Then, I chose a specific miRNA from the data and wrote a project funded by government. Then, I conducted all the experiments without any help from anyone.
This manuscript submission was done by the first author and my supervisors after my graduation and me leaving the laboratory. I am an early-career researcher with a few experiences in academia, however, I am proud of my work, and I think I need to claim the lead.
I communicated with my supervisor that I do not agree with her decision, but she refused my idea and insulted me for leaving the group. Unfortunately, I am very aware that ethical misconducts are common in this group. Next, I sent an email to the editor. However, I didn't receive a feedback yet. I mentioned that I have all data in raw format, and they only had the figures, also that this work belongs to my thesis. What should I do?

Does this answer your question? My master’s thesis’ results will be published without my consent. What should I do?

He may have a valid claim on first authorship, since you say "He also sent RNA samples for sequencing years ago.". We can't actually judge that. But you should wait to hear from the editor. Fighting with your advisor isn't helping your future prospects either.

You can check this out: https://provost.yale.edu/policies/academic-integrity/guidance-authorship-scholarly-or-scientific-publications#:~:text=The%20first%20author%20is%20usually,first%20draft%20of%20the%20manuscript.

"Often" and "usually" are not universal quantifiers.

Journals will generally claim that they cannot arbitrate authorship order disputes.
However, submitting a article in someone's name without their permission is a serious ethics breach. Many people will do so, but they are taking a risk. Thus you are likely to have better luck with an editor saying "I did not agree to this being published, they are using my name without my permission" than "I think I should be first author".

Hello, thank you. However, there is another thing that might be important in this situation. My thesis was funded a project, so copy right doesn't belong to me, i guess. At this point, do i have a right to say"I don't want this study to be published".

Yes you. This is a question of academic ethics, not copywrite law. Ironically had they submitted it without you as an author at all, it would be much harder to dispute.

Specifically you are saying "I did not agree to be an author of this paper (with the associated liability that carries)" not "I did not agree for them to use my data".

It is a group that is toxic enough to remove me from authorship and publish the article. They threaten me in all sorts of ways (never leaving any written evidence), so I'm scared, and I hope I don't take a wrong step. Thank you for your help.

Removing an author once a paper is submitted is much harder than not submitting it with the author in the first place. At good journals an explanation is required, and the permission of the author being removed (not all journals are this good). Of course they could withdraw the paper and submit somewhere else. At which point you'd be back to complaining the department head or academic misconduct process at the institution in question. But the withdrawal and resubmission would not look good for them.

Thank you once again. After I receive the reply from the editor, if they continue with the process, I will contact the ethical association affiliated with the institute.

@Cgl Authorship implies having inalienable moral rights to the work (as per Berne convention, virtually accepted worldwide), and economic rights. Publishing something without an author's permission is a violation of their moral rights. I'm (still) in the process of editing a canonical question on all things copyright and plagiarism, but for now - unilaterally excluding an author is a grave, easily career-ending violation. Know your rights. Authorship order is trickier matter, but journal policies normally require informed consent from all authors.

I received an e-mail about the subject from the editor office. They examined my thesis and expressed it as an ethical violation. They also added the following sentences " For articles that are principally based a student's dissertation or thesis, we recommend that the student is listed as principal author as stated in ICMJE guideline". They assured that they would contact other authors and resolve the issue.


text:
How to become a Junior Group Leader in Europe
From your experience, in the field of biological-chemistry & biophysics: Do you think it is enough to have 10 first-author publications (in impact journals around 4-6) and only ONE publication in Angewandte Chemie (or Nature Communications, JACS, Chemical Science; impact factor around 12-18) to get a Junior Group Leader position in Germany, Switzerland, England or the Netherlands?
Also, I have experience from two postdocs positions, I have won about 10 minor funding fellowships and have teaching experience.
If this is not enough, what is missing? A first-author article in a super-big journal (Nature, Science, Cell)?

I am not sure that this is a question that has a definite answer, as it seems to be strongly dependent on indiviual circumstances.

Sursula has a point, it's difficult to give a blanket answer for a process that has a lot of individual factors influencing the outcome. I'll try to provide my own perspective anyways:
Let me preface this by stating that I am not precisely in your field (I am somewhere between environmental science and statistics) - so take my advice with a grain of salt. I have, however, recently gotten an assistant professorship in one of the aforementioned countries, so I have a bit of insight into the process.
As far as publications are concerned, from what information you provide, I think you are definitely ready to apply for such a position. Your experience with funding acquisition and teaching definitely also play greatly in your favour! Keep in mind that - contrary to popular belief - many departments (personal opinion: at least the good ones) don't care as much about the raw number of publications as much as they do about the novelty, potential, and relevance of your research. And the raw number and even venue of publications doesn't always imply these things. If you can convince the committee of your excellence with just five publications, you will beat any competitor with twenty manuscripts about mainstream, trite, or trivial research. Make sure you have a distinctive and convincing "research brand".
As far as concrete steps into a junior group leader position are concerned, remember that faculty searches unfortunately often involve a great deal of chance - there's always a lot of factors in play behind the scenes that you won't be able to anticipate, so don't take rejections too personal. Finally, I don't know about Great Britain, but for the EU, Germany, Switzerland, and Netherlands, there are a number of fantastic starting grants to fund your own junior research group. I recommend checking those out while you scan for suitable faculty searches:

For the EU, check out the ERC Starting grants (success rate is about 8%).

For Germany, check out the DFG Emmy Noether programme (success rate is about 15%)

For Switzerland, there are the SNSF Professorial Fellowships (success rate is about 20%)

For the Netherlands, I don't there is an exactly equivalent starting grant that also funds PhD students and researchers. The closest thing, I believe, is the personal Veni grant - but this one only covers your own salary, to my knowledge.

Applying to one of those, by the way, also strengthens your applications for faculty searches - an applicant who already has a finished proposal to throw onto the Roulette table often gets a bonus point =)


text:
Is "stealing idea" rare in mathematics?
I have heard a lot about stealing research ideas in lab sciences but rarely heard of stealing research ideas in mathematics. Is stealing research ideas in mathematics rarely happen? Or never happen?
Edit
By "stealing ideas" I mean A proposed a theorem and prove it in somewhere. B read it and published the proof without acknowledging A.

You may have heard a lot about stealing research ideas, but does it really happen much at all? Ponder that question first.

What do you even mean by stealing ideas in math? If you propose a theorem and I prove it true (or false or indeterminate) do I steal from you?

Where have you heard about a lot of this? It's rare. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXlfXirQF3A

I don't have any examples in mind, but am sure it happens. But I'm also sure it is rare. The opportunities for it are rare, actually, and most people are honest and willing to give credit.
You will find a few examples on this site where it is charged, but some of them result from misunderstandings. For it to occur person A has to do something worth publishing and somehow communicate it to B but not much farther. Even that is rare.
There is parallel work, of course, but that isn't stealing. If you do something significant and put it in a drawer (Like Newton did) and someone else (Leibniz) later publishes something close to it, then it isn't stealing.
The one situation that gets charged is when a student does something that a professor later publishes without attribution. Some of these charges are valid, but not all. Sometimes the work was begun but not finished and some ideas just "floated around" for a while until someone else finished them. But sometimes the bad thing happens since not everyone is honest and some are desperate.
The comic in me wants to suggest that the opposite situation of the ideas of a professor being published by a student is just called "A doctoral thesis". But attribution is normally given even there. And the student does contribute substantially in almost all cases.
Note that the statement of a "theorem" without a proof is just a statement, not a theorem, and is usually worth very little other than a goad. There are some well known exceptions w.r.t. "value" (Riemann Hypothesis), but resolution of those isn't thought of a stealing in any sense.
But if you are  worried about it, then either work in private and publish soon after you have something significant, or else, share your preliminary ideas widely and seek collaboration. Either of those protect you. Over time, the trend has been from the first solution toward the second.
And also, be careful in your own work to give acknowledgement about the source of things even if it was incomplete when you first learned of it.
And note, that "ideas" can't be "stolen" since they aren't "property". But the origin of ideas should be attributed whenever possible.

I agree it's rare, because much of math research is so technical and specialized. That said, it did happen to me, or at least it might have. See this 15 May 2002 sci.math post. The reason I say might have is explained in the paragraph beginning with "It just so happens that". I still don't know whether something along the lines of my guess as to what might have happened is correct, but I also haven't pursued the issue with any of the participants involved.

Incidentally, in that post I misread the OP's question, and wound up proving connectedness of a different subspace of the plane than the OP actually asked about.

As a PhD student, one must be extremely careful. I've known about someone candidly giving a seminar abroad on some of their thesis results, and a professor there quickly published it. See also the disturbing comments in https://arxiv.org/abs/1406.2601


text:
Would reviewers verify the articles that my manuscript is based on?
I have written a manuscript which is based on some results of a preprint. I have submitted it to a journal and it is under review. Will the reviewers also verify the results of the preprint?
One thing worth mentioning is that my result is groundbreaking (if it is correct!), it seems to me that any reviewer should also verify the results of the preprint to prevent errors.
Edit
The preprint was not written by me. I just apply the results of it. I tried to verify the preprint but my knowledge is not sufficient.

Did you write the preprint yourself and is the review process open (or at least not double blind)?

I believe there are other Q&A here that address the issue of the responsibility of reviewers: it is not to "verify results". Authors must verify their own work before submitting, it's your job to get it right, not the reviewer! Here's one: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10611/how-do-journals-and-conferences-verify-if-the-results-in-paper-are-genuine I'll try to find some others.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65491/how-much-of-a-paper-does-a-reviewer-fact-check https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/192607/do-peer-reviewers-ignore-details-in-complicated-mathematical-computations-and-th https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/171133/reviewing-a-paper-that-is-build-on-a-paper-not-peer-reviewed-yet

Sorry if I'm a bit blunt, but the sentence "One thing worth mentioning is that my result is groundbreaking (if it is correct!)" is rather unsettling. Of course, you first have to make sure yourself that your result is correct before you submit it to any journal. Peer review serves as a quality control to safeguard the scientific community (and science itself), not as a proof verification service for authors.

Did you verify that the preprint was correct with regard to your work? If not, why not?

Papers should be self-contained, and as a consequence there shouldn't be a need for reviewers to check the preprint (although they might, of course). Can you elucidate the connection between your paper and your preprint?

"I tried to verify the preprint but my knowledge is not sufficient." - You shouldn't base your work heavily on things that you cannot understand enough to know is correct. Have you discussed this with your advisor?

... and if your paper is published, and at some future time the preprint turns out to be wrong, it is you who will be blamed for your wrong paper, not the referees.

The academic review process is prone to errors and has a wide quality range, despite being in general pretty good. This means that individual experience will vary a lot and no-one here can predict what the quality of review will be.
Strong statements demand strong evidence. This means that a reviewer is much more likely to look carefully at the preprint that you are using if you indeed have achieved a "groundbreaking" result.
A competent reviewer will in any case try to assess whether you applied the preprint result correctly.
I am a bit concerned that you might be using the review process as a way to check your result. This is really the author's task. I hope that I just misinterpret the tone of your question.

Because peer review is random, the answer is "maybe".
If your reviewer is diligent, has free time, is a real expert in your field (i.e. they might already be familiar with results adjacent to the one you got or can quickly understand the preprint), etc. - then they might check. See example.
Conversely, if your reviewer is pressed for time, is in a bad mood, is distracted by other upcoming deadlines, etc. - then they might just assume the other manuscript is right.
There might also be cultural/field-specific reasons as to how carefully reviewers are expected to check a manuscript.
Ultimately there is no way to predict what your reviewers will do.

Here is what I would do if I were a referee (my field is math):

Take a quick look at the preprint you are referring to.

If I see that it is clearly wrong, then reject your paper.

If I see that it is clearly right, then continue reading your paper.

If I cannot easily conclude, ask an expert in the area what do they think.

If after step 4 it is still inconclusive, then reject your paper without further reading.

There are some known exceptions to this strategy, e.g. when the preprint in the question is the work of Perelman or Thurston.

For me, the answer is "yes, but".
Before recommending acceptance, I would consider it necessary to check correctness of any preprint on which the paper critically depends.
However, I would not attempt to do this until I am completely convinced that the paper in question is otherwise correct. If there is anything that needs fixing before I can be sure of this, I will just recommend revisions and defer any attempt to check the preprint until the next round. It is possible that the preprint will be an accepted paper by that stage, in which case I can assume it has already been checked.