text:
"All Rights Reserved" is the same as "Copyright"
In my dissertation I have mentioned Copyright © 2023 , [My Name]. All Rights Reserved.
In order to upload it on the HAL Thèses website (belonging to the French government), I shoild choose a license from the list.
I have attached a screenshot for reference:

Could you please advise me on which option from the list of licenses corresponds to "All Rights Reserved"?

You want straightforward ’Copyright’ - you are retaining all rights, not giving any permissions to anyone else.

@Jon - Sounds like a (good) answer!

So I agree with the people who say that "Copyright" is probably the answer to your question.... but strictly speaking if you don't assign a license to the site you are uploading to, then they do not have permission to publish it! But perhaps there is a license for that specified separately in the site's T&Cs.

You will want to choose what everyone around you is also choosing. Take a look at the choices made by your peers who submitted their theses before you.
As for the actual question: There is a difference between the concept of "Copyright" and "License". For example, you can release your works under a "liberal" license that allows others to use them more or less as they see fit; in this case as the author you continue to have the copyright in your work, but you are not retaining any of the rights associated with it. The "license" is how you specify how others can use the work that you have the copyright for.

Specifically, by asserting "All Rights Reserved" they are not allowing any of the other options besides straightforward Copyright by themselves.

At least in the United States (and as far as I can tell, in France as well) this answer is not entirely correct - works in the public domain do not have a copyright, and if an author puts their work in the public domain, they are giving up the copyright entirely and have no say how the work is used thereafter (though France's "moral rights" of authors, where they must still be recognized as the creator of that work, still apply.)

@WhatTheDuck Yes, good point. I edited my answer.

Straightforward "copyright" is the license corresponding to "all rights reserved". However, works can have "Copyright © [year] [name]" on them without being ARR. A work under, say, a CC-BY license is under the copyright of its author, who has simply chosen to have laxer restrictions on reuse than one's rights under the Berne Convention. Due to said convention, there's no actual need to declare a work "all rights reserved" -- this is the default assumption in all Berne signatory countries, which is "virtually all of them".
In theory, an interesting test case could come out of "author labels work as ARR, unintentionally uploads under non-ARR license on a repository, someone reuses it by its accidental license". I suspect variants of this have already happened by way of Wikimedia Commons, which gets 1. a lot of drive-by uploads by people who don't understand its licensing and 2. a lot of massive database scrapes and image resales by people who do.
As a total aside, "three different PD or PD-equivalent licenses" on that list seems a bit much.


text:
Submitting to ArXiv while awaiting ACM journal peer review: any concerns?
In the situation where I've submitted my article to an ACM journal, awaiting peer-review, and considering publishing it on ArXiv (https://arxiv.org), could this pose any issues?
ACM, Author Guidelines, it is mentioned:

"ACM authors may post all versions of their work, with the exception
of the final published "Version of Record", to non-commercial
repositories such as ArXiv."

https://dl.acm.org/journal/dlt/author-guidelines
However, it is not entirely clear to me whether this statement also answers my question.
Any insights, excluding suggestions to consult ACM editors?

The statement is clear enough. Yes you can post a version prior to the final published one. This would include the version under review.
Note that with some exceptions, both CS and math are pretty free about permitting pre-prints. Be aware that there are exceptions, however.

Yes, the ACM allows it.
Does the specific journal allow it? In theory it would put you in conflict with the anonymization policy of many ACM venues.
For some communities within ACM arXiv is still new, and they are still figuring out how it fits into their publishing workflows.
I'd pose this question directly to the journal you're submitting to.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Authorship when PhD project given to new post-doc?
I'm in the mid stages of my PhD, working on 3/4 of the components of a major project in our group. A post-doc has just started working on the remaining 1/4 using protocols I established (to keep our work comparable). My supervisor has now reassigned a lot of my original work to the post-doc, and let them re-optimise protocols independently.
Now it's looking like I will have no authorship for the majority of the project, as the post-doc modified my protocols (which were meant to be consistent between us) and has taken over the bulk of my project.
What can I do to ensure I still get first-author publications out of my PhD? I have spoken with my supervisor who does not want to discuss authorship 'at this stage' and has been known to publish in the past without consulting other members of the group.
Thanks

This seems unethical to me. Any chance to change supervisors for one that will respect  you?

See, for example, this answer to a different problem: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/112448/75368

First things first: I fully agree with Buffy and whoever else that this sounds like a very dodgy situation. A supervisor reassigning work and then 'not wanting to discuss authorship at this stage' takes an enormous amount of agency away from you as a PhD student. That has to be demotivating and frustrating. You could indeed look into transferring to another supervisor.
If you want to stay with this group, the project sounds like a co-first authorship to me. If you've done 3/4 of the project already, that seems fair even if the postdoc will optimise some of your results. Since taking it up with your supervisor wasn't really fruitful, talk to the postdoc and make sure they see this project as a shared first publication as well. After that, stay involved by discussing results, , asking what you can do to help, helping with troubleshooting etc. Make sure you know what stage the project is at and especially when writing starts, help with that. Obviously if you can improve on results, that's a bonus, but just staying involved should come a long way.

I think that such behavior on the part of a supervisor is unethical for the following reasons.
It seems to me that some people regard the research as more important than the people involved in it - students. I think it is understandable, if not commendable, that people are driven by results, but it is wrong, IMO, in almost all cases.
There are some aspects of medical (and some other) research, however, in which the need for a solution is so great that the results dominate everything else, but I think that kind of research is rare. But yes, some problems demand solutions NOW.
If a person (faculty member) just wants to get the job done - people be damned - then he should do it himself with only like minded colleagues. In particular he should not take on the responsibility of shepherding students who will necessarily be slower to find results than he and his fellow "superstars" are.
As I say in this answer to a different question, a supervisor has a responsibility to the student that overwhelms most other considerations. There is no essential reason why someone needs to have students. If it is required, and you accept the responsibility, then don't abuse those students, especially by taking advantage of their work and then yanking away the prize. It is really a form of intellectual theft.

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


text:
Should I send an email back after getting rejected for a Master Project?
Planning to do a Master degree in Canada but my professor is not planning to take in any students for the upcoming year. Should I send an email back or just leave it as it is? If I should send one back, what is the proper way of writing one?

Just want to thank him for his time to read my application that's all. Is it a bit too much? Been getting two-sided answer so just want to make sure what is the right thing to do in these kind of situation.

You never lose by being polite - especially to people who can possibly help you in the future. I would suggest sending an email, or even postal mail - a bit more formal.
The email/note should be short. Thanks for your consideration of my application. I appreciate your help and hope to be able to work with you in the future.
If you need a project from another professor, you could also ask him/her for any advice or recommendations they might have.
Don't burn your bridges. Don't let them fall into disrepair. Keep them tidy and well swept.

These professors are busy. If they said that they are not taking in anybody, it's likely that they have other things on their mind. Don't send a mail back unless you are sure that you do not bother them. Assume that 50 students think the same way as you do - these means 50 extra mails to answer.

@CaptainEmacs, I disagree, of course. Send the email but don't expect a reply. You can even give a ps that no reply is needed if you think that there is a problem of scale. In particular, don't ask questions in the mail that seem to require an answer.

Of course, you are entitled to disagree. But I suggest you give a reason. If you create extra work for the prof, what is the purpose of it? Today,  with the amount of communication going on, politeness expresses itself more by not creating extra work for someone than pushing one's business card in their hands. It is an entirely different thing, of course, if the student has done an internship/practical/project that highlights that they will be an interesting person to consider in the future. But just "self-name-dropping" has little value.

Thank you for both of your advice. From the looks of it, I guess I will just leave it as it is.


text:
Publishing a paper - not enrolled in university
I've never delved deeper into this but I'm still curious: do I need to be enrolled in a PhD to publish scientific papers?
I have a MSc but I regularly read research papers of not-so-great-a-quality and think "I might write better stuff than this". It doesn't happen with the majority of papers but the point is: I don't think those authors are all smarter than me.
How does a 'private citizen' not enrolled in any PhD course publish a research to a journal?

I wonder what makes you believe that you are `smarter'. Writing a paper in my opinion is not about being smart but about completing some research worthy of publication.

I probably poorly expressed myself. I do not wish to 'outsmart' anyone. My point was that I believe I'm capable of writing papers as well. I never attended a PhD so I'm not familiar with how peer review, journal submissions and other iters work.

The answer may also depend on the field. In some, you'd have to find someone (another academic, editor), to present your work.

@AnyAD that's a point that interests me: do I need a professor to present my work? Is that mandatory or common?

In computer science, almost anyone can publish a paper. Many good researchers don't have PhDs. But it depends on the field.

@AnyAD, which fields require "someone to present your work"? Sorry, I never heard of that. A journal might make such a requirement, so as to get some easy (i.e. free) assurance of the likelihood that a new author is not just putting out garbage, wasting the time of reviewers. But for a field in general, it sounds, frankly, preposterous to me. Examples?

Journals do not require academic affiliation or PhD to submit a manuscripts. This is why eg industrial researchers can publish, too. I don’t know though why you think you can do better a job if you have very rudimentary knowledge of said job. Your questions suggest you haven’t ever seen paper writing from close.

Einstein published his Nobel Prize winning paper while not enrolled at University and without a PhD (one month before submitting his Thesis to the University of Zurich)

The answer perfectly address your actual question. However, I would like to point out, that in my experience, about 3+ months of "full time" research are required to obtain enough results for a good paper. While the papers may be written poorly, don't expect that it's possible to simply "sit down and write a paper" in your free time.

I'm an author on two papers from before I finished by bachelor's.

@AnyAD I would also be interested in learning about a flied that requires "someone to present your work". I know that "conference publications" are pretty common in engineering / computer science, but it's the authors that present the paper at the conference (whether they are academics or not), and a presentation is certainly not necessary for a journal publication.

No, you do not need to be enrolled in a PhD to publish scientific papers. You don't need to be a professor either. It's common, but by no means mandatory. For example the game Arimaa was invented by Omar Syed. He published a paper introducing the game and has never earned a PhD.
As for how to publish - it's no different from those who have PhDs. Go to your target journal's website; it will have instructions for authors on how to submit the paper.

+1. It is the work that is important not the imprimatur of any organization. If you do the work and it is good work, serious people will want to know.

There is no qualification required to submit a journal to an academic publication.  Most journals allow you to create a profile on their submission website and submit papers at will.  The profile information for academic journals generally allows a range of titles (Mr, Ms, Dr, Prof, etc.), and this anticipates the fact that some submissions will be from people who do not have a PhD.  Most good journals use the practice of blind-review, so the referees will not know who the author is, or what qualifications the author has, or lacks.
If you would like to submit a paper to a journal, search for their submission page online, create a profile, and then undertake your submission.  All you will really need is an email address for them to correspond with you, and a healthy sense of self, for dealing with inevitable rejections!

What you describe is the double-blind review, but it is not that common except of certain limited number of disciplines (e.g., computer science, which appears to have a strong community here). In my discipline it is more or less non-existent even in top journals. The reviewers do know the identity of the authors.

@Vladimir: Okay, that is interesting.  In math/stats it is standard to have blind review.  I guess it varies by discipline.

I've done peer review in public policy and public administration and I never knew anything about the authors

May be true in stats, but not in maths.

@Vladimir F Every maths paper I was ever asked to referee had the author names on the paper (including affiliation). It is the referee details that are not shared with authors.

You say that you have a masters degree. So you have an affiliation with the university where you have studied. It may be possible to use this. You could talk to your masters degree advisor or the head of the department and try to find out (Especially if perhaps you got the research idea or some work done there as a student).
If you tried to submit to ArXiv for example, you'd be asked for your affiliation.
So affiliation may be more important than a PhD.
You may contact the journal and ask them directly. In my opinion, if your work is good, the journal should make an effort to publish it.

I thought about that but it's nowhere a leading university and by all means a crappy one. I'm afraid they'll want to put their name on the paper even though they did nothing. That's a path I should consider carefully before treading.

Think of affiliation as more for identification than anything else. If you are affiliated and they have put resources in that aid you then listing them is worth doing. Otherwise "unaffiliated" is accurate. Whether it makes people value your work more or less is personal - up to them.

Last year I published a paper, and I don't have a PhD.  I wasn't even employed.
First I contacted a researcher in the field to get recommendations on which journals are the best in the field.  Then I emailed the editor of one of them, after doing my research, but before writing a paper, to see if he thought the topic was a good fit.  After he said it was, I wrote the paper and went through the normal peer review process without any problems.  For affiliation, I listed "Independent researcher", as did my co-author.
Kirmse, A. and de Ferranti, J. (2017) Calculating the prominence and isolation of every mountain in the world. Progress in Physical Geography 41(6), pp. 788–802.

Congratulations on your paper.  Looks like an interesting one.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
Can we cite/use publications from other disciplines?
I reflect about preparing research publications and possibly starting a PhD. The subject matter of my interest has connections with the social sciences different from mine.
Specialised in Law, I intend to research a topic which is closely connected with political science and sociology. Such publications, done in the sciences different from mine, would be of a great use for me as they may improve the description of the context proper to my own topic.
Therefore, it would be nice to know whether using cross-discipline sources is allowed in academia. If yes, which precise conditions would I want to respect to avoid getting my publications rejected?
Many thanks for any informative input.

A yet another issue of "why?" vs. "why not?"

While using results from other disciplines is allowed, encouraged, and the key to several breakthroughs, be aware that it will make it harder to publish because you have to bring your audience up to speed. The issue is smaller when you bring things from closer disciplines.

People even cite Harry Potter in computer science (as a joke, of course, but that counts as "you can" I guess).

The answers are right (you can cite from other fields) but beware that if you don't have a reasonable amount of cites from your field, it could be hard for you to tell that your work is on your field. If a law thesis only cited social science references (and no law sources) I would see it more like a social science thesis.

As I have previously said in an answer to another question on this site, research is about telling the truth about facts of reality.  You can cite any fact of reality you want, from any source.  If you want to cite sources from other disciplines that is absolutely fine.  You can cite papers from any discipline.  You can cite a published academic paper, a newspaper article, a blog post, a letter, a tweet, the conditions written on the back of a bus-pass, or the graffiti written on the wall of the faculty toilets.  Any source of information that is relevant to your paper is fine.  So long as cited information advances your work, and you specify the source, and accurately transcribe the remarks, that is okay.
Generally academics stick mostly to citing peer-reviewed research appearing in academic journals so that they are dealing with reliable information.  Cross-disciplinary research frequently cites work from across disciplinary boundaries.  The main thing you will want to do to make sure your work is acceptable is to do your literature review well, and make sure you are citing relevant work that bears on your results.  You are unlikely to get a rejection for citing work that the referee hadn't thought of.  It is more likely you will get a rejection for failing to mention relevant published work that bears on your argument that the referee wants you to add.  For that reason, cross-disciplinary research generally requires citations from multiple fields.

Apologies for being late with upvoting the answer. It took me some time to get back here as I had accidentally posted the question as an unregistered user and then needed to merge accounts to regain control of the thread.

I think that the reason the question needs to be asked is that academia has become overspecialized in many fields. Most people work in very narrow parts of a discipline - though not all.
So, the short answer is yes, you cite the work that supports your own, no matter where you find it.
But the situation is a bit more complex from your standpoint starting out on your studies. You don't say whether you have an advisor or not. Your work will need to be acceptable to the advisor, including the breadth of the field you want to pursue. That may be easy or hard, but don't neglect to consider it.
The other issue is finding a place to publish your work. The academic marketplace seems to value specialization over generalization, I think/fear. Frankly, I have no experience finding such a publishing venue. It may be easy or hard. But your advisor should be able to answer questions like that. If it is hard to publish (no appropriate journals/conferences) you can do great work but be invisible to the world at large. I've done some work of a different kind that wasn't really publishable, but it satisfied a need of my own, so was worth it, but not for reputation building.
My personal view is that work that brings together disparate ideas from across a broad spectrum is both very interesting and very valuable. Not many are willing or able to integrate ideas from across disciplines. Some public scholars have achieved success at this, but it is usually after building a reputation in a narrow field.

Both your answer and the one of Ben are reassuaring :)
Regarding what is my motivation for this research, not that I do not care about reputation but my main goal is essentially to succeed with a personal intellectual project of writing a decent PhD.
My master's studies did not include research but I do think that a thesis completes an academic education cycle and because of this I would like to write something pertinent and useful. I see PhD as an inspring challenge worth my time and attention.


text:
Postdoc exploring tenure track faculty jobs against the wish of mentor
I have been a postdoc for a year and half with a good number of publications. I feel it is the time for seriously exploring the TT faculty positions. However, my mentor wants me to work for a few more years in the current position. Though I have good rapport with my mentor, I dont know if it is ethical and practically possible for me to  proceed with applying without taking his reference. Advice will be appreciated.

Is your mentor your boss? I.e., do they benefit from you work[ing] for a few more years in [your] current position?

The job of a post-doc is to get a job. In my opinion you should go through the application process this year. You might not make it, but the experience will be worthwhile next year.

It's your future and not that of your adviser, so I'm surprised that an adviser would say that they want you to work as a postdoc "for a few more years" -- which sounds far beyond the usual 3-year postdoc period.
My recommendation is essentially the same as for at least half of the questions on this forum: Communicate with your adviser. Have an honest talk about your future, why you desire to look for tenure track jobs, what you need from him in this regard, etc. You will very likely need your adviser's support (through letters, introductions, and in other ways), and the only way you'll get that is if you have honest conversations about what each of you want to get out of your current relationship.

+1 the key question is how good of a reference letter will your host write. If there’s no letter, or worse- a bad one, you’re probably not going to be successful in your search.

@Spark The more I read such kind of remarks, the more I'm convinced that a hiring system based on recommendation letters is bad and that can lead to all sort of abuse: one's chance of getting hired should not depend on whether their supervisor is a < put-your-favourite-epithet-here > or not.

@MassimoOrtolano yes, it’s the worst system, except for all the other ones (paraphrasing Churchill).

@DanRomik Honestly, I don't think so, and I've yet to find a convincing proof fo this (for the academic hiring process, I mean :-;).

@MassimoOrtolano -- I'm with Dan here. I've yet to see a better system, even though I agree that of course the current one is not particular good.

Yes, it is ethical for you to seek a permanent position. And it is unethical for your advisor to hold you back. If s/he can provide you with a path to a more suitable position then it is less of a transgression. But preventing you from moving on is a serious breach.
The practical issue is harder. Your publication record may be enough without a strong letter. And if your advisor chooses to write a letter that subverts your chances then it is another very serious ethical breach. But someone reviewing your record can probably figure out the situation when there is a contrast between a strong publication record and record of productivity against a "sour grapes" letter of recommendation.
I suspect that your advisor has come to depend on you too much and hates to see you go, expecting a drop in productivity on their own part.
Some people will apply for a position and ask that the application be kept confidential in the short term until the institution starts to approach the decision stage. Most people will understand that such things are sometimes necessary for just the reasons you give here.


text:
Engineering Ph.D. from another country searching TT position in US
I had my complete education up to Ph.D. in Engineering in a country on the other side of the planet. However, I did a postdoc at a tier 1 US university for two years and then went back to my country, worked in a reputed multi-national company for 6 years. I had 6 publications in top journals with my advisers. More importantly (I believe), in the last four years, I published on my own (as the corresponding author) 6 more papers in top most journals (considered rank 1, 2, and 3) in my field. I am writing 4 more papers at present. I left my industry job, as I am interested in doing research in academic setting. Therefore, I came back to the US on another postdoc position. I am tempted to try my luck, applying to TT positions here, but, not sure about my chances. Another fact, I think, is against me is that I am in early 40's. Could any one let me know if I stand a chance here for a TT job?

Apply and find out...

You age itself isn't an issue but the number of years it took you to produce that CV is how it matters. Overall it seems like your publication output is about average for a postdoc. Is average good enough for an academic job in your field?

Age is not an issue especially since you have been working and are productive. However, it sounds like you should be networking and getting in contact with potential colleagues and institutions.  Whether you would enjoy teaching and be able to teach well is the other issue for a TT (tenure track) position.


text:
Can I include Abandoned Patent in CV?
I recently came to know that one of the patent we filed in my previous organization has been abandoned. I am currently preparing my resume for PhD applications. I am confused whether to specify the abandoned patent in resume/CV considering the effort involved in coming up with the patent.
I thought of specifying like this in resume
"Patent Name", "Inventors:....", "Application No....","Status-Abandoned"

Perhaps more important is why it was abandoned - they will surely ask...

The term "abandoned" can refer to either a patent or a patent application. A patent application is abandoned if fees are not paid or you don't respond to the USPTO in time. In that case, there is no patent. A patent can be abandoned if it's granted and you don't pay the appropriate renewal fees. In that case, you did get a patent. It matters which of these two things happened. (See this page for a summary of how this all works.)

A patent can be abandoned as a business decision as well as because of lack of novelty.  Really it is a balance as most applications (by decent researchers) can be got across the goal line with enough expense and with enough limitation of the claims.  I think its fine to list an abandoned patent (labeled as such).  It's actually technically still a publication (in the patent literature, as an application, not a granted patent).

I'm assuming you mean abandoned in the sense defined by the USPTO. A patent (application) is abandoned if the application is never completed for some reason and cannot move forward to registration. In that sense an abandoned patent is not a patent, so it would seem to be a mistake to include it as anything other than incomplete and abandoned work.
Perhaps you can find a way to include the work in another way that is more positive. Did it result in any publications, for example?

Unfortunately, it didn't result in a publication. But your definition of a patent gives a clear idea.

The USPTO does not refer to an incomplete application as an abandoned patent. That would be an abandoned patent application. A patent is abandoned if renewal fees are not paid. The OP's terminology is confusing. They say the "patent we filed", but you don't file a patent, the government grants one. You file an application.

You can include anything you want in your CV as long as you use precise language. Your “abandoned patent” sounds like it’s not actually an abandoned patent but is an abandoned patent application. Personally I don’t think it will be of much, or possibly any, value on your CV, but whether that’s the case or not would depend on the specific nature of the invention you tried to patent and the reason for abandoning the application. I can imagine hypothetical (though unlikely) scenarios where it might be worth mentioning. And even if you don’t mention it on your CV, the story of the abandoned application can still make for a nice anecdote to mention in an interview or a statement of purpose.
Regardless, whatever you do, do not use the word “patent” to refer to something that has not been approved as an official patent by the US Patent and Trademark Office or some other national or international patent registration agency. The correct phrase to use in your situation is “patent application”. A related term that people sometimes use for applications that are under review by the patent office is patent pending, but that only applies to applications that are still pending, and yours isn’t since it’s been abandoned, so you shouldn’t use that term either.

A huge number of patent applications - and patents - are of questionable scientific value, and are often just "IP grabs" by large corporations. In fact, probably most patent applications and possibly even most patents are like that - AFAICT. They are definitely not peer-reviewed contributions.
I have no idea how they are considered when it comes to PhD track applications (and possibly they don't matter that much at all) - but I'd be careful about up-playing your work on patents overmuch. Specifically with respect to that abandoned patent application - perhaps you should focus on the actual innovative aspect of your work rather than on whether or not a patent was formally registered.

Some patents are useful, anyway.

A huge number of academic papers are also of questionable scientific value. Is that a reason for someone applying for PhD programs not to list their publications on their CV? And as for patents not being peer-reviewed, they are reviewed by patent examiners, who judge them based on specific criteria of novelty and nonobviousness among other things. So a patent being formally registered does mean something, and it is completey rational to regard it as an achievement worth listing in one’s CV.

@DanRomik: Let me rephrase. Also, I don't think highly of the criteria by which patents are judged.


text:
Minimum residential requirements For PhD
I have a permanent Job that I don't intend to give up. I wish to pursue PhD. All I can manage to get is 2 years of leave. Beyond that I will have to resume my job and I can continue research work along with that. What are the typical requirements?
I am aiming to get a PhD position in CS/EE department. Are there some departments which would accommodate such cases. Please share your insights/suggestions.

Just go part time after two years. What country are you in? PhD course requirements (and therefore attendance) vary considerably.

Why not do a PhD part-time and just do some short residentials? Some countries do not need coursework, so working on your research during your own time is easier rather than having to attend mandatory coursework.

I can (sort of) answer this for the UK but not anywhere else. You need to specify a country.

this is superficially contradictory.  You have a permanent job and don’t want to give it up, but you are also aiming to get a position in CS/EE?

Possibly related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/132960/93566


text:
Is it worth going to a conference [IEEE UEMCON] to get my undergraduate thesis published?
I'm weighing the costs/benefits of going to a conference in New York despite living in Seattle.
My main motivation is that I want the undergraduate thesis I finished earlier this year to be published. In the future I may decide to apply to graduate school and search out opportunities to do research in a different topic.
If I just showed Universities/future job prospects that I was accepted at a conference would it carry as much weight as being a published conference paper?
My reasons for not going basically boil down to:
-Its a big hassle and investment time/money
-The conference could be rather dry
-I want to go but how do I know that I won't just change my mind about it later after already committing?

Attendance does nothing for you. Have you submitted the paper and has it been accepted for presentation? Deadlines have passed, of course.

Yes my paper has been actually accepted for presentation, sorry for not clarifying that point

Generally in CS, conferences are the preferred venue for publication. If your paper would be withdrawn for non-attendance then it would be a mistake not to go and present it. This is especially true if IEEE publishes a proceedings, as I assume (I'm not a member).

@Buffy: I think "it would be a mistake not to go and present it" is too strong for the student apparently having to pay himself.

If you see yourself in an academic setting in the future, this could help you. It's no guarantee, but it is very likely. This is a merit in the academic world. If you are coming from computer science and going into industry right away, and are done with academia, the published paper will not matter. CS people get jobs anyway without much trouble.
You'd need to try and see this as an investment into your future career IF you want to work in academia. Otherwise it's a cool item on ones resumé, but it won't nessecarily add much after you've gained some work experience which I'd like to guess will carry heavier weight than the paper.

"It's a cool item" sounds like a better motivarion to me than "some person will put higher weight in this when evaluating you".

Even if he’s not going into academia, listing a published academic paper on his resume under the Outcomes section of his undergraduate degree wouldn’t exactly hurt.

@nick012000 In my opinion it might help with the first job, but after a short while, his experience in the industry would outweight this. This is my opinion. Of course  I canät picture a scenario where it'd hurt, but is the cost/profit ok ?


text:
Why do PhD students do research for other people’s research ideas?
I’m a research assistant with an idea for a new study.  I’ve started my literature review, however a couple of people have said to me there are plenty of PhD students who would be keen to help with the research.  Why would a PhD student want to do research on a topic that’s not potentially of any interest to them?

baffled at the close votes I could understand considering this "primarily opinion-based", but how can you possibly say "unclear what you're asking"? The question is clear in the final sentence.

If they want to help, it implies that they are interested. Multiple people can work on research projects and get a benefit from them.
I've helped on numerous projects and ended up getting a name on the resulting research paper. I wasn't able to use that research in my PhD thesis, but any job applications look a lot stronger as I have experience in a good variety of projects.

Thanks Richard, it makes so much more sense now

As Richard said, there are plenty of reasons to offer help and getting publication is one of the reasons. It sounds likely that your topic is in an area that will likely to be published and hence the interest level would be high and publications will help PhD students and their careers.
Another reason is to learn new techniques and improve their skillset. Maybe your lit review covers methodologies that students want to learn and engage with. Doing the project with you will help them diversify their research skills.
Other reasons may be more directly due to you. You may be likeable or engaging. People may want to spend more time and you may have an uplifting effect on people as well. I am sure you can think of many interpersonal reasons as well.

Or, they might just find the topic interesting!

They are PhD students, i.e. they are just starting out and are not able to come up with exciting new ideas themselves. They might not even have had serious research experience. Sure, it's possible to cite some fancy topic ("I want to solve the Riemann hypothesis!") but knowing whether it's feasible to attack that problem in the time available is something else entirely.
If the PhD student attempts the topic and finds it's not interesting to them, then chances are they'll stop working on it. After they've already worked on a few topics (i.e. a few years into their PhD program) that's when they will get more selective about what to work on.

My specialization (computer vision) is such that I can easily work in many application domains (e.g. satellite and multispectral imaging, medical imaging, agri-robotics). I can develop my research line and interests equally well with many different sources of data, as long as my work is supported. Getting familiar with new domain-specific challenges is a very gentle way to expand my expertise.
What I want to say, in addition to all the great reasons listed in the other answers (chance for publication, establishing collaborative connections, new skills) is that - a PhD student's fit or interest in the topic might not be as obvious at first glance, but knowledge transfer between domains can be a strong motivator as well.
This might be even more pronounced in an informal lab setting where the names of interested students might have been just mentioned in passing and you looked up their profiles yourself (e.g. why would somebody looking at remote images of urban environments suddenly want to work in robotic farming?). Which is why letting the students explain their interests (by having a chat) is a good way to see where their motivation comes from (e.g. because the underlying problem is semantic scene segmentation both for remote and agricultural images, and that person is interested in semantic segmentation).


text:
Widening the Search-ability of a Journal's Articles
I manage a peer-reviewed and open-access publishing journal for academic research. At the moment, the articles are not viewable in google searches. If someone wants to access the articles, they must go to the journal website and download the article from there. This means that someone must know of the article and our journal to access the piece of research.
I am interested in making the articles that are in our journal appear in google search results and generally more accessible to a wider interested audience. What is a good way to do this?
I have looked into Google Scholar, but it seems you can only upload your own research articles (i.e., that it's only for individual researchers, and not for organisations like an open-access publishing company).
I would appreciate any advice on how to widen the visibility of a publishing company's research articles.

Google scholar
You can find the general indexing policy of Google scholar here: https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/publishers.html#policies
And the more technical information is available here: https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html
In case of link rot, the articles should be findable via search keywords such as "google scholar indexing".
The non-technical summary is that the abstract or the first page of the articles should be vievable for everyone. Further, I think the article should look like scientific articles, with titles, possibly abstracts, text, references, and so on. The exact parameters are almost certainly unknown. I know at least one journal published as a blog, and it is not indexed by Scholar, while some websites are.
General visibility
Publish good articles, get famous editors, perhaps appear in conferences or sponsor them, if relevant for your field. Avoid being a predatory publisher or looking like one.
Maybe also look into the basics of search engine optimization (not the arcane stuff about how to cheat Google, but the basics like having metadata and website headers right) and usability of websites.

Good luck, it's not easy. If you're a member of the editorial board, the good news is the publisher will be doing most of the legwork. Inform them of any opportunities you might encounter, e.g. any potentially-interesting conferences, names to add to the mailing list, etc, and they should take care of the rest (if they don't, find a publisher with a bigger marketing budget).
If you're the publisher then you'll have to do it yourself. Your most pressing concern is to get your journal indexed in all the major databases. Tommi Brander's answer has covered Google Scholar, which is the easiest to set up (since they index for completeness but not really quality). After that there're a lot of others, e.g.

Medline (if your journal is in the biological sciences)
PubMed Central
Scopus
Astrophysics Data System (if your journal is in astronomy)
...
And the big one, the one that's more important than all other databases: Web of Science.

Getting indexed is not trivial and you'll need to do things like publish regularly (all issues should be on time), publish papers that are cited by papers already in the database, and so on. You'll need a steady stream of papers; preferably 2+ years. You'll need sample papers, an ISSN, yada yada blah blah. As I said, good luck, it's not easy.

Sorry, but I really don't understand. The link which Tommi includes doesn't seem to give any practical and easily-understandable information on how publishers can create a Google Scholar account and upload their articles for wider exposure. It does give explicit information on how to do this for individual authors. Can anybody explain simply?

@inquiries look at the second link by Tommi.

Thank you, Tommi. I missed that.

converting my comment to an answer, as suggested.

I am interested in making the articles that are in our journal appear
  in google search results

This is basic thing to be fixed first, before even thinking of indexing. Even if I keep a pdf on my personal website, it appears on google search results. This can be fixed easily by talking to your journal website administrator.
The rest of the question I think, is covered by other answers.


text:
Invitation letter Phd from Sweden
Recently I have been interviewed and gone through a writing task for phd position in Sweden. After that, My supervisors told me that they hope to show their labs and city to me in a visit to Sweden and they like to here my research intrest in a presentation ( that is optional).They will cover travel and accomadation. I am not from the Europe and from east Asia. They already send a invitation letter to me indicating the visit and saying I am one of the top candidates for position and therefore they would like to invite me for the arrangements of position. I could not understand this. Will they offer position for me? Anyone have experience?, thanks in advance.

They want to meet you before making an offer. Since they cover travel and accommodation you should definitely take it! And do not pass the opportunity to give a presentation. It will be good to not only share what you do but you'll also be able to add it to your CV afterwards.

They want to meet you face-to-face. This is always a good sign - it means they're seriously considering your candidacy. It doesn't mean they're offering you a position, but it does mean you're one of at most a handful of candidates they have.
If you aren't busy with something else during that period, you should probably go. You get to meet them face-to-face too. You get to see the atmosphere in their department firsthand. You get to experience the city, a sense of how expensive it will be to live there, check out potential places to stay, and so on. If they're covering travel & accommodation you won't even have to pay much to go. Worst case scenario, you could treat it as a holiday in Sweden.

Adding to this: the reason they sent an actual letter instead of something more informal is likely so OP can use it as support for a visa application to come to the visit.


text:
Biographical Sketches in NSF Postdoc application
I am applying for NSF postdoc and it is asking for Biographical Sketches ( see part 14 in here) https://www.nsf.gov/mps/dms/MSPRF/MSPRF_Application_Instructions_FY20.pdf.
So I was wondering if we can upload our CV here?

I would follow the specific directions.
Trace the links back and you get to a full description of what they want.  It's on pages II-14 and II-15 of this document:  https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappg19_1/nsf19_1.pdf
Give them exactly what is asked for, in order, and matching the directions.
No, not your CV.

Thank you so much for your response. But is there anywhere that we can upload the CV?


text:
Faculty funding in biomedical postgraduate-only institutions
What is the model for faculty funding in biomedical postgraduate-only or research-only institutions?
I understand the distinction between "soft" vs "hard" money and I was told that in medical schools non-clinical tenure-track faculty is usually a soft-money position. I can't find any information regarding the funding model for places like Rockefeller University or Sloan Kettering Center.
It seems that in Rockefeller they pay salary for tenured faculty, but not for tenure track (news article from 2008). What about research institutes like Scripps or Cold Spring Harbor Lab? Does anybody have more concrete information?
Thank you in advance for any info!

Since you are focused on a small set of institutions, why not just ask them? The information is probably available.

Good point. I am not sure that they will be willing to share this information through the general inquiry email account, but it does not hurt to ask.

You might need to contact someone involved with employment contracts. The name of the office will vary, but you can normally find contact information for most offices on university web sites.


text:
Self studied courses during my PhD. How to fill the relevant courses section in the CV?
My PhD thesis is on numerical modeling using finite element methods and non-linear continuum mechanics. My university did not offer these courses during the first two years of my PhD. So, I had to self study them from different books to the best of my ability. As I got completely engrossed in my research after my second year, I decided to not take the courses which were then being reintroduced.
I am finishing up with my PhD thesis and have started writing a CV for postdoc applications. In many sample postdoc CV's, I have seen people mention about the relevant courseworks carried out. I think that my lack of relevant coursework will be a huge negative in my applications. Is there a way, I can address the self-studied courses in my CV?
Additionally, since in the future, I will be applying for tenure track positions, do courses taken during graduate school carry weightage in shortlisting a candidate for a position if they are expected to teach exactly those courses too? Like, I might be required to teach finite element methods and non-linear continuum mechanics at the university, won't it be an issue as I have not done the courses in a structured manner myself?

I think that my lack of relevant coursework will be a huge negative in my applications.

I seriously doubt this. While I cannot speak to all cultures and fields, I find it hard to imagine that anyone will doubt your ability to understand and teach underwater basket weaving if you have published original research in underwater basket weaving.
So, I would not give this undue weight in your mind, and certainly not in your application. In particular, I really recommend against raising this issue in your application, and certainly not in a prominent place such as your introductory paragraph. Your application should focus almost entirely on your research. A rule of thumb is that successful post-docs act like faculty members while unsuccessful post-docs act like students -- and giving undue weight to coursework risks placing yourself in the latter group.

I had to self study them from different books to the best of my ability.

This sounds an awful lot like you simply researched topics that were relevant to your research. Under this definition, I have taken enough classes in my PhD/Postdoc/Professorship to have several extra degrees. Taking a course usually is reserved for actual courses you studied for and were examined on. It's generally expected that graduate students do what you described in order to be skilled researchers.
For grad students, the best way of proving you know something is to conduct research on the topic. If you have papers/manuscripts using finite element methods and non-linear continuum mechanics, then it's reasonable to assume that you are skilled in using these things, and listing them separately is redundant.
If you took some free online classes that may count: in that case you actually have some proof that you've taken these courses (say, a certificate of completion from Coursera or EdX).

Is there a way I can address the self-studied courses in my CV?

If you really insist, you could add them under the "skills" section (with your programming proficiencies and stuff like that). They will not carry much weight for general applications; however, if you are applying for a position that specifically asks for these skills (or that you know that the group's research interests focus on these topics) it may be worth mentioning. You can also say this in my application email.
When emailing my CV I'd say something like
"Dear Prof. X,
See below my attached application for your consideration. I would like to highlight that despite not having taken any formal courses on method A, I am proficient in finite element methods and non-linear continuum mechanics. Thus, I believe I would be a good fit to your group. "

do courses taken during graduate school carry weightage in shortlisting a candidate for a position if they are expected to teach exactly those courses too?

Not much. I am currently teaching classes I've never taken in my undergrad or graduate studies. If your studies are in the general topic that the department specializes in (e.g. a physics major applying to a physics department), there is an implicit expectation that you'll be able to teach a good chunk of classes, even if they're not in your area of specialization. Of course, no one wants you to teach stuff you're not good at, but things happen (manpower issues, someone is sick or leaves abruptly etc.). People often end teaching statements with a list of courses they're willing to teach - just list those you're happy teaching.


text:
Astrophysics after Aerospace Engineering?
I'm a second year aerospace engineering undergraduate student.
I like this course because it might get me to the space industry; but it is not as closely tied to the subject of space sciences as astronomy/astrophysics courses are.
Of course I don't want to abandon my course, so I was wondering how difficult it is to get a graduate degree in astrophysics after I'm done with aerospace. I know I'd be lacking some knowledge but I feel like the trade-off is worth it.
I can consider abandoning my course and going to physics instead, but that's a last resort.
Any advice is highly appreciated. Thank you.

This might depend on where you are. The two fields are pretty different.

@Buffy I'm in central Europe.

Is double-majoring an option?

If you want to work in the space industry (and I take this to mean planning/designing/building space missions, rocketry etc) then aerospace engineering is far more relevant than astrophysics.

@Nat No way. Aerospace and Astrophysics are both academically brutal and quite different, so there's not enough intersection.

@astronat I understand, but isn't it really hard to actually get into the space industry? It feels like a gamble, almost.

Assuming you live in America, If you have any problems getting into NASA or Space X right away, you could always get some experience working at Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, etc.  I don't think there is any gamble getting an Aerospace Engineering degree.

@GaryDrocella I don't live in America, and I'm afraid their security clearance levels would highly limit my employability in the companies you mentioned.

@Victor SCS Where do you live if you don't mind me asking?

@GaryDrocella I don't mind at all, Right now I'm located in Portugal; I'll probably be able to get a citizenship by the time I get the degree.

@Victor SCS According to this: https://news.clearancejobs.com/2018/07/07/can-immigrants-obtain-a-security-clearance/.  It is possible to get a security clearance, and I don't think Portugal will raise any red flags.  Keywords are "I think", though.  Is there anyway you can become a citizen sooner?  Getting a security clearance will be a very, very long and boring process for you.  It might take possibly even 2 years or more for you to get the clearance.  That's why I am wondering whether you can get your citizenship sooner.

@GaryDrocella I think it's very unlikely that I'll get the citizenship sooner, but I'm not worried about that; as long as in the end I'm able to do what I want, I'll be fine. I'm very inclined in the direction of your suggestion; getting experience in certain jobs to raise the odds of an ideal one. Though, maybe it's because I'm inside the box, but I'm still quite uneasy about that.

It's doable. Won't be easy, but doable. Get as much background in physics as you can during your undergraduate studies. You probably won't be able to take e.g. Quantum Field Theory, but it doesn't sound like you're aiming for these theoretical branches of astrophysics anyway.
Example from the MIT Physics PhD webpage:

Must I have a degree in physics in order to apply to this graduate program?
Prior to starting their Physics doctoral studies here, our successful applicants generally hold a Bachelor of Science degree in Physics or have taken many Physics classes, if they have majored in another discipline. The most common other majors are astronomy, engineering, mathematics and chemistry. Bachelor of Science degrees may be 3-year or 4-year degrees, depending on the education structure of the country they are in.

Can you take classes after you finish your last undergrad class? So as to not overload; aerospace is mental as it is

@VictorSCS you'd have to check your institute's policies - I'd guess yes, you can delay graduation, but you'd have to pay tuition fees.

Jesus. I guess my best option is to take at least 1 extra curricular physics discipline per year then. Either that or get a second bachelors in physics after I finish, which would take me 2 years in the same university (I've checked it). I'm really unsure though so if you have any advice on this I'd be very thankful.

@VictorSCS I'd suggest 1) talking to someone in the field who you want to join and 2) attempting the graduate studies without getting the physics BSc. A physics BSc is likely to teach you a lot of things you won't need, so don't do it if you don't have to.

Yeah, you're right, the BSc was a bad idea.
I'll probably just delay my graduation and do one more semester just with the extra physics disciplines I'd need for the masters. I've talked to the course director and he said this is a good idea, so I'm going for it. Thank you!


text:
Should I do a Master's degree if I am already employed in the field?
I am very torn about whether to take the plunge to do a Master's degree. I graduated a few years ago with  BSc in Maths which I didn't particularly enjoy, only the statistics and programming courses. I then got a job at a big technology company in their R&D department doing research and applications of data science. I thoroughly enjoy the work I do but I am also interested in developing my skills further. I want to gain a deeper understanding of artificial intelligence and am also interested in spatial data science. I am not sure whether I should continue in this role or at a different company and learn on the job or invest some time and money into full-time education. I am also not sure whether in the future with only an undergraduate degree I would be able to progress in my field.
I am also concerned about age, whether it's wise to go back to university at 25.

This isn't really a question about Academia. https://workplace.stackexchange.com/ is a better place for such questions.

First, research if your company has incentive programs for higher education. Many top companies offer partial/full tuition reimbursement to qualifying employees to pursue a masters. If this is the case, use the program to take 1 or two classes a semester. Frankly, a person with a bachelors can usually attain the same titles and salaries as a masters. The biggest difference in salaries/titles/responsibilities are between masters and PhDs. The main difference is that a PhD can be a PI on research grants/studies.
I went back to University when I was 30. Sometimes the market calls for a change in careers. But as I stated before, you may not have to "return". If your company is flexible, you could attain a masters on the side within 3-4 years by doing classes in the evening/weekend/online.

First off, your age has next to nothing to do with when you are able/should go back to college. When I was in college, I saw people in their 70-80's taking courses. My mother got her masters, after taking classes on and off for decades, in her 50's or 60's (I don't remember which anymore). I have one sister that got her Masters in her late 40's, and another sister with multiple Bachelors and Masters degrees over the course of a couple decades.
I'm 41 and I want to go back to get a Bachelors in robotics, but part of that is only because I only have an Associates degree. I know a BA/BS will look better on a resume, so it's partly just vanity at this point, because I already have 20+ years experience between computer hardware and software. I went to university at 19, failed to get that degree for many reasons, including money, then went back to college to get my Associates at 26.
The real question is: what do you intend to accomplish by going back to school?
Do you really need a Masters to do what you want? Sometimes yes and sometimes no. A Masters can get you slightly further in the door at hiring time and sometimes it can completely disqualify you. It can further you by showing you likely have more knowledge and stamina at a position than others without, but after the initial resume review, it likely won't really matter that much. It can disqualify you for some jobs that "don't want to pay that much". Even if you ask for less than they expect, they'll likely wonder why you are willing to work "for that little". I've seen senior level jobs in the computer sector that didn't require any degree and I've also seen entry level positions that required a Masters. Every job and every company is different, for better or worse.
If you are simply interested in the topics and don't specifically need the degree, just take the courses you want and don't bother about a degree course. After a couple of years you might find you have met the requirements for a degree by accident and can get it then, but it doesn't have to be the goal.
Also, there's lots of online and book learning you can do without a school being involved. YouTube, pod casts, blogs, Instructables.com, and more sites have the kind of things you're interested in for free. There's likely all kinds of informal and semi-formal groups on the topics you want in your area. Search FaceBook Groups, LinkedIn, MeetUp.com, and other social sites to see what's available. If there isn't anything, maybe you can start a group. With you being in a computer field, you might even be able to meet with people nationally and internationally through video conferencing. You might also try looking into local maker/hacker-spaces to find people with similar interests.
With this site being an academic forum, the "of course" answer is to get the degree, but there's much more out there to think about than simply more schooling.


text:
Applying to informal call for PhD students
My question is about PhD positions in computer science, in EU (non UK) countries. In many cases, websites of research groups/professors advertise PhD positions with something like: "We are constantly looking for talented PhD students to join our group. Feel free to contact me anytime. Include your CV, grades and references.".
My questions are: How early should I apply to such positions, relative to the expected starting date of my PhD studies? How polished should such an application be? Should I prepare all material like letters of recommendation before contacting for such a position?

I suggest you contact them with a letter of interest as soon as you can. You should have a CV and a SoP in good shape, but you probably have a short time to refine it if they show interest. Letters and such can probably be safely delayed for a bit until everyone is serious.
But, since they ask for references, names will probably do for the moment. But you should contact those people so they know that a formal request is forthcoming.
But, if this is an informal sort of thing, rather than a formal application, you can probably ramp up the details as they emerge.
It is a good idea, of course, to keep your CV up to date at all times. It is painful to have to put one together quickly and you are likely to forget some important things.
I'm assuming this is pretty much a universal thing. Not limited to EU. In some places, I think including the EU, applications often start and sometimes end with a PI. So, it isn't wise to be too informal.

Thanks! Are you sure that I should contact them as soon as I can, even if I'm not quite sure about my future? (But I am honestly interested in the research group). I'm not sure if I could start my PhD studies in 1 year or in 1.5 years, and I'm not sure if I could accept a position any time soon because I'm also looking for other universities to apply for.

The first contact can be an exploration. You can each explore any constraints, etc. It isn't a commitment. But, yes, early is better than missing an opportunity.


text:
Can I include review scores in CV?
I have submitted a manuscript to a CS conference, and it was rejected but with decent scores given by the reviewers (just under the accept treshold). If I list the manuscript as a preprint in my CV, is it OK to mention that I submitted to that conference and it got rejected with those scores? This version of the CV would not be publicly accessible.

What is OK and what is wise may not be the same thing. I doubt that this would be wise. Instead, I'd list it as "in preparation" if you intend to revise and submit elsewhere. Showing work in progress is a good thing and forward looking. Being rejected is less of a good thing, and also backward looking.

Do you think mentioning rejection with "weak accept" reviews from a good conference would always be a negative? My situation is that I have no publications in the area of the conference (theoretical CS) and I'm planning on applying for phd positions in it.

Certainly more negative than positive.

I agree. "In Prep" is the way to go, but be clear on what it is in prep for. "In preparation, to be submitted to X CONFERENCE, YEAR". Listing an "almost, but rejected" on your CV gives you nothing. Listing the possibility of a good acceptance shows what your are actively working on and that you are familiar with the field. You aren't even a PhD student yet, you aren't expected to have many, or even any, publications.

Scores alone without the associated reviews have only little informative value, since the final decision usually does not depend on a threshold, but on a discussion between PC members. Maybe the reviewers who gave a positive score were "informed outsiders", whereas the most expert reviewer saw a major flaw and fought against the paper's acceptance? From just looking at the scores, we can't know. Therefore, I would be skeptical if I was reading your CV and saw this entry.

You should not.  CVs are for factual information.  Review scores are opinions, not facts.


text:
Associate adjunct professor to Assistant adjunct professor in USA
Is it possible that an Associate adjunct professor becomes  assistant adjunct professor in USA university within same department of that university?

This is likely much more common than for non-adjuncts. The protections for adjuncts are pretty weak generally. However, there are situations in which adjuncts are unionized and then the union rules would apply.
Also, the typical adjunct position is a fixed term contract that might be renewed or not. The nominal rank would be part of the contract.
But possible? Certainly. Not common, though.


text:
Highlights in springer journal
I have submitted a paper in springer journal which stated in the instructions for author to provide highlights in supplementary material. I forgot to provide at the time of submission and 3 days have now passed. If I email highlights to the journal now, I fear they could say my submission as inappropriate for the journal  as it is in admin processing stage. Is submitting highlights really essential for successful publication? What can be the consequences if I don't submit highlights now.
Moreover, the journal says in instructions to send highlights in 3 page PPT. Does it mean 3 slides of powerpoint only?

Generally speaking, following the submission instructions is essential for successful publication.

Good news—the highlights are not so important that their absence will make a big difference to whether your paper goes out for review. Just wait and see what happens next. If the editor likes the work, they will request you add the highlights at a future revision stage. All that said, it is generally good to follow their instructions.


text:
Associate Professor to Assistant Professor
Is it possible that an associate professor in one university be designated as assistant professor after a year in the same university? What could be the consequences of it?

Within one university this would be a demotion so it is possible but rare, and could happen if the appointment and ensuing titles were given by courtesy, i.e. the appointment is not a regular full-time appointment.  Rank associated with this courtesy appointment might then be tied to some specific commitments.
I’ve never seen this happen for a regular position: I would guess that such demotion of a regular faculty member would lead to dismissal or resignation.  For courtesy appointments my experience is that these are either renewed or not, but I know of one place where such a “demotion” is technically possible.

Caveat: This is a view from the US. In other countries with different traditions things may differ.
I think that would be rare. It might be possible (unlikely) if the person changed fields and departments and needed to start over. I've never heard any instance of it. An associate professor in the US has tenure. An assistant does not.
In order for such a thing to work the person would have to give up tenure, which would be very unlikely. There can hardly be any incentive to do so, other than a change of field/department.
If it were forced, the consequences would likely be a lawsuit as it is a civil, not criminal matter. If it were by mutual consent then there are no consequences.
But switching universities is a different matter. It is possible to give up tenure and the rank of associate professor at one place and become an untenured assistant professor at another. But the incentives would need to be pretty strong for a person to want to do this. More commonly a switch would retain the rank but with a probationary period built in, normally a small number of years, before tenure is granted.

Additional caveat. There are a few places in the US that do not have a system of tenure at all. People normally serve on multi year contracts that don't automatically renew. In such a place pretty much anything is possible and there are few consequences other than higher turnover. See, for example: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED424814

To be clear, the incentives for giving up tenure when moving to another university are usually that the new university is substantially better than the old one. This might convince someone that going back from Associate to Assistant Prof is a worthwhile move.

Since pretty much every school's faculty negotiates their own system, the caveats never stop. I think there are more than a few schools that have a non tenure-track system of ranks alongside the tenure track, I'd presume to allow them to pay better salaries to untenured faculty.

Tenure and promotion are distinct processes at several US universities, including my own, at which one is eligible for promotion to associate professor the year before one is eligible to apply for tenure.  (US academia even contains instances, albeit fewer, of tenured assistant professors.)  Nevertheless I agree with "I think that would be rare."


text:
Rejected journal paper for submission as a book chapter
My paper is not accepted in journal. I contacted other journals as well, but they considered it out of scope for their journal. I want to now submit it as a book chapter in springer or IEEE. Please tell if it is possible or not? Is publishing a paper as a book chapter equivalent to publishing in an impact factor journal? I want to acquire scholarship in Australian  university.

What is possible can only be answered by the book's editor. I doubt that many would consider it equivalent to journal publishing, but it would depend on the book and the process. If it has the same review mechanism, then it would have greater value than otherwise. But you need to ask the editor.

This won't work. Research papers aren't published in books.
When papers are published in books - so-called review volumes - they are usually by invitation only. The editor will contact the people who he/she thinks are able to contribute. They aren't research papers either; they're usually reviews.
You're probably best off talking to your supervisor about what to do next. It's unlikely that there are no other journals that will consider your paper; you just have to find them.

"Research papers aren't published in books." This depends entirely on the field. In philosophy, for example, research papers are often published in collected volumes.


text:
Would this work be publishable in a journal of physical philosophy?
Background
So I can derive the relative maxwell distribution (selecting 2 random particles what is the probability they have a particular relative velocity) from relative variables (relative position, relative momentum, etc). My friends have told me since in some sense a rederivation of the Maxwell distribution it probably isn't publishable in a physics journal.
Given how this plays a role in the discussion of Leibniz's idea against absolutes
I was wondering if perhaps this could be published in a physical philosophy journal? (Also I'm not sure how me not being currently in academia will affect things).
Question
Is this manuscript publishable in a journal of physical philosophy? (Any recommendations will help)

This site is not the right place to evaluate the publishability of individual works because this requires subject knowledge and a strong familiarity with your work. However, please have a look on the [tag:independent-researcher] tag regarding on how to proceed with publishing, in particular When submitting a research paper as an independent researcher, is it advisable to have a professor look at it first?. In short: You probably want to find some expert on the field to assess publishability and mentor you along the publishing process.

Just like this? Unlikely. You would have to ground it in the philosophy of physics and explain why you are doing something that is new and why it is relevant to a wider discussion in the history and philosophy of science. Both Maxwell and Leibniz are subjects of VERY active, long-term and rigorous scholarship.  You would need to do considerable background reading to understand where your work fitted into the wider picture of contemporary scholarship, what problem you were trying to address, and why it was (genuinely) new compared to all the existing papers out there.


text:
Is academia a fair playing ground?
Is academia is a fair playing ground?
I was talking to a friend who made this point.
Unless one is from an elite institution it is considerably much more difficult to have an impact with your ideas. The example he gave was of inflation. Before Alan Guth the same idea was published by a Russian scientist and he failed to have an impact.
The example he gave was of 1979. Is he correct? Have things improved since then or does academic elitism of this sort prevail to this extent?

what's the metric to judge "fairness"?

I think even one example of a the same idea being published by 2 people and the one belonging from an elite institution having a deeper impact is a rare but sufficient metric for (un)fairness

I am not familiar with the exact case you presented, but in my opinion, the effort of pre-publishing and post-publishing paper have a massive impact on the idea itself being recognized. Do we know whether in the case you shared that they exert comparable work? There are many other factor than just having an "idea".

I have observed a lot of preferential treatment given to young scholars based on their institution and advisor. I think it’s very common.

"Is academia a fair playing ground?" Unfortunately, it is not. However, the most concerning aspect of this is the way it is presented to young students without acknowledging its shortcomings.

@Yacine that's why I asked for a metric of "fairness". Judging everything in ideal definition "fairness" simply doesn't exist in any field of life.

In general, your question applies to the world in general.  The higher your starting point, the more likely your 'success'.  It is 'easier' to get into elite schools if you have been tutored since you are born.  This means you must have come from a family with resources.

There are certainly Matthew effects ("the rich get richer") at play in academia.

Life is in general not fair but academia is still much fairer than industry

@lordy in which sense? the industry may be unfair towards the society/environment at large, academia is unfair to its own members (for the privilege of few lucky academicians)

Related discussion: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/188805/40589

Actually, no. Academia isn't "fair". Actually, though, life isn't fair either. But you make of it what you can and find ways to success on your own terms.
If you feel that you need to be at the very top of the heap you will most probably be disappointed. Einstein didn't do relativity to be seen as the smartest person around. He did it to learn something about the world as it is.
Yes, graduates of top schools have an advantage in some ways, but, then, many of them had advantages from birth. Some of them had advantages thrust upon them. Some achieved advantages on their own.
But that doesn't make you a lesser being if you don't have those advantages.
One of the things I learned in my modest academic career was that I was about as smart as the superstars that I heard speak at conferences and that I'd had many of the same ideas they were expressing. They had better opportunities to develop those ideas and get them into print and into conferences, but I didn't treat that as a problem. Instead it encouraged me to keep thinking "deep thoughts" as best I could.
If you get frustrated because someone else gets credit for something that you also did then you will be, well, frustrated. If they haven't actually plagiarized you then there is really no solvable issue. The world ain't perfect and we would probably all be miserable if it were.
OTOH, if you discover prior work done on some important topic where credit is due but not given, then it is good to bring it to the fore. Not, specifically, for the credit, but for the betterment of our understanding of the world.
And, lots of great work is done by people not at or from top institutions. It isn't a closed society. One of the common academic jokes is that there is no one dumber than a C student from Yale.

"They had better opportunities to develop those ideas and get them into print and into conferences" This. I had this thought yesterday but I do not have the capability to put this into the words like you did. Which is probably the core to the answer of this question.


text:
Grade changes with auto grader
If I use an auto-grading script and allow students to see their would-be grade based on the auto-grader, is it wrong to change their grades after the due date if I decide to change the auto-grader? I'm curious what others think because on the one hand students could go back and change their submissions as many times as they liked prior to the deadline, and many students took advantage of this to do as well as possible. Now that I've changed the script many students now have a zero (including a few who previously scored perfectly). On the other hand, the issue that these students had was a result of not following an instruction I gave out, which I overlooked while writing the original auto-grader. So is it wrong to change the grades or am I justified?

How did a change in the script take some people from 100% to 0%?

Fwiw in my classes the autograder only ran about 20 test cases, and provided immediate feedback. But once the assignment closed, it ran 100+ cases. So students get feedback during the assignment, but are also inventivized to check their work even after hitting 100% in the live autograder. I still remember one of my missed full test cases for Virtual Monopoly - my submission did not correctly handle a chance card that moved you backwards past Go.

You said students were "incentivized to check their work even after hitting 100%".  Why is this the case?  Did students know that there was going to be a more thorough autograder after the fact?  My reading of the problem is that you implied that the autograded result from before the deadline was the grade that the student would receive.

The first rule of grading is "Students should not suffer from instructors' mistakes."

@MooseBoys yes, this is how my school did it, as well. There were "public tests" that everyone could see and test as many times as they like against the software, "private tests" that you could only test a certain number of times per day (encouraging students to start the project early), and "secret tests" that you wouldn't be able to see until after the assignment was closed. However, the instructors made this extremely clear to students from Day 1, which does not seem to be the case with OP's situation. Huge difference.

The error in the autograder is your mistake: grade with both versions, and give the student the highest marks awarded by either grader. This prevents students who followed the guidance of the (bugged) autograder from being disadvantaged by your mistake, while rewarding students who got the correct answer(s) in spite of your mistake.

Even in the scenario described by MooseBoys, high incidences of jumping from 100% to 0% are likely to indicate a flaw in the test design of the public auto-grader.  If the public auto-grader's test score is not correlated with the private auto-grader's test score, what's the point of the auto-grader?

How easy is it for students in your class to ask questions about the assignment? In many of my classes, the instructor would provide some sort of Q&A where questions could be posted and either other students or the instructor could answer, and often the first 4 or 5 days after a spec is posted, several "What does this point of the spec mean" or "This program is reacting differently than this part of the spec suggests" get posted so that typos, bugs and unclear instructions get cleared up. It helped avoid the type of situation you are describing in the first place.

I changed the compiler used (students submit the .c file and the auto grader compiles it) and with the new compiler a parse error occurs if any declarations are made after any non-declaration statement(s), so some students' code no longer compiles. I later realized I should've used this compiler, as was specified for students to use while compiling their own code in the handout. Some students only used the gcc compiler with a makefile we provided and not the separate compiler we provided them with.

@forty_tw0 So, in other words, the jump from 100% to 0% is a result of your tool's output, rather than any actual lack of topic mastery - while they didn't use exactly the tool you supplied in the spec, they did use the tool you supplied as part of the submission (and they are using a valid C compiler - declarations being required at the top of a given block scope were last in the C89 standard)

Forcing C89 all declarations at the top of the function (or scope) isn't even a good idea, IMO.  Modern C and C++ style is to declare + initialize vars when they're used.  The only reason to use C89 style is compatibility with crappy old compilers, which becomes less and less relevant as we get farther away from C99 being new.  It might be justifiable to take off a couple marks for not following the instructions, but definitely not a 0 for a working C99 or GNU C program.

If any student feels disadvantaged by this, then you will have an uproar and complaints to administration. You describe a system in which they depended on the actual thing you built not some "instruction" you gave.
I would guess that you are stuck with the thing for this group of students, both practically and ethically. Otherwise grading will seem chaotic and unfair to them. Your reputation might suffer both with them and with your boss.
This sounds more to me like a case of releasing untested or insufficiently tested software.
One way out would be to void the results of the autogravder for anyone disadvantaged and give them one additional attempt to submit. But that could also be a problem because of time constraints on other things in your course and in their other courses.
Live and learn. But first, be fair.

Totally agreed: ++1. Never let a software dictate how you give out marks, unless the students had the opportunity to gauge themselves against it (which they have). Changing this after the fact is pulling the rug under them.

I would add as an addendum that if you are transparent about the fact that you made a mistake and you give students the chance to amend their submissions against your amended autograder, that would probably be okay.
I majored in comp sci, and we had autograders for some small coding assignments. mistakes happen. given the ambiguity of instructor's word versus auto-graded score, you really cannot fault them for going by what the autograder told them and if you decide to retroactively change the standard, it's only fair to let them retroactively redo the assignment.

And do tell the students about it. "There was a bug in the autograder. While your grades stand, it didn't account for XYZ. Therefore XYZ will be in an upcoming test instead."

"With a sufficient number of users of an API, it does not matter what you promise in the contract: all observable behaviors of your system will be depended on by somebody."

Now that I've changed the script many students now have a zero (including a few who previously scored perfectly).
... because on the one hand students could go back and change their submissions as many times as they liked prior to the deadline

I don't see how (2) matters here.
Here's what's effectively happening here: If I was in your class, I submitted an assignment, and you told me that it's perfect, I obviously wouldn't revise it later. You can't at the last moment decide that you didn't do the right marking and give me a zero. That's not how it works. If you'd told me beforehand that the work needed to be revised, I would have done so.
But you can't say that you're giving me a zero after telling me it's a perfect score, and after the deadline, and not allow me to revise it.
If you go through with changes to the auto-grader, your students will lose any respect they have for you. As will your colleagues, probably, since they'll think that you tried to take the easy way out by writing an auto-grader and then messed it all up.

The third paragraph should be bold and the only part of an answer needed. Sometimes I really wonder where common sense is.

@rahuldottech: You bolded the 4th paragraph.

@Brian RIP me, I should get more sleep. I've bolded both now, I think that should be okay.

But you can't say that you're giving me a zero after ... For the fairness to all of the students in the class, instructors have a right if not a standing obligation to fix any mistakes that they may make in grading an assignment as soon as those mistakes are discovered. An instructor is only obligated to allow revisions to regarded assignments when such a policy was stated in the syllabus or on the assignment itself. So, the OP may very well be able to do exactly what you stated he/she can't. But, even when he/she can, the more important question is should he/she?

@JeffreyJWeimer ah, yeah. When I said "can't", I guess what I meant was that "it isn't morally right to"

I guess whether it's strictly speaking "wrong" depends on how you communicated before (i.e., could a reasonable student interpret your grading script as part of the assignment spec, or the ground truth about how your instructions are to be understood?). However, pretty much independently of how you communicated, you will get a lot of backlash if you provided a grading script that students could use which gave them full points, and for the actual grading you change the script so that the same solution gets 0 points. Students will not be pleased, they will complain, and more likely than not they will have a case to do so.
In essence, think of it that way - if you manually "pre-graded" solutions and told groups that everything is ok, would you then consider it fair to change your mind and give the same groups 0 points? If not, is it so different if the grading is done through an automated script?
Let the grades stand for this year, and improve your grading toolkit for the next iteration.

My suggestion is to:

Give them a grade that matches the initial auto-grader.
Also tell them that there's something in the requirements that the auto-grader failed to check for.
As part of the next assignment, give them a task that builds upon the current one and can only be accomplished if they also meet that specific requirement you initially didn't check for.
Make sure that your updated auto-grader checks for every requirement you care about in their submissions, including the one you previously forgot to include and the ones that pertain to the new task.

Students who didn't follow that specific instruction will now have to update their solutions accordingly, before implementing the new task.
This approach doesn't punish anyone for failing to meet a requirement that your auto-grader didn't enforce and offers everyone the same opportunity to learn and to prove that they master the topic of the assignment.

You seem to have put yourself somewhat between a rock and a hard place.
The rock is when you keep the auto grader at its previous value. This approach disrespects your intent to have performance based on students doing exactly what you ask. The hard place is when you change the auto grader to the newer value. This approach portrays that your grading metrics are subject to last minute changes even when those changes are likely fully justified.
YOU made a mistake. Admit it and don't punish students for it. Do not change your auto-grader AFTER the grades have already been posted. This approach will leave a sour taste for everyone all around. Consider, do you really want to give the impression that students have to be in competition with each other for a better grade when you make a mistake?
When you really feel that you need to rebalance the grades in some way, offer an opportunity for extra credit on the assignment. But make that opportunity open only to students who did exactly what you asked in the first place.

If a specific test case was marked as passing or failing in the sample validation, it should still be marked the same in the final way that you grade. Ideally you would also have text explaining that the sample validation only tests SOME test cases and the final grade will be based on a much larger set of test cases or criteria, but I suspect it's a moot point in this specific case because it sounds like you changed the result on some of the existing tests. (However, you should include that discussion for future assignments.)
I'm using the term sample validation because your "auto-grader" that you give to your students should never be the full grading criteria. If nothing else, a student could turn any assignment into a map that takes the input from the auto-grader and returns the correct output by "magic", which would be acceptable if that was literally all of your grading criteria.

This is more of an extended comment on the effect of auto graders and especially problematic ones. First an example that is a bit extreme, just to make the main point.
Suppose I give a multiple choice test that is auto graded but also permits the student to take the exam multiple times and only submit one of them.
What does that emphasize? In fact, I doubt that it promotes learning at all, and emphasizes that the teacher wants answers even if at the expense of learning. The student is encouraged to just guess and re guess until they "get it right".
The problem is not just the obvious one, but the fact that such a system that seems to require work from the student provides no actually useful feedback to them on whether they have learned the proper lesson. Student work should always come with effective feedback, especially when the student has made errors. The feedback should attempt to give the student an idea about where their thinking when astray so that they can do better in the future.
I can't claim that the situation of the OP has these characteristics, so haven't made this a proper "answer" here. But it is something to think about for anyone wanting to incorporate such a thing into an educational system. Think beyond the obvious about what unintended consequences there might be. Do this prior to implementation, of course.
Education requires reinforcement and feedback. Make sure that your system provides both. And the feedback needs to be effective, not just "yes" or "no".

Agreed on retaking multiple-choice tests. But re: "Student work should always come with effective feedback", a counter-argument is that many instructors are users/proponents of the "check homework for completion only" policy, e.g.: https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/13423/what-are-the-minimum-criteria-when-checking-homework-for-completion-only


text:
If I wanted to quote a joke from a website in verbatim in a formal academic essay, how would I do that?
The assignment is to evaluate humor in movies. I am unsure how to incorporate a joke quote in there. Would it be classified as plagiarism?
Quote: “I have an Epi-Pen. My friend gave it to me as he was dying. It seemed very important to him that I have it.”

If I wanted to quote a joke from a website in verbatim in a formal academic essay, how would I do that?

The same way you use text taken verbatim from any source.


text:
Is it stupid to quit graduate program after one year?
As the title says, I'm thinking about quitting. Everyone I've spoken to seems to think this is a dumb idea (quitting after one year, at least), but I haven't talked to anyone who's actually gone through grad school and been in this position before. I've been having second thoughts about grad school since the month or two before I started, and now that I'm here I know it's not where I want to be at all. I'm in a philosophy PhD program, and I could take a master's degree and leave after two years in the program, but I'm deciding whether I even want to do that, or just leave after this year. I am a teaching assistant, which is why I can't quit before the end of the year.
Last year I had the chance to work abroad for a few months, and I could have prolonged that, but I went ahead and returned to my country because grad school was just what I had been expecting to do long-term. But now I really have no interest in getting an academic job. I don't really have a long-term plan now, I just want to go back abroad while I'm still young, become fluent in the language there, work on my own writing projects, and get broader experience. So that's the plan whether I stick around for a second year to get the master's or not. My classes are interesting enough (I still love philosophy), and the teaching is easy enough. So the issue isn't that I'm too stressed out because of the workload or anything. It's just because I know what I would rather be doing, so I feel stupid for being in this program at all. (When I say that, I always hear "If you weren't smart, you wouldn't have gotten into the program." Sure, but I've made a stupid decision starting this program.) So I am still anxious all the time, and for the last couple of weeks I've had an awful time trying to focus on anything. I'm working on getting help for that, but I'm still worried that being anxious and miserable while I'm here might keep me from learning as much as I otherwise could, even if I did stay.
So, my question is whether leaving after a year (rather than staying another for the MA) for reasons like these is a horrible idea, or how common it is. Since I don't plan on pursuing an academic job, the degree would just be a piece of paper; it's not like the philosophy MA is a hard requirement for anything else I plan to do (and it wouldn't be from one of the top ranked universities anyway), and I think the experience working abroad will be valuable in the long term too. I just really don't want to feel dumb and like I'm stuck in this program while I'm still young (in my early twenties), especially when I know what I would rather be doing.

Are you paying for this MA programme yourself (e.g. with student loans) or do you have a scholarship that pays for it? If you are about to walk away with debt but no degree, you should strongly consider sticking it out for the second year, especially if the issue isn't academic and you feel that you can continue to do well in your studies. Even if you are not going to be walking away with debt, consider staying on.
While you may feel that you do not need a master's now and that it is just a piece of paper, you can't quite predict where your future will bring you. You might find yourself in a position where a master's degree (any master's degree!) will allow you to progress in you career in a way that is vastly more beneficial than if you only have a BA. To go a bit sociological on you and to whip out the Pierre Bourdieu, you are proposing you bank on your embodied cultural capital and are wanting to forgo the objectified manifestation of it; you are wanting to head off into the world without the degree. Yet this world likes degrees and may not always believe in you when you don't have them. In 10 years time, when you are somewhere in life that you can't predict now, how would you feel if not having the master's holds you back?
If you stick it out one more year you will be, at most, in you mid twenties if not still in your early twenties. You will still be young. Mid twenties abroad is just as good as early twenties abroad, and one year is not very much time to wait. Everything is the same, nothing is going anywhere, you'll just have a master's degree when you get back to it.