text:
What makes you keep on reading articles in your non-English native language, while the same information might be published in English?
As a future French PhD student (in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning) that legally HAS TO write his thesis in French, I am a bit concerned about the fact that less people would be able to read it and it got me thinking: why do you keep reading articles in your native language, when some ideas you find might also be published in English?

To those who are not English native speakers, do you read articles in your native language?
If so, what is it that you find in these articles compared to English-written ones? Are you just looking for useful information for your own research or are you motivated by something else?
How would you cite these articles in your own English-written paper?

I understand that using one's own native language can be justified for some fields such as social sciences, but here I am asking about "exact" and computer sciences.

I strongly recommend publishing an English version of any scientific non-English manuscript you publish. Unless, of course, it is important to you that people not read it.

@Bitwise I am not asking about whether I should publish in English or not, as I will do everything I can to write in English. The French law explicitely tells that the PhD thesis has to be written in French, which is kind of stupid but I don't have any power on that. On the contrary, I want to know what incentives make people read articles in their native languages.

I understood that. I just thought it is important to stress (for anyone reading this question) that you should make an extra effort to publish an English version.

@Bitwise Agreed. I am already prepared to do mostly everything in English, except for the thesis that will also be in French.

It's equally valid to ask why native-English speakers would read non-English papers. I often read papers in French (in fluid dynamics/turbulence/combustion) simply because there are papers written in French. So I read whatever language I need to in order to get the information and references I need.

From your comments to the posts, I would suggest modifying your question to include more about what kind of answers do you want. For example, it seems you want to know if there is ever valuable information in non-English papers about the hard sciences. This would stop many of the 'yes I do it and there is no problem' kind of answers you are getting.

@earthling Done, I hope it makes it clearer now.

Are you absolutely sure that the thesis has to be in French? I am currently a PhD student in France, do not speak French and can not hope to improve it enough to write a thesis in it. My supervisors assure me that I can do my thesis in English. Also, I know at least a handful of people who got their PhDs in France in the last year or so, who did their theses and defenses in English.

@penelope I can cite what my university calls Charte des thèses: "The thesis has to be written in French, except if there is a justified need due to the topic related to other language or culture. It is also possible that a part is written in another language if one is co-advised, or in English if requested by the PhD student." What I read there is, even if you want to write in English, you might not be given the possibility... Your case might be different, since you don't speak French, and it is clearly impossible to maintain your research while learning the language.

@PatW: in France, the obligation of writting the thesis in French is only half true: you can publish a sandwich thesis made of a detailed introduction in French and copies (or variants) of your published article in English.

@BenoîtKloeckner Good to know, I will see what my advisor have to say about that.

I don't usually read articles in my mother tongue. But I do regularly read articles in a language that is neither English nor my mother tongue (French, to be precise).

With regards to my mother tongue, the few exceptions are resources (articles, books) I received from some of my collaborators. I refer back to them purely for convenience. For French:

there is (at least until very recently) still active research in my area performed by researchers who publish heavily in French; to gain access to those results sometimes it is necessary to read the original articles.
there is a large corpus of useful literature from even the mid twentieth century that still hasn't been completely distilled into English language textbooks. (For mathematics, this refers mostly to particular arguments used in proofs. Quite often the same result would be available in English, but using a different method of attack. But there are also cases such as [from outside my field] The EGA.)
translations may contain "errors". Sometimes it is good to go back to the original source.

I just cite them as I would any other source. Most style guides have sections on special rules for non-English and/or non-Latin-alphabet sources. Just follow them.

Your three-part question is quickly answered:

Yes I read articles in my native language
Almost never because very few exist except older ones (ca. 1960s and older) and possibly bachelor or masters theses.
I would definitely cite them if they contained anything useful

Your concern is valid, regardless of preferences, using a common language ensures better spreading of the science. This does not mean non-English science is in any way uninteresting but will obviosuly be harder to find and read. It will be up to scientists in that language to bring the research to general attention. A possibility with thesis work is always to publish it or parts of it in journals and then translated. In such cases nothing is lost (except time for the complete re-writing)
EDIT: This answer was written for the original question which subsequently has been changed, also in terms of focus.

Publishing is not my biggest concern for the moment as it will become a little later. What amazes me is that you affirm reading articles in your native language, but it actually almost never happens. Are you looking for some specific publications/information or are you simply curious about what is done in your country?

As a native English speaker who's working abroad, I am finally at the point where I can directly read the scientific literature in the local languages. However, in the past, I haven't hesitated to cite references in French (my "original" second language) when it was appropriate to do so. There are no challenges to do so, really, except making sure that you have the correct abbreviation for the journal title.
However, I would agree with the other posters that indicate that, today, scientific work needs to be in English if it is to reach the widest possible audience. Between the fact that a thesis gets nowhere near the number of "hits" as the papers that are derived from it, plus the fact that it's in a foreign language, and I would expect you to get very little in the way of citations for your thesis.

Maybe my question is misleading, but what interests me is why would you now read articles in "the local language"? What do you earn from them that you won't find in an English-written paper (except for the ideas)?

Well, usually it's because a work I'm reading (in English) cites the particular work, and therefore there's a reason to read it (because it's a data or method source).

I do read scientific literature in my mother tongue (German).
For papers, that are mostly classics and not so recent. However, it is quite common in my field to write theses in German. And there are still serious and good scientific books as well as text books written in German, which I enjoy reading and citing as well.
I'm also writing my thesis in German.

Main reason: My old university required that (would need to ask special permission for any other language). I changed university, but I'm not going to change the language as well.
The findings are/will be published also in English. So not having the thesis in English doesn't matter that much in terms of availability in English.
Second main reason: the thesis is the place where things are formulated in a less condensed manner than the papers. Such theses are good for teaching students who are usually not yet that fluent in English (applies to some kinds of foreign students as well!) nor in the subject.

The same (more detailed, elaborate, less "it follows trivially" jumps of thought) is often true also for technical reports, which I read for exactly this reason (any kind of language I understand).
I  cite literature I read in any language I understood (which not that much more than German and English, as I'm not as fluent in other languages).
For the books, there is sometimes an English as well as a German version. But of course I cite the version that I acutally read.
(If I'd be concerned that the English-only reader would not get from "Leary & Skoog: Instrumentelle Analytik" to "Leary & Skoog: Instrumental Analysis", I may put a note that points to the English version)
Finally, how would you read and cite e.g. DIN 38402 A 51 if not in German?

Although this may not answer your question, I just wanted to say that I did my PhD in France and did not write my thesis in french. I just wrote a summary (about 3 pages) in french, the rest was a compilation of articles. Since a serious publication can only be written in english nowadays, translating it in french would be a waste of time.
You should discuss with your advisor and see any way to get your thesis published in english. I do not think any legal argument holds.

Since a serious publication can only be written in english nowadays - I disagree. Language has nothing to do with the "serious"-ness or what I think you mean (acceptance, authenticity etc). Language only affects reach and spread. The quality of a publication has nothing to do with its language.

@Shion: Any publication in a non-English language nowadays is suspect. If it was any good, why didn't the authors submit it to a respected English-language journal? That they chose not to and instead publish in a regional journal is a signal that even they thought it was not very good. So, empirically, serious publications are almost exclusively in English (and most of the remainder is non-English only for legal reasons).

Any publication in a non-English language nowadays is suspect. — [citation needed] Hard to publish, sure, but suspect? Really?

I was on the committee for a French PhD student whose thesis had the abstract and introduction/overview in French and everything else in English. I suspect this law is enforced with variable precision in different French institutions/departments.  Check with your advisor. (Most French PhD students I've known simply produced two versions of their thesis; an official version in French, and a public version in English.)

@luispedro I will beg to differ with your assertion and will agree with JeffE. If you can provide a relevant citation [even if it is in another language] please do so. A publication in a non-English journal does not equate to a "non serious" publication. Deviating from the norm is not necessarily a bad thing.

I don't have a citation, but if I find a recent paper written in a non-English language in a non-English language journal, my prior is that it is not very good. I don't know of a single non-English journal that I would consider to be on par with the average of the area. So, back to you: show me a single example of a non-English scientific journal that's considered important in its field.

@luispedro: I guess it depends on what you are looking for. If I need to read up or cite the relevant norms which I should/did follow, DIN or DIN-EN is my choice as I'm in Germany. If I need to read up or point to a concise summary of the current medical state-of-the-art I'd have a look for Leitlinien. If you want a journal, what about the Deutsche Ärzteblatt (note that it has a quite different purpose than Nature Medicine, and it is English-or-German language). And there are fields (though some may argue that they are not scientific) where you won't be able to avoid e.g. the Bundesanzeiger.

@cbeleites Fair enough. I think we were mostly talking about different sorts of publications as I would probably not really consider any of those a scientific publication, at least not primary publications, but secondary literature.

@luispedro: I think I know what you mean, you're restricting the scope to "original research papers", right? I guess if I'd look for good original research published in non-English languages, law, literature, language (l. didactics), (maybe even linguistics) would be fields where I'd start looking. As these are not my fields, this is just a heuristic. In any case, I'd have said that if you need to cite the Bundesanzeiger, it is as primary a source as it can possibly get. But it is a data source, you won't find original research papers there. (But I think possible continuations -> chat)


text:
Mention engagement for mentally disordered people in application?
Im not sure if I am right on academia so please forward this topic to another page if necessary.
A friend of mine is writing her application for a job in research, e.g. studies about medications, diseases etc. Though she has lots of experience and a very good degree (diploma + master thesis) in public health it is not easy for her to find a job.
To increase her chance for an interview she thought about to mention her high engagement for mentally disordered people. She founded a self-help group at the university which is well established and has several dozen members. She does it almost by herself in her leisure time after university and sideline. She herself is not handicapped but has therapies running, but nothing which speaks against working regularly. On the one hand she could point out that she has a high level of soft skills and does a lot work voluntarily. But the problem then is how would an employer react about these facts? Wouldn't he think she has problems herself and therefore isn't a suitable candidate?
I think it isn't good either to mention only vague information about this. What should she do?

Application for what? Is she mentally handicapped or is she helping people who are mentally handicapped?

For an academic job like research, e.g. studies about mediactions and dieseases

Can you modify the question to reflect your answers to these questions, so that we can judge whether it is on topic and, if relevant, to answer the questions?

Well she is not handicapped but has therapies running, nothing which speaks against workung regularly

This likely depends on your social environment. For example, in German university cities (and likely the same elsewhere around Europe and North America), such an engagement would be rated solely positively.

The very fact that she founded this group exemplifies  leadership as well as concern for the community at large. These both seem like positive qualities for a research position.

Many medical research jobs require interfacing with patients, stakeholders, family members, potential study subjects, etc. Therefore, people-skills can be a great asset. Furthermore, it sounds like your friend started a support group on her own initiative and successfully ran this group for some period of time with a fairly large number of person. This speaks to being a 'self-starter', and to good organizational and time-management skills, since she was doing this will completing her degree. The volunteering aspect is not as important as the other aspects, in my opinion since volunteering usually provides evidence of being motivated/'self-starter' which creating the group already emphasizes.
My feeling would be that this is a good thing to mention as it highlights several desirable qualities. In my opinion, whether or not your friend has mental health issues is her own personal business and not that of potential employers, unless it requires special considerations, so I would advise her to describe this work without reference to her personal health situation, framing it in terms of interest rather than personal experience - i.e. her interest in mental health issues led her to create this group which she managed for a certain period of time with however many clients.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it possible to do a literature review in the IMRaD format?
The IMRaD format (Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion) seems to be the gold standard in publishable scholarly articles in certain fields. I am wondering if I could get my literature review published if I modified it to fit this format. It’s not a systematic review and uses a lot of grey literature (unpublished project reports and presentations, newspaper articles, working papers) as it is on a topic which has very little research.

There's a hint of the cargo cult around "many excellent papers use this format, so I should use this format to make my paper successful". Different structures will be good for different papers, and I struggle slightly to see a review forced into that. On the other hand, if your reviewers also like to see everything squashed into this structure, you may be in luck ;-)

Why would you even do this? Have any of the unsystematic literature reviews you've read followed IMRaD? If it's not a systematic review, you don't have a much of an M, and you don't have R.

Introduction
People sometimes wonder what they can or should write in the IMRaD format (Introduction, Method, Results, and Discussion).  For example, should a literature review be written this way?  In this answer, we will examine a toy model for this question, namely stackexchange  answers, to produce evidence that although anything can be written in IMRaD format, it is not necessarily helpful.
Method
We prepared an answer on academia.stackexchange.com, wrote it up in the IMRaD format, and submitted it to the website.
Results
The answer appeared on the site, but the IMRaD format yielded no apparent benefits in organizing the answer and it looked eccentric.
Discussion
Stackexchange answers are not a perfect model for literature reviews, but they share one key similarity: they could be written in IMRaD format but usually are not.  Our experiment suggests a mechanism to explain this observation.  Genuine experimental results fit the "method, results, discussion" paradigm, but most other academic contributions do not.  Unless you are carrying out a formal meta analysis for which you can document a precise method, I see no good reason to use the IMRaD format for a literature review (and it would be actively harmful if you had to distort your account to make it fit this organization).

I am wondering if I could get my literature review published if I modified it to fit this format. It's not a systematic review and uses a lot of grey literature (unpublished project reports and presentations, newspaper articles, working papers) as it is on a topic which has very little research.

Your question suggests that you have trouble getting your literature review published for some reason. While I cannot make a definite statement (I would need to know your work intimately), I am pretty certain that the lack of an IMRaD format is not the reason. I can only suggest that you consult the comments of whoever rejected your review so far or, if you did not try to publish it yet, seek the opinion of colleagues or similar.
Now, there is such a thing as a paper about scientific literature using the IMRaD (or a similar structure), namely a meta study. In this case, the way you select the literature would make your methods section and your results would be a certain statement about this literature, e.g., “In 95 % of all studies, homeopathy was found to be as effective as placebos”. While you could apply such an approach to grey literature as well, you state yourself that what you are doing is “not a systematic review”, so this way does not seem like an option for you.

From what you've explained, I don't think you should concern yourself about the IMRaD format. If you want to know the right format to use to publish your review, then look at your target journal and examine the literature reviews that they have published. Pick the one that is closest to what you are doing, and then follow its general pattern. However, don't be too strict; let your article speak; feel free to vary the format of your model according to the unique characteristics of your model.
I strongly suggest, though, that before you complete the article, contact the editor-in-chief of the target journal with your idea or draft and make sure that it is acceptable. I do this for almost all articles before I submit, and the best news I can get is the editor telling me that they don't publish that kind of work, which saves me many months of wasted work.
Here are some possible caveats to this advice:

You don't have a target journal: You need one! It is difficult to publish research with only a vague idea of where you want to publish it. You should have a definite target in mind and write for it. Even if your article is not accepted at your first target, you should modify it to fit your next target. Except for most high-quality target journals, articles are frequently rejected (sometimes without review) because the writer clearly didn't have the target in mind.
Your target journal hasn't published any similar articles: Congratulations! You just saved your self many months of useless work by submitting to an inappropriate journal! Look for another target journal that has already published the kind of work that you are doing.

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


text:
What can you get from submitting an abstract?
I work for a technical company at the interface between engineering practice and research. Since we have to deal with academia on a daily basis, I have seen many calls for "Abstract submission". Generally these calls are associated with some sort of academic conference that is focused on a particular topic. It is also subject to deadlines and regulations. Several universities, research institutions and even private/public entities might be participating at these conferences.
My question is this: What can you actually get from submitting an abstract? Why do these conferences even request abstract submission? What do they get from it? Why are abstract submissions important and why do people do them?

In addition to what's already explained in the answers, let me add that many conferences print a booklet of abstracts and give each registered participant a copy of it. That helps the participants decide which talks to attend.  (For conferences with multipage abstracts, what I called a booklet is really a full-sized book.)

You submit an abstract to a conference if you would like to give a talk there. The abstract is then used to determine whether or not you get that chance (based on how interesting/relevant/sound the abstract is judged for that particular conference). So for the conference, this lets them filter (a bit) the talks that get presented there, for the author, this is the prerequisite for being allowed to give a talk.
Giving a talk at a conference is a means for a researcher to disseminate their research ideas and to advertise themselves. Discussions following a talk can lead to future collaborations, and giving the right talk at the right time can lead to eg a postdoc position.
"Talks given" is also a typical category on a CV, so even beyond the immediate talk, the fact that you gave the talk can be beneficial in competing for jobs.

So basically thats it? A talk? What can the talk bring you as a researcher? I understand it makes the conference more interesting but is it also an opportunity for networking or applying for research positions?

@user32882 I've added a comment on why people might want to give talks.

"What can a talk bring you as a researcher?"  In some branches of science, conferences are the main places where research is published.

Another benefit of giving a talk is that it lets you see much clearer what issues there still are to address, and what the strengths and weaknesses of your idea are.

@GEdgar but in these fields conference talks do not require a abstract to be submitted, but rather a whole paper before the decision is made as to if to accept. (At least that is true for CS and for Signal Processing)

@user32882 "Giving talks" (and listening to them) is the main formal activity that takes place at a scientific conference. That's why the conference exists at all - the talks aren't just an interesting sideshow!

@LyndonWhite: That's not true in other fields. Most stuff presented at e.g. CHEP2016 will only be published as proceedings and it does not require writing a paper beforehand, just an abstract.

@user32882: Scientific Conference are not like sales conference where vendors present their stuff.

@Marianne013 interesting. So is it the case that for high energy physics conference publications are considered as valid as journal publications? (as it is for large parts of CS). It seems a bit odd to be publishing papers that were accepted based only on the peer review of the abstract -- not the paper itself.

@LyndonWhite High energy physics is not one of those fields where conferences are the main avenue through which research is published. And accordingly(?), conference submissions are not considered as valid as journal publications. Actually, in HEP one does not generally submit a full paper to a conference; we submit an abstract, a slideshow (for the talk), and perhaps afterward a proceedings which is a ~4-page written summary of the research described in the talk.

Ergo as HEP is not a field where most research is published in conferences. Thus is not a counter example to my claim that in fields where conferences are the main venue (eg CS) a Paper is required for acceptance, not merely an abstract

@LyndonWhite CHEP is about Computing in High Energy Physics, not HEP itself. While HEP proper works as David Z. explained, papers in the Computing part are rare, Proceedings are the main form of attributing recognition to an idea and generally you are assigned talks on your abstract and  write the proceedings afterwards.

Following up the comment - giving a talk is not just a CV line. For most academic researchers, access to funding to attend a conference depends on being a presenter at that conference. So giving a talk is essentially the ticket to hearing what other people are working on, identifying potential collaborators, and keeping up to date.
Journal papers are not really sufficient, publication tends to be slow (though in some disciplines, initiatives like ArXiv is correcting that) and talking with someone is often better than reading a report to understand what they have done. Personally, I always find at least a few talks at conferences that are interesting and give me new ideas but I probably wouldn't have read the paper because it wouldn't have appeared in any of my searches.

It really depends on the conference. Contact the chair and speak to your colleagues to ask what benefit you might gain from attending the conference.
Some conferences, though in my experience in the humanities and social sciences, just ask for an abstract (a few hundred words) outlining the contribution of the intended talk. In those conferences, they pick which talks to have based on the abstracts. Then, after the conference, they invite a number of the best talks to write up their work as an article to be published in a journal.
In my field, computer science, most conferences require you to write a whole paper (usually 4-10 pages, depending on the conference and the size of your research contribution) to be able to give a talk at the conference. As @JenB says, most academic institutions will only pay for their research staff to go to a conference if they have published a paper there.
Now, some of the conferences that require a whole paper, will require an abstract to be submitted a week or two before the paper deadline. This is normally for logistical reasons, so they can pre-allocate which reviewers will review each paper.

Why might one want to go to a conference? To learn about the state of the art in this research field, and to network with the other researchers in the field, to maybe form collaborations.
Why might a researcher want to publish and present at a conference? To disseminate their work, get feedback from their peers, to promote their institution, and also for the reasons above.
Why might a employee of a company want to present at a conference? (I've not been in this situation, so take with a pinch of salt!) To disseminate their work (as much as their company allows), to promote their company, and also for the reasons above.
Why might an academic conference want industry attendees and presenters? To help cross-pollinate the work of academia and industry, so they can both learn from each other. To enable networking and industrial collaborations. To facilitate partnerships that might bring industrial money into academic research projects, or gain access to research council funding that requires industrial collaboration.

+1 since for some conference, the "abstract" you're submitting is the whole thing, just in a very concise form and perhaps missing some of the minor-but-longer details.

All of the other answers are correct, but may also be missing the fundamental misunderstanding here. Academic conferences are not like (some) commercial conferences, in that there is not an existing programme - perhaps of invited industry figures - that these talks add to. The talks that come from these abstracts are the only, or at least the main, content of the conference.
Perhaps more significantly, wheras at many commercial conferences the goal is networking, and the programme of presentations is of minor importance (a cynic might day that it is mostly there to provide an excuse to attend that will satisfy the accountants), at academic conferences people are actually there for the talks - although of course networking can be an important component too.


text:
How to highlight original work in a talk where it is not expected?
I am a student who is giving a talk on a topic in a few weeks. The talk will be a brief introduction to the topic concerned followed by a rapid survey of recent research and developments.
I have obtained an interesting result in the field by myself which complements a result that I will be talking about, so I am planning to include my result in my talk. However my result has not yet been submitted to any journal and has not been put up online independently.
How should I present this result in my talk? The talk is going to be a competition and being able to present such an independent result (even if it is minor) is considered commendable.
I want to make sure the audience notices that I have found this result. I will definitely be saying it out loud and clear, but I also want to display this somehow in my presentation.
What should be the proper way of such a display? That is, how should I put my name before this result? Shall I write, “Carter, 2017”? But note the work is unpublished. I don’t know if this is reserved only for works that have been published.

"The talk is going to be a competition..." I feel that this deserves more emphasis and explanation, as a talk is usually not a competition (though there may be some competitive undertones).  This makes me think that normal conventions on what to do in a talk may not apply in this context.  Also, this is a good question to ask your advisor, who is presumably much more familiar with your specific situation than we are.

No no, you see it is just that around 7 students are going to give talks on different topics, and finally a prize will be given to the best talk.

First, make sure that you are referencing the works of others that you build upon. This way, the audience should be able to easily distinguish the results that belong to you vs. the results that belong to others.
For a published work of yours, I'd prefer a Carter, 2017 citation, including the name of the journal or a conference, and some of the following: name of the article, DOI, link or issue and page number.
For an unpublished work of yours, I'd use an own work or own data notice. This way, you do not make a false impression that this work is already published. Your audience will possibly infer that these data are fresh from the lab bench. If I were to attend your talk, I'd pay more attention to these data, because these are ones I wouldn't be able to found in the literature (yet).
For an unpublished joint work, still use an own work notice, but add in collaboration with X, University of Y to give credit both to you and the other person.

Suppose I an another person have together found a result which I would like to state. Suppose that too is fresh from the bench. Should I write "Joint observation with X" if that person is X?

@LandonCarter thanks for a reminder, addressed this in the answer.

Why not "Carter et al., in preparation"?

@E.P. this will definitely work. Just make sure the first author will not change in the process of publication.


text:
How to write your research work in simple way
I am a PhD student works in the theoretical computer science. I am facing a difficulty while I have to write my work in a good manner. I try to write but when other students, collegues read my drafts they are not able to understand the idea I want to convey. I have written one or two research paper in my previous years. I try to look at the research papers which I am referring for help, it gives me some help but not that much. The problem I am facing is not able to write the things in a simple way, some time mix the  things. To me it appears that writing is much more challenging than solving a research problem.
Question : How to write your research in a simple way? Simple just means  other people can understand my work and the idea behind it at least.

It sounds like "I know Java, but how do I build a large systems in Java so it easy to understand and maintain"? There are whole BOOKS dedicated to academic writing, some address clarity of writing in considerable length. You can't just follow some quick advice; building up your writing style is a serious work.

Start by looking for books on writing - one that is useful is “writing technical reports” not sure of exact title or author... but there are many, get one, read it and work on improving.

Check out books on academic writing, book a course or workshop on academic writing at your uni, share drafts early and often, practice.

Take a look at my answer in MathOverflow about how to make a paper concise, but not condensed and dry. It's quite opposite to your question, since you only want to make your writing understandable, while that question pushes the idea of conciseness too far. Anyhow, maybe you will find it interesting.

To me it appears that writing is much more challenging than solving a research problem. — Yup.

Are you writing in your first language or a second language?

@Buffy Second language

Use a hierarchical structure that is clearly shown to the reader.    https://www.amazon.com/Pyramid-Principle-Logic-Writing-Thinking/dp/0273710516  Make a bulleted outline of each section of work before writing.
Be honest and direct.  https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/media-arts-and-sciences/mas-111-introduction-to-doing-research-in-media-arts-and-sciences-spring-2011/readings/MITMAS_111S11_read_ses5.pdf
Look at the "directions to authors" for each journal you submit to and follow them rigorously, like a checklist.
Write frequently and get frequent feedback and incorporate it.  Look for those who are good writers to review your work.

P.s.  I disagree with the advice to write in your native tongue and then have a translation made.  You will not learn well that way.  Stick to your flawed English but get better as you use it.  If anything being weaker in English will force you to a simpler sentence structure (fine).  Issues with clarity are very likely not the language problem but poor structure or poor logic.  "Clear writing is clear thinking."

+1 for the reference to Barbara Minto's book. It developed out of a course for English-as-second-language consultants at McKinsey when she realised that native speakers of English could not write clearly either.

Since you are writing in a second language you may need a different work-flow. But first an anecdote. It is an oddity of history that one of the main languages from which English evolved is German (French is the other). But scientific German has a very unique structure that didn't get obviously retained as English arose. So, even though the languages are similar in many respects it is still difficult for an English speaker to understand scientific German while having a grasp of conversational German.
It may be the case that something similar is going on with you. It may be that your first language is influencing how you write your second (probably English) and that difference in expressive mode and thought process makes it difficult for native speakers of the second language to get your meaning. It just seems awkward to them, though it is natural to you.
I recognize that this may not be the case at all, but if it is, I suggest that you write, first, in your native language directly and then have it auto-translated into the desired, second, language. You are now half done. Since auto translation is imperfect, you will need to tweak the output to refine it. But hopefully, the translator will modify the structure enough into what a native speaker would expect, making it more comprehensible. The vocabulary might be a bit weird, of course, but you can correct that.
You could also pay a human translator to translate your native writings into the second language. But if this is necessary, I'd suggest two things. It is unlikely that the human translator is also an expert in your field, so you will need to guide the person. This shouldn't be too hard if you can work directly together, since you speak a common language. But working together is also important for you in the long run as you will learn from the translator how to "think different" about the second language so that you won't need the same services for future work. Thus, the translator will also be guiding you.
Maybe auto translation would be the place to start, as it would likely be less expensive. If that is enough then you are done. If not, think about the other. It would depend, of course, on the relative quality of the translation, either by machine or human.

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


text:
Is just after your PhD a good time to switch your research area?
I am finishing my PhD soon. The area in which I pursued my PhD is very challenging as I was only able to publish couple of papers even after spending many years. I want to switch into other research are due these reasons

to attract more students
to be comfortable to do research (along with teaching, I should be able to do research)

Even though I like the research I am doing right now, I seem to be isolated in my university. If ten students join my university for a PhD, hardly one student takes this area. My research area is not like machine learning or deep learning etc, so researchers of my domain are also not that much interested in my work.
The thing is I can work different research area but: Is this the right time? I am heading to a post-doc and learning a new area will probably take several months. Although my switch is not 180 degree, I am still worried.

What do you mean by "okay"?

I was only able to publish couple of papers even after spending many years – If this is only because of your field, I wouldn’t worry too much about this. In any reasonable system, you will be measured against the typical publication frequency in your field, not in science in general.

It's certainly a better time than switching topics just before finishing your PhD.

This decision requires a fair amount of courage and planning. In short, yes, it is very much possible to switch your research area. Whether or not such a switch is successful depends on how well you plan it, and on the supportive nature of your future employers. You should be upfront with your postdoc advisor about your intention to switch. Because of the learning curve associated with the new area, expect a reasonable amount time (6 months or 1 year) before you can hope to produce research output in the new area. They should know this in case they are hiring you with the intention of fulfilling some funding obligations/deliverables in short time frames. My suggestion is to see if you could try to find a link betwee your current and intended area. If so, you could use this link as a bridge to move towards your new area, instead of all at once (which can be very overwhelming).

As you noticed, switching fields inevitably takes its toll as you have to spend some time to get familiar with the new topic.
To make this worth it, you need to enter a rapidly expanding field (which does not have enough home-grown candidates that would outcompete you with experience) or your experience in your current field must be an asset for the new one – ideally both.
Apart from structural reasons (not leaving in the middle of a thesis or other project), the only thing in favour of a late change is gathering field-specific experience in the old field that helps you in the new one.
Most likely, you already have done this and if not, you better hurry, because:
The higher you climb on the academic career ladder, the more experience in the field will be a requirement. The next step are tenure-track positions and similar where you not only need to have a sound research plan, but also have to convince others that you are the best person to enact it and can supervise others doing it – which is at least extremely difficult without any prior experience and something I have never heard of. Therefore the postdoc is the last stage at which you can hope to make a switch. (That is at least before you have the academic freedom of tenure or similar, but for that you first need to get there.)
For whatever it’s worth, I switched fields shortly after my PhD into an expanding field, which is quite a common move for that field.

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


text:
Should all computer science courses from a reputable university contain programming?
Right now, I am taking a BSc in computer science from a more reputable online university. Courses from there are transferable to most major Canadian universities. I would have preferred to take it from a brick-and-mortar place, but I wanted to just get as much done as fast as I can. In addition, I already have a degree.
Now, many of the programming courses (e.g., Beginner's Java, C++) are quite intensive even coming from a programming background. Some courses like Data Structures go through the concepts as well as have you code them (also fairly involved). However, some courses like Operating Systems and Computer Networks do not have a programming component. They are quite intensive, but I’m worried that not having a programming component will render my learning useless by future employers. (Though, on the other hand, they do have courses like socket programming that does cover that aspect)
So, I am wondering: Do brick-and-mortar universities typically have every computer-science course require you to program?

Computer science is not programming.

@JonCuster Yes, I understand. But I'm just curious what the typical University standard is regarding "COMPXXX" is. It's just a bit odd for me since I came from a workplace environment where everything was described in c#, c++, or Java. I guess I'm under the (maybe false) impression that if you can't build it, you don't really know it.

No. I have taken computer science courses at several reputable universities (Harvard, Stanford, MIT) that included no programming. Computer science is no more about programming than astronomy is about telescopes.

No.  In particular, most algorithms courses at top CS departments do not have a programming component.  On the other hand, I'm struggling to wrap my head around an operating systems class that doesn't require actually implementing significant portions of an operating system.

@Thomas Sidenote: whoever wrote that telescope comment is a computer scientist who misunderstands astronomy. You can absolutely get a degree or make a career in astrophysics focusing in instrumentation, i.e. building telescopes, detectors, and image processing. In fact, this is what many must do in the field, because the majority of astronomers do not continue in the field after school, and apply their skills to things like finance and oil. While you do not need a computer to write theorems about Turing completeness, you need to back up astrophysical theories with real observations.

Here in Italy, the BSc in computer science includes some mandatory math courses (linear algebra, calculus, probability, for instance, and even a physics one). These typically don't contain any programming (although a teacher may decide to use it to let the students verify some results by themselves).

@JeffE Maybe there is an "Operating Systems I" class that everyone takes, followed by "Operating Systems II" for those specializing in systems. In an ideal world, everyone in TCS/HCI/ML would also know how to implement significant portions of an operating system, but we don't have the 10+ years to teach everything every CS graduate should know.

Here in Eindhoven (the Netherlands) the first Computer science included barely any programming. It has algebra, math, graphs, logic, ... and programming 1 which used a non exiting programming language (Guarded command language) and a book called the derivation al algorithmes. And that was the core. Not the programming. Actualy programming in the first year was 2 hours (programming 0 so everybody knew what a real life program was and could write one... some pre knowledge was assumed) and some assembled in an electro course (not from the CS&math department)

I guess that I am trying to say is that you do not learn programming. You learn the science behind a lot of things. You understand why an algorithm has an order of time execution. You learn to think abstract.  Actual typing of code does not have to be anywhere in that.

No, computer science is much more than just programming. That's what makes it science.
Introductory CS course tend to focus on programming, but as you get deeper into the subject programming becomes less central. Thus many (maybe even most) graduate-level CS courses at top universities do not involve programming at all. (Of course, graduate courses on systems or security will still involve programming, but it's no longer universal.)
By the same token, assembly code, digital circuits, and semiconductor physics are all vital to how computers work in practice, but we don't expect those to be a ubiquitous part of computer science education. We are able to abstract away from the implementation details of how our Python script gets executed. Likewise, more advanced topics in computer science will abstract away from the practical aspects of computing.
For example, course in computability and/or complexity theory is unlikely to contain programming aspects. The reason being that these subjects focus on what is impossible to compute and such impossibilities do not depend on what programming language you use or how good you are at debugging. That is, these scientific questions require you to think more abstractly. Similarly an advanced algorithms course may avoid programming assignments because (i) it's assumed (i.e. is a prerequisite) that the students could in principle implement the algorithms and (ii) the algorithms are complex and it would take a lot of time to implement them with little pedagogical value.

It's good to know how to implement an algorithm efficiently, but if you want to be more than a technician (i.e., if you want to be a tool maker instead of just a tool user), you need to learn how to develop algorithms.  You need to know why A works and B doesn't, or why A works better than C, and what you mean when you say it works better.
Sometimes an instructor will assume that you can implement an algorithm that has been studied, without your having to demonstrate that you are able to do so.
The key to your coursework being accepted lies in the accreditation and the prestige of the school, I think.  Universities look carefully at transfer credits to ensure that the transferred course had the needed rigor.


text:
Is it ethical to accept masters admission from two different countries?
I have obtained admission from a well reputed university X from lets say Country A, and I also accepted their offer. Now I have also applied to another university Y, from country B, but which still did not publish their admission decision. Now after a while I got an offer for admission from University Y and for some reason I want to switch from university X to university Y.
Do I need to tell university X that I am not interested in their decision? Is it even possible?

If "Country A" is the United States, I believe you can switch without any issues before April 15. See my comments on the answer below.

It does not matter whether the universities are in different countries, continents, cities, states, provinces or buildings. In accepting an offer of admission from one university, you have promised them something in return for that offer -- that you will go there and pursue a course of study. Since it is not possible for you to accept a second offer while still satisfying your promise to the first university, you are ethically bound to the first university, regardless of there being a second university that is also interested in you.
Consider the situation had the tables been turned -- a university seems to want you, and offers you admission and financial aid, which you accept. Then the university finds another candidate which it wants even more, and withdraws its promise. Would that be ethical? I have a hard time imagining that anyone would say that it is.
This does not mean that you have to silently accept the consequences of your decision to accept. You can very honestly inform them that you have a better competing offer which you would prefer, but you recognize that you have accepted the earlier offer which creates an obligation for you to perform. Still, you hope that the university / department would be willing to release you from the obligation, though you will make good on your promise if they will not do so.
EDIT: The below-mentioned CGS resolution is potentially relevant, in that the first university may have made an offer accompanied by such an "escape clause" (assuming it was an American university). But I assume that you have no knowledge of there being such a condition extended by the offering university, otherwise you would have mentioned it. The fundamental moral question that you need to resolve is whether you believe that your promise becomes null and void if you discover that the university had an limitation on the normal understanding on "acceptance". Unless at least one of the involved universities is a CGS institution, this resolution wouldn't really affect my ethical point.

Well, thanks for the points that you have mentioned. I will definitely think over it.

I don't think this is right. If I recall correctly, an acceptance of a graduate school admissions offer isn't binding until the universal April 15th deadline has passed, at least in the US.

"In those instances in which a student accepts an offer before April 15, and subsequently desires to withdraw that acceptance, the student may submit in writing a resignation of the appointment at any time through April 15. However, an acceptance given or left in force after April 15 commits the student not to accept another offer without first obtaining a written release from the institution to which a commitment has been made." http://www.cgsnet.org/april-15-resolution

@Potato: Everything you say is correct.  But what it really means is that "accepting" an offer before April 15th in the US is not a conventional (i.e., ethically binding) acceptance.  Note that from the student's perspective, there is no reason to accept an offer before 4/15 if there is any possibility of a better offer on the horizon.


text:
What is the importance of postdoctoral teaching experience for US tenure-track jobs?
I'm a math Ph.D student in the US who has just accepted a four year postdoc--NSF postdoc at a US school interrupted by a year in Europe. For better or for worse, I am only slated to teach for two semesters in those four years--likely during the second semester of my 3rd year and 1st semester of my 4th.
I am planning to apply for tenure track positions in the US afterwards and am wondering whether the relative lack of teaching as a postdoc will adversely affect my application.
Should I be looking for volunteer teaching opportunities?
If it matters as a graduate student I had fairly extensive teaching experience, serving as sole instructor for courses in various levels of calculus, multi-variable calculus, and linear algebra for four years in addition to mentoring REU students and grading/TA-ing graduate and advanced undergraduate courses.

@BenCrowell  I don't think this is very common.  In math, at least, almost all postdocs include a typical faculty teaching load.

@BenCrowell Math works on a very different model from science fields.  In physics (and other sciences), most research seems to be grant-supported, and it's common for postdocs and even professors to not teach a full load.  Math, on the other hand, is almost entirely supported internally at most universities (at least in the U.S.), owing to the enormous number of students who need to take calculus.  Mathematicians do apply for grants, but mostly the grants just cover summer funding, travel, and computers.

@JimBelk I agree with your first comment and almost all of your second, but I'd add that grants often also include money for students, sometimes for the PI's advisees but also sometimes for REU support.  In fact, I once had an NSF grant approved but with a reduced budget, and the NSF allowed me to decide which budget lines to cut, except that I wasn't allowed to cut the REU line.

Two semesters of teaching in four years sounds almost ideal for a postdoc, so I would not be worried about that -- if you are aspiring to be a mathemagician rather than teaching-focused mathematician.

I won't answer your question because I am in France and not aware of the practice in the US; but a similar question can be asked everywhere, so let me give an answer to the equivalent question in France.
From my experience in a few hiring committees, teaching is secondary to research in the assessment of applicants, if considered at all. More precisely, an excellent research record seems to compensate almost any other consideration, and a very good research record leads hiring committees to barely look at teaching to see if it seems ok. I have seen a candidate be ranked very high (and be recruited elsewhere) without any kind of teaching experience (and a quite limited skill in French). So, for the sake of one's career, I would say that focusing on research is the winning move.
In my opinion, this situation is very unfortunate, and I guess and hope that many other departments consider teaching more seriously. Also, for one's own sake, one should try itself at teaching and get regular practice before applying to jobs that will involve a significant amount of teaching. This need not be intensive though.

The US have a better system of feedback from students than France, but still in most places you don't even need to be able to speak intelligibly. If you go to ratemyprofessor and such website you'll see how little some universities care about the quality of the teaching. However, hopefully, there are places, perhaps smaller, community colleges or liberal arts, where teaching experience and quality is taken into consideration. I have never seen it with own eyes though.

Given your level of grad student experience, I wouldn't worry a lot.  I think it will hurt you when it comes to jobs at liberal arts schools, but for a research university, it sounds like you already have a reasonable amount of teaching experience.  Make sure you save any evaluations you have from grad school, as those could be useful if there's any question about your teaching.  Similarly, with your teaching during the postdoc, make sure someone actually comes and observes one of your classes and can write a letter based on it.
As general advice, I would be more worried about starting a TT job as an inexperienced teacher than not getting a job because of it.  I personally had a relatively low level of teaching experience when I started my first TT position (one lecture course and 3 semesters of TAing) and I think it would have been beneficial for me to have a bit more, but I don't think it ever hurt me with a hiring committee.  I think it doesn't matter a tremendous amount whether you get the teaching experience you do get as a grad student or as a postdoc.
It is worth seeking out volunteer teaching/outreach projects assuming they don't consume too much time.  They're often a lot more fun than teaching normal classes and they're helpful for NSF grants, etc.

It depends on the type of job you are going for. If you want a job at a R1, then not having teaching experience hardly matters. If you are applying for regional universities or liberal arts colleges they will place much more importance on teaching (and since these job entail a much heavier teaching load, usually 3-3, but I've seen up to 5-5s compared to say, 2-2 at research Unis). Many of these schools will ask for a teaching portfolio as part of the job application instead of a teaching statement. You will have to submit past teaching evaluations, syllabi, and also the standard statement of your teaching philosophy. If this is what you are going for, you will want to have some of these material ready before you go on the job market.

My understanding is that at R1 US universities, for better or for worse, the reality is that pretty much nobody will even read your teaching statement.  Unless your letters explicitly talk about how terrible a teacher you are, you should be fine.
Anecdotal evidence: In my three years of postdoc-ing, I only taught the last semester (and only for fun), so it didn't even make it onto my applications which were due before that.  It didn't stop me from getting a tenure track job at a math department.


text:
Remove submission during review
I submitted a paper to an Elsevier journal which is now in 'Submitted to Journal status'. Now I want to remove it to improve the write up, though the content is good. I don't want it to be rejected after waiting for 7 months which would be a lot of time wasted. I would rather remove it now and improve it  myself or with the help of editing services. Should I email editor to remove it?  I am worried because the reasons for withdrawals mentioned on their website are serious and I don't want to give that impression when my reasons is just to improve the manuscript.
When you feel your paper does not have high chances to get accepted, do you keep on working on it during the review and re-submit to a different journal when it gets rejected eventually? Or remove it immediately, work on it and submit again.

What did the editor at the journal say when you discussed it with them? (They're the experts, after all.)

“When you feel your paper do not have high chances to get accepted”… then I suggest you don't submit it for publication in the first place!
It has happened that I have submitted a work which I continued to work on improving, but it was definitely in some very specific cases, where

the improvement in question was nice but absolutely not crucial to the paper,
had no impact an any of the conclusions of the paper,
I was not sure the improvement would actually work.

Basically, something like submitting the paper while continuing to tinker on Figure 2, thinking without adding or removing any data there might be a better way to present it, but it required getting a new software license and learning how to use it. Or submitting a paper while thinking that “hey, this is totally publishable, but if I continue running the simulation while the paper is submitted, maybe I can get the curve on Figure 3 with a little bit less noise”. But nothing as extensive as changing the text.

What should you do now? — Well, if you think reworking on the paper can in a significant way improve its chances of being accepted, I suggest you withdraw it from consideration. If you submitted not too long ago, the editor and referees might not even have wasted much time on it yet. So write to the editor, apologetically explaining that you've realized you made a mistake in submitting your paper too early, and would like to withdraw it. It's not a very nice thing to do, but I still believe it's in your interest.

Just to check: the changes you want to make don't affect the results of the paper, you just want to write it more clearly?
If the paper has already been under review for 7 months, they at least think it's good enough not to reject immediately, and the referee(s) have probably spent a fair amount of time looking at it.  If you withdraw it now, you will have to start the whole process over when you resubmit.
I would probably do one of two things:

Wait until you get a decision from the journal.  There's a good chance the decision will be "accept with revisions".  Then you can include your changes along with those suggested by the referee.  Include a list of all the changes you made, so that the referee knows what to look at.  Of course, if it's rejected, then you can make your changes before submitting to a new journal.
Make your changes now, and quickly.  Then contact the editor, saying something like: "Upon rereading the manuscript, I think its clarity would be improved by changing such and such.  Would you be willing to consider this updated submission, and pass it along to the referees?"  Again, include a list of the changes you have made.

In either case, it would help to minimize the amount you change: revise what you have to, but don't gratuitously make changes that aren't really necessary.


text:
What to wear on one's shoulders to interviews? (bags, backpacks, etc.)
There has been quite a few questions about how to dress to an academic interview. However, no answer to these questions addresses what one should use to carry their things in. For example, is it acceptable to carry your things in a backpack, cheap shoulder/messenger bag made of synthetic materials, briefcase, expensive leather bag, purse etc? A backpack with a suit would look awfully strange. Maybe a cheap messenger bag would still look OK. Links to photos of acceptable/preferred bags would be nice. Is the etiquette different for post-docs vs. faculty positions?

How does the proper attire worn during an academic interview differ from that worn during other professional interviews?  That is, how is this question specific to academia?

@JoelReyesNoche it is far more common for folks in non-academic professions to wear formal clothes on a daily basis, which is quite different from what I have seen among folks in academia (lots of jeans and T-shirts/polos, at least in my experience). Since daily clothing choices vary for corporate vs academic individuals, doesn't it follow that the proper attire for an interview might as well?

While I agree with @AruRay, I imagine the dress code e.g. in a law school to be different from that in a mathematics department.

I don't think this is worth a full answer... but as a girl, I absolutely love those "postman-style" bags that go over one shoulder. They can be classy enough, or not, and unless you need a laptop, you can fit everything in there (even a small laptop/tablet is possible if you use protection :P). They leave both your hands free, usually have a small handy and a big spacious pocket. Additionally, I usually have a cardboard folder inside with all the important documents easily accessible when doing administrative stuff.

@JoelReyesNoche The proper attire worn for "other professional interviews" varies wildly by field, and in academia varies as well, for example an interview at a medical school vs. a biology department.

I have seen them in all in faculty job talks in our department for the last few years. I have seen messenger bags, backpacks and briefcases; some of them have been made of expensive leather and looked really classy/professional and I have even seen them made of cheap, fraying materials.
Either way, it does not matter - except maybe in incredibly conservative departments. We hired one of the folks who had a pretty cheap looking backpack. The fact that they had multiple publications in the top journals and conferences in their area probably mattered more. They were all wearing suits though.

The fact that you remember the quality and nature of the bag your colleagues brought to their interviews years later suggests to me that, in fact, this might make enough of an impression on some people (eat subconsciously as it relates to professionalism) that it's worth borrowing a more professional looking bag.

I think, at least in the UK (I couldn't be sure about other countries), this probably matters a lot less in academia than it would for a corporate job.  The most important thing is probably that you feel comfortable with your choice.  It's extremely unlikely that you would fail to get the job simply because of your choice of bag, but if you are feeling uncomfortable all day about, say, wearing a backpack with a suit, then that could end up having a negative effect on your interview performance.
When I interviewed for my current job, I carried my larger items in my backpack, and I did feel a bit silly wearing a backpack with a suit, but fortunately I was offered to leave my backpack in the secretaries' office for the day, and I had all the things I really needed to keep with me in a small leather handbag.  I think I would have felt uncomfortable carrying the backpack around with me all day (even though it was a good-quality and quite new one), especially as the other candidates were quite smartly dressed and didn't have backpacks.

+100 for The most important thing is probably that you feel comfortable with your choice. This is so true. I failed an interview because my suit was too tight. Always remember that you are interviewing for the academic job, not a fashion model.

Bags, shoes, hats, it's all the same answer as for clothes. Post-docs vs faculty positions, it's the same answer. If you've any specific instructions from the panel who will interview you, follow them. Otherwise, follow local customs for smart professional attire. Err on the side of looking smarter and more professional.

[F]ollow local customs for smart professional attire.
If a Swede interviews for a position in (say) South Korea or Singapore, that may be easier said than done.

If you wear a backpack on both shoulders with a suit jacket, it will make the suit bunch up in front and the sleeves look too short. Also, you will probably pop the button(s) if you wear the jacket closed. If you don't need to bring anything heavy to the interview and strongly prefer your backpack, then wear it on one shoulder only.
As someone else said, choose to bring what you are most comfortable with. By comfortable, I am referring to the ability to quickly find whatever you might need during the interview. It is awful to be dredging through a bag or purse, trying to find something while one or more potential employers are waiting! I have done that, and it was flustering, distracting. The same is true about latches on a briefcase or satchel, if you choose that.
An academic interview is so important. Even if you don't wear a suit, or don't have one, make sure that your shoes fit well, hair is combed, and your socks match. No one is likely to notice or care, but doing so costs you nothing and will minimize self-consciousness, especially if you need to stand to write something on a whiteboard.

Actually, my socks never match :D I'd say it's not as important as long as you don't flash anybody with your mismatched socks -- and it actually helps me relax knowing that no matter how "smart" I am obliged to dress, I still have a bit of fun and crazy in my shoes ;)

@penelope you rebel, you!

@FeralOink I didn't mean to offend anybody, but honestly, if anybody has a problem with my mismatched socks hidden away from sight in my shoes, while I'm dressed appropriately, I would have a problem working for/with them. How would they even get insight about what kind of socks are in my shoes? Oh and BTW, I am a science student from a developing nation. I'm not saying "put you crazy cap on, everybody!", but if it helps you to have mismatched socks, a silly watch or some other "not so serious" token, it's okay as long as it is discreet enough.

@DanielHatton Graduation hoods are roomy and drape nicely. They aren't tight and don't get bunched up. Most clothing issues are surmountable, but since I have first hand experience going to interviews with bunched up clothing and clunky backpacks, I wanted to share alternatives to that.

Borrow a professional looking bag or briefcase. I borrowed a nice black (synthetic material) shoulder bag for my interviews that looked better than my Chrome bag I use for commuting on my bike. Even as they say it should not matter, other answers suggests that faculty remember how professional or non-professional the bag a interviewee brought was for long periods of time afterward.
In a job interview, you are trying to communicate that (a) you are professional and competent, (b) that you are taking the interview process seriously, and (c) that you the kind of person that faculty can imagine as their colleague (as opposed to their student).  Looking professional and professorial is one way you can do all three things.
Keep in mind that the way you appear is a sort of a package deal. If you have an less than professional backpack that looks like something a student would bring, it's probably not going to tip the scale either way, but it's not going to help and it probably will be noticed. If you are a student or a post-doc, people understand that you don't have the cash for a fancy bag. That said, if there's any way you can borrow a nicer looking bag from somebody for your interviews, the downside is low enough that I don't see why you wouldn't.


text:
Am I too old for academia after a PhD?
Currently, I am applying for PhD positions at United States and Canadian Universities. I will be 35 when I start my PhD in Computer Science/Machine Learning, and probably I will finish it around the age of 40.
Will I be banished from academic positions considering a possible PostDoc time and what about industry positions ? Should I plan my study towards industry or academia from the research perspective ?

Here's an example of a very successful researcher who started her PhD at 38: http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/pers/hd/s/Sagot:Marie=France.html

A colleague of mine who recently retired earned her Ph.D. at 50 and went on to an academic career, so the answer is "you are not too old". However, this is a duplicate of the question @earthling linked.

@BenNorris In which field is your colleague if I may ask?

@sequence - chemistry

No.
Age discrimination is illegal in the US and (I assume) Canada.  If you're worried, just don't put your date of birth on your CV.  Most people don't.
Hiring committees just don't care how old you are.  All that matters is the quality and impact of your research.

What about research in mathematics?

@sequence What about research in mathematics??  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Birman


text:
The use of words such as "clearly", "obviously" etc. in a technical paper
Is there any hidden rule for using the words "clearly", "obviously" or similar ones in a technical paper? It can be offensive to the readers in many cases (especially in mathematical proofs), since the reader may not find it "clear" or "obvious". But does that mean that we should completely avoid the use of these words?

these words usually preface a lie. its a tell.

I don't see a reason to ever use these in writing. They could easily be replaced with 'since' as in 'Since two plus two equals four....'

"proof by intimidation"

Clearly, the answer to your question is obvious.

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2991#comic

Contrary to what @JoelReyesNoche states, the answer to this question is obviously clear, and not the other way around.

Besides providing a popular alternative to actually proving your claims, those words are also useful when something really is "easy to see" (but is nevertheless useful) and you wish to point out that you're aware of that. Referees sometimes seem to feel like they're talked down to when something is "too easy", so that can serve as a way of avoiding their wrath. If something is not too difficult but does not deserve a proof because it's well-known at least by the community I'm aiming at, I usually provide at least a reference (see Exercise x in Smith et al. [y], page p).

Also asked at MathOverflow and Mathematics StackExchange.

@AnthonyLabarre In addition to that, a very simple point in the midst of complicated arguments may end up causing the reader to believe that it is more complicated than it seems, and to waste time and effort looking for a deeper meaning that does not exist.

I do prefer having "clear/obvious"  to not even saying that regarding some claims/equations that are in fact not so obvious and given without argument... "clear/obvious" at least coveys the information that the author thinks it isn't difficult (which of course may be wrong).

Seconding posdef's appraisal, but being a little more blunt: if one is in a position to get away with bullying or intimidating people by implying that it's their problem if one has not explained well enough ... well, I'd say it's still a jerk-y thing to do. If one is in a lower-status position, such words will often be red flags.
Or, coming to functionality versus rhetoric versus "formal proof": at best these words are functionless filler. That is, saying something is clear is not what makes it clear: if it is clear after these words, it was clear before. Conceivably a thing is clear _once_noted_, and thus deserves "Observe that...". But this, too, can be abused if used outside situations where one is noting that something is "a-fortiori" true, that is, is weaker than what the argument has already demonstrated... but presumably suffices for the issues at hand.

But even "Observe that" is redundant.  You don't need to announce that you're about to say something. Just say it.

Meh, it is redundant, but I agree with his idea that it is a better way of 'underlining' a point (and is OK to use occasionally) - Similar to VS's (below) 'it follows'.

I prefer "We emphasize that..." to indicate emphasis.  Sparingly, of course.

@JeffE I propose it's circumlocution

"Saying something is clear is not what makes it clear": Perhaps, but it can certainly help to make something clear. If I read a statement that isn't accompanied by a proof, I might try various ways to convince myself that it's true. If the statement is accompanied by "clearly", that reduces the number of ways I'm inclined to try and suggets looking at the easiest ones first. That "clearly" can save me a lot of time.

@AndreasBlass, I agree that a description of the depth of a missing bit can be helpful, and we can hope to trust the author's characterization... but I still do think that either a very short explanation itself can be given, or some details about the allegedly not-too-long argument if the author doesn't want to give it. Otherwise, if it's not been made clear (an admittedly subjective issue) by the previous narrative, announcing that it's clear all too easily verges on petty bullying. I myself prefer more gentle, polite explanatory styles.

I think saying something is obvious (if it actually is) can be useful though, it helps the reader do a sanity check and make sure they're following all your arguments correctly.

@user541686 If it is obvious it should be as simple to write why. If it's clear, just write it clearly. In all cases there is a better way to handle it than writing "it's obvious" (try starting with "it follows from" or "by ... we see"). If this does not work, omit the "obvious" altogether and the text will be better still.

@Dirk: We obviously disagree

I don't think there is a clear consensus on how to use these words.
As mentioned in some other answers, some people find them annoying or obnoxious.  Others think they are a perfectly acceptable way to mention a fact for which you believe a detailed explanation is not necessary.  Certainly they are quite common in published writing.
I think it is a choice that you make as part of developing your own personal writing style, and your feelings may change over time.
My only advice is: when you write that something is "obvious", make absolutely sure it is true!  I've been embarrassed this way before.

While often abused for not writing down an argument, these words serve a useful role in mathematical writing. They are not superfluous; they serve a useful function.
Writing "Clearly, every woogaloo is badonk. Consequently,..." suggests to the reader that they should be able to come up with the argument for why every woogaloo is badonk after a moment of thinking. If you just write, "Since every woogaloo is badonk,..." the reader is not alerted to this fact and might think this is a well-known, though possibly very deep, result that is assumed to be known by the reader. In that case, the reader might either not think about it or might even give up continuing to read because they "obviously" don't have sufficient background knowledge.
Generally, outside of fully formalized mathematics, there are always gaps in proofs that are left to the reader. A step might be so obvious that writing "obviously" is superfluous. Writing "obviously" is meant to make the reader take a brief breath and think where this is needed and useful. It is precisely because such terms are useful in guiding the reader's expectation that they cause so much anger when they frustrate the reader's expectation.

+1 Normally I don't like to see new answers to old questions since they rarely add  much. This one does.

While I don't strongly disagree with these points, I still avoid using these loaded words in my papers. I'll use them in more colloquial settings like in class for plain facts that the class knows by heart, but I like to give just enough detail in papers that I can avoid these phrases. I have a different approach than most when it comes to mathematics paper writing though. I take the approach that a second year grad student should be able to follow the entire paper without too much difficulty. I also have a very strong narrative throughout as connective tissue.

More broadly then in regards to mathematical proofs, a mark of good writing is to avoid the superfluous. Whether something is clear or obvious comes from the content, not the writer labelling it as such. Trimming unneeded adjectives and adverbs like those you describe should be a regular step in a proof-reading stage. See Strunk and White's Elements of Style for a more detailed treatment.

We touched this particular subject in a "Technical Writing" course; the simple answer is that it's a power-stance. In other words, if you are a big-name professor in your field, you can use it without offending someone. Alternatively if you are a petty PhD candidate, then you are better off avoiding not only these two words but also other forms of bold statements when you are drawing conclusions.
As I said this is rather the short answer, I am sure those who are more into linguistics etc might have more insight into the matter.

I would add that if it is clear or obvious, explain how it is clear: "X is clearly the case, as shown by Y." (In other words, the words "clearly" or "obvious" are unnecessary fillers and can be omitted.) If it is being used as a power-stance, I would not accept it even from a top-level expert — or my boss.

if you are a big-name professor in your field, you can use it without offending someone — [citation needed]

@JeffE it was the lecturer in the course I mentioned, who is a professor in linguistics I believe. So it's not something I made up myself :)

@JeffE: I remember that we were studying once in school a text written by "Ibn Khaldoun", an Arabic scholar in the 1300's. We noticed the use of many statements that would be be considered nowadays as "arrogant". The teacher, I remember, said that the author (i.e. Ibn Khaldoun) is allowed to do that given that he is a big-name scholar. I remember the teacher said this technique was followed by other big name scholars of that time. But this could be a cultural matter more than anything.

@AJed I would suspect that the field in which the article in question is written in, has a role to play. Many here are from maths or CS-related fields, where the articles are written inductively instead of deductively, which is the case for chemistry, biology and medicine... The difference being that findings need to be interpreted in deductive research, which leaves the door open for clumsy expressions such as "... clearly indicates that ..." (Note that I do not approve these expressions, nor do I try to justify them)

@posdef: I am sorry but I really did not understand what you mean.  But anyway I just wanted to give an example to support your argument above.

I was always taught that if you had something to say that was "clear" or "obvious" to your intended readership, then it wasn't really worth saying at all. Made a lot of sense to me, and I've never used those words in any of my technical or academic writing since.

I propose never using these words unless your goal is to trick the reader into thoroughly checking your claim, or in an exam's trick question where you set a false premise (though these words are give-aways if not overused). If something is obvious there wouldn't be a need to even state it. And if you need to state something, it is not obvious.
If you think some non-trivial1 steps should be omitted so your 5 page paper doesn't bloat up to a 30 pager, then please have the decency to either briefly state the trickiest tool involved (be that induction or some specific part of Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem) or - even better - put the detail which you should have done anyway into the appendix / online supplement and refer to it.

1Trivial is also one of these words.

By reading the comments and answers here, the conclusion is, that it is usually not a good idea to use these terms. Keep in mind that it might not always be the case that something is obvious to your reader. That being said, the reason you want to use such words is probably because you want to point out/conclude/summarize your findings to the reader.
The bottom line is not to tell your readers what (you find) is obvious, but to tell them what the obvious thing is (conclude/summarize). This way they will either:
A. Confirm their own observation
or
B. Let them know they haven't fully understood yet (they might re-read your article now)

I might go against most of the answers here and say why not?.
I am going to this right now. I am writing a paper proposing a solution for problem X by adopting well known mathematical model Y. Now Y has clear axioms and definitions (for instance, the set of considered elements has to form a commutative semigroup under combination). I defined X then defined the combination operator. Should I go further and proof it is commutative semigroup?  I believe it is clear that X form a commutative semigroup within my framework. Yes It is obvious..
Now whether the author of these words is a student or professor, I believe it doesn't make difference. At the end, there is minimum knowledge required to understand any given paper, if its clear then it's clear and you better utilize the paper limited space in something not clear enough.

There's nothing wrong in stating that Y being a commutative semigroup implies X being one too (due to none of the possible exceptions occurring, of course). But there's no need to state that this is obvious, just state the fact and instead of "it is obvious" write "because Y is". Also three words, but much more helpful IMHO


text:
How to reply to reviewers on an unintentional wrong proof in my research paper?
I submitted a research paper and the reply has come back. The reviewers are positive overall, but one of them pointed out a flaw in one of my proofs. This happened because I made a wrong assumption regarding the proof. Now I have found a way to get around this and have a better proof. How do I present that my previous proof was wrong, the reviewer was right in saying so, and that now I have a better one?

Just fix your paper to include the better proof and thank (in the acknowledgments) the anonymous reviewer for pointing out the flaw in the earlier version of the proof. Also, when you submit the revised version of your paper, you should mention  that you have corrected the proof following the suggestions of the reviewer in the cover letter (or in the response to referees if you have it separated from the cover letter).

What's the editor's decision?

Is this a journal review where you get to submit a revision, or a CS conference "author rebuttal period" where you cannot submit a revision, but only respond to the reviewers comments?

@Ri49 Editor has asked us to address the reviewer's comments and submit the revision.

@Aaron Yes, it is a journal review with a revision policy

If the reviewers and subsequently the editor does not consider the error enough to warrant rejection, you should simply make the changes necessary and submit the revised manuscript according to instructions. Since the reviewers spotted the errors you should acknowledge their helpful comments (unless this is not the custom in the field for some reason).
It seems to me that you may be lucky to get the chance to revise the manuscript since the type of error you describe, I would think, would likely lead to rejection. But, with a favourable verdict you just revise the manuscript and return it as per instructions.

I have rewritten the manuscript and have written a response to the reviewers. I was just curious as to how I should be starting the reply in the new proof. Like "I apologize for the apparent mishap in the previous proof which happened due to making this assumption. Now I realize I shouldn't have made that assumption. So and So" or should I just write the new proof, acknowledge their helpful comments and give it back.

@dineshdileep "Thank you for identifying the incorrect assumption in the proof. We have updated the proof in Section x.y." In a good "reply to reviewers" letter, you should outline each point the reviewers make and point them to the correction. That is more important than apologizing.

I'm not sure much luck was involved. If I come across a wrong proof, but the theorem looks like it's true, I'd recommend acceptance subject to fixing the problem (assuming the rest of the paper merited acceptance, of course). I'd probably only reject if I thought the theorem had a good chance of being false.

Second the comment by @DavidRicherby. At least in mathematics (which is adjacent to where this sounds like its coming from) reviewers often treat results and their proofs as separate. Revising a proof is completely warranted and you should do it.

Just fix the proof. Especially if you feel that the reviewer gave helpful suggestions about how to fix the proof (beyond just pointing out that the original version was wrong), you could consider adding an Acknowledgments section thanking the anonymous referee for pointing out the error in the original proof of Theorem X and/or their suggestions of how to fix it.
You don't need to apologize for your mistakes, either in the paper or your reply to the referees' comments. In your reply, you should of course acknowledge the error, thank the referee for pointing it out and say that you've fixed the problem.

Even if the reviewer only pointed out the error and didn't suggest how to fix it, I'd still put in an acknowledgment thanking the reviewer "for pointing out an error in the original proof of Theorem x" or "for pointing out that the original proof of Theorem x was wrong".


text:
How long is reasonable to wait for reply from an editor?
About 5 months ago I submitted a paper to a journal. The editors assigned a reviewer. In the meantime I sent a couple of revised versions, which did not help matters, but the editor ultimately wrote back and asked me to complete my revisions and re-submit the document. I did that within a couple of weeks. The editors did not acknowledge receipt of this submission, but I did not want to ask for one since I felt I had already been pestering them too much. A couple of weeks later, I notified the editors that I wanted to post a couple of graphs from the submitted paper on a blog, although I hoped to make it clear that only a very small component of the whole paper was being posted on the blog. The editors did not respond to this notification. More than two months went by after the re-submission, and I sent a message to the editor asking for a status update, just to be sure that the paper was still being considered and under review. It seemed to me that a very simple "yes, it is still being reviewed", or "no, we have considered your paper withdrawn and it is not being reviewed" or something like that, would suffice. About 10 more days passed with no response, and I thought I would telephone the editor with my question, on the off-chance that my emails were not getting through.  I left a message for him, and another week has gone by with no response. At what point do I take the non-response from the editor as a message that my paper is no longer under review and that I should re-submit it elsewhere? The journal is otherwise a reputable journal, and I would like my paper published there, but there are many others that interest me too.  I feel like I made a mess of the whole process, and am to be blamed for over-communication and confusion, but am I not owed the courtesy of a response from the editor?

It's summer (in the northern hemisphere); many academics take extended vacations in the summer.

Thank you everyone for your replies. It is helpful to know how long the process can often take, and that the time involved in my case is not atypical. I will hang tight for another month or so and ask for a status update again. If the one editor does not respond, there is another executive whom I can contact for feedback. I will take it on faith for a while longer that unless they specifically tell me the paper has been rejected, that it is still somewhere in the process of review. There is a temptation to infer that the paper has been left for dead, but I am reassured by the comments here tha

In my situation, I sent a manuscript for a book to an editor, and it's been 1½ weeks, and I still don't know if they even received my email. Is this normal?

There are good reasons to expect communication with an editor to be slower than many other e-mail exchanges. Editors are busy, especially since editing may be a minor but time consuming part of their job. And responding to questions from authors often involves contacting referees, who may in turn be unresponsive.
I'd say that it's reasonable to wait a couple of weeks for a response to a timely request for a status update (two months after a revision strikes me as a bit early---I'd expect it to take longer---but not unreasonably early to ask for a status update). If it gets lost (for instance, the editor is waiting for a response from the referee, and hasn't remembered to tell you that's what's happening), a polite reminder and a few days to another week or so of waiting might be appropriate.
After that, though, you can rightly begin to worry that you aren't hearing back. If there are other editors, especially a chief editor, you can contact, I'd start there. I'd be very reluctant to unilaterally withdraw the paper, since that might cause complications if the editor returns and feels you resubmitted while it was still under consideration.  Before resorting to that, I'd try to talk to one or two senior people in the field for advice about the specific paper.
(Just to emphasize, I'm talking about communication with an editor about the status of a paper. Of course the refereeing process as a whole can take a year or more.)

On rereading the question, I realized that I misread the first part of the question. What I described was for the case where you'd waited an appropriate amount of time to request a status update. Two months would be short, but not crazy, if you'd gotten a revise-and-resubmit. But in this case, you (repeatedly?!) altered the paper after submission, so that it's actually only two months since the paper was actually submitted. You've made a lot of extra and unnecessary work for the editor, and now you're asking for a status update prematurely. No wonder it's a low priority for the editor.

You are right in both that you have made a mess and that you should get a prompt reply.
First, to see what usually happens: A paper is submitted, the editor takes a look (reads) the paper to decide if it is appropriate for the journal and if it is ok then either sends it out to reviewers directly or assigns the papers to co-editors who will send it out. This process can vary greatly in length but will be on the order of weeks to a month depending on workload. Remember that editors usually work for free or with little pay and working out of their spare time. Assigning reviewers means contacting reviewers, waiting for their reply and in some cases getting negative replies. Each request might use up 2 weeks and so if you are unlucky it might take month just to get enough reviewers to accept the chore. Reviewers usually have something like three weeks to do the review (it will vary though) but often reviewers are not on time so a month can easily go by. Upon getting the reviews back, the editor has to scrutinize the reviews and make decisions on the recommendation to send back to you. Several weeks to a month are typical times for this depending on a situation. The editor will then contact you with a "verdict" varying from accept to reject through revisions. During all this time you will not hear much unless the journal uses an electronic submissions system in which you can usually monitor the progress yourself.
So, if you contact the editor with questions during the process, I would say it is fair to get a reply within at least a couple of weeks unless it is a holiday season. The fact that you for some reason submitted a manuscript which probbaly was sent into above process and then followed up by sending revised manuscripts which would have caused quite a lot of extra work for everyone concerned at the journal, was a mistake and would make me as editor really irritated. Don't send a manuscript unless it is completed. If you need to add or change anything wait until the manuscript is reviewed or withdraw it.
Despite the problems you may have caused, you are of course still entitled to get a response on direct questions. The fact that many months transpired without contact about your manuscript is not out of the ordinary but if you ask for a status update after 4-5 months, I would think it would only be fair to get a quick reply such as you mention. As a side point, a rejection is usually communicated quite quickly so a lack of contact is usually a good sign. Now, I do of course not know why the correspondence is slow, if it is the norm with the journal or if it is just an accident. As a final point I would say that even if you messed up, it doesn't entitle the editors to treat you any worse than anybody else. It is always difficult to know if sending additional mails will help, most likely not, but at some point, give it another month, then a response should have come forth. If not then another mail is in order.

From reading this it almost seems like the paper is not actually submitted. By submitting revisions (via email? were you uploading them? withdrawing the original? submitting via the submission systems as if they were new submissions?) AFTER the manuscript had been sent out to reviewers, you threw a wrench into the system. The editor was polite and told you to resubmit a final version of the manuscript. They probably WITHDREW your original manuscript and pulled it from review. The clock now resets for this submission. How did you do it? Via email to the editor? If you did that, it is not submitted. If you have no acknowledgement email, manuscript number, control number, it is not submitted and probably not under consideration. I would not recommend contacting the editor further and log into the manuscript submission system and check the status of the manuscript. You will probably have at least one submission withdrawn by the editor, but it is unclear to me how you submitted the unsolicited revisions and whether they will appear in the system.