text:
Where I can publish my bachelor thesis?
Currently, I'm doing my bachelor's in science. I wanted to write a bachelor thesis so I tried contacting many professors so that I can get some projects and can write my bachelor thesis but most of them were busy or better to say all of them were busy. So I decided to do a project by myself and to write a paper (a bachelor thesis). But What should I have to do with it?
Where I can publish it so that in the future I can have proof?

Edit:
I'm a physics honors student currently in my last year of the degree. I understood that research work and writing a bachelor's thesis are two different things. I have read this post. And  I don't have any research work as I have not come too far in the subject. But I have some things in my mind like writing a new solution to Brachistochrone problem or some geometrical proof for some theorems that I want to be in some official paper as my bachelor's work.
I contacted many professors from my department as well as some other universities but I got no response from them apart from saying that they don't have time or something of the sort. I haven't contacted Ph.D. scholars as I don't how to contact them (How I can access their information from the site?)  But I will try to contact them. Any of the students don't have a personal tutor or anything. And I haven't written the paper under their supervision so do they give really mention it?
I actually tried it posting on arXiv but they too need some endorsement approval or something of the sort. So I ask some professor showing my work and asking to approve it but He said,

Dear student
?It is better to publish it in a journal rather than sending it to arXiv.

I don't understand what's the difference and I don't know How to do what He said.

A published paper and a bachelor's thesis are two very different things. It's not very common for bachelor's theses to contain publishable research. Does your department not offer a project/dissertation/thesis module towards the end of your degree? And which field and country are you in?

I'm a physics Hons student. I'm from India.

I had a bachelor's student whose work was published (not as written in the thesis, but as a separate paper). It was absolutely outstanding. However, I am not sure whether a student in a field, even a good one, is usually in the position to judge that.

@YoungKindaichi That's not sufficient reason to publish. Publication means you have new results worth the time of your fellow scientists to read. If your point is only to prove you have a bachelor's thesis, that's what the degree is for. Don't waste people's time with a vacuous paper.

It seems unusual that you can't find anyone at your university to supervise your bachelor thesis if that's a requirement for graduation. How did other students at your uni find a supervisor?

There is no answer to this question.  You are asking ''Where can I publish thing I have written which none of you have seen or know nothing about?''  We do even know if the results in that thesis are publishable to begin with.

Be careful and check with your universities' studies administration whether what you're planning to do would even count. I'm pretty sure at my university, you will not be able to get a grade and credits for a thesis if no Professor supervises it.

As a preliminary step, you might look for undergrad physics conferences (or physics conferences with undergrad sessions)  and present your work there.  You'd then have the program from the conference to prove that you gave the paper.

@henning--reinstateMonica The bachelor thesis is not necessary here for graduation. Most of the students are not aware of these things at all. I mean about the bachelor thesis. So students don't find a supervisor at all because they don't need.

There are many assumptions bundled up in your question which I think need to be addressed.
Firstly, a bachelor's thesis and a research paper in physics are very different, in almost every aspect (content, length, aim, purpose, style etc). It is perfectly possible to write a bachelor's thesis on a topic and then rewrite part of it as a paper that you then submit to a journal for peer review and publication, and it is also possible to incorporate the findings of a published paper in a bachelor's thesis. However, I do not know of any journal (in physics at least) that would simply publish a bachelor's thesis as it is.
Secondly, it is extremely rare for a bachelor's thesis to contain actual novel research. In some countries, it's rare for a Master's thesis to contain novel research. The main purpose of a bachelor's thesis is to give the student a chance to develop their literature review and writing skills. Typically you would write about the history of a certain topic in physics, and perhaps discuss some recent findings or developments. In my bachelor's thesis, I wrote about Noether's theorem, describing its history, showing a couple of basic proofs and talking about how the theorem can be applied to orbital mechanics. Obviously I am not Emmy Noether; none of this was my own original research.
Thirdly, I expect you will find it extremely difficult to progress without supervision. You mentioned that you have contacted various professors. Are they all at your university? Have you tried contacting professors at other universities to see if they would supervise you remotely? And have you considered contacting PhD students or postdocs instead of professors? They may have more time to devote to you and could possibly provide more hands-on supervision.
If you do write a thesis but your university does not offer it as an official part of your degree (i.e. it will not appear on your transcript in any way), then the best "proof" that I can think of would be to show the finished thesis to whichever of your professors you are closest to (do you have a personal tutor or equivalent?) and ask them to mention it when they write reference letters for you. That way you have their word as well as your own that it is your work.
Alternatively you could consider posting it on your own website, or putting it on arXiv as a preprint. I would think carefully about the latter option, however, as you cannot delete things from arXiv and, as your personal standards improve and you move on to more in-depth research, you may not want your bachelor's thesis to remain public five, ten or twenty years down the line.
Edited to address the new details provided:
It sounds like you have some ideas for a research paper and you want to publish it when you have finished it. Your professor told you that it's better to publish your paper in a journal rather than on arXiv, which is true. ArXiv is a preprint server and does not provide peer review, unlike a journal.
Submitting your paper for publication is fairly easy. Firstly you need to identify an appropriate journal for your submission. I'd suggest asking your professor for advice on this, but it sounds like they are not the most helpful. A good way to decide on a journal is to look at the papers you cite in your paper and the journals those are published in.
Be aware that journals have different standards for submission and for some journals, it is common to receive a "desk rejection" i.e. your paper is rejected by the editor before going out for peer review, either because the editor thinks your paper does not fit within the topic of that journal, or because it is insufficiently novel or otherwise of low quality.
Once you have identified a suitable journal, navigate to the website of that journal. There will be an obvious link to click called "submit" or something similar. Click that link and follow the instructions given. Then, if you do not receive a desk rejection, you will have to wait (perhaps a month or two) to get the referee report. You may have to make corrections or alterations to your paper based on the referee report. If you do that satisfactorily, your paper will be accepted and published in the journal.
In physics, it is typical to upload a copy of your paper to arXiv. In my subfield, it's common to post to arXiv, wait a couple of days for the inevitable "you didn't cite me" emails, then submit to the journal. Once the paper has been published, you can then update the version on arXiv. You can check the arXiv help page for information on how to get endorsed: https://arxiv.org/help/endorsement.

Thank you for your time. I have edited the question and added all the information, You have asked in your answers so I think this would clear up all the assumptions made. So Please guide me to what should be my next step.

@YoungKindaichi thanks for that, I will edit my answer to address your new question. PhD students at my university all have their names and email addresses on the department website, but this obviously differs from university to university.

I think now I have pretty much of a good idea, How things works and I know what I have to do. Thanks a lot!

In some countries, it is rare for PhD theses to contain truly novel material.

It’s not clear an undergraduate thesis would make it through the filter of arXiv, unless it was unusually good - certainly not a thesis on the brachistochrone problem.  If it were possible arXiv would be flooded with such documents.

"Secondly, it is extremely rare for a bachelor's thesis to contain actual novel research." What? In the two universities in Germany, where I studied, this was a requirement. Albeit, the novelty was small, but it was supposed to be a problem noone solved before (mainly due to time restrictions, not due to difficulty). PhD-students may find a small potion related to there work, to be solved by a B.Sc or M.Sc thesis. In my case, my professor was interested in a comparison between a simulation and an approximation. So I programmed both cases. But as far as we were aware, this wasn't done before.

@infinitezero indeed, but academic conventions differ widely from country to country and from field to field. In my experience (in physics, like the OP), it's very hard for an undergrad to have a deep enough knowledge/understanding of a topic to have any original insight. It also depends on the level of support you have from your supervisor and their Master's and PhD students. In the OP's case, it sounds like they have none.

Let me address one point that isn't mentioned in the otherwise complete answer of astronat. You have discovered that it is hard for an undergraduate to make contact with professors at other institutions. This is because they are busy with their own work, including giving proper attention to their own students. Helping you adds to an already full workload, so many will just ignore your emails.
If you want to get such help, however, you can, perhaps, use an intermediary to make the initial contact and recommend you. Your own professors are probably a good source of such introductions if they have maintained a circle of contacts through their own work.
It is easy to ignore an email, especially a long and detailed email, from some unknown person. It is much harder to ignore one from someone you consider a colleague.
So, rather than asking your professors for suggestions on who to contact, ask if they will make an initial introduction on your behalf, giving their "friend" a heads up on why it would be useful/fun/valuable to start a conversation with you.

And, I'll also emphasize that anyone can publish, provided that they write something that editors and reviewers judge worthy of publication and it is brought to their attention through a submission. But the standards are high and few undergraduates (but not none) have yet learned how to meet them. Good luck in your studies.

I get the impression from your post that you are confident in your research skills, perhaps more confident than is likely warranted for a bachelor's student. I think it would help to clarify research for you.
First, although I would consider any paper in a good journal to be sufficient work for a undergraduate thesis, most undergraduate theses do not rise to the level required of a good journal. (I say "good" here because there are predatory journals and conferences looking for money that will publish almost anything.) Most undergrad theses are published online by the university of the student.
When submitting a paper to a good journal, the journal will peer review your paper before acceptance. They will invite reviewers, who are usually other faculty working on similar topics, to assess whether your work appears to be 1) correct and 2) new to the literature. ArXiv is a pre-publication site used to distribute manuscripts before they undergo peer review. It does not have the same prestige as a good peer-reviewed journal.
Second, most master's and PhD students are guided by an advisor. For master's theses, the advisor will often shape the topic and direction of the thesis. Even with a PhD dissertation, where the student is learning to become an independent researcher, the advisor often has a large influence on the topic of the research. This is because it is  difficult for a person new to a field to make interesting contributions: 1) they probably lack knowledge of the technical methods used in that field; and 2) they are not familiar enough with the field to know what would constitute a novel contribution. This is true for most master's students and first-year PhD students. As you are a bachelor's student, I am skeptical that you are expert enough on any research topic to work independently.
The level expected of a bachelor's thesis is usually much lower than the level expected for a good peer-reviewed journal paper. Even so, I would be concerned about whether an unsupervised student project would meet that level.
Third, when most master's and PhD students choose an advisor, they are also choosing to work on a research topic within their advisor's expertise. This is even more so of undergraduate research assistants, who often work closely with a PhD student on their research. Most students applying to work with a professor state their interest in the topic, some familiarity with relevant technical skills, and then expect the professor to shape the specific direction of the research as well as provide more technical training.
It is not clear how you approached the professors you mentioned, but I believe that for most professors, if a qualified undergraduate student wanted to be a research assistant with them or their PhD students for thesis credit, they would most likely say yes. When I personally have rejected undergraduates, it is usually because they 1) seem to lack technical skills that other undergraduate students usually have, or 2) they want to work on a specific topic that is separate from my research.

"[arXiv] does not have the same prestige as a good peer-reviewed journal." Indeed. It has more or less zero prestige.

@cheersmate depends who you ask.  Some nutcases take great pride in having arXiv papers, and use the apparent prestige of arXiv to substantiate grandiose claims on the validity of their work.

Incidentally, April 1st may bring some new papers!


text:
Ditch Workplace Ethics or Quit PhD
During my last PhD year there were several disagreements with my supervisor. I am out of funding and got warned of being forced out of the PhD program if I disagree in the future with the supervisor or the terms and conditions, both related to research and timeline. The warning is based on fabricated narratives from the supervisor, the Faculty, distortion of evidence, attempted gaslighting and retaliation. They give the impression that they can force anyone out of the program either if it's with ethical or unethical measures, regulated or unregulated measures, either enforcing or undoing written agreements.
Some advisers have recommended me to just accept whatever they throw me on, don't risk the opportunity to get the PhD, and think this as a win-win situation. For me this sounds as more gaslighting.
Is there any point in going on with the PhD when neither the supervisor nor the Faculty trust in you and the suggestions of low chances for the thesis to be approved? Or would you ditch ethical principles and prioritize the degree on the CV?

You should clarify what you mean by "ethical principles". Are you being asked to engage in academic dishonesty or otherwise violate the understood codes of ethics of your discipline? Or, rather, are you saying it is against your principles to accept how you are being treated socially. These are very different things.

Do you being "forced" out, or "enforced" out? I think you have a typo.

I am not being asked to engage in academic dishonesty, just being asked to accept the paper "as is" when it is finished. It is against my principle's and other's principles to accept workplace dishonesty, manipulation and breach written/non-written agreements. This creates insecurity and stress in the workplace. (Just edited "forced out").

what makes you think your thesis have low chances of approval? Sometimes people approve stuff they deem sub-par just to get rid off people.

Surely this abusive behavior (or to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, this significant difference in expectations) isn't coming as a surprise now.  Why on earth haven't you already left?

Too vague. What precisely is it you do not agree with? Your supervisors may not agree with a way a paper is written because of a weak result, bad presentation, or they want to fake results. These three motives are very different. However, your question indicates your disagreements seem to be based on the meta-level, rather than the concrete work in your thesis. What indications do you have that your own position is right and everybody else in the faculty is wrong? In addition, what indications do you have that your concrete research work is up to par? Not saying it's not, just checking.

Since you have not explained the ethical principles you are purportedly being pressured to discard, it is not possible to offer an opinion on that matter.  In cases where there is a highly strained relationship between a student and the supervisory panel, it is often worth considering changing supervisors, or even changing universities, but this depends on a range of factors, including how much time you have already invested in your present topic.  The vast majority of academics are capable professionals who can proceed with work even in cases where the relationship with a student is strained, so it is usually possible to proceed if you wish to do so.  If you have been given a warning or other treatment that you consider to be unfair, you will need to decide whether to take action against this (through appropriate university procedures) or else accept that warning and continue despite your candidature in compliance with the requirements you have been given.
The main requirement of a PhD candidature (the only requirement in some cases) is to produce a dissertation that passes peer review by outside examiners.  This usually entails submitting and publishing papers during the process, to get peer review of individual parts of the dissertation.  It is usual that you would submit your dissertation to your own supervisory panel prior to it being sent out for formal review, so they can review it and give you feedback.  Ultimately, the dissertation will be assessed by outside examiners in the profession, and so long as you can produce work that is up to the required standard of these reviewers, the misgivings of your own supervisory panel ought not be fatal to the success of the candidature.  Having said  this, if your supervisory panel are telling you that your work is unlikely to pass peer review, this is an opinion you should take seriously.  Most academics have a lot of experience publishing academic work through the peer review process, and it would be rare for their opinion on this matter to be incorrect.

There are three possible main reasons for getting a PHD

you are interested in the subject and have time to spare (well, in that case it's probably the best to follow your instincts)
you (believe that you) need the title for your career outside science (In that case, make a plan in accordance with your personal moral compass what you are willing to do)
you seriously want to stay in research and follow a career in the subject. In that case it depends on:

The subject you are in (what is ok in Medicine or Law may be not ok in Physics or math)
The influence of your supervisor
if he/she is egocentric (bad) or egoistic (good, everything is a deal)
The competition in the field: Easier to take and extra round if you are in a field where everybody gets a postdoc position.
Your personal connections (if you know a lot of people, maybe you can swicth positions)
How small the field is (i did my PHD in a field so small that everybody knew about how honest or not other groups are)
If your mental stability allows you to take such shit without serious damage
The likeliness of you getting caught (it's a difference between dropping two datapoints and copying a whole dataset from the competition).
Your moral compass

I luckily was in a subject and position where such complex considerations were not needed.
Good luck.

It seems you are misplaced, at least. It is hard to recommend continuing in this environment and no one should recommend unethical behavior. But, perhaps, your best option is to seek a different supervisor or even a different university.
I also don't have any way to know if you are merely an innocent victim or a participant in the current situation. But, either way, a different situation would most likely be an improvement.

I agree with the meta-level comment from Captain.
Unfortunately, as a PhD student, what you perceive as dishonesty may be a difference in perspective and experience. There are varying levels of transparency and discussion which you may perceive as gaslighting. Unfortunately, discussion and deliberation can be very limited in most research teams. A full airing of differences is not usually the norm. Authority and deciding to which direction, whether to amend, to publish really depends on the research team. I guess as independent authors, it may be different, but every team has a different level of autonomy which may be uncomfortable for some within the team.
What is disturbing from your OP and the comments is the lack of input from others. It would have been nice if you included other people's opinion and perspective of your situation too. If others agree with your assessment of gaslighting, academic dishonesty, distortion etc then it would help to show us how they came to that conclusion too? Otherwise, what you feel is unreasonable, may be reasonable for just about everyone else? Your anger about having a timeline and accountability although it may feel like an attack, but maybe that is what is needed to help you finish your PhD, unfortunately if you are not meeting deadlines, there may be an increase in accountability and reduced autonomy that you were given before, especially if you are already late with your PhD resulting with you running out of funding?
Sometimes there is no "right" way, but having support and having others support you cope better may be the best way forward. After your PhD, you can join research teams that have a research style and approach that suit you!

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can I pursue a master's degree and research career after taking 16 years to finish undergraduate?
I've just finished my bachelor degree in Psychology as a second under-graduate degree. My first degree was in mathematics.
I am 37 years old and I would like to know if it's possible to pursue a master's degree program in Psychology. My under-graduate degree in psychology was unique for the following reasons:

I started it in 2003 and since then I did it very slowly (sometimes stopping for a few years) because I was doing my under-graduate degree and then a masters degree as well as working as a TA in another area (pure mathematics) for several years. Another reason for the extended time is because even if I hadn't stopped this undergraduate degree in Psychology several times and had done it full-time, it would have taken 6 years to finish (very long under-graduate degree).
My course was more focus oriented in humanities/arts.
Despite studying psychology as a second degree, I've always taken it seriously. My average grade for the entire course was 9 (10 is the maximum) and I always had a higher performance than the other students, maybe because of my mathematics background. I'm used to studying a lot with a high level of concentration.

So my question is: do you think it's possible for me to be accepted into a master's degree program in psychology? I'm afraid I wouldn't be considered a good student because of taking such a long time to finish the undergraduate course (maybe they would even laugh at me).
An additional problem is that I want to study in a more science-focused research in psychology. What are my options?

Psychometrics seems as if it would be a natural fit for you and, at least in the U.S., the job opportunities (availability of employment, pay, etc.) are excellent.

@Roland thank you. I took a long time because I was split in two different areas. Of course focusing only in psychology would be a different story. The problem is how I can convince them. Maybe studying as an independent researcher for a while? My grades were very good as I've mentioned.

@DaveLRenfro I didn't know the job opportunities in this area were excellent. Thank you very much. I will take a look.

You may have started 16 years ago, but it seems like you successfully finished a math degree, paused, and then did a psychology degree. Right? Also -- do you have any work experience? I assume you had income. Being a "second career" student is different from being an extremely tardy undergraduate.

@cag51 exactly, I finished math degree and I got a master in mathematics (In this time I was working in schools and universities and I still do), paused and I did a psychology degree, the only difference is because I've already done some classes before doing mathematics that's the reason why 16 years in under-graduation in psychology is a little misleading, in fact we should count only the years when I came back (4 years ago).

This is multiple questions.  Please change it to one question.  Currently:  "Will I be accepted?"  "Will I be able to pursue a research career?"  "Am I too old?"  "Did my degree take too long?"  "How should I explain the length of my degree?"  "Is psychology a science?"

Extended periods on your CV are fine as long as you can explain why they are there.
From my understanding, you took as long as you did because you did a full-time undergraduate degree in Mathematics followed by your Masters degree, while still doing TA duties on the side, and then also attempted to do the Psychology degree at the same time. This is a huge amount of work. You also stated that you had to pause the Psychology degree for a few years. Given that your full-time Mathematics path would have taken around 6 years (correct me if I am wrong) and the full-time Psychology undergrad would have taken 6 years, your situation makes sense.
All you need to do is be able to explain the timeline - and you can! I would not worry too much about applying. You have demonstrated that you are completely capable of higher-level study by getting your Masters in Mathematics (which isn't at all easy)!
Good luck! I really hope this works out for you!

There are currently several questions, I will try to answer:

Do you think it's possible for me to be accepted into a master's degree program in psychology?

Yes.  Very likely, if you look at different universities, you can find a master's degree program in psychology that accepts all applicants who have bachelor's degrees.

It's very hard to say from the information you have given. All you have told us is:

You took four times as long as usual to finish a bachelors degree.
You are 37.
You lack focus.
You are currently confused.
You managed to get a fairly good mark in one class.

Working as a TA in other areas isn't a good reason to stop an undergrad degree. I am wondering why a university would accept such a protracted process. It makes me wonder if there are not some extenuating circumstances. Maybe some personal stuff happening that the university would take into account. The typical university would not just let you drag out an undergrad degree this way.
But consider. Your lack of focus and energy has made a 4 year degree take 16. If you start a PhD, and if your past performance is an accurate guide, your PhD will take 12 to 20 years to complete.  With the 20 year range being more likely.
By then you would be 57. Most people at 57 are starting to shop for retirement options, not starting out a research career.  Finishing a PhD at 57 reminds me of the biblical story of Jacob. He worked seven years for Rachel's father to earn her hand in marriage. Then he found out he had not earned Rachel's hand, but her older sister Leah. And he had to work another seven years to get the woman he loved.
Maybe there are other options that would suit you better. Maybe there are more rewarding things to do than helping undergrad math students with their homework.
Unless that is, you can find some way to put some passion and focus and energy into your work. Maybe that personal stuff I mentioned can be tidied up? Maybe you can find the exact right kind of research that will get you excited so that you work at it without needing to be pushed? If you don't find yourself working extra hours on something, without needing to or being told to, then it's probably a bad choice to try to do a PhD on it.

Thank you very much for your answer. Some clarifications:

This grade 9/10 was the average of the entire undergraduation not only one class

I studied in one university mathematics and psychology in another, they were completely independent

My lack of focus was because I was split in two branches, of course studying for a Phd (I would let mathematics aside) it would be a completely different story

I think this is a very unfair assessment/interpretation of what was asked and provided. The person in question was busy with an undergraduate degree in Mathematics and then did a Masters degree. I'm not sure where @user26832 is studying but where I am from, that process would take 6 years. It was also stated explicitly that she/he was attempting to do the Psychology degree at the same time as the full-time second degree with extra TA responsibilities. It was also stated that she paused the Psychology degree (not the Mathematics) for a few years in between.

The average of the whole course was a 9/10 and not just one class. That is remarkable considering that she/he would have been completing the course in the spare time she/he had available. So, considering the Mathematics track is 6 years and the Psychology full-time track is 6 years and the poster said he/she had to pause for a few years, it isn't as bad as you have made it out to be in the response.

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


text:
How to deal with (ex-) supervisor not meeting promise to write reference letter
Before actually submitting anything, I contacted one of my ex-supervisors and he agreed to write a reference letter for me. That was almost a month ago. Then, the first time he received the invitation to submit a reference for me (invitation self-generated from the online application system), he promised he will submit it "soon" with enthusiasm.
However, days went by, after two weeks of the initial invitation, nothing was received. I therefore sent a reminder to him and he again said he will submit it in one to two days (he did mention he was a bit busy). Now a week has passed and still nothing. The deadline for getting the reference is closing soon (in two weeks).
What should I do? I have options to send him an email reminder personally (I cannot call him because we live in different countries right now). Or I can re-send an invitation via the application system. Which one would be more polite, as well as more effective in getting him to actually write it?

I'll guess you have done about all you can other than send a final notice very close to the deadline. The prof is probably targeting that "drop dead" date and continuous reminders may just get in the way. But a note on the next to last day would be good.
You might also start to think about other options. Who else might be able to do this for you?

+1 for next to last day. Deadlines are amongst the strongest legal stimulants. Nonetheless, having a plan B is always a good idea.


text:
Is it unusual to be offered an academic job without pay?
I have been applying for academic jobs which are admittedly a bit out of my league. I have a Bachelor degree from an elite (ie world top ~3, depending on ranking) university. My course had an interruption in it, which I spent working for an academic institution (and I got paid).
I have been finding academic jobs in the past by emailing professors if I can work for them. Most of the time the answer was no, but there were always at least 1 person who would give me a job in the past, when I was looking for one. I think this is probably because I was lucky enough to be enrolled to an elite university (yes, I think that is at least 90% luck, but that's another topic).
I know that people who work for research instituions have usually higher qualifications than only a Bachelor. However, when I was given a job, I was always paid.
Recently, I have encountered a new situation: the people I applied to were keen on giving me tasks, and they seemed to think I am qualified to do it, but they didn't think they need to pay me. They thought they are mentoring me maybe, or something like that. Ie their idea of my participation was that I work under their guidance: I get their guidance & the possibility to contribute to research papers, they get code I write.
While this would be perfectly ok for me if I was rich, I cannot afford to have a job which does not pay. (I don't mind if it pays badly, I am not looking for an extravagant lifestyle, but I do want to keep a roof over my head.)
Previously, I thought that this goes without saying: if you don't think I can do a good enough job for me to be paid, then just don't hire me. If I do work, I get paid.
Is this approach too arrogant? Is it normal for slightly underqualified people to be working for academic insitutions without being paid?

What kind of job and what area? It is very common for undergraduate and graduate students to work under a professor on a research project, and yes, that's a form of mentoring. The compensation students get from this is that it helps them for their graduate school or phd applications. Sometimes, they may get money (depending on the law of the country and the funding of the PI). All this is strictly organized by law to avoid abuse. Compare with "unpaid internship".

Are you including something like "I am looking for full-time employment?"

If it is a "job", except mentioned it is a "voluntary" type, it should be legally be paid, based on most of the cases I have seen in different countries.

If you are looking for a career in research, esp academic research, why do you stop at Bachelor's level. Even if I generously assume that your actual skills are much higher, the lack of education is explicitly forbidding you of many jobs, especially in academia.

I don't yet have the money to continue.

No it would be illegal for them to hire you to work and not pay you regardless of your qualifications or the work you are doing.
But given your level of qualifications there may be some confusion with the people your contacting, who may think you are asking for a research project as part of your degree. Thus they are assuming you are already being paid by whatever funding model your country uses for degrees, so they don't need to pay you further. You, perhaps, need to make it clear to them what your are looking for is not a research project for your degree but instead an actual job.
That said you may find it hard to get an actual job, as they will have a large pool of people who will do the work for free (as part of their bachelors or masters degrees).

It's tagged Europe, ianal (and no one should be coming to a random website for actual legal advice). But I'm pretty sure all European countries ban unpaid labor. There may be some wiggle room with unpaid interns but for a job at a university I would be quite confident that they would not employ someone in a job without paying them.

Even if not "illegal" it would be improper. But I agree with your interpretation that there may be a misunderstanding of intent here. They may well be thinking that they are making a contribution, rather than asking for unpaid work. The  OP can/should explore that.

The last paragraph is probably field-specific. In my field, the kind of work a paid student researcher would do can be different from thesis work (for example, maintenance of software).

(-1) The first sentence on employment law is overbroad and probably false.  Do you have any legal argument to back up this claim (and are you trained as a lawyer out of interest)?

It is very likely a communication problem as Rob suggested.
If it is a full-time job, you should get paid. You will also have tasks that do not benefit you at all. Usually these jobs are advertised so if you made contact, this may not be the first thing the professors you contact think of, therefore you should clarify from the start that you are looking for this type of work.
It is also common, especially if you contact the professors and do not apply for an advertised RA job, that they offer you affiliation and a project but you work as much or as little as you want and only on your own project, and it is unpaid. Mostly students choose this option who want better chances to apply for PhD positions or who want to do their thesis project.
Our group has both kinds of research assistants. It is always discussed before they join the group what they want and what we can offer so there are no misunderstandings.

Edit: added very likely to first sentence.

I don't think you can say definitively that it's a communication problem. It may be or there may be unscrupulous people trying to take advantage of the OP - we don't have enough information to say.

@Rdd True, it is possible. But I would start with the assumption it is. First, it is more likely. Second, assuming the worst of people may be prudent but makes one rather lonely and sad, no? You are right, though, I should have expressed some uncertainty. Edited.

Totally agree. Nowadays that everyone and his cat has a PhD, if someone with any formal degree would reach out to me for research, I would assume that she/he is a student or someone who is working on getting into grad school. In those scenarios, a "I do not have money, but I am willing to share resources so you can improve your chances to build a portfolio" is actually an attempt to giving a favor.

Whether student work is paid or unpaid generally depends on the type of work and the rewards it gives to the student.  It is not particularly unusual for academics to offer to do joint research projects with students where the only consideration offered to the student is experience/credit on the project.  In some cases the student contribution might be sufficient for co-authorship or acknowledgment in a paper, and for lesser contributions it might just give the student some experience and a useful academic reference.  Unless the contrary has been agreed, this is not so much "hiring you for work" as it is "offering to let you participate in a research project".
Academics usually have plenty of students willing to work with them for free (including PhD candidates with more experience than it sounds like you have) so cases where the student is unpaid are common.  Indeed, some students may wish to participate in a research project as a way to get experience to apply for a PhD candidacy or a paid research position, particularly if they are able to get co-authorship on a paper.  Within employment law, such arrangements are often considered to be a type of "volunteer work", or "vocational placement", or an informal "joint venture", rather than an employer/employee relationship.  (Contrary to another answer here, failure to make payment for work of this kind is usually not illegal, so long as it meets the requirements that put it outside the scope of an employer/employee relationship.)
There is nothing wrong (or arrogant) with you wanting only paid employment, but because unpaid work in this area is common you should be up-front about your desire for paid positions when you email academic researchers about work of this kind.  From a practical perspective, it is also worth asking yourself whether you will get any success seeking paid employment of this kind ---i.e., are you easily replaceable by an unpaid volunteer with the same skills.  Given your (relatively) low qualifications you will probably find that there are other students with the same or better qualifications willing to work for free on research projects.  Still, if the academic in question considers your work sufficiently good you might be offered a paid position.

The specific legal argument would depend on the jurisdiction (which is not specified in the question).  The category of volunteer work is broader than vocational placements, and joint ventures fall outside the employer/employee relationship in any case.  (The onus is on the person asserting illegality to demonstrate this; there is no onus to prove the negative.)

"A European jurisdiction" is not helpful in identifying the legal jurisdiction at issue (and therefore the applicable law).  I am not sure where you are getting your second idea; reasonable doubt by whom as to what, in what forum, under what action?  Out of interest, do you have any legal training?

You have made a number of legal statements (several of which are false in my view).  Yes, I am trained as (and have practiced as) a lawyer.  Like other jurisdictions, EU laws recognise categories of relationship (volunteers, joint ventures, etc.) that are separate from employer/employee and would not require payment.  If you have a specific EU law that you think makes such arrangements without payment illegal then I'm happy to hear it, but I'm not aware of anything that would contradict what I have written in my answer.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.


text:
Is Excel-generated chart acceptable for publication?
I have always wondered, why it seems I have never seen people using excel-generated charts for publishing. Is excel considered less professional/not serious?  Say I have a time-series like this. What could have other chart making platforms do better (that excel cannot) to improve it? The dimension (boundary) of the chart?

Depends upon the standards fo the journal. Most likely, Excel can be used to make figures that meet the journal's requirements. But, the answer is specific to that journal.

I certainly look down on them because Excel is finnicky and hard to make reproducible. If you're doing statistics in Excel, I would worry about the quality of your research

Yes, we have published charts with Excel-made graphs. However, they looked very differently.

I like to compare the aesthetics of graphs to your outfit in an interview. Surely, you want to look your best in a job interview and you dress up nicely in an ironed dress shirt and a nice tie. Putting a quick Excel graph with Calibri, standard color scheme and horizontal grid in a publication is like showing up unshowered in old jeans, an old Metallica shirt and Chucks. The content might be the same, but one can tell you did not put any effort in it.

I avoid Excel because the default file type for a chart includes its data with the image. If I'm sharing a chart with a lot of data, my colleagues prefer receiving a 100 kilobyte PNG or PDF as opposed to a larger, slower, software-dependent Excel chart (i.e., it is considered less professional). The answers cover the other anti-Excel reasons well, but this is an argument for avoiding Excel for analysis from the beginning (and instead learning matplotlib and pandas, for example), before considering the problem of published charts.

@Ian that's a bad analogy. Showing up like that in an interview doesn't really tell anything about your capabilities in the subject matter, it just shows you don't take the interview seriously (and maybe implies you don't respect your potential employers). But using Excel reveals that you're not cabable of selecting the right tool for the job, and likely just aren't able to use the right tool. — How good a diagram looks aesthetically is not really very important.

Excel can produce high quality charts, but it takes a lot of work. The biggest difference between Excel and other systems is the quality of the defaults. I suspect some people are using excel charts, but they have gone to a lot of effort to tidy them up.
In the example chart, you will, for example, definitely need to deal with the x-axis labels overlapping the y-grid lines. In fact the y grid lines are too strong - in fact I'd put some more consideration into the gird lines in general - why y lines, but no x lines - there might be a good reason, but you should think about it?
Limit the y-axis to make 0 the minimum (I'm assuming a negative flux makes no sense).
I would personally also add a y axis and x-axis border line. You are almost certainly going to want tick marks on the axes. And markers on the lines/larger markers if they are already there but too small.
Your axis titles need to have the same font size (the y looks bigger than the x to me at the moment) and the difference in font size between the labels and the titles is probably too big. I probably take out half of the x-axis labels and make the remaining ones bigger.
One thing that Excel is bad with, and isn't easily fixable is consistency. Getting two plots looking exactly the same, with exactly the same size plot, same size text, with all the elements in the same place is really difficult because it relies so much on the mouse and manually moving/sizing things.

I believe your last sentence is the most important one. You want consistency in publications.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

Azor Ahai's comment about reproducibility is the most important one. I used Excel for many years in a professional but non-academic setting but gave it up when I needed auditable, reproducible results. It is extremely easy to make mistakes when you use Excel and very hard to detect that you have made them. It is effectively impossible to check an Excel spreadsheet that someone else has produced and, as we are all taught in basic coding courses, "somebody else" is you in 6 months' time.
If you want other people to be able to follow what you have done and reproduce it, don't use Excel.

I have also done this, many years ago, and the reports had to be consistent from month to month.  The only way to do it was lots of VBA, because that avoids the uncertainty inherent in clicking and dragging.

@Droplet That is not correct, you Ctrl+C Ctrl+V the new data. That's all.

While I enjoy dissing Excel / Calc as much as the next person, given how absolute this answer sounds I feel compelled to point out that a clean, properly coded Excel spreadsheet can be as useful and replicable as a clean, properly coded script in any other language. The real problem is that excel spreadsheets tend not to be clean and properly coded in the first place, which is not exactly a problem that is missing from other types of academic code either. There's even a joke(?) software licence reflecting the typical quality of academic software ...

@TasosPapastylianou you are of course right that it is possible by being highly disciplined to work reproducibly in Excel. A friend of mine used to run courses in how to do it. The discipline needed is severe, and there are features of Excel, however, that encourage bad practice (the need to copy formulae into many cells, for instance). By contrast, the disciplines needed to achieve good code in other popular languages are readily available, and, in my experience, modern researchers know about them - even if they do not always follow them.

@TasosPapastylianou a main reason academic code is so bad is because scientists tend to use all languages in a manner that's not much better than a spreadsheet. Matlab is the worst offender, which in fact encourages specifically such an everything-is-a-matrix≈excel·table  style. But still, at least the source files play together much better with version control, which is a start. Even in better languages like Python you'll often see them write just as bad code, but as JeremyC says: those languages do readily allow for better practices, and indeed bigger science projects make use of that.

You have asked several important questions.

Are Excel-generated plots ever accepted in published manuscripts?
Is Excel considered less professional/not serious [at creating plots]?
What can other chart making software do better (that excel cannot)?
What are some examples of things that can be done to improve the sample plot provided here?

In response to your first question, the answer is, unfortunately, yes.  Being a regular peer-reviewer for academic publications and an expert in data visualisation, it is usually very easy to identify how graphics have been generated, e.g. whether they have been generated using Excel, ggplot2 in R, MATLAB, or other software.  This is because there are hallmark tell-tale signs - usually default settings that aren't changed by the user, which is a dead giveaway.  It is worth noting that I have never seen this in Q1 SJR-ranked journals (top quartile of journals), but it does sometimes happen in Q2 and less reputable journals.
In response to your second question, the answer is a resounding "YES".  While Microsoft has made large strides to improve their graphical tools (for example, by consulting with data visualisation guru Edward Tufte), the default options are poorly chosen (and even go against Tufte's 5 Principles of Graphical Excellence), are difficult and tedious to manipulate when the default options are untenable, and the amount of work required to create the same plot with different data or for another user to recreate the same plot with the same data is difficult.  From the choice of colour schemes to unnecessary details like 3D effects are all bad design choices.  Moreover, some types of plots are available which shouldn't be (like pie charts - there is no good reason to ever use pie charts), and many types of plots and features are unavailable (polar charts, interactive plots, GIS maps, 3D surface and 2D contour plots, raster plots, etc.).  Compare this to the list of plots available in ggplot2.
As an extension of the response above and in response to your third question, other software excels at making plots (excuse the pun) in many ways:

The default options are usually better looking (higher quality) and meet Tufte's Principles of Graphical Excellence.
Changing the default options is usually straightforward.
Plots generated programmatically (say from R or MATLAB) are able to be reproduced by simply re-running the code (code which can be published alongside a manuscript as supplementary material which facilitates reproducibility).
Editing the plot at a later date is easier.  This is important when you submit a paper for review and reviewers ask you to make changes to your plots.  Many features are difficult or impossible to replicate in Excel plots, which leaves you with only one option - taking a screen-capture and manually processing the changes. The tediousness of this task is exacerbated by the number plots to edit and level of detail/changes to make.
Journals often have strict standards on graphics, such as what format (file extension) is acceptable and often specify a minimum resolution/DPI (usually between 300 DPI and 600 DPI).  This is easily accomplished in software like R and MATLAB where the user can specify the desired DPI and re-generate the plot accordingly.

In response to your last question, Ian Sudbery has already provided a number of good points for improving your sample plot.  I would add the following:

Consider using a better colour scheme; the current one is neither grey-scale friendly or colour-blind friendly.  I suggest making use of ColorBrewer to help choose good colours for qualitative data, and the Colour-blindness simulator.
Consider making the lines thicker (I would have to test this to see if it's actually better or not).
Consider using log-y-scale (if flux is always positive; in which case the error bars should be capped at 0 too) to facilitate comparisons when values are smaller (which is where most of your data occurs).
The title of the chart is missing (although you may have chosen just not to embed it in the plot itself, which is fine).
In addition to Ian's suggestion of making the y-axis minimum zero, the maximum should be 550 rather than 650.

The journals can use MS Excel graphs as vector graphics. Why would one use screenshots? The graphs here https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10546-017-0258-x were prepared in Excel. Are they bad? Do you question the quality of the research as many seem to imply?

@VladimirF I'm curious - how do you know these images were created in Excel? The paper doesn't mention any software, which seems sloppy and pernicious for a methods research paper, not least because it undermines reproducibility (which only reinforces my point that good quality papers wouldn't do this, if indeed Excel was used.)  As for the graphics being vector graphics, they appear to be GIFs (and low quality at that), which AFAIK are raster images, not SVG.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
how to do scientific research?
yes.I am a graduate student but i don't know how to do scientific research.My speed of scientific research is slower.I really need others to help me.Can you give me some advice or methods? I really want to how i can open my research.Thank you for your time.

This is too broad. Basically, you read about a topic, and think of ideas to improve the existing solutions. Try to focus your question on a more specific problem. See here and here. Also, statements like "I really want to know answers quickly" will probably reduce the amount and speed of answers you get.

@wimi I interpreted this as "I want to get answers to my research questions quickly", which truthfully isn't much better.

@wimi thank you! I first come here.I may take many grammar mistakes,please don't mind these.Can you tell me why my statements is wrong.hahaha,i don't understand it ..finally,i sincerely thank your comments.

@xLeitix thank you so much.i will correct my statements immediately.

@user118304 Your question has not been closed due to your grammar mistakes (although they probably didn't help). It has been closed because it is way too broad - most of the PhD experience is about learning how to conduct research. In a nutshell, you need to give us a much more narrow question, otherwise we cannot answer within the scope of a Q&A site. That said, Allure's answer is probably more productive than continuing here - go to your faculty advisor, and ask him how to get started in your field.

@xLeitix OK.I understand your meaning. Thank you for your time.

Speak to your advisor, who's there to teach you this. He/she will also be more familiar with your exact research, the immediate goals, the steps you need to take to get there, etc.

IN the fact,my advisor is very professional,he helps me a lot.But sometimes,i want to know  how to aright open or start a research.he always tells me "i only see results".i support his views,but i want to know how i can do.i don't understand whether i say clear to you.hahaha.now i suspect myself,i don't tell this thing to my teacher.


text:
Refusing for turning on a zoom camera during an exam?
Hello I have a question regarding video during exams.
My professor is hosting an exam using Zoom, and I was wondering if there was any basis for refusing to use the camera during the exam. Each student will be able to see each other unlike a previous question asking about one-way monitoring.
The exam is also open-notes, and open-book. There is also an issue of cheating that is being discussed. The matter is being discussed because three exams already without the camera but the professor says its kind of just to make sure we are not doing anything sketchy. However, I feel its a contradiction because if the class "cheated" doing his past exams, then why give them the grade.
However, I am wondering if that means I can't refuse the camera.

I modified the tags, and I hope the question is on topic for the site.

What exactly is the reason for your objection to turning on the camera?

@DanRomik Kind of not in school to be watched, I have a disability I get up, and do things like go the bathroom, I listen to music because its helpful. I eat breakfast early in the morning, and I have to drink pills that require a wait time to I can eat typically I do this all during lecture, because the other exams have been during the weekend due before Monday. They were timed nonetheless. I hope this helps your comment.

@EnlightenedFunky but if the exam was happening on campus (I assume you have experience with that) then you would be watched while taking it, wouldn’t you? So “not in school to be watched” is an illogical objection. Obviously you are in school to learn and get tested, being “watched” is only a necessary side effect you have to tolerate to allow the school to perform its essential functions. And if you tolerated it before Covid-19, I’d ask why the current situation is so different that you suddenly feel like rebelling against being watched while taking an exam when you previously accepted it.

@EnlightenedFunky for what it’s worth, I think it’s reasonable to not like being watched when taking an exam, which is a stressful situation even when you’re not watched. And this is true for everyone, not just for someone with a disability. But students all around the world put up with it. I put up with it when I was a student, and everyone else I know did. I don’t see why you should feel you’re being reasonable to ask to be exempted from something every other student in the entire world has to accept.

As I alluded to in my answer before you mentioned any sort of disability, if you had disability accommodations in the past and this interferes with them, then maybe it's reasonable to object, but if there aren't technical constraints and you didn't have accommodations to take medications or eat during classes before then I'd agree with Dan.

@DanRomik I am at home now with my family, if I am taking an exam and its stressing out I go and talk to them, and kind of don't need to be accused of cheating when first of none of my parents are college graduates, my baby brother is in 5th grade, and my sister is an English major. I have my laptop in my bedroom I am not going to be lugging that around, and have people listen in to my business because that's not it. The thing is Co-VID changed lots now you have people to interact in your house I don't know if you do. My baby brother walks into the room needs help with something I help him.

@BryanKrause Your right I do have accommodations, I asked to update them but they said they still applied to online, I had to ask for extra time, and sometimes I didn't get and still outscored much of the class.

I am not new to a stackexchange I am going to post a new question in reference to testing.

Allowing you the same extra time that you got in person is reasonable and should be accommodated and if you aren't getting that despite your professor being aware then you should complain through your disability office. Having conversations with your family and being interrupted during an exam on the other hand is not reasonable, especially if you have a bedroom you can go into, unless there were some emergency situation like someone choking.

@EnlightenedFunky I feel for you, and for every other student having to manage being in school through this very difficult period. It’s hard on everyone, and unfair that you and millions of others were put in this situation. But your objections to turning on your camera don’t sound reasonable, sorry. Anyway, it’s reasonable to discuss this with your professor, maybe they will be willing to work with you and figure out a solution of some sort. Good luck!

I think you need to deal with this through your instructor or the university. Personally, I think that requiring you to use a camera has ethical and privacy concerns, but I don't get to judge. What should be the case and how you are constrained are probably quite different.
I wish you luck in such a pursuit, but have little faith that you will prevail. Such things are, of course, disruptive to those living in the same place as the student in many cases.
Complain if you can find a way to do so.

It sounds like your professor plans to monitor video to prevent cheating. Since the exam is open note/open book, this would primarily be to make sure students are not collaborating between each other.
I think there are reasons this situation is unfortunate from the students' side: could students be penalized if their video freezes? (mine does all the time on Zoom calls despite a good internet connection and despite good incoming/outgoing audio throughout...) is it fair to give your class a view into your personal living situation?
It's also quite a difficult time from the professor's side: they're trying to make sure they can administer fair and honest exams while knowing that given sufficient leeway some fraction of students will use that to their advantage.
I think it's reasonable to ask your professor for flexibility, but you should have your reasons/concerns in mind and express those rather than only your solution (opting out of video). If you come at it as trying to work between your concerns and those of your instructor, you are more likely to be able to come to some intermediate arrangement.
However, depending on the time until the exam, size of the class, etc, they may not be able to make any allowances in the sake of fairness unless there is a real serious concern. Having your classmates able to see you is probably not going to be sufficient, since they would normally see you in-person as well, unless you already have some disability considerations related to that. They'll all be focused on their own exams anyways and probably won't even have you on-screen.
OP's logic suggesting that because past exams didn't have video this exam doesn't need video (paraphrased) doesn't make much sense to me. Maybe this is a particularly important exam (a final?), or maybe the professor has some circumstantial evidence that cheating happened previously that is insufficient to act on, like certain students having very similar answers. There might not be much they can do about the exams they've already given, but they are probably hoping for a better result for the next one.

Same thing my classmates are saying. But thanks +1.

You say "The logic about past exams doesn't make much sense to me." then go on to give a very reasonable justification. What you are saying in the last paragraph seems like a good justification to require students to turn on the cameras.

@Eracnet I meant OP's logic ("However, I feel its a contradiction because if the class "cheated" doing his past exams, then why give them the grade." - this was also expressed similarly and maybe more clearly in a comment that has since been removed), not their professor's. I'll clarify. Indeed the professor's logic makes sense.


text:
Open Educational Resources Listed on CV
I have been contributing to OER Commons, and was wondering how I could consider adding that to my CV. I have two works now that I used LaTex to construct problems, and develop flashcards for individuals learning certain topics. In what constructive area would that go under Volunteering, or would I put that under experience, as well as with the links to the material I have made on the website? My goal is to leverage that into applying for an adjunct faculty role, or even an educator position.

Do you have a PhD?

@AzorAhai-him- I am going for my Master's at the moment. I graduate in about 3 semesters because I am going part-time.

Most CVs are designed by the person themself. With the exception of a few "necessary" sections, you can do pretty much what you like. A section labeled "Other" or "Contributions" should be fine. Even "Open Educational Resources" would be appropriate.

+1 Right but how would I go leveraging these contributions to a point where I apply these OER material to a instructor based position, or would it be not worthwhile?

They are what they are. Their value will be judged by others. Be prepared to speak of your contributions in any interviews, especially if you expect to continue with them.


text:
Feeling like stuck in a wrong field of study due to inept technical background. Seeking advice on how to sustain in academia and research?
I completed my PhD from North America recently in a particular subfield in mechanical engineering. Though, I have published 3 decent publications and got a postdoctoral position afterwards, I am feeling lost about my ability to contribute well in my field of research.
The reason being that my research area is interdisciplinary and researchers from different fields like physics, computer science, electrical engineering, materials science, mechanical engineering, civil engineering work in this "hot" area. My background is materials science.
Mathematical expertise ( mainly Calculus), programming proficiency (python) and knowledge of statistical methods (for deep learning applications) is a huge advantage in my field, which I lack due to my poor mathematical background. My undergraduate mathematics grades were all B- and C. Didn't take any grad level mathematics courses.
I am self learning all the advanced concepts and relearning the fundamentals, but I feel that I will always be at disadvantage from my more fundamentally sound counterparts.
I am 30 now, want to give my best shot at academia for the next 3 years. I feel like I am stuck in a wrong field because of my poor fundamentals and knowledge. Any advice on thriving in such a scenario? I enjoy my research field, but being less technically sound makes me question my place.

You sound like me!  I've been doing research for many years, and find that I lack  skills X,Y and Z at times.  So I do self-learn to fill any gaps and to broaden my skills set.  It is important, however, to be good at one or two things so that you conduct your research using your own tools.  If mathematics is not your forte, then maybe prototype (or implementation) is.  There are many ways to contribute.

I think I know what you're going through, since I'm also from a materials background and need to work with teams comprising mechanical engineers/physicists on mostly inter-disciplinary topics. Through some limited experience with your specified sub-field, I am quite confident that materials science by itself has very unique and valid contributions to make, even without the mathematical/statistical tools that you mentioned. (Those tools, incidentally would be great assets in almost any field, IMO).
The key fact is, on such teams it is necessary to speak the same language. You must pick up on the shared jargon and to resist the temptation to view everything through the lens of individual specialisation. This will force you to acquire a basic familiarity with other team-member's work. Once you acquire that and have a generally pleasing personality, you will likely find a lot of help and resources coming your way. In some sense, your team-members will become force-multipliers, and it will get increasingly easier to learn the ropes and find a niche where you can contribute uniquely. This may all take some time, so don't worry if there are some lows along the way.
Even while learning new things (it goes without saying that you must be open to this!), don't forget your primary specialisation/skillset, and look for problems that can be solved using that. If they aren't any obvious problems, look for places where you can help to optimise or enhance something. If even that doesn't work, start off by considering parametric studies, where you vary certain parameters unique to your specialisation and see the effect it has on the overall process. This will also accelerate your learning and help you get a feel for the field. Naturally, you will need to convince others that such studies are reasonable, so adequate background work and literature surveys will be required.
Finally, don't overlook the personality aspect, because you would like people to work with you, not against you.

Thank you for your comment and advise. I agree, with materials background I do have an edge over others with respect to perspective and I should always be open to learning. I am no longer an experimentalist (was in undergrad and masters), my PhD was entirely computational modeling and I learnt a lot during it. But, it still lacks the mathematical rigor that can be offered by a mechanical/civil/physics background researcher. That really bothers me and makes me feel incompetent. If you don't mind me asking, what's your research area?


text:
How do you validate the credibility of arXiv cited papers in IEEE conferences?
As a reviewer, should I point in the comments that, "I" think it is not right to cite a paper that is not peer reviewed -- arXiv papers, rather, cite a closely related/relevant peer reviewed paper. Do they expect me to pseudo-peer-review that arXiv paper too?
Edit:
To be clear, I never meant to say "do not cite" as in to hide the source. I should have been more precise with the wording -- "replace the citation  with a closely related peer reviewed paper/journal".

Not citing your sources, be they peer-reviewed or not, is plagiarism. Please do not suggest that authors plagiarise.

A paper can cite a book, a news article or a lecture. None of those are peer reviewed. The validity of the science may be doubt, but a citation is just "hey I go this from here", even if "here" is a drunk grandma's ramblings.

It looks like the title and body focus on two related but separate questions. Sadly, the answers have set the scope in stone now, but perhaps you want to ask a new, better focused question in the future.

A pretty popular machine learning method (rmsprop by Hinton) was never published as a paper. It was invented by Hinton during a coursera lecture. People just cite Hinton's coursera lecture slides.

I wonder what is, to your opinion, the purpose of arXiv?

Upvoted as I think it is a relevant question to be answered. I don't support the point of view from OP.

@RicardoCruz Similarly for example for YOLOv3 -- that was only ever published on arXiv as a techical report. 27k+ cites to date. "Replacing with a closely related peer reviewed paper" would mean citing a different version -- so misleading.

Perelman's proof of the Geometrization Conjecture was never formally published, it was only published as a set of Arxiv preprints.

No, you should change your thinking. First, despite your edit, it does encourage plagiarism because sometimes there is no equivalent paper. Second, lots of good stuff isn't peer reviewed. @Ander mentioned books, news articles, and lectures. There are also presentations, casual conversations, and so on.  E.g. "I got this thought from a conversation with Einstein" would beat the heck out of a lot of peer reviewed stuff!  And there are even (gasp!) some regular journals that are not peer reviewed but that publish some good articles, nonetheless. I've published one of those, myself.

No, I don't think this is appropriate.
Citation is about giving proper credit. If an author uses something from an arXiv submission to motivate a way they identify or approach a problem or the methodology of their paper, they must cite it. They don't get to choose to pretend like it doesn't exist merely because it was not peer-reviewed. It's not their sole responsibility to get that paper through review and published, so by insisting that any cited work be peer-reviewed work you're imposing an impossible burden on the authors.
If you have an issue with the specific claims made in reference to a preprint, you should make your comments about those specific claims. If it's sufficiently important to the manuscript, yeah, you might need to read another paper as a reviewer. That doesn't mean you must review every paper that is cited, though, you're reviewing the present manuscript not the whole literature.
Peer review is not magic. Lots of published, peer reviewed content is absolute junk. Peer review does not make something true. An author should put as much effort into understanding and evaluating any paper that they cite as if they themselves are a reviewer, whether it was previously peer reviewed by others or not. Similarly, a reviewer should evaluate all claims in a paper they are reviewing, and not just take the ones that have a peer-reviewed citation next to them as unimpeachable facts.
Remember that peer reviewers are not testifying that each statement in a paper is accurate and true; that's the author's job. A peer reviewer is looking at the methodology of the work and providing the editor comments about the appropriateness of the approaches taken, conclusions drawn, and connections made to existing literature.

I agree, and I might add that if a paper relies in a fundamental way on an arXiv preprint, and if the preprint looks like it'll never be published (e.g., the author died), then as a reviewer it is appropriate to ask for proofs of these results to be added, so that the statements they are relying on do make their way into the published literature (still with credit to the original discoverer / preprint).

Citing is never a problem. Citing something not peer-reviewed is same as asking some LLM models to come up with text and tables. Why should anyone be trusting a not peer reviewed paper, when almost all the journals/conference have rigorous review process? If anybody thinks, arXiv paper counts for a dissertation, then they really need to talk to the examination board of their university to understand the reality.

@goldfinch I'm not sure what your field is, but I'd say common sentiment in physics is completely different from what you express here.

@goldfinch I don't think peer review is as magical as you're making it seem. Lots of published, peer reviewed content is absolute junk. Peer review does not make something true. An author should put as much effort into understanding and evaluating any paper that they cite as if they themselves are a reviewer, whether it was previously peer reviewed by others or not.

Similarly, a reviewer should evaluate all claims in a paper they are reviewing, and not just take the ones that have a peer-reviewed citation next to them as unimpeachable facts.

@goldfinch Citing something not peer-reviewed is same as asking some LLM models to come up with text and tables. Why should anyone be trusting a not peer reviewed paper, when almost all the journals/conference have rigorous review process? I disagree. It's completely different. Anyway, as a researcher you are vouching for the correctness of anything you rely on, whether peer reviewed or not. But the fact is that science moves fast and if you only ever cite peer reviewed things you'd be years behind. Get used to relying on yourself to check correctness, not the peer review process.

I understand the process, and the urge to be fast, and efficient. It's a problem for early stage researchers, who could not have read all the paper(s) and technique(s). Very countable number of works really make something novel. Most of the work nowadays cite their chunk of previous work(s). At least if something is reviewed, for instance in IEEE-RAS, it would have gone through three relevant people in that field. It is even worse, if arXiv is self-cited (A's paper in IEEE-RAS cites itself to their arXiv).

@goldfinch Those issues all seem quite orthogonal to the one you've asked about; I also challenge you about whether it's possible for non-early stage researchers to read all the papers and techniques at the modern rate of publishing. See also: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem

Back in the days when I used to publish HEP papers, the tricky bit was to convince the editorial board of your own experiment that something could be made public. By the time it reached the "being allowed to post to arXiv" stage your work was basically done and the actual publication considered a formality. The comparison with an LLM is so far off the mark, it's hilarious.

This answer is excellent for physics and some other fields (including my own, math/CS).  But I do not think it’s accurate in all fields — different fields have different norms and practices.  I’ve been told by researchers in neuroscience and medicine that their fields have a strong ethical  norm of only citing fully published, peer-reviewed research.  Their explanation they gave was, broadly, that keeping the literature as reliable and accountable as possible is a much higher-weighted priority in those fields than in math — which makes a lot of sense.  [cont’d]

[cont’d] When I asked one how they’d give credit to unpublished work, they said mainly that they simply wouldn’t ever draw on such work substantively — certainly not use its results — but that if they had, they’d guessed they’d give it an acknowledgement in text, but not a formal citation.  So if OP is in one of these fields, or another with similar practices, then they may need different advice.  Academia varies more than you think it does.

@PLL I publish in neuroscience and medicine, I do not publish in physics, CS, or math. The views you describe are very outdated in the fields I publish in. I'm sure you can find someone that has those views; you should not take them as accurately describing the current state of the field. It would be absolutely inappropriate to give an acknowledgement in text rather than a formal citation in those fields.

@BryanKrause: I beg your pardon, in that case — my impressions were clearly out of date!

As a reviewer, you should be evaluating the research presented, and it's presentation.
The body of work the authors cite is part of that.  They need to be citing the "right" body of literature.  Sometimes that includes non peer reviewed work.  For example, conferences are fast-moving research by design, and some of the work cited might be stellar, but just not all the way through the peer-review cycle yet.  That can take a much longer time than the fast-moving research presented at conferences can tolerate.
Some stuff can be in the margins, making astounding claims, sub-par methods, and may use questionable literature to support it.  It might be fair to encourage the authors of such a document to be more careful to defend their methods and findings from a better literature.  The more astounding the claims, the more solid the necessary defense of those claims needs to be.

I agree with the other comments. I would add that, even if already peer-reviewed, if the alleged result(s) from a cited source are heavily relied on in a manuscript you are asked to review, and you have not read this source paper before, it is also your duty to check that these result(s) are used in an appropriate fashion by the author(s) of the paper you are reviewing. This compels you to have at least a quick look at the cited source.

Arxiv papers should be cited. When I checked related work of papers and found arxiv papers that were missing, I even complained as a reviewer. But I approach them with more skepticism than papers from well-established/ranked conferences/journals. It is also ok to express this skepticism in a review, but I would not say that it is big concern as almost any good paper is first put on arxiv and the quality of the average arxiv paper is not much worse from a not too well-ranked peer-reviewed conference/journal.
As a reviewer I do mostly not "pseudo"-review references because they are arxiv papers, but rather I look at references if I feel the need to.
However, sometimes I have stumbled upon papers that are 2-3 years old and still only on arxiv.org and some additional search revealed that they got rejected at good conferences for serious flaws (openreview.net). So here I have sometimes acted as a "meta"-reviewer.


text:
Using postdoc as a bridge to switch fields and transition from academia to industry
I am finishing a Ph.D. in psychology, but my goal is to find an industry job in biomedical engineering. Would an academic postdoc in biomedical engineering improve my prospects for an industry job in that field?

This question is problematic to me. If you specify the fields, the answer depends on the specific field. If you don't specify the fields, the question is too broad, in my opinion.

Edited with specific fields

My solution strategy for answering this question would be to check which tasks a biomedical engineer performs in industry, and check if the particular post-doc will help you gain any experience with these tasks.

Psych to biomed engineer is quite a change. I would suggest to make sure that you have the required knowledge, and maybe spend a few quarters getting the needed courses first. After that, though, it is in theory of course possible to change fields in your postdoc; you just need to convince people why they should hire you, so why you have the skills and knowledge needed for this postdoc.

Thanks for the advice @Dirk In my situation, I already have the postdoc offer in hand.

A PhD is a very high level qualification but going from psychology to biomedical engineering is quite a big change. So anybody who wants to hire somebody to do biomedical engineering would need some pretty strong arguments why they should hire you as a psychology phd. This applies to the professor looking for a postdoc the same way as in industry.
In comments you said you already have a postdoc offer. This seems to change things a lot because after the postdoc you can apply to biomedical engineering jobs and show you are qualified for them with the postdoc. Currently it seems very hard to judge your qualifications in that field.

This advice makes sense. Besides publishing and auditing courses to round out my skill set, is there any activity I should work on during the postdoc to improve my resume?


text:
Can you plagiarize a fact- or evidence-based, objective conclusion/claim?
Suppose a secondary source proves that poverty was rampant in the Middle Ages by using a variety of primary sources (or statistics from other secondary sources). If years after reading this secondary source I decide I want to make the same claim (that poverty was common), would it be plagiarism to make this exact same statement using the exact same sources (supposing I actually noted and remembered them)?
In other words, can you plagiarize an objective fact or claim when it's backed up by concrete facts, regardless of whether or not someone else has made the same claim?
If that example above is too vague, let me paraphrase with a problem that I have encountered recently. I once read a source that said that Sultan Suleiman (who led an attack on Vienna hundreds of years ago) had his good and his bad qualities because he was ruthless in war yet was very chivalrous domestically. If I can't find this source again, can I just find other sources that talk about his ruthlessness and his chivalry, and then make the same conclusion?
My personal opinion is that yes, this is totally fine, because these conclusions are not the author's own voice, but rather what evidence shows to be a fact. If a source tried to make the claim that Suleiman had bipolar disorder, then this would have to be cited since this is not a fact but rather a subjective interpretation. However, an identical piecing together of "microfacts" to create "macrofacts" does not seem like something that could be categorized as plagiarism.
Notwithstanding, I'd like some second thoughts on this. Am I correct?

See Getting secondary citations right.

If you can remember the secondary source, you should cite it (secondarily) as the origin of your idea; the interesting question (IMO) is what to do if you can't remember/relocate the original source within a reasonable amount of time/effort.

@BenBolker Thanks for your input. I agree with you that knowing what to do in the case of not being able to locate the source of the original idea is tricky. If the idea were totally original, then of course it's either cite it or don't mention it, but I tend to think finding the same conclusion (or evidence that points to the conclusion) in another source is acceptable.

This is a question I've wondered about myself. I'm thinking of cases where I first encountered some idea in a certain source, but, upon learning the facts it was based on, came to the conclusion that the idea was self-evident and that I would have almost certainly come to the same (independent) conclusion had I encountered the evidence/facts first rather than the conclusion/idea. The question, then, is whether the simple fact that I read the idea in a source obligates me to cite it, or whether the real rule is whether the idea is truly unique or at least a notable accomplishment.

To answer this question, one need look no further than the dictionary, which defines “plagiarism” as

the practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own

What you are describing absolutely fits this definition. You read ideas that were published by another researcher some years ago, tying together some historical facts and drawing conclusions from them about Sultan Suleiman. Now you want to republish those exact same ideas in your own name (with immaterial differences in which sources you rely on to justify the exact same claims), without citing the source or even the fact that you read these ideas in an unnamed source you are now unable to locate.
Sure sounds like “passing off someone else’s ideas as your own” to me. So yes, of course it would be plagiarism. All those rationalizations about “not the author’s own voice”, “objective conclusions” and so forth, are just that - rationalizations. If you want to publish a paper, find something original to say, and don’t mislead your readers about the provenance of your ideas.

So if  I write a biography and I want to mention Suleiman's brutal war tactics and his chivalry beside each other, it's off limits to narrate this as being duplicity in his character since someone has once said this before? I don't see this as being an idea, because no one brainstormed that Suleiman was that way; he simply was.

You’re overthinking this whole business. Plagiarism is passing off someone else’s ideas as your own, period. You can twist words all you want but I think people generally know what an “idea” is when they see one, so I don’t see a point in debating what constitutes an idea. Also, it is inaccurate to say that it is “off-limits” to mention something that someone else said. You can mention it as much as you want, but unless it’s something really trivial or obvious or it was your own original idea, you need to attribute where you got it from.

You cannot plagiarize facts, but you can plagiarize conclusions based on those facts. That sounds like what you are actually talking about here. The fact that Suleiman attacked a certain place on a certain date is a fact. But when someone gives a reason for it, that is a conclusion, not a fact. It may even be that his reputation for being chivalrous is an opinion (conclusion) or an inference based on certain facts, but it is not, in itself a fact.
You will probably need to think a bit more about this distinction before you proceed.

Interesting insight! However, I don't think that saying he's chivalrous would necessarily be an opinion, because that would also be based off of his own actions and not the secondary source's interpretations.
As another example, one could say that though Hitler was a brutal dictator, he loved his dog and thus had a bit of a double nature. I don't think it would be fair to say that this is anyone's unique thought.

While I may disagree, you are the one at risk here.

I'm not at risk; I'm just trying to develop my understanding more. My university did an exceedingly poor job of teaching me how to write in my undergrad, and the skill is more important now that I'm in post-graduate work. In the humanities, it simply seems that it's impossible to say anything because everything (ideas, conclusions, etc.) has already been said. If a person is plagiarizing for making basic factual conclusions that have already been made, I don't understand how one is supposed to write anything without very careful note-taking strategies even during recreational reading.

That last bit is pretty much what it means to be a researcher. But, in general if you find/read something and later use it without attribution, it will be construed as plagiarism. So I urge caution - and good note taking.

Can you plagiarize a fact- or evidence-based, objective conclusion/claim?

Yes, of course!  If not, then I could copy every scientific result or mathematical theorem I ever read and publish them as my own.

Perhaps I should have specified that this question is specific to the humanities. I'm talking about making obvious narrative conclusions/links based on simple historical facts. What I'm talking about is a bit simpler than doing intricate scientific or mathematical experiments.

You cannot plagiarise an objective fact of a conclusion based on evidence. However, it would be plagiarism to present the argument leading to that conclusion based on the evidence as your own. You can still present a novel argument or interpretation of the data, even if it leads to the same conclusions. It would be worth acknowledging prior arguments and pointing out the differences with your own reasoning. You should work to avoid it being misunderstood as presenting an existing theory as your own, especially if you’re presenting a novel theory based on the same data or sources (rather than supporting the theory with new data).

I used to work for a copyright attorney.  My understanding is that you can't copyright a simple idea a person might come up with independently.  For example, you can't copyright the story idea that Abe Lincoln only pretended to be shot.  However, if your story goes on to include other concepts, like "and after that, Abe Lincoln then lived the rest of his life pretending to be a freed black slave," then they've probably got you for copyright infringement.  One can only copyright the unique expression of an idea.
As for ownership of historical facts, no such thing.  You just can't copy how an author expresses what they know, nor can you steal their exact research work and claim it as your own (i.e. using someone else's conclusion and then citing their list of                sources).
Still, the author must prove in court that you had access to their specific work, that you actually read their work, and that you probably didn't get the idea from somewhere else (such as general reading of sources over your life).  In deciding court cases, one generally presents a preponderance of the evidence to win.  There should be a high bar, otherwise society can't share and use knowledge.

Copyright and plagiarism are distinct. Any copyright would have expired by now, but it is still possible to plagiarize "old" things. Don't confuse the two ideas. They have different meanings and standards.

Please clarify. Do you mean "using someone else's conclusion and then citing their list of sources" is to "steal their exact research work and claim it as your own"?


text:
Is applying for other positions during the early stages of a PhD you don't like considered bad?
I've recently started a PhD position in a university and I figured out that many aspects deject me. At the moment I'm employed in a test phase of a few months, and this has led me to think of leaving this position if it didn't fulfil me by then.
With that in mind,

Is it ethical/professional/acceptable to ask my references for additional recommendation letters, again, for the new positions I'm going to apply to?
Is a sign of lack of commitment and interest (and therefore, unprofessional)?

I appreciate your opinions.

PS: Even though I have accepted this position, it never was among my top choices. In fact, my decision was very much affected by the situation of COVID in my country and the market recession.
UPDATE
The main reasons unprofessionalism strikes my mind are the following. I hope it clarifies my situation more.

I'm in the very early days of my PhD, the transient phase so to speak. So any extrapolation of my current situation to the future isn't reliable. I'm afraid that I'm making my mind during this transition time, before adjusting myself or tasting the research as much as I should.

As far as I can feel, the non-academic aspects of my unhappiness outweigh the academic part; For instance, the cold environment of the campus and the city, the depressing atmosphere of the only accommodation I could find, as well as my flatmates (please look at PS2) who are desperately are looking for jobs in the wakes of the pandemic, all transfer a sense of stagnation to me. Although some of these issues can be solved, I believe they need an immense amount energy and time, probably comparable to the effort I need to put on my research.

I accepted this position with one vital side goal in mind, which (to be honest) is as important for me as the PhD degree if not more: learning the local language (until B1 level). Learning a new language is though, especially alongside a PhD. I know it needs extra focus and perseverance. But with all I have to face (summarized in the previous number), and knowing my personal mental capacity, I'm seriously sceptical about being able to achieve this.

I believe these are decent arguments on a personal level, but maybe not academically. I'm afraid that Academic institutes may find this chain of reasoning unsatisfactory, a set of excuses, or a sign of unreliability. As I'm barely a researcher at this point, I'd be grateful if you can shed more light on these arguments and resolve their (lack of) pertinence to the academic world to me, as an experienced outer observer.

PS2: My flatmates are good people. However, I'd rather like to be surrounded by people who are trying to push forward a meaningful protect with passion. That kind of people whose perseverance inspires others. And I'm not talking about superman; For me, any other PhD candidate is a good example of such a group.)

Does this answer your question? Is transferring to another university an option for an unhappy PhD student?

The qualification exam is not really relevant.

I don't understand why you ask if it is professional or acceptable. If you are, after much consideration, unhappy (of course, not unhappy for one day, but permantely), then why wouldn't you change even if someone finds it unprofessional?  Also, why should it be unethical? I could think for maybe one exception where it might be unethical: if you are doing significant research on covid-19 which no one except you could take over.

@user111388 please refer to me update

@AnonymousPhysicist There is a significant overlap between my question and the question you linked to. Despite the invaluable insights I got from it, I believe that question concerns a rather developed PhD. Mine is an embryo still :)

What is unprofessional is staying on a dead-end path. Life is short. It should be enjoyable.

You say the current climate makes you unhappy, mainly for personal reasons. But personal reasons are not somehow worse than academic reasons.
One of the main advices I give my students is "Never make your studies everything in life. To be a good researcher, you must have a fulfilling life outside of academia."
I wouldn't mention those precise reasons in interviews etc. I'd just say personal reasons (which is true). Reasonable people understand your life does not consist only of academia. And you should not treat your personal reasons as unimportant because of some unreasonable people (which there are unfortunately a lot).
So yes, I'd say it's completely ethical, acceptable, professional to not do a phd when you have personal reasons not to.

Identifying that you are not happy where you are, honestly attempting to address the reasons and then, if you are still not satisfied, making the decision to leave before you become depressed and wholly negative, is far from unprofessional. Quite the opposite, in fact.
There should be no negative associations from taking a purposeful step away from an unfulfilling working relationship. For that reason, there is no problem for asking for additional recommendation letters from your referees for a different PhD position. They might be curious why the previous position didn't last. Being honest and professional with your reasons is a good policy.
You mention that you are "employed in a test phase" for a few months. Does this mean that you are in some kind of provisional stage of your PhD programme? It is not uncommon for PhD programmes to have some kind of initial provisional period during which both the PhD candidate and their supervisors develop their working relationship. If by the end of the provisional period it emerges that the PhD candidate and the supervision team are a poor fit to each other and/or to the research programme, the PhD registration can be terminated and everyone goes their separate ways.
There is no downside to this, despite many candidates viewing this as "quitting" or feeling that they were at some kind of fault for not making it work. The PhD -- supervisor relationship is just that: a relationship. In addition, there are occasions where it becomes obvious that the research project and/or student and/or supervisor are a poor combination. Normally this would have been avoided during an initial registration period, but sometimes the disconnect(s) are only discovered later in the piece.