text:
How can teachers reduce student suspicions in discrepancies and irregularities of grading?
From experience, many teachers dislike it when students compare grades, but that often shows the discrepancies and irregularities in the grading system. What other methods should teachers implement in order to keep grading transparent and fair?
Consider the following situations in your answer:

Curved Grades
The possibility of an error in grading, which leads to an imbalance in the grade distribution.

Some teachers immediately assume that just because a student wants to compare papers that he/she is just interested in increasing their grade. This is not the case! Some teachers make mistakes so instead of brushing it off, by assuming that students want to "grade-lawyer" or the like, they should consider the possibility that an error has been made. The goal of this question is to reduce such responses.

Too short for an answer: I personally don't care if students compare grades, but, for the student, it takes the focus off of what is most important. (What do you think that is?)

@MadJack For me, grades are the least of importance. How well you understand the topic is clearly the more important thing. However, grades should represent that understanding. Therefore, if comparing grades reveals that X got higher than Y but didn't understand the topic as well as Y, then clearly the grade matters and is of importance.

@MadJack I agree with you, but consider a final grade which is past the point of making any effort. For example when grades are curved, those efforts don't always translate to a better outcome and that creates problems.

It is not at all evident to me that "many teachers dislike it", nor that comparison "often shows the discrepancies and irregularities..." since it is not clear to me that there are widespread discrepancies and irregularities. I do understand that the impulse to compare is based on a suspicion that there are secret injustices being perpetrated, but it is not at all clear that (e.g., in the U.S., in mathematics) there are significant discrepancies. Why would one believe that "many teachers dislike it", and so on?

If it was the case that for instance. Jessica got an A because she put in her best paper of the year but Sarah got a B- because while her paper was superior to Jessica's best work it was only slightly better than we we would expect from Jessica then yes those grades would be an unfair means of comparison. The problem is that grades aren't supposed to work like that. While there should be some degree of wiggle, in theory grades should closely (though arguably not literally in some cases) track with a student's quality. Teachers shouldn't (and don't to my knowledge) care.

In my exp they often discourage grade comp not b/c of indescrepencies but because grade comparisons can inhibit personal progress. If Jessica gets her best mark of the year she might see herself as improving and be motivated/pleased by it, but by comparing it to Sarah's "Horrible grade" which is still marks above hers, she might feel dejected and less motivated to improve. I know MANY teachers dislike grade comp for THOSE reasons. Which again are student oriented reasons (i.e. Don't do it because it's not good for you) not teacher oriented reasons (i.e .Don't do it because it's bad for me)

@paulgarrett It depends on the course. In a mathematics course, it is often the case that the answer is either right or wrong, so I doubt discrepancies would appear there except when giving partial grades. In other courses, such as an Ethics course, the grading scheme is less clear. Further, when combined with curved grades the distribution of grades is no longer clear and perhaps fair. Obviously, transparency plays a major role in this.
Anyhow, this has become a conversation rather than an answer to the question so I'm going to stop here.

By the way, it is not at all the case (probably contrary to myth) that "math questions have direct answers", and so on. The explanation is what is usually wanted, which is a narrative, etc.

@paulgarrett I wanted to avoid that myth in my edits, that's why I used the word "often". It depends on the level of the course and the type of question( MC), I suspect.

Many teachers dislike it when students compare grades -- [citation needed]

@JeffE Added from experience. I must urge the reader not to assume that just because they haven't met those type of teachers that they don't exist--they very much do even if not in an institution that they were or are currently in.

I voted to close, because the real question is in the premise(s). Maybe rewrite to ask "do teachers care whether or not students compare grading outcomes?" Also, the "why... if you've got nothing to hide?" is an all-too-well-known rhetorical device.

@paulgarrett I agree, made necessary changes.

I don't understand the "how justified is...": once students have the grades, they can do whatever analysis or comparison they want on them, independently of any justification.

@MassimoOrtolano Justification for presenting the analysis of the grades to the teacher.

In my experience, teachers have nothing against students comparing grades. The problem is the grade-lawyering that typically ensues.

@FedericoPoloni That's quite a funny sight!

As a TA, I tell the student that their answer is wrong, and that they should bring me the other student's assignment so I can lower their grade.  (They never do.)

@bitterstudent That's awfully impudent of you to assume the answer is wrong, without considering the possibility of it being right. If it indeed is wrong, then you are right in saying so. However, attempting to threaten(even if they are idle), in order to scare students, is again unacceptable. You should make sure from the beginning that all assignments are graded fairly, and not doing so, is clearly your fault.

The response to this question has showed several things:
a) Many people are too focused on the grade
b) Some people do not seem to accept that mistakes happen
c) That bias can happen in very small ways that ultimately affect the final grade.
Therefore, I'm going to edit the question to something that is more helpful to everyone here: How can teachers help avoid discrepancies and irregularities in grading? Thereby reducing the need of students to compare grades!

@paulgarrett I have edited the question to something that is perhaps more useful to the people here. What are your thoughts?

@Eddy That's awfully impudent of you to assume I was assuming.  Of course I check to see if the answer is wrong first.  But from experience, they have never been correct in these sorts of situations.

@bitterstudent When the topic of discussion is clearly not about a wrong answer and you decide to make it about one without adding a conditional, I am definitely in line in assuming that you were assuming. And please note that I didn't assume and offered another option, so please read the whole sentence before once again assuming!

@bitterstudent Please stop making this an argument. This is not the objective of this question

Added from experience. I must urge the reader not to assume that just because they haven't met those type of teachers that they don't exist- I must urge you not to assume many teachers dislike it when students compare grades just because you met those type of teachers. And please stop making this an argument because this is a Q&A site. If you have personal experience, just say so and ask a question about it. But, please do not assume many teachers/students have the same problem.

@scaaahu I never generalized my statement, you took it out of context. Many teachers I have met dislike it when students compare grades, which does not include teachers I haven't met-a very large set no doubt. Instead of nitpicking needlessly on details of no merit, I think it would be worthwhile if you add valuable input about the question  rather than what you assume I assumed. I am disappointed that such a question in a mature Q&A website was met with such antagonism.

Eddy, I recently posted a couple of comments relating to this in another question.

@DaveLRenfro I think that's an excellent way to approach the problem, Thanks Dave!

@DaveLRenfro You should contribute that as an answer to this question, since comments are disposable

@MJeffryes: I thought this question was closed (or in the process of being closed), but apparently that's changed. OK, I'll post my comments as an answer. Indeed, while I've posted quite a few comments the past couple (three?) months since I signed up to this particular stackexchange, I've only encountered two questions thus far that I felt I had something relevant enough to post as an answer.

Something I used to do (I no longer teach) was to grade in such a way that there should not be an issue if any student compared his/her graded test with any other student in the class. And this certainly happened in my classes (indeed, I sometimes did this myself when I was a student), from the first classes I taught in 1983 to the last classes I taught in 2005. By the way, I taught math. I suspect the methods I describe are much easier to carry out in math than in some other fields, such as literary criticism or philosophy.
Something I started doing after a few years of teaching was to photocopy my solutions/rubric sheet and handing a copy of it back with each student's test. Before this, I often handed out solutions to save class time (and office hour time), and at some point I realized I could save even more of my personal time by simply handing back what I had already hand-written for grading purposes, without bothering to rewrite (or type) it again in a neater form. The solutions I used for grading purposes were often brief, but for rubric purposes I would always include steps that I expected some students to miss, so it actually worked fine with most students when they consulted it to see what they did wrong or how to correctly work the problem. And for those places where I was too brief for a particular student, they tended to consult with their neighbors sitting next to them and together they almost always managed to figure things out, so I tended to only get the less trivial types of questions. As for the rubric, what worked best for me was to treat the rubric as a "work in progress" in the sense that I made grading decisions whenever a certain type of error showed up, rather than trying to anticipate them in advance.
One policy I had and which I often reminded students about was that they should never be afraid of asking me about a question for fear that their grade could decrease. If they saw anything that seemed to be an inconsistency in grading (and this only happened on very rare occasions because I tended to document for myself almost every kind of mistake made as I graded tests), then I wanted them to let me know. If in fact I did make a mistake, then my mistake would never lower their grade, but it could increase other students' grades if my mistake was an inconsistency in how many points were counted off for a certain type of mistake on their part. Also, if I saw on a student's paper brought to me where I made an oversight by not counting off for something incorrect, then I would mark in ink a correction (so the student wouldn't at some later time think what was incorrect was actually correct) and include a comment that this was found after the tests were graded.
One issue I used to often see students and teachers arguing about was points taken off for correct answers that were obtained by not entirely complete work. I learned early on that this can cause trouble when trying to justify your grading to students. The most straightforward way I found to handle this was to simply design problems whose solution requires all the things you feel are important, and of course often reminding students when working problems in class prior to a test what type of work is acceptable and what type of work is not acceptable. For example, the standard elementary calculus method for determining the global maximum and global minimum of a continuous function on a closed and bounded interval involves finding the values of the function at the critical points (where the derivative is zero or undefined) in the interior of the interval and the values of the function at the endpoints of the interval. So if you give a problem where both extrema occur at the endpoints, or both extrema occur in the interior of the interval, then the student could get the correct answer using correct (but not entirely complete) mathematical reasoning by only considering the critical points or by only considering the endpoints. The way to fix this is to design the problem so that one of the extrema is in the interior and the other extrema is at an endpoint. Better still is to arrange it so that there are at least two critical points, with at least one critical point lying outside the interval and at which the function's value is greater than the global maximum on the interval or less than the global minimum on the interval.


text:
Which is better at verifying that a conference is reliable: Scopus, IEEE Xplore or DBLP?
In the case that I got one paper published, which of the aforementioned repositories have more relevance (so that I can determine that my work has not been published in a nobody-knows-about, fake conference)? I have read that some papers that are in IEEE Xplore belong to bogus or fake conferences and there is also the same problem with Scopus. I have also seen that in some occasions Scopus miss some citations of my articles, while for example in Google Scholar they appear.
Well the bottom line, which repository is better viewed for backing up that one publication was in a reliable conference?

The systems that you mention are not conference ranking services.

What do you mean by having "more relevance"?  Your second sentence and last sentence look like you are gathering evidence that your paper was in a respectable conference, while the sentence about citations seems to be on a different topic.

The best repository for determining venue quality is a human: someone who understands the area and the different available options.

....but your best option for convincing brainless administrators is all three.

Anyone who is reasonably experienced in your field (i.e., anyone who might hire you) will know which venues are "relevant".  They won't base this on IEEE Xplore, Scopus, or DBLP, but on their own knowledge of the field.
Hopefully, anyone who would hire you will also know enough to evaluate your work directly to some extent, rather than relying on the reputation of the venue as a proxy for the value of the work itself.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Should I drop my paper after finding a recent very similar paper?
I have been working on a research paper to apply a technique X to solve certain problem Y. The field is in computer science. Approximately some months ago I started to check it up if there was something similar to my proposal, but I did not find anything at all.
A couple of weeks ago and when I have already finished the tests for my proposal, I decided to check it up again. In my new search, I found an article that was published about two years ago and when I read it, I saw that it was very close to the idea on which I have been working. The differences were very subtle, I was using a simplified version, data was collected in a different manner, and other tiny differences. If we talk in percentages, the differences would be like 20 % between my article and the one I found.
The reasons that I did not find this article in my first search were that it was published in a not so well known journal, and while it has been cited before, it were only self-citations and there was no strong relation between the article and the citing ones.
So what I can do in this situation? I have not based my work on this paper, but I know that I must cite it like a related work. Should I drop my paper or present it and see what the reviewers have to say about it? I would not like to be pointed as a case of plagiarism because of the similarities.

Slightly related: Is it normal to find unknown work during peer-review process?

In this situation (which is not that rare, particularly in active areas) one has no choice but to drop the publication of the current article. This situation occurs because after having worked something out one understands the literature, and how to search it, better than one did before working the thing out. But there's no publishing something already published (unless methods are very different), and feigning lack of awareness of the already published article would be dishonest, morally like plagiarism. All one can do is use the results obtained as a building block for something more.

You are way too honest for the academia. I think the best you can do now would be: write up you paper, cite the similar one (let's call it X), write a couple of sentences like "X is a very interesting appraoch", but "My version is simpler" (and thus easier to use, I hope?), "data collection is different" and so on. If the reviewers say you have enough contribution, then you get a paper. According to my experience in CS, the reviewers will hardly bother to read the "related work" section.

@user12956 You obviously know nothing about CS, so "the reviewers will hardly bother to read the related work section" is as silly as it can get. a) We do READ related work b) We do KNOW related work if it is on our area of expertise.

@DanFox This situation occurs because after having worked something out one understands the literature, and how to search it, better than one did before working the thing out.  A bit like the phenomenon where you start writing a question for StackOverflow and in doing the research necessary to write a good question you realise you've found out the answer, even though you thought you'd already researched...

You are way too honest for the academia. — [citation needed]!

First of all, you are absolutely right that you need to cite the paper. Citations should not be to "previous work you based your work on" but to "the state of the art" - whether or not you explicitly based your work on a previous article. The reader should be able to place your work in the context of what is already known on a topic.
Second, giving any advice will be hard for us, since we don't know the specific situation. If all you add to this previous article is a simpler design and collecting data in a different manner, then your paper likely does not offer a publication-worthy contribution to the state of the art.
Your best bet is likely to rework your paper heavily. Identify weaknesses or open questions remaining in the previous article and address these. Then you can build on the previous article and expand upon it, and you will have a genuine contribution.
Of course, this will be a lot of work, and much of what you already did may turn out to be wasted effort. That sort of thing unfortunately happens in academia. You will need to analyze your specific situation to find out how much you can salvage.
The positive side is that you have found someone who can meaningfully review your work. And if, as you write, their work has so far mainly been self-cited, they will appreciate some external attention on it, so if you get them to review your paper, you may have a sympathy bonus. Alternatively, you could even contact the authors of the earlier paper and see whether they would be interested in collaborating with you.

It's not plagarism to come to similar conclusions to someone else, as long as you're open and honest about everything plagarism isn't the issue. Since you know about it you'd definitely have to cite it. As long as you don't claim to be the first to have discovered it then citing the earlier paper and confirming that you found similar results before encountering it is, if anything, positive for the author of that paper. They get cited and an independent researcher, you, has confirmed their findings.
You did the work, ethically you're in the clear as long as you're honest.
I disagree with the other answer in that I don't believe that such repetition is "wasted" to other researchers. Lots of methods/technique papers gloss over weaknesses or "just happen" to use ideal datasets or don't mention the things that make the algorithm/technique unworkable in the real world and sometimes another paper from someone doing the same thing who's more open about such weaknesses can be invaluable.
Politically on the other hand it can be harder to get published. Since it's so similar you're less likely to be adding significantly novel data to the field. It's less sexy but confirming previous work is of value. You're likely going to need to be more rigorous about it than if you were showing something completely new.

This is potentially true, but it depends whether the new paper is adding useful value by confirming/reproducing claims in the earlier paper, or is simply duplicative.  The former is more likely for an experimental area (where additional experiments that confirm and reproduce earlier results are valuable).  The latter is more likely for mathematical/theoretical area (if they show an algorithm and prove a theorem about it, and you do the same, there's not much additional value to you doing the same thing a second time).  The question doesn't have enough information to tell which case we're in.

Obviously it depends exactly on the topic matter, but reproducing work is an essential and underratedpart of any scientific process, IMO. Actually also the work can probably be considered novel in its own right if the process to the result is different (e.g. in maths, a different proof for the same theorem can be considered as a contribution).

@user1207217 A second proof of an existing theorem is only a useful contribution if it is somehow better than the original one. Better could mean shorter, simpler, more rigorous or better by some other metric which may well be completely subjective. In experimental sciences, there is benefit in confirmation: knowing that something happens ten times in a thousand is better than knowing it happens once in a hundred. But a mathematical proof is supposed to be a fully convincing argument: there's no additional benefit in being convinced a second time.

@David Richerby Since the OP talks about data I'm inclined to think that it's either experimental or testing algorithms rather than pure math hence it's likely still valuable. I've read enough CS papers outlining an algorithm which quietly neglected to mention why they happened to be using data that had certain properties.

@Murphy Agreed. I was addressing the specific comment, rather than your answer.

In general, all papers tell a story:  "Here's this important problem.  Here's what's been done about it.  But what we don't know is X, Y, Z.  So here in this paper, I address X, Y, and Z."
Do your best to frame your introduction to acknowledge this previous paper in the "here's what's been done about it" section, and set up your novel 20% as the "X, Y, Z". Don't forget to explain to your readers why that "X, Y, Z" is important and useful to others.  Your project may be perceived as a relatively incremental advance, and therefore may not appeal to a top publication.  But it may still have value to a specialist publication.  If you're already done with the computational work and in the process of writing up, you might as well give it a shot.
If it gets rejected for not making enough of a novel contribution, then, based on the responses, I'd consider whether it's worth following Stephan Kolassa's advice, and doing more work to more explicitly establish your project as an extention of the earlier paper.  It might be.  Or you might find that your time (and excitement) are better devoted to other projects in your pipeline.

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


text:
Failed entrepreneur applying for master oversea
I have BSc in computer science and entrepreneurship background with strong technical skills (software) but low GPA and no publication. I have bean away from university for few years and have not been working as employee so I can't provide any letters of recommendation.
As my previous businesses have not been successful (partly because of country I live in, it is one of the top worst) I'm thinking about starting over by applying for a master program and moving to a better place (preferably US). It can also help me find better ideas and like-minded people for future ventures.
All I can provide are few links to my previous works, some of them shiny.
Do you think I have any chance to get admission and grant from a good university? How should I prepare myself for it?

It would help a lot if you started contributing to an open-source project and maintain a repository of your work.
Also, most people here would advise you to wait for a year and then apply with some research background. What about your funding and other such questions should be thought about as well.
On a related note this question is similar to yours
http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/778/should-i-stay-in-school

At least for admission to strong CS departments in the US, I strongly recommend that you take the GRE, especially the subject test in computer science, and do well.  Otherwise, the evidence that you would complete an MS program is rather thin.
Also, you must have recommendation letters.  Otherwise, your application may not even be reviewed by the admissions committee.  (In my department, for example, incomplete applications are automatically flagged by our admissions database system, and applications that are still flagged several weeks after the application deadline are automatically rejected without review.)

In some countries like Japan, it is ok to apply even if you do not have a good publication record. They care mostly about the entrance examination, which is focused on math and computer science.
You could apply to some Universities as well as to the Mumbukagakusho Scholarship, which depending in the country might be really easy to get (about 50% chance) or really hard (about 1% chance).
Good Luck

In some countries, e.g. the Netherlands, for a lot of masters there is no problem to get in, as long as you can pay. Ofcourse some have restrictions in terms of prior knowledge you need to have.


text:
Who owns the research data at US research institutions?
When a graduate student, or PI does government funded (NSF/NIH/etc) research at a US R1 institution who owns the data?
What portion of the copyright for the research data does the graduate student have and what portion does the PI have? My understanding is that graduate students are supposed to be listed as co-inventors on resulting patents meaning that they should own some portion of the copyright? Can a graduate student deny a PI access on copyright grounds?
My interest comes from a debate we recently had between two PIs where one refused his copyright for our collaborative research results (some anonymized medical outcomes data). Apparently, PIs can refuse to their copyrights to each other, but can graduate students?

I think you are confusing copyright and patent. They are about very different things and have different rules, laws, and ethics. And, many such things are spelled out in grants and published agency policies. Data, if unpublished, could also be considered a trade-secret with yet another set of rules.

Data isn't necessarily something that can be copyrighted at all.  See for instance https://smallbusiness.chron.com/copyright-data-63070.html.

No one.
The short answer is that “data” as the term is understood by US law is not covered by copyright, thus in popular parlance it is not “owned” by anyone. If you google “can data be copyrighted” you will find various articles explaining this in more detail. Here is one.
The longer answer is that, as seems to often be the case in matters of law, the legal meaning of “data” seems to differ slightly from how people use this word in normal speech. What academics might refer to as “research data” may also include aspects of what is referred to in some sources as “presentation” or “compilation” of data, and to the extent that this is the case, copyright might apply to it after all. In that case, the copyright would be owned by some combination of the PI, graduate students, the institution that employs them, and any funding agencies who might have funded some of the research, depending on the policies of the institution and funding agencies. For example, at my own university, researchers own the copyright to the work products they create.
I also notice you are mixing up copyright and patent rights by mentioning them together as if they were the same thing. They are not. Data is not a form of invention so I don’t see how patent rights would apply to it. But more generally, if a graduate student and PI come up with any patentable inventions, those would be subject to quite different rules and policies than those covering copyright. For example, at my own university, patent rights for researchers’ inventions will generally belong to the university, though the inventors can receive a share of any royalties generated from their inventions. As far as I know this applies equally to graduate students and regular faculty. But you should check the policy at your own institution.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.

"researchers own the copyright " Does this mean the graduate student owns it or the PI? Or both?

@Buffy good point, I replaced that with a link from a US university.

@Mikhail what is unclear about what I wrote? “Researchers” refers to all the people who participated in the creation of the copyrighted material. At my university this would include both faculty and graduate students, and I suspect that would be true almost everywhere but can’t say that with certainty.

So can a graduate student deny a PI the right to publish the data the graduate student collected? This would be the case of the data was jointly owned.

@Mikhail my answer makes the point that “data” is not owned by anyone, so the answer to your question is “no”. But as for other copyrightable material, yes, anyone who is a co-owner of the copyrighted material, including a student, could technically deny any other co-owner (including a professor) the right to publish the material. What would actually happen in a situation where a student tried to exercise that legal right is anybody’s guess. I suspect it would not end pleasantly.

That is kinda strange because at a company, for example Disney, the copyright is owned by the employer? Are the same exceptions that a PI has extended to students?

Particularly when you are government funded (at least in the US), you are merely the data steward. If asked for your data, you are obliged to make every effort to share.
Inventions, IP, patents etc are different, and usually concern what the data means or how it can be used. Here you must engage with university legal counsel to reach an agreement because usually the institution owns your IP by default when the work leading to it was conducted while under employ.

For the NSF, specifically, see: https://www.nsf.gov/od/ogc/intelprop.jsp
For NIH, see: https://grants.nih.gov/policy/intell-property.htm
Each agency will have a published policy. Just go look for it. Or consult an IP lawyer.
But note that acknowledgement for something and ownership of it are quite different things.

Keep in mind that NSF and NIH grants are awarded to institutions rather than the individual PI and that institutional policies on intellectual property are usually in place.

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


text:
Does it amount to plagiarism by supervisor?
I have been working on an idea for last 2 years almost independently along with other research works. My advisor did not believe in my work much initilally, so I did not get an RA for two years even after requesting. Recently, I am getting encouraging results with some specific examples and scenarios with good hope for success to solve a complex problem using that idea. I have not published the work yet. Initially, my advisor was not interested in the idea partly because the work is not his area of expertise and insisted that I spend my time in other research projects with a senior colleague. I pursued it with my interest in spite of RA support, but with new results and potential benefits of the approach my advisor became extremely interested and even described the work as the next big idea in our lab meetings. I am happy about it or maybe he says it to make me happy.
However, recently I encountered a situation which was difficult for me to comprehend. I found my advisor present a perspective paper along with many other renowned experts in the field, proposing and highlighting the approach I have been working on as the future direction and visionary in the field along with other important developments in a conference. Even though I was not a co-author in that paper and my work was not cited or even acknowledged, I consoled myself as my advisor was alluding me that he was promoting the idea; it was an advertisement of the work (of course with out any acknowledgement).
As he was not the first author of the perspective paper and there is a possibility that first/other authors can make claim of it, he asked me to file an updated technical report in the department before the  paper is published. It looked to me like he wanted to promote himself among his colleagues with that idea with out acknowledging it to me before the audience and greater scientific public where it matters.
I happened to attend the conference as a PhD student, and found that the presenter of the perspective paper (whom I don't know) presented more than half of his talk on my idea with my slides that I shared with my advisor, and there was no acknowledgement or mention of my report or work. It was even worse to see that some of the terminology that I planed to use, was disclosed and few misinterpreted while explaining.
Even then, people really seemed to liked the idea and the approach and many are convinced that the idea is going to impact the field. While I saw a very drastic change in the way my advisor treated me recently, but what really made me sad was when my advisor asked me to refer to this perspective paper (to which I was not a co-author) in my impending submission (on the idea).
I feel like it was unfair but I don't know if research is done this way in academia or if it is perfectly legit to do something like that. I decided not to cite the perspective paper with possible consequences. I just wanted to know how other students handle such situations effectively and if such a thing is a common practice.
Edit: I do have all email traces and even a previous publication explaining part of the idea and a recent technical report submitted to the department with the complete idea.
UPDATES
June 2014:
I have continued with the situation I described above honestly because as a student I hardly have any options and as suggested by many that it would be an academic suicide. But, it had impacted me severely, mostly because I believe that any good idea I will bring to the table will be stolen or misrepresented and there will be cleaver manipulations to take ownership of them. I will take two steps forward and three steps backward. I could hardly perform in my potential. I will let you know my ordeal soon and many thanks for your kind help and support.

I second the comments about the importance of evidence/paper trail. I think version control can be a useful tool in such situations as well. Version controlled data and writings can help show when you came up with stuff and what you came up with exactly. If this is a repository which other people have access to and have committed to (this does not mean the repos needs to be public) then that is even better.

*I don't know if research is done this way in academia or if it is perfectly legit * NO.

As far as I understand the situation, it seems to me that your advisors' behavior is borderline, even if likely on the wrong side of the border. Since it does not look like a very clear and frank misbehavior, even if you are perfectly right it would be tremendously difficult to prove it beyond doubt. In case of doubt, you could end up being seen more as the trouble maker than as the one who came up with that great idea; the surrounding people to whom you could complain (department head, etc.) would hesitate a lot to go against tenured faculty when the misbehavior is not crystal clear, etc.
With this in mind, I would strongly advise you not to confront to wildly with your advisors. You can (and should, as advised by Shion) discuss with them the fact that you are uncomfortable with the way they presented things, with the use without permission of your slides, and so on; but always let them a way to discuss it calmly. If they feel cornered, there will be little chance of the situation not degenerating into a conflict, and it would be very difficult for you to survive professionally a conflict with your advisors.
You could cite their perspective paper in a way that friendly makes explicit that the idea is yours. Your aim should be to get decent credit for your idea, even at the cost of letting your advisors benefit from it: think about what you have to gain or loose first, rather than about what they have to unduly gain or what you can cost them.
If everything goes smoothly, you can get into a good position to build on your idea, and be on track for your career.
Once you're a respected tenured faculty, you should remember this episode and be supportive of young researchers.

+1 for this answer, and specifically for : "Once you're a respected tenured faculty, you should remember this episode and be supportive of young researchers."

While the other answers are good, I have an alternative approach for you.
Have you actually gone and spoken to your advisers about this? A perspective paper is just that. It talks about concepts and the next big thing - which very well may be your work.
I suggest that you have a nice, sit down, frank discussion with your advisers about this and make clear what future directions and expectations are regarding publications, collaborations and co-authorships. That would clear the air quite a bit, which frankly now, is rather hazy.

The only way you're really going to be able to establish some sort of claim to recognition is if:

Your advisors did not independently come up with the idea, and choose to change their stance and give you credit for the idea; or
You can establish conclusively that this was your idea, and not your advisors'.

The best way to do this is if you have a verifiable documentation trail supporting your claim. This means that you have conclusive records showing that the work exists. This would include things like emails, verified laboratory notebooks, and other documents that can be dated and that demonstrate that you came up with the idea. The challenge, of course, will be showing that you came up with it independently of your advisors (which would require that you have documented proof showing that they discouraged you from working on it.)


text:
Appropriate to thank examiners?
I have just completed a research degree. By the rules of my university, my dissertation was examined by two outside examiners, whose identities were kept secret from me during the examination process. Now that I have received my results, my supervisor has told me who the examiners were (this was permitted by university rules and the consent of the examiners).
Is it appropriate to send them each an email thanking them for their efforts?

Yes.
It's a lot of work to examine a thesis and (generally) this is unpaid work done in our own free-time. So a simple thank you will make your examiners feel appreciated. This will have the side benefit that your examiners will remember you in a positive light, which may be useful in the future when you are looking for a job, for a reference, for a place to visit to give a research talk, etc.
It never hurts to be polite.

A thank-you note is always OK. However, I wouldn't go further than that (no "substantial" gifts!).

@aeismail Would a printed copy of the thesis (maybe a version with them in the acknowledgements, and/or with a small inscription) be "substantial"? (Let's not discuss whether it'd make for a useful gift. ;))

A copy of the thesis would probably not be viewed as inappropriate in this context.


text:
Career advice: How can I move on from my probable PhD flop?
So thing aren't going well for me with my PhD and I sort of think I'm not going to get there (hard deadline is September and frankly I think I'm fairly close to having a breakdown). I'm in the UK and the hard deadline is university policy.
How soon should I start looking for work outside academia? How should I go about explaining my (likely) failure?
I'm not sure I know what to do from here.
I don't feel confident about bringing this up with my supervisor. If I did, he would brush it off (he doesn't really get me, I don't think) with something along the lines of "What else are you going to do? Just get on with it.". He has expressed concern about my progress before now. Also, part of the motivation for asking this question is feeling well-researched on this topic prior to having a conversation, which I'm hoping will show my supervisor that I'm serious about it.
If this information is useful I'm based in the UK, I have a pass at Master's level already and a 2:1 BSc in physics and I am in an allied field at the moment.

BTW, read this: How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student?

Think about this: An acknowledgment in my doctoral dissertation says, "... Dr. C, who never gave up on me, even when I had given up on myself."

Although I  an obviously only accept a single answer there were many good ones which I have upvoted and this has been useful thank you.

In an interview for a job play it up as you realized you are better suited for practical jobs than academia.

Many people outside academia would think of better of you for leaving the PhD program.  If you decide leave, play up your departure as an affirmative choice, not as failure.

I too was 10 months away from giving up on my PhD, decided to give it all by writing whatever I could solve, rather than attempting to solve what I really would have wanted to, worked day and night for 10 months, also running 1 hour per day, and managed to finish it. I went into my PhD viva expecting to be failed, but everyone congratulated me. Chances are you're in a similar position. However, to be fair, I've not enjoyed life in academia and I should probably have dropped out early on. So if you do give up, it won't be as bad as you may fear. But give it all you have first.

What's a "hard deadline"? The only deadlines I've heard of for PhDs are for scholarships running out, not for submission dates. You should be able to keep working on the dissertation, even if only part time.

This is a submission deadline.

If you're so stressed, you might not be able to evaluate your progress. I hear every PhD student goes through some crisis (I certainly did), and many get out of it.

I hope you made it.

I had a rather severe depressive episode. I've been granted an extraordinary extension to try to finish.

I never finished and life has been pretty rough since. My self-esteem never recovered from this. I regret ever trying.

I read this in 2020. Did you manage to finish your PhD?

See comment above yours. Jaya A

How is your sitatuion now after 5 years?

I hope you're a lot happy with life now.  I'm also really looking forward to hearing about what is the situation after around 10 years? Was that stress worth it or you now you look back and say it was not that big of deal? It will be really nice to hear again from your experience. For the context I'm also 4'th year PhD and am kinda not happy with every direction things went and mostly because it was not my fault for most of the part, but I also have some big regrets and am a bit worried about future. Thanks.

I am going to answer from a rather different perspective, that of someone who has been involved in technical hiring, the sort of person who is going to be looking at your job application and possibly interviewing you if you go into industry. I'm a retired computer programmer and computer architect, and have spent many hours trying to pick the right people to hire.
I had a colleague who started on a PhD. and decided after a few months that he was not suited to that path, and would do better in industry. That was absolutely no problem.
On the other hand, quitting at this point, or later, in a 4 year project is a potential red flag. It would make me worry that you may throw up your hands and quit a few months before a deadline if the going gets tough, rather than rising to the challenge. That would be a serious negative for most technical jobs. Moreover, even if you think you know what went wrong, why you did not complete the PhD., you would have nothing to show that would give me confidence in your analysis.
On the other hand, suppose you continue with the PhD. through September, putting together the best thesis you can in that time. If it is accepted, great, carry on with the academic path.
If it is rejected, you still have something to show a potential employer. You would need to analyze what went wrong, and understand your strengths and weaknesses. You either need to correct weak areas, or pick a job that plays to your strengths and does not need your weak areas. For example, if your thesis has insufficient original results but is well written and presented, you could apply for jobs where original research is not required, but organizing and presenting technical information is important. There are plenty of those.
In a comment on another answer, you say "my supervisor has had a lot of successful PhD candidates". That means he is both good at picking students, and good at shepherding them through the thesis process.
I think the time to start looking for industry jobs is after the very best thesis you can write by the deadline, taking full advantage of your supervisor's advice and shepherding skills, has been rejected.

What sort of jobs require "presenting & organizing technical information" without original research?

@Paul: Almost all of them in any technical field outside academia.  Think about planning, selecting, and installing a major information system, for example.

@Paul In the later stages of my industry career, after about 20 years, I was in jobs where patentable inventions were expected. Before that, just applying ideas I could find in existing books and papers was sufficient. If I had gone the management or technical writing route I would never have been required to produce anything truly original.

To Pete's brilliant answer I want to add that there is a chance that you are not as bad as you think. There is a lot of people suffering from the "impostor syndrome", and if your supervisor brushes if off it is very possible he has a different perspective, and thinks that you have done enough; but he is not conveying it effectively.
September is ten months away, more than a quarter of your PhD is left. Keep a cool head and don't rush to conclusions.
In case it helps: a friend of mine, also PhD student in the UK, was panicking because he had only six months left and no results. He is now a successful postdoc where he wanted.

I really don't think this is the case but I suppose I'm a bit of a pessimist. I could be wrong but regardless, it would be good to know what to do when this seemingly likely eventually comes home to roost.

You do seem pessimistic.   OK so you don't think it likely you will pass.  However, don't you want to find out, just so you know?  Otherwise it might bug you for years!  I'm sure you have done something worthwhile, even if it seems a trivial contribution.  If your supervisor is not worried, then it is unlikely you will fail outright.  The worst case outcome is probably that the examiners ask you to spend 6-12 months reworking and expanding your work.  Is that the end of the world?

@P.Windridge The worst case outcome is that having thrown myself at this work for years and sacrificed my wellbeing to trying to get it done, I fail, walk away with nothing and can't get any kind of job afterwards with a record of failure on my back and sink deeper and deeper into depression and never get out of it. The worst that can happen is pretty bad. That said I'm hopeful that I can do better than the worst case scenario I just need help working out how to do that.

@Reluctant_Linux_User "Failing" at a PhD after doing well enough to get to the final year without being kicked out, and with your supervisor still optimistic, is a very mild form of failure by most standards. I went through my entire industry career without knowing whether I could have got as far as a graduate student as you have already done. So do most people outside the academic world.

@Reluctant_Linux_User  There are very few things in life that have gone down as bad as I thought they would, and the more I stewed about them the farther off my prediction was. That said, do you have a support network for your emotional wellbeing? I am not a psychologist nor do I play one on TV, is seems like you have some markers for being currently depressed, aside from the stress and worry you are under. With a little perspective... and SLEEP, you might relax more, or at least find your decision easier.

Your situation sounds tough.  It is also very hard to specifically advise, but let me try to be at least vaguely helpful.
The natural person to talk to about this is indeed your supervisor.  You say that he "would brush it off".  That doesn't sound like a fully rational way of evaluating the situation to me.  Either he will brush it off or he won't: you can't proceed further until you know which it is.  Moreover, if you tell a PhD supervisor that you think you will have to drop out of the program and by the way you're fairly close to a breakdown and he brushes you off, then he's in worse shape than you by far.  From my safe distance of total ignorance of your situation I am going to guess that if you bring things to him in a sincere and serious way, he is not likely to completely brush you off.

How should I go about explaining my (likely) failure?

I'm sorry, I don't really know.  I think explaining why you feel that your failure is likely is plenty for one conversation.

How soon should I start looking for work outside academia?

I think you should process the "likely failure" part before you seriously start looking for work: first find out whether you can still get out with a PhD.  (Unless you no longer even want to get a PhD, in which case you should also bring that up with your supervisor and should start working on an immediate exit strategy.)
If you and your supervisor -- or someone who can function as your supervisor if he is really incapable of stepping up to the task -- agree that your failure really is a likely outcome, then at that point you should start looking for outside work.  If there is really little or no hope of success, you should start applying for jobs right away and feel free to take a job as soon as it is offered: you have a master's degree, so if you can't get a PhD then there's nothing keeping you there except the financial support you have.
A lot of people drop out of PhD programs for lots of reasons.  (In many programs the overall completion rate is less than 50%.)  You should speak in terms of leaving the program, not in terms of "failing" it.  All that any prospective employer needs to know is that you are deciding to leave the program and the academic track.  Try to have the positive spin on that originate in your own mind: if your present path is so unpleasant that continuing on it feels like heading towards a breakdown, won't it be an immensely pleasant relief to do something else?  I am not a psychologist, but in my experience the real root of unhappiness is not so much the bad things that you have but the good things that you want and don't have.  If you really want to be in a PhD program, you could try starting again somewhere else (maybe someplace where there isn't a hard deadline: that sucks).  But it seems more likely that you really want to do something else.  What is that something else?  Identifying it and experiencing the sensation of moving towards it could make you feel much better.

Yes I should think about what else I want to do. It's a bit of a blow to be honest. I've always wanted to be a scientist ever since I can remember I wanted to go into academia but looks like I'm not cut out for it. Maybe I'll carry on until I can think of something else. I suppose that is a very big uncertainty for me that I should try to address. Get a sense of direction, try to think of anything else I want to do with my life. I'm not sure I'm really cut out for it at the moment. Maybe if I just crash and burn and try to pick up the pieces afterwards it won't be any worse than anything else.

"It's a bit of a blow to be honest." I understand.  " I've always wanted to be a scientist ever since I can remember I wanted to go into academia but looks like I'm not cut out for it." It is not at all clear that such a general conclusion is warranted.  Definitely consider less drastic options like transferring into a different program or even starting over in a PhD program in a different place and/or scientific sub/field.  Also: think about why you want to be a scientist.  That will help you decide what you would enjoy and value doing instead.  Good luck.

and, think about whether it is science in general or something specific about the program that is a bad fit.

I did subscribe in order to answer your question. The usual thing that you'll hear is that "it's not that bad, you'll have your Ph. D.". And, might you believe it or not, this is both true and the right ting to hear.
Your advisor has better grasp of what's in the field and the scientific contributions of your work. Trust him. Maybe your thesis won't win you a Nobel prize, but if he's confident it will win you a Ph. D. degree, then this is almost a sure thing.
You tend to compare your work with your own standards or maybe with the wrong people's work (e.g. experienced researchers etc.). Take a broader view of the topic and maybe read some really bad Ph. D. thesis. This will boost your confidence level.
This is not to say that you should lower your own standards, but to get over hopelessness. Then, trust people more experienced than you are (the Ph. D. advisor). And finally, remember that a Ph. D. degree is not there to prove that you are a researcher. It only proves that you are fit to become a researcher. Much more work will be needed.
And... a Ph. D. student is just that: a student. You have your doubts, the name "Ph. D." is quite frightening, but you should keep calm, organize your work, and commit to an effort without desperation.
Stopping the Ph. D. right now, on these grounds, looks for me like a "fuite en avant" (that's French. The best English translation that I did find on the Internet is "unconscious mechanism that causes a person to throw himself/herself into a dreaded danger".) Avoid that and only focus on getting things done.
You are also at a moment of your Ph. D. when much of your work is not yet organized and results might seem inexistent. This is because the work that you did was precisely that: a research work. You did explore many spots, contributions seems lost in the bigger picture, but when you start organizing all those, things will become clearer.
My advice: start writing your results in a document, let's say a draft of your thesis and of your Powerpoint (or LATEX) presentation.
This is of double usefulness:
1) will be helpful to you later, in writing the final version of your thesis
2) the strengths and weaknesses of your work will appear much clearer once you try to integrate your work in an organized presentation. The strengths that you'll see will boost your confidence. The weaknesses are the things you have to address.
Good luck.

I'd like to offer a completely different perspective. We are about a week away from the winter solstice. Dec 21 will be the shortest day and longest night of the year. Many people, myself included, are strongly influenced by the shortened photoperiod. You've probably heard of Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), which can cause depression and disturbances to the sleep cycle. Do you find that you are a lot more energetic and confident in the spring and summer months? If so, then you might wish to read a few articles about SAD.
I have personally found it very helpful to bathe my office in light throughout the day. Using a photographic light meter, I determined that my previously preferred office illumination level was about 100 lux at the surface of my desk. By switching on all of the lights and keeping the window blind open, I was able to increase that to 700-1000 lux, depending upon the weather. I am now keeping my office fully illuminated all day, and I find that my mood and energy level are elevated. I have read that it is equally important to have reduced illumination in the evening hours to ensure a good night's rest.
A very simplistic explanation is that light (and exercise) increase serotonin, which lifts the mood and increases energy levels, while darkness increases melatonin which causes drowsiness. So get as much light as possible in the morning and throughout the day. Take an outdoor walk at midday if possible. And then dim the lights in the evening. Give it a week or two and see if you feel any better.
Also, if you want an easy, economical way to increase your office illumination, purchase a T5 high-output fluorescent light fixture. Each 46" high-output T5 tube emits 5000 lumens. One of those fixtures would probably double the illumination of your office. Three of them would turn your office into an operating theater!

Would you care to explain how this answers the question?

The original post included the phrase "frankly I think I'm fairly close to having a breakdown". A subsequent entry by the original poster included the phrase " I fail...and sink deeper and deeper into depression and never get out of it.". Having worked with numerous PhD candidates in a research setting, these phrases have an all-too-familiar ring. Based on those experiences, and my experience with SAD, I thought my advice might be helpful.

I see how this could be perceived as tangential, but if clinical depression is the real reason the OP is considering dropping out, that is the problem which needs to be solved.  Up here in the sub-arctic, this particular syndrome is a lot more pronounced than in the UK, but whatever the reasons for psychological distress, if they are external to the actual PhD work, they certainly deserve attention; and this answer does not deserve downvotes, IMHO.

Short version: This is perfectly normal; don't panic; hold on tight.
As Patricia said, this would be the worst time to drop out, so don't do that.
Your question refers to ‘my probable PhD flop’, but who says ‘probable’?  If it's you, I doubt you're the best judge at this point.  Many/most PhD students go through something like this, at around this stage, and you're in excellent company.  [long list of sample late-PhD worries deleted, in retrospect, on the grounds it's too depressing].
You say your supervisor ‘would brush it off’, not ‘brushed it off’.  Try talking to him about how you feel: since you say he's had a lot of successful PhD students, he'll also have had a lot of them having the screaming hab-dabs at about the same stage.  This is your first PhD, but it's his n-th, and he's probably OK at spotting any real warning signs. He may or may not be good at being reassuring, but if he's not worried, then you perhaps shouldn't be worried either (and I agree that's easier said than done).  No-one doesn't care about whether their PhD students fail.  A lot can, and usually does, happen in the last 6–12 months of a PhD, and there are strategies for dealing with problems.

Personally, I'd be interested in your list of "sample late-PhD worries". Of course, I'm not trying to complete a PhD.

Well (folk at this stage should look away now): you know a great deal about very little, which feels like knowing nothing. All your office-mates seem to understand your work, but you don't really understand the details of theirs. At conferences, people are either doing something much more interesting/important, or are doing the same as you, better/sooner. And they seem to give better talks. And you've got to start looking/schmoozing for a job/postdoc. And... all the familiar academic anxieties we're all used to, but they bite baaad at this stage (or was that just me?).

Hi Norman. Yes, some of that does seem familiar. Except the "office-mates seem to understand your work" stuff. I never experienced that. Thanks for writing.

Just to be clear, you are talking about a deadline of Sep 2015, right? Perhaps you can elaborate on your current status. What is your situation with your work, do you have a thesis draft? If not, start writing one immediately. If it helps, I spent the last year of my PhD basically freaking out, though I don't think it was obvious to anyone else. I think I did a lot of smiling out of sheer nervousness. I did eventually get a PhD, though. I know other people (friends, acquaintances) who also had a bad time.
Bottom line; lots of people have a rough time in the closing stages of a PhD. Try to stay calm and relaxed. Definitely talk to your adviser. Also, talk to your fellow students. Try doing something else at least part time. You can't work the whole time, and if you try to, you'll spend the time you can't work panicking. I recommend going dancing. Excellent exercise, and as good as anything I've found for taking your mind off things.
For what it is worth, I agree with what the majority are saying here - try to get your PhD if you can. For one thing, you have already spent all this time on it. Second, it seems you are interested in doing research. Maybe it won't work out eventually - nobody can see the future. But the time to give up is not now. Getting a PhD is only the beginning of a research career, unless you are already 70. :-)

Building on the other answers, I'd like to offer the following advice:

Focus on publishing papers, as soon and as well as possible

Let me break down the reasoning:

If you don't finish the PhD, but you do have a publication record, you have a better chance of being taken seriously academically. It depends on your location, but there are situations where you will be able to graduate later if you just add to your publications in later jobs. You may not get a postdoc position, but a job as a technician might be enough.
In the end nobody will care about the thesis. The publications are what people actually read.
As noted before, you are feeling pessimistic. Pessimism is great way to kill your productivity. If your only goal is the big one, you'll be depressed until you actually make it. By setting up smaller, intermediate goals (such as publications), you will rebuild your confidence and positivity step by step.
Finally, if you do make the switch to industry, you'll have something to show for your work. You worked as a researcher for four years, and you produced publications. The PhD didn't quite come together, but I don't think you'll need to explain it beyond that. Most likely the interviewer won't know much about academic life, and if you give him a brief, honest answer, they won't really care.

Do check your university's policy on extensions.  It should have one, though financially you may be in a difficult place if you get one.  Now is a good time to start thinking about it, though you might not need to apply just yet. Get in touch with the postgrad officer in the student union if there is one - they may have a realistic idea of when extensions are granted.
Within your department/faculty there should be someone with responsibility for graduate students.  They may well be more suited to this discussion than your supervisor, and will be well placed to see the big picture.
During my PhD each student was assessed annually by 2 academics who weren't their supervisor.  This was a very useful process (though preparing for it felt like a waste of time sometimes).  These assessors were similarly able to advise informally on progress.  You may not have such a system, and even if you do, it may not work so well for you as it did for me.
It's a little later than typical in your PhD but everyone hits a stage like this, sometimes more than once.  You will at some point need to involve your supervisor.  Those great results that both you and your supervisor were hoping for after your early successes were always unlikely really -- but the majority of supervisors would have let you know by now if you were well short of the necessary progress.

Usually, there is considerable motivation for your adviser to get you successfully through the program.  At my university in the Netherlands, a research group would get something like 80,000 euro from the University for each successful PhD candidate.  Also, a professor's career will partly be judged on his or her ability to successfully graduate PhD students.  So your professor has every reason to take your concerns seriously.
Second, it's important to understand what a hard deadline really means.  Again, my experience in the Netherlands was that a PhD student got a 4 year contract at the University.  After that you had to either: start as a Post-doc with the understanding you would finish up very soon or move on to a professional career and try to wrap up final papers and the thesis while working.  I think less than 50% of PhD students finished within the 4 years.  The rest used one of the other two options, including myself.  I work with someone who got a PhD in the UK and had a similar experience there, so it seems likely to me that there will be a way for you to get a PhD even if your official time at the university is up.  It will be more difficult, but then it will be down to whether you really want it or not.  Again, though, it will be in your superviser's interest that you finish your PhD at some point rather than walk away.

I have to hand in my thesis inside 4 years and my supervisor has had a lot of successful PhD candidates. If I fail it would have very little effect on him. I don't have to have done my viva and I can do corrections after 4 years but there is a significant deadline that could be completely fatal to my work in September.

@Reluctant_Linux_User Whether or not it will have any effect on his work is very different from whether or not he will not invest effort in preventing it from happening. No one here answering has a vested interest in you getting your PhD, but none of us want to see you fail to get it.

In addition to the other answers, it's very likely that your university has some sort of system for providing free counselling/therapy for students. (Try googling for " student counselling".) A counsellor can help you understand to what extent your feelings of failure are based in reality versus (extremely common and normal!) PhD-induced depression, help you find ways to cope with stress/breakdown/feelings of failure, and help you figure out what path is best for you. Helping you cope with these kinds of situations is literally their job -- please take advantage of them!

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


text:
Is it acceptable to e-mail a professor at another university to ask for a meeting to discuss common research interests?
I'm a PhD student, from Europe, nearing the end of my thesis.
I'm going to the USA for a conference in a few months. A couple of professors (assistant professor level, both fairly young, recruited in the past 2 or 3 years) whose work I'm very interested in teach in the vicinity of the conference venue.
Would it be acceptable for me to e-mail them out of the blue and ask them if they'd like to meet/have coffee to discuss common research interests?
They both do literature like me and care about similar methodological issues. However we work on (and in) very different geographical areas, so the chance of us ever meeting at a regular conference are low.
Is this ever acceptable? Does rank/school factor into it?

In case you do set up such a meeting, here are some very good suggestions for turning such meetings into a successful collaboration. (I assume collaboration is what you're ultimately after?)

You have nothing to loose, some of such cold calls may work. I would recommend to explicitly comment on some of their papers or work, in their email, and may send some of your papers in your email. If you do it right, it backs up that you done your homework, and you dont just randomly emailing people to look for post-doc positions.

@ff524 while there is nothing dishonorable about wanting a collaboration, isn't it a bit sad that this is the first conclusion we would jump to on reading such a question? Haven't you ever wanted to meet someone whose work you read and liked or have a shared interest with just for the sake of having a fun intellectual conversation?

@Dan definitely! For example, there are many people on this site I'd love to meet in person, if we ever happen to be in the same place at the same time. But when interesting people meet (whether with or without collaboration as a goal), often interesting things come up, ideas get scribbled on napkins, and collaborations can result :)

@ff524 indeed. Too bad many of us hide behind anonymous user names. ;-)

I would not consider email to be "cold calling," since email is asynchronous and the recipient has time to think about the matter before responding.  "Cold calling" is when you put the person on the spot with an unexpected phone call, or showing up in person when you have not been invited.

I also thought the title was misleading.

The answer is simple: yes, it is acceptable and common. Don't worry about your rank or about the status of your school. If your email is polite, friendly, is not too long but still includes enough relevant information about you to make it clear to the professors that you and they have shared interests, I estimate that the chances of success (meaning they will agree to meet) are very high — basically the only reasons why this may not work are if the professor is out of town on the day you are proposing to visit, is overwhelmingly busy with other commitments, or is an unpleasant and unfriendly person you probably wouldn't want to meet anyway. Good luck!

I wouldn't say it's common. Then again, maybe you (and your research) are more popular than I am. ☺ I would say "acceptable and welcome."

@BenjaminMakoHill what, you don't get 5-10 emails a day from students from other universities wanting to meet with you? My apologies, I assumed that was everyone's experience... ;-)

Would it be acceptable for me to e-mail them out of the blue and ask them if they'd like to meet/have coffee to discuss common research interests?

It's certainly acceptable, but I don't agree with Dan that it is "common". More frequently than getting mailed completely out of the blue, I get requests from conference acquaintances (although the bar is extremely low - people who I have talked to literally once have no problem contacting me when they are in town), or it is the supervisor of a PhD student who asks me to meet his student who will be in town.
I guess the main points to keep in mind are:

Not being disappointed if the professor does not have time or does not even answer. Professors by and large tend to be busy, and your request is bound to have rather low priority. Don't take it personally if nothing comes out of it.
Having a clear goal / agenda for the meeting. The one time that I don't enjoy these kind of "let's have coffee" conversations is when the other side who requested the meet-up seems to expect me come up with ideas of what we even talk about. Do your homework, and don't expect them to prepare for the meeting.

Does rank/school factor into it?

"Rank" as in "professor vs. PhD student" may factor into it a little bit (even though it should not). "School" as in "their university is better ranked than yours" will not realistically be a significant factor for most people.

"people who I have talked to literally once have no problem contacting me when they are in town" After having been introduced to several professors several times (always as an unknown person) I am not sure they can really know how many times they talked to someone at a conference.

To add to this: if you want to maximise the chance of a meeting, the supervisor can be used as a mediator. Your supervisor adds always a hint of creditability. Not only because the title and status, but it says that there will be a well written agenda, because he is willing to let you use his name. It is kind of a seal of approval so to say. Nothing more than the dentists worldwide recommend on a toothpaste package, but still something.

@VladimirF I did not want to imply that people keep track of how often they have met others. I just wanted to indicate that you in fact don't need to be best friends with somebody to ask them to visit their department when in down - a vague conference acquaintance seems to do for most people.

@user3644640 I disagree. For what it's worth, I would have a much higher opinion of a graduate student sending me a professional and polite email themselves than of someone who gets their supervisor to contact me on their behalf on such a matter.

I find it not only acceptable and common, as Dan Romik wrote, but very welcome and even fundamentally necessary for a successful academic career (for all parties involved!) and a research which really provides progress to society.
You will certainly achieve something even as a secluded researcher in your ivory tower. But you will surely boost the output if you exchange ideas, experiments and results.
I just sent out such a mail and I received two of them yesterday. We will have a small congress in March and I want to use that chance to talk to others and many others want to use the chance to talk to me.
Good research is always "giving and receiving" - you can only do that in constant exchange with other researchers.
I strongly encourage you to do so and to use every future chance to do it again. You may get business cards you put in your drawer for years. But suddenly you stumble across a problem and a contact from years ago proves very useful to solve it.
Make as many contacts as you can. Get in touch with people, exchange ideas with them and always remember: This is beneficial for you and the other party, for the scientific community in general and for our society.

These are your future colleagues. You will (hopefully) be "running into" them in the future. So "now" is as good a time as any to try to get a head start on the relationships, if possible.
As another poster warned, just make sure that you have something to say, most busy people don't want to "just have a cup of coffee, and, of course, conduct yourself professionally as with colleagues.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
For a postdoctoral fellowship, what is more important: number of positions, length of time in a/the position(s), or variety of research?
I saw that various postdoctoral fellowships have different lengths. they are anywhere between 1 to 4 years.
Which one is more important to get a tenureship: number of fellowship positions, or length, or the variety of research?

You should probably edit the title to add the number or length or variety of what?

If you seek a tenured position, you will be judged on your publications, reputation, and reputation of your employers.  Number and duration of postdoctoral positions has low importance.  In many fields, zero is no longer an acceptable number or duration.
Long duration postdoctoral positions are good because they reduce the amount of time you spend looking for your next job.  But that does not really answer your question.
Judge your employers based on their histories, not their advertisements.

Should there be a distinction here between 'postdoctoral positions' and 'postdoctoral fellowships'? While the language isn't consistent everywhere, the former usually means any PhD-requiring research post, but I would interpret the latter as an independently-funded post awarded through some competitive mechanism. These would carry significant weight in application for permanent posts in our university, much more than a 'normal' post-doc of similar duration. The exact number and duration may be less important, but having at least one is becoming a more common benchmark.

@StephenMcMahon,  in your comment, it should be: 'postdoctoral positions' == 'postdoctoral fellowships', 'postdoctoral fellowships'=='research fellowship'. see: findapostdoc.com.

@user366312 As I said, the language isn't consistent everywhere, and I don't think your definition is a general one. Even on the page you link to, of the first 50 post-doc jobs only five are described as "fellowships" and three of those are the competitive type I describe above. (There are a number of 'research fellow' posts in the UK, but in the UK usage a 'research fellow' is rarely the holder of a 'fellowship'. Yes, it's a silly nomenclature). You may get clearer and more useful answers to your question if you are more explicit about the type of post you are interested in.

Exactly. It is all about the H-Index isn't it?

@StephenMcMahon I do not see how your comment relates to the question.

@AnonymousPhysicist In my (UK) reading, an answer about postdoc 'positions' doesn't fully address a question about 'fellowships', where the latter are understood to be independently awarded individual funding. I'd agree the type of postdoc positions in general are not important in hiring decisions. But I observe having secured independent postdoc fellowship(s), particularly longer & higher-value ones, is increasingly significant in recruitment. And this can offset e.g. a weaker publication record. As noted, this may be a regional difference in how 'postdoc fellowship' is interpreted, though.

@StephenMcMahon What you say is true, but in my opinion is not relevant to this question, which is about number vs. length of positions.

Positions that are advertised for one year often in practice still run for three years or so. Nobody wants to kick someone who has just learned the ropes out again after a year, but there may be legal reasons to advertise a position for one year, or maybe funding is not secure yet beyond the first year. But in practice, the majority of postdocs hired for one year actually stay longer.
In other words: Talk about this issue with the person who would hire you, but don't make decisions based on the advertised length of the position.

Definitely talk about this issue with the hirer, agreed. But the first paragraph is very field-specific. In my experience, for example, mathematics postdoc positions are rarely extended beyond what the advertisement says (in North America at least).

@GregMartin I disagree. In both of the math departments I have worked in, positions were advertised as one year with the possibility for extension. That's also how my own postdoc positions are advertised. In practice, I can think of only one person who had ever been let go before three years were over.

I agree with greg. My postdoc (engineering) was absolutely for what it was advertised for (1 year). If we didn't receive another grant, it would not have been extended. And the extension then changed the topic, somewhat. Other postdocs at that department were in similar situations (often with longer original contracts depending on the funds on the grant they were employed at).

I agree with @WolfgangBangerth - a postdoc is a temporary position and HR makes it one year renewable up to 3 years without question. Beyond 3 takes positive management action, will not renew past 6 years.

@VladimirF It seems to me that you actually agree with me, then :-) Your position was advertised for one year only, but you ended up staying for longer.

If you try to base a decision on that alone you are making a mistake. What matters is what you do in your early career - papers produced, collaborations established, visibility, ...
A long post-doc provides some stability. It is possible to be productive in such a situation, or to be stuck in a rut. The stability might make it possible to spend more effort in seeking a permanent position. Note: "might make it possible..."
A sequence of short ones offers variety, but you have a shorter time in each to actually produce something. And you are spending more time seeking the next opportunity.
And, few have the luxury of juggling a lot of offers with different characteristics. You want one (or several) with a PI that is likely to help you advance your career. That is independent of length.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
What should be verb tense be in figure captions?
I am confused about what verb tense should be used in captions for figures that showcase experiments that were necessarily performed in the past. Is there a norm for this, or is this question journal dependent?

Use the present tense when you can.

Also related: Past or present tense, when reporting results?

Why would the choice be any different in a figure caption than anywhere else in the paper?

In my experience, this is not only journal dependent but also editor dependent, and I had several cases where editors changed past tense to present tense but we insisted that it makes no sense and they undid that change. Present tense is appropriate when you say something like "here we demonstrate" or "we present evidence for", but an experiment that was performed in the past has a certain date attached to it and a certain chronology that implies causal relationships. It is very often important in what order experiments have taken place, and that's why English has different tenses that you must try to benefit from in your writing. Technical editing is very often outsourced, so if you feel that some changes the editor did are not to your full satisfaction, simply ask to undo them in the proof corrections with a short explanation. It always works unless your request is in violation of some official style guide, yet I am unaware of any style guide that would forbid the past tense. A specific example of the text would help to make a more specific judgement.

The verb tenses should be appropriate to the information being conveyed in the caption.
So

The graph shows results of all the Tests...

is present tense - the graph is indeed currently showing the results.

Test 7 was conducted three weeks before Test 8...

is past tense, and is noting the order of the tests which did happen in the past.
Now, when the Journal of Time Travel becomes a thing there will be additional problems to consider...

Is there any reason your captions need to be complete sentences or have verbs?
I had to take a spin through my dissertation to verify, but not a single one of my figure captions or table titles has a verb.  A non-exhaustive search through my publications reveals the same thing.  I guess that's just my writing style-- I certainly didn't do it on purpose, or even consciously.   (I clearly favor very short captions, restricting explanatory text to the, uh, to the text itself.)
But if this is something that really worries you, maybe you can do the same.


text:
Impact of a grade W for grad school if I'm changing majors?
I'm changing my major to philosophy from computer science in the middle of a semester, and I'm doing pretty poorly in one of my math classes. My advisor told me it would be a good idea to drop it since I'm changing my major. Would it have any impact in grad school admissions, especially if I want to go to a highly reputable school?

You might want to explain what "W" means?

Nobody cares if you dropped a class.

This question is probably country-specific. Could someone add the relevant tag?

In general, no single thing like this would have much impact. In this case, I'd say even less. People aren't looking for small reasons to reject your application, but for evidence that you will be a success in your chosen field as well as in the program you apply to.
So, if you do well overall and do especially well in Philosophy then you should be fine. Good letters of recommendation will overcome a simple thing like a W.
But be prepared, if asked, to talk about why you wanted to switch. And make the reasons positive, about philosophy, not negative about math or CS.

A "W" on your transcript typically comes with no explanation.  A pessimist reading your application might conclude that you withdrew from the math course because you were failing the course.  In comparison, a B or even a C in the course would look better.
Whether this would be a significant factor in an admissions decision depends a lot on the person reviewing your application.

I once dropped a course (non-major, but required) and got a W, but there were no consequences. No one ever mentioned it. I was over-extended with extra courses and all were suffering. It would be different, perhaps, for a major course. But, like all things negative, you want to have an acceptable explanation if asked about it.

you withdrew from the math course because you were failing the course — My university doesn't allow students to withdraw from a course (after the usual drop deadline) merely because they're failing; withdrawal requires extreme circumstances beyond the students' control, like serious illness or injury. So this pessimistic explanation would never have occurred to me.

Our institution has 3 time limits for getting out of a course.  In the first 3 weeks, a student can drop the course with no mark on their transcript.  Between weeks 3 and 10 they can withdraw from the course with a W on the transcript.  After week 10, they can only request a "withdrawal without prejudice" for unusual circumstances. Policies on this vary.


text:
Possibly, quick acceptance for publication
Two days ago, a physics journal received my manuscript and today they informed me that the editor and reviewer accepted my manuscript for publication. this is the first time for me publishing a manuscript, but two days, isn't that quick?
and they told me that I will pay around 700 Euros for the first installment.
I really need your advice here, I am afraid of getting screwed.

They sound legit and they have many publication on their site. this is their website tsijournals.com/journals/journal-of-physics-astronomy.html –

In my research vicinity, people very rarely pay to publish their papers. What about yours?

Trade Science Inc. (the publisher) is generally considered predatory and disreputable. See here and here. I wouldn't publish with them - especially not with such quick acceptance.

is there a different value in publishing in a predatory journal or a normal journal?, like does it affect the published manuscript

@shivansirdy Yes, of course. Articles don't go through proper quality assurance and make you look bad for not avoiding a predatory journal

@shivansirdy There are many questions about predatory journals on the site already. Maybe you should take a look at What are “fake”, “shady”, and/or “predatory” journals? and Does publishing in journals known as “predatory” hurt one's reputation?.

Thank you dears for the inputs, much appreciated

Thoughts from my less than 2 minute investigation, most of which was spent waiting on slow website responses: (1) The journal's title is ridiculously general, so much so that it looks like a parody for titles of predatory journals. (2) Clicking on a random volume, 6, and random issue number, 2, I then randomly selected this paper, and even though I know next to nothing about this topic, the sophomoric level of math, physics, and logical reasoning is unmistakable. For what it's worth, this paper took 8 days to review.

Don't pay any money!

Does this answer your question? What should I do if I submitted an article to a predatory journal?

Duplicate of https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/83764/with-bealls-list-gone-how-can-i-tell-if-a-journal-is-spam

Thanks a lot for the inputs

It is very unusual for a paper to be reviewed and get accepted in two days. Of course, there are some exceptions such as:

Solution to a very well known and long studied problem (even in this case, it is highly unlikely for the review process to be completed in 2 days).
Dramatically improving the conditions of a current crisis (e.g. a vaccine for COVID-19 outbreak)
Very short

Other than these extreme cases, I, personally would not choose to publish in that journal, let alone pay for the publication.
Also, you can check this famous list for future considerations.

I think you have a stray "not" in the first sentence.

Thanks a lot, much appreciated


text:
How deep should I check references of a papers I am going to cite?
I am a new researcher who just started writing scientific papers and am concerned about checking the papers I am planning to cite. When citing a specific paper, I always try to read most of the cited paper (at least the described methodology, results, and conclusions) and I generally put the trust into the authors (and peer review process) of cited papers since for most of the scientific papers data is either private or it would take too much time to repeat the experiments by myself. Additionally, I always try to check the paper I am about to cite by searching for it in Retraction Watch db, PubPeer, and problematic paper screener. However, this check will still not guarantee me that my papers in the future will not be flagged as problematic even if my methodology and experiments are correct.
For example, let's say I wrote paper A which cites paper B which cites paper C (in a literature overview section). A few years later paper, C is flagged as problematic (or even retracted) which also makes paper B problematic and indirectly my paper also. How should I deal with this kind of situation? It is obviously insane to check all references for a specific paper in depth. I am not sure today that I can trust peer review, citations, and all available information in order to avoid such things.

Would paper C being wrong affect your conclusions?

No. Paper C was cited by paper B in an literature overview section.

What field are you in? This amount of worry about papers (putting each one into multiple retraction databases?) is foreign to me.

"A few years later paper, C is flagged as problematic (or even retracted) which also makes paper B problematic" Why does the retraction of a paper cited in a literature overview make B problematic? There is absolutely no rule saying that you mustn't cite papers containing a reference to a retracted paper.

My question was inspired by a recent retractions of a lot of papers from the guest edited special issues from the journal Neural computing and applications by Springer. Reason for retractions were mostly irrelevant references and peer review manipulations. However, since these special issues were from few years ago, some of those retracted articles were cited several times by other authors. My question was mainly aimed to should I avoid those papers that cited those retracted papers. Most of them actually cited them in introduction section without further references in the following sections

@mt29 The situation you have just described is very different from what your question asked. I don't suggest you edit, you've already received an answer.

Re "I generally put the trust into the authors (and peer review process) of cited papers" I am a CS guy. When I try to implement what I read about in papers (mostly CS and math), about 50% of the time things do not work as advertised: Important preconditions for proper operation have been omitted, error bounds and efficiency claims are not stated correctly, etc. One's experience may differ based on field, but in general an attitude of "trust, but verify" seems advisable.

This is primarily from a math and CS perspective. It probably also applies to fields that primarily use statistical methods to establish evidence for the results.
Ideally, you want to read backwards until two things occur.
First, and most important, you want to assure yourself (at least minimally) that what you are reading is correct and the proofs (evidence) backs up the conclusions.
Second, though perhaps more difficult, is you want to gain insight into the class of problems that the papers explore. You may already have this insight, of course.
I say "ideally", because it is often difficult and time consuming to do this, so you may need to compromise a bit, though it is dangerous to do so.
The correctness in some fields is a bit easier since you can probably depend on the skills of reviewers for reputable journals to have vetted the results. This sometimes fails, of course.
Insight is harder, but you need that to advance in these fields and maybe others as well. And insight will help you recognize the occasional paper with incorrect results that, nevertheless, passed peer review.

If possible, for every paper you cite you should always try

Get the actual paper and store it for future reference. It is super embarrassing to answer to a reader of your paper, that you cannot hand over a copy of a reference, because you never obtained a copy yourself.
Check the paper states the claimed statement. If a claim is only backed by another citation, consider citing this paper, too, including all the checks you did for the first paper.
Skim through other papers citing your paper. Sometimes there are rebuttals you can identify by their titles. Be extra careful, if nobody else is citing the paper.

Might the first point depend on the copyright licence terms?

@AndrewMorton - if you can’t read the paper, don’t cite the paper.

@JonCuster I think Andrew means the "hand over a copy" part of my answer. He is right, but usually in personal communication this is not that much an issue. E.g., US law has a fair use clause. Usually this is only a problem for old or obscure publications, that have no financial interest (PhD thesis, internal technical report, presentation on a professors big birthday celebration).