text:
How to cite a conditionally accepted article?
I'm currently working on an R&R with a fairly strict due date coming up within a few weeks. One of the reviewers had a question about a small part of the paper that uses data from a particular source, Organization X. I know of another paper that uses different data from Org X that just got conditionally accepted elsewhere, and I'd like to cite this other paper as evidence that Org X data is reputable. Is citing it as "forthcoming in journal Y" appropriate, even though it has only been conditionally accepted? Should I wait until that paper is accepted to put it in as a reference? Is there something else I haven't considered? Thanks so much!

The "condition" you mention is an important consideration.

Is the "due date" just for submission? Will your work go through review and revision?

Not sure what the conditions for acceptance were for the other paper – I believe it was addressing 1-2 minor points. But for me, the R&R due date is for a second round of review and, (I hope), revision before publication.

Is this paper on a preprint server that you can cite?

Can you state Unpublished?

Is citing it as "forthcoming in journal Y" appropriate, even though it has only been conditionally accepted?

You should only write that the paper is "forthcoming" or "to appear" in a journal if the paper has in fact been accepted for publication in that journal.
The problem with "conditional acceptance" is that it doesn't convey precisely how easy/likely it would be for the author to meet the conditions for acceptance. One might reasonably assume that final acceptance is probable once you reach a "conditionally accepted" status, but it is not guaranteed. So I think you want to be careful about giving an inaccurate impression of the paper's status. "Forthcoming" sounds like too strong of a claim to make at this point.
There may be hypothetical exceptions to this, where what should really be described as a proper acceptance is described in a way that creates an appearance of being "conditional", but those cases don't seem that common to me. If based on what you know about the paper's status, you really feel that acceptance is nothing more than a formality at this point, I suppose you can take the chance and describe the paper as forthcoming. But if I were you I'd want to be ready with a very good explanation of why this description makes sense, and to have a very good reason for even bothering to put myself in a position where I'm making statements that people might find misleading or eyebrow-raising.

Should I wait until that paper is accepted to put it in as a reference?

Regardless of whether the paper is accepted, you are free to cite it. This would make more sense if the paper is publicly available as a preprint. It might make a little sense even if the paper is not publicly available but its existence is public knowledge and easy to confirm. In a situation where neither the paper nor its existence are public knowledge, you can still cite it, but such a citation may not carry much weight or lend your claims about Org X's data the sort of credibility you are hoping it would.
If you cite the paper, listing it as a preprint or as "submitted", you can add a footnote explaining that you have been informed that it is conditionally accepted, if you feel that is helpful.

Saying the paper is "forthcoming" is overly optimistic unless you know the details. It might even be withdrawn by the authors if they don't agree with the condition.
For a submission that is subject to review and revision yourself, you can add a note that the paper is under review and has been conditionally accepted. Then, when it comes time to revise your own work you can update that with the current state.
Make sure, however, that if the paper isn't, in fact, accepted/published that you are covered in what you say. Don't make your own work dependent on the unknown factors associate with someone else's work.
But initial submissions can normally be revised before publication. It is fairly rare that things are published as first submitted and notes to reviewers can be fine. Submissions to conferences, of course, have tighter deadlines and fewer opportunities for revision.
If you need to formally/finally cite a paper that is under review, even if late in the process, my choice would be to list it as "in preparation". Saying more is problematic.


text:
Do you still cross out and redo the page numbers if you do it wrong in your scientific notebook?
I recently started my science notebook/diary/journal in preparation for a local science fair. I accidentally realized my issue into numbering the pages on the left side TOO. Do I cross it out or redo, and if not, what do I do?

What does TOO stand for?

@RichardHardy I'd guess that it's just caps for emphasis and not a TLA.

@Bobson, thanks for another acronym, or TFAA for short :)

You are overthinking this.
Your science notebook should be a reliable uneditable record of your day to day observations. As long as you date entries and don't cross anything out or erase anything it does not really matter how the pages are numbered.
You could write a comment in your the book today that on June 10 you discovered you have misnumbered pages but that none of your entries (past or future) will depend on the page numbering.
You have nothing to worry about. Just do the science as best you can.

Edit in response to comments, many of which are concerned with patent legalities. I think they are not central (partcularly for a science fair project).
The point of the uneditable science notebook is primarily to keep you scientifically honest and able to demonstrate that honesty. It records your false starts as well as your good insights. It makes it impossible (at least in principle) to ignore data that does not support your theories.

In the old days one never would deface one’s notebook that way  unless you wanted a long talk with the patent lawyers.

When you cross out in a notebook, cross out with a single line so the original remains legible, and date and initial the correction.

@JonCuster If you're in any situation where a patent lawyer would have cause to look at the notebook, one would hope that the people footing the bill would "splurge" on pre-numbered notebooks.

Notebooks have become much less important for patents since the US changed from "first to invent" to "first to file"

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How would someone submit a proposed proof of a Creator of the universe theory for peer review
B"H
I'm aware of this question Getting peer review for research without submitting to conference or journal
Which asks specifically for what platforms are good for submitting a study for peer review, but how would one go about submitting a proposed proof of the Creator to get credible critique from professionals, and/or published in some kind of scientific journal?
As opposed to that question, I'm asking for any way to give legitimate professional authentication to the proposed study, including publication.
What category would this fall under, and what journals or professionals would be open to peer reviewing it? I'm asking about only cheap reviews, under $50, but still credible.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/201589/how-can-an-independent-researcher-publish-a-well-written-research-paper-proof Similar to this, you write it up and submit it to a journal.

The thing about peer review is not to give your work credibility. It is to critique and assess the methodology you use. As a consequence, if you submit your proposed work to peer review, you will also have to live with the fact that it may be negative. You can't just use review "to give legitimate professional authentication" to your study -- you will in all likelihood get reviews that say "this is unscientific".
As a separate matter, $50 equates to perhaps 20-30 minutes of a typical researcher's time, if you take into account the salary, health and retirement benefits, and self-employment taxes. You won't get respectable researchers to read through a 20- or 30-page paper for that amount.

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


text:
Should I get into a masters program at one of the most prestigious universities in India but a lot of the syllabus has been covered in my bachelors
I am currently an Engineering Physics undergrad at Delhi Technological University. Most of the courses we completed were about applied physics, you can find the syllabus here. I want to pursue research but I am not sure about what exact field I want to pick. So I decided to get into a master's program. In India for masters you either pursue MSc or MTech.
MSc(Master of Science) has a more generic syllabus for physics and MTech(Master of Technology) is highly specific. Considering that MSc is more generic I decided to give the entrance exam for that and I was able to score in the top 1 percentile. So I can take up admission in IIT Delhi(which is one of the best colleges in India).
Now the issue is that my bachelor's syllabus and master's syllabus have at least an overlap of 30-40%. I originally wanted in because it would give me some knowledge, good connections, and a reputation from a good university. Keeping aside the fact that I do not gain much direct knowledge from the syllabus will MSc help me for my PhD applications at top universities around the globe? Even with a stellar GPa and fancy college people considering me for PhD candidacy could ask me why did I do I degree, 40% of syllabus I had already completed in my previous degree.
A bit of a disclaimer, generally people do MSc after BSc, I am a BTech student which is a more comprehensive course. This was the leverage I used to get into MSc easily.

You assume that people will take the time to compare your BSc and MSc syllabus. This is not going to be the case. When you apply for a PhD programme, the most important question they will ask themselves will be, “does this candidate have all the necessary background we need for our project?”
Do not focus on the name of the degree; that is not going to be relevant. I do not agree with your statement that "BTech is more comprehensive than BSc"; it depends on the goals of the individual.
The answer to your question then lies in the goals you want to set for yourself for the future. Will the degree you do next prepare you for all the qualifications that PhD applications are looking for? Which one will keep several other options open for you if you do not want to do a PhD?

Also -- following your first two sentences -- no one is likely to have much of an idea of whether BSc and MSC courses with essentially the same name are essentially the same or drastically different. For example, in undergraduate physics (in the U.S.) one often takes courses titled "mathematical methods for physicists", "classical mechanics", electromagnetism", "quantum mechanics", etc. and then in graduate school take courses with identical or nearly identical titles which are drastically different. For an example from my education, the 2-semester undergraduate course in (continued)

electromagnetism used  Foundations of Electromagnetic Theory by Reitz/Milford/Christy (1979, 2nd edition) and the 2-semester graduate course in electromagnetism used Classical Electrodynamics by Jackson (1975, 2nd edition). In mathematics departments, "algebra" could mean college algebra (i.e. school algebra), undergraduate algebra (groups, rings, etc.), or graduate algebra (groups, rings, etc. at a much higher level), and similarly for "linear algebra" (1st/2nd year vs. more advanced).


text:
Careers in Academia in Belgium and Salary (Intend to move from Canada as a PR)
I am currently working as an Assistant Professor since more than a year in Canada after my PhD (graduated last year). In near future, I intend to move to Belgium, I am looking for some insights what to expect in terms of academic job prospects and salary expectations. I am not a Canadian citizen yet but a permanent resident. Also I do not speak Dutch.
Any other general advice and guidelines based on experience will be appreciated.

How is your French? Half of Belgium is French-speaking.

@StephanKolassa, as are parts of Canada and, ummm, Switzerland. ;-)

@Buffy: certainly. As are parts of Africa. My comment was in the context of OP considering a move to Belgium but only mentioning their proficiency in Dutch... I wouldn't necessarily expect a permanent resident in Canada to speak French.

Belgian univerities are either French speaking or Flemish (Dutch) speaking.  Most teaching, in my experience, almost all at bachelor level, and some at masters level will be done in whichever is the native language of the university.  Some teaching may occur in English.  The university will also generally run in that language, so meetings, emails etc will be in French or Dutch.  Notice, I'm saying 'or' not 'both' - a Wallonian (French speaking) university will not use any Dutch and vice versa for the Flemish universities.
In the job adverts I've seen, at Flemish universities, it's standard practice to ask that a candidate can reach C1 level in Dutch within 2-3 years.  This is a high level of competancy in a langauge, and it will be extremely hard to reach this level, alongside teaching new courses, getting new research projects up and running etc.  If you want to apply for these posts, start learning the language now, so you can get a head start on this requirement.  Once you get a position there may be some language learning support provided by your department to help you attain this level.
I don't know if Wallonian universities have similar requirements for French, but I would imagine so.
You should also be aware that general networking at conferences will take place in French/Dutch even if the conference talks are in English. I've been to several Belgian/Dutch/Luxembourgian (Benelux) conferences, and the profs generally cluster chatting in their native languages, while the more international phds/postdocs chat in English.
Finally, you asked about job prospects - generally Belgian students have quite a number of publications at completion of their phd, as they are often required by the university or department to publish (sometimes multiple papers) to get their phd.  This can put people who are from countries which tend to write a book form thesis and then extract papers and publish afterwards at a big disadvantage when it comes to job applications and grants especially early in your career.


text:
Publish a COVID-19 paper post-COVID
We did a study under a grant to investigate the effects of COVID-19 on Medical Education. We however had some few corrections and ended up not publishing. Is it reasonable to start publishing efforts now considering we did the study in 2020 and we`re already post'-COVID?

Does the paper contain study in 2021 and 2022 ?

We are very definitely not post-covid.

We may be pre- the next Covid wave. And we are probably pre-whatever other bad illness will appear. I suspect that the effects of Covid on medical education would apply to other highly infectious and possibly lethal infections as well.

Of course it is reasonable to publish something about COVID-19 despite  the peak crisis of the pandemic having declined ... just as it is reasonable and useful to publish about the effects of

the Fukushima Daiichi disaster
the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake

or

the Great Influenza Pandemic

even though they too are now over. Indeed, it is reasonable to expect that the publications that have already appeared regarding COVID-19 will represent only a small fraction of the papers that will eventually be published. Research into a phenomenon or event, does not become irrelevant simply because the event has passed.

Thank yoyu..I will consult my Professor to see how i can jump start the whole thing


text:
Jobs similar to research that don't require a PhD
I am 2 years into my experimental physics PhD and I'm considering dropping out.
The main reason for this is that I am unsure whether I want to continue in my specific field (optics and photonics). I do enjoy the research day-to-day and working in the lab. It is mostly the loss of passion for the particular project that I feel is the problem here.
I have been thinking lately that I would enjoy the renewable energy field more. I want to find a job in industry that will let me explore other areas of research - I wouldn't want to enter another PhD with the same outcome.
Are there any research jobs in industry I could apply for, that don't require a PhD? What do you think is the closest to research you can get without having PhD? I am also considering doing internships, any advice? How much would my PhD be worth if I applied to different fields? Thanks a lot, I appreciate any input.

'Are there any research jobs in industry I could apply to without a PhD?' Of course! But it's likely you'll be competing for those positions with applicants who do.

Jobs outside of academia are off-topic on Academia.SE. If you look at positions within R&D, you'll find most do not require PhDs. Whether you like those jobs or not is up to your preference.

Yes. Without thinking too hard, I can come up with 5 people who were grad students at the same time I was, quit the PhD and are now doing research. One of them supervises a team of PhDs even though he only has a master's. Just as interesting, I think that the majority of the people I went to grad school with are not doing research now, PhD or not. So finishing the PhD is not even a guarantee of being able to do research later.
Quitting the PhD is always an option, for a lot of reasons.
You get into the system, then climb your way up. One thing that industry has going for it over academia is the focus on results above everything else. If you deliver the goods, you go up. There's a lot of politics, but politics are where humans are, and academia is not exempt.
Having said that, don't discard the possibility of changing projects or advisor. Two years is not a long time, and they are not "wasted". A close relative of mine works as HR manager in a scientific industry, and she tells me that they require PhDs not because a PhD is necessary, but because it shortens the applicant pool. Again, that does not mean that you won't be able to get a research job without a PhD (see my examples above), but evidence that it might help you get your foot in.


text:
When to capitalize the beginning of a quotation?
So I know (now) that if you quote a complete sentence and this sentence is syntactically set off from the rest of your sentence with a comma etc, one has to (according to the Turabian) capitalize the start of the quotation. However, I am wondering if "complete sentence" here includes sentences shortened with an ellipsis? The sentence is still "complete" grammatically but shortened.
In general I am not quite sure what "complete sentence" means. Does it mean that the sentence is a complete sentence in the original or that it can be a part of a longer sentence in the original that, however, grammatically still is a full sentence?
A sample complete sentence shortened with an ellipsis: "As he pointed out, 'Fishes come in many colours...and can be found in many places".

is this a "complete sentence" shortened with an ellipsis in the Turabian
would I in this case not capitalize "fishes"

Reference from Turabian:

In most disciplines, you may change the initial letter
of a quoted passage from capital to lowercase or from lowercase to capital without noting the change. If you weave the quotation into the syntax of your sentence, begin it with a lowercase letter. Otherwise, begin it with a capital letter if it begins with a complete sentence, with a lowercase letter if it does not.

On a related note, I have to admit that I only learned about this rule recently and before had assumed that it is fine to change capitalization of the beginning of a quote, as long as it is integrated into one's larger sentence.
Is this a great faux pas (it is in some of my published work) or forgivable?

Can you give an example sentence?

Are your publications in humanities, law or science?

I am in the humanities.

Does this assist ... https://www.servantsuniversity.com/run-in-quotations-in-turabian-format/

My question would be a) what is meant by "complete sentence" in the Turabian and b) what if such a complete sentence is shortened with an ellipsis but still has its beginning and end intact. Would I still say: "As he pointed out, 'Fishes come in many colours...and can be found in many places". Or would I in this case not capitalize "fishes".

Such "mechanical" style issues will depend on where you want to publish. Look for official advice from that place, a style guide or some such. Look for how previous authors have done the same thing.

@bobaFit that would suggest that there is no 'absolutely correct' way of doing it then? Style guides of journals aren't always clear about this I am afraid. So I can only go with the Turanian etc.

@IbnZubeira There is no absolute right way. Different journals will have different rules. If the "boss" changes at a journal the rules may change.

But there must be some guidelines? To be honest I am unhappy I didn't know about the capitalization rule I mentioned above before even though I have been in academia for years... But I guess if there is no absolutely correct way then there is also no absolutely incorrect way of doing it :)

Sometimes I see brackets used, when the original was not capitalized: "[F]ishes come in many colors..."

The example you gave is a bit difficult to work with. Typically, at the end of the ellipsis, there should be a standalone 'sentence'.
With your example, one would rather go with

As he pointed out, "Fishes come in many colours...and can be found in many places"

Or, if there's a stop at the end of colours

As he pointed out, 'Fishes come in many colours....They can be found in many places".

If however, what you want to express is where fishes can be found, I'll go with

Fishes can be found in many places

See:

Turabian 9 guide
Cross reference from Chicago: Ellipses with Periods (CMOS 13.53)

PS: though distinct, there are overlaps between Turabian and Chicago.

Thanks so much! One further query: What if one interrupts the quotation with one's own words in the middle? For instance: "As he explains, 'Fishes come in many colours' and they 'can be found in many places.' Would one still capitalize "Fishes"?

Can I ask what you mean by "The example you gave is a bit difficult to work with. Typically, at the end of the ellipse, there should be a standalone 'sentence'."? Usually an ellipsis is not always followed by a full sentence.


text:
Can I make a paper as OA after final files submission?
Yesterday I submitted a paper to an IEEE hybrid Journal without choosing the OA policy. However, I found that my institution has an agreement with IEEE and it is possible to publish the paper as OA without paying.
Is it possible to change this before the final version of the paper is published?

Why not ask IEEE, and why not ask now rather than waiting all the way until the final version?

I've just written to the Editorial Office...

I assume OA is "Open Access".

Yes, Open Access

Different publishers may handle this differently, but in m experience it's enough to just reply to whomever sent you the publication agreement and ask them to publish your article as OA. It's a good idea to remind them that your institution has a relevant agreement with the publisher. An agreement is an agreement. The rest should be a technicality.


text:
Does using methods from one research domain to another research domain counts as scientific contribution?
If method A was developed and published in XYZ Conference or Journal and then method A was used to address problem B, can it be regarded as a contribution to the research community?
For example, can using ResNet Architecture for industrial computing like nut bolt classification be considered a contribution? (I know is a minor contribution).

I think this is an XY problem question. What is the actual underlying problem you are trying to solve? For example, are you trying to obtain a degree where one of the degree requirements is to make a "scientific contribution" and you're wondering if your project will count?

I suspect the question cannot be answered without seeing the paper in the context of the field. Using methods from one field in a second field is done all the time, so the answer is "yes." But how minor a contribution is too small to count, that's a judgement call.

@BryanKrause The underlying problem I am trying to solve is the classification task for nut and bolt classification for industrial research. However, method A has been used to classify birds, dogs, or cars. Method A has not been used by anyone else for nut and bolt classification, and I have used it, and the performance is very good. So my question is, is it worth considering as a research contribution? As I have read many research papers which use Method A to solve medical image classification or face classification without changes in Method A itself.

@techno Sorry, I didn't mean the underlying research problem or whatever, I mean "why does it matter if your work 'counts as a scientific contribution'?" That is, what is the underlying problem you're trying to solve by asking here on Academia.SE whether your work "counts"?

The general answer is "Perhaps, but not necessarily". If a technique from another field gives insight into some class of problems and/or provides insight into important issues, then probably it would be judged a contribution. But it is a judgement call that each researcher would make.
I can envision other situations in which such an application might "work" in the specific context of a paper and, so, imply publish ability, but have no wider significance. Again, a judgement call.
There is no ordained "court" that judges such things.
Hard problems in one field might benefit from what has worked in other fields. Or not.


text:
Using presentation style from someone else's talk in my personal statement
A while ago I have come upon a spectacular academic talk. The presenter, an analytic number theorist, used a unique take on a classic fable to introduce her subject (which is completely unrelated to the fable) (link to a recording of this talk). In particular, she presented analysis and number theory as two biomes interacting with another, and followed the path of a hedgehog and a fox as they wandered in the intermediate ecosystem between these two biomes.
I was really inspired the presentation style of this talk. My field is far different from analytic number theory, but as I am drafting my personal statement for grad school, I am thinking of following this presentation style. I am thinking of explaining my undergraduate research in the eyes of a hedgehog and a fox wandering around the meadow and forest, which symbolize the fields that I have been working in.
Here is the issue. I am not sure if directly taking her presentation style is appropriate or if it is considered plagiarism. Her talk was nothing short of spectacular, and I think her coming up with this presentation is a feat in itself. Should I use her style, and if I do, how should I best attribute her?

We all learn from each other. If her talk was so outstandingly original that you clearly derive - even just a stylistic - profit from it, there is no harm having the original talk/author explicitly in the acknowledgements of the talk. This way, you give proper attribution. Note that some caricaturists copy the style of original paintings and they say "after xyz". It is a nice homage to just state that the style of your talk was inspired or follows xyz.

Yes, it is a high compliment to emulate someone... and, of course, to give credit where credit is due. Let's not think about artificial rules, but about the really-quite-obvious ideas of fair play, giving credit, etc.

It's hard to give an exact answer, because the reaction will vary depending on the university and evaluators. Some might love it, others might not care, and some might even dislike it, thinking that there is no need to link your work to the stories of animals in order to prove your point. Therefore, there is always an element of risk involved, but this doesn't necessarily mean that you shouldn't go ahead with your plan.
Since you specifically asked about the issue of plagiarism, you should be safe so long as you do two or three things:
(1) Don't reuse any of the images/slides/drawings from the other presentation (create your own slides instead);
(2) In the last slide, provide some kind of brief credit, or written reference or acknowledgement saying that Dr. Pierce's presentation served as an inspiration;
(3) [Optional] Just before you start showing your slides, it might be a good idea to give a gentle notice, saying something like: "...and now, I would like to introduce my undergraduate research. I took some inspiration from a presentation made by mathematician Dr. Lilian Pierce, and so I will showcase my work from the eyes of a hedgehog and a fox wandering around the meadow and forest, which symbolize the fields that I have been working in." Perhaps some will think that saying this is a bit overkill, but it doesn't hurt either.

(3) is imo the correct (and simplest) answer. If the slides are not going to be shared further, then credit can really just be given orally and does not need to be written on a slide. The appropriate place to state that you have borrowed the overall idea for the talk from someone else is at the beginning. For one thing, if someone in the audience has seen the original talk, they would otherwise spend the entire talk up to the very last slide thinking that the OP's plan is to keep the audience in the dark about the fact that they are using someone else's idea.


text:
How to choose relevant literature for literature review in grant proposal?
I am currently working on a grant proposal that also asks for a literature review. Now, when it comes to literature reviews, I have always had a problem with selecting what is relevant enough to be included. Obviously, one can't/shouldn't include everything and needs to delineate certain limits. With this grant application, it is even more so the case because there is a clear word limit. So I am wondering how people go about this? To be a bit more concrete, I have the following conundrum:
I work on the history of the diplomacy of two particular countries in the 1960s. Now, as a historian, I have included works that have written historical studies about this period/topic. That is the main stay of my lit review. However, I have now come across a study from 1969 that is more of a policy paper that gives contemporary opinions/observations about the diplomatic relations between both countries. It is not a historical study, but it briefly and superficially does mention some of the specific phenomena I look at. Do I need to include something like this? It is definitely not part of the scholarly discourse I engage with or base my study on. In a sense, it could be more of a primary source I might cite, but because it was published in a semi-academic journal, I am somewhat torn. But if I were to include this source, I might have to include many more similar sources.
Anyways, this is just an example of the larger question how you delineate relevant from irrelevant literature and decide what to leave out. Whenever I see keywords (like in the example) or a few superficial pages relevant to my topic anywhere I am tempted to include it if only so that no reviewer can reject my grant proposal because I overlooked this or that book.

Let me adapt my answer to a different question (Difference between literature review and introduction part of a research proposal) since I think the core principles could be helpful here.
In general, the purpose of the literature review in a scholarly article is to situate your work in the context of other academic research. Its purpose is NOT primarily to summarize all related research (contrary to what some might say); its purpose is to show how your work complements and extends the literature. From this perspective, the literature review for a grant application serves the same purpose, even if there is less space to do the same thing. The literature review section should only summarize work that shows three main things:

What scholars have done so far to resolve the research question that you are treating, or very closely related research questions.
Clearly show that past research has not sufficiently resolved your specific research question.
Frame the specific shortcomings or opportunities in the literature that your grant project aims to resolve or at least extend.

You should try to focus only on these points and leave out anything that does not clearly serve these points--you do not have much space to do anything more than this, and anything else distracts from the value of the grant proposal, rather than helping it.
For a grant application, it is particularly important that you not overlook any truly relevant work so that the grant reviewers do not think that you are unaware of the literature. However, because your space is limited, you will necessarily leave out much marginal work that a random reviewer might think should have been mentioned. So, it is probably a good idea to precede your literature review with a few sentences explicitly stating some well-known but only marginally related works and then briefly explaining why such work is outside the scope of your review.
One exception to ignoring marginal works is that it is indeed important to convince the grant reviewers of your authority in the subject. So, you should definitely at least briefly cite any of your own works that are remotely related to the topic. This does not directly serve the literature review purposes I list above, but it is very important for grant applications.
Based on the preceding suggestions, considering the example you gave, I would recommend that you go ahead and cite your own prior work--but do not waste much space on it if it is only marginally related. However, although it is difficult to tell from your brief description, it seems to me that the 1969 article that you mention is not directly related to your topic. If that is the case, I would completely ignore it. You should use your precious space to focus on the three points I list above.

Let me assume that you have actually read the papers that might be included, so you are familiar with their context. Let me also assume that there are too many to include all of them.
I suggest that you prioritize the papers according to their relevance, perhaps using a spreadsheet. You don't need to have a precise ranking, but at least approximately similarly relevant papers are similarly ranked.
Then just cut off the list at the maximal length for the current project, perhaps saying that other paper were excluded for length. You might possibly even offer (footnote, perhaps) to provide a longer list if you are contacted.
But for the request in your final paragraph, you need to actually be familiar with the content of the papers and make the judgement yourself as to what is relevant. If you don't know that then you are missing something.

Whoh, I would advise not doing this. You are in systematic review territory, not a regular lit review for a grant proposal.

@Dawn, I added a clarification. "Rank by relevance", not by perceived quality or such.


text:
When I integrate a quotation into my sentence, can I decide where I start/end the quotation?Or do words like "a", "the" or "that" need to be included?
This might be a strange question but basically I am wondering the following:
If I wish to integrate a quotation into my sentence and in the original text there is a "the" or "a" or "that" before the start of the bit I want to quote directly but the same words are also those I wish to use in my sentence grammatically, do I need to include the "the" or "a" or "that" in the quotation?
To give an example if the original sentence is "I hereby declare that time is relative". Can I then say in my sentence: After Einstein paused for a second he explained that "time is relative". Or am I bound to include the "that" as well? The thing is I have kind of seen both in the writings of historians (that is my academic field) it seems (not with "that" I think but with "a" and "the" for sure, meaning that some include it in the quotations and others don't). And what about "that a" or "that the" being before the bit I wish to quote?
Thanks!
P.S: Cross-posted here: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/607749/when-i-integrate-a-quotation-into-my-sentence-can-i-decide-where-i-start-end-th?noredirect=1#comment1535287_607749

No, you don't have to include a preceding word just because it exists in the original and is the same as the word you want to use. The same goes for two or more words.
This is fine:

After Einstein paused for a second he explained that "time is relative".

This looks weird:

After Einstein paused for a second he explained "that time is relative".

In fact, in this example, it is not just weird. It even makes it sounds like he was talking about THAT time in particular, whatever THAT time was. So you should definitely not do this.
Make sure your quotations are accurate, and don't give a misleading impression about what the original person said, and make sure your own writing around the quotation sounds natural and makes sense.

Just to clarify: The key thing is to make sure the quotation and its meaning in the overall sentence is correctly represented. Beyond that, whether or not I include one or two words that precede the quotation is up to me? And sorry for the bad example. Had to come up with something quickly:)

Yes, I think those are the key things. As you are careful about things like this, I predict that your writing is probably better than plenty of other people in your field!

Thanks! Yes, I think these key things I do. Just want to make sure I do everything correctly when quoting:)


text:
Advice on pursuing a PhD
Before diving into the question I'll just give some necessary background:
I have just finished a master's degree in electronic engineering with a top grade (First Class Honours) from a reputable university in Ireland. Originally when I started the bachelor's degree my goal was to become a circuit designer but as time went on I naturally focussed more and more on "pure" mathematics (e.g. Signal Processing, Machine Learning, Linear Algebra, Data Structure & Algorithms, Graph Theory etc...).
I did work placement working as a software engineer and I really enjoyed it. When I came back to university for my master's I focussed on Deep Learning and did quite a good dissertation/thesis which is either very close to publishable or publishable.
I accepted a position as a software engineer at the company which I did my work placement which I am excited to start with and it will be good experience but every time I hear about some of the cool research areas nowadays it makes me completely rethink my decision and I go into a frenzy worrying about whether I should have done a PhD in x or y etc. For example the reason I am writing this is because today I went down the rabbit hole of whether or not to do a PhD in quantum computing (more the algorithm side of things) and I have a list of about 60 different ideas of things I want to do/research like "Quantum computers for neural network execution" etc...etc.
In summary I'm really struggling to come to terms with my decision, I took the job for two reasons, I enjoyed the work and my supervisor who I could learn a lot from and the fact that the money will really help give me some independence like moving out of home. I have signed the contract so that is going ahead regardless but I think what I really need in the short-term is to know that I have the option to something like this later if I really feel the calling to it. With the background that I have given, is it not ridiculous for me to assume that I would be a competitive candidate for a PhD/Research position in the areas of Machine Learning or Quantum Computing (Algorithms, Software Tools that side of quantum computing) ?
Apologies if this is the wrong place to post this, I kind of just couldn't take second guessing myself anymore.

what is the view of your company in supporting you towards a PhD? ask your line manager if it would be a suitable goal for "long term skills improvement"?
If you have 60 topics, there must be 1 that shows some promising for-profit application in 5 years (i.e. you can do your PhD in peace while the management is company because they will have a market advantage towards the end of your phd)...

@EarlGrey They do fund PhDs but mostly in the area of Analog Circuit Design. That is a possibility I'll look into while I'm there but most of 60ish topics are just ideas I'd like to delve into in the area of machine learning and quantum computing.

Nothing prevents you from looking for a PhD now, in your free time. Some people find stimulating to use their holidays to booze in the sun, some others find stimulating to use their holidays to apply and to read books/paper/write proposals. Neither is right or wrong, but do what is interesting for you.  Apply for PhD positions, get feedbacks. You will see how real are your chance and motivations. Out of 60 ideas you will find open positions related to them, apply to them and keep in mind that even when stated otherwise, PhD positions do not require previous solid experience in anything.

@EarlGrey Thanks that's quite useful. I actually have about 2 months this summer scheduled off to research these areas so hopefully that'll help. Thanks for the help

Nobody is going to be able to tell you if you made the right decision for your particular situation.
Making decisions like this one is difficult.  I find a framework to help you organize is of value.  I recommend Lakein, How to Get Control of Your Time and Life as a valuable tool.
Lakein recommends spending time figuring out what your long-range plans are.  Do you value wealth, fame, beneficence, early retirement, love, ...?  Write it down.
Then, start with shorter term plans for how you plan to reach the big-picture goals you just generated.  Keep writing shorter term plans, until you're working on your daily to-do lists.  Constantly review those lists, and if you don't understand how a list item will help you reach your long-term goals, you might consider why that item is on your short-term list.
Now, that said, there are probably more pleasant ways to spend your time than pursuing a PhD.  It shouldn't be taken on lightly.  Given the above exercises, if a PhD seems to be the only way to reach your long-term goals, you should strongly consider changing your immediate plans, or find a way to work the PhD in to your current plan.
I sit every student who asks me for a recommendation down, and ask them to tell me why a PhD is necessary for them to reach their goals.
AS with any such tool, this is just a tool, and may or may not push you to the correct path.  Take it for what it's worth.  In engineering design, we use many such tools to screen ideas and land on the right design solution.  When they point us to an answer we know is incorrect, it often means there's something yet to be worked out in our process that we haven't considered important enough to write down that merits more consideration -- but anything that helps you think about your issue in an organized way is often a plus and not a minus.


text:
Who should be the people from whom the letters of recommendation should be taken for a PhD application?
When applying for PhD programs in the US, as an international student, typically 3 letters of recommendation are required.
The exact question that I want to ask is that if it is possible for all the three letters to be written by professors in the institute where I did my undergrad from.

Of course it's possible, if those professors agree. Perhaps you mean is it a good idea? and the answer to that is yes, if those are the people who know you and your work best.

To extend what others have said (thus far), most every U.S. applicant will have had ONLY undergraduate professors, so not only is it possible, it is likely the case for the majority of applicants (vast majority of applicants for some fields, such as Education and English literature). However, if you've done some graduate work, and especially if you've completed a graduate degree, it would probably be expected that at least one (and probably two if you completed a graduate degree) of the recommendations be from your graduate work teachers, but it's certainly not required.

Yes, the people you take recommendation letters from are usually your Professors from your undergrad program.
Contact those professors who have a good reputation in their particular research field. Collecting three letters could be a task, so look for professors with whom you have worked as a student, secured a good grade in their subject, and you can always ask the department/institute head to provide a letter. I would recommend you contact such professors who know you well about your potential in the academia and research field. If you know such professors from your undergrad on a personal level, it will make your task easier.
Best,
M

Usually they are professors you have had contact from your undergraduate or Master's studies.
You most likely wrote a thesis at the end of your previous degree, so the supervisor(s) of your thesis is(are) a good choice to ask recommendations from.
If you need more letters, and you didn't have any other research experience in another lab, then you could possibly ask professors in whose lectures you took an excellent grade.


text:
Can I retake and send GRE scores again to schools in the US if I had already sent them before (when I took the test last time)?
After the GRE, there is an option of sending the test scores to 4 schools without paying any fee.
I had taken GRE before, and I have sent those scores to 4 schools previously. However, I am planning to take the test again, and I wanted to know if I can send the new test scores to the same 4 schools.
If I do this, which scores would those schools select? Also, how can I know if those schools received the new scores?
Additionally, it would be great if someone explains how does the schools know that the GRE scores sent belongs to a particular person.

From https://www.ets.org/gre/score-users/scores/receive-scores.html - "What information do score reports include?
For all score delivery methods, score reports include the test taker's GRE scores, mailing address, email address, phone number, date of birth, gender and intended graduate major."

From https://www.ets.org/gre/test-takers/general-test/scores/send-scores.html#accordion-d35ebe9746-item-97d8af100c - "On test day, after viewing your scores at the test center, you can choose not to send your scores at this time OR you can select either option below for each of your four FREE score reports:
Most Recent — Send your scores from your current test administration.
All — Send your scores from all GRE General Test administrations in the last 5 years."

Admission to programs in the US is in general up to the university. (Sometimes there are state mandates for undergraduate admission.) Each university can set their own rules, so that you have to approach the universities you are applying to individually. Ph.D. admission committees in general assume that GRE scores have a large variability, so they would tend to allow you to retake the exam and submit a better score.
You also have (thanks to Jon Custer) the option to select how to treat GRE scores right after knowing the scores.


text:
Epitranscriptomics PhD without a biochemistry background?
I managed to get into a Doctoral Training Programme that focuses on the role of mRNA modifications in gene regulation but my undergraduate degree was in biology and I don't even have a chemistry A level. I want to self-teach biochemistry this summer before I start the project but I'm not sure what the most effective way to do this is. Does anybody with some knowledge of the field of epitranscriptomics know how much biochemistry is needed to be competent for this? And are there some aspects of biochem that are much more important to than others for this purpose?

I suspect this is going to be closed for being too specific or "depending on indevidual factors", but as someone who has dabbled in epitranscriptomics, I suspect you'll be fine with a biology degree.

Identifying the specific aims of the dissertation and the approach you will take to answer those aims can help answer this question. If you would be looking at the post translational modifications in a large number of samples and comparing those changes with existing databases or validating novel findings using computational approaches, then you need more Bioinformatics than Biochemistry.
On the other hand, if your goal is to analyze the mechanisms from a more wet-lab experimental approach, you would need molecular biology and protein biology. Having some of these details can help gauge the level of Biochemistry needed for your particular project.
Either way, learning is a big-part of being a doctoral student so don't let what do you not know deter you.


text:
Backing out of a signed tenure track offer due to changing legislation that alters tenure and abolishes DEI
I have a question related to potentially backing out of a tenure track faculty offer I signed.  Ideally I'd love to get feedback from established faculty or others well-familiar with the black hole of academic faculty positions and searches.  I've read all the responses to similar questions, but this is a unique situation and I'm at a loss as to what I should do -- thus input from those familiar with the 'other side' of faculty hiring would be most helpful.  I would note up front I am not asking "can I bail on a signed offer for a better one", as this is just something I couldn't do.
Recently (March), I signed an offer at a public university in Texas for a tenure track faculty position, Lets call it "University A".  A week later, the Texas legislature began the process of moving several higher education bills into law, one (SB18) which sought to abolish tenure at TX public universities, and another (SB17) which sought to abolish DEI offices and program in TX public universities.  Despite assurances from multiple faculty (including the deptartment chair,) since then, these bills, in one form or another, have passed the senate and the house (effectively no chance the governor won't sign them.)
While the anti-tenure bill was modified by the House to no longer ban tenure, it still adds a litany of poorly-defined reasons a tenured faculty can be dismissed without much recourse by administrators (including "moral turpitude,") which could heavily weaken tenure, or not do much to it depending on implementation.  The anti-DEI bill, however, passed with flying colors.  The latter is particularly problematic, as it may have a very strong negative effect on attaining funding from multiple federal and private sources, due to their requirement of DEI/outreach components which will now be very hard to implement at public universities in Texas, having a potentially major impact on funding.  Not to mention what the 'optics' of this will do to future recruitment to this department or many in TX, and possible established faculty egress as well.
During this time (following my signing, while SB18 was written to fully abolish tenure) I contacted a university/department whose search was still ongoing, but which I had already notified that I had accepted a position, to tell that I may not be as decided as I thought -- lets call it "University B".  This department is now in the deciding phase, and I've been told I am a top candidate (search chair,) whatever that means in this context.
While these bills have an unequivocally negative effect on a faculty position in TX, given that the full outcome is ambiguous in the degree of negative, is it acceptable to back out of a signed offer in this unique context? Should Uni B offer me a position?
I would never be able to just bail on a signed offer for a better place, and am quite aware of how such reneging will negatively impact Uni A, but in the context of this legislation (not to mention that this is the most stressful decision I've ever made independent of said legislation) I have major concerns -- the landscape of the position I signed for has since changed considerably regardless of what happens. Of course, if TX had fully abolished tenure the offer I signed would be unambiguously no longer valid, which would simplify things a bit. Currently it is almost the worst place one could be with respect to reneging.
EDIT: A few UT AAUP links for those masochistic enough to want to see more details related to these bills:
Analysis and history of tenure bill.
DEI bill's potential impact on funding.

Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.

I'd guess that the administration will sympathize with you. There should be no problems withdrawing, especially if you point out your reasons. A tenure track position is supposed to lead to tenure and the Texas Legislature is putting that in doubt, fundamentally changing the likelihood of having a successful career in the state.
To protect yourself, however, send a letter saying that you want to withdraw in spite of signing the letter, giving reasons. If they haven't given you anything of value yet it is unlikely that there could be legal repercussions in the worst case.
Do what you think best. Good luck. There are actually places that value higher education and the contributions it makes to society.

@RichardHardy The discussed changes to tenure are objectively bad for higher education. The DEI laws need to fit into the context of the federal laws. There is federal funding with conditions attached that may or may not be bad for higher education in general. The Texas law says you may not get this funding. That is objectively bad for higher education.

@quarague, I understand the mechanism but I am not on board with the broader conclusions. I will not discuss this here, however, as it is off topic w.r.t. this thread. I just wanted to point out to Buffy that IMHO the last sentence does not enhance the quality of the answer (rather the opposite).

I think the last line makes a useful point.  Walking away from a job offer is a means of making protest against legislation that someone thinks harms higher education.  If nothing else it gives the university evidence to cite if they want to lobby against it.  It is not an unreasonable consideration from either side of the argument.  If the Texas Legislature had not considered this as a possible effect of their actions, they should have.

@Buffy This is my hope (understanding).  From my perspective it seems distinct from just backing out for personal reasons, but i'm too close to this and have trouble trusting myself in this...unique situation.  Since the dust wont settle on all this legislation (eg how much the admin will undermine tenure given open-ended, if DEI work-arounds can somewhat circumvent funding concerns, etc) for months/years, its tougher for me. While everyone ive asked says these offers are not legally binding, that doesn't mean its not an ethical/professional quandary for me.

As Richard said, the last sentence is poorly worded.  It doesn't matter whether the changes to Texas law are good or bad for higher education.  It matters whether they align with OP's values.

I guess I'd say my (relevant) values are: similar opportunity to attain funding at University A as another (non-TX) equivalent university and the ability for the department I join to continue to attract quality incoming faculty (ie avoid stagnation).  Unfortunately there is already evidence that these will both be negatively impacted by these bills.  Which is particularly ironic as historically Texas has very strong public research universities and funds higher ed quite well.  which was one of the reasons i picked Uni A over 4 other offers, a decision i am now obviously regretting...

@BenVoigt, to clarify, my point was that the last sentence seems to imply Texas does not value HE and its contribution to society. I think one could easily argue the opposite. Your observation on alignment with OP's values is a different point. Not saying anything about the latter, just clarifying my point.

@RichardHardy: I understood that.  I just wanted to cut short the debate by pointing out the concerns created for OP are independent of the objective truth value of that sentence.

You are perfectly permitted to have an opinion about the ongoing changes in Texas laws.
It is ethically acceptable to back out of an acceptance due to changes outside your control that decrease its desirability to you.  Particular after the administrators made representations to you about the changes that turned out not to be true.  You aren't trying to game the system here.
The only case where you morally wouldn't have an out would be if you aware of the coming changes and chose to accept to "hedge your bets" without letting the other party know of your concerns.

I am a tenured full professor in life sciences at a state university in Texas, and a former department chair.  For all I know it could be MY department that has made you an offer and we might have even have met during your interview processes.  Over the years I've seen pretty much everything and what I'm going to say echoes some comments above.  Given that the conditions have changed since the time you interviewed (even though tenure has been preserved in Texas) you should not feel any compunctions about withdrawing your offer should something that you feel more comfortable with arises soon.  I should note that the policies for tenure and post-tenure review required by the legislature are policies that our Board of Regents has required for many years. The legislature would not have known or cared about that but it is reality. For now, we have escaped. I honestly have no idea how abolishing DEI offices will affect your ability to get NIH or NSF grants.  I don't need to competitively renew my grants for a couple of years but even without a specific office I am confident the university will find a way to remain in compliance.  BUT, my concern is over the long run.  It could be that this is the beginning of Death From A Thousand Cuts.  I am convinced that the people that run the state of Texas believe that education of its citizenry hurts their long-term prospects for holding on to political power and so they will do everything that they can to weaken education.  On the other hand they are also very interested in money, and corporate interests within the state are aware that universities are essential for their well-being. These corporate interests tend to donate a lot of money to the people that run the state. They are part of the reason tenure survived. My recommendation is make sure you have offer B well in hand before you withdraw from offer A.  I actually moved from a public university in a different state to Texas earlier in my career because I was concerned about long-term prospects of maintaining my career. It was the right move then.  In fact when I accepted that first position I had it pretty well in my mind that at some point I would probably end up leaving.  I stayed nine years. I got tenure and I was able to move because I had been successful. To be honest if I was younger I might consider going onto the job market again now for the same reasons. The problem is that this insanity is somewhat contagious and the number of public universities where you will be safe from this kind of thing in the future has diminished, which means finding jobs in places where you feel more comfortable becomes that much more difficult.

Sorry to hear you are in this position. In the end, only you can decide what's best for you (both rationally and in line with your own moral compass). That being said, a few things to consider:

I would not jump ship before University B explicitly makes an offer, simply because you need to know what your alternative situation would look like (whether at University B or elswhere) should you decide NOT to join University A.
You are starting a tenure track. In a way, that makes the whole legislation surrounding tenure a "future" problem. All other things being equal, you could have a very successful 5-7 (however long it takes at University A) tenure track and be a highly attractive candidate for other places to hire at that point, your tenure track may turn out to be less successful for totally other (because science) reasons (knock on would that that won't happen, of course), etc. Impossible to predict what the world and your personal position will look like so many years from now (because who would have predicted today's world in 2015).
That makes the DEI legislation a much more "current" issue. In addition to what your own moral compass says about that, have you discussed this with others from a purely scientific/practical perspective as to how it would affect your research? Which grants would you no longer be eligible for? How does that interfere with your plans? Can University A compensate for that by changing the start up? And if money could solve this problem, how does that feel for you from a moral compass perspective?

From what you describe (in your questions and answers to other comments) it seems as if you are on good standing with your potentially future department at University A. I would definitely voice these things as concern if you can, because they should understand your struggle, I'd think.

These are good points.  For #1 I agree. #2: This is also true, research labs live and die by grants, so tenure is not directly important for a successful research lab, however this will (and already has) have a strong impact on recruitment (and not just mine).  What I did not put in the question was that one of the reasons i was keen on Uni A was the dept is expanding a lot (TX is funding the unis a lot), which is now abrogated by this bill.  #3 is an very-relevant open question but i added a link to the post from the UT AAUP speaking to this.

As for speaking with A, I did contact the chairs (search and dept) before the bills passed, and was given assurances they will not pass (so, optimism...). Now that I'm considering backing out I've been advised (correctly or incorrectly) not to contact them until the way forward is more clear.  If B doesn't offer its a moot point beyond how i work with the changes.  If B offers, as you note i could try re-negotiating. however my worry is this is simply the vanguard of a continued legislative axe to grind against higher ed in this state and "getting out wile i still can" may be the best option.

While I can't offer any kind of advice on whether or not there will be any legal blowback of backing out of a signed contract, the morality of the situation is quite clear, and one doesn't even need to explicitly express any kind of political opinion to see its absolute validity:
Institution A has offered you a position, and it offers you benefits x, y, z, etc. Your acceptance of this position is heavily dependent on benefit x. It is the case that benefit x is so sought-after and attractive that nearly all eligible candidates would not pursue this career choice without it, as it is the only benefit capable of offsetting the numerous downsides of the career path. For whatever reason, benefit x is now no longer on the table, and will not be offered.
From here, it should be pretty obvious that you are under no moral obligation to take this job, regardless of what you insert for benefit x. The conditions of employment have changed, the results being equivalent to that of a potential employer who has given you a bait and switch (even though, as you have pointed out, they are not responsible for what's happened here). And it should be obvious that the hiring committee of Institution A has no good reason to hold anything against you: they understand this proof quite well, being professors themselves. If Institution B has offered you a job with benefit x, you take it.

The ethical aspects are, of course, complex.  Ignoring the specifics, I point out that the uni has changed the effective contract after you accepted it, so from my point of view, the uni is in breach of the contract.
You might want to check with a lawyer, but in the US it's nearly impossible to enforce a contract against an employee in a way to compel them to continue working for the employer.  Also, any lawsuit would have to be pursued in TX courts, and if you're not in TX yourself, there's really no way for the uni to compel you to answer a lawsuit.
The more "interesting" part is whether the other university will hold this against you.  My guess is no, but I don't know anything.  Then again, whether you can get offered that job may not affect your rejection of the TX job.
An alternative strategy would be to take the TX job but intend to job-hunt for a proper tenured position next year.  In that strategy, TX making hash of tenure isn't salient.

I think it can be argued that the terms of the offer materially changed. Both parties entered in good faith, but the institution (Texas) changed the structure of the position. I don't think the employee can be compelled to work, non-compete, etc. when the employer changed the previously agreed to position.


text:
How much time does a journal editor spend on a submited paper before deciding to either go forward with reviewing or desk rejection?
I've been wondering, how much time journal editors spend (on average) on newly submitted papers before deciding go/no-go ?
Do editors have the time to read the full paper or do they get a "feel" of it by reading the title+abstract+conclusion + maybe a few figures ?
It would be very interesting to get answers from people that are currently journal editors to explain what is the typical workflow and time dedicated to newly submitted papers.

Which journal?  I suspect at most journals it is less than one minute since they almost never desk reject.

@AnonymousPhysicist It's true that I should have specified the journal category: all except predatory journals.

@AnonymousPhysicist: I'm wondering how field-dependent the claim that most journals almost never desk reject is. In pure math I'd say that desk rejections are not uncommon.

@JochenGlueck, yes I am mathematics doctor student and quite few times my papers didn't not pass to review process through the editorial scrutiny

The American Mathematical Monthly does an "editorial review" before sending it to a referee. Sometimes (often?) it is rejected at that stage, with some terse comments.

Depends on the editor. Some spend more time, some spend less. Those who handle more papers usually spend less. Those who handle one paper every three months usually spend more. There's also a personal element in that some editors have a higher bar before saying a paper is reviewable, while others have a lower bar. For example, it's possible an editor goes "This abstract is not well written, which does not inspire confidence. [Quick glance at main text] Yeah paper is not well written. We can't be sending poorly-written papers for review. Desk reject." A different editor might feel this is overly harsh to the authors, especially if they're not native English speakers, and try harder to understand the paper.
Also one needs to identify appropriate reviewers before sending a manuscript for review, and to do that one needs to have some idea what the paper is about, which means reading it. So actually sending a paper for review can take a while, even if it's clear that the paper is worth sending for review.
Personally, I usually spend less than 10 minutes, but I handle 30+ papers at any one time. Those who handle one paper every three months might spend several hours per paper, based on how fast they respond to emails.

Editors might not even see a desk-rejected paper, as they have trusted graduate students doing most of these rejections. These are just obvious, and result from a completely inappropriate topic to not being formatted according to the journal's template (though the latter ones are not being final).
An associate editor can also desk-reject and sometimes the decision is explicitly left to them. In this case, the editor just looked at the paper long enough to decide on the associate editor. The editor can ask the associate editor to see whether this should go to reviewers or not.

Could you specify the field which your expierence refers to, in particular the sentence "not being formatted according to the journal's template"? I almost never format articles according to the journal template (if one exists, which is not always the case), but nobody has ever complained to me about it. My field is mathematical analysis (a bit more on the theoretical rather than the applied side).

computer science

@JochenGlueck, same. I never format a paper before submitting to journal. If the journal accept for publication then it is obvious they will give directions to format in their way before publication

Conventions differ. Math is less stringent, but formats are important when there is a page limit.


text:
Conflicted on authorship possibly not included in journal publication
Approximately a few months ago, I was an intern in a research institute. One of the supervisors in a department became a PI of a project which seems to have huge implications. He needed help in performing simulation analysis and 3D modelling. As I was starting school soon, he persuaded me to work with him on this project, concurrently with my studies, telling me about the huge benefits of the project's impact and that he will include my name in the publication. Having the desire to really make an impact and wanting my name on the publication, I agreed to work on his project and extended my internship for another 4 months
During those few months, I worked tirelessly providing all sorts of simulation analysis, and from what I gather, this supervisor is good to work with. Fast forward, post 4 months, I've long ended my extended internship, and continued with my undergraduate study. 2 weeks ago, I asked him if he will be including me in the publication, he told me that 'it depends on whether the publication content has my contribution'.
Upon receiving that, my heart shattered still thinking that it's simply just a friendly way of saying 'no'. From that train of thought, it spiraled to hating myself onto putting my trust on to these people. I feel used. I feel exploited. I feel cheated.
Am I right to feel this way? Or am I simply overthinking about it.

"he told me that 'it depends on whether the publication content has my contribution", that is the obviously correct thing to do in any case, but does not tell you anything about the actual paper you are interested in. You need the specific info about that paper. Have you discussed in detail what the current state of the preparations for publication of the results are? Is there a draft already circulating? Do you know who is responsible for writing? Etc.

This is an unfortunate situation. It sounds like you did quite a bit of work under the impression that authorship was a sure thing. Right now, I don't think you can do much, other than see how things shake out. You should, however, be persistent and stay in contact about this. Ask for more details on the paper and get a sense of how things are going. Be clear about your concerns.

"I worked extensively on this project under the impression I would be an author. Is there a way to make sure I am a part of the paper moving forward?"

is better than

"Will I be an author"

Keep in mind that papers can take a long time to put together and projects often stall for periods of time.
If time goes on and things do not go your way, you have a couple options. You could discuss with your PI how you feel and express that you would like to get a publication. I would shy away from any insinuation that you are owed authorship, but a frank conversation about your goals is good. Keep in mind that this experience can still be valuable. You can always talk about it in a future application even without a publication. And if your work was not published, you could ask to publish separately or present the work as a poster at a conference.
You can reach out to the department head if you really feel that you were taken advantage of (and don't mind burning bridges). This should probably be a last resort.
There is a big caveat here though. In my experience, undergraduate students sometimes vastly overestimate their contribution to a project (and how critical they are to its completion). On top of that, it takes some time and experience to learn to navigate authorship conversations. Your position may not have been as set in stone as you initially thought. None of this would be your fault - it's on your PI to guide you in these things - but its something to be aware of. This is especially important if your PI is acting in good faith (i.e. they were not exploiting you intentionally). If your contributions are not used, then you should not be author.

There are two conflicting rights here.
First, a paper should only contain those as authors who have contributed materially and substantially to the contents.
Second, you were promised an authorship on a paper to be send to a rather prestigious outlet. You have a right to have this promise fulfilled.
How you get out of this conflict in a constructive manner depends on your situation. If you are not included among the authors, because your contributions were not used, then you are owed compensation. There is always a fudge factor when including authors, as for instance negative results can be quite valuable for the research process, but are usually not included in the final result. But if the PI with good will cannot include you as an author, they "owe" you another publication, maybe with you as the first author, or some other compensation. You can always bring this to the attention of a supervisor like the chair of the department, but don't expect a good outcome if the PI has decided against including you. From their putative perspective, there was a good chance of you getting on a good paper, but by bad luck, it did not work out, so nothing can be done.
Your best chance are: wait what really happens with the authorship. Then, if you are not an author, bring up your volunteer work and the promise of authorship and ask for compensation.

While the professor should not have promised authorship if it was not clear that the contributions would actually lead to authorship, I don't think that the OP is "owed" authorship.


text:
How a research project, taken on my own, of undergraduation will be valued?
I’m from a south asian country, and here neither the universities nor the governmental agencies (who regulate educational guidlines) have any provision for undergrads to write a thesis, they simply require them to pass the annual exams, and a few assignments (for internal markings).
I talked to my professor regarding undergraduate thesis, but he replied that the university doesn’t have any rule or requirements for undergrads writing a thesis. I asked him can I undertake a research on my own, and then have it ceritfied by him as regard to its merit (as my professor is a PhD.) to which he replied that that such a thing won’t be a thesis as the university doesn’t have provisions for it, it would rather be called a project (mind you, he hesitated to call it a research project) and even after its ceritfication by him it won’t carry much value.
I would like to ask, in Germany undergrads are required to write thesis and they themselves are of the view that their thesis doesn’t give out any new knowledge to the world, their thesis can be said to be a new way or a different way of looking at the things already known, but then they get this advantage that their admission chances in reputed graduate schools gets up, as their application form by that thesis becomes stronger. How can I, whose university doesn’t have provisions for undergrad thesis and is also not a reputed one from a developed country, make my application stronger in matters of research? Will a research project, taken on my own and certified by my professor regarding its merit, be a total trash?

Possibly this depends on the country (and even the university) where you wish to later study, and possibly also the field. For what it's worth, in the U.S. this is something one would have the professor involved discuss in that professor's letter of recommendation. Moreover, someone who does something like this when not required for graduation would probably stand out -- other things equal -- as compared to those who had no choice but to write a thesis.

@DaveLRenfro "For what it's worth, in the U.S. this is something one would have the professor involved discuss in that professor's letter of recommendation”
In my country the system of LoR doesn’t exist, should I simply request my professor to do it  for me (by informing him about my aimed University) and he would somehow manage it?
By the way, as of current situations, I’m aiming for U.K. universities, but they don’t differ very much from those of U.S.

I don't know enough about U.K. universities to advise you, but others here might. Worth considering is how much writing a thesis will help you towards your later study and research, and not just in getting admitted somewhere, since the people looking at your application will be judging your potential for success and likely can see through attempts to game the system, although I think writing a thesis will almost surely help towards later study and research.


text:
Is humor unacceptable in referee reports?
I am from a country where humor is a part of the culture, and I recently prepared the following referee report:

The manuscript solves an interesting problem, but, unfortunately, the
authors are a bit late with their study. The very same problem and the
same results were described just half a century ago by XXX, Journal of
XXX (1969). Like the manuscript under review, that paper ... <details>
It was a very important problem at the time, but the research field of
XXX has somewhat evolved since then, so I'd like to take this
opportunity to encourage the authors to catch up with the recent
progress and do something on the cutting edge of research.

The idea was to use a humorously gentle style to jokingly portray the authors as stuck in the old era, especially given that they are now professors in their 60s or 70s. "Just" half a century is a huge time period, and the research field has evolved beyond what people could even imagine back then.
To clarify, the problem solved in the manuscript isn't something everyone in this research field knows about. I myself didn't know about that problem when I received the manuscript for review. However, I checked the literature and found that paper in about 20 minutes. The paper is highly cited and was helpful in solving various problems when the fundamentals of the research field were laid. It looks like the professors made an attempt to do something fundamental and failed to properly check the literature first.
Considering the authors and the editor are not from my country and might find such a style inappropriate or even offending, I rewrote the report in a rather boring manner with a bit of empathy:

The manuscript solves an interesting problem, but, unfortunately, this
problem has already been solved in the literature. <details>
On the bright side, I can confirm that the authors' solution and
conclusions are correct. I would be happy to recommend this manuscript
for publication if the problem had not already been solved.

I sent the latter version and now feel that I may have played it too safe. My original report could have made a day for the editor and convincingly taught the professors an important lesson. I feel very tempted to use my original style in similar circumstances in the future.
My question is addressed to people who have worked on editorial boards. Are reports like my original version acceptable? What are the policies and practices regarding this? As an editor, what would you do upon receiving such a referee report?

P.S. I don't want to specify my country, because I don't want to start a discussion about its culture and people. My question is about humor in referee reports.
Please don't be too hard on me if my original version is highly inappropriate. After all, I didn't send it. I'm asking this question to ensure I won't do anything wrong in the future.

Answers in comments and tangential discussions have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review this FAQ. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.

You were right to change it. The worst thing that could happen is that the authors feel like you are trying to make a dig at their ability. The best thing is that.. someone might find the comment slightly amusing.
I am also from a country where humour is 'part of the culture', but I find the comment slightly patronising and rude, and not particularly funny either. People underestimate the degree to which humour gets lost over formats like email compared to spoken word. This is particularly the case when interacting with people from other countries and cultures.
Play it safe and be nice to people.

Completely agree with this comment. You did right by taking time to assess the situation. While their conundrum might be amusing, firstly, it's hard to read the tone from written text, secondly, when the joke is on them it can be hard to see it as funny. Play it safe and be nice really is the way to go. Maybe if a joke is on you or someone who can't get hurt (eg, historical figures), it could be a refreshing addition.

When writing a comment like this, you can hear it in a light-hearted tone of voice, if that's what you're thinking, and that just barely might be appropriate.  When reading it, a rather sarcastic tone comes naturally, even when we're forewarned that it's meant to be humorous. I hear it in something close to the voice of a professor known for making unnecessarily cutting remarks even to junior members of the group, in public - and I'm sure we've all met someone like that.

The one thing I would add to this is to keep in mind the likely state of mind that the recipient would be in. Are they likely to want a joke? Or are they going to be possibly in a foul mood because of the bad news you're bringing, or possibly just in a "I just want to get this done so I can go home" mood. It's extremely grating to have a joke forced on you when you're not in the mood for it, and there's no way to know whether the reader will be in the mood for it.

To add, there is almost no scenario in life in which people are (understandably) more sensitive and on edge than during the harsh and raw process of manuscript review. It just in our nature. Always be as gentle as you reasonably can, as even the most seemingly benign of comments can cut someone like a razor during review. So taking the time to evaluate things like this is essential. The idea of using humor to soften the blow of such a major flaw in their work is a good thought in theory, but not in practice, as it will most likely not be received as it was intended.

But then the paper is about something proven 50 years ago. So humour or not, it’s only what the author deserved.

The idea was to use a humorously gentle style to jokingly portray the authors as stuck in the old era, especially given that they are now professors in their 60s or 70s

Humor is fine. The problem is not that you are using humor. The problem is that there is no way to tell from the written text that it was meant to be interpreted as "humorously gentle style".
You are making the common mistake of imagining that the reader is going to read what you wrote in the same mental voice that you used when you were writing it. This is not at all the case. In an in-person interaction, you can rely on non-verbal cues to convey the information that you do not mean to disparage the authors. But this information is completely lost in written text. You are severely overestimating your ability to do convey your mental voice in written text if you assume that reasonable readers will interpret your text as "humorously gentle style".
Consider the following thought experiment. Suppose that, unlike you, I am a mean-spirited referee who thinks that the authors are idiots and who wants to skewer them mercilessly in my report. Suppose that to this end, I write the following in the report, hinting at the fact the authors are idiots for doing something that has been done half a century ago:

The manuscript solves an interesting problem, but, unfortunately, the authors are a bit late with their study. The very same problem and the same results were described just half a century ago by XXX, Journal of XXX (1969). Like the manuscript under review, that paper ...
It was a very important problem at the time, but the research field of XXX has somewhat evolved since then, so I'd like to take this opportunity to encourage the authors to catch up with the recent progress and do something on the cutting edge of research.

Now ask yourself: how exactly is the recipient of the report supposed to distinguish between your "humorously gentle style" and my "sarcastic and biting style"?

«…the authors are a bit late with their study…» then adding «just half a century ago by XXX, Journal of XXX (1969)» is where I guess the “humour” lies (hidden). It's actually very easy to interpret it as sarcasm rather than being cheeky, or an example of good-natured teasing.

The problem of misinterpreting (attempted) humour in text is called Poe's Law.

@gidds Poe's law is more about satire, which might or might not have humorous intent.  The real problem here is that in this case the "joke" is only funny if it is directed at someone else.

Philosophical Rant: "The world is as you are". Even in the scenario where you actually try to be mean the reader could just assume good intentions. Would that be a more beneficial way of going through life for such reader? It's an interesting though experiment to think about what kind of people would read it in the negative light.

@xReprisal that's the point here though. The text is the same as what OP has. So we have no way of knowing which way it'll be interpreted by the readers.

@xReprisal "what kind of people would read it in the negative light." someone who has just had their paper rejected?  "The world is as you are" the problem with that is that most academics are not "as they [normally] are" when they have just had a paper rejected - they are temporarily in a worse mood than usual.  It also applies to making the joke, we also make the world as we are, and sometimes we need to self-censor to prevent the world from becoming a worse place because of our thoughtlessness/lack of consideration for others.

My rule of thumb for humor in an academic context is that you can joke about your own work, but avoid joking about others'. A pun here and there is fine, but you don't want to look like you're calling into question a fellow scholar's competence or like you're not taking their work seriously.

@DikranMarsupial that's a great point, haven't thought about it from that perspective.

The reviewer of a paper is in a privileged position. It's their prerogative to advise the editor whether the author of the paper should have a good day or a crappy day, and while their power isn't absolute the relationship between reviewer and author is decidedly unequal.
So when attempting humor, consider the likelihood that your jokes will be interpreted as 'punching down', as having cruel fun by denigrating someone who can't fight back. In that light, your original version does come off as unkind. (Well, it comes off as confusing and poorly phrased. But if you look past that, it comes off as unkind.)

Very well said. You can be humorous, if you have to, if your review is positive, but shy away from it if it is not. The authors will not find it funny. Maybe they worked for 2 years on this and being told off like little boys is not nice. Sometimes people from other fields realise that a problem is long solved in a different type of language. Bad luck, but don't compound this by also laughing at them. This comes across as "Schadenfreude" (google it).

(or epicaricacy)

Humor is great! But there is a time and a place for it, and your use falls outside of the range of situations in which it is appropriate.
By way of illustration, the following are situations where the use of humor is inadvisable:

When informing an author that you are recommending their paper be rejected

When firing an employee

When breaking up with a romantic partner

When you are a doctor telling a patient that they have a life threatening illness, or need major surgery, or similarly grave news

The common denominator in these situations is that you are about to deliver news to someone that can come as a major blow to their ego, self-esteem, livelihood, prospects for professional success, prospects for happiness, etc. You need to expect that, regardless of their culture and how humor-loving it is, upon hearing this kind of news the person is not going to be in the mood for joking around! For that reason, making light of the bad news you are communicating to them is tone-deaf and highly unempathetic; it will almost certainly make them even more upset than they would be if the news were delivered in a dry, humorless way.

Dilbert covered this rather well…

Very interesting perspective, thanks for sharing this!
I am not an editor, but author and reviewer. With my personal cultural background and in my discipline, I would not have had understood that your remarks were meant humorous.
As an author to get the original reply, I would feel that you are talking down on me.
As a reviewer, I would (in my discipline) always stick to a very formal, positive, and precise tone. In your case, I understand, that it is not easy to tell some people, that are in the field for many years, that they did a beginner's mistake: bad literature research. However, the way you solved it seems good to me.

Humour is totally fine.
However, there is a mismatch between the question title and the example provided, which is irony and it sounds both rude and condescending.
irony : humour = laughing at someone : laughing with someone

Irony is not about laughing at someone. From Wikipedia: Irony, in its broadest sense, is the juxtaposition of what on the surface appears to be the case and what is actually the case or to be expected; [..].

@usr1234567 it's not by chance that wikipedia has a section Definitions for irony. Which kind of irony is OP using, and why, according to the different types of irony postulated in the Wikipedia page you mention?
Irony can be categorized into different types, including verbal irony, dramatic irony, and situational irony.

@EarlGrey Those are all subtypes of irony, and fall under the same broad definition.

@Feathercrown what is the broad definition? What has been posted here by the commenter is just half of the preamble to the definitions of irony. Additionally, if OP is using irony as described in wikipedia preamble, the sentence "The manuscript solves an interesting problem, " means exactly the contrary, i.e. "The manuscript is not solving an interesting problem" where the laughing resides in "laughing at the authors of the paper because they spent so much time in such a non-interesting problem already solved 50 years ago"...

@EarlGrey I don't deny that the humor is ill-advised

@Feathercrown and are you denying that OP is using irony?

@EarlGrey I'd say they are, but again not for the reason you stated. Comments are not for extended discussion; if you'd like to continue, move this to chat please.

The issue here is not humour, but context - or lack thereof, because text-based communication generally cannot convey context due to its very nature. On the internet emoticons like ;) are used to provide that context, but the very nature of academia precludes the use of such context clues.
There is another way to convey context via text, and that's if you have an existing relationship with the person(s) you're communicating with. In that case context will be implicit to that relationship, which can assist the others in interpreting your intended tone - but is still not a guarantee that they'll get it right.
Given the above, the readers of your report are going to be coming in effectively context-blind when they read your comment, which means they're likely going to take it at face value. And at face value, your "humourous" comment... isn't; my (completely unreasonably cynical) interpretation of it would be "you idiots failed to do basic research, with the result that you completely wasted my time on reviewing a paper that doesn't need to exist".
There's a time and place for (attempts at) humour, but refereeing is not it.

Self deprecating humour might be fine in reviewing, but probably not worthwhile.

A nice example of humour (IMHO) which actually didn't make it into the referee's text is due to Paul Halmos:
'I remember one occasion when I tried to add a little seasoning to a review, but I wasn't allowed to. The paper was by Dorothy Maharam, and it was a perfectly sound contribution to abstract measure theory. The domains of the underlying measures were not sets but elements of more general Boolean algebras, and their range consisted not of positive numbers but of certain abstract equivalence classes. My proposed first sentence was: "The author discusses valueless measures in pointless spaces."'

My personal approach would be to avoid humor in a referee role.
A publication record can be critically important in academic situations.  In some situations it can make the difference between getting a grant and not getting a grant, or keeping a job or entering the job market.  People in such situations may not appreciate efforts at humor.  Even if you're offering a completely positive review, other reviewers may put publication in jeopardy, leaving an author nonreceptive to the humor a referee may offer.

I am not on a review board, but I have authored or co-authored a lot of papers and I do statistical reviews for a couple of journals (over 1000 reviews by now).
A couple thoughts:

The authors are quite likely to be from another country. Even if their English is quite fluent in the paper (and I've read lots of papers where that is not the case), fluency in an academic style is quite different from overall fluency. Also, it could well be that some of the authors are much less fluent.

Even among totally fluent speakers, humor translates badly from one culture to another. To see this, read some comedy from 1600.

Many authors, when they see that envelope (or e-mail address) from the journal are in a highly fragile state. Maybe the author is just fine with humor in their everyday life, often joking with their colleagues and friends. But ... this isn't normal times.

The usual tone of a review is formal.

So .... I would avoid any humor at all. For some journals, you can communicate to the editor separately from the authors. That's a place for humor. Or, you can joke around with colleagues:
"You'll never guess what some guy sent in as a paper!"
Finally, on a purely personal note, way back when I was 12 or so, I proved a theorem about the Fibonacci numbers. My math teacher joked about how it was already proven, long ago. That did not make me feel good.

I don't think you're supposed to talk about this on a public forum. So don't put it in the report, otherwise they could find the sentence here…
Anyway I don't think it was a good idea. No need to hurt the author, who may simply not have been able to explain what's new in his work.


text:
Master's degree studies
I want to apply to a US/K university for masters's degree on economics/management. At the same time I have a Bachelor's degree in management and master's degree in economics. The problem is that my Bachelor's GPA on management is only 2.05, and master's GPA is 3.1/ Can I show my master's degree GPA when applying to master's degree, because most universities at least require 2.75 average on GPA.

Most US institutions want copies of all of your higher ed transcripts. I don't know about UK. If asked for you should supply them.
But, also in the US, make other parts of the application convincing about your likelihood of success. Letters of Recommendation, for example.


text:
How can I get email alerts of conferences, summer schools and workshops in statistical physics?
To the statistical physics community: I am a PhD student in theoretical statistical physics. I want to be up-to-date with my field. How can I get newsletter/ email alerts/ updates of summer schools, seminars, workshops and conferences in statistical physics research? I want ideally around Europe.
I use twitter but I was wondering if there is any better way?


text:
Why did the status of my paper change from "with editorial office " to "with editor" in bioinformatics journal?"
I submitted a paper in bioinformatics journal. After a five days, the status of my manuscript changed from "with editorial office " to "with editor." What does this indicate

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55665/what-does-the-typical-workflow-of-a-journal-look-like-how-should-i-interpret-a Does this answer your question?

Yes. Thank you for sharing it!

I imagine it indicates that a specific editor has been assigned to deal with your paper.