text:
MathSciNet is apparently refusing to index my paper. Has this happened to anyone?
Over 6 months ago, I published a paper in a journal that is on MathSciNet's journal list, and has been for a long time. It's not the Annals, but it's a solid and reputable journal. My paper is in applied mathematics (applied to a different topic in the real world), but clearly of a mathematical nature. The primary interest is mathematics, more so than the results we obtain about the topic at hand.
So far, this paper has not been indexed on MathSciNet. Papers I have published after it have been indexed. Other papers from the exact volume of the journal have been indexed. In fact, other papers from the same volume of the same journal and the same journal subtopic as my paper have been indexed.
I've emailed them twice about this at mathrev@ams. Twice I have received the same response, "Thank you for your message. The paper you mentioned has been forwarded to the editors of Mathematical Reviews / MathSciNet for consideration." I have received this response 1 month and 4 months ago.
I question why and how Mathematical Reviews can be making editorial decisions on what "counts" for indexing or reviewing. Surely they do not have the time and resources to do a proper peer review of every paper. (Side note: every paper of mine that has been "reviewed" has just featured an exact quote of the paper abstract as its "review.") The paper has been reviewed and published in one of their listed mathematics journals, the AMS does have categories for applied mathematics that it includes, and the paper is clearly mathematical in nature (unlike say a philosophical paper appearing in a mathematical journal). Part of me feels like taking this as a slight, though I'll seek an alternative explanation.
Has anyone else experienced this and what should I do? In my environment, it's rather important to have papers listed on MathSciNet, rather than arXiv, Google Scholar, etc.

Despite my general skepticism about the scrupulousness of established arbiters... I doubt that MathSciNet is actually "refusing" to do anything, rather, just ... not choosing to do so. They don't have an obligation to do anything. This is why we shouldn't rely on MathSciNet, despite its general utility...

MathSicNet (a database of reviews of selected papers), arXiv (a preprint server), and Google Scholar (a database indexing published and unpublished papers) are very different things.

@BrianBorchers I am aware of this. MathSciNet is among other things a search engine for mathematical work. It also takes substantial care to disambiguate between authors with the same name. It is possible to see "all" the published mathematical works of a given author. One of my works is missing, which is a problem. In this sense, it shares similar functionality with arXiv or GS, where one can see all the works of a given author. And Paul, I suppose they're declining (by non-response) my request to index my work, which I find questionable. They may be exercising some implicit bias.

Historically, publishers didn't make abstracts of papers available to indexing services, and thus it was necessary for Mathematical Reviews (the print-only predecessor to MathSciNet) to use volunteers to prepare "reviews" (basically summaries) of papers for inclusion in Mathematical Reviews.  The volunteer reviewers and editors would also classify the papers according to the "Mathematics Subject Classification"
Over the years, many publishers have agreed to allow MathSciNet to include the publisher's abstracts and reference lists in MathSciNet.  The editors or volunteer reviewers sometimes use the publisher's abstract rather than preparing an independent review, but not always.  There's no guarantee that any particular paper will be chosen to appear in MathSciNet or that the editors will publish a review rather than simply using the publisher's abstract.
The editorial process is described at
http://www.ams.org/publications/math-reviews/mr-edit

"Elementary articles or books, or articles that have not been refereed are ordinarily not listed. Articles and books that are not in the published literature are not considered for coverage."
This site gives no indication of why mathematical work published in one of the listed journals https://mathscinet.ams.org/dmr/JournalList.html would not be indexed.

I had a paper published by a physics journal for which only some papers are indexed and reviewed by MathSciNet.  My paper was not indexed or reviewed.  Other physics papers I wrote have being indexed by MathSciNet.
Notice they claim to "cover articles and books in other disciplines that contain new mathematical results or give novel and interesting applications of known mathematics" (from MathSciNet) and it does not say it will cover all such.  In any case, novel and interesting is a judgment call.
My rule of thumb is that I only trust MathSciNet for pure mathematics from pure mathematicians.  I love finding papers there, with nice reviews and good hyperlinks, but when I analyse the work of an applied mathematician I use other databases.  Then those databases are so big I cannot tell if others' papers are getting picked up by accident.
This is why many of us carefully curate our CVs, our ORC ID pages, our websites.  All the databases are full of errors and omissions.

You are right that the obvious explanation is "they really only comprehensively index pure math, not applied." However, there are several subject areas in the AMS' MSC scheme, such as biological and natural sciences, which are clearly applied math.

There is nothing you can do. MathSciNet is a volunteer organization, and their volunteers get to choose how they want to spend their time. If they are not interested in reviewing a paper -- because none of the volunteers is interested in the area, or because none of the volunteers believes that the paper is of broader interest -- then that's that. You can't force a volunteer organization to do anything.

Math Reviews is not a volunteer organization. It is published by AMS. The access to Math Reviews is not free so it is a source of money for AMS.

I don't need their "reviews" - I just want my paper indexed.

@MarkSapir Math Reviews/MathSciNet depends on volunteers to write the reviews.

@MathSciNetIssue Are you or your institution paying for the service? I suspect not. So what's your claim for them having to do something for you?

@BrianBorchers: The OP does not talk about reviewers. Indexing or non-indexing is done by paid staff or by software managed by paid staff.

We don't know whether MathSciNet is waiting for a volunteer reviewer to review this particular paper or whether the editors have made a decision to not include it.

@WolfgangBangerth AMS does charge institutions a fairly hefty subscription price for MathSciNet.  If the OP is working in a department where getting papers reviewed in MathSciNet is important then the institution is most likely paying for a subscription.

@BrianBorchers: The fact from the OP is that the paper is not included (indexed) after 6 months while other papers from the same volume are included. That means somebody has made a decision not to include it. That somebody is not a volunteer.

@MarkSapir indeed, the editorial team has not responded to my request twice, and it seems someone has decided not to index my paper. I can't say I understand why this would be. I am indeed at an institution that pays for MathSciNet access, though I don't see the relevance of this. Wolfgang, in the absence of an alternative explanation, I am tempted to take it as a slight (and there may be some racial and anti-foreign-institutional bias going on) for why they are arbitrarily not choosing to index my paper.


text:
A letter of support for a grant from an independent practitioner
I am applying for a grant and am strengthen my proposal with letters of support. I will probably need help in a domain that I am not familiar with (i.e. Ophthalmology). A friend of mine is an independent ophthalmologist working with several health institutions. He offered to support me and write a letter of support to be submitted together with the proposal to show the funding organization that there is someone who will cover the lack of knowledge in that area.
Actually, I have never come across a letter of support written by an independent person. Would this letter look strange in my application even if it fulfils its main purposes (supporting the applicant with what he/she needs)?

Is this proposal for research or clinical work? Does the person have the same focus (research v clinical)?

The proposal is for research in CS and ophthalmology is the application domain/case study.

I can't give an answer, but I think that other things here are more important than the fact that the person is independent. That should be settled by their qualifications. But the "research" issue is more important to think about.

Are you asking for funding for some of their time? If not, are they offering time as a volunteer? Either way, how much time? Is that amount reasonable?

@BryanKrause No, he won't be a member of the project consortium. I mean no funding for him and ordinarily, the letter of support is not binding. It just demonstrates that the applicant knows what he is doing and that he/she already recognizes what is needed and even found who can help and support.

But why would this person not be on the official team? That is what is confusing about the situation.

@Dawn as mentioned already, he is an independent practitioner.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
emailing supervisor to ask about application status
I have applied for PhD programme (in Dec 2020) and informed my potential supervisor that I have completed my application. Recently (9 days ago), he asked me if I have received any communication from the institute regarding my application and told me he has not received my application yet. To this, I replied that the Graduate admission office will not answer individual queries regarding application status and I will be receiving emails once the decision has been made (I informed this after making an inquire with the admission office). Also, I had asked him to update me if he has any further updates regarding my application. I have not received any email from the professor after this conversation. The institute has no specific timeline as to when the application decision will be made.  Now, Should I write another email to the professor and ask him if he has received my application? or should I make another inquire in the admission office about my application status by mentioning that the professor had asked me about my application status?

What country? .

It doesn't seem effective to ask the admissions office again if they have already said that you will hear only when decisions have been made.
But you could give the potential advisor an update that you haven't heard anything yet, asking if he has. But it seems unlikely that one of you would be notified and the other not.
Unless you have some actual reason for needing to know, such as replying about another opportunity, I'd suggest patience. You don't speed anything up by sending pointless emails.

I agree with you, in general, however OP states "he asked me [...] and told me he has not received my application yet"
I see the situation as follows:

the applicant contacted the professor;
the professor expressed interest in the applicant, giving him instructions "please apply through the official channels";
the applicant applied;
application got stuck somewhere in the mighty HR-style automatic filter of application office
the professor would like to evaluate the candidate, but did not receive anything from the official channel.

Yes, I read it correctly. But it is unlikely that it is "stuck" unless there are some reasons. For example, you may not be first in their ranking, but not beyond the cut.

Reply to the potential supervisor you submitted the application to the Graduate admission office (GAO) asking him if you should apply/submit all the required documents directly to him, or if you should contact the GAO to enquire about the status.
If he does not answer in 3/4 days, write to the GAO, putting your professor (he is the same as the potential supervisor, right?) in CC, asking for an update on the status of your application.

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


text:
Emailing supervisor after applying for phd to discuss about research problem and funding
I had contacted a potential supervisor regarding phd position in his lab. He was interested in my profile and advised me to apply for the program. I have applied for the program and informed him about the same. Earlier, We had not discussed about funding and exact research problem. I am curious to know about funding as well as my research problem. I need your opinion on the following

What is the appropriate time to discuss about project? Should i wait till I get an offer from admission team to discuss this or while my application is being evaluated can i discuss with my potential supervisor
Can i get some help in what should i write in my email when i ask about project and funding?

I thank users in advance for helping me in this regard

Which country and field?

Canada and Aerospace propulsion

Hope you are well.
Okay so since you have already applied to the program as per your supervisor - You can reach out to him through email to let him know that you have applied to the program and you will be keeping him in the loop in case of any updates. Along with this you can then ask regarding the research question and its specifics - Make sure the email is not too long though.
Also, and you may find different people with different opinions on this - I would advise not to bring up the funding question in the first email - if he replies to your email you will be sending after admission submission - only after that you can go for the funding question.
Saying this because certain times supervisors do not have funding readily available and are always looking for students that are self-funding because that is in their favor ofcourse.
Hope it helps - Let me know if you need help with something.
Thanks.

Thanks!this will help

If the possible supervisor encouraged you to apply, (s)he is interested in your profile as much as you are interested in joining his(her) group! So you both share a common goal - make it work. Take it from there...


text:
Faculty Vacation Time
At my university in the US, faculty are granted twenty-two (22) days of vacation leave annually. Except for emergencies, faculty may not take vacation while classes are in session.
The only time classes aren't in session are in the summer and holidays but my contract runs from August to May. I am already granted the summer and holidays off, so it seems that this time can never be used. It also specifically states that they can't be used when classes are in session. Also, this is the faculty vacation leave that is a separate policy from all non-teaching positions.
So, when is it even possible to use the vacation leave provided for a ten-month contract?

I would guess the 22 is in there for legal reasons.  The 22 days would be irrelevant for you, since you need not be in the office during the summer, making more than 22 days off.  But the 22 may be relevant for non-teaching staff (administrators, research support, custodians, etc.), who must otherwise be there through the summer.

Are you sure the restriction is "when classes are in session" and not "when you have a class scheduled to teach"?

Where I’ve gone, faculty routinely traded off guest lectures if one wanted to go to a conference or go visit their folks.

I'm sure, because it specifically states that they can't be used when classes are in session. It's also a separate policy for teaching faculty vs non-teaching positions. Trading off guest lectures would not be possible because vacation time is forbidden to be used when classes are in session.

@Alice Downs  Generally going to a conference counts as work, not vacation.  At least this is true when the conference is relevant to ones research or teaching.

In the US there are a number of official holidays, but universities also have additional "breaks" that can easily equal 22 days. About two weeks near Christmas and much/all of a week near Easter, can be considered, as a semantic item, as "vacation". Students certainly think of Spring Break (yay) as vacation.
"August to May" academically is about 40 weeks, but the two typical terms in the US take up about 30 or so (active) weeks. There is room for 22 days in there somewhere.

Today happens to be Lincoln's Birthday (Feb. 12) which is specifically celebrated as a holiday in several states as a holiday and as a part of President's Day elsewhere.

The break for Christmas and New Year can often be more like 4 weeks than 2 weeks.

There might be an intersession term filling up most of the days between the end of the Fall term and the start of the Spring term.  Really, we cannot answer this without local information.


text:
Preparing for a PhD many years after master
I would like to start a PhD now, about ten years after completing my master degree.
I already work in academia, but in a very peculiar situation: I am employed in a teaching-only position in an overseas joint institute (in country B), the links with the university employing me (located in country A) are flimsy, even more so after Covid made travels impossible.
My degree is related but not exactly in the same field that I would like to do the PhD in, like Math to Computer Science. I don't want to do a PhD in the field I did my master in, I actually declined a PhD offer when I was finishing my master because I found that the research in that area was really not a thing for me - I could do it but I found it very dull.
My line manager at the university (country A) - who is not a researcher and is in a completely different field - welcomes the idea and the university would waive any fee of taking the PhD with them, but in practice they would consider reducing my teaching workload only after I have enrolled in a PhD program, which is a problem because due to lack of staff my workload is already very heavy and leaves me very little time for anything else.
Without giving out too much details, I can say that this is UK-style PhD program, so there would be no courses to follow, instead the PhD candidate is supposed to come up with a research question, find a supervisor and then with the supervisor approval they can enroll to the PhD program.
I am having a lot of trouble with this step of coming up with a research question and finding a supervisor. I have tried contacting professors in my department but only one replied; they gave me a talk about their research and basically said "you need to find out what you're interested in", but I feel like I am missing a step before that, like I barely know the options. Everything seems interesting at a first sight, but I would have no idea of what it means to do research in that. Also, my time is so limited that it is hard to dive in into a topic without some mentorship. I have taken online courses in the area that seems most promising to me, because I thought I needed to fill in the gaps before getting to PhD level knowledge, but that gave me nothing about research directions.
From other conversations I feel like in country A there is a natural way for students to get into a PhD, because in their last year they take courses that expose them to the research areas so they can make an informed choice and quite often they pick a topic that is a continuation of their master research. It feels like there is no place for someone coming from a different background, at least not without mentorship, since I have no idea what do I need to learn to get there.
On top of that there is the issue of physical distance from country A and the pandemic making everything more complicated, but doing a PhD in country B where I am located is out of question, not only there are language barriers, but I have serious problems with the academic environment and I have heard too many horror stories to get into that.
I am a bit stuck now, I kind of have the feeling that I would need a mentor before having a supervisor, but so far I had no luck with that. What other options should I consider?
How can one get into PhD level knowledge coming from a different but related field without guidance? Or how else can I get that guidance without a mentor?

My suggestion is that your professors gave you the right direction. No one can really mentor you choosing what you like. You have to spend some time yourself and decide your interest area.

@SuktiSen Yes, but spend some time doing what exactly? Reading books? How do I pick them? Studying what? Reading random articles? That's what I am struggling with...

It is hard to guide you without knowing the specifics. But one thing I would recommend is to not start a PhD if you are not passionate about the topic. It can be difficult at times even when you love your research topic, so if you don't like your research, it will be a painful journey. So take your time before committing to it.
A question that came to mind when I was reading your question is why do you need a PhD? Is it necessary for what you want to do? Sometimes redoing a MSc is also a good option if you want to pivot to a different discipline. It is also less commitment than a PhD and may help you define what you really want to do.
I don't think you need to do an entire literature review of the field at this stage. It looks like you need to define first what you enjoy doing. Do you enjoy coding for hours and build software? Do you like being outdoor doing fieldwork? Do you want to do something very applied or theoretical (fundamental research)? Hard to suggest specific questions without knowing the specifics, but try to define things you can do for hours and hours while still enjoying yourself. It is also almost equally important to define what you don't like doing. If you are struggling defining these, perhaps you can seek help from a professional career/life coach. Some universities also have career development centers that also may be useful.
Once you have defined these general interests, you can try to narrow down to more specific research domains and eventually to a more specific research question. I believe, there are several ways that could help you at this stage:

Talk to students doing MSc and PhD s in a lab that seems interesting to you. Ask them what they are doing. It will be helpful to hear about the variety of projects in that field. You may even tell them what you like doing (see previous paragraph) and ask them what field/subfield of research they would suggest. Many labs have regular lab meetings. You could ask if you could attend one to hear about the students research projects. Then you can do some more online searching and paper reading on own.

Contact people on ResearchGate and/or LinkedIn that are doing research that seem interesting to you. Ask to meet them to chat about their research. Someone randomly contacted me via LinkedIn once to ask more information about my job (specific tasks, pros and cons of my job, field vs computer work, time commitment, etc.) and I was happy to meet and chat.

Once you are able to narrow down things a bit, perhaps meet with more researchers to refine your favorite research topic. Don't hesitate to meet several of them (I've met with 3 different researchers in 3 different departments before committing to do a PhD).


text:
My PhD supervisor doesn't want to add his name on a paper
Here are the details:
I'm a Ph.D. student in mathematics.
A year ago, my supervisor ask me to try to generalize some results, saying that this "question" is given by one of the famous researchers in our domain of work, let's call him X.
Four months ago he asked me to add the name of X to the paper, and I did.
Now, the paper is almost finished (after a lot of discussion/presentation with my supervisor), but he never read it until this week.
Today, he asked me "kindly" to remove his name and the name of X from the paper and send it to a journal without including their names, he thinks that this is not research for three names, (which sound like: it is not significant enough), knowing that I did what he asked me to do exactly, and I tried my best.

I know that I can submit this paper alone, but the whole situation is very strange, it makes me very sad and anxious for three reasons:

I feel that my supervisor is giving up on me in this.
Not having his name on the paper will surely affect its chance of acceptance.
suppose the article is published, what will be the interpretation of not having your Ph.D. supervisor's name on it?

I will appreciate your help!

Edit: Many thanks for your useful answers, I will keep you updated.

Did you ask your supervisor what they meant? Why exactly did they want the names removed? Also, what kind of help / answer do you expect? What is your actual question?

He said that it's it is not too significant for three authors, and that if he add his name, he have to add the name of X. I just want to know if my thought are logic, or not, since the situation is strange for me.

I find the sentence "this is not research for three names" rather conerning. It doesn't make any sense to determine the authors of a paper based on some absurd "research output per number of contributors" target. In pure maths, the authors of a paper are supposed to be those people who made a significant intellectual contribution to the paper - each of them, and no one else. (Though, admitttedly, it's often quite open to interpretation what constitutes a "significant intellectual contribution".)

It sounds like your supervisor initially wanted an opportunity to collaborate with X, and maybe after chasing X for some time to join the project, and given that you've made significant progress, he/she decided that it's no longer at a point in which he/she and/or X can made any intellectual contribution.

Perhaps your advisor recently learned that adding names of collaborators who do not collaborate is increasingly considered an ethics violation that can result in a retraction if the "guest authorship" is discovered.

this is just a thought, but are you sure your supervisor didn't mean his contributions aren't significant enough for him to be an author?
In my experience, it's not unusual for PhD students to mishear an innocent comment like that and to mistake it for something that confirms their anxieties.

This question is a refreshing change from all the questions on this site about supervisors insisting their names be added to papers they didn't significantly contribute to.

I once wrote a paper which I was planning to co-author with my supervisor as he assisted slightly.  After reading it, he suggested that I publish it myself as he would write the article differently if it were him, and I then published it myself.  Your supervisor in fact might be pushing you to try and publish your own papers to show that you can do independent work.

Actually, in (pure) mathematics, I would find it unusual to find the names of "authors" who didn't contribute to the work. I think that the request to add X, if they didn't participate, was wrong, but removing it was right. Adding the name of the supervisor is less common in math than in some other fields, but I think the same standard should apply: they are authors only if they make an intellectual contribution to the paper.
So, in the wider math community you will be fine. The supervisor's name isn't expected. The paper should be judged on its merits and will be by reputable journals.
I can't say much about your supervisor. I don't know if he is "giving up" on you. I hope not. My hope is that he is just doing the right thing here, but I don't have much faith that such is true given earlier actions.
The world of math will just judge that you did the work. If it is good, then good for you.

Applied math can be a bit different.

I understand the request of removing the name of X, but It's the first time that I see this situation: a supervisor asks to send a paper without his name

@Nacouy: As Buffy points out, it is completely common for PhD students in pure mathematics to publish some (and sometimes all) of their papers without their supervisor as a co-author.

@Buffy: I upvoted, but I'm under the impression that "The paper [will] be judged on its merits [...] by reputable journals" might be a bit too optimistic in this generality.

@Nacouy: "It's the first time that I see this situation: a supervisor asks to send a paper without his name" --- For what it's worth, it seems that the situation is quite a bit different now as compared to a few decades ago, and probably also much different where you're at as compared to my experience. At the risk of over-generalizing, my observation (here, and mostly 2+ decades ago) is that papers co-authored by a Ph.D. student and supervisor tended to fall into two categories: (1) the supervisor heavily pushed the paper along (provided nearly all the essential ideas, (continued)

provided much of the corrections and revisions, provided context for the results, etc.); (2) the student was so strong that the paper was a true collaboration between research colleagues. Moreover, those in the field pretty much knew in which category such papers belonged. However, most people (and I mean more than 50%) "back then" and in my experience did not co-author a paper with their supervisor, at least not while the person was still a student.

I would give the prof the benefit of the doubt.  Maybe they just asked for X and prof to be listed as coauthors anticipating that both X and prof would contribute to the paper.  Perhaps prof intended to rope in X and contribute more themselves.  When the paper was wrapping up and the expected collaboration never materialized, they said these names should be removed.

@Steven Gubkin: Good point, and fuzzy versions probably apply to many of the seemingly strange situations described in this group. Incidentally, regarding my earlier comment here yesterday, after posting it I decided to check on some of the people I knew from way back (late 1970s). I looked into 4 people I knew who got a Ph.D. in the late 1970s to early 1980s, and none co-authored a paper with their supervisor, at least not while a student. One now very well known mathematician, for example, got his Ph.D. in 1979, (continued)

but as far as I can tell his first publication was in 1981 and his first publication with his supervisor wasn't until 1995. Things are definitely quite a bit different, either now or in other places (before now or now).

In math the historical convention is that the advisor doesn’t put their name on the thesis paper even if they make an intellectual contribution to the paper.  We can argue about whether that’s a good or bad convention, and it certainly originated in an era where coauthorship was very rare, but it’s very clearly how it worked for a long time.

In pure mathematics it is common to see both papers that are coauthored by a PhD student and their adviser, and papers that are authored solely by a PhD student without their adviser. Both of these things are considered completely normal and neither of them is likely to cause any prejudice against your paper by a journal or anyone else who looks at it.
It is also normal for professional mathematicians to decide that a paper is not significant enough, or that their contribution to it is not significant enough, for them to wish to have their name on it as coauthors. That is a signal that, by itself, contains almost no information. In particular, it doesn’t automatically imply that the paper is a bad paper from the point of view of the PhD student who was the main driving force behind the work. It could be a perfectly nice and worthwhile paper for a PhD student to write and publish as part of their PhD dissertation research.
What the above observations mean is that your stated reasons 1-3 for being anxious are somewhat misguided. None of the information you gave us logically implies the negative conclusions you seem to be drawing.
Does that mean you have no legitimate things to be anxious about? Not necessarily. If you believe that your paper simply isn’t good, not because of the information you gave us about the coauthorship issue but because of other more detailed information you have about it, that is a valid reason for disappointment and frustration. Or, if you have other reasons to think that your supervisor “is giving up on you”, obviously that’s not good. But, at least, the coauthorship thing is just a distraction and by itself means nothing.

I had a very similar experience. I wrote a great paper, mostly alone but under the general (and very kind) supervision of my thesis director (the area was physics).
I added him as a secondary author (which he deserved, at least in my opinion) and he asked to be removed. He said

It is a great paper, you do not need to dilute your authorship with my name.

That was nice of him. Now, he was was a full professor ("tenured"), head of the department, and one of the vice-presidents of the university - so he did not really need another paper. But in any case, I appreciated very much the kind attention (and thanked him vigorously in the acknowledgments section).
So maybe just ask him at the occasion why he wanted his name removed, who knows?

you do not need to dilute your authorship with my name --- Things may be different now and/or in other places, but this fits with my understanding of authorship by graduate students in math in the U.S. in several places in the late 1970s through the early 1990s, namely a single-authored paper was considered far more significant than a paper co-authored with one's supervisor (other things equal).


text:
Can independent study classes hurt/help grad school admissions?
My liberal arts college does not offer many courses that are considered required by many CS PhD programs.
Our college offers an independent study option where I can propose the topic I want to study and study it kind of one-on-one with a faculty member or with one other student.
How are graduate schools gonna look at courses completed in this way?
Are they gonna show less credibility towards them by thinking "Well.. it wasn't a regular course, it's not too important..." or are they gonna treat independent study in the same fashion as regular courses.
In other words, does it hurt/help PhD admissions in any way? I have taken two independent study courses already. Should I do another one, in say, "Programming Languages" (which is considered required by many programs) or should I just take another regular Math course (Statistical Computing in R) that is not a req. course by grad schools but can be considered as a potential CS elective
Edit: Independent Study classes do carry a grade.They are NOT P/F classes

Usually these classes will just be "Independent Study" on your transcript, you don't get to give it a title. Do you in your university?

The short answer is: it depends.
Before you decide to endure a independent study with a the professor, you need to create a statement of purpose of what you attempt to research, discover, review, analyze, and find that is creative and truly exceptional.
Dependent on the discipline, if you can be published in a major research journal, as part of your independent study, this will be very impressive to any graduate admissions office.
Usually the professor will name the course commensurate with your study.
For example, I completed a independent study as an undergraduate, and on my transcript it does not state “independent study“ but conversely it states “Theories in Literary Theory”
It is always important to find out how your institution presents your independent study on your transcript.
Also, if your work is truly pioneering, the professor will most likely write you a very favorable letter of recommendation whose value is profoundly important.

It really depends on other people, but if there's one thing I know is that it most likely won't hurt you in any way IF you complete regular courses along with one on one courses as you said. If I saw a student take these courses, I would most likely consider that as a positive.

I suspect that different people will look at such things differently, of course, but I would, generally, approve of them, given some constraints.
But it would depend on the course. If it is something that seemed more advanced than other options, or, better, more advanced than what occurs in most curricula, then it would be a plus.
This assumes, that the course is graded as usual, rather than just pass/fail, where it is harder to get a sense of accomplishment.
If a professor is willing to take the extra time to guide such a course, they would likely (not necessarily) be indicating respect for that student.
A professor who guides such a course might also be a good person to consider for letters of recommendation.
Lots of "regular" courses are designed for mainstream ideas. If you want to go beyond that you need to learn to work independently. Getting some guidance in it is a good way to start.


text:
How to determine whether writing and asking to collaborate on a paper is appropriate
I am a graduate student in mathematics, and yesterday I posted a research question on mathoverflow. I was shocked to find a surprisingly amazing response. I was even more shocked to see Terrence Tao answer my question. I now have a few questions about what could happen moving forwards.
It seems to me, in my extreme inexperience, that what was brought up in the discussions for my question could make a nice little paper. I have not written a paper before and do not know how the process works, nor if this is appropriate at this level. I will definitely speak to my supervisor when I meet him, but we work in a completely different field, so the advice would be more general about paper-writing.
And of course, the other issue is that since the answer is written by Tao, and if I wish to write a paper about this, I'm assuming I will need to discuss possible collaboration with him, since a key part of the result is due to him. Or at least, talk about referencing his answer, and getting his opinions if necessary on what I plan to build on his results. But Tao is an extremely busy man, and one cannot simply contact him about a possible collaboration. I feel that would be in bad taste given his stature and my humble position.
I'm hesitant about my options. What would you recommend I start with? Are there other more important points I should be thinking about instead, or am I confused about how all this works?
EDIT I bit the bullet and emailed him. I got an immediate response, so my worries were for nothing. Thanks for the advice!

If you can't "simply contact him," what other options do you even propose? Complexly contacting him?

@AzorAhai-him- I'm referring to something I heard about, that he gets swamped with emails and thus does not respond to most requests out of necessity

Have you checked whether you can publish a result that was shared on stackoverflow? You can definitely cite it, but publishing it ... I'm not sure how the copyright works there.

@Our No I haven't I guess I didn't think of that, nor do I know where to look for that, but I'll check it out, thanks for the suggestion!

@PaulCusson, I would suggest to mail him directly. I myself is Mathematics PhD scholar and I often mail to famous mathematicians to understand some parts of their paper or seeking their opinion about a question. Many of them answer positively. It is true that Tao is busy, but he might be interested in your question. Also may be he can  refer  you to contact to his collaborators.

@AnonymousPhysicist Yes, that is an excellent thread with satisfying answers!

As accomplished as he is, Terry Tao is a human being like you --- just email him and ask if he'd like to write the paper with you.  Offer to do the "heavy lifting" of writing the first draft, to save him time.  (And since it is his result, maybe check if he intends to write it up without you first.)

Why don’t you message him here on SE something short and ask him if this question is something he’d like to pursue with you as a research project? You know he follows his account here to some extent. Nothing longer than a few lines.

Oh I didn't even know one could send messages on SE. Unfortunately on MO there is no way to send private messages. Are you suggesting I do so on academia.stachexchange?

He might just see this post and figure out how to contact you directly.

StackExchange doesn't have a mechanism for this, by design. See https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/431/any-way-to-send-a-personal-message-to-another-user and https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/57537/how-do-i-contact-other-users There are some exceptions, like if the user you want to contact uses Chat. Users who want to be contacted can include external contact info in their profile; generally comment requests for contact or dropping personal details in comments is frowned upon and may be removed by moderators.


text:
How hard it is to switch for a new Master's degree from different Undergraduate background?
For Non-STEM backgrounds like Media/Film Studies, is it possible to get a master's degree in Data Analytics/ Data science to go for the desired field? I feel extremely need for a transition into a data analyst role with strong scientific research methodologies, computational and quantitative skills. As I am looking forward to working within my expected environment, I have a strong dedication to this field. Currently, I am working independently on different projects using data and coding, some sort of skills of math(linear algebra, probability, matrix) and statistics (as classical inferences, Bayesian, Regression, Hypothesis Testing, ANOVA). But after all, I want to learn more critical and overwhelming concepts of computational processes, statistical methods and . I have an affinity for Technology and IoT very much.

What country are you looking to do your Master's in? Are you looking to do this at a top university?

I am technically looking for opportunities in the USA but not at a top university. Rather I would love to choose mid-ranges. Can I have any suggestions/advice about this?

What specifically? I know a lot about Master's degrees in the UK, but not so much about the US. Does Brian Tompsett's answer clear things up a bit?

Some universities offer Master's degrees designed for students who are changing discipline; they are called conversion Master's. These are offered alongside a Master's degree for students who are coming from the same subject area; these are considered an advanced Master's.
In either case there will be some kind of admission qualification to achieve so that applicants need to demonstrate they have some of the qualities necessary to succeed. If you are admitted it will because of the potential demonstrated in your application. For example, mathematical and statistical experience together with using data and coding in a non-academic context would be that kind of appropriate background.
However such conversion Master's degrees are not a walk in the park as they compress several years of undergraduate study into a few intense trimesters.
I know this because I teach on one.

Some universities allow this provided you have real good GPA in BS. But you will need to take some bachelor course in new discipline as pre-requisite.

Just to clarify, what does BS stand for here?

Bachelor of Science


text:
Does positive feedback during a tenure track campus interview mean an offer?
I had my first on-campus interview 10 days ago at an R1 university, which is not an ivy but a dream job in my field. I was supposed to give a colloquium and present a research talk about my future research and mentoring plans. Not only did every one-on-one interview go well, even after the research talk (that many had told me is the most important factor in decision making) many faculties told me the talk was amazing and they were very impressed with it. Also, I received a lot of positive feedback after the thank-you emails.
Does this mean anything? I don't know what to expect. I know many people say they thought the interview went so well for them, but they didn't end up getting an offer. But I have never heard someone talking about these many positive feedbacks (some in writing). Since I'm extremely stressed and the waiting period is too tough, I appreciate if someone could tell me about their experience, positive or negative...
P.S.: I know 2 out of 3 other candidates in person and they haven't heard either. I also know the last interview was last week.

The comments of other candidates are not reliable sources of information, especially if they are short-sighted.

Your underlying assumption here is that from your interactions during and after the interviews and talks, you can get useful information about the outcome of the hiring process. By and large, that assumption is largely false. You generally don't know what's going on behind the scenes and how the other candidates performed. Ultimately, you need to be very patient with hiring processes - it's best to completely forget about particular applications as much as possible after the talks + interviews, focus on your other applications and anything that helps your further build up your track record.

The purpose of positive feedback is not to tell you they want to hire you.  There are two goals in mind:

The positive feedback will encourage you to accept the job if it is offered to you.
The positive feedback establishes a good working relationship if you end up getting the job, which might happen in the distant future.

They can also just be polite.
If the search has been run well, all the finalists are qualified for the job.  There is uncertainty that they will accept an offer.  The primary motivation of the department is to ensure that the position is filled.  They do not want to be left understaffed.  They do not want to do the search again.
Nothing you hear between your interview and your offer/rejection is a reliable indicator of what happened during the search.

Only an offer is an offer. If there are several top rated candidates all of them may be getting positive feedback. You made a good impression. You'll have to be satisfied with that until something official is done. Good luck.

You thought your interview and talk went well, you got good feedback, and the email indicates you're probably still in the running. That's encouraging but not a guarantee. You'll find out whether you got the appointment when they decide to tell you. That's all that can be known for now.
In short, it means you likely have a good chance.  But don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Thanks @Nicole for the answer. Do you say this based on the positive feedback or the email? So it's not so common to be positive to everyone, right?

@tenuretrackjobseeker moved my response into my answer.


text:
Any significant differences between tenure track interviews between Canada and the US
I've been invited to a zoom interview at UBC, Canada, for a tenure track job in physics. I'm more or less familiar with the US academic system and how either the phone/zoom interviews or campus visits go, but this is my first experience in Canada and I don't know if the do's and don'ts between the two cultures are similar or not. Any suggestions?

I've worked in both countries, though I'm in the social sciences. Expect broad similarities - Canada and the U.S. act a lot more alike in terms of academia than the U.S. and the UK do, and the department will be accustomed to people from a range of backgrounds. Here are some subtle points of divergence.

There are some minor dialect differences in terminology about higher
education, so don't be surprised by that (where Americans would use a
generic "college" or "college students," Canadians almost always use
"university" and "university students." In Canada a "college" is a
trade school or community college or specialized postsecondary
institution that does not legally have full "university" status).

Undergraduate education is generally far more affordable in Canada, at least for domestic students. American-style jokes about student loans may come across as exaggerated, unfortunately (though most of the largest cities in Canada are experiencing a cost-of-living crisis, and it's been hard on students).

Probably best to avoid talking about American/international politics
unless someone else brings up the subject first. Canadians do very likely have
opinions and these are often well-developed (Canadians watch the U.S. intensely and often critically, especially as the political center is farther left than that of the U.S.), but are overall culturally much quieter
about discussing politics openly, especially among strangers. I've
seen candidates occasionally blurt out the wrong thing and
unwittingly alienate the onlookers. Even self-deprecation is a bad idea: I watched someone visit our campus from the U.S., joke about Americans being [personality-related stereotype], get severely frowned at by the chair of the search committee - who is American - and not be offered the job.

Sometimes people from the U.S. end up chatting about cross-border issues and unwittingly go overboard on insisting that
Canadians count as Americans too, because (the reasoning goes) they are also from North
America. I recommend not doing that. "American" on its own to
Canadians very clearly means "from the United States," and insistence
that things are otherwise can seem like weird semi-imperialism.

White folks in British Columbia have been reckoning in a very big way with the ghastly legacy of anti-Indigenous racism (among other things) since contact. Be aware, expect to see land acknowledgments and possibly more efforts everywhere, and don't joke about it. (This goes for most of Canada, but B.C. is farther ahead in its efforts than most of the rest of the country is.) It's very much a work in progress. Indigenous folks as a collective right now are probably best referred to as Indigenous (not "Native Canadians" and certainly not "Indian" unless a given Indigenous person states a preference for that). You might also hear "First Nations," though technically that's a subset. Avoid using phrases that suggest that Indigenous people somehow belong to Canada, because that kind of assumption is part of the problem.

Be aware that if anyone with Canadian citizenship is on the
shortlist, they may have a minor advantage due to anti-"brain drain"
measures - though this is not a guarantee of anything and many
departments have people from the U.S. and abroad. I have an American colleague we hired over a Canadian competitor years ago.

Vancouver's a wonderful city - best of luck!

And don't speak ill of poutine.


text:
Do Canadian universities defer to the grade conversion scale of a foreign univerisity or do they follow their own?
I'm planning to apply this year to several Ph.D. programs at different universities in Canada. The school where I finished my master's degree (outside Canada) uses a percentage grading system where a GPA of 94% is supposedly equivalent to a Canadian GPA of 3.60. This is indicated on the last page of my transcript. However, when I checked several reliable online resources on how to convert a foreign GPA to a Canadian GPA, I learned that the Canadian GPA of 3.60 is equivalent only to around 90%, not 94%. Thus, if I follow my former school's grade conversion scale, my GPA will look lower than if I follow the grade conversion scale that I found online. My question is: do Canadian universities defer to the grade conversion scale of a foreign university where the Ph.D. applicant graduated from or do they follow their own grade conversion scale? Thanks in advance for you reply!

Going to depend on the school you come from and the school you are applying to. You should web-search the contact info of the school you are applying to and ask. Plus, PhD progs are going to look at things other than grades. Letter of rec is going to be a big deal. If you have some kind of funding it will also be a big deal.

You can expect individual universities to give you guidance on what information to provide and what conversions to use. If it's not clear, you can contact them for guidance.
I took a couple minutes searching "(name of university) grade equivalent" and immediately found:
https://www.mcgill.ca/gradapplicants/international/equivalency
and
https://www.sgs.utoronto.ca/future-students/admission-application-requirements/international-credentials-equivalencies/
for the first two schools I looked at.
Grades aren't everything, and much of the advice given for the US at How are Ph.D. applications evaluated in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students? Am I likely to get into school X? will apply similarly for Canada. Like in the US, admissions are typically done at the department level, so you may need to address your questions to the specific program you apply to rather than a general graduate admissions department. A brief email like this would suffice:

Dear (graduate program),
I'm interested in applying for a (degree) in (program/department). My
undergraduate education was at (institution) in (country), where
grades are (given on a scale of XX to YY/given as class ranks/however
your country/institution does it).
(explain in a sentence what you
already understand about grade conversions from reading information
provided by the university online)
(ask a specific question about
whether they would like you to convert grades and how they'd like you
to do this, if it isn't clear).

I can’t see how 90% or 94% will make much of a difference.  The availability of funding, academic trends on the transcript, and LoR will have a much greater impact than a 4% lost in translation.
To answer your question directly: Canadian universities do NOT defer to grades awarded in other countries.  There is a country-specific scaling factor based on historical data and some other factors (that I don’t know too well) and as far as I know this scaling factor is agreed upon by all universities (at least within one province).

Graduate admissions are done by a committee of professors, not bureaucrats.  The professors will look at the overall records of applicants and make a [i]subjective[/i] decision about who is admitted.  It's quite likely that at least one of the professors on the committee will be familiar with grading norms in your home country or even your specific university and evaluate your transcript directly without converting your grades to a "Canadian" scale.  In any case, the small difference this will make in your GPA will have no impact on your application.

"Quite likely" seems like a a bit of an overstatement considering we don't know the country or the size or makeup of the admissions committee. In my own department (which is highly ranked) I would rate the chances of anyone on the committee being familiar with a given country as low. Perhaps mathematicians have more familiarity with worldwide grading systems?

@AzorAhai-him- of course it depends on the country, but my department of 20 can cover 10 countries and we could easily get information on another 15 through either close collaborators or other folks on campus.  That will easily cover most applicants (even if it doesn't cover most countries).

It is more likely that professors are NOT familiar with grading systems of other countries, but that some office has a known algorithm (based in historical or other data) for converting to an approximate university equivalent.

@ZeroTheHero: In my experience, this is absolutely not the case.  This is because professors are frequently people who have immigrated from another country and know other systems from personal experience, while the bureaucrats are frequently people who have never even lived in another town and can't even conceive of the idea that other people might do things differently.


text:
Non-responsive co-author
I have written a paper together with a co-author. The co-author is a former assistant of mine. The paper is based on my idea but they have done quite a bit of work on it. We had a generally good relationship. The paper has been rejected twice and in the third attempt there was a request for a major revision. I have updated the paper after the rejections, but after the last decision, namely the revision request, the co-author has stated that they want to add some material that they think will likely satisfy the reviewers. I actually know this material and think that it may make another paper, however I said "that's fine by me". This was half a year ago. I am now waiting for the co-author to do what they have promised to do. I am very keen on having the paper published, and I believe that what the reviewers want could be addressed in a different way. I think I could do it (and if it doesn't work submit elsewhere where I think we have better chances with the paper as it is - rejections up to now may have been caused simply by aiming too high). I'm open to what my co-author proposed, so if they did that work, I'd be OK with it as well. However we are losing time and new relevant literature comes out in the meantime, so our task will be more difficult if we wait for much longer.
The thing is, I have asked my co-author a few times how they get on with the work and when we can resubmit. Originally there were answers like "I'll have this done in a week or so", but now they have become unresponsive (last response was end November). I'm starting to doubt that they will ever finish this, and even if they did, I don't think I should wait for very long, one more month OK, but a year or two? No way.
I assume nothing serious has happened because they were active on social media a few days ago.
What are my options now? I could update the paper and tell them that here it is and if I don't hear anything within a week, I take it as a confirmation that it is fine for them if I resubmit it. Would that be OK? I suspect it isn't, but I am interested on views on that.
Note that I already have sent them an email asking for whether it would be OK if I update the paper and resubmit, but I didn't get a response.
An alternative is to remove their name as co-author, rather state in an Acknowledgement what they have done, and submit with only myself as author. Fur sure I do not want to remove their name and I'd warn them about it and offer them to submit with both names if they agree on submission (rather than holding things up for ages), however I wonder if in case I don't hear anything from them using only my name would be the more legally correct option.
Or am I just stuck and there's no way to get this published without a further response from the co-author which might not come?
PS: Additionally I wonder for how long a journal is likely to accept (or at least review) a requested revision. They haven't set us a deadline but it's half a year ago now, so I'm worried.

Can you phone them?

All the usual: talk to them, provide a specific deadline for their contribution after which you make the decision to do something else with the reviewers' concerns. Make it reasonable so that either your co-author can communicate in time and you are okay with waiting that long: from your description, a couple of weeks to a month would be a good estimate.
Regardless of whether the reply comes or not, at the deadline you would know the answer to the issue with edits. As for co-authorship issues should they ghost you... Well, you are stuck like Buffy says. Still, do not make this assumption at that point: clearly, you are more interested in publication than they are, and you must even the ground first by communicating a timeline that is acceptable to you.

Thanks, good advice setting them a deadline. Seems I can't upvote yet.

No worries, long as it helps... :)

I think you are stuck. It would likely be unethical to submit as a sole author since your description indicates they have earned authorship. Reputable journals require all authors to agree to publication.
But, I'll guess that you have a solution if you are willing to complete the other person's work yourself, so that they don't need to work further on the paper. But still leave them as a co-author.
Some things in your question suggest that they somehow got stuck with something, maybe this paper and maybe something else, and just stopped replying as they had no effective way to make progress and so, shut down.
If you finish the paper yourself, all you need from them is permission to go forward. But making a "reply or else" demand won't help if the journal wants their affirmative permission - which they should and probably will. You can't assume permission is implied by the lack of a response. Nor can the journal.

" that you have a solution if you are willing to complete the other person's work yourself, so that they don't need to work further on the paper. But still leave them as a co-author." That is in fact my preferred solution. But I sent them an email asking whether this is OK, and no answer. :-( I have added this to the question.

The bottom line is that you need their permission. As to how long the journal will wait, it depends on the journal and the paper. But it is more likely that they will be permissive unless they tell you otherwise. A worry of mine is that they may be suffering in some way, perhaps depression. Perhaps some third party who knows them can give you advice.

In fact yes, depression or similar may play a role here. There were phases of very low productivity when they still worked for me and I suspected something like that. It seems I can't upvote yet by the way.


text:
Is it accepted that I submit two novel papers at the same time, but one uses the methods in the other one?
I have written two STEM papers (Paper1 and Paper2) and I have already submitted Paper1. Paper2 implements some of the methods presented in Paper1. The conference I submitted for Paper1 and the journal considered for Paper2 both require novel work and state that the work presented in the paper is not published or under review by other journals. Both the conference and the journal are prestigious and Q1.
Paper2 is more of an expansion of the first with more methods, data and discussion. So, what are my options for Paper2 now? I am thinking of one of those:
1- Rewrite the methods of the first paper but with different phrasing than what was shown in the first paper. I think this falls under "Not under review by other journals".
2- Option1 but without mentioning that the method is novel and try to make the writing as short as possible so Paper1 is the complete version.
3- Wait for the first paper to be published then reference it and summarize the methods. The problem with this option is that the conference will be in October and the paper will be published in Decemeber, and I cannot afford to wait ~9 months.
Is there an option I am missing?

Appendix. Put whatever is in paper1 in a very short form in the appendix of paper2. Then if you are lucky, during peer review you will have the possibility to add the freshly published paper1 in paper2

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

Does this answer your question? How to address dependencies when publishing a chain of papers

Just a thought; why do you submit these papers at the same time? Can't you postpone one of them to submit after the other is accepted?

Yes, it is totally acceptable. But you are missing at least one option, and that is the one that I think is prefarable:
Submit the second paper, and cite paper 1 as "submitted" (add the title and authors, but not the journal/conference). It is often possible to add information that is intended "for review only": it will be sent to the reviewers but not published. The essential information from paper 1 can be added in this way for the reviewers to understand paper 2.
This can lead to 2 situations:

Paper 1 is published first, and the citation in paper 2 can be updated before it is published

Paper 2 is published first, and the citation remains incomplete. This is not ideal, but I have seen it regularly so apparently it is acceptable by some journals. Readers will be able to find the first paper based on the list of authors and title.


text:
Supervisors are pushing me to keep trying with a bad paper- what can I do?
I wrote a paper towards the start of my PhD. It had nowhere near enough data- and by nowhere near I mean by an amount that it is not remotely publishable and would be laughable. It was rejected a couple of times, and I was tasked with changing it to hopefully get in somewhere, but I put it on the back burner. My PhD supervisors recently arranged a meeting with me to ask about it and I explained that even with the marginally more data they have, i don't think it would get in. Both of them were like "oh it'll be great, I think etc, get it done by x deadline" it will take me a lot of work to add this data (much of it mindless work that wouldn't benefit my skills) and I can't even begin to describe how depressed I am that I am being asked to do this when I am towards the end of my PhD. I think it's easy + risk free for them to ask this, but it isn't for me. I almost think I should quit and find a job. What should I do? Could I refuse? Should I just do it to not aggravate?

It is hard to give good advice without knowing personalities. It is usually a bad idea to fight with supervisors, but perhaps you can negotiate a middle ground.
Maybe you can agree to spend the majority of your time and effort on your dissertation research, but promise that you will spend "some" time, perhaps negotiated, on the other project. A flat refusal, however, is probably less than optimal.
If you make "some progress" they might be satisfied (but - personalities...). Once you finish the degree you can judge for yourself whether to continue on the old project.
There might actually be a benefit in having a second, but secondary, project so that when you get stalled on the main work you have something to think about. Take some notes on the secondary work so that you can show it if asked.
The deadline set is more worrisome, however. If they are very vindictive then it could be a problem, but the usual case would be some disappointment but not a block. Good luck.


text:
Is the grad school of my current undergrad a safety?
I am currently studying mathematics at College A (In the United States). Assume that College A is not a notoriously "prestigious" college, but that it's also not a "nobody" college. When applying to graduate schools for mathematics, is College A a safety school just because I went there for undergraduate?
I think it's important to assume that the college isn't some top 20 school because I think that would not be the case.
I was surprised to find no information on this topic online.

You need to provide additional information: country? admission policy of the university? Otherwise there will be too many possible answers. i.e. US universities do this; Aussie & Kiwi universities do this; etc. That is exactly the reason why you could not find any information on that topic online.

Do you know what a safety school is?  Are you sure they will admit you?

If by "safety school" you mean that you'll almost surely be accepted to the grad program... I think the answer is "no". Even if you've done reasonably well as an undergrad, for grad admissions you are suddenly competing with people from all around the world. The "playing field" is suddenly much different.
Yes, some universities do try to take good care of their own grads, but this is very inconsistent from place to place, and depends enormously on the current administrative cadre at a given place.
Also, typically R1 universities graduate many more undergrad math majors each year than they have openings for (funded!!!) grad students. So the numbers/money game alone restricts what your home place can do.
So, in summary, if you are one of the better math majors in your year, it would be sensible to apply your own place as a back-up. But/and you might want to make it clear to your own dept what you are doing, since many depts will simply not make an offer to prospective students who give every indication that they wish to go elsewhere... since the current rules/guidelines for grad admissions in the U.S. effectively punish programs for making offers to students who won't accept.
Talk to your faculty at your place about the advisability of this...

Talk to a few current math professors to get an opinion on whether you would be a good candidate for their graduate program. If they say yes, more or less unanimously, then, yes, you could use it as a sort of backup in case other applications fail to get results.
But, in some sense, it doesn't really matter. No one can guarantee you admission anywhere.
And don't get complacent. Make a solid application there as well as elsewhere.
There is an advantage to going to a new place, actually, as you get the opportunity to meet new people (faculty) and  with it, perhaps, new ideas. I always advised my students not to continue at my institution for that reason.

Okay, I'll be sure to ask around.


text:
Should I include high school IB diploma on CV/resume?
I graduated high school with an IB diploma. I am a current undergraduate and I am wondering: Should I include high school IB diploma on CV/resume?
I have read this question, so I am essentially asking the question: is an IB diploma valuable enough to put on my CV/resume?
I think if I were a graduate student or above the answer would be clearly no.

This question would be improved for future readers by defining what an “IB diploma” is.

Well I guess that answers my question…

I included that I was an IB student when I was applying to Georgia State in 2015. And, while I still was, the academic or industry job I'm applying for won't care about that, so I omit it from my vita, since it isn't relevant to the position I currently want.


text:
Marie-Curie Fellowship PhD salary
I have received a Marie curie Ph.D. fellowship in Spain. The salary written in my contract is much lower than what I expected. Although the website has some information regarding the salary (pdf from the website), there is still a lot of confusion among students on what they should expect (see the different answers to this question).
I was offered around 2700 euros gross per month. Calculating my salary using the country correction coefficient and tax rates in Spain, I was expecting 2700 euros net. I want to know whether the salary I was offered is what I'm supposed to get (in Spain) and if so why is it so low compared to the advertised values? If anyone knows the actual values of salaries recieved by marie curie fellows, kindly let me know.

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/179060/20058 See also the final comment from the OP which says that it turned out that the taxes where much higher than expected.

I don't know enough about Spanish taxes to answer this specifically, but it's important to remember that for Marie Curie projects employers can also deduct their tax and other employment costs from the living allowance listed in that linked PDF. So employer social security contributions, contributions they make to a pension fund on your behalf, and other similar costs can all be deducted from your pre-tax salary. This can add up to be quite a bit in some countries, and may explain the difference.

I've never heard of any employer/scholarship provider that sets an amount of money net of taxes --- offers of payment from employers, scholarship providers, etc., are always pre-tax in my experience.

I'm selected for a DC project in Spain, too and I wonder the net amount very much. In MSCA DC calculations, it is written that 3400€ for life expenses and 600€ for mobility. I've read too many post complaining about the same thing. Did you request the detail of calculation? If you don't mind, could you share exact amount?

I have access to my payroll and it seems that its almost 40 percentage of taxes and other deductions. The salary that I receive in hand is about 2100 euros


text:
Accidental dual submission
I have accidentally found myself in a dual submission situation.  I submitted it to one journal over four months ago.  A few weeks later I sent another email inquiring about the status of the article.  After waiting a further few months I assumed I had not been successful and there had been an error. At this point, I should have sent an email request to remove the article from consideration.  I did not.   I then submitted the article to another journal (around three weeks ago).  I am now aware of how serious submitting to two journals is. I have since received an apology for the delay and confirmation that my article has been received by the first journal, informing me it has been sent for peer review.  I immediately responded apologising and asking to remove my article from consideration.
Is there anything else I need to do in order to correct this mistake?

I'm curious, why did you withdraw from the first journal (where the article had progressed further) rather than from the second journal?

@nanoman: One likely reason (which I would have felt in OP’s situation) is that the second journal is entirely “innocent”, while the first journal is (at least partly) responsible for the situation.  So it seems fairer that the first journal, not the second, should have to deal with the negative consequences.

@PLL Sure, but the consequences for the journal (and waste of referee time) are lower for the paper that was submitted only three weeks ago. It may well be that this paper was simply sitting in a queue and no one had spent any time on it yet. So it would have seemed cleaner all around to withdraw the one submitted very recently.

Hello, OP here.  My first thought was the same as @PLL outlined above.   Although, I can understand your perspective too- Perhaps that would have been a better response.  I was in a bit of a panic!
Thankfully, the first journal responded quickly acknowledging the withdrawal.  I have also been informed the second journal has responded and the research has been sent for peer review.   I will certainly ensure I am not in this position again.

@Worriedresearcher I think your comment above was in reply to me. I happened to come back and see it, but I would've been notified if you @'d me. A previous commenter is not notified of your response unless you @ them.

No, you have taken proper action.
Assuming it wasn't in the system was an error of judgement, but your withdrawal has corrected the problem.

Proper actionS, just in the wrong order, as Churchill more elegantly didn't say "Americans will always do the right thing - after exhausting all the alternatives."

OP: I would have actually retracted the second one.

First journal: I am not sure what they claimed, but 4 months without communications seems a long time. They are at fault. But they can live with harming your interest, you are "just" a client, golden rule for a succesful business is "you cannot please all your clients".
Second journal: I assume they asked you (via submission forms and the like) if you submitted or if you were planning to submit the same material somewhere else (or similar legalish gibberish). Depending on what you answered, you are at fault. You have been careless and you harmed yourself doing your job, luckily your job is not "truck driver", so for the moment the damage is only on you [1].
However the first journal has a history of poor communication, ask insistently confirmation of the cancelled submission. Apart from the copyright, there is the larger issue of people already doing peer review (free work) without any use.
Additionally, if your research field, or at least the pool of experts regarding your paper topic, is small enough, you put yourself in a dangerous situation: what if the two journals sent your paper to the same reviewer? If I were the reviewer (let's say I am reviewer A), I would immediately contact the editors that sent me the paper for review.
In a theoretical world, the second submission may be invalid (we do not know what you declared during submission), so you should withdraw the second submission and submit it again to another journal, openly declaring to the editor all the submission history with the previous two journals, so the editor can properly present your paper to the reviewers.
Reviewer A receives then the same paper for the third time. Thanks to the short introduction from the editor, reviewer A finally understands the authors had issues with submission to the previous journal(s).
Without the note from the editor, reviewer A would think the authors are exploiting peer reviews and the submissions system, trying their luck to get their work published in blatant disrespect of decency, fairness and consideration for other people works.
[1] Don't worry, Academia (the big one, not StackExchange only) is full of people taking moral shortcuts and having all kind of double standards, so you are not the first, nor the last, but at least consider how serious it is if you lied, even if it was just a "box ticking form on the web".

Hello OP here,  Thank you for your response.  Thankfully I have heard back from the first journal quickly with confirmation of withdrawal.  Taking your advice on board,  I emailed the second journal to inform them of my mistake, provide an explanation and let them know the resolve.  Luckily they were understanding!


text:
Should I do an exam-focused study or a complete learning based?
I've completed a Bachelor's degree in engineering and I plan to go for a master's next. To get admission to one of the top universities in my country, I need to take a standard exam, which is highly competitive. That exam solely would decide whether I get a seat or not.
However, I feel I'm not prepared for the master's yet. There still are things in the undergraduate course of my field that I feel I do not understand completely, and before I clear them up I don't think I will be able to make the best out of my master's program.
Here I come to a dilemma.

If I study solely for the exam, I will be able to get a seat in a year
or so, but doing that, I know, would sacrifice my learning to some
extent. I'm of this opinion because I've experienced that I can solve
an MCQ even if I have a cursory knowledge of a topic.
If I study to truly understand, it takes time, and as a result, I can't
complete all the subjects, which as a result, results in low scores in
the exam.

There already has been a year gap after my bachelor's, following that complete learning-based approach.
I look forward to your suggestion on this, should I do an exam-focused study or a complete learning-based, or is there an option three?

Details of the Exam
My field - Mechanical Engineering
Can someone please help me with the tags? Thank You.

Was your bachelor's a 4-year degree? If yes, you have already spent sufficient time trying to understand UG-level knowledge.

If you still decide to wait a year: in a field as applied as Mechanical Engineering, might I suggest you try to gain industry work experience alongside studies?

@whoisit Yes, it was a 4-year course. The first time I studied those subjects I did not pay attention to details, as much as I'm able to now. I feel like I've learned how to learn over time, something that I never knew before. If after my master's I want a job in sector B, and if I gain experience in sector A, where A and B are different, would it be beneficial?

I will answer your question with one of my own. You say there are parts of your undergrad you don't understand.
How long do you think it will take you to come to a situation where there is nothing about mech eng you don't understand? Even at an undergrad level.
Mech eng, like the typical area of study at a uni level, is a gargantuan subject. More, it is changing all the time due to advancements and new ideas. The apt metaphor is drinking from the fire hose.
If you have a plan for your degree, move on it. Don't worry that there are "holes" in your knowledge. Forty years from now when you are a senior respected emeritus in the field there will still be holes in your knowledge, even of your specific area of study within your field. This is how the advancement of knowledge works, both personal and in the wider community.
While you are still in uni, treat it like an "all you can learn" buffet.  But don't worry if you don't get the same amount of knowledge on every subject.

'How long do you think it... Even at an undergrad level.', honestly, in recent years I've felt as if I'm walking on a path whose end keeps on getting farther, even when I'm walking the fastest I could. This resonates with what you said. I guess I need to find peace with not knowing something. Sometimes I cling to a topic, even if it's not important for the exam, coz I feel it would be important someday and that there are many resources to learn that topic that I have access to.

@HarshitRajput It's always a balance between learning the stuff that "glimmers" seductively and the stuff you need for your classes or job. Keep the shiny stuff in mind, but finish the work-a-day stuff also.


text:
Will people be interested in the collaboration that can have the last author?
As a just graduated PhD, I would like to work with other people. But I am a nobody in my field. I am thinking that people will be interested in working with me if I do a postdoc with them or become a visiting scholar. I think that is because that the PI and postdoc both have interest in some topic. I take that as a Win-win. The postdoc can get paid and more important get some direction and advice, and the PI can get his idea be implemented. Both of them have the same goal, they want to do successful research and have some good publication.
However, due to personal reasons, I will not be able to do a postdoc for a long time. I was wondering if I still can work with some people, like a remote postdoc, but the difference is that they do not theoretically hire me. I can have some direction, advice froom them, and they can have their idea be implemented, and both of us want to have sccessful research and discovery or contribution and have some good publication.
Am I too naive about this idea? Or is it possible? How do you get to know the people to collaborate with? What will you say to them when you first meet? Like tell them that I can work together and have some scheduled meeting, and ask them for advice and direction, if every going well they can be last author for the publication?

Cold emailing people will be difficult, given that they do not know whether you will run off with an idea.   Your best strategy is use your connections, e.g., supervisor(s), or class mates.

That make sense. Like ask you supervisor or class mates to recommend or introduct some people to work with?

Don't offer to work for free. It's immoral and undermines your colleagues.

Yes. You are right. I mean collaboration.

From my perspective, you suggestion to work for somebody and trade their support for an authorship is very wrong. Authorship is something that should not be traded, it has to be earned. And how would you say anything definite about an author list or the author order without any work done, any results, let alone an idea or a concept of what is to be published? So no, I would expect your offer not to be taken into consideration by respectable researchers.

Thank for you answe. I can see  that you are person with great integrity. However, I may not make myself very clear. Definitely, I won't give somebody a author when he does nothing. I mean of course he has some contribution. The reason why i want to work with these experienced people is that I hope that i can get some advice and direction. But when you purpose a collaboration, you want the let the person know the role I and they will play in that project. So they can give their support and contribution. But of course things change. The final author order depend on their contribution.

If they did less than what they should do or they did more than they do, I will try to tell them in time. Like either they accept authorship order change or they change their investment to the project. So that I and they will adjust the investment and expectation to the project. Everyone understand what their role in the project. For my experience, if we only discuss the authorship when we are going to submit the paper, there is high risk that people will have argument at that time. I also wonder what you do and how you deal with this problem, it is very welcomed to discuss. Thank you.

Yes, you seem naive about this. People will want to collaborate if they are interested in, and have some skills/background in, you topic. There are, of course, people only interested in citation counts, but those are not the people you want to collaborate with.
Collaboration is a sharing of skills and ideas. Focus on that. If you have some skills and ideas then search for others who seem to be similarly inclined (reading their papers, meeting them at conferences) and start to share ideas. Perhaps something will come from it.
In some specialized fields there are conference where people come together and one can meet presenters, but also just chat up other attendees and see if there is common interest.
But, if people want to "collaborate" just to get authorship, then they are probably the people you don't actually want to work with as the chances of producing something meaningful seems pretty small. Focus on the research, on the ideas. Let the rest follow naturally.

I'm guessing that "last authorship" means primary authorship in your field.


text:
Should I follow up with a potential supervisor?
I was talking to a potential supervisor on mail for quite some time, asking them different questions related to the PhD project. They didn't reply for quite sometime to the first email but after that they were very kind and generous when answering. The project ad was listed as available for students worldwide and they were kind enough to mention that part themselves, while stating that it will be the unis responsibility to which I agreed. I was invited to a video call to further discuss the project and what direction I would want to take it. They asked me about my thesis and about a prominent and common topic I was involved in (which they knew from my CV). I felt very comfortable talking to them, even though I had communication issues in the beginning we were laughing by the end of the discussion. They were even telling me about where their lab is located and what all to expect when coming to the uni.
They suggested me to apply for the position and email them the details so that they can have my profile on their desk, figuratively. I did apply, in fact twice, since one of my documents was wrong I had to withdraw one of my applications. I wrote a new email to them stating that one of my applications wasn't complete and I had to withdraw it, and I gave them the details of the new one.
They haven't responded yet, it has been couple of days after the deadline and I'm overthinking things to an extreme extent. Have I been rejected? Should I mail them again? Should I mail them a follow up query full of questions that I have already prepared?

What would you lose if you choose to follow up?

It's a couple of days after the deadline. The committee probably hasn't even met to review the applications yet (depending on the country, they may have Easter holidays around this time, for example). Just be patient. If you haven't heard after 3-4 weeks, I would consider writing a follow-up.

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

From the sound of your earlier interactions, I'd guess that the person isn't primarily responsible for your admission or rejection. A couple of days past the deadline is not enough time for decisions to reach you so you may have been rejected or not, but you need to wait for an official response.
But, yes, if someone is interested in your work then it is good to keep in contact for as long as it is fruitful. I suggest, however, that you don't flood them with questions. Ask one or two questions at a time. And the questions should be about the topic, not the admissions.
It is also good if you have something to add to the conversation, not just questions but results of your own explorations and any insights you might have.
Long term relationships, especially collaborations, are valued in academia, even if you wind up elsewhere.


text:
Explaining what a PhD is all about to parents
I am joining a PhD program in mathematics in a few months. But I am having a hard time explaining what a PhD is to my parents! They ask: Why is it not enough to complete a PhD just for the sake of completing it? How can I come up with something not known to anyone?
My attempts at explaining go in vain and are often met with ridiculous counterexamples (many universities in India grant PhD in around two years for little original work, which is a major source of their counterexamples!)
Could you please suggest ways in which I may properly communicate these things to my parents? It would be great if you could suggest articles that explain what a PhD in science (mathematics) is all about. I can share them with my parents.

You are ready to embark on a 'PhD in Mathematics'. Why are you doing so i.e. what motivated you to join that PhD program?

In which country will you be doing the PhD ?

@Dawn I’ll be doing it in Spain.

The obvious counter to the counterexamples would be a proper analogy. Find something they are proud of and mock it equally. If they have an expensive car, tell them you can find a guy who can glue a BMW-badge to an auto rickshaw for a tenth of the price. If they climbed a famous mountain on a holiday, ask them why they did not just walk up some small hill next to wherever you live, and so on. If they tell you that this is not the same, tell them that this is the point and that no one who actually works in the field sees those degrees as a real PhDs, but only as a waste of time and money.

This doesn't exactly answer all of these questions, but you can send them this: https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/

This is something that many of us face: it is hard to explain a PhD to somebody who does not have much or any experience with academia or higher education. Even this year, as I also leave and graduate college to enter a PhD in mathematics in the Fall, I've received a lot of confusion from friends and family regarding the program. I've been asked "how much debt are you going into for this?" (response: none), "what jobs can you get with a PhD?" and "are you going into more schooling because you couldn't get a job in the real world?"
(The following advice assumes that you plan to enter an academic career).
The best counter to any doubts that people have about academia is to talk about a PhD like it's a job. Say, first and foremost, that you are a paid researcher hired by the university, and that although your primary responsibility is research, you will also have to teach, and will probably take a few classes just to get up to speed with some advanced material. Second, explain that a job in academia is both desireable (as in: pays well eventually, is a legitimate career choice, and has many benefits that no office job has, including intellectual freedom) and very hard to get (as in: a lot of people want it and most people fail to get it and ultimately enter industry as a direct result). The latter point is necessary because many people---even those who have gone to college---think that being a professor is easy, perhaps with the old adage in mind: "If you can't do, then teach." Third, just be honest: "my dream is to be an academic; a PhD is the only way to continue to work in research in a university and become a professor; it is hard to become a professor, so realistically, I have X and Y backup options, and the PhD may make me more employable for those options, but that is not its primary purpose."

Thanks for the answer. I have already implemented your first advice! Seems like the communication gap between a scientist and the general public begins right from the PhD level!

@DimensionEntangled: I can assure that, at least in some fields, it begins much (really much, much) earlier than at the PhD level.

Wait, isn't it a cultural thing that people in some countries respect doctors much more than they probably should? If it's your case, than it simple: it's a doctor, but in math.
Another idea is to say that you are getting an advanced university qualification (that makes you more suitable for a research career, by the way), that's basically worth at least the same than the same time spent at a commercial company. So, if the concern is that you won't find a job with that fancy title, ensure your parents that it's not the case and it's the time well spent. And since it seems that you are getting a position, it's not some kind of an extremely underpaid practicum. So, you actually start earning some money with your head.
A yet another issue about a PhD, coupled with being a better researcher, is that it's the beginning of a track to become a professor.