text:
Invitation for a Manuscript Review
I have been invited to review a manuscript for a peer-reviewed journal. Actually, this is my first invitation and I am a bit confused whether I should accept or decline. The subject is in the field of experimental physics which is quite different from my research field which is computational physics. In addition, the subject is also different from my background. I really appreciate any advice on this matter and if anyone can guide me whether I should accept or not and why. Thanks a lot for your help and for your prompt reply.

If you don't feel like you are qualified to review it say so. It may be that the actual paper turns out to be closer to your own area of expertise after you read it carefully. Editors don't mind though being told that the person they sent a paper can't review it; when I've done that, I've generally a) explained why I can't and b) tried to recommend someone else who would be a good reviewer.

Is the journal an established journal you have heard or one you would publish in? I often get invitations to review of "spam" journals.

Yes, it is a well-established journal and I would publish in it.

I also work in computational physics and am regularly asked to review experimental papers on, e.g., materials that I have studied computationally. Before accepting these invitations I usually contact the editor saying that I can only comment on partial aspects of the paper (I can't comment for example on the experimental growth conditions of a material) and ask whether that's OK. They always say yes to a partial review. When in doubt, communicate with the editor.

As @RichardErickson says above - if you receive an unsolicited request for review as a junior researcher, and out of your field on top, there is often a predatory publisher behind it.

The Committee on Publication Ethics have a nice flowchart for this to walk you through what to consider when asked to review.

This answer is basically a link only answer. I was about to include the image of the Flowchart, but I am not sure of the license of the Flowchart. Do you know if it can be included in the answer to make it self contained?

@llrs one can see the licence by clicking the downward triangle next to "About this resource" on the linked page: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0.

@plannapus Great, I missed the arrow. I added then the image to the question for future readers

@llrs: The CC BY-NC-ND licence is incompatible with the CC BY-SA one used by Stack Exchange.

When I am asked to review a manuscript I ask myself three questions:

Do I have the time at the moment to do this?
Normally the invitation to review comes with a time limit. In my field this is typically months in the future but can be limited to weeks. If I have a big deadline or other personal commitment coming up I might pass over the review.
Am I qualified to do the review?
When you are asked to review a paper you are often shown the title and maybe abstract too. The job of a reviewer can be broadly thought of as trying to improve a paper. Even if you are inexperienced you might have other expertise which would add something. If the paper is too far away from your field it may take a very long time for you to read and understand which isn't good for you or the authors.
Am I interested in the paper?
Reviewing should be a two way street. In effect you are giving your time away for free! Normally there is an implicit understanding the others will give their time for free to read your work in the future so it all plays out fair. Having said that if you are giving your time away you might want to get more out of the task than simply paying your service. I normally interpret this question in a quite friendly way and have never turned down a review for this reason.

If you have answered yes to all three there is no harm in accepting. Your review is a recommendation that the editor may or may not listen too when making a final judgement. There will also be other reviewers. Reviewing isn't something you should take too seriously and should hopefully something you enjoy doing!

I think you should clarify your last sentence, as the tone is super-important and could be misinterpreted. As a spoken sentence, if you emphasized the word "too", the meaning would be "It's serious but don't go crazy about it"; if you didn't emphasize that word, the meaning would be more like "don't feel you need to take it seriously". I'm hoping you mean the first of these!

@tr1987 provides a good, general answer. Since you say that this is your first review, and another question of yours suggests you might be early in your PhD, I'd like to add a few points.

You can ask your advisor for advice.
Reviewing is a skill (maybe an art!), and who's better placed to help you get started? Now, there is some field dependence in what's considered acceptable. Asking about general advice in abstract terms should be fine in all fields, but in physics it's usually also OK to discuss specifics about the paper with others. E.g. the report submission form for the Physical Review journals asks whether you prepared the review on your own, or if you discussed the papers with others. (For other journals, asking the editor for permission first would be the safe approach.) Since you're on the fence, asking your advisor whether they think you're qualified to review this particular paper might be useful.
Read the referral from the editor carefully, and have a quick first read of the paper.
Often you're qualified to review part of a manuscript, but not all of it. The editor might know this already, and is maybe looking for a review focusing on those specific parts. Other times they might not be sure what your expertise is (relatively likely if it's your first review), and you should set this straight right away: "I can handle this part, but other reviewers would need to address XYZ". For example, an experimental paper might contain some computations as supporting evidence, which you might be qualified to review, while other reviewers might focus more on the experimental details.
Find connections.
Finally, it's quite common to be asked to review papers about related topics. E.g. as a computationalist, you might be asked to review experiments on systems related to ones you've studied previously, or theoretical papers using methods related to what you've used yourself. If the topic is completely unrelated to your past work, chances are that you're not qualified. However, sometimes system/method A and B have more in common than the names suggest. Learning about such connections and getting a broader view is a very valuable aspect to reviewing.


text:
Got negative teaching reviews, can this affect my prospects for postdoc
I’m a sociology PhD student in the EU. Back in September, I started teaching a recitation class. My MSc is from another institution (which is also in another country – I moved from Finland to France...) and so I taught the recitation more or less how I was used to from my previous institution (with permission from the professor in charge – I didn’t do anything without consulting her first).
The problem began when I gave the students some bonus questions which could earn some extra points. As the semester ended I discovered how not only most students did not solve the bonus, but that they also expected me to give the extra points regardless (to which I refused).
To keep a long story short, they complained to everyone in our department about it, tarnishing me whenever they could – it even got to the head of department, who rebuffed them. Only that it didn’t end there. In the following semester I worked as a grader in a course with the same students, and they constantly appealed my grades – the reason, as I later learnt, is because a group of them decided to do whatever it takes to get me fired (their words, not mine). These bad
teaching reviews and student complaints already cost me a job next semester. Also, most of these students are likely to still be undergrads in two-years’ time, so I can’t just wait it out until they
graduate.
I have several questions:

Is there anything you suggest I can do to get better teaching reviews? At the moment, I have no idea how to do it (and I doubt it’s even possible).

Theoretically, I can take a semester off with no teaching.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind skipping it altogether for the rest of my PhD – but I was told that if I’m to continue for a postdoc (let alone a permanent position), positive teaching reviews are a must have. Is it true?

From my experience applying for postdocs in Europe, they don't ask for teaching letters or teaching evaluations. But they do in the U.S.

Interesting question; I suggested some minor edits for clarity. With respect to question #1: is your question how to teach generally, or how to rebuild your relationship with the students who hate you? Is there no possibility to teach different students (i.e., in a different year?). For question #2: what is your field (generally speaking)? And finally, I have a hard time believing that their hatred is based only on the extra credit incident; is it possible there were other issues (i.e., recitations they did not find helpful)?

Do you have any insight on how the positions got so entrenched? How did it escalate from a dispute in grading bonus questions to trying to get you fired?

I assume you are asking about a post-doc at the same institution and a possible long term position there. If not, please clarify.

Was the recitation section teaching your first time teaching one? Also, did you give students anything, in writing or via web site, indicating your expectations for them and you?

@Mehta I think it would be also quite unusual to ask for teaching letters/evaluations in my field in the US (neuroscience). It might be more common if the position included a teaching responsibility (math is a field where this seems more common) or was education-related, but not for post docs that are primarily research positions.

You create a document with all grading and assessment requirements, deadlines, all tasks (including potential bonus points) before the semester starts.

You discuss said document in class and upload/share the document to the course webpage, Facebook group, etc.

You stick to it.

Note that there will always be groups that dislike you. You cannot do much about it except treat them fairly and avoid them as much as possible (in later semesters).

Is there anything you suggest I can do to get better teaching reviews? At the moment, I have no idea how to do it (and I doubt it’s even possible).

You have already stated that you know what went wrong initially, and you have described the problem in detail, so obviously yes, there is something you can do to get better reviews in future.  Take the thing you described that went wrong in the first instance and reflect on how to make it better; either decide it is already okay and the student complaints were baseless, or change it so that it works better, or remove it from the assessment.
Regarding the follow-up actions of these students to tarnish you and get you fired, assuming your description is accurate, that is an incredibly immature and nasty reaction to a disagreement over assessment, and any halfway decent department would not take their childish tantrum seriously.  If your description of the matter is accurate, the fact that you lost a teaching job over it is poor form, and you should consider whether you want to continue in a department that is that craven.  (And of course, if your description is incomplete then you should also reflect here; why did a disagreement over assessment grading escalate into a campaign to get you fired?  Is there anything you did wrong that you are not including?)
My advice here would be to stay calm, self-reflect objectively on your own teaching work and the problems that arose, and make any required changes.  If you are having ongoing trouble with a particular group of students then you should seek teaching work in courses that are not at their year level (e.g., keep teaching the same year level courses after they have moved on to higher level courses).

Theoretically, I can take a semester off with no teaching. Personally, I wouldn’t mind skipping it altogether for the rest of my PhD – but I was told that if I’m to continue for a postdoc (let alone a permanent position), positive teaching reviews are a must have. Is it true?

Teaching experience is useful for any academic position that has a teaching component, but the expectations on fledgling academics are usually not high.  Admissions committee members differ in the weight they give to teaching, and the expectations they have in terms of quality, trajectory, etc., so any advice here will be speculative.  It is important who told you about the necessity for positive teaching reviews and what basis they have for the claim --- was it some random student who has no idea what they are talking about, or was it the Head of Department telling you the admission requirements (or something in between)?
In regard to your title question, ceteris paribus, bad teaching reviews are worse than good teaching reviews, and if you only have bad reviews then that could negatively affect an application for any position with a teaching component, since it shows that you have never had a successful teaching experience.  As general advice, I recommend you get back on the horse if you can.  Try to get some teaching work in a course that does not include the problematic students, and have another go at refining your teaching.  Treat it like you would with any academic skill --- instead of avoidance, get back in the saddle and practice.  Many academics will not expect you to get good teaching reviews early in your training, but they will expect you to confront problems and work on improving weaknesses.

For the topline question, yes, it can effect the chances for some, but not all, postdocs. It depends on whether the postdoc is exclusively research focused or broader. For many postdocs, there is no teaching expectation. Moreover, it would be expected that almost all candidates are novices when it comes to teaching.
But, it is very (extremely?) unlikely that your student teaching reviews would be shared with any potential employer. Your teaching might be mentioned in a letter of recommendation if the job had a strong teaching focus. But you have some influence over that.
If you are "hated" by a group of students, but the head is aware of the issue and is supportive of you, then you probably have no issues, though I don't understand why you "lost" a teaching slot.
As to the broader question of getting better reviews, I'd rather suggest that you do a couple of things to improve your teaching. One is to visit the courses/sections of one or more other students or (preferably) experienced faculty and focus on how those courses are run and the interactions with students.
Another is to ask a skilled instructor to visit your class occasionally and give you some informal feedback afterwards. In some places this is actually a formal requirement. But they might notice things that you don't. If you do well in their eyes they might be convinced to write a supportive note to the head.
One last thought is that you discuss the issue (and that group of students) with others in your same circumstances. Perhaps their experience is similar and perhaps they might have some advice.
I was once in a vaguely similar situation, but earned the support of the dean who supported my efforts to improve student learning. The students in question had become a bit lazy through lack of challenge. The dean looked over my shoulder for a bit before giving full support, as is natural.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
My recent paper on arxiv does not appear in my google scholar account?
I posted a paper on arXiv recently. But it doesn't appear on my Google scholar account. Although it has appeared on the Google scholar accounts of my co-authors. How can I link my Google scholar account to my arXiv account or should I add this paper to my scholar account manually? Thanks.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80698/published-paper-not-showing-up-on-google-scholar Duplicate?

The linked question is related, but not exactly the same -- in that question, the problem is an article showing up on your profile but not listing the right venue, whereas here, the problem is that the the article does not show up on your profile at all.
In your case, the solution is much simpler: just go to your profile, click the + button, "add articles", and search the article and select it. You don't have to upload a manual citation; Google scholar allows you to associate any article with your name that you want.

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


text:
Is it self plagirism if i use the same assignent twice in the same course?
The final essay of my course is asking a question I extensively answered in an essay earlier in the same course. Rather than doing essentially the same assignment twice. Is it wrong to edit and expand on my previous assignment and hand that in?

You should probably ask your professor this question, and see what they suggest.

The more important question is whether this would be accepted by your professor. If you cite the earlier work it isn't plagiarism and you put the professor on notice about what you've done. But it would be much better (safer) to get permission first.
Whether it is technically self plagiarism or not depends a bit on whether you have, in some sense, published the earlier work. Probably you have, just by giving it to your professor. But even if it doesn't meet the technical definition, the professor could still penalize you for it.
And it isn't just the issue of copy/paste of the same words. Even paraphrasing without citation is considered plagiarism if the definition applies.
I'd guess the professor is already aware of the situation and will have a ready answer for you. They may want you to go deeper into the subject than in the first assignment.

I do not think the concept of "published" is relevant here. What's relevant is whether the learning outcomes are met if the student has already done the exercise elsewhere, or it is supposed to be some work providing skill in addition to previously existing skill proven with the previous iteration of the work. I agree with the "ask the professor" advice, though.

@CaptainEmacs, if I write something and keep it for myself, maybe share it privately with a few friends, but don't publish it in any way, there is no issue about self plagiarism if I just copy it later in to something that I do publish. Some sort of "publishing" is needed or else there is nothing to cite. So, the question becomes "What constitutes publishing?". As I suggest here, it has probably been "published" when used to fulfill an assignment. Quite different from just finding it unused in my desk drawer.

@CaptainEmacs, you can plagiarize the unpublished work of another person, but you can only self-plagiarize your published work. But the definition of "publish" can be situation dependent.

Of course, if it has never been used before, the student is free to use it. What I meant by "done the exercise" was to achieve a grade, corresponding to your use of the word "published".

I was not at all thinking of plagiarising here, of course. I find the term "self-plagiarising" also quite misleading, as strictly spoken it is not misappropriation of credit, but selling goods twice.

@CaptainEmacs, the question explicitly asks about self plagiarism.

My original comment did not refer to the term "self-plagiarism". You brought it up in your comment response to mine. I know that the term is used in the aforementioned meaning. Basically, all I am trying to say is that whether or not it is legitimate to recycle one's exercise depends on what the prof considers essential: 1. the ability to carry out the task (whether the ability is newly acquired or already established) or 2. being able to do a new task or carry out a known task in a new way.


text:
Contact Professor before applying for Phd scholarship?
I am applying for Phd. funded scholarship in Australia here is the link, in this link it is mention that you should contact professor before applying for the scholarship. I emailed him and his response was "There are selection criteria.  It would be worth responding to each of these as well as providing a CV".
My question is how can I provide proof about the selection criteria. Should I provide a cover later about that or just CV.

Contact Professor before applying for Phd scholarship? Yes, do. how can I provide proof about the selection criteria. Should I provide a cover later about that or just CV Yes, provide a covering letter.

do a google search for "address selection criteria" and look for guidance and examples. Doesn't have to be academic positions.

Actually, send three things. The cover letter is introductory and speaks about your desire and basic qualifications for working with that professor. It is a sort of a Statement of Purpose. Also send the CV. But the third document is one that specifically addresses, in order, each item in the stated selection criteria and how you meet that criterion or that you have little to no experience with it. Make it an honest statement, not just empty claims. Point to items in the CV as necessary.
It is probably expected that you meet the criteria in general, but also expected  that each candidate will meet each item differently


text:
Got caught for similar answers on an assignment
So recently my professor reported me and my colleague for cheating and reported both of us to the Board. We haven't heard from them yet, its been a week.
This was a class assignment for a masters course and it accounts for 15% of the grade. The plagiarism is about 30 - 35%.
Now, I've already apologised to the Prof saying that I had asked my colleague to help me because I was going to personal issues due to COVID as an international student. He has not replied to that email yet.
What can I expect next?
I'm really scared and I'm not sure what is going to happen. I'm already stressed about staying away from home during this crisis and now this.

How should this forum know what will happen? Maybe you will have to leave the university, maybe you fail the course. Maybe there are no consequences.

Have you learned something out of this incident? (sorry for acting like an a**, but it is important to.learn something from those kind of incidents).

Of course I have. Even if I'm not in the best state of mind to study, I should contact the professor first and let him know instead of asking someone else to help me solve it. No matter what, cheating is wrong.

So you did cheat. If you copied a third of the assignment from someone, then this is more than “asking for help”. You should’ve informed the lecturer about any personal difficulties instead of (frankly) copying someone else’s answers. In a fair world, the two of you can expect to get zero marks — at least for the 30% - 35% in question.

@Sensitive_Chapter: Okay, great. I am relieved. Sorry again

I'm voting to close this question, as (1) we cannot know how your professor will handle this, and (2) there are lots of other substantively-similar questions already on this site. As others have said, cheating on a single assignment (as a first offense) usually results in a zero grade for the assignment. Penalties could be stricter since you are in a master's program, however.

@cag51. I'm so sorry, I posted this because all the other questions have been for bachelor or diploma. Wasn't sure how this would work for a masters degree. Wanted to know what I can expect so that I'm better prepared to mentally handle this situation. I'm really worried about the consequences of this. In my weakness due to my stress, I committed a stupid mistake and I really don't know how this is all going to pan out.

Just relax, don't take it too hard. You cannot do much about it now anyways.


text:
Discussing the technical errors with referencing to unofficial experience
I would like to present and discuss the technical issues of used software, which crippled/damaged some of my final data during the data processing (Still I have a sufficient amount of data for the conclusion). However, I am not quite sure if I can discuss the technical issues in my thesis with user posts from software user forums. Of course, the same experience can support my evidence.
Is it possible?
Many thanks

I think this would be OK. Just explain it in the most academic style possible, clearly and concisely.
Maybe you can explain the problems in your own words, and explain how you have verified the information by your own experience. Then at the end state that some of these points were gathered from software forums (which you can cite) and you have verified that they are accurate yourself.

Thank you very much! Seems reasonabe!


text:
Discussing avoidable flaws in my work in a master's thesis
I am in the final stages of M.Sc. in bioinformatics and am currently writing my thesis. While I was writing I noticed that one of the datasets I used for a major part of my project is quite problematic and may have somewhat biased the results (if it matters, the data was obtained from a published paper. A postdoc working with me on the project had reviewed the paper and suggested that it would be appropriate for our work). I do not think this is very major bias, and I can give a concrete explanation as to the source of this bias, but still there is a bias.
I am considering of referring to all of this in my thesis as part of a broader discussion of the limitations of my work.
Knowing my thesis supervisor I suspect that his reaction will be something along the lines of "why did you use this dataset in the first place? You should have looked at the data before using it." In retrospect I wouldn't have used this dataset and yes, I should have looked at the data more carefully. However, at the time I was doing this I had no prior experience with this type of analysis, and therefore did not know what types of problems to watch out for (I was also put under continuous pressure from supervisor to produce results, which did not give me much time to ensure the quality of the data, but this is a different problem).
From my perspective, learning to identify and avoid such problems is a valuable part of my learning process, and I therefore consider it important to demonstrate this learning process in my thesis, but I don't think my supervisor will be appreciative of this, and I really fear backlash from his. To make things more complicated, we are currently writing a paper based on these results and I fear my supervisor will blame me for undermining the paper by using this dataset.
My questions therefore are:

Is it at all appropriate to use a master's thesis to demonstrate my learning process in such a way?
How do I balance between my desire to be honest and show what I have learned and between the harsh response I am likely to get?

Have you talked about it with the postdoc you are mentioning?

@YYY: Not yet. I'm not sure how much she will be able to help me with this but worth a try, thanks!

Well if she suggested the data set and it is your (plural) work, she should feel a bit concerned about this issue. It might even be that she noticed it and after some thoughts, came to the conclusion that it is not biased for some reasons. In any cases, I would definitely not play the total ignorant. The reaction of your supervisor might be even worse if they notice there is indeed a bias and think that either 1) you missed the point or 2) you tried to hide it.

"if it matters, the data was obtained from a published paper" -- I would say that it matters a great deal. Talk about the issue, but spin it as a strength of your research (it uncovered a bias in the existing literature -- which is one of the things that subsequent research is supposed to do) instead of a weakness that you need to be apologetic about. If anyone should feel apologetic, it should be the authors of that paper and the referees who didn't notice the problem. You should feel proud about that aspect of your work. I don't know your advisor, but I wouldn't be surprised if he is impressed by this rather than critical of it.

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


text:
My supervisor won't accept that I won't stay in the lab for a PhD
I have recently graduated a M.Sc. I have agreed with my supervisor that I will complete the work required in order to make my project publishable (we have agreed that this does not entail any additional analysis, only revisions of the manuscript, polishing some figures etc.) and another small project.
Despite the fact that I have made it clear to my supervisor that I am not interested in any further projects, he keeps offering my to stay in the lab for various projects.
Last week I have informed my supervisor that I have decided to take up a job unrelated to the lab.
The day after I received from him a text message offering me to stay in the lab and work on extension of my project in collaboration with another PI
I replied to him that I thank him for the offer but I that I prefer the job I have taken for personal reasons.
Today I have received an email from our collaborator, most probably written at the behest of my supervisor offering me a joint position with him and my supervisor on some expansion of my masters' project.
While this offer is legitimate in itself, I find it disturbing that my supervisor won't respect my will not do any further work with him.
I have to emphasize that what I have described above was just the latest in a long series of such attempts to persuade me to stay. Typically I say something along the line of "I don't want to stay in the lab because I won't to focus on X (X being some topic/method outside our group's speciality)" to which my supervisor will reply by either trying to persuade me that focusing on X is a bad idea or how can stay with him and still do X.
I also think I have good reasons not to want further work with my supervisor. Namely:

Our areas of interest are fairly different. Based on my experience during my masters' I don't think my supervisor has neither the will nor the required background to guide me in the approaches and methods I am interested in and is unlikely to to allow me to pursue these directions on my own.
We appear to have differences in our basic approach to what constitutes a good scientific work.
We do not have a good inter-personal communication which means that our differences leads to a constant conflict between us.
All of the above causes me considerable emotional distress. In fact, I feel that I have extended as much energy during my masters' on dealing with these emotional issues then on tackling the scientific problem at hand.
Since I know that other students of my supervisor have a much better communication with him, and since I had a very good experience with another PI I am working with, I think that problem doesn't lie squarely with neither of us.

I have started attending psychological consultation a few months ago and am trying to work out my emotions from my side, but I do not think staying in an environment that causes me this kind of distress is a good idea.
My goal is to find a way to convey to my supervisor the message that I am not willing to accept any more offers of this kind from him. I do not want to discuss my reasons with him because he will again attempt to persuade me why I'm wrong, and I definitely don't want to discuss my emotional issue with him.
Any advice on how to do that will be most appreciated.

"I am happy to polish the paper for publication as agreed; however, unfortunately, I cannot accept your generous offer. I have already accepted the other job and committed to it." - repeat and rinse. You agreed to the publication, which is fair enough. It is not your job to satisfy your supervisor's wishes outside of that.
You are perfectly entitled to choose your future. Don't feel bad about that. You have your reasons to leave. Trust your gut feeling and accept you won't change your opinion. Once you accept that you won't change your opinion, it will be easier for you also radiate to your (former) supervisor that you won't change it.
Do not budge. Repeat your formulation. Only when they realise that you are not going to change your tune, they will relent.

+1 for "Once you accept that you won't change your opinion, it will be easier for you also radiate to your (former) supervisor that you won't change it." I'm definitely going to implement this advice,

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


text:
How does someone who holds two doctoral degrees sign their name?
If just received second doctoral degree, how does one sign their name at the end of an email or other correspondence.  Would it just stay Dr. So and So or be Dr. Dr. So and So?

I know this might sound crazy to some but I've seen it so that's why I'm asking.

This may be more dependent on local culture and etiquette than global academic norms.  I believe in Germany, you would use "Dr. Dr." (or "DDr"), but in the US this would look silly.  Either way it isn't a matter of  ethics; getting it wrong wouldn't be unethical, just possibly embarrassing.

I always wondered why anyone would get a second PhD.

Sometimes when you do part of your PhD abroad, you can be awarded two PhDs. That's the only situation I believe this can be done. Otherwise the person is just crazy. See this awesome answer: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17232/is-doing-two-phds-a-good-path/17245#17245

@CW - Do you mean that you're asking because you think there might be a standard formula, and you're curious if someone's signature is reasonably close to that?

I've heard that in Germany it is iterated. So if you just accidentally say "dr. Stein" you may be corrected "dr. dr., please". ( No you probably wouldn't, but I couldn't help myself ).

If you call yourself "Dr. Dr. so and so" I will automatically assume that one title is bought and the other is given to you because you have too much money.

@Mark: From your comment, I automatically assume that you don't have much awareness or emphathy for different cultures around the world.

@All that write that this is so ridiculous: Keep in mind that companies may have policies about their employees having to state all titles when writing to customers.

Nobody made the obvious pun? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradoxes_of_Mr._Pond#When_Doctors_Agree

(Since this post just popped up on the front page.) @NateEldredge: In defence of the Germans I'll add that some of them also think that "Dr. Dr." looks silly... ;-)

Depending on the country and local department customs, signing Dr. So and So would be already ridiculous enough. But I don't know of any situation where signing Dr. Dr. So and So wouldn't come out as a show off. I particularly would think very poorly of someone signing their name in this way.

What is ridiculous about calling oneself "Dr. Biderman"?

I wouldn't "think poorly of you", but I share the sentiment that in everyday affairs, calling oneself "Dr. XXX" implies an MD, not Ph.D. Personally, a Ph.D. holder preferring to be called "Dr.XXX" comes off as someone seeking authority or credibility. There is a nice (and quite topical) discussion of this in this recent article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/16/sebastian-gorka-likes-to-be-called-dr-gorka-he-gets-his-way-only-in-conservative-media/?utm_term=.9160d9607dd6

@StellaBiderman It may sound cool to think of your name with a prefix "Dr." attached to it. But in real life, people just don't call you that (at least in most circles I'm aware), unless you are in medicine. Signing your name like that would imply that that's how you think people should be calling you, which sounds a bit show off.

If I read "Dr. Dr. Name", I'd think it's a typo

@user23658 I agree that in spoken word and outside the context of your field, asking to be called "Dr. XXX" is a bit attention seeking, but I see no issue with using that when, for example I register for something. To be fair, it is slightly annoying when I am not given the option and I have to choose "Mr. XXX".

@o4tlulz Agree completely.

There are huge regional differences. For example, I had to fight my landlord to remove my Dr. title from my home door. In some countries (Germany or Austria) academic titles are hugely important and used in contexts that @ShakeBaby would consider ridiculous.

@MaartenBuis Agreed. As a small child in England, I was taught to address the envelope to "Dr. and Mrs E. W. Shanahan" even though the letter inside began "Dear Grannie and Grandpa".

@PatriciaShanahan To be fair, the postman probably wouldn't have known where to deliver it if you'd written "Grannie and Grandpa" on the envelope.

@sgf My grandma put her nicknames on her mailbox so the post could find it when we sent her mail

Honestly, I'm just thrilled that I can use "Dr" to avoid the whole "Ms" "Mrs" confusion, the female honorifics always confused and slightly annoyed me. And I don't think it's ridiculous to ask to be addressed as "Dr" instead of "Ms/Mrs" (in situations where people would already try calling me Ms Lastname by default).

The usual form in Austria would be "DDr.", which you see quite often, especially on lawyer's plates. After that, it would be DDDr. (and probably so on).
Remark : He is at least DDDDDDr.: https://www.nachrichten.at/oberoesterreich/Das-ist-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Norbert-Heinel;art4,843952

That page says he writes Dr. mult., for the sake of conciseness, by the way.

In Germany I have seen the title dres. (for doctores) used for multiple PhDs.

That seems silly, to say the least. One person isn't several doctors, even if they hold multiple PhDs.

As one with two earned PhDs in the US, people refer to me in writing professionally as Dr. MYName. When living my name in any biographical information, it is listed as My Name, PhD, PhD the first time it is written. After that, it is just Dr. MyName. However, if persons are being listed by the title first, it is written as Dr. Dr. Myname following conventions in Germany, Austria, and parts of Africa.
Those who are offended are those too lazy, ignorant, or stupid to earn one PhD, let alone two.
Signed,
Dr. Dr.

For real life examples, search for "Kieferorthopäde" (that is, orthodontist) and "Dr. Dr." or for "Kieferorthopäde" and "DDr.". In Germany and Austria, orthodontists typically study both medicine and dentistry, and some of them do a doctorate in both disciplines. Germans seem to prefer "Dr. Dr.", whereas "DDr" occurs primarily in Austria.

(Other countries may have other customs, but this has been my experience)
In most circumstances, no one bothers writing "Dr." as a prefix anyway! Informal situations in general tend to drop prefixes and suffixes, especially honorifics and degrees. I guarantee you that Paul McCartney doesn't make dinner reservations as "Sir Paul McCartney". Most people with doctorate degrees don't introduce themselves as "Doctor So-and-so", similarly to how people don't think of themselves as "Bob Bobrick Junior". In formal situations, this is obviously different, but writing a letter to my friend, I wouldn't sign as "The Honorable user45266" if I were a courtroom judge.
Assuming that one is in a situation where convention would dictate a person with a doctorate to sign with the title, a person with two such degrees should probably just sign as "Dr. So-and-so". If mentioning both degrees should happen to be importance, "So-and-so, Doctor of ________ and _______" should suffice.

Indeed, in English-speaking countries, proper protocol is never to use any title for oneself.

no one bothers writing "Dr." as a prefix anyway! ... Ph.D.s don't but of course others may: M.D. or D.D.S., etc.  Long ago one of my colleagues (a Ph.D. of course) remarked that the only time he called himself "Dr. Friedman" is when he made a reservation at a restaurant.

So in which countries has this been your experience? UK?

I just wrote a letter of application responding to a academic job offer. It was addressed to "Prof. Bigname". How else would I sign it other than "Dr. Myname"? And, in that situation, if I had two doctorates (as a recent hire in our lab does... I know... I also think he's crazy)... well, I'd want to know how to properly sign with a title without specifying the disciplines (as I wouldn't do that either in my signature if I had a single degree). I also sign all the letters to utility providers, banks, credit houses, etc, with my title - they just treat me so much better.

@GEdgar: This reminds me of a story sometime ago when a relative was in hospital. I made a phone call there, and the staff was extremely unfriendly. So the second time I called, I introduced myself as "Dr. Glück" - the change in their tone was quite amusing...


text:
Does publishing in a journal and getting cited constitute a "contribution to knowledge"?
If I publish my research in a respected journal and I get cited a few times in less than a year (cited as part of the literature review and background of my field), does this mean my work is a "contribution to knowledge"?

In what context? Who is going to evaluate this (these might be better people to ask)? Also, I am not sure why being cited is particularly relevant. Once it is published (assuming it is a piece of research), it has contributed to knowledge.

in the context of a phd viva. if the examiner question if the work is a contribution to knowledge or not

What journal?
In principle, regardless of citations, anything accepted to be published in a journal should be a contribution of knowledge. There are some exceptions to this, like survey papers, but for the most part publications should have a novel contribution.
The citations help measure the impact of the contribution i.e. how relevant or useful it is in the field. But an uncited, published paper should still contribute knowledge.
And, of course, if it was published in a predatory journal, it may not contain a knowledge contribution. Citations make this less likely, unless the citing papers themselves are also in predato journals.


text:
How do I answer questions about my long term goals in PhD interviews?
So I'm planning to answer with a mixture of apply for postdoc or go to work in a industry in this field
some answers have recommended to answer what will we get out of you with amongst other things, publications - is this not too cocky to answer with publications?
Also is it to cocky to say I am hoping it will open up new lines of inquiry? or not?
thanks

They want to hear that you are going to pursue a career in research.  Assure them that you want to do research for the rest of eternity and they will be satisfied.

What are the downvotes for? I did not upvoted because IMHO, the question is not particularly well-phrased or well-formatted. However, it appears to be fully on-topic, relevant, and objectively answerable, in about the same way as questions about typical interview questions for industry positions are acceptable on [workplace.se].

I am thinking that the downvoting is people are interpretting the question as to be asking how to game the system or otherwise be dishonest, answering in a contrived way rather than actually saying what your personal long term goals are, why you want a PhD, and what you believe you have to contribute. I think Pete's answer makes it clear that this is actually quite a useful question, as lots of people wonder how best to "say the right thing" at least partly due to culture (this being so typical in job interviews), which is counter-productive for everyone involved.

I imagine the downvotes are because the question is lacking proper grammar and is quite hard to read.

It sounds like you are trying to game the system by figuring out in advance what answer the interviewers want to hear.  From the perspective of someone who was first a student, then a faculty member and is now the coordinator of my department's PhD program, I have to say that I think there's a real risk that you'd be "gaming yourself": spending 4-7 years in a program with true motivations different from those that the parties that admitted you think you have risks making the entire experience a waste of your time.
I actually think that you would be "shooting yourself in the foot less" if you just gave an honest, off-the-cuff answer.  However, better yet is to take the fact that you're thinking about this in advance as an opportunity: indeed, what are your motivations for pursuing a PhD program?  Are they a little fuzzy?  Do you have concerns that your motivations are not well aligned with what the faculty involved in the PhD program would want? Work through that and ask about it.

+1. Honesty is the best policy, both with yourself and with the interviewers.

"It sounds like you are trying to game the system by figuring out in advance what answer the interviewers want to hear." - although I consider it likely that this effect is weaker for the average academic position compared to the average industry job interview, that is pretty much how job interviews work.

You have to game the system now.  Everyone else is going to.

@O.R. Mapper: I am the graduate coordinator of my department and am currently making last-minute preparations for our visitation day, which takes place tomorrow.  So I speak from experience when I say that I want students to be honest about their motivations and knowledge.  If I asked a student what their long term goal in getting was in getting a PhD, if they didn't know then that's the answer I would like to hear, and it would not be held against them.  If I felt a student was trying to bs me, that would be a potential red flag.

@Hobbes: That is really not the case for math PhDs at American universities, at least.  I can assure you that the average applicant, successful or otherwise, is quite professionally naive.  Maybe it is otherwise elsewhere, and if so it would be very helpful if you could provide specific information.  An anonymous "No it isn't" is not helpful.

@PeteLClark: "if they didn't know then that's the answer I would like to hear, and it would not be held against them." - I see no reason to doubt you would act like that. I may even believe that could be somewhat representative of academia as a whole. Still, I'd argue that in general, there is a widespread perception that competitive interviews are in part more about knowing the right answers than the truthful answers.

I think that giving an honest answer to the "long term goal" question is the only way to go. Still in my PhD, I can already read new students. "I want to research forever. Academia sounds cool" is bs they think they should be saying. "Well, what I want to do is simulate things like _____, so I am interested right now in learning ___ and ___, and maybe doing some ____ to get to ___ ...", it's obvious that person is wants a PhD for the right reasons, and you can't drip with that kind of enthusiasm unless you mean it (or you're a really good actor who studied hard, or lying to yourself).

Honesty is great, 100% agree.  I wouldn't trust the other applicants to be 100% honest though.

@Hobbes: I know very well that students (and faculty, and staff, and administrators, and people in general) are a lot less than 100% honest.  You seem to be assuming at least three things: (i) that the single goal of a PhD interview is to get the PhD offer, (ii) that the answer to this question is a crucial factor in the admissions decision and (iii) there is a fixed set of answers that faculty interviewers want to hear from everyone.  In my own direct experience as Graduate Coordinator, none of these are true.  In their absence, there need not be a reward for dishonesty in any sense.


text:
As a PhD student, should I give a talk at a conference outside my supervisor's field?
I am a PhD student in mathematics. Talking to some colleagues on my department I wrote a paper whose subject lies somewhat beyond the interests of my advisor. I gave a talk on it on a couple of seminars.
Unexpectedly I was invited to give a talk on a conference in another country. I have a feeing that my advisor might be unhappy if I go there, in particular he refused to give me any funds for travel. (It might be he does not have any funds, but I still have a feeling that he does not want me to be involved in activities in other fields.) Nevertheless I am interested to present my results to a broader audience and one of the colleagues on the department I talked to agrees to help me with the travel funds.

Would it be ok if I will go to the conference? Is it ethical with respect to my supervisor?

If your advisor is not OK with you broadening your horizons and your research directions, then something is not alright.

We need a "You need to talk to your advisor" autoresponder bot for questions like these.

A friend of mine was in a similar situation. Then the logic was that the first impression matters, and sometimes it makes sense to take more time to develop professionally and make a stronger "debut". Not sure whether that applies in your case.

Your adviser's refusal of funding for your travel might have nothing to do with how he feels about your going to the conference. His research funding might come from a grant for research on a particular topic, and he might not be allowed to use that money for purposes unrelated to the topic.

As @eykanal stated, the answer is simply to talk to your supervisor.
To specifically answer your questions:
1- Yes, it is more than OK to go to the conference. Being invited to an international conference is a great achievement that you should be proud of.
2- I don't see how it could be unethical to your supervisor.
I'm not sure from your question if your advisor has already refused the funds. I would suggest to not overthink this. Budget are generally tight. If your supervisor is a normal human being (most are), he's probably proud of your achievement. If for some reasons he doesn't approve, but does not clearly forbid you to go...well that's a strange situation but you can't guess his mind, can't you? If your relation is good, discussing is the only way to know.
Just remember that the goal of the PhD is to create an independent researcher out of you. Not a duplicate of your supervisor.

Just remember that the goal of the PhD is to create an independent researcher out of you. Not a duplicate of your supervisor. If only all supervisors were thinking along these lines!

I am not in mathematics, so I'm not sure how much my response is discipline-specific.
One of the roles of an advisor is that of a mentor. If you are presenting a paper at a conference, this is part of professional development and normally it should be supported. However, if the paper is outside of your advisor's field, I do not see why he or she would provide you with funding (if available) for travel, since his or her funding would normally be tied to the work that he or she is doing. Also, if the paper and conference are that different from your advisor's field, he or she may not appear interested or supportive because they do not have enough expertise in the topic to be involved.
In some cases, advisors may be arrogant and feel that their area is important than others. Some also become paternalistic and express disappointment if you are not making decisions that THEY think are best. That does not make your decision to attend the conference unethical. However, you also do not mention "how far" outside the field this paper and conference are from that of your advisor. If it seems that you are going in a different direction altogether in your studies or engaged in activities that seem distracting from your program of study, he or she may be concerned. However, this is not necessarily your case.

"However, if the paper is outside of your advisor's field, I do not see why he or she would provide you with funding" - I tend to think something is wrong there already. For instance, I am rather unfamiliar with the concept of "outside of [the] advisor's field". The advisors I know are generally supportive whenever someone opens a door for possible interdisciplinary collaboration; it's one of the best things that can happen. (Of course, a specific grant may require a particular topic.)

Well, if I have funding for a conference or for my student to attend a conference, it is usually connected with a grant or contract that would be related to my field. I cannot spend money from a grant on topic A to cover student travel for some other unrelated topic. If the advisor has general funds to cover the student, that is different. I think funding would more appropriately come from the department, not the advisor.

I can still be supportive of my student and help him or her with the project (reviewing the paper or poster, etc.) without providing travel support.

Even funding basically "related to a field" can well be available for certain kinds of interdisciplinary research. And aside from that, there are also field-agnostic funding sources such as support programmes for female researchers etc. Anyway, my comment was just meant to address the issue when the advisor does not just lack the funding, but is actively unwilling to support the student, which transpired from both the OP's question ("feeling that he does not want me to be involved in activities in other fields") and from your answer ("I do not see why he or she would").


text:
Can I use citation of used machine learning methods from O'reilly?
I would like to describe my used machine learning methods in the methodology of my thesis and my source is Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras & TensorFlow from O´Reilly. I anticipate that there is no general answer and it depends on the University, however, if I would like to publish it as a scientific paper, are there any obstacles with these sources?
Many thanks

Btw There are many citations inside the book on scientific papers in the case of concrete methods...

Why would there be an issue with using this book?

Maybe because It is not from the scientific publisher? e.g. Springer, Taylor and Francis?

If you take a look at Google Scholar, you can see that there are, at the time of writing, 3420 citations to the book you are referring to. So yes, since you used that book as a source for your methods, do add the citation. There is nothing inherently wrong with O'Reilly books, when you use them for your research, you cite them.

I think you should cite this book, and also find the original academic publications about the methods, and read and cite them.
Or maybe not the original academic publications, but some major academic publication such as an academic book that describes them, for example: Hastie, Tibshirani, Friedman (2009), The Elements of Statistical Learning. https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/ElemStatLearn/

Yes, you should cite it as you would any source. There are two reasons. If you don't cite it you may give the impression that you developed the techniques yourself, which is plagiarism. Also, a reader needs full context of your work and some of that appears in the book.
Unless something is common knowledge it needs to be cited. Things in undergraduate textbooks are usually common knowledge, and this may be in a grey area, but it is better to cite for the context reason if nothing else.
And an unneeded citation is almost never harmful, while a missing one, if needed, always is.


text:
Math postdoc in Europe or the USA
I am a PhD student in mathematics in the US. I got a 3 year postdoc position at a R1 university in USA and I was extremely happy about that as the department is pretty strong in my research area and my postdoc mentor, say Prof., is a top researcher in my area and also works on similar things as me. But Prof. informed me that he has accepted a position in Austria (he is Austrian) but he can offer me a postdoc there for 3 years and it will also include teaching (which I prefer).
I am now really confused about making a decision as to where to go. Since I am from Mauritius, staying in US or going to Austria are bot fine with me. One of the main reasons for accepting the US offer was that I was excited about working with Prof. I am hesitating a bit about moving to Austria because 1) I have heard that the North American job market for tenure track is a bit harder for candidates from Europe and 2) my partner is in the US. I asked my advisor and he suggested that I stay in the US. Below are my questions:
1) How common is it for math postdocs to work without a "mentor"? If I end up staying in the US, then even though the department has a good research group in my area but they work on different type of problems and there won't be anyone "officially" assigned to me as a mentor and I am a bit scared that I might feel to lonely there in terms of research.
2) Will it be considered ok, if I ask the department in the university in the US to maybe defer my position for a year, during which I go to Austria and (hopefully) start a collaboration with Prof. and then come back to the US? Is this something which is common with postdocs? Are universities in US, generally ok with such an arrangement (I haven't consulted the university yet)?Comments from people who had similar experience (either as a postdoc themselves or as a faculty who have seen this happen) will be greatly appreciated? Thanks.

Who will be paying you if you go to the US? The professor who's moving to Austria? I don't understand how that can work without you also going to Austria.

@astronat : It's a departmental postdoc in the US, so the salary will be mostly from teaching.


text:
Did I cheat on an exam by knowing a solution in advance?
I am a mathematics student in the US. For a recent exam, I achieved one of the highest scores. The problem is that the final question was  intended to be a challenge, rather than one "average" students are expected to solve completely. Most students got only partial credit for their attempt.
I got full marks on this problem not because I solved it during the exam, but because I happened to see both the problem and solution while I was studying. I'm guessing that I would not have been able to solve it on my own had I not seen the solution. Therefore, my performance on this problem was largely a function of my ability to regurgitate the solution I had seen. This problem was worth a significant portion of the exam.
Is this cheating? Should I tell my professor?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

You answered the question using knowledge that you acquired honestly and in good faith. This is serendipity, not cheating.

What you did is called "learning" and it is not forbidden.

No, if you saw the problem and its solution through random reading (rather than getting an advance copy of the exam, etc., obviously), then you have not only NOT cheated, but have in fact been a better-than-average scholar.
I realize that some instructors (and students) have some idea that reading ahead, or consulting other sources, is "against the rules"... (I'm not talking about during an exam, but about an approach to studying for a course) ... but this is bad/dumb/anti-intellectual.
So, no, what you did is not "cheating", it is your reward for taking a broader view of the subject, and reading more broadly. Also known as "scholarship/learning" :)

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

NO, you have not cheated. It's good that you put in extra effort to practice some problems/learn few stuffs on your own, rather than just depending on the assignments and lectures. It was your hard work that paid off.
A very similar thing happened with me in the last year of my undergrad. The professor had given an exercise in the class as an homework. The question wasn't too hard, but still it was on the harder side. None of us were able to solve it properly; all of us just had some intuitive idea. After few days everybody just forgot about that problem. But before the final exam, as I was doing my revision, I again decided to give it a try, but, again, no luck.
Few hours before the exam I went to the professor's office to ask him about this problem and  he told me the solution. To my surprise, that exact same question appeared as a bonus (or "challenging") question in the exam.
Obviously I was able to solve it and my other classmates couldn't. Then, after the exam, I talked to the professor about this and he said,"well, lucky you".

Your professor's view is exactly what my father (a physics professor) told me early in my career: If you've already composed an exam and then a student asks you a question that's on the exam, you answer the question and you leave it in the exam.

Nice ...........

That is an amazing story!

No, you have not cheated.  When lecturers create an examination they have the option of writing new questions from scratch.  If they choose instead to copy questions from another source (e.g., past exam, textbook, etc.) then they are choosing to give a question that a student may have seen before.  Some lecturers do this on purpose, since they want to further incentivise the student to practice through a wide array of practice problems.

Indeed. To put it another way, did the professor cheat on the exam by copying a known problem instead of making a fresh one?

I graded a lot of written math exams, and I can tell you I'd be perfectly fine with students knowing some answers beforehand. In fact, we often had exam tasks copied more ore less 1:1 from homework tasks that the student had beforehand, inlcuding sample solution, and you would be amazed at how bad the students did at some of those. So good work, reap the benefits of studying well and being prepared.

" you would be amazed at how bad the students did at some of those" I totally relate on that. The worst is that, even when it is explicitly told that some of the homework exercises will be 1:1 in the exam, the results are not much better.

@YYY I did enjoy the students who memorized those sample solutions word by word and wrote them dwon exactly like that, even if we changed a variable name or something minor :).

@JosephDoob: I'll confess those aggravate the heck out of me. I get some students who bizarrely memorize a proof or problem textually with no understanding. E.g.: globally replace ∈ with ⊂, identify the same set for a - b = ℤ as a - b = ℚ, etc.

The fact that you studied and learned to solve a variety of problems is just good scholarship, not cheating.
When I taught, my tests were intended to explore a students knowledge of the material. I would sometimes include material we barely discussed in class to separate the best students from those who were "merely" good. Whether a student had read the solution somewhere, or derived it by themselves, was less important than their knowledge of how to address the problem. If your professor had actually wanted to test your ability to resolve an unknown problem, then he would have invented an original question. However, few questions, or problems, are truly original which is why we study hard to recognize a broad range previously answered questions. Good work, sir!
Oh! Tell your professor if you wish, but he will look at you rather oddly and wonder why you are wasting his time.

No. This is what exams are for.
However, those papers that offer a choice of two or three problems of equal and considerable weight are problematic. It may be that a good student must know at least one of the problems by rote, otherwise it is a lottery.
If on day 1 you are given 20 problems and promised that the final exam will be any two of them, master all twenty. This can happen for any number of disciplines. Study.
Now, if this is not a local examination, and papers are not the same across a federated geography, it may be unfair to others that a past question has been re-used verbatim.

Not cheating, but you are correct -- there's a possible ethical(?) problem. But not in this case.
If you were given, say, a placement exam and specifically told it's about problems you've never seen, clearly you should speak up about ones you've coincidentally studied. Ethically, you're lying by implicitly presenting it as "here's how I solved a problem which I have never, ever seen before". And of course, it's in your best interest to be placed correctly. One could construct examples where it's less and less important and less and less dishonest. A problem on a school test is somewhere below 0 on that scale.
You're probably getting an A either way, and one test isn't that big a thing, and minor changes in grades don't matter than much anyway, and if you did so well your score will be left out of the curve (if there is one). You were only told about "to see how you handle a problem you've never seen" afterwards, and there's no practical way to fix it (the instructor is not going to find a new problem for you), and it's already understood that tests contain a certain element of luck as far as what-they-studied vs. what's-on-the-test.
I've had students come in and tell me they got 2 extra points on an exam (their final score was 2 points higher than if you added the points they got for each problem). That's fun. I generally dead-pan it, telling them it would be too much trouble to change but I'll try to keep it in mind for final grades. If you wanted to bring this up with the instructor, they'd probably be amused, understand where the impulse came from, and not consider for even a fraction of a second that this was anything they needed to fix.

I would add that this "ethical" issue might happen in the case of an oral exam (or an oral job interview); in that case, the ethical thing to do might be to mention the prior knowledge.

@Stef Maybe, but I feel like the OP is already very attuned to possible deception. I'm going for just any "yes, as you've noted, this would be a problem in some situations".

"it's about problems you've never seen" is a ridiculous claim to make.  How in all the tarnations would anyone else know what I've seen?

@BlokeDownThePub But that's the entire point of the Q, isn't it? The hard test problem was intended to be something the students had never seen -- since it wasn't that way to the OP, they feel they didn't solve it in the spirit of things. That's the key to why they feel they may have cheated, right?

I agree with the other answers that you have not cheated on the exam, or more precisely that you have not violated ethical/academic principles to gain an unfair advantage.
However, depending on the nature of your solution, it is very possible that you should have given some kind of citation or attribution when you reproduced the solution. This applies especially if you saw the solution not in the course text but in some external resource. Even though you did not cheat and deserve full marks on the problem, standard academic principles of not passing the work of others off as your own still apply.
Fortunately, this is not a big deal, and if you're so inclined you can send an email to your Professor letting them know what happened, and including the attribution to the source of your answer in that email. If they are reasonable, the most they will do in their response is thank you for your honesty. Sending such an email may also help to relieve some of your anxiety about whether your conduct constituted cheating.

That seems a bit extreme. I would be very puzzled to receive such an email. Also if you study an extensive amount of material, demanding a precise citation is (in my opinion) asking too much. Hmmm, was this in the old exercise sheets of Prof X, the book of DreamConspiracy or the old exam of last year. Furthermore, I have friend that is in his masters now and likes to ask me for some exercises I would put on the exam if I was the prof. How would you want this to be cited (private communication by S.S. Schraven, 2021?)?

@SeverinSchraven its not about getting a precise citation or anything like that; just cite in a best effort way. The key point is that you don't pass off work that is not your own as original.

The full citations for a solution to FizzBuzz would be longer than the answer!.

It's simply not possible to give citations for things you have learned, not knowing you'd ever need again, in an exam, and I really can't imagine anybody expecting it. When you're writing a paper, of course you need to check and cite your sources. When you're writing a closed-book exam, you can't check, so you can't cite.

Maybe "citations" is the wrong word; the point is not that anyone produce a correctly formatted MLA compliant citation. The point is that the person reproducing an answer give attribution where its due

DreamConspiracy, I'd say this isn't practical in real life. I have a large set of knowledge at this point.... yet I have no idea where I got each aspect, or even a composed solution, from. Human knowledge doesn't work at this level. It has nothing to do with the formatting and more to do with humans are not computers with indexes tying everything back to some source.

not in the course text but in some external resource --- The only situation where this reasoning makes sense to me in a mathematics course (I assume this is an appropriate restriction here, given your participation in mathoverflow) is one using the Moore method. Typically, the actions I describe in the first two paragraphs of this answer are not all that uncommon, at least for graduate students (and are often encouraged for undergraduates planning on graduate school).

But then shouldnt also the teacher cite where they got the question from? (Even more so since they have more time to do so?)

When I studied mathematics (undergraduate and masters level), there were plenty of exam questions which asked for a proof of a theorem which had been proved during lectures. There was never any expectation that our answers needed to cite our sources; the only person who would see our answers would be the lecturer themselves, and of course if we reproduced their own proof verbatim then naturally they would know exactly where it came from without any citation being needed. It is hard for me to imagine a mathematics exam where students are expected to cite the sources of the ideas they use.

I personally would not send such an email; of course, it is up to you.

When I was in graduate school, I realized that the professor of the Real Analysis class was taking homework (and later test) questions from the textbook I had used for Real Analysis as an undergrad. My recollection is that I got a C+ as an undergrad. Might have been a B–. I finished third in a class of over 20 as a first-year grad student. Many of my answers came from my undergrad homework, including the solutions provided by others for the problems I didn't get the first time.
I would add a number of my classmates had used the same text as undergrads and had a similar experience second time around. None of us thought twice about any ethical issue here. Nor should you.


text:
What does "Remuneration: Expenses" mean in an internship description?
While reading an internship description it mentions Remuneration:Expenses with 3 months duration. What is the interpretation of this? Does it mean if I get accepted I won't get paid? In general, is it worth applying for?

It sounds like you will be reimbursed for your living and travel expenses, but you will not receive a salary.
As for the wisdom of taking such an internship, that's impossible for us to judge in the context of your career.

The context and responsibilities are closely related to my background and in the area I would like to follow, so I think it's hard to say no. Maybe this will be the first step to a better internship in future years.

You would likely only receive living expenses if you are expected to relocate for the role.

You need to clarify with them which expenses they will reimburse, mind you.


text:
How to build my CV if I have two MS degrees in the same field (and quit a PhD)?
I got a MS degree in Statistics in University A, then I got admitted in the  Statistic PhD program in University B. However, I couldn't finish my PhD study, and I have to transfer to the MS program so that I can apply for OPT. Now I have two MS degrees in Statistics in both A and B, how can I list them on CV? And actually A is better than B... Should I write ABD on B? Thanks.

What's the problem with listing both MS degrees?

CV's aren't universal.  If you're applying to a lot of places, create a master CV that has everything, then whenever you apply, branch off a copy and whittle it down to the relevant information.  Also, what're you making this CV to apply to?

@ShakeBaby I think the OP's problem is both MS are in Statistics. It doesn't look too good.That's why the OP asks "Should I write ABD on B?".

Well, if you have two MS in Statistics, I see no point in listing something else.

@ShakeBaby I think it's not good to list two same degrees? The second one doesn't make sense actually?

@Nat For job hunting, I worry about that the reviewer might feel weird for my second MS degree in B...

Weird or not, that's what you have. It's either that or nothing. In that case you'll have a blank period in your CV. ABD is not a real thing, and not even true in your case.

If there is any difference whatsoever in what you were working on during the two programs, I would do something like this depending on the job you are applying to and how the focus of you program matches with the job:

Master of Science in Probabilistic Models (discontinued PhD in Statistics), University of Second-place, 2017
Master of Science in Randomized Algorithms (Statistics), University of First-place, 2013

In short, you want to put honest information that doesn't making it look like you are hiding something or leave unexplained gaps, but at the same time you want to put things in the most positive light and prevent people from assuming something negative. If you just put two "MS in Statistics", one line after the other, that will indeed make most interviewers likely think, "huh, what's this about?" I fully expect they will ask about why you are leaving the PhD program and/or why you have two masters in a closely related field, so just have a good explanation for this that fits the job, or answer it proactively in a cover letter.
You could also list one as just a generic MS in Statistics and be more specific on the other one, etc - so long as you provide accurate information, you are free to add more specific and useful information.
This also serves the purpose of making it clear that you didn't learn exactly the same thing in both degree programs. Employers care about the skills you've developed and how you can use your knowledge to benefit them, so make that easier on them (they are rarely ever going to spend half an hour trying to decipher academic transcripts to see what courses you took).

Why emphasize that you left a PhD program? There are many reasons for doing so, but this leaves the worst impression - that you failed to complete it.


text:
I have 6 weeks to hand in my Thesis. Should I quit?
I'm a PhD student with 6 weeks to go until I need to resubmit. I had my first viva last year and got an MPhil or major corrections with another viva. I decided to carry on to try to get a PhD but I think I was bit depressed about it and basically had very little motivation to do the corrections. I limped on with it until about a month ago when it hit me that I would need to do a second viva and my stress levels went through the roof. I couldn't sleep, was panicking and crying all the time. I ended up going to the doctors and they gave me beta blockers. I told my supervisor this morning and he thinks it's not worth my health and that I should just submit and take an MPhil. However, I just wonder if I should just hang on for the next 6 weeks for a chance at the PhD even though the thought of it is really stressful. I'm honestly not sure my thesis will be good enough and I get so nervous in situations like vivas and feel like my performance in the first viva played a role in not getting awarded a PhD and I'm not sure it will be different this time.
I don't have a job lined up, but I don't want to go into academia and am hoping to go into R&D in industry.
Any advice?

What do you have to lose by trying? (Not a rhetorical question.)

How many years have you invested in the PhD so far?

5 Years. Its a really long time which is what is making me question hanging in there.

@Rachel omg, try it, it totally worth it

I hope things go well whichever you decide, but I don't think this site can give a useful answer; it's too specific and opinion-based.

Keep in mind: they don't want you to fail. They want your success to improve their statistics, to the very least.

Making important life decisions when under stress does not always lead to good outcomes. Is there a counselor that you could talk with? That might be more helpful than any answers you would get from random people on the internet.

@henning It is certainly possible to think of situations where there is much to lose by trying. Suicide is not that uncommon among students.

@JessicaB I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying, if the second viva goes wrong there's a chance OP will commit suicide (whereas if OP doesn't try in the first place, there's less of a risk they might commit suicide)? Or are you saying that the six weeks to the viva may be too taxing on OP's mental health to make it worth an attempt?

@henning I was thinking of the latter, although the former could also be a consideration. Obviously I don't know about the OPs specific case, but in general it could be true.

Try university counseling. Talk to supportive friends/family. Take a couple of days off to clear your head (don't think about PhD; 2 days won't matter). Exercise. When you come back: ask yourself (with supervisor if poss.) what needs to be done and is it realistic/possible. Wish you best of luck.

If your supervisor is looking at you and your work and says your health is more important, you should at least give that statement serious consideration. They are probably the only person who knows enough about both you and your work to be able to make a reasonable judgement (it really sounds like you are not in a good frame of mind to judge for yourself).
An alternative approach, at least for a couple of hours, would be to find out whether you can get an extension, given the impact this has had on your health.

+1 for seeing if you can get an extension because of your health issues


text:
How should I spend my time as a pre-doctoral fellow?
I have written to my potential PhD supervisor and he has replied that he would be happy to supervise me on a project. I have not applied to the university yet and I think the process will take several months. During this process I would like to take some time and use it to develop skills and my résumé before getting into grad school (I call this "pre-doctoral fellow").
Professor X has with the "Équipe" Y all that is ideally situated for my needs.
What would be the academic position that I should apply for some months in Y with professor X to develop important skills for the success of my future phd program? A pre-doctoral fellow? How much time is the minimum/maximum I can apply for? In general, how would be the letter to professor X soliciting it go? Does this project is founding? Advice and comments are really welcome!

This varies greatly by institution/department/field. Job titles I have seen are things like "junior scientist" or "research technician" - there are also programs that are called "post-baccalaureate" but these are typically more involved, established programs for 1-2 years, whereas the timeline for the other titles can depend fully on the institution/supervisor. The only person that can answer these questions is the professor you would be working for. I suspect most people would want you to stay for at least a year to be paid, because anything less than that will be more effort than worth.

(I would add that "fellow" usually implies scholarship funding for your position, some external grant that is funding you specifically rather than a project you are working on - such an arrangement seems very unlikely in your circumstance)

Are you prepared to do this without pay if need be?  That would make it easier to set up.  // I would not call it a pre-doctoral fellowship, but rather just describe what you have in mind.


text:
Proofreading Struggles and Research Proposal Feedback
First off: I really like my supervisor. I’ve worked well with her, I’m on her research team for her own research and I really appreciate her and look up to her.
Long story short. Continuous feedback on my research proposal when I send in revisions is that I need to learn how to proofread/proofread better to not waste their time. The problem is is that I am and I am trying. The last revisions I sent, I put through grammar software, proofread it 4 times for the common mistakes she identified I make, and even had a friend proofread it.
I’m concerned that she thinks I’m not trying, when really I am. I’ve only had A’s in papers throughout my graduate coursework, with other professors commenting on my strong writing. I feel incredibly stupid because I am missing things on the revisions. I’ve signed up for a proofreading/editing workshop through my University since this is now a constant feedback point from her.
However I just don’t know how to address letting her know I’m not skipping proofreading and that I am trying. Particularly after her last email stating my lack of proofreading is wasting her time. If I’m being honest the feedback felt hurtful when I spent so much time on it and was really proud of my work.
This is the third time she’s sent me strongly worded feedback about my proofreading. I don’t want her to think I’m ignoring her feedback or just sending her shit work for fun. How would you respond?

Comment: "What sort of errors is she commenting on?"
Reply: "Oxford commas, verb tense, I had one anthropomorphism in the last revision. Two of my narrative references had an extra comma (et al., vs et al.) and then being inconsistent with abbrev. so my research is healthcare focused. Referring to the Medical teaching unit (MTU) in its longhand in a few spots rather than using MTU for the entirety of the proposal."

Has your advisor had a number of other graduate students?

@AlexanderWoo I think I’m her 5 ish. The one prior to me left the program and she has another one right now that’s around the same progress as me.

Have you already told her that you are spending a long time proofreading these? I can't tell if this is just a communication issue (if you've never acknowledged her last three complaints, and she has not noticed an improvement, then some frustration is natural) or if she actually feels that your work is deficient.

The only thing I worry about in her response is "strongly worded". If the strong words are about the proposal then it is fine. But if they are about you and how she perceives your competence, then it is not so fine.
In the former case, then don't respond at all, but just try to do a better job. There is a difference, of course, in formal scientific/academic writing and the more casual writing that you use elsewhere. Perhaps she is just focused (too focused?) on that aspect and wants to move you along the line to more formal writing. Yes, I realize that is a generous interpretation.
But if she is belittling you then it is a different story and the only way to deal with it is either to find a different advisor or to have a sit-down face-to-face to clear up the issues.
I want to remind you, however, (since I can't remind her) that proofreading your own writing is vastly more difficult than proofing someone else's work. Our mind "sees" what we think we wrote (remembered writing) rather than what we actually wrote. Oxford commas are a perfect example. In mathematical writing I've substituted one operator for another and missed it completely while proofreading, invalidating an argument.
And proofreading twice is no panacea. If you can get someone else to proofread your proposal before submitting, you will get an independent view. Yes, that is hard also.

Possibly OP and another student can trade proofreading each other's material.  It won't take any more time than re-reading yourself, you'll learn new things, and as Buffy says, it is far easier to spot others' mistakes than one's own.

Comment: "What sort of errors is she commenting on?"
Reply: "Oxford commas, verb tense, I had one anthropomorphism in the last revision. Two of my narrative references had an extra comma (et al., vs et al.) and then being inconsistent with abbrev. so my research is healthcare focused. Referring to the Medical teaching unit (MTU) in its longhand in a few spots rather than using MTU for the entirety of the proposal."
It's surprising that grammar software did not catch verb tense errors, sometimes people will also paste a few paragraphs at a time into a draft of an email in gmail to take advantage of additional grammar checking available there (in addition to all other available grammar checking software).
Another thing you should absolutely always do is to read it out loud to yourself and then again, to a friend. When reading silently, especially if it's something we've recently written ourselves, it's so easy to skip over small errors because we already know what it's trying to say and automatically fill in for small errors.
Use of abbreviations must be consistent and there are plenty of standards and rules for this. The first time you write it out, then forever more you only use the abbreviation or acronym. If readers don't recognize it, they know they can search for the first instance and expect to find it written out clearly there (and nowhere else).
Get yourself a good style guide and read it and commit to it. Find a short one otherwise you'll get bogged down. Consider asking your supervisor for one suitable for you.
For each mistake your supervisor points out, commit to never making it again by keeping a list of your pointed-out mistakes handy and using it as a checklist from now on when proofreading.
on the "strongly worded feedback about my proofreading":
As suggested in @Buffy's answer if the strong wording is against the types of mistakes, or includes "you've done it again!" comments because you did something they already mentioned not to do earlier, try to see this as actionable and therefore helpful and constructive feedback.
In the future, you may simply get rejections with generic reasons without any specific or actionable feedback. Enjoy it and take it to heart while you've got it!

These sound like relatively minor complaints, the sort of which you would expect perhaps the typesetters or editors to catch for you once you made it to publication, if you're lucky enough to be in a field that still has real editors and typesetters.
If you are worried that she doesn't appreciate your effort, or that there's something specific that you could be doing to make yourself more detail-oriented, why not ask to spend some of your next research meeting specifically on mentoring on this problem? Then she can make suggestions about how she catches things, and you can describe what you've tried, and you can come to some mutual agreement on appropriate levels of effort and strategies for catching these types of errors.