text:
Can applying for different but consecutive jobs at the same insitution be perceived as wrong?
I am applying for different postdocs at the same institution. They hire during the year in different subfields of my main field.
I already read some questions related to my problem (here, here, here), but I think that my situation is little bit different, because I just keep applying to one institution.
My situtation, consecutively:

I applied for a fellowship to one professor for a specific project. It was not successfull.
In the same time, a similar position in a different group popped out. I'v asked the professor what he thinks, and he advised me to apply for it. No success.
Several weeks later, the professor told me that he discussed my CV with a different group. They want to invite me for an interview.
Now, a new postdoc is available. I am thinking of waiting for the result of option 3 and than apply for option 4. Or should I apply for both at once?

What if they will not hire me now, but a new job will pop out in a few months?
I would like to know whether they can perceive me as someone who want to be hired to a particular institution and a particular country rather than someone who want to be hired for doing research.

Your situation seems normal, and I don't think applying to multiple positions will hurt you. It is also normal that you want to work in a particular country and in a particular reputable institution.

Disclosure: I applied for two positions at the same time in the same department and it worked out fine for me.
Clearly, I think doing this is fine. And I wouldn't be particularly worried about being perceived as trying to work in a particular country/institution if you're appropriate for both positions. Make sure to write your cover letters appropriately - both of them should speak to your interest and qualifications for that particular job.
You might, however, consider informing the people involved that you have applied for both positions. This lets them discuss you in the context of which position might be best for you, etc. For example, if Option 3 is super-interested in you, then Option 4 can take that into consideration. Or if strategically one is having a harder time filling their position, etc.

Thank you @Fomite. When applications are sent to human resources department, do you recommend to inform the other people involved? Or should I let to do this by the HR department?

@user3624251 I would probably wait to inform until an interview stage, unless the positions are so closely related that the same person is likely to be involved in hiring decisions at each. If both positions would like to interview you, at that point it would make sense to coordinate the interview process both for the reasons Fomite mentions and also to coordinate travel if applicable.

While such an inference would not necessarily be drawn, it is desirable if they perceive you as a person who would particularly like to work for their institution.  The mere fact that you are willing to apply for multiple positions in this institution over a broad range of possible research topics would not be treated as a negative.  I cannot imagine any selection panel being happy with your credentials but worried that you are too keen to work there.


text:
Does IEEE membership have any value whatsoever on the CV?
Some CS veterans would probably shoot me on sight for questioning its value, but let's face it, you are a member of IEEE if you're paying them a fee every year, and I don't think there's anything else keeping you from entering if you're in CS/EE. I see every single professor writing it on his CV though, and it is beginning to look like a must-have.
Agreed, you get some (limited) access to papers from their library, and a discount for conferences and the rest of the library, but as a student I can't afford to skip classes to go to conferences (and often I can't afford the travel costs either), and I have few things pressuring me to read papers, if any. In fact I haven't come across a subject with so little material on it with public access that I felt I needed access to other papers.
I'm not denying the existence of people that actually use the papers they have access to, but I am confident that a survey would reveal that not even a quarter of the members access the libraries.
To sum up my points:

It only shows that you pay a fee every year
Probably without using anything of what you get for that fee
It just adds a line to your CV that doesn't really say anything about you.

So does it have any value? Do people notice this? Is it worth renting a title and nothing else?
Concerning whether or not it is a duplicate of Should I write IEEE membership on my CV:
That question assumes membership is already active and asks if it is worth mentioning it, however it costs nothing to mention something you already have so the parameters are significantly different. This question questions if it is even worth obtaining the membership, essentially also asking if this (or any) title is worth paying for, given that many others already do so.
Even though some of the answers do make mention of whether it holds any value to those who answered, they do not address if university staff or recruiters pay attention to this, or even how it affects them. One could even see it as renting a title to compensate for lack of other things to write on the resume.

I've been wondering this also. I do read IEEE papers but my university is already paying for them (so discount on papers wouldn't get used). And I do potentially attend/publish-in IEEE conferences, but the discount is small (and Paying for IEEE membership would come out of my pocket, vs paying for conference attending comes out of my supervisor's grants)

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
VG Wort – why would I agree to share with the publisher?
Background
When I reported my publications from 2017 to the VG Wort today, I could decide whether I wanted the publisher to get a share of my returns from the VG Wort (‘Verlagsbeteiligung”).
The pertaining information provided by them only elaborates technical details.
Unless I missed something, I plainly decide whether a portion of my returns shall be given to the publisher or myself.
Moreover, given that the decisions for analogous retroactive redistributions were anonymous, I assume that this applies here as well, i.e., the publisher will not know how I decided but just see how much they got in total.
Question
I feel like I am missing something: Is there any reason why I would choose to let them have a part of my share? To forego the inevitable discussion, assume that I do not consider the publishers of my papers worth or in need of additional financial support.
Note that this is about newly reported publications, not about the redistribution of returns between 2012 and 2016 after their distribution was ruled to be unlawful.
Here I can understand that one might argue that publishers could not account for this in their calculations.
However, this does not apply to publications from 2017 as publishers had the chance to adapt.
For the search engines: Warum sollte ich einer Verlagsbeteiligung bei der VG Wort zustimmen?

Check the paragraph "Änderung durch BGH-Urteil" in the Wikipedia-link you gave, it should answer at least part of your question.

@DirkLiebhold: I am aware of that, but that’s about redistributing past earnings. It does not explain why this option exists for publications made after the verdict.

You would do this if you authored a publication with a small, independent publisher whom you want to protect from bankruptcy.
The decision of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) that publishers have to return the share of VG Wort royalties they received between 2012 and 2015 to their authors has cost publishers 20--200 percent of a yearly proceed (according to a science publishing association).
Most publishers can handle this, but some small publishers seem to struggle, and these are often houses that publish financially risky work beyond the mainstream, i.e. they may be run by patrons of the arts rather than business people. Some authors have a close and mutual relationship with those publishers and would relinquish what's now legally their share of royalties in favor of keeping their publishers in business.
See, for example, this excerpt from an open letter by a dozen authors who published with Verbrecher Verlag, Maroverlag and other independent houses:

Nun wollen wir von dem für unsere Verlage schmerzhaften bis ruinösen
  Ausgang [des BGH-Urteils] auch nicht profitieren. Wir haben gewiss nichts zu
  verschenken, aber wir wollen uns auch nicht gegeneinander ausspielen
  lassen. Es sind die unabhängigen Verlage, die unsere eigensinnigen
  Bücher in einem nicht einfachen Umfeld durchgesetzt haben.
Wir werden deshalb das Formular der VG Wort „Verzicht auf
  Rückabwicklung zugunsten von Verlagen“ vor dem 28.2.2017
  unterschreiben und bitten Euch, das ebenfalls zu erwägen.

Rough translation:

We don't want to profit from the Court judgement, which is painful or
  even ruinous for our publishers. We certainly have nothing to donate, but we don't want to
  be played off against each other. It's the independent publishers that
  have made our idiosyncratic books possible in a difficult environment.
Therefore we will sign the [pertinent VG Wort form] and thereby
  relinquish our royalties, and we also ask you to consider this option
  for yourself.

While this letter is about the redistribution of returns between 2012 and 2016, it illustrates the reasoning behind the decision of some (few) authors to share their VG Wort proceeds with the publisher also in the future.
The initiative "fair book market" lists further considerations for and against sharing. Those in favor are either based on notions of fairness, or on the strategical calculation that disgruntled publishers might leave the VG Wort in the long run to form a new entity in which author's interests are represented less well.
In sum, this is unlikely to be relevant for most authors of scientific literature, but it might be a consideration for authors of literary or philosophical works at the fringes, who want to support their indie label.
Strictly based on your assumption: there is no (strong) point in sharing your returns.

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


text:
Asking a question in SE might be considered a breach of anonymity?
I find the SE sites, especially Math.SE, MathOverflow and CompSci.SE, extremely useful for solving specific problems I encounter during my research. But I have one concern: if I ask a question in an SE site, and then describe the same question in a paper (whether I got an answer or not), then this might be considered a breach of the anonimity requirement, because, one of the reviewers might be a member in one of these sites, see my question and know that I am an author of that paper.
Is it possible that my paper will be rejected because some parts of it were published as questions on the web?

Your question in the last line is separate from the issue of anonymity.  I recommend you post a second question.

I think there's two parts to the question, one about anonymity, one about content.
In terms of anonymity, it's unlikely that your paper would be rejected, at least in my field (which is not math/CS). While papers are submitted anonymously, in reality, reviewers sometimes have a good idea of who the author is. A reviewer can recognize the submission's subject area and approach from other work you've published/presented, or be tipped off by little things like the citation of an unpublished thesis (which likely only the author would know about). If reviewers think they know the author, and there's a conflict of interest, they contact the editor; if they don't see a conflict of interest that would bias them toward or against who they think is the author, they just review it. That's been my experience at least.
In terms of content, it's a bit dicier. I know this isn't something you're asking about, but I figured I'd address it for completeness sake. I assume that you're referring to questions that are fairly small, narrow, and specific, and whose answers don't make up the core of your paper. If so, no problem. But an editor or reviewers might take issue with you using answers you get here as your own, especially if they're central to your argument. You probably know that already, and I've never seen it occur in any blind review I've done, but I feel better including this caveat in my answer to your main question.

Thanks. I would also add the suggestion of Suresh: 'citing "an answer on the stackexchange forums" with "identity withheld to preserve anonymity"'.

It's becoming a common practice to cite answers on SE if they get used in papers. I'd strongly recommend (at least for the second question) that you cite answers you get. There is indeed a risk that this violates anonymity requirements (because you're not supposed to cite material that can reveal your identity), but you can get around that by merely citing "an answer on the stackexchange forums" with "identity withheld to preserve anonymity".
In this way, you make it clear whether the result is yours or not, without breaching rules.

I've never seen citations to SE in papers (which is probably field dependent), but am curious about what the citations usually look like. Are they usually included in the ref list, or only in-line (similar to how "personal communication" is used)? Are they generic references or do they refer to specific questions by number?

For example, here's a list from G-scholar of citations to cstheory.SE: http://scholar.google.de/scholar?hl=en&q=cstheory+stackexchange&as_sdt=1%2C5. Also see http://meta.cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/1289/bibtex-entry-for-citations for style information

This should be heavily encouraged... why does all knowledge have to be presented as "papers"?

Thanks. citing "an answer on the stackexchange forums" with "identity withheld to preserve anonymity" seems like a good idea (if I use this idea, should I also say that the idea itself comes from academia.SE?)

I personally have 'acknowledged' the StackExchange network in a paper, it was the best that I felt was doable at the time.

You should carefully check the Creative Commons Attributions Share Alike (CC-BY SA) license agreement under which this site operates. You will find a link at the lower right corner of this page or simply use the link. The license essentially tells you that you can use and distribute the material, even commercially, provided that you make correct attribution and that any material that builds on it is shared under the same license. The license can be waived through permission (see the CC-BY SA page).
So from this perspective you are not doing anything wrong as long as you follow the license. I also do not think any journal, editor or reviewer would hold use of an SE site against you as long as the material can pass review, the license is followed and that the source for your information is provided. Also check Attributing contributions to academic work that occur in Stack Exchange for more information.

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


text:
Job after post-doc - Whom to list as referee?
I'm currently a postdoc (in computer science) and planning on applying for faculty jobs soon. During my 3 postdoc years I've had a couple of papers with 2 "superstars" in my field, whereas my current boss is somewhat less renowned.  Most job ads seem to require 3 referees.
Now my question is, who should I list as referee?

my PhD advisor + the 2 superstars
my PostDoc supervisor + the 2 superstars
A different combination?

Would option 1 or 2 be perceived as unusual?

List all 4!
People will find it odd if you PhD advisor is not under the list of referees. The same holds for the host of your last position. If you are limited to 3 references then get rid of one of the "superstars", but typically job descriptions say "at least x referees".

I agree with @A.Schulz: List all four.  You must get letters from both your thesis advisor and your postdoc advisor.
If you have to choose only one of your superstar coauthors to write a letter for you, consider the purpose of the letter: to help the committee make an informed judgement of your long-term potential for high-quality, high-impact research and intellectual leadership, or to put it more bluntly, your likelihood of getting tenure.  The best recommendation letters draw direct comparisons between your research ability/quality/reputation and that of other people in your subfield at similar career stages.  For that reason, the most useful letters are from people who have a broad perspective on the field, with direct experience with many other people at the same career stage as you.  For example, someone who has served on lots of recent program committees can offer a good perspective on your current competitors.  Someone who has worked in a strong department for many years can offer a good perspective on people who had records comparable to yours in the past, and how their careers progressed.  The research reputation of your letter-writers is secondary to their credibility in judging your potential.
Also, in the interests of objectivity, each of your letter-writers should focus as much as possible on the work that they were not involved in.  In particular, what you do not want is a letter from a superstar coauthor that talks about the fantastic paper that the two of you wrote together; such a letter will not be taken seriously, because of course they think their own paper is good.  So ideally, you should only ask a superstar coauthor for a letter if they are willing to write a strong letter about your other work.

I think this is a little too research oriented. Not all schools require high-quality high-impact research to get tenure. Some schools value teaching over research.

But if you're aiming at teaching-oriented departments, letters from research superstars are probably not worth much.

Yes, if you have worked for your current boss for at least a year, not listing him as a reference will look weird. Same for not listing your PhD advisor, unless you obtained your PhD a long time ago (say, you have held 3 different positions since then). Thus, I would advise to drop one of the superstars if you are limited to 3 names.
Another thing to consider: you have worked with superstars, but if your relationship with you has been less close than your boss/advisor, will they write a glorifying enough reference letter for you? Unless you have made quite an impression on them, or you had an close relationship, I don't think the odds are in your favour (though you have more information to answer this question than I have).

I am not sure to what extent a letter from a "superstar" is that useful. Often superstars are only stars within their fields and not know more broadly. If you have a publication with these superstars, that will speak for itself. If there is a pending publication, maybe the letter would help. If there is no publication coming, it is not clear why you would want them to write a letter.
Unless there are odd circumstances you need letters from your PhD and Post-Doc supervisors. These people are going to be in the best position to write a letter for you since they likely know you the best and have the most invested in your success. As for a 3rd letter writer, you need to think about what the perceived weaknesses are in your application and who can best comment on them. For example, if you have limited teaching experience, you might want a letter from someone who has seen you teach or at a minimum given talks. Maybe your research is weak, then a letter from a research superstar might be useful.

Superstar letters are a high-risk high-reward proposition. If they are good they have a disproportionately large boost, and if bad can be problematic, depending on the way in which they are bad.


text:
Author title for ex-student in research paper
I have graduated from a Masters program recently. After graduating, my Masters thesis supervisor and myself decided to write a paper based on my dissertation. I have a question about the format in which my name should appear in the paper, given that I am now an ex-student of the university. Is something like below acceptable?

John Doe, MS in XYZ, University of ABC, Current
  Residential Address, me@gmail.com

Do I need to remove/add anything?

Wouldn't you be called a Masters graduate or something similar?

For a definitive answer: check issues of the journal you will submit to, see what they do. If you still have doubts: contact the editor (I would wait until after acceptance of the paper, because it's not such a big deal).
My take on it:

First, it's very rare to mention the diplomas hold by the authors. Even the titles (Dr, Prof, etc.) are often not listed at all. The exceptions seem to be (at least in my field) some journals edited by German societies, academies or publishers (Angewandte Chemie lists all titles, for example, in a footnote along with full affiliations). So, I'd remove the “MS in XYZ”.
Secondly, your main affiliation is the institution where you carried out your work (or most of it). This means, list “University of Nowhere, Department of Procrastination” as your main affiliation.
Thirdly, you can indicate your “current address” in the author list. Depending on journal style, it might be a footnote or listed as other affiliations. It will start with: “Current address: University of Big Name, Department of Corrections”. But… given that you don't have a new institutional address, I would advise you to skip it altogether. Simply don't list your home address in the paper, it's not really useful for readers. If they want to contact you, they will use email anyway.
Finally: if your former university didn't provide an email address that will last, using your gmail address is perfectly fine.

I hope this covers it!

@fx +1 for “University of Nowhere, Department of Procrastination”


text:
How to deal with advisor not allocating time to me?
One of my advisor's students asked me how frequently I have meetings with him. And since at that time we had very few meetings I replied:

"We have a very few meetings and the advisor does not allocate time to me."

The advisor heard it and has started retaliating by reducing those few meetings to zero and complaining about me to other faculty, etc. Do you have suggestions about what I should do now?

On my first day of PhD school, our department chair said, "Never say anything bad about your advisor, he or she will hear about it."  We all laughed, but it's invariably true--people talk, and word gets around.  I've found that the best ways to repair a damaged relationship with your advisor are (1) talk to him or her directly about the problem, and (2) produce the best research you can with frequent updates (in person or via email).

I really hate the other student behavior (if your advisor knew it from him/her).

First, do not assume bad faith and go talk to your advisor. There is an issue which you feel threatens the successful continuation of your PhD, the natural person to talk to about it is your advisor. In this case, it so happens that the problem involves him too, which means you have to be diplomatic about it, but he's still the right person to hash it out with.  Behave professionally, do not accuse him of anything, just state the problem factually (“I need more involvement from you in order to successfully overcome this problem”), and see what he and you can come up with.
Not assuming bad faith at first is good advice in most professional situations. In this particular case, the elements you mention are:

lack of time, which could be completely explained by other factors such as the advisor being swamped (don't get me wrong, it still needs to be fixed somehow, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's being an ass)
rumor (“complaining about me to other faculty”), which might be just that

Now, if after trying in good faith to solve the issue with him (give it a few tries), the situation doesn't improve and it is hurting you and you think he is of bad faith: I listed several possible recourses in this related answer (and another write-up here). But don't jump the gun, because a lot of the options on this list will mean burning a bridge.

To merge accounts, add a message saying so in both account profiles (“please merge with X”, “please merge with Y”), then flag any post of yours for moderator attention and explain the issue

@EnergyNumbers I have asked for merger

Yes do not assume bad faith. Advisors are busy with other commitments and have little time for their students. It is a common problem to most of the grad students

On my first day of PhD school, our department chair said

Never say anything bad about your advisor; he or she will hear about it.

We all laughed, but it's invariably true--people talk, and word gets around. I've found that the best ways to repair a damaged relationship with your advisor are

Talk to him or her directly about the problem
Produce the best research you can with frequent updates (in person or via email)

Advisors are also human beings. They get upset when they hear bad words. However, please remember your advisor is usually on your side(of course, there are exceptions). Your success is also his.

@scaaahu - agreed, and good point.  Nothing makes an advisor happier than ending up as an author on many papers from his or her advisees (well, nothing except getting a tenure letter).

Not all advisors are coauthors of their students' papers.  Nothing makes me happier than my students' success, but CV bullets are not the reason.

@JeffE Can you please answer this? What other duties are expected from a PhD student apart from his/her own research?

@JannatArora: Not much.  My department has a one-semester TAship requirement.  My group has a few de-facto cultural requirements, like giving at least one talk a semester within the department, and presenting papers at conferences even when they have faculty coauthors.  I require my PhD students to publish at least one paper without me before they graduate.  And of course, there's the ultimate requirement: convince the thesis committee that you've passed the defense.  But what does any of this have to do with my previous comment?

I agree with the others: Talk to your advisor.  Do not assume bad faith.  Be professional.  Be an adult.
But do not expect the situation to be resolved in a single talk.  The response you describe is completely out of proportion to your offhand comment; "threatening" a student is never appropriate.  It's impossible to tell — and it's none of our business — whether your advisor is actually being childish and abusive, or you are just perceiving her (justifiable) annoyance as an attack.  But in either case, your student-advisor relationship is dysfunctional.  Even if you can resolve this particular situation, you may be better off finding a new advisor.

I go with the other commenters on approaching the matter diplomatically and courteously as a means of getting the feedback and support you need—up to a point.
My experience of academics is that though often bright and accomplished, they can sometimes be a precious lot, flinching from the mildest bit of constructive criticism, often taking things personally.  If I could turn the clock back I would have seriously considered changing supervisors.  I often think I got my PhD in spite of and not because of him.  When you are just starting out in research you need the feedback, support and encouragement.  So try not to be stoic about it, look for potential avenue out of your problem: have a chat and get it in the open, or change supervisors if your differences are irreconcilable. It helps to be on the same wavelength, personality-wise.
Nobody is saying they are not human beings.  But if you are being neglected, then the issue needs dealt with sooner rather than later.  If it is a PhD you are doing this may well seriously delay getting your research out in good time for your final viva.

I'm assuming you can't switch advisors. Have you tried having a heart-to-heart with your advisor about this matter ? Failing that, maybe you have members of your committee who can help mediate ?


text:
What to write in the section "what will be the impact of proposed research on development of applicants academic profile"?
I am applying for a post-doc fellowship and one of the section in the application form is "what will be the impact of proposed research on development of applicants academic profile".
I have a limit of 1500 characters. What exactly should I write in this section? The research proposal and an abstract of it are in different sections (as well as the list of my main publications and my CV). If I understand it properly, it is not the same as statement of purpose.
Should I mention my current or past interests/skills/research? Or write only about my future? I have no idea how will my fellowship and up if I am successful or not with publications etc. So how can I know what will be the impact on my future? I hope for the best of course, but I pressume I cannot base this section on my dreams. Or can I?


text:
How to spot a weak postdoc offer before you accept the position
I would like to ask, how can you rule out some "weak" postdocs. I mean weak from a long term point of view - impact on your life, or career. For example, you can apply to positions where you will continue with the same methods you used in your current positions or you can apply to positions where you will learn entirely new skills. Or you can be the only one with your skills in the group etc.
What are the red flags to look out for in postdoc offers?

I think it is a bit difficult to answer a question like How not do to something? The offered answer tries to answer the question of "How to do that something", which is not quite the question. Your last line is maybe a bit more concrete: What are the red flags to look out for in postdoc offers?, so maybe you could try and rephrase it along those lines? However I feel that there is rarely standard red flags, and every fishy situation will be specific and not easily generalizable.


text:
Is it any unwritten rule, that for how long after getting PhD is it appropriate to publish with your advisor?
After reading this question on What is wrong with continuing to publish with your PhD adviser I wonder whether there is something like an "unwritten rule" for how long after getting your PhD is it suitable to publish with your supervisor.
Is there some sort of, let's say "secret statistic" related to the ratio of your own papers vs. your papers with your supervisor, upon you are rated among fellow scientist long after your graduation?

Any work that your supervisor contributed to should have their name on it. Now, you should go on to do other work with other folks if you are going to make a career of science.

A friend who got his Ph.D. in his 20s was still publishing with his committee chair 40 years later.

As the answers to the linked question say, the important thing is demonstrating independence.  It's not that you can't keep working with your advisor, but you should branch out on your own as well (depending on your goals).

This is heavily field-dependent. Answers should absolutely mention for which field they are meant.

You should not only publish with your advisor, because it suggests a lack of independence, and that rather than emerging as an independent researcher, you are still essentially "doing the work" for your advisor's ideas.
That being said, I know a number of people who still work with their advisors on projects - the key is to project an image of "long-standing partnership". This is especially compounded in public health (my field) where a single large study is a vast mine of potential papers, and so it's likely someone will be working on the same data with the same people long after they've started their own careers. The key is to have a place carved out that's clearly "Yours".
If there's a secret statistic for it, I must not have gotten my copy in the mail yet.

@djechlin That's not an assumption I'd necessarily make. You'd have to be using a pretty vague definition to consider my advisor and I in the exact same field, especially if you weren't viewing it as "Complementary skill sets working on the same problem."

Oh, come on. The statistic is secret. you aren't supposed to tell anybody you get it by mail.

There is no limit. You can always write and publish with any other researcher(s) (e.g., PhD supervisor) as long as they like to do so as well.

However, it would be unwise to exclusively publish with your adviser.  One might be considered unoriginal.  I once saw a job where the number of publications from post-PhD work (i.e. not listing PhD advisor as coauthor) was a selection criterion.


text:
How much information should I reveal in a postdoc interview, when I am also applying for a fellowship at a different institution?
I have been invited for an interview to a post-doc position. In the same time, I am applying for a post-doc fellowship to a different organisation. If that fellowship application will be successfull, I will have to quit the postdoc position (where I am going to do interview) somewhere in the middle, because I am more interested in that position with the fellowship.
I know, I don´t have any clues whether any of the two positions will work out, but how should I address this fellowship opportunity on the intreview?
Should I let them know in advance that I am applying for a fellowship and let them decide whether they want to interview me anyway? Or should I mention only at the interview, that I am applying for a fellowship? Or shouldn´t I mention it at all?

They will probably ask you if you are applying or evaluating other positions during the interview, if they don't you don't have to bring it up.
But if they do ask, just say you currently don't have any offer in hand but that you are applying to other positions. When and if they make you an offer, at that point you should decide to accept it or not, or to ask for extra time to make your decision. But switching post-doc half way will not be good for your CV or your research, but that's another question.

When it is just an interview and you are under no obligation to let them know. And you probably shouldn't because it might decrease your chances of getting the position. However, when they decide to hire you, you'll have to decide.
It would be unethical to quit for another job after a few months: funding is often not flexible enough (at least in Europe) to be awarded to another candidate, and even if it is, it will easily take a few months before someone else is recruited. It will be viewed as very bad and the research group concerned will probably never want to work with you again: this could easily affect you later in your career: it's a small world.

Although the second paragraph of this answer is not exactly inaccurate, I think its lack of detail means it could be more alarming than is warranted.

Clearly not everyone seems to agree with me (different people see things differently, as usual). A postdoc is not at all like a normal job: in a normal job you are just replaced by someone else. For a postdoc this is often not possible. You are hired to publish. It is very unlikely that a postdoc will succeed to do so during the first half of his contract. So it would lead to the postdoc taking the money but not getting the work done: this is unethical in my (and my collegues) opinion. I am also speaking from experience.


text:
Is it acceptable to contact people from an old postdoc interview and ask if a job is still available?
Is it normal to contact people from an old postdoc position interview and ask if a job is still available? Last time I withdrew my application before results were announced. I was from a different country, had some family issues etc.
I noted that some positions in academia remain unfilled for longer periods of time (several month to more than one year), because they cannot hire the right person, I suppose.
Is it a good idea to contact the main member of the selection comittee (project leader) and ask directly if that particular postdoc is still available? They have a webpage with open positions but none is related to what I am capable of doing. I wonder if they found the right person for that older job, or that person could leave before the contract expired etc.

In general it's totally fine to write a short note asking if the position is still available. The worst that will happen would be your e-mail gets deleted and never replied to. Even if the original interview was some time ago, you could still phrase the e-mail as "wondering if there are any new open positions in your lab for X."
In your specific case, because you applied, dropped out, and then are re-expressing your interest, the potential hiring faculty member would probably be a bit wary of your sincerity. I.e. if you dropped out once, what's to say you wouldn't drop out a second time, this time after the faculty member goes through the time and expense to hire you, get you set up in the lab, etc.?
Therefore, you should go ahead and write the letter, but be prepared to justify why this application is different from your previous aborted one.

They have a webpage with open positions but none is related to what I am capable of doing. I wonder if they found the right person for that older job, or that person could leave before the contract expired etc.

Contacting the project leader when they are no longer advertising for the postdoc is probably pointless. If the position were open, they would list it. If they don't list it, they no longer need someone.

Is it normal to contact people from an old postdoc position interview and ask if a job is still available?

That's a different issue, since it's a question of etiquette. No, it's not "normal" in the sense that few people do it. Hidden in this question is another: "will it do any harm?" That depends on the project leader. For most, it probably does no harm to remind them of your existence.
But there are more effective ways of doing that. It begins with learning as much as you can about the project leader's research. Then send a note to the project leader about how much you value their research (assuming you do) and that you had liked  idea of working together, and regretted having to drop out. That would allay any misunderstanding. You could even say that you hope at some point to have the chance of working together in future. If they have an opening, they will let you know. And if one comes up in the near future, they'll remember you.

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


text:
What is a suitable gift for an Italian PhD advisor based in the UK?
This question is already asked here. But I found the answers unhelpful, so I would like to ask again, and narrow to the case the advisor is Italian (but has lived in the UK for 20 years).
I would like to buy a gift, so suggestions such as in the accepted answer "be someone who is easy to advise" is not helpful. I already finish my PhD anyway.
I am thinking of possible options:

Chocolate (sound informal)
Shirt (I don't know his size)
My PhD thesis with beautiful hard-bound cover (I doubt that he will ever read it again)
...

Please give me some suggestions. I'm an Asian, and do not know much about European traditions. At first, I intended to invite him (and all people in the group) for a drink on my viva date, but it turned out he insisted to pay for all :(

a bottle of wine or something to eat or a dinner at a nice restaurant. Avoid little gifts that end up in the trash.

I'm not sure whether the fact that he is Italian makes any difference in the choice of a gift, but anyway here are my suggestions. Maybe they won't help you, but hopefully some students of mine will read this (ha ha!).
Avoid the shirt and your PhD thesis (don't take it personally, but PhD theses don't make a nice night reading...).

A good book, if you know his reading tastes, or a gift card to be spent in a bookshop (if you're in London there are wonderful bookshops). If you buy a book you can think of writing inside it a short dedication (so long and thanks for all the fish...)
A bottle of wine or two. However, as far as I know, it might not be easy to find a good bottle of wine at a reasonable price in UK.
Chocolate, yes: a chunk or a bar of good dark chocolate is typically welcome.

Instead of something related to Italy, how about something related to your own home?  I (in the US) had a student from China; she gave me a tapestry depicting the Great Wall.  I still have it hanging here many years later.

Important note: you have finished the Ph.D.  Giving gifts before that may be seen as an attempt to bribe him.  It seems to be the custom in China and Korea to give gifts to the professor, but not in the US (probably also not in the UK).  Wait until after you are finished, so it won't be seen as an attempt to unfairly influence the professor.

In the UK the advisor has nothing to do with the examination of his students, so influencing him should not be considered a problem. However it might be considered a bit presumptuous!

Yes, I already finished my PhD. Moreover, as Calchas also said, in the UK the examiners decide the outcome, and the advisor is not allowed to attend the viva.

Something beautiful from your country would be a great choice.  It could be something to go on the wall or a book of photographs.  You could also choose an object that is related to something about the UK that has intrigued you or meant a great deal to you.  That would be a way of giving the professor something of yourself.  Another possibility would be a small photo album with captions, that follows your trajectory through your studies or your sojourn in the UK.  Our goal is for the professor to look at this gift in 10 years and feel once again the satisfaction of having worked with you.

From your last sentence, he seems to be a welcoming and generous person: you say he insisted in paying for all. I don't think that happens often (I'm Italian, and I haven't seen many professors offer to the same).
This lead me to think that you should not go for cheap, cheesy gifts.
If he likes to drink, you could:

buy him a bottle of Scotch (it's a bit expensive, but it's nice and "formal")
find where in Italy he comes from and buy him a bottle of wine from his place. It maybe be difficult to find, but also cheaper than Scotch, and he would probably like the fact that you did a bit of research. It's a warmer gift, I think.

Both of these gifts would be convivial (Italians, as many others, tend to drink together), and that is part of the gift. I would not choose something for him to be consumed alone, and something that is not personal. He seems to like conviviality, so buy something with that in mind.
A good book that you really liked and you think he could like too is also a nice idea.

I think a wine from where he is from is a bad idea. He will surely know better what the good stuff is, and how to get it (and you don't). People have done this for me, and while I appreciate it as a nice gesture, I would have preferred get to know something new. On the other hand, something from your country may be much more exciting.

Mmm, you have a point. I would underline the "personal" touch, then.


text:
Repositories of funded research projects in different countries?
I am looking for different national repositories (US, Canada, Australia, UK, etc.) of funded research projects, similar to what Cordis does in EU. Any suggestions?
I am after any repository that list funded research and some of the projects details, whether it is public, private or partnership...

@damien I am after any repository that list funded research and some of the projects details, public/private or partnership...

I am now voting to close this question since the bounty makes it is clear that this is a poll question.

@DanielE.Shub This is not a poll question. It can easily be turned to a wiki of sorts for everyone to use and one brave person can compile a comprehensive list (and that is the reason for the bounty).

@blackace "I would like to draw attention to it and get more answers in regards to other countries/sources" is the definition of a poll question.

@DanielE.Shub "The current answers does not contain enough detail" is the selected reason for the bounty and the extra bit you quoted is extra detail that you have interpreted differently.

@DanielE.Shub In case you still think its a poll question I suggest you edit it to a more acceptable form as I think we can all use this if other interesting answers are added rather than closing it.

@Damien A comprehensive picture, figuring out what's out there. This might include other search engines similar to Cordis, repositories countries not mentioned, tools that might assisst with gathering this information, figuring if there are schemes that share the successful submitted proposals...

In the US, the government funded agencies usually publish lists of funded projects. For example, you can search the National Science Foundation database for all of the funded projects relating to "beer". Each of these entries lists the name of the project, the NSF program that funded it, the PI's names and contact information, the amount awarded, the date awarded, and an abstract, among other information.
Here are the databases from other US government funding agencies:

National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Energy
National Institutes of Health

There are other agencies probably, but all you need to do is go to their main site and search for "funded projects" or "Search awards" or "recent awards" or something like that.
One agency that may be hard to search would be DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), which is the scientific research arm of US military.

so there is no unified meta search engine out there in US for all nationally funded projects. Any info on other countries?

There are a couple of databases about funded research projects in the Benelux countries:

NARCIS - National Academic Research and Collaborations Information System (NL)
Fonds National de la Recherche (LU)
Databases INVENT and FEDRA by the Belgian Science Policy (BE)
Flanders Research Information Space (BE)
Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique (BE, only in French)

In the German speaking countries, there are informative databases about funded reseach projects as well:

ELFI database for the German-speaking area
Swiss National Science Foundation (CH)
FWF Austrian Science Fund (AT)
DFG German Research Foundation (DE)

Welcome to this SE. I awarded the points to you as you provided the most interesting and diverse answers.

In France we have the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR, National Agency for Research). The "régions", local administrative divisions, have also a capacity to finance research.

In India it is  Shodh Gangotri.
From the website...

The word “Shodh” originates from Sanskrit and stands for “research and discovery”. “Gangotri” is one of the largest glacier in the Himalayas and source of origination of Ganges, the holiest, longest and largest of rivers in India. The Ganges is the symbol of age-long culture, civilization, ever-aging, ever-flowing, ever-loving and loved by its people.
... research scholars / research supervisors in universities are requested to deposit electronic version of approved synopsis... The repository... would reveal the trends and directions of research being conducted in Indian universities [and] would avoid duplication of research. ...once the full-text thesis is submitted for a synopsis, a link to the full-text theses would be provided from ShodhGangotri to "ShodhGanga".

Why the down vote? The website seems like a legitimate answer to the question.

I agree with @DanielE.Shub. Would have been nice if a reason was provided for the down vote.


text:
Should I agree to review papers as a postdoc?
I am a post doc in mathematics, and was just sent a request to review a paper. This is the first time it happened to me. I never heard of this journal before, but it is a Springer journal, and upon checking the editorial board it looks like a respectable journal. Also, the paper looks quite interesting, so it appears that I shouldn't worry about it being dubious.
I wonder however, if this is a good time in my career to do such a job. Given that I am a postdoc, constantly in the run for the next job, and probably this will take some of my valuable research time. Is it normal for postdocs to review research papers? Should I accept it? If so, should I mention the fact I review for this journal in my C.V?

How did you manage to become postdoc without having to review tons of papers 8-o ?

Keep in mind that if you do refuse to review papers, you will be asked why, and will be asked to help provide a list of colleagues that you could recommend to review the paper instead of you. So there is a tiny amount that you want to do if you end up not accepting to review.

@cbeleites, my field of study is very deep, and requires great amounts of learning before one is able to read a paper. I have never heard of a grad-student reviewing a paper in this field.

@MathMan If you've never heard of a grad student reviewing a paper and only a very experienced individual would be capable of reading a paper, who better than you to review one? Sounds like you are the best possible candidate!

@dpatchery, well, experienced professors in my field would be more capable of course.

@MathMan: My experience in my field is that reviewing is one of your duties as a PhD student. It may start gently by your prof asking you do do a review for him (or maybe even to review only part of a paper) and then talking about it, or it may start immediately your full duties. In my field you are considered a fully responsible professional once you're graduated with your master's. And a paper that cannot be read and understood by a "normal" professional but only by professors would be considered badly written...

@cbeleites, the problem is not badly written papers. The reason why grad students do not review papers in my field is that the lack the knowledge required to do that.

I am just curious to know your field. If PhD students cannot review, then who can? is it possible to say what field are you in?

Yes, reviewing papers is an integral part of your job now, and a very beneficial one at that!
It's true that the first papers you will review will take you quite a bit of time, but it's a sound investment (unless you consider dropping out of academia next month). You'll improve your reading and ability to read between the lines. It will help you gain a wider view of what others are doing in your field, because it will force you to really go through the paper in depth, not just skim over it as we are so often forced to do when a paper is not at the core of our own research.
Moreover, it will give you invaluable experience when you write your next papers, because you will be able to put yourself in the reviewer's shoes! You will see better what could be problematic for a referee in the presentation of your work.
As for whether you should list it on your CV: yes!

As a side note, there are actual humans who will be aware of your decision to review or not.  Among these may be members of that editorial board.

I agree with all of the comments so far.  The only thing I'd add is that you should off course assess whether the subject of the paper is close enough to your areas of expertise.  If the paper is too distant from your expertise, it will take more time to evaluate responsibly, if that's even possible.  Editors try to choose reviewers who are suitable for a given manuscript, but this is judgement call, and editors have to depend on potential reviewers to tell them that if the MS is too distant from the reviewer's expertise.

I have served as a referee for various math and related journals since I was a graduate student. I'm a postdoc now, and during this career phase, I have refereed way more papers than I wrote. I put on my CV the names of journals I have served for as a referee. I don't think I have done anything wrong about this. Let's see if I will land on a tenure track job this year!
On a bit more serious note, I think it's normal for a postdoc to referee papers. One of the editors of Nature once said the best referees are postdocs because they're on the cutting edge of research but naive enough to be honest. I don't know if this equally applies to mathematics. But I think the fact that the editorial board you find respectable chose you suggests that you are qualified and needed.

"I have refereed way more papers than I wrote" I guess that how it should be: http://stats.stackexchange.com/a/3483/4598

Yep.  Everyone should write at least as many referee reports as other people write for their papers.  (Yes, I know that's actually impossible.)

@JeffE: I think you could relax this to as many reviews as are needed for the papers you submit as first author (otherwise with the usual numbers of coauthors in my field, we'd end up with 3 - 8 people x 2 - 6 reviews per written paper). However,  having  a director who is editor in chief somewhere, I can tell you who makes all those other reviews (the difference between the # of reviews actually written as calculated from needed reviews x submitted papers and the # of reviews people usually write per paper they submit)...

In my field (theoretical computer science), there is no such thing as a first author. There are only authors.

The other answers have focused on why reviewing papers makes sense to you.
But there’s a second, equally as important facet to it: It’s your duty as a researcher to review papers.
Sure, nobody’s contract mentions anything about reviewing papers, and no grant proposal ever allocates resources for it. But, to put it bluntly, that’s a bug in the system (and one, I might add, that badly needs fixing).
Peer review is a fundamental part of how science is done today. And, by design, the people to do it are researchers. It’s simply required that researchers perform peer review. Of course we could all just say “eh, let other people worry about this” but I hardly need to explain how conceptually broken and ethically objectionable this concept is.

Do unto others as you would have them do to you.

This sums it up quite nicely. Do you want your papers to be reviewed? Do you want the reviewers to do it properly?
I'm going to assume the answer to both questions is a profound YES. From the perspective of science, writing and reviewing are both crucial. As a scientist, it is part of your responsibility to review even if you consider it to be less rewarding.
This does not mean you should accept every review request. Sometimes you may get a request to review a manuscript which you may not be entirely suitable for as a reviewer. If the manuscript is in your field of expertise and there is no conflict of interest you should probably do it, though.

This is very true in general.  However, when the academic job market is as cut-throat as it currently is, I think it is at least worth contemplating that certain services to the profession might be more fairly assigned to people whose future in the profession is not in great jeopardy.

That said, I think refereeing papers is a sufficiently important part of the profession that a postdoc who has done none of that is missing out on an essential perspective and skills (evaluating the work of others is a key part of the profession!).  So I would recommend that a postdoc in math should referee at least one paper.  It might be a good idea to confer with one's supervisor and/or contrive to get a paper to referee for which close reading is directly beneficial to their research program.

Yes, but you should be protective of your time. Here is my algorithm.
We have a duty to review papers, but how many?
How many reviews have you consumed?
My rule of thumb is that I will serve as a reviewer for each time when someone else was asked to serve as a reviewer for my paper. Therefore, if I have 4 first author papers, and each was reviewed by 3 people, then I have a duty to review 12 papers. When doing these calculations, I will discount my obligation if I had co-first-authors on the paper, but not for minor authors or senior authors. Senior authors are typically occupied with other obligations, such as serving as editors for journals.
Will you benefit from this review?
Are you interested in the topic? If so, you are getting the first peak at this research, along with an opportunity to get the authors to respond to your questions. Do you respect the editor, and are you happy that she considers you an expert?
Pay attention to how much time you spend on a review
I have a tendency to spend 5-10 hours on a review (biology), but have been told that 2-6 hours is appropriate. I am trying hard to compress that. The appropriate amount of time may depend on your field. A mathematician colleague of mine said that he spends several days reviewing each paper. This is feasible for him because publications in his field are very rare. Sometimes I spend a lot of time because I am interested in the topic but have not previously bothered to read the background literature, so I read several papers while reviewing the one. This may be a helpful or harmful habit for my career. Refuse to review a paper if it will require background reading that you are not interested in.
Don't review unless you can get it done immediately
If you can't make time for it in the next few days, then you probably don't have time for it. It's best for everyone if the review is returned to the authors ASAP.
Reject bad papers ASAP
Refuse to review papers with bad abstracts
I have reviewed a couple of papers even though they seemed pointless based on the abstract. It turned out that they were indeed pointless. My new policy is to refuse to review any paper with a bad abstract and write to the editor that I do not consider the paper publishable. I have not had the opportunity to do this yet, so I don't know how editors actually respond. However, I think this is a legitimate basis for rejecting a paper. If the abstract accurately reflects the content of the paper, then the paper is indeed pointless. If the abstract fails to describe what is notable about the study, then the paper is poorly written and is not ready for publication. Some journals say that their papers are not to be evaluated based on "impact", but if a paper is as pointless/trivial as the stuff I've seen, it is not worth the effort of reviewing it, and therefore it is not publishable.
Try to identify a fatal error quickly; if you find it, stop reviewing
Nobody benefits from detailed nit-picking on a paper that is not going to be published anyway.

I can't imagine how you would review a paper in 2 hours. Only reading and understanding the small details of the paper would take much more than that. And then you need to write a clear and detailed review.

That figure came from a senior scientist, who was in a different field than me. I imagine that his quickness could come from his experience (so that he interprets things quickly) and perhaps the predictability/simplicity of the techniques and theories in his field. Maybe the papers tend to be brief. He emphasized ignoring anything that won't affect the decision to accept/reject, so small details might not be relevant to him. In my field, good papers almost always get "accept with revision", so the details do matter to the decision. Last thought- reviewers are not copyeditors.

There are already several good answers, but I will add one from a pure mathematician point of view, because this question is very dependent on the field (or at least, fundamental maths are outliers given the time needed to deeply review a paper: from a few hours for a clearly flawed paper to years in some cases).
Reviewing is part of your duty as a researcher, it adds a little bit to your CV, it pleases important people when done right, and most importantly it makes you learn stuff. But as said it takes a lot time to be done right, and you are in a position where your own research will earn you the right to have a career as professional mathematician or not.
I therefore consider that you should only accept to review papers that are either easy enough (or easily rejected enough) not to take too much time, or that are of primary interest for your own research, in which case a few weeks of part-time work on a review can be very beneficial.

Thanks for your input. The paper looks interesting, and quite similar to things I have recently worked on. I accepted the review job.

I was referee for various IEEE journals / conferences / proceedings during my PhD studies.
Opportunities:

a good opportunity for your CV
some benefits from the editor

Duties:

if you are member of a community (research is community) you must participate to the community's activities
reject the review if the paper doesn't fall in your research field

Suggestions:

if you do not feel up to it, you can only evaluate the scientific soundness and point this out to the editor


text:
Do IMS journals count as open access?
I'm considering submitting a paper to Annals of Applied Statistics, published by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS).
According to IMS Journals on arXiv:

Note that the IMS posts all accepted IMS journal articles on arXiv at publication.

However, the paper entries on the journal page do not link directly to the arXiv paper. Also, for at least the following publication, there is no corresponding entry on arXiv. I'm not sure what to conclude from that.
So, I was just wondering if this approach counts as open access. Also, the Wikipedia entry, Comparison of statistics journals lists Annals of Applied Statistics and other IMS journals as not open access.

The definitive place to check is the IMS's Copyright Transfer Agreement, which conclusively says:

However, the author(s) reserve the following:

All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
The rights to use all or part of this work (with appropriate reference to the journal and article) in future works of
  their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, textbooks, or reprint books.
The right to place the final version of this article (exactly as published in the journal) on their own homepage or in
  a public digital repository, provided there is a link to the official journal site.
The right to provide a copy of the final peer‐reviewed manuscript to the NIH upon acceptance for publication, for
  public archiving in PubMed Central as soon as possible but no later than 12 months after publication.

So the IMS follows the green open access model (which is confirmed by Sherpa/ROMEO).

Thanks, F'x, that's helpful. So, does that mean Wikipedia is wrong? Also, did you mean "definitive" rather than "definite"?

@FaheemMitha yes, but it is possible that Wikipedia is referring to “gold” open access…


text:
Is shifting from one field to another helpful for a good career?
I have a Master's Degree in Pharmainformatics (which is quite IT oriented and different than regular Pharma Masters) from India. Since two years I am working on Microbial Genomics, which is Bioinformatics and now I have got a task of Database Management for next year. Is this shifting of fields increasing my exposure to different fields or am I just wasting time learning different things?

It depends on what your ultimate expectations and goals are.

Can be either and the information you gave is severely insufficient to determine which one is the case.

My ultimate goal is to go to academics. I have to do these things during my PhD. After 3 yrs I will be getting PhD in (Computational) Biology.

I would say that you should at least be an expert in 1-2 fields to go in academia and being jack of all fields would help you take up multidisciplinary research and guide students from varied backgrounds in a better way.

It's very common to do your PhD in a different topic to your previous studies (and I think it's a good thing to do so). After your PhD, however, you should find a postdoc position that will help you converge on a field you want to become an expert academic in.

Shifting among several fields is definitely exposing you to different fields, and as the comments indicated,  being an expert in more than one field is helpful for a successful career in academia. Answers to other questions on this site make it clear that shifting (or even completely changing fields) in the duration of an academic career is normal and advantageous.
For example, see Bitwise's advice here, where he says

Changing fields is very common in academia, especially at the PhD/postdoc transition. In many cases it is actually considered an advantage, since you can import your skills, expertise and a certain thought-process into a field in which many people do not have those skills. For example, many physicists, computer scientists and mathematicians have migrated to biology and have made significant contributions. In fact, there are even postdoctoral fellowships that specifically fund this type of field-change.

The question was specific to changing fields at the PhD/postdoc transition stage, but his advice holds at any stage of an academic career.


text:
Should a Database Update be sent for publication in same journal where previous edition was published?
My lab published a database (db) two years back in Nuclear Acids Research. Now looking at the increasing data and new features we are planning to update the db. but the db admin is leaving now and I have taken full charge over it.

Is it mandatory for us to send the update to same journal (so as to increase chance of acceptance)
What authorship may I expect? (1st or 2nd)

Hey! I expect your question (and the title) are too specific to attract a lot of views, and consequently, answers. You might try reformulation it in something along the lines "Should an update/extension to a paper (method/structure/database/or whatever) be published in the same place as the original?" and making a more general question that appeals to more people. Also, clarifying your contribution (v.s. the old admin) for the new version might be useful

FYI: Nuclear Acids Research is pretty much the go to journal for bioinformatics related databases (at least it used to be; I left the field a while ago).

Nothing ties you, neither ethically nor legally, to publish your new work (your database update) in the same journal as earlier work on the topic. However, if the journal was a good venue for this particular publication some years ago, the same reasons probably still hold, which means it's still a good place to publish your update. If, however, you feel like changing, just go for it!
Regarding authorship, this should be discussed right now. If you have full charge of the database, did important work on it yourself, and write the paper, then you have strong arguments to be first author. On the other hand, if you're the new admin but contributed little to the recent improvements, your position is weaker. In the end, it will be the result of a negotiation.

Thanks. The actual improvement part is starting now and I will be responsible for updates. It's a 3 month job to me.


text:
Reply to Graduate Admission offer
This question should link with the question.
After I get the admission offer (unofficial), I replied Graduate Coordinator

"Thank you very much for the offer. I will inform you the  decision
  regarding admission offer around the end of March. I have already sent
  the  official GRE(Subject + revised) and TOEFL-iBT score from ETS and
  I will contact soon at my university to get  the official transcripts
  to send your department. "

The professor replied:

"Please do not send any official transcripts to the department. As soon as you notify us that you accept the offer,
  the Graduate School will be informed and you will be contacted with
  instructions on how and where to send official documents. The school
  may not accept documents not sent directly to them."

Again I replied him

"Thanks. I understand  you completely. "

My question is, as the admission offer was unofficial, I wanted to send all of the official documents and I will decide letter. Now will it be okay if I inform them the decisions after a month and send offical documents at that time?

Wait until you receive your official offer. The offer letter will include all relevant instructions and deadlines for submitting official documents. If you do it before then, you risk doing it incorrectly. Assuming that your deadline to decide will be April 15, it is acceptable to submit everything in March.

I have received the full offer letter . The letter mentioned that  "The official certificate of admission will come from the university, after all official transcripts and  other necessary documents and test scores are received; until then, this offer is considered unofficial. "

This seems to be the timeline that they want: (1) You decide to attend that school (2) You tell them that you will be attending (3) They tell you how to submit official documents (4) You submit official documents (5) They send you a certificate of admission and confirm your enrollment. I'm guessing that they listed some deadline for telling them that you'd like to attend, but you could always e-mail them to confirm that.


text:
Getting a pet during a PhD
There are questions on here about getting married, having kids, and other major time commitments during graduate school. But one thing that I haven't seen posted -- but that I've seen come up with some frequency (at least in the US) -- is concerning people getting pets during their PhD. Yea, I know certain pets (e.g. fish and reptiles) take less time to care for than others (e.g. cats and dogs), but I'm specifically wondering about what to consider in the latter case.
Pro: Pursuing a PhD can be a very lonely process, so having some companionship can be worthwhile and perhaps even lead to increased focus and productivity.
Con: Cost and time commitment, particularly early on with a pet.
What are other things to consider in getting a pet during the PhD? Does the timing make a big difference? That is, should I wait until I'm ABD, or should I get one over a summer?
Does having a companion, like a dog, for example, often help students' productivity when they were otherwise adrift in isolation?
Also, I'd be interested to hear from a faculty perspective as to whether it's ill-advised to get a pet during the PhD. I assume most don't care as long as the student stays productive, but I'm curious if there are any anecdotes that support either the pro or con I listed above. Same goes for anyone who got a pet during grad school.
NOTE: The help center explicitly states that questions pertaining to "Life as a graduate student, postdoctoral researcher, university professor..." are on topic (emphasis added). Thus, this question appears to be fully within the stated guidelines.

In my experience the biggest issue isn't time. As long as you're willing to give up some of your free time most students can handle taking care of a pet. The biggest issue is often flexibility. Depending on the pet, they can make it harder to travel, work extra-long days right before deadlines, etc.

We're starting to veer into boat programming territory here. There isn't much specific to pet ownership that wouldn't apply to someone in almost any other occupation.

Another issue can be housing as either you may be charged extra for pets or (in university housing/dorms) they may not be allowed at all - though it can certainly depend on the type of pet

@aeismail: Looking at StrongBad's quote in the marriage question I think his point applies here as well.

Also, there is plenty to pet ownership that's unique to a PhD. Other occupations aren't necessarily as time-limited or as self-driven a task. While it's not quite the same permanence, I think this falls under the same category as "pros/cons/consequnecy of/etc... getting married/having children during a PhD" and there is a precedent for those questions in this forum. Thus, I don't agree with the down-votes, particularly since they did not come with close-votes either.

I'm going to paraphrase JeffE and say that not only professors are people too, but phd candidates are people too. Almost everybody is busy, doesn't mean you can't do something you really want. It just means it is harder...

@marcman: Those downvotes may have come from users without closing privileges.

@aeismail: Fair enough I didn't think of that. Regardless, there is precedent for this question in this forum. I see your concern, but this question is one that arises pretty commonly among grad students (again, I can only speak for the US). I do think that other users will benefit from it. Furthermore there are specific questions raised in the post and that can be addressed in an answer.

Dogs require much more time commitment than cats. The litter box alone makes a huge difference. The fact that many cats can be trusted not to overeat permits using bowls that self-fill from a supply  tank; their small size means that solution can go a considerable time before refilling. In a pinch, many adult cats after settling in  can look after themselves unattended for multiple days, limited mostly by how long they are willing to put up with an uncleaned letterbox. Of course the cat and the human will be happier if they spend more time interacting.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because boat programming.

Despite the obvious concerns about living space and day-to-day care of the animal (which depends on what sort of pet you get!), perhaps most important is how you'll care for the pet when you travel. Make sure there is a suitable commercial facility available in case family, friends, or housemates cannot do it.

I agree with the boat programming votes... sure there's frequent travel and the chance of having to move to a different state or country, but these problems are not really unique to academia.

I think either the marriage and kids questions are off topic as well, or this one is not. Hence my vote to reopen.

Unless someone can explain in very clear terms on how the marriage and kids questions are on-topic, and this one is not, then I think this question should remain open. I vote to reopen.

The fact that something else didn't get shot down is not a defense

@keshlam: Yes it 100% is. If those are on topic, then this is on topic. If this is not on topic, then those are not on topic. If A->B, then ~B->~A right? The cumulative 75 upvotes on those linked articles seem to support that those are within the guidelines for this site.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not really about academia.

A better question might be what to consider when selecting a pet for someone working PhD-like hours and living in PhD-sized housing, and that would seem to be be a good fit for the pets discussion. Better fit than Academia, anyway.

With all due respect, until there is a good explanation why this is off-topic, but all of the other balancing-personal-life-with-a-PhD questions (basically anything with the "work-life-balance" tag) are valid, it seems only natural to conclude that we are operating under a very whimsical and arbitrary definition of "on topic" on this site.

@keshlam: Also from the help center: "What topics can I ask about here?
...If you have a question about...
Life as a graduate student, postdoctoral researcher, university professor...
... then you're in the right place!" (emphasis added)

To object to a closing decision , bring it up on the Meta discussion, and/or try to edit into a form likely to attract Reopen votes.

(and yes, reviewing is less than perfectly consistent. understandings evolve, and the dividing line is a high-order fractal, and we don't always get it right as a community but mechanisms like meta let us refine it as we go. note that by "we" here I mean the community; I'm just an opinionated user who has one vote like everyone else, not an admin, and I've been wrong before and will be again.)

I don't think this question should be closed. The two answers provided not only answered the question, but gave me several new things to think about as a soon-to-be graduate student who wants a dog (and already has a cat). Granted there is a lot of overlap with other occupations, there are unique things to consider in academia, and therefore the question shouldn't be considered boat programming.

I second @RogerFan's comment about travelling.  As a grad student, you should be flexible to go to a special semester and going to lots of conferences.  Of course this doesn't mean you shouldn't get pet, but you should factor this in to your decision.  (I am usually overseas with my family for 2-3 months out of the year, and this is one reason I don't consider getting a pet now, though my kids would love one.)

I got a Pomeranian and gave it a haircut so that he can look and feel like a little lion. The only problem is that he loves the attention so much that now he always wants that haircut, which is done by a well-known, but very expensive, dog-stylist. So if you get a pet, say, a dog, and you intend for him or her to be somewhat fashion-forward, you'll be paying a lot of money to maintain the dog's lifestyle

I got a dog during my MS, and it's the best thing I ever did. It was too easy to blow off exercising, but he needs to go out for runs on a regular basis. That makes me run as well, and that stress relief is the only way I got through some classes.

I bought a cat recently - I'm in the 4th year of my PhD, but I wish I had done it sooner. Particularly if you are working at a very high intensity, a pet provides 3 incredibly useful things:

A reason to go home. Many students, particularly international PhD students working at top-tier institutions where 18hr work days is not uncommon, tend to spend their entire life at work - after all there's nothing else to do. If you have a particularly one-sided work-life balance, a pet will force you to break up your day into work time and home time.
Time management skills. Before I had a pet, I would go to sleep when I was too tired to continue working, and so it doesn't really matter when I go to bed or when I wake up, so long as that period of time spent asleep is short. However, doing this for several years can enforce some pretty bad habits! With no strong circadian rhythm and poor eating schedules, you get worn out faster. Having a pet forces you to adopt a healthier schedule, for your pet's sake. New mothers/fathers often say the same thing, although a pet is certainly less work. It's not just sleep though, it filters down into everything you do - because you're responsible for two now.
Perspective. If the other two were wishy-washy answers, this one certainly is - however it's also the most important. I don't know about other pets, but cat's don't live all that long, depending on the breed. Mine has about 10 years, which means for every day I am alive, my cat burns up 7 or 8. 'Is he getting the most out of his life?' quickly becomes 'am I getting the most out of my life?'. Another similar but slightly different emotion that you get when you are the only person responsible for something else is, "am I being responsible with his life?". If I was to get hit by a bus today, there's a good chance the cat would also perish. Asking yourself how responsible a pet-parent you are, forces you to ask yourself how responsible you are being with your own life too.

There are obviously a bunch of practical reasons like time, energy and money (although honestly its not so bad), but im sure you have considered all those things already.

As an international PhD student at arguably a top-tier institution, an 18h workday seems to me like a terrible exaggeration. If you consistently work that much you are more likely to die of heart attach than to graduate on time.

I agree it's not healthy - but if you're the sort of person that can't help but say "yes" to unreasonable demands..... then a cat is for you ;-)

Also in the "perspective" category is that a pet gives you unconditional love. Your pet won't judge you by how smart you are or how well your research is going. So when you come home after a bad day in the lab and see how happy your pet is to see you, it helps you realise that your worth as a human being hasn't changed.

I'm going to presume in my answer you're looking to stay in academia post-Ph.D.
One of the biggest concerns you're going to have isn't now, but after the Ph.D.  Consider if you get a super playful mega cuddlebug kissing dog, there are many places with ignorant breed-specific legislation that would mean you couldn't bring your dog with you.
Unlike in other fields where you probably have a good idea (or decent say in the matter) of where you'll be living at, jobs in academia are scarce, and if you're only offered a job in, say, Denver which bans the aforementioned nanny dogs, are you willing to leave your dog behind to advance your career?
If you're in a field that may require a lot of traveling (public health, foreign languages, anthropology, ecology, marine bio, etc), I would absolutely not recommend getting one unless you have someone that you can consistently and always count on to be willing to watch your animal for extended periods of time.  Let's face it, you're not going to be able to afford boarding on a GTA stipend.  OTOH, if you're needing to be in the same on-campus lab virtually all year, that might not be a concern at all.
Lastly, consider something else: fostering.  You get all the benefits of pet ownership without the long-term complications (unless you become a decide to become a foster failure and decide to adopt).  You can also often workout with the foster coordinator to give you dog/cats that are a year or two or older to reduce the initial time commitment because even if not house trained, they can hold it for a work day.

A similar consideration is that you may find that after the PhD, you want or need to take a job in another country.  The regulations and logistics for transporting a pet internationally can be daunting (6-month quarantines, etc).

When I was an undergraduate (engineering) , I wanted a dog. The summer before my senior year I got a large blue-heeler mix from my cousin. Immediately my life changed because my dog was a bright smiling face for me to return home to at the end of the day, which cured alot of loneliness that I had during that time. In addition, my dog would require 2-3 walks per day of about 20 minutes each, so I got much more exercise than I would have if I did not get a pet. 6 years later I still have my dog and she still provides the same benefits as when I got her. I enjoy the responsibility and companionship of a dog and it definitely helped me during school because of the social aspect. I would walk her around my university and people would often stop to pet her, compliment her, etc.

There is a middle option you can take between having a pet and not having one: you can volunteer at a local animal shelter for a few hours a week. I've listed some pros and cons compared to getting a pet.
Disclaimer: I have neither worked at an animal shelter nor have I ever owned a pet.
Pros:

Contact with animals: Although you won't spend as much time at the shelter as you would with your own pet, you still have many animal friends.
Social element: You can bond with other volunteers and like-minded animal lovers.
Cost: Both your time and monetary investment are much lesser compared to actually owning a pet.
Less direct stress: If your pet falls sick, you have to take care of it all the time. At the shelter, there are other people helping out with the work, so it's less stressful for you.
Flexibility (possibly): While a shelter will most likely ask you to give a regular schedule, you might be able to ask for different dates etc. if you have extra work or have to attend a conference. Asking somebody to take care of your pet at short notice might be relatively difficult.

Cons:

Compassion fatigue: If most of the animals are usually kept in poor conditions or if most of them are sick, and there isn't much you can do about it (lack of funding, poor management), then taking care of the animals all the time can take a toll on your mental well-being.
Possible "break-up": If your favourite animal at the shelter is adopted by somebody, you might not be able to stay in touch (of course, this depends on the owner).
Lack of intimacy: If you have a pet, you are probably best chums. You can cuddle them, take silly pictures, take them for a walk anywhere etc. However, if you don't spend much time at the shelter (say 3-4 hours a week or less), it may take a much longer time (and it will be more difficult) to bond with the animals.

Other factors to consider (depending on your priorities and opinions):

Animal welfare: You are helping a large number of animals at the shelter. Even if you are adopting one animal as a pet, you are just improving the life of one animal.
Young animals: A young animal like a puppy or a kitten will demand roughly the same amount of time from you as an infant (of course this also depends on the breed/infant in question). This can be difficult to manage unless you have a partner helping you out. At the shelter, there are others helping you out.

Note: Some shelters do not keep young puppies/kittens but give them out to foster parents who take care of them for 8-10 weeks or more.
Guifa has mentioned fostering as an option as well in the answer here. With fostering, you have the pros of "Contact with animals" and "Cost" and the cons of "break-up" where it might be difficult for you to separate from the adopted animal and possibly "lack of intimacy" depending on your fostering duration.

I have always wanted a dog, then I started my PhD and thought it is better now, the first year is always a bit calmer... So I got a puppy, a whippet puppy, indeed the first 2 months my productivity went waaaay down because I could sleep and had to go home many times and was worried. But after those 2 months I had the most perfect dog - does not chew, was house trained (after much effort xD), did not bark, did not scratch and I let her loose on the house (this took many months, increase one division of the house per month).
Now, half-way through my PhD, I actually want another :)
nothing helps more those awful tired days than that dogs smiley face. I force myself to have lunch at home and never do more than 6 hours morning 6 hours afternnon because she needs to potty, so I never work more than 12 hours, and my productivity is higher, my lifestyle too! and social stuff, I try to take her!
is great to have a best friend living with you during the PhD, and I would chose a dog everytime!

Recently, I rescued a cat, and he is the best thing that could have happened to me.  I am getting prepared for my Ph. D. journey, and I am taking him with me.  On commencement day I plan to have a cap and gown for him.  Interestingly, we both will be PH. D.s!

Welcome to this forum! Good answer!


text:
Is punctuation necessary for displayed formulas in academia writing?
If a formula appears in the main body of the text, there seems no doubt that punctuation should be given to that formula when necessary. But when a formula appears displayed (i.e. solely taking up a line), there seems no consensus on whether punctuation is needed for it. I wonder if there will be any potential ambiguities if punctuation is (or not) included in this case.
This is essentially a question about functions of punctuation for displayed formulas. I don't want an answer about rules from certain style guide...

The exact same question was asked before on MathOverflow. You can read the question, comments, and nice answers here: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/6675/periods-and-commas-in-mathematical-writing

You can take a look at the American Mathematical Society book Mathematics into type (pdf) for some guidance on typesetting mathematics.

In mathematics there is a near universal consensus that displayed mathematics should not be treated differently from inline mathematics with regards to punctuation. By this I mean that the vast majority of papers on the arXiv follow this convention, most journals will add punctuation according to this principle if it's not already there, and so on.
Thus whenever you're unsure whether or not to include punctuation at the end of a displayed equation, try to replace \[ ... \] with $ ... $ - whatever punctuation mark looks natural when it's inlined should be included also at the end of the displayed equation.
I don't think that texts without punctuation after displayed equations are necessarily ambiguous, but then again, a text without punctuation after inlined equations would probably not be ambiguous either. The main purpose of punctuation is after all not to reduce ambiguity but to increase readability and "flow" of the text.

... maybe not-quite-universal... but, yes, the very fact that anyone at all would believe that there was such a consensus is the data point. I don't mean to disparage anyone by expressing doubt that there's "near consensus", and, indeed, there may be, but I do wish to register at least a small dissent, as in my "answer"...

Well, I was careful to write "near universal consensus", and so on. ;) Anyway, I think a random sampling of papers on the arXiv will confirm how widely this convention is accepted, although I don't have the urge to carry out a scientific study...

@paulgarrett "But I have come to the conclusion that that eliminating visual junk from the printed page is more important than punctuatory pedantry, so that when the same formulas is displayed, for example $$t^2+1$$ then it looks silly if the comma is included, like this, $$t^2+1,$$ and everything is much cleaner and less ambiguous without punctuation."--Preface of Galois Theory (third edition) by Ian Stewart.

@paulgarrett In effect I also wonder when this "convention" formed. 150 years ago, there seemed no such convention. For instance, see Riemann's 1859 manuscript: http://www.claymath.org/millennium/Riemann_Hypothesis/1859_manuscript/riemann1859-1a.jpg Some of the displayed formulas have punctuation attached, but some don't. Maybe only most English papers today follow this "convention"?

@ZhouFang Do you have a transcript of the text? Very likely the formulas that don't have it there shouldn't have it, because you don't but a comma at that place in a sentence. It's not like that every formula gets punctuation, it's that every formula which should have one gets one.

@tohecz Yes! See http://www.claymath.org/millennium/Riemann_Hypothesis/1859_manuscript/EZeta.pdf Notably, the translator does not change the way how Riemann used punctuation for displayed formulas. (The last formula on the first page certainly can have a comma attached.)

@tohecz Also see the German version: http://www.claymath.org/millennium/Riemann_Hypothesis/1859_manuscript/zeta.pdf

@ZhouFang Nice! Then notice that whenever there's no punctuation after a displayed formula, there should not be any, or at least need not be. It seems to me that either German has a different sense of commas than English and the translator kept this sense, or the translator was quite loose on commas. However, you can easily check that he keeps all the full stops as they should be. +1 to both comments for finding it! :)

@tohecz Regarding your last sentence: not necessarily. See the last displayed formula in the paper for instance.

@ZhouFang Very boundary case (I discussed it elsewhere here I think) with "mathematical ellipsis" ... at the end of a sentence. I would have an additional dot there, someone else would not, and a third person would ask the author to re-write it to avoid this problem ;) However, to me it looks like the only exceptional point.

@tohecz I was actually joking... but I'm pretty amazed that you would really write an additional dot there... :)

As a probably-minority opinion, I try to avoid having English-language punctuation juxtaposed to mathematical notation, especially anything complicated, whenever possible. Also, I try to avoid beginning a sentence with mathematical notation, trying, instead, to begin with an obvious English word that is capitalized.
In that vein, I do not put periods or commas at the right edge of displayed purely-formulaic expressions, but have the next line start with a capitalized English word, signifying new-sentence.
My objection to juxtaposition of English-punctuation with formulas is the visual noise, small though it may be. At least my own perception of my own scanning of English+mathematics is that I think of English in a somewhat different manner than I think of the mathematics (apart from small naming-phrases), and everything's easier if the two functions of "comma" and "period" are clearly distinguished.

Maybe the customs are field-dependent, and not so universal outside maths: I have checked my own papers (in both physics and chemistry journals), and it's a mixed bag of punctation and no-punctuation… So not all publishers favor punctuation in displayed formulas!

I try to punctuate displayed formulas, but I'll take out the punctuation is it's really distracting.  But I'm religious about not starting sentences with mathematical notation, so I have lots of sentences that start "The set S..." or "The graph G...".  More generally I try to separate any two "phrases" of mathematical notation with at least one English word.  (Commas do not mean "and" or "where" or (shudder) "for all"!)

I am amused that there was a down-vote, mostly because I am acquainted with people who have VERY strong feelings about this... apart from house-styles at journals, which have brow-beaten me into adding marks. Naturally, "clarity" is context-dependent, ... but I am entirely unconvinced that "rules" truly enforce "clarity", etc. But, perhaps, the lesson is that the people who believe that displays must be punctuated as though they were English have powerful beliefs, while those who doubt ... are not as aggressive... not burning the crops and villages. :)

@paulgarrett I'm strongly tempted to downvote this too, because I see this opinion as quite wrong. Yes, there are publishers who consider punctuation in math wrong, but as well, there are publishers who publish journals double-spaces, so I don't think that this is a good measure.

@JeffE Two of the basic rules for mixing math and text say: 1) never math at a beginning of a sentence, 2) each two in-line formulas should be seperated by a word. Bad example: Theorem: $H(v)=H(u)$. If $G(v)=G(u)$, $K=0$. Better example: Theorem: We have $H(v)=H(u)$. If moreover $G(v)=G(u)$, then $K=0$.

@tohecz, I did not mean to use any publishers' house styles as evidence for-or-against natural-language punctuation in displayed math. My argument, such as it is, is entirely in terms of scan-ability and separation of mathematical function of small marks (which is very sensitive) from natural-language function of small marks, which is both different and more robust in an information-theory sense.

However, A punctuation mark at the end of a display formula cannot be mis-interpreted as a math thingy, not even in cases like \[ i^2 \quad \text{for } i=1,2,3,\dotsc .\] (which should be avoided at all, for obvious reasons, but that's another story and quite a special case). I basically wanted to put some light on why someone else might have downvoted you. The "scan-ability", as you describe you, is probably quite subjective. That's why typographic rules have been established: To give things a unique look even when the feelings or each of us differ quite significantly ;)

@tohecz, ah, "rules"? :) I am quite far from being a prescriptivist, although there seems to be a general tendency among mathematicians to prescriptivism (say, in contrast to descriptivism).

They are rules. They may be loose or tight, they may change in time, they may be followed or be not. But they are rules. And we are too chatty, let's end this. We can discuss a bit in the chat if you wish, but I have to go soon.

Dear @tohecz, please read the last paragraph of my question.

Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Yes, of course. No matter what is the formatting on the page, the text is linear, with the only exceptions being floating objects (figures and tables), which obviously float. The fact whether the formula is on display or not should have no implication on the punctuation used.
This issue exactly is not much addressed by Knuth in his Mathematical writing. Still, him being a profesionnal typographer, a mathematician and an author of many books, his opinion on this (which is clear if you open any of his works) is IMHO quite valuable, being a strong reference for proper punctuation. The linked article is definitely worth reading.