text:
Starting a faculty position in a different department than what I did my PhD in?
I'm a computer science post doc and recently saw a tenure-track faculty posting in a humanities department, looking for someone with a computer science background to join their team. This position aligns really well with my research, but I'm a bit apprehensive of going to a department that I have little background in. While the group I would be joining has stuff I'm doing, the other faculty in the department are in a totally different field. All the PhD and Master's students are from this humanities department, which makes me wonder how I would recruit my own students, and what kind of venues I would be potentially publishing in since I'm not from the same background as everyone else in the department.
I will still apply because it seems interesting, but I wanted to get some opinions from people about what to consider in the application materials, questions to ask if I got invited to an interview, and other things to consider if I were to be lucky enough and offered a position.

It seems unlikely to me that a humanities department is able to offer a competitive salary and work conditions relative to CS departments, just something to think about.

"what kind of venues I would be potentially publishing in" - Presumably, as a tenure-track faculty member you'd be expected to run your own independent research program which would include choosing appropriate venues to publish in yourself, no? Why are you thinking the department has a role in that? I do think it would be worth having a conversation about tenure expectations, though, to get some idea of whether you're on the same page about what it means to be productive for someone doing the sort of work you do compared to what others in the department may be familiar with.

What would they expect you to teach? What happens in N years time when the department profile has evolved, fashions have changed, and a new Dean is in post? Are you going to find yourself assigned to teach 20 lectures on "Ptolemy: geography, culture and identity in the ancient world" and if so, how do you feel about that prospect?

@user176372 Why? In many universities, the faculty pay scale is the same for everybody. Teaching and service expectations are the same, e.g. one class. The question is what you're going to teach.

@avid Humanities is broader than philosophy. Consider an art, music, drama or dance department. You got "3D computer graphics," "Interactive [Video game] Audio Technologies," "Motion Capture." These can in fact be very popular classes for students who need to check off a GE arts requirement.

@BryanKrause on 'venue', the thing that would concern me is if they rated my work by their standards not ones relevant to CS. eg if they expect faculty to publish books and monographs but CS people publish in conferences, there may be a mismatch. It's worth having that conversation with them to clarify expectations.

I think you could improve the title to make it more informative. Something like "Computer science postdoc starting a faculty position in a humanities department". The mere fact that you are going to another department (e.g. CS to CS or humanities to humanities) is absolutely nothing special. What makes it special is that you go from CS to humanities.

Not sure about CS, but in some places the guy that publish the most is the lone statistician that happens to collaborate in every paper everyone else does. If there are groups in this Humanities department willing to add some CS to everything, you may end in a similar good position.

IMHO quite an interesting question, although it could use some editing to be more general rather than about an individual. Voting to leave open.

It is probably worth the effort to apply in today's marketplace. While it seems unusual (and is), it might be that the department has some long term goal to get more "computational" in general. You can explore that in any discussions. If that is the case, then you might actually have a good path to tenure, guiding others. Nothing is guaranteed about that, of course, but it might be worth the effort to explore it.
In discussion, be sure to explore the likelihood of obtaining tenure and what the department can/will do to make it possible. If my guess about possibilities, above, is correct, it might be relatively straightforward to build a team, though a focused one.
You can also explore the "venue" question with them, though I'd guess that it would be in applied areas. That could include applied CS areas as well as computational "field" areas.
Expect, however, to have a need, stated or otherwise, probably stated, to learn about that specific field going forward. If that isn't interesting to you at all (and you have other options) then probably not worth pursuing. But if it is interesting then it could be a good move. I once (as a mathematician) worked with a geographer, though we didn't get very far. But there was some synergy.

My concern would be that the career of a computer scientist is quite different from the career of a Humanities prof.  Where would you get your mentoring.
Can't hurt to apply and check it out, but maybe you could go into how you could make this a viable situation for yourself.  Maybe discuss the possibility of a secondary appointment right from the start, for example.

Exploring the idea of a joint appointment is a good idea. My own advisor, a mathematician, held a joint appointment in computer science (the discipline specified on my Ph.D. sheepskin). I admit that math would conventionally be considered closer to CS than a humanities field might be, but this is 2024 and maybe people are more forward-thinking.

@PaulTanenbaum -- yeah, it's not hard to credit the humanities department with forward thinking here.  Hopefully, they have a plan that would keep a CS person's career thriving from within their own department, if that's the path they're running down, but "trust, but verify" holds.

You say that this position aligns very well with your research. If that’s so, then it shouldn’t be a whole lot easier to attract your own students if you were in a CS department. Many schools are truly seeing the benefits of interdisciplinary research (and equivalently, acknowledging the fairly arbitrary and restrictive nature of the boundaries between disciplines).
If it is within your capabilities to play a role in fostering this interdisciplinary activity, then perhaps you should affirmatively adopt it as an explicit part of your value proposition. And you could reach out to CS colleagues (and their students) from such a humanities post anyway. If your work is interesting enough, then such an invitation to collaborate should strike at least some of them as quite appealing.

In some ways this sounds quite exciting. In particular, if your interests lie in applications of your computer science expertise, then it could be a really good opportunity of "pre-made" collaboration.
However, it could also leave you quite isolated, as the only person doing what you do in a community that doesn't understand your methods, your field, your publishing venues or conferences, etc - so you would need to be very self-reliant. If taking this further I'd recommend looking for ways to mitigate this factor, e.g. a joint appointment (as others have mentioned) or less formally making contact with the CS department to ask if you would be welcome to get involved in their community.


text:
Was this teacher fair towards me?
So last week, I had to get a COVID test due to me being ill. However my teacher decided that because I wasn’t there, that I would get a zero on the assignment that was posted and I wouldn’t have a chance to catch up so I could finish the work that was assigned? It was band class so I couldn’t have worked from home. Is this fair for my teacher to do this?

Was this a university course?

If this is a high-school class then the question is off topic. But you should, in that case, take the issue to the principal and have your parents make a big issue of it.

"Fair" is a matter of opinion...and the opinions of random people on the internet will count for very little. What is your goal here?

Did you explain beforehand to the teacher the situation? I think a sending a note in advance to him or would have been the proper thing to do, and maybe you did so.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Do all licenses in arxiv have no ban
Is there a license from one of the five or six licenses that has a ban period, mean, they delete your article after a while, or all licenses do not have a ban

See https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104722/what-license-should-be-chosen-on-arxiv-for-a-paper-to-be-published-in-communicat - I don't believe any of them delete the article.

If you give them a perpetual license to distribute, then they can do so forever. But it doesn't require them to do so forever. What is your actual concern here?

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


text:
Is it possible to send the research to a local and international magazine?
I am 21 years old and I sent a scientific research to a local  journal for youth, meaning it helps young people, and because my research in high school mathematics was sent to that journal, but now I study complex mathematics and understand it, and I want to write the same research, but with complex mathematics and complex concepts, and send it to an international journal. Is it possible?  Acceptance of a research paper from an international journal, even though I sent it to a local journal.

What does "local journal for youth" mean?  Is it just a school publication?  Something peer-reviewed?

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2893/attitudes-towards-self-plagiarism

Quite similar question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17374/how-can-i-withdraw-a-publication-from-a-predatory-fake-journal-and-resubmit-to

Do you have an advisor? It is them who would typically teach one how publishing works...

In general, you can't send the same paper to two journals. There would be copyright issues among other things.
But if you write an extension of an older paper you can submit that to a different journal. Just be sure to cite the older work in the newer one and don't just incorporate parts of it. Quote and cite the older work just as you would the work of any other author.
The second journal will make a judgement, however, about whether the new paper is sufficiently advanced over the older one. If not, they would probably not be interested. Each new paper needs to make some "novel" contribution to the literature.


text:
How do I cite a pullout of a news release?
How do I cite the pullout? Should I just cite the original? What would the bibtex be?
The pullout has information that is extremely useful, and I have not found the thing I needed anywhere else.
(I feel like I'm overthinking this, but this is one of the most obscure formats that I have had to cite, and I'm inexperienced...)
The link to the news release. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/janet-news-24-april-2014.pdf
The link to the pullout. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/janet-news-24-pull-out-april-2014.pdf

Depending on your preferred style, either of the following APA variants should be fine:

Jisc (2014) 1984-2014: 30 years of the Janet network. Janet News 24 (Special Edition Pullout), April 2014. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/janet-news-24-pull-out-april-2014.pdf
Jisc (2014, April) 1984-2014: 30 years of the Janet network. Janet News 24 (Special Edition Pullout). https://www.jisc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/janet-news-24-pull-out-april-2014.pdf

Also, since company newsletters on the internet have an unstable repository, I recommend you download and save both the newsletter and the pullout on your local drive and keep it with your supplementary files.  This is just in case the link breaks or changes, the company goes out of business, or the newsletter is lost.  If you have your own personal copy of the newsletter then your reference will not be lost in this event.

Why wouldn't you just cite the title, "1984-2014: 30 years of the Janet network", publisher and other details same as usual?


text:
Motivation Interview: Your Cons and Pros. What to answer if I can't find any my cons?
I am going to have "entretien de motivation" (interview of motivation) for a graduate school. There is a high change that one of the questions will be like "What are your pros and cons?".
What to say if I can't see any serious cons that can influence my study? I admit that I am not perfect but all these imperfections are normal for all humans (e.g. make mistakes in English, ask stupid questions on the Internet).
I mean, what is the point to be aware of personal cons and to do nothing with it? Obviously, once I am aware of it I manage to get rid of it.
So, how to say it? I do not want to look complacent but in the same time I do not want to make up stuff just to answer these questions.

I usually just made up one and then elaborated how I fixed it. To me, it is just a regular question.

FOUND ONE!  CONStantin. ;-)

This is just a variant of the classic “what is your greatest weakness?” interview question. There’s tons of articles discussing it, for example here and here.

You can take something positive and position it as negative for the purposes of the question. For example, "I've been told I'm too much of a perfectionist" or "I have trouble saying no to more work even when I'm working 80 hours a week."

@DanRomik I really like "I could use more experience in…" from the first article, I think that's actually a constructive, actionable "weakness" instead of the usual "I just love work too much" kind of answers that people are probably sick of hearing.  Everyone has things they would really like to know more about, and it might start a useful discussion as long as it's used properly (and you don't put "I don't meet any of your needs" as a weakness)

@Maybe this is just due to my insufficient command of English - but the wording "your pros and cons" doesn't seem to make sense to me at a semantic level. What does it mean to attribute "pros and cons" to a person by means of a possessive pronoun?

@PeterK. that is an awesome way to start an answer to such a question if the interview is in English ("I would have to say my biggest person CON is the start of  my name"), but I suspect from the post that the interview might be in French, in which case I don't think this joke will work.

"Obviously, once I am aware of it I manage to get rid of it."  So you immediately correct all of your personal flaws the instant you are aware of them?  So, at any given time you are perfect... until you become aware of a new flaw?  And then correct it?  How do you know when you've corrected the last flaw for good?  Do you think you're perfect now?  Was the last correction you made your last remaining flaw?

It seems likely that you can honestly answer: "Lack of self-reflection."

Did you mean to say that you successfully get rid of any flaw you discover in yourself, or did you mean that you work to get rid of it? If the former, you're either exceptionally good at self-improvement (to a degree that seems hard to believe honestly) or you're overlooking flaws in yourself; if the latter, that means you have flaws you haven't yet overcome but have something good to talk about: how you're working on them and improving.

Highly related: How can I respond to "Why shouldn't we hire you?"

@JochenGlueck "Pros and cons" probably just means "strengths and weaknesses" here. In the context of employment (and to some extent academia), one could also consider pros and cons of a person to be the pros and cons of hiring or accepting them above someone else (which is mostly still just strengths and weaknesses).

@JohnWu Taking something positive and positioning it as negative is commonly considered the worst way to answer a question about your weaknesses. Although if you stand by that suggestion, you should probably expand on it and post it as an answer. Comments are not for answers.

@NotThatGuy Indeed. Asking someone about their weaknesses is commonly considered to be one of the worst possible interview questions. I am editorializing (a.k.a. commenting) by providing a flippant answer.

@JohnWu Mentioning perfectionism specifically as a weakness is a cliche, and it's a cliche because it used to be a sincere recommendation for what to say and plenty of people do actually say it without being too sincere about it. So plenty of people would take your comment seriously and some may follow that advice (which is the problem with flippant answers that aren't clearly indicated as such, regardless of whether they're posted as comments or answers).

@NotThatGuy If it is commonly understood to be the worst answer, then the people who would take it seriously would be uncommon, not plentiful. It's okay to say you don't like something without a vague appeal to authority. I would consider removing my comment, but I think this exchange may be of value to the reader, as it calls attention to some of the contention surrounding the question.

@JohnWu People who commonly consider "my weakness is perfectionism" to be bad would interviewers, who've been through a few interviews (on one or both sides), while those who commonly use it would be fairly inexperienced interviewees (and would generally be the ones looking for advice). It's not an appeal to authority; my point is not that it's objectively bad, nor that I dislike it, but rather that most interviewers who hear it are going to roll their eyes. (Unfortunately pointing out bad answers doesn't really seem to fit well into the SE model; actual bad answers just tend to get deleted.)

Everyone has imperfections, and pretending you don't have any would be preposterous. But they are normally not looking for any serious flaws of yours, but rather how self-reflected you are.
If you cannot think of any flaws yourself, try asking those around you that you have worked with before what they think you could improve on. There might be some minor issues that you are not aware of, but might bother others.

"Try asking people around" is a great advice: what's "normal for all humans" might be a problem of varying degree to others. Maybe OP comes 5 minutes late to work on a daily basis and "c'mon, everyone does that" but their colleagues are, in fact, seething with rage about it. Not knowing that any issues actually impact performance is probably a lack of feedback.

"Reflection" is the keyword here. This is what this style of question is really trying to get at - is OP a person who thinks a great deal about what they are good at, and what they could improve? For this questions the most important part is that you talk about something coherently - people don't care about the specific weakness you identify, they want to see that you think about how you learn and work.

@Lodinn Depends---some people may be willing to give you an honest answer, but a lot of people will feel put on the spot by such a question unless you frame it well.  And if you get an honest answer, you may not like it and it may affect your relationship with that person.

@kimball if you can't handle constructive criticism, that is an imperfection in itself.

@Kimball In all fairness, ideally a candidate would have gathered this feedback already by paying attention to others and reflecting on interactions. If someone can't come up with a few examples of "when I inconvenience colleagues, it's usually (...)", they probably aren't paying enough attention. That alone would actually suffice for OP's purpose of listing cons ("I'm not really sure how people I interact with feel"). There are also people struggling with things which were meant but not voiced explicitly, for them asking questions bluntly is often pretty much the only option.

Otherwise, I'd probably pay more attention to how people react to lot more innocent statements or questions like "Hope this meeting is not too early for you" or "is this deadline okay with everyone?".

The actual idea of this interview question is (usually) to see that the candidate is able:

to identify weak spots of a project and
to propose approaches to fix them.

Some committees will ask for weak spots of your personality, while others will ask for weak spots of a specific project, but in the end it is the same question (I prefer the latter, though).
That means, answers like "I am aware of my English not being perfect, and thus I am trying to improve by taking language courses and always seek feedback from native speakers for my manuscripts" or "my background in X is not too strong, so for aspects of my research connected to X I am reaching out in my network to get advice from experienced people" should be perfectly fine.
The answer "I don't see any serious cons that could influence my study" is rather problematic, as it may indicate that you are unable to identify such potential influences and hence you will likely fail to address them appropriately.

Think about aspects of your work behavior that you struggle with or want to improve. You already mention that once you see a weak point you get rid of it. This is good. This is of course not an instant change, it takes time to build new habits. Mention one of the weaker points you are now working on getting rid off. For me personally one of the things I struggle with is procrastination, so I would word that like so:

I tend to procrastinate sometimes, especially when I'm working on something that is a bit boring/repetitive. This is something that I am aware of, and that I am working on. I am using daily to-do lists and the Pomodoro timing system to make sure I am doing what I should be doing.

Here I mention the issue, I mention when it affects me so I know when I need to be aware of the issue, and how I handle it in those cases.
Do make sure you mention an honest weak point, not a pro hidden as a con! For example, "I am too much a perfectionist, I don't stop until I'm really satisfied with a task", which would show a lack of self-awareness if you'd mention something like this.

not a pro hidden as a con --- (+1) Definitely this. But I suppose it could work if you describe doing this several times and how it caused problems (not getting something done on time, others felt you were wasting their time with minutia concerns, etc.) AND THEN describing how you eventually overcame it, or at least limited the negative aspects somewhat (maybe by trying to always keep this issue in mind when seeking to perfect something, as I just now forced myself to stop after revising this comment 6 or 7 times after my initial posting).

If you genuinely can't see any flaws or cons with yourself, this is a serious flaw and you could consider mentioning it:

I have a serious lack of self-awareness that leads me to be unable to spot any particular shortcomings I have. I know, of course, that I'm not perfect, and I share certain imperfections common to all humans like making mistakes in English or asking stupid questions on the Internet. But deeper introspection has never been my forte. In the past, I have coped with this by ... and .... One example of how I used my other abilities to get through such a situation was ....

If in the course of filling this out you are reminded of some other gap, flaw, or con in yourself, probably use that one over this one.

I really like the meta-awareness of saying you are aware that you are not self-aware. But I wouldn't actually recommend saying this in an interview -- saying you have a "serious lack of self-awareness" is probably a huge red flag.

@Andrew Agreed… more useful as an exercise to get to a better answer than as an answer to use verbatim, to be sure.

If you really can't think of anything, you could go with something universal, such as "I think my writing is okay, but I think it can be better." This will be true for just about everyone in the world, including the interviewer. Be prepared for the obvious follow up question: "What do you think could be better?" You probably already know a few things to answer that.

There is no clear answer to this. It ultimately depends on your personality and what they are looking for.
If you are humorous, you'd inject something funny as an answer, like refusing to reveal your weaknesses.
If you are honest, you will list your weaknesses.
If you are dishonest, you will list weaknesses you think they want to hear.
If you are confident, you give a blunt answer, like refusing to answer such a question or claim to not have them.
They may look for a certain type of personality, so you should answer what you think suits you best. Choosing to appease them might be just as much a mistake as to not to - they may value obedience or are repulsed by desperation. Maybe they are looking for people who express confidence and maturity in their personality. Maybe they want you to reject the question as childish. Maybe they want a well thought-out, honest answer, showing your capability of self-reflection. Maybe they have no clear expectations and will be impressed by your answer (although consider that it's just a tiny factor of many).

There are two possibilities.
It could be that you really do not have flaws of any kind, and are a perfect, productive, working machine that pumps out correct and high-impact research at a very high rate. In this case, I wouldn't worry too much about the interview. Someone will hire you, and even if they don't you can just self-publish your research on your own and make a name for yourself as an eccentric and reclusive genius who solves major open problems in your field. If you are worried about this question, you can always make up a flaw out of politeness so you don't make your interviewer feel insecure.
Or, it could be that you are a human being from planet Earth, in which case there are some areas where you can improve. Maybe you can manage your time on administrative tasks more effectively so you can spend more time on research. Maybe you have never done a project with a collaborator and want to learn how to work with others effectively. Maybe you have not developed good habits around unit testing your code. Whatever it may be, being able to identify an area where you can improve, and articulate how you will improve that aspect of your work, is a major skill that you want to be able to demonstrate in an interview.

Considering that this is an interview for graduate school, this is really a softball question. Your weakness is "a lack of advanced knowledge in the subject field". That's why you're applying to that school, to fix exactly that weakness.
You can strengthen the point by explaining how your basic knowledge of the field made you realize that there was still much to learn, specifically in areas X,Y and Z (and you've prepared for the interview so you come up with areas that are relevant to that particular school).

Be honest.  I suspect the interview doesn't have to be looking for serious cons, just that you are aware of those that you do have and can give a realistic account of your qualities.  Wanting to do something about the cons you know about is of course something worth mentioning.
If you have to "sell" yourself at such a meeting, the problem lies with the institution, not you.

Whenever you're asked "what are your cons", or similar, just reword it in your head.  Just like you've got areas of your academic life that you want to improve, so to should you have areas of your personal life.

What are the areas of yourself that you want to work on?  What interpersonal or personal skill do you want to develop or learn?

I don't like to think of them as "cons", or "bad things", any more than the fact that I don't understand quantum mechanics very well is a "bad thing" - they're just areas I want to improve and learn.  I usually pair them with some areas I have already worked on, to establish my personal growth narrative.

I want to work on my ability to sell my work, so I can better promote my team's interests, and on my emotional awareness, so I can be a better leader for my team and a better partner for those I work with.  Recently, I worked on my patience, and on my listening skills.  I've found that listening to others, even when I think I already know the answer, has given me better ability to understand the problem, and improved my relationships with my coworkers.


text:
I want to learn everything and it is doing more harm than good
I got really bad problem. First of all, I am studying for exams, and we have syllabus for exams. And 80% of questions in this exam are repeated from the past year question papers of last 10 years. I have this weird fantasy that whenever I understand a subject well, I want to dive even deeper to the point I am doing worthless and useless stuffs that won't be asked in exams and wasting my time on them. How do I prevent this idiotic behaviour. It is really not good for getting good grades in exam. Also it makes me feel less confident as I encounter stuffs that I can't learn that easily.

"Help, I find the material interesting and want to learn more than is taught in class"

Can you please clarify: are you getting poor grades, or just not perfect grades?

@jakebeal I am not sure about that. Because my exam results are not yet out. My learning has changed a lot in short time. Before that although my overall grades were poor, there used to be some subjects which I was interested in and I used to do like that and get ~70% grades in them. I am wasting time on useless things that is concerning. My goal should be exams and nth else at the moment.

@AzorAhai-him- there is a huge issue with this indeed I will tell you. First of all I get interested in this and that which are never asked in exam. Secondly I just have very very few days for the upcoming exam. Thirdly I should instead put that time into sth else rather than trying to learn this and that, this is not the time to learn this and that rather to focus on exams only.

@watcus I'm afraid that I'm rather confused about what question you're actually trying to get answered.  Are you trying to ask whether others agree that you're studying "wrong" or are you trying to ask about self-management techniques, or something else entirely?

Take fewer classes.

Why must you focus on exams only?

@AzorAhai-him- because time is limited and I should get good grades so that I can get better opportunities for my masters. as simple as that.

You might want to pay attention to the language you are using in this question: "really bad", "weird", "worthless", "useless" and "idiotic". It could be that you are judging yourself too harshly. Consider using less loaded words.

For the short-term goal of passing exams (and earning credits), you are right to focus somewhat and not become lost diving down too many interesting rabbit holes. However, wanting to learn more is a sign of an eager and curious mind, a thirst for knowledge and a desire to go beyond what may be merely a superficial understanding. That is admirable and entirely healthy if kept in balance. Deeper knowledge can stand you in good stead in your future studies/career and is certainly not worthless! You are already aware of the dangers of getting the balance wrong. Set yourself a time limit - no more than a certain number of hours a day (or week) going beyond the exam material. As for confidence, accept that there is much out there on the frontiers that very few understand well. It is good to get used to that feeling, as you will encounter it again, especially if you become a researcher.

Firstly: please do not be so hard on yourself. What you call "idiotic behaviour" is behavior that most teachers want their students to engage in.
I don't think you should stop wanting to learn more about topics that may have no relevance for the exam. Instead, I think you should first learn the core material that will be on the exam, and then focus on the more interesting material later. This will require good time management skills, but if you can do this, you will satisfy your need to delve deeper into a subject area and get good grades. Of course, you need to have a familiarity with the core material that will be tested in the exam, but please do not think of your interest in "worthless" topics as meaningless. It can be very beneficial, as it could allow you to have more of an understanding about a subject than your classmates who will only study what is required.
In my experience, it is often the case that in exams, the content on the exam will always be a bit more challenging than the content you will study in class. By taking an interest in the subject and finding out more about it than you need to, you may be at an advantage when it comes to answering some of the more difficult questions in the exam.
Please do not stop being curious.


text:
How to reapply for another PhD program after quitting existing PhD?
I am in 4 semester of my PhD program. The moment I joined the XYZ University, I was not that much happy with the lab, supervision, system, environment. Then, the pandemic happened. On and off I tried to visit my lab.
During this whole period same thoughts came to my mind to quit and start applying again. But due to some reasons I could not.
Now, I am at the verge of quitting it. But i do not know how to proceed with the reapplying thing. Todays I started to shortlist some universities, open the application system but they ask for support letters, which I can not give my current supervisor email. I do not know how would I justify all this.
Is it okay If I did not mention any affiliation (research assistant +PhD) with the current university, and apply solely on masters degree?
I really want to move on as I have almost lost my mental peace. I see zero professional growth. I tried to give many chances of thinking again to my decision, but I think it's becoming over.
Please your suggestions will be appreciated.
Thanks

Have you searched previous questions? Try a search term like “reapply”.

Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.

Most places, in the US and probably elsewhere, will require that you mention all previous education, including transcripts. They will consider it misconduct if you omit the current program.
However, given the disruption caused by the pandemic over the past 20 months it is probably understandable to an admissions process (say, a committee) that you were also disrupted. And the timing suggests that the pandemic hit at just about the time you were getting started, so a big surprise.
You don't say whether your current supervisor can be expected to be negative in any letter, but don't make assumptions. You may be able to make a positive application using other letter writers, say from your masters program. You will be expected to be able to explain yourself if asked, but don't make your troubles the focus of any application. In particular, make sure that any SoP is positive and forward looking.
I once changed programs with the support of another faculty member than my advisor, who would have been unlikely to give me any support. I did much better in the new place. It isn't impossible, and the current disruption is a ready explanation.
But, don't be dishonest. Having unexplained gaps is worse than acknowledging what has happened.


text:
Grad school admissions with multiple colleges?
Does anyone know anything about grad school admissions with multiple undergrad institutions?
I dropped out about 5 years ago with an abysmal (~1.7 GPA) as a math major halfway through sophomore year (so 1.5 years done) but am now looking into going back in preparation for grad school to fulfill that dream of being a Math PhD.
I've taken time off and fixed my mental health and am doing pretty well (gotten a good job, saved up a lot, gotten engaged etc.) and ready to give this another shot!
I was wondering, if I go back to school to what extent would they care about my old grades after I have the bachelor's from a new college (also in Math)? What if I retake old failed courses?
Am 24 now and in the US by the way.

There's a good chance that, when you apply to graduate programs, you'll be asked about all your undergrad work; if so, then you should truthfully include your previous bad experience. Fortunately, I don't think it will have much effect on your chances of admission. When we admit grad students, we care about their abilities and attitudes at that point and in the future, not 5 (or 7 by the time you're applying) years in the past.


text:
Looking for advice about whether I should stay in my current lab
I'm a first year master's student, and I joined a robotics research lab at my university about 3 months ago as an independent-study student. Since then, I've been working mostly with a 2nd year phd student in the lab, but I haven't had much interaction with the PI at all, outside of biweekly meetings that involve the whole lab.
I was recently asked by the professor whether I wanted to stay for another semester as an independent study student, but I have a few concerns about whether I should.
I'm very new to the world of academia and am not familiar with how labs usually are run, but I wanted to ask if it's the norm for a professor to not spend a lot of time with their master's students? Also, the professor refers to students like me as "interns" rather than "grad research assistant" or similar titles that my friends get called in their respective labs. Would you consider this a red flag at all? Or just some weird nomenclature the professor decided on?
Looking forward to hearing from you guys!

Are you getting paid?  Generally "research assistant" is a paid position.

No, only doing this for 3 credits towards graduation. Maybe that explains the difference in title?

Have you actively tried interacting more with the prof? Have you tried to schedule meetings on your progress?


text:
Correcting possible self-plagiarism years after
A few years ago I wrote and received high honors for an undergraduate thesis. A large section of the thesis, one third by page count, consists of a paper P I had written a year prior for a different class at a different institution. While drafting the thesis, I told my advisors that this section "leaned very heavily" on a paper I had written for that class. I did not tell them that the section was almost identical to that paper, simply because I thought P was very good and did not want to change it, but I also did not want to seem lazy.
Crucially, I did not cite myself in the final version of my thesis printed by my institution for their thesis library.
At the time I thought this incorporation of P into my thesis was completely harmless. For the work was my own. What's more, it had always been my intention to incorporate P into my thesis in some form. I understood this to be a perfectly ordinary, acceptable thing to do.
My source of ethical worry is this: I did not cite myself. At the time it simply did not occur to me to do so. It did not occur to me that a rough, unpublished paper submitted for some other class would merit a citation. But now I appear to myself to have passed off work not done expressly for the thesis as work done for the thesis.
My question is whether I have done an ethical wrong, and if so, how I should go about correcting it.

As you present the case, I'd say that you haven't actually committed self-plagiarism. I'm assuming that the early work wasn't published and was seen only in a limited course context. You also say that you asked permission to reuse it. For purposes of academic misconduct, I think you are clear.
You can always incorporate unpublished prior work in a new work. The problem with self-plagiarism (outside the more restricted classroom rules) is that the reader of a new work wants to be able to follow context back to source. That implies the source is published.
Note that "plagiarism" and "self-plagiarism" are often used in a  course context differently from in the wider academic world. But you seem to have filled the necessary gaps.
In a strictly classroom context a professor might want you to produce a completely new work that doesn't rely (heavily) on previous work. That is a matter of what is acceptable under the course rules, so more can be prohibited. So, the rule of "don't copy/reuse old stuff" might go by the name self-plagiarism there, but really isn't.
Scholars, for example, often communicate ideas with others to develop a theory. The things they write in such letters aren't published. They can be freely copied from in some resulting paper. (Citation of the work of others might be required of course, but that is a different issue).
What you should do is kick back, have a culturally appropriate beverage, and think about the next big thing.

Note that I, too, was once given explicit permission in a somewhat similar case.


text:
Does master thesis mentorship contributes toward Erdos Number
The question is pretty basic. My Erdos Number is number of edges that seperates me from Mr. Erdos. Two people are connected with an edge if they contributed a paper together. I had written a master thesis under guidance of my mentor. He is mentioned on the front page but technically he is not the second author. Can I use this as a link in calculating my Erdos Number?

May I know why the downvotes?

I didn't downvote it myself, and I think it's a more reasonable question than the -3 indicates.  My best guess is that the downvotes are following the "does not show research effort" standard, on the grounds that no description I'm aware of makes it sound like thesis supervision counts.  (But some descriptions are vague enough that it would be hard to know for sure how the community treats it.)

Let me expand on user37208's comment.  Nobody takes Erdős numbers too seriously, and the rules aren't quite precise.  For example, do preprints count as lowering your Erdős number?  Purists might say no, you have to wait until the paper is officially published, but nobody would judge you too harshly if you jumped the gun a little and counted a preprint.
However, everyone agrees on one basic rule: you can only count coauthored mathematics papers.  Your thesis is not exactly a paper, and in any case your advisor is not a coauthor of your thesis, so it doesn't count.  If you prepare a coauthored paper based on the thesis, then the situation will be different.
If you hang around with people who enjoy talking about Erdős numbers, you'll hear all sorts of weird variants.  For example, people sometimes say that Hank Aaron has an Erdős number of 1 because he and Erdős once signed the same baseball, but this isn't intended seriously.  Basically, if you can come up with a funny or surprising angle on things, people will let you bend the rules in all sorts of ways, but they won't really consider it legitimate.

Erdős himself apparently favored the variant in which only two-author papers count.

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


text:
Applying for NSF PRFB. What constitutes "Current and Pending Support" for a postdoc?
I am applying for the NSF PRFB. I recently began a postdoc position in lab and have been funded since June 2021 by my PI's NIH award. I have no sources of current or pending funding that have been directly awarded to me. I was wondering if anybody knows if, and how, this situation should be noted on the standard NSF format "Current and Pending Support" form?
Because applicants to this fellowship apply as PIs themselves, I am assuming that the form should not list my lab PI's NIH award. If this is the case, then is there any way that I am supposed to indicate that I have indeed been hired and getting paid by someone else for the past 6 mo?
Thank you so much for any help!

It is perfectly okay to ask these questions to the Program Officer for the grant program.  It is part of their job to answer such questions.  Although it is possible to ask sufficiently clueless questions in sufficient quantity as to prejudice your grant applications, these are not such questions.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/173320/40589

Unfortunately, I need to submit this proposal in about 12 hours, and am not counting on the PO responding in time. Left these peripheral documents to do last minute, and I am now stuck taking shots in the dark online for these types of questions hahaha. So it goes!

You've got nothing to list in terms of funding where you are the (co-)principal investigator, so don't list anything. That doesn't absolve you from submitting the form -- the form will simply not list anything.
Go to SciEnv and generate the pdf file that NSF wants. In your case, there will be no need to enter any information.

Thanks so much for clarifying!


text:
Academic misconduct
My professor sent out an email saying he had evidence of me cheating in a Physics class. Exam was done on gradescope. And I don’t really know what evidence he has.
He is requesting a zoom meeting with him, I don’t know if it’s a good idea to meet him because he said he will be filling a report and would like to know if I would like to meet with him

What is your question?

Did you cheat? .

If you cheated, you better apologize and accept whatever the punishment is.
If you don't, just explain to him and there is no reason for you to be afraid.

You didn't specify whether or not you actually cheated, so let me answer you in both cases.
(a) if you didn't cheat, then you won't know what it is that arouse your professor's suspiciouns. Your first priority is discovering what exactly the alleged evidence is against you. Send your professor an email, asking him to clarify what exactly he's accusing you of and to detail his evidence ahead of the meeting, and then you can meet him to defend yourself against the allegations. Asking for a meeting with you without telling you what exactly you did wrong is an informational asymmetry meant to catch you flat footed. Innocent people get accused and convicted, it happens, and sometimes it's because they mistakenly self-incriminated.
Once you know the evidence behind the accusation, it's time to meticulously prepare your defense. Again, just because you're innocent, doesn't mean you can't get convicted. You might even seem guilty to a reasonable person. Document everything. Write down a thorough rebuttal to each accusation. Give perfectly reasonable and believable explanations to anything about your work that seemed suspicious to your professor.
NOTE: different institutions deal with allegations of cheating in very different ways. In some institutions, the professor is judge jury and executioner. In others (like mine), the professor's only role is in submitting their allegations to a council, which independently determines guilt and sanctions, while giving you the opportunity to defend yourself. If your institution is the second type (I believe most are), then the council are the real people you have to convince. Of course it might still be worthwhile to talk to the professor, maybe you can convince them and they won't submit the case to the council (which will save you a lot of stress and headache, because these things can take a long time).
(b) If you did cheat...the ethical thing to do is to come clean. Note that you will not get any brownie points for doing so. In most cases they won't go easier on you just for being forthcoming. If the ethics of this aren't important to you, you can do exactly what I described in (a), especially if your case is borderline. If you argue it right and cast enough doubt on their suspicions, you might get off.


text:
Do potential postdoc mentors judge candidates negatively if their advisor in graduate school was denied tenure?
I heard some postdocs discussing at a meeting that if assistant professors get denied tenure their students usually can’t find jobs. I think by this they meant academic jobs i.e., postdocs. This seems like an unfair situation since tenure denial seldom has much to do with the student. Is there any truth to this? Are non academic jobs similarly out of reach for such students?

Since such judgements about candidates are made by individuals, without regulations, there is no way to make a general statement. Surely it happens. Surely some will ignore the issue. But there are a lot of reasons why it is sub-optimal to chose an untenured advisor. This is probably the least important, actually. I mentioned this problem in my answer to your earlier question.

No field is mentioned in the question.  I wold guess such negative judgment is more common for a literature Ph.D. than for an engineering Ph.D.

I doubt anyone looks at post doc applications and sorts them according to the tenure status of their mentors.
However, there are secondary ways that an advisor's productivity can influence their student.
If a student comes from a high-productivity lab, they are likely to have (co)authored more papers, possibly in better journals. Surely that's not a given for every student, but if someone has failed to get tenure then that suggests they've struggled with productivity and that likely means their students have struggled, too. While it might be possible to account for "advisor bias" and judge students based on what they've done "adjusting for their environment", I think it's far more common to look at output at face value.
A second influence of advisor would be in letters of recommendation. A strong letter from an advisor who is well-known and successful may carry more weight than one from an advisor who has struggled. Again, this is not a direct penalty for having an advisor fail to make tenure, only a side effect.
When positions are scarce compared to applicants, I think it's important to recognize that successful job applications do not come from merely being qualified or capable of doing the job, but rather from competition in comparison against the other applicants. Many qualified candidates may find themselves with no position if their peers outcompete them. There isn't any solution for this if the number of positions cannot be increased and the number of applicants remains high. Different fields have different limitations on available positions and therefore vary widely in competitiveness.

Having been in precisely this situation, I'd worry--but not give up hope!
I concur with both parts of @Byran Krause's answer. Your applications are unlikely to be ignored because your advisor did not get tenure, but factors that often lead to your advisor's denial of tenure, like not publishing much/well, may be reflected your CV too. Moreover, the failed tenure process can certainly strain or break relationships, and thus weaken any recommendation that your advisor might provide.
This is not necessarily the case: some places have astonishingly high standards and some profs just don't fit in, personally or intellectually, with their first department. However, even if it is, all isn't lost but you have your work cut out for you.
The Good News
The good news is that even if it is, postdocs are often hired both for their past output and their future potential. You therefore need to convince someone you will be successful in the right environment. If your CV alone doesn't do this, you need to find another way to make the case.
This is easiest to do with people who know you already, so I would focus on them, rather than "cold" applications. Collaborators or acquaintances from conferences are good starting points. Hosting a seminar speaker with whom you'd like to work is also a tried-and-true technique. Asking people in your network to introduce you may also help. "He was on track for some great work until the funding ran out" is uselessly gauche coming from you, but can allay some initial skepticism if it comes from a third party.
In a similar vein, I would focus on groups that have recently gotten a large influx of funding, especially if it comes with tight timelines (e.g., DARPA contracts). These groups may be more disposed to hire someone ASAP rather than holding out for the perfect candidate. You can often find about these things from the funders' websites (e.g., NIH RePORTER or CIHR Funding Results).
The rest of your application needs to be top-notch as well. The cover letter needs to clearly and quickly explain why you're applying to this particular lab. Your presentation should be polished, and you should have summaries--in various lengths--of your past work and futures ideas.  You need a pat and not-too-negative explanation of anything that "went wrong" in your PhD ("I've learned how important it is to finish projects"). Brush up on past work from the group members so you can ask intelligent questions. Send thank yous, etc.
The Bad News
So armed, I don't think it will be impossible to find a postdoc. The bad news is that academia is cumulative and even if your postdoc is successful, your subsequent applications (e.g., for faculty jobs) probably will not be "curved" to account for a less-successful PhD experience.
So, you will need to hustle. If your PhD lab did not lead to many/strong publications, you will already be on the back foot for funding opportunities, maybe of which are only available for a short time post-PhD. All else being equal, I would pick the faster-moving project: modeling vs. data collection, in vitro vs. in vivo experiments, etc. You will need to collaborate and network: future funding and job applications will need 3-5 references who are both well-regarded in the field and have seen you succeed. You will need to think about a Plan B and C for your career (indeed, everyone should, and I find that not feeling trapped leads to better work).
Most critically, you will need to make peace with the fact that it will be a longer and harder road for than for others who, mostly by chance, landed in a "better" environment. It is unfair, but anger can only get you so far. I try to channel it by lobbying against things that make it so (e.g., time-since-degree windows) and try to ensure the students around me have a better time than I did.
Good luck and get to work!


text:
Are universities strategic about when they release grad school admissions results?
I recently went through the process of applying to graduate school (in mathematics, in the US).
Of course, decisions come out at very different times. For example, two of the departments I applied to had applications due on the same day, were of similar size and prestige, and likely received a similar number of applications, whereas I (and most other applicants) heard from one in the first week of January, and the other in the middle of February.
I assumed graduate schools simply release decisions as soon as they can / as soon as their committee can come to a decision, and because administration is difficult, this causes huge variance between when departments are able to release results. However, do some graduate schools actively decide to release results earlier or later than others in order to strategize?

One potential reason to try and release decisions as early as possible is so that students become invested in the school as early as possible and have more time to decide to go visit, reach out to professors, etc.

One potential reason to release decisions later would be if a lower-ranked department wanted to give some time for some of the applicants to withdraw their applications after getting into other places, so they know who's actually invested and might actually come. It must be very frustrating to admit the best X% of your applicants only to have most of them decline the offer soon afterwards because they got into a school they see as more prestigious.

Are you familiar with https://cgsnet.org/resources/for-current-prospective-graduate-students/april-15-resolution/ ? This agreement limits the potential games for schools to play and most US schools participate.


text:
For funded US PhD programs, why is the summer funding listed separately from the overall stipend?
I am applying to U.S. PhD programs in mathematics. I have noticed that the school websites (and the official offers I have received) all separate the summer funding from the overall stipend; the summer funding being an additional $3-5k over the $20-40k funding given already for the academic year itself. Why is this the case? Isn't the expectation that students will work full time? If students get all the money, wouldn't it be more convenient (and look more impressive) to just state the full amount as the "stipend"?

Note that the values you cite are much less than three months at the academic year rate ...

You're right; the summer funding is more in the neighborhood of $5-8k instead of $3-5k, and perhaps the lower end for the yearly stipend was too low. A specific offer I received is around $35k for the stipend and $7.5k for the summer

Still though, all those values are less than 1/3rd the academic year rate. I wasn't trying to call out your numbers, but more point out the department is screwing people.

Is your funding offer as a TA or RA?  There is generally less work for TA's over the summer- the department may spread the available funds around, or some students may end up with no summer TA funding.

Yes, I'd be expected to work as a TA to receive full funding; I expect you are correct and this is where the disparity comes in, as naturally one cannot TA in the summer. Thank you!

Some students get no summer funding.

Some students may be working at internships in the summer.


text:
Is it improper to list on your website/resume which grad schools you got into but did not attend?
I'm interested in the cultural norms of my field (pure math, in US academia) though of course all answers are welcome.
I'm applying to graduate school, and noticed that the personal websites of several current students at top PhD programs include a small list of other top graduate schools they got into but did not attend. For instance, at the bottom of the student's website, it says "PhD student at X school; turned down offers from schools A, B, C (with prestigious fellowship Y), D, and E".
I'm curious whether this is standard and proper. I was personally somewhat taken aback upon seeing this, as it felt a bit cheap to use the prestige of a school you don't even attend to make yourself look better. However, I can see how this would look impressive on someone's resume (at least early in the student's career before they have more serious publications/awards to speak of).
One case where perhaps it would make sense for a student to do this is if the student chose a relatively lower-ranked program over some higher-ranked programs, for personal reasons or because of a specific professor.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/142308/should-one-add-declined-awards-to-a-cv

If you got into ten PhD programs, that means you wasted your time nine times.

IMO, there is not much difference to listing all known titles in one's signature.

Frankly, "what is proper" to list on your resume depends on how much stuff is already on your resume. If you already have plenty of job experiences, then your diplomas are still relevant, but your GPA isn't. If you don't have much job experience, then every diploma is relevant. If you don't have many diplomas, then anything that looks like a diploma or achievement is relevant. An offer from a prestigious school is an achievement. If you went through a two-part admission test and successfully passed the written part but then failed the oral part, the written success is maybe still relevant.

An academic CV is more about curriculum than it is about vitae. ;-)

Do you really expect to impress someone with this ? Either the one you got is the best one, then there's no point mentioning the others, or it's not, and then the people are going to think: "well, he/she was accepted into this but ended up only in that" ??

@AnonymousPhysicist Since when is applying to multiple schools to improve your chances of getting into at least one a waste of time?

@chepner "Since when?"  Since you found out the results.  After finding out the results, many things are a waste of time.

That's an absurd definition of "waste of time".

Don't do it. Declining fellowships is one thing, maybe still don't do that either. But telling grad school admissions you rejected, or job offers you rejected, or invitations to the prom you rejected (!?!) is considerably off-putting, and probably does more to make people think they'd be happier not having you around, no matter your other purported virtues.
EDIT: as suggested by @JochenGlueck, yes, it is surely worth making clear that this viewpoint is that of current (2020's) U.S. practice, in math, and probably in most STEM fields...

I have in mind now wedding vows where each person lists off all the romantic partners they rejected to get where they are...

It might be worthwhile to point out that whether "telling [...] job offers you rejected [...] is considerably off-putting" is very strongly dependent on local customs. Since OP explicitly mentions US, I agree with you, but in some other places it is completely common to list rejected job offers for, say, positions as a professor in one's CV.

I would say it might be okay to list a fellowship as an Honor, even if declined. Similar to the NSF's Honorable Mentions) but otherwise 100% agree with your answer

@BryanKrause Did not know that was a thing.

@wha7ever I was only intending to imply this would be quite an uncomfortable circumstance for...many involved, not that anyone actually does this. I hope they do not.

I completely agree with this answer.  I just want to add: I think this is entirely cultural.  I see nothing unethical about listing this on one's CV -- it just so happens that it is most likely to create a negative impression rather than a positive one.

Absolutely right. Who cares where you might have gone? What matters is where you are going. To list such dead stuff is merely narcissistic.

@BryanKrause - Listing off supermodels would be quite impressive

@Valorum Why? Supermodels are good to look at. Nobody knows if they're good to date.

Seems in poor taste. It also seems to align with the ‘degrees are just social signaling’ view advanced by some over the idea that education has intrinsic value (i.e. you’ve actually grappled with the challenges and done the hard work to earn a degree and the diploma’s just a superficial means of verifying this). I mean, really — if you get into a bunch of programs, attend one, deny the rest — shouldn’t the material in your CV used to offer you a place in the programs you denied be sufficient to show your merit?

A fellowship you have declined can be listed as an award on your academic CV, so long as you mark it as declined.
Listing degree programs you did not enroll in is not traditional.  Do not do it.  At best, it is a distraction from the information a hiring committee is looking for.  The person hiring you wants to know if you have the required degree or not.

I feel like it would also be an awkward call for the HR person who has to call the college/university to verify the non-enrollment, if that's even possible.

It is not really "improper" to tell the truth about any aspect of your education/work history, so if you really want to, you can mention that you were given offers at schools that you did not attend.  But it raises the question --- what kind of inference do you think an admissions committee will draw from this, and do you think those inferences will be positive or negative?
On the one hand, I can see that your goal here is to show that you are such hot property that you receive many good offers from institutions --- i.e., that these are "markers of esteem".  So I get why you want to do this, and there is at least one possible positive inference that could be drawn from this information.  However, I suspect that the primary inferences an admissions committee will draw from this will be negative ones: (1) you claim credit for institutions you did not actually attend; (2) your actual achievements are so thin that you refer to offers you did not accept as achievements (where others generally omit them); (3) you lack modesty and a sense of privacy in dealing with work/program offers; and (4) if we offer you a position, there is a good chance you will turn it down and then list our offer as more fodder for your resume.  (Note: I'm not saying that these things are true of you, but they are the types of negative inferences that might potentially be drawn.)

One case where perhaps it would make sense for a student to do this is if the student chose a relatively lower-ranked program over some higher-ranked programs, for personal reasons or because of a specific professor.

I think there is a fallacy in your thinking here, wherein you are conflating the prestige associated with graduating from a high ranked institution with the much lesser (essentially nonexistent, I would argue, in the context we’re discussing) prestige associated with getting admitted to a high ranked institution.
If you got in to a high ranked institution, good for you obviously; but you can’t really “cash out” on the prestige of the institution (at least not in a meaningful, significant way, other than extracting some social capital out of it when you’re on a date, say, and even that is pretty uncertain and could easily backfire) until you’ve actually graduated or at least started attending and getting good grades.
Your hypothetical student who chooses a lower ranked institution/program over a higher ranked one should be aware that in doing so they are necessarily giving up some prestige. Whether that will affect their decision is another matter, but the point is that there isn’t anything they could write in their CV that could “correct” for this effect. Because the prestige comes from actually realizing the potential that the higher ranked institution saw in them when it made the decision to admit them. And the only way to realize the potential is to actually go to that institution.

I agree with most of Paul's answer.

Don't do it. Declining fellowships is one thing, maybe still don't do that either. But telling grad school admissions you rejected, or job offers you rejected, or invitations to the prom you rejected (!?!) is considerably off-putting, and probably does more to make people think they'd be happier not having you around, no matter your other purported virtues.

BUT, a another reason for not including is that it is a waste of space and looks like a filler (i.e., you have nothing better to write or if you have do have better things to write, this dilutes them).
Although academic CV's are notoriously long (and defined as Latin for “course of (one’s) life" in a dictionary, including trivial things gives the appearance you either have nothing better to say (e.g., you are an early-career persons) or are padding your CV with details that do not matter. Thus, you're taking the course of one's life too literally or in too fine of detail.
However, I have seen people tactfully list declining fellowship and as an honor or award similar to NSF's Honorable Mentions (e.g., offered NSF fellowship X and DOE fellowship Y and selected the DOE fellowship Y because... or NSF GRFP Honorable Mention).

Short answer is NO as others have stated. However, I would like to point out that during interview some professors may want to know which other universities have you applied to and only when asked would you mention the universities you've declined. One thing to note is that it's better to mention universities that are almost ranked at the same level or above the one that you are applying. Besides, all this depends on how you sell yourself especially during interview. You could use the information when answering general questions about yourself and emphasising that you applied to several schools to make make sure you realise your dream of pursuing research is not entirely a bad idea, but obviously not to be stated on a CV. Good luck!


text:
My master's program in math is not listed in the council of graduate schools. Does this mean the degree is invalid?
https://cgsnet.org/institutional-members
Does this mean the masters degree will be invalid ? The school was ranked on usnews so I did not think it would be this bad.

No. The Council of Graduate Schools is a nonprofit organization; it has nothing to do with degree validity. While it's true that most reputable graduate schools are members, it does not follow that all non-members are non-reputable.
Moreover, there is no clearcut definition of a "valid" degree in the United States. The closest thing is probably accreditation, and I suspect your school is accredited. But because there is no universally-accepted hierarchy of institutions, employers have to decide for themselves whether they consider your degree meaningful. While the US News & World Report rankings are not perfect, I suspect a degree from any school listed there would be acceptable to pretty much all employers.


text:
How many new ideas should notes or teaching material contain?
This video states that our brains can only hold 4 to 5 new things in working memory at any one time. If so, should notes or teaching material contain  only 4 or 5 new ideas too?

No, it is possible to contain a lot of ideas in a lecture. Don't confuse the issue of simultaneity with what can occur over time. Our brains are good at juggling a few distinct ideas at once, but also good at processing ideas over time.
A day's lecture can contain a lot of ideas provided that it isn't necessary to overload the student with too much at once. One technique for doing that is to introduce the ideas serially and have the explanations have enough time to settle in the student's mind before moving to the next idea and, then, combining them.
And, if the student takes notes properly, the ideas will be spread out in both time (listening/writing time) and space (the flow of the text written down).
But the wise instructor who is pushing out a lot of ideas will also stop occasionally to ask for questions (or ask questions themselves) to let students assimilate what they need to know.
In effect, if you have ten things to learn and you first learn two or three of them, you can assimilate them into "one thing", and thus take up the next idea. It is a hierarchical process of simpler ideas combining into more complex ones that can be applied without necessarily always referring back to the simpler parts. Our brains are good at that.

An additional technique for the student who wants to learn something deeply is to summarize their notes from a lecture soon after it ends. Try to extract the two or three most important ideas. One useful technique for this is to use index cards that can later be carried and used for review when you have a few moments to spare.


text:
Accept applied PhD student position or wait for math PhD?
I have been offered a great PhD student position in information theory and machine learning, but in my heart i want to pursue a PhD in pure mathematics, hence I am debating with myself whether or not I should take it. I am looking for advice primarily from mathematicians, and especially those that did not have a straight line path to a career in mathematics.
Some context is necessary. I have a background in engineering, with a B.Sc. in electrical engineering and an M.Sc. in engineering physics (with theoretical physics specialization). This is in Europe, and 3 years bachelor's plus 2 years master's is standard in my country. I graduated a couple of years ago, but I got into engineering quite late, having had an earlier career in music, so I am now in my mid thirties. Since graduation I have worked with signal processing and machine learning in a commercial R&D setting.
Ever since starting my engineering studies I have had a growing interest in mathematics, but it never quite felt practically feasible to pursue full time mathematics studies (recall that I started late; I also had to work part time throughout my studies). However, I did take a few pure mathematics courses like real analysis, abstract algebra, and discrete mathematics while at university. More recently I have started to read some mathematics in my free time (currently Lee's Introduction to Topological Manifolds), but progress is slow since I can only use evenings and weekends.
This spring I started applying to PhD student positions. Primarily in pure mathematics, but also a couple in theoretical aspects of machine learning and physics. I had low hopes for the mathematics positions though, since I just barely fulfilled the formal requirements, and indeed nothing came of those applications. But I did get offered a position at an electrical engineering department where, if I take it, I will be working with information theoretic analysis of machine learning algorithms.
As I see it I have two options:

Take the information theory PhD position. As far as electrical engineering subjects go, I think this is about as mathematical as it gets. I also know from my interviews that I would have a lot of freedom to take courses from the mathematics department as long as they are relevant to the project. Hence I should be able to take courses in measure theoretic probability theory, optimization, perhaps complex and functional analysis, and so on, with the mathematics students. But my research would be constrained to the main subject, and in the end my doctorate would be in electrical engineering.

Start a second master's in pure mathematics, and apply for math PhD positions again next year. The idea is to get more advanced mathematics credits under my belt, and then ideally to get a PhD student position in mathematics before finishing this second master's. But of course it might take the full two years (or longer) before I get anything, if I even get anything at all. With full time studies I believe I would be capable to get perfect or close to perfect grades. I have enough money saved to take a year off from work, but if it takes longer I may have to reduce the studies to part time.

Clearly option 1 is the rational one from a career perspective, but my heart wants to go with option 2. One big worry is my age, since option 2 will take at least one year extra, and, as mentioned earlier, I am already in my mid thirties. I expect that I will want to continue in academia after the PhD, but maybe such a late PhD in mathematics will make that difficult?
I guess my main question is, would it be moronic to go for option 2? I would also love to hear from people who have had similarly strange paths into a career in mathematics, if there are any on the site. What advice can you share?
Clarifications:

These are all fully funded positions that I am talking about, as is the norm in my country.

There are other good candidates lined up if I don't take the information theory position, so I would not be putting the advisor in a rough spot.

I have strong references in machine learning and theoretical physics. In particular I have previous mentors that are happy to write letters of recommendation for me. I think this was an important factor in me getting offered the information theory position.

I don't have any family relying on me economically.

I guess the number one question is, if you successfully finish a PhD in EE/ML, would you be happy continuing to work in EE/ML or is your current intention to use the PhD programe to transition into pure math? Starting a PhD in a field in which you don't wish to work sounds like a bad idea, unless you have a concrete realistic plan for how you want to leverage that to transition to a different field. On the other hand, starting a PhD in a field which is not your dream field but which is in demand and in which you could realistically see yourself working does not sound like a bad idea at all.

@AdamPřenosil Yes, that is certainly a concern with option 1. I worry that I might end up unsatisfied in the long run with being confined to EE/ML, and that I will be stuck there, even if I have a strong mathematical profile in the PhD. It seems an unlikely trajectory to take a PhD in EE/ML and somehow manage to transition into pur mathematics.

Also, while I think statistics and machine learning is very interesting from a theoretical perspective, I am not one of those people that are super excited about applications of machine learning. If anything, my gut reaction to current developments is often a slight sense of worry... Maybe that will be disheartening in the long run.

Crossposted: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/470589/accept-applied-phd-student-position-or-wait-for-math-phd

"One big worry is my age, since option 2 will take at least one year extra" But is one or two years really that much when you're in your mid-30s? If people are prepared to accept someone older than the usual PhD student, does it matter if he's 35 or 37?

@Stefan I suppose, but it might make the difference between finishing my degree before or after age 40, and this in turn might affect later prospects, perhaps. I also have the impression that mathematicians in particular often take their PhD quite early; but maybe my impression is skewed.

First of all, congrats on being accepted to a fully funded PhD program! That's quite an accomplishment. Many people apply for such programs and don't get into any.
Second, "math" and "applied math" are not as siloed as you might think. There are many professors, like me, who maintain a presence in both worlds. It is certainly possible to get a PhD in applied math (or electrical engineering, physics, signal processing, information theory, or machine learning) and still end up doing research that would be classified as "pure math."
To make your decision look carefully at the published papers and research interests of the faculty at the PhD program where you have been accepted. If you say yes, then you'll need to work with one of these people. Are any of them doing work you are passionate about? A PhD is really hard. If you try to get one in a research area you're not passionate about, it's almost impossible (and miserable).
Depending on the specifics, there might be information theory professors whose research consists of probability theory, measure theory, functional analysis, Fourier analysis, etc. There might be machine learning professors whose research consists of probability theory, advanced linear algebra, or topological data analysis (TDA) which includes homological algebra. You can't know unless you look.
You can also inquire about the possibility to take some math courses as part of the PhD program you mentioned. That's usually possible and many applied math professors would be thrilled with a PhD student with a deeper than usual understanding of pure math (because, that can help quite a lot in applied math research). For example, during my PhD in math, I took courses and wrote a thesis to get a master's degree in computer science. I know another person who did the same concurrently getting a PhD in math and a master's in stats. It can even be possible to have a PhD advisor or co-advisor from another department (though, rare). For example, you can imagine working with a machine learning researcher who wants to learn more about TDA, and there's also a math professor who wants to get more into TDA, and they jointly supervise your thesis which you could have done working for either of them separately. My point is: advisors might constrain your research less than you think they will, as long as you can connect it in some way to their broader research program. Another point worth mentioning is that if you go to this program and take a few math courses as you mentioned you'd be allowed to do, then develop a strong relationship with a math professor, you might be able to switch over to the math program, with the blessing of the applied math professors, who in the end will want you to follow your true calling.
That said, all things being equal, a PhD in applied math is better for jobs than a PhD in math, whether you want to be a professor or work in industry. If there's an option to get that PhD even though your research would be heavily pure math, that's the ideal situation for you. You won't know till you check the research of the professors at the place you got accepted.
Lastly, the late PhD should not be held against you. In the US, it would actually be illegal to do so. When you get to that stage, you can try to market your extra experience as a strength.

"all things being equal, a PhD in applied math is better for jobs than a PhD in math, whether you want to be a professor or work in industry". I have seen many people working as math professors, high school math teachers, etc... They may disagree with your statement.

@Job_September_2020 My statement is based on actual data. Check the AMS Notices annual reports. I'm a math PhD working as a math professor. I've also been on a dozen hiring committees. The fact is that, like computer science, hiring an applied mathematician is harder than hiring a pure mathematician. We get fewer applicants, and they have more offers from other places. Same for my students going into industry: easier to get a job with applied skills than pure.

@DavidWhite Thank you for responding. You raise many good points, though I think the idea about possibly "switching over" to the math program might be too unlikely to let it affect my decision. I will take your advice about looking carefully at the published papers of the faculty at the program to heart. I have already browsed the thesis of the advisor's previous PhD student (and I attended his thesis defence), since my work would closely relate to his. But I will also look at some papers by the advisor himself, and possible others at the department.

@DavidWhite I have posted a follow-up answer, in case you are interested.

Follow-up
I ended up not taking the position. The way I reasoned is that I really had two different questions, which I had somewhat conflated:

Do I want to work for ~4 years in a project about information theoretic analysis of machine learning algorithms, at the specific department offering the position, and earn a doctorate in electrical engineering?

If the answer to answer to question 1 is no, then should I start a second master's in mathematics (with the ultimate goal of earning a PhD in mathematics)?

I should therefore evaluate question 1 alone first while trying to ignore question 2. Hence I used the last few days before the decision deadline to study the dissertation of the previous PhD student of the advisor since this is work that I would be extending. I also followed David White's advice to read papers authored by the advisor and other faculty at the department. My conclusion was that these texts did not make me excited enough to warrant embarking on a ~4-year project in the field.
I will likely follow through with the mathematics project of question 2 as well. I feel better about it now that it does not seem like it comes at the expense of the ML/EE doctorate; especially if it turns out not to lead to a doctorate in mathematics in the end.

Great, thanks for the update. If you feel better after having made your decision, it's a strong sign that it was the right choice for you. Good luck.

I think the applied math degree is the rational practical solution. But your question says several times that your heart is with the mathematics.
I wouldn't venture advice (I know too little about you) but given the fact that you have no family to support you might entertain the nominally less practical choice. If the math masters disappoints you or it seems as if a pure math phd is not going to happen the year of mathematics can only strengthen a reapplication to an applied math program.
In any case let us know here what you decide and, later, how it worked out.

I hope you are correct that "the year of mathematics can only strengthen a reapplication to an applied math program," and that I would not just appear indecisive.

I have posted a follow-up answer, in case you are interested.

Have you applied to any programs where the degree is actually "Applied Mathematics"? This comment may apply to the program you list too though. Often you can still do "pure" research in such a program, proving theorems, etc. You could pursue some theory in probability theory/stochastic processes or statistics and the related.
It sounds like you might have a fixed project you are assigned to though. Without knowing the details of that project, it's hard to say what your options really will be. Do you think you can put up with working on that project for 4+ years? Even if you end up not liking the project, liking the people you work with might make up for some of that. But it might really just depend on your own personality/disposition.
For future employability, the information theory and machine learning is probably the better choice. Of course, it is difficult to predict what the economic and political situation will be when you finish. As long as humanity still exists within a technologically advanced civilisation, what you learn will likely still be quite valuable.
On that note, consider the job prospects of previous graduates. Where do they typically go? Programs often keep a running list of their graduates. Maybe there are existing pipelines to private industry or public sector.
It could also be helpful to look at current job advertisements that sound interesting to you to see their desired applicant qualifications. Take note especially of any computer skills listed. Continue to scan such job adverts every now and then, updating your self-study program on the side if/as needed.
Getting a faculty job in this field will also be more lucrative than math. Your starting salary will be a significant amount above that for a starting math assistant professor. This of course will vary quite a bit depending on your accomplishments and where you apply. But, as mentioned elsewhere, a greater proportion of PhDs in such an applied field will be going to industry, but those academic programs are facing higher and higher demand, so basic economics works in your favor if you want to be faculty in an engineering department or similar.
It's a lot to consider, but it's an important decision. Make sure you can live with your choice, or, at least, if you decide to change course, be honest with yourself about it and take appropriate decisive action.
Good luck!
For what it's worth, I chose applied mathematics and probability theory and am pleased with that choice since the ability to teach statistics is an in demand skill too. I didn't have the computer skills necessary for industry jobs though. That's why I emphasize that latter aspect. I'm tenured faculty in an undergraduate math department. That also brings up another piece to mention: consider the fact that there might be smaller colleges to apply to for faculty positions too. Maybe you will easily qualify for R1, but consider honing your teaching skills too just in case. Not that teaching skills aren't important at an R1, but they will be more important when applying to teaching-focused jobs such as a small liberal arts college (say, one with an engineering or math major).

You've done work in signal processing and machine learning, you have an experience in possible applications and  you are not getting younger. Take the position in applied math,  information  theory and machine learning.  There is a lot of fresh and nontrivial math to deal with and with your experience you are better suited to ask and answer good and relevant questions.  You can seek an adviser in this area that has more theoretical inclinations.  I say this as a working mathematician who finds the math stemming from computer science very exciting, challenging and fresh.


text:
How to mention a coding style guide in thesis or scientific text
Is there a best practice where or how to introduce a style guide inside a thesis?
(Meant is a style guide for programming languages)
I write a scientific text which contains some code samples. My studies are in a non-coding field, so there is no official style guide provided. I choose to use one provided by Google.
When searching, the results are about style guides for the actual thesis or how to format code in a thesis, which is not what I am looking for.

Can't you just say "Coding style X is used," at the point where you have the first code sample? If the coding style is very important and relevant to the content of the paper, write a bit more. If it is not relevant at all, don't write anything. I don't think it really matters and I don't think you need to worry about "best practice."