text:
Is it frowned upon to go to office hours as a graduate student?
I'm a graduate student (PhD, first year) in physics, and there have been a few times where I just can't figure out something regarding the material/subject of the class. Normally I just tell myself that since I'm a graduate student, I better be able to figure it out myself without the help of the professor, or any other "higher-ups" in my department for that matter. This usually leads to success, but not without a fair amount of work. Sometimes the end of my problem seems to recede faster than I make progress, and I usually have other stuff to do, so I get really tempted to just ask the professor, specifically by going to their office hours.
My question is, is going to office hours in a graduate course seen as a bad or "inferior" in US grad schools? I'm obviously not talking about spamming the professor with impulsive and ill-conceived questions.
EDIT: Some people in the comments are saying "Well you're a graduate student, and there are office hours, so obviously you can and should make use of them." Life isn't as simply black-and-white as that. The focus of my question is on the unspoken, possibly subliminal, perception of going to office hours as a graduate student which, by its very nature, is not explicitly stated in "official" text (e.g. syllabi, student conduct guidelines, etc.). Such latent social phenomena are present in every situation and culture. Stated explicitly or not, general academic culture expects graduate students to become independent researchers. I was wondering whether this underlying expectation affected the perception of going to office hours as a graduate student, which by definition is a partial dependence on the professor. This topic is nuanced by the various ways in which one could "go to office hours" (e.g. fully prepared, unprepared, in-between, etc.) and by the variation in perceptions of those various ways. Therefore I think it's nontrivial and worth asking about.

As a second year master's student in math, I wish I would have gone to office hours more like in undergrad. I'm still trying to get over myself to ask seemingly simple questions.

Master's or Ph.D.?  Asking because the end objectives are different; if you're a Master's student, presumably you're there to learn the material, in which case there's little reason to deviate from the practices that worked as an undergrad.  But a Ph.D. student's goal is largely to figure out how to be self-sufficient in academic matters, so there's cause to wean oneself from practices that rely on outside assistance.

It is frowned upon not to go to office hours if you need to because you are expected to take your studies seriously, and office hours are provided to you as a resource to be used for exactly that end.

If your graduate-level class has office hours, then of course you are meant to attend them! If you are attending an undergrad-level class as a grad student, then maybe you should be more hesitant to make use of office hours; just make sure you aren't taking time away from others.

It is certainly OK for graduate students to ask questions in office hours. I'm required to hold regular office in any semester when I'm teaching, even if my all my students in that semester are graduate students.  That requirement would make no sense if office hours were somehow off limits for grad students.

go to office hours. not going because of pride or wanting to keep up appearances isn't very wise.

if your post-graduate institution discourages graduate students from asking questions then you are probably at the wrong place.

Graduate students are just that -- students. Office hours are for students. What's the problem?

@MPW See my edit.

Again, just go if you need to go. Is it more important that you know the material, or that you appear to know it? Besides, who are these imaginary crowds of people laughing at you for asking a question during office hours? If you already know everything, why are you in school?

Don't you heave regular research group meetings which are exactly for this purpose?

@MPW  > If you already know everything, why are you in school? To get a Ph. D.

The premise of this question strikes me as bizarre. It's inconceivable that there would be a regularly scheduled weekly event to which, by some unspoken social rule, no one is supposed to go to. Even academia is not this incredibly inefficient. Also, being independent does not mean never asking for help. Professors too ask colleagues for help.

Why don't you just ask your professor whether the office hours are just for undergraduates, or whether you'd be welcome?

@SashoNikolov I don't think 'a regularly scheduled weekly event to which, by some unspoken social rule, no one is supposed to go' is inconceivable. It seems like quite a plausible construct, especially in a world which includes religion.

It sounds like you're talking about visiting a professor that is not your supervisor during their office hours for a course they are teaching (and that you are taking as part of the coursework component of your degree).  Is this the case?  If so, that's what their office hours are for.  I wouldn't, however, go to see your supervisor, or any professor for that matter, for a problem unrelated to the purpose of those office hours (ie: you're not taking the course the office hours are for but just wanted an opportunity to bounce ideas off of them).

Simply becoming a graduate student did not give you any magical powers that allows you to understand things better.  Now the fact that you were allowed become one suggests you have tended to understand things better in the past but realistically you are not that much better than you were a year ago.
Taking that into account, why would you visiting office hours be bad if it wasn't as a final year undergrad?

Grad students who come to office hours with good questions that show serious engagement with the material (e.g. attempts to solve the problem themself) are generally seen as mature, hard-working students.
It is also a good way to get to know faculty in your department, which can be useful e.g. if you are looking for a research assistantship, or recommendation letters, etc.
Personally, when I teach, I like when students come to office hours with good questions - it helps me see how students are understanding the lesson, where common points of friction are, and thereby improves the quality of my instruction. It also helps them do better in the course, which is of course a goal we have in common. But, I enjoy teaching and engaging with students. Some faculty in my department don't like teaching, and don't like office hours - but even those faculty members don't look down on students who make (good) use of them.

I think it also would not be in anyone's best interest that someone who is trying to research something novel and original is roadblocked by something trivial. Consider the parallel in the workplace: a senior member of a development team might forget some parameters to a function call and ask someone else. Even Jon Skeet has asked 48 questions on Stack Overflow!

Of course, that's GOOD questions and serious engagement.  Graduate students who come to office hours to get walked through every step will quickly lose help.  There's a balance between trying to unnecessary stubbornness and unnecessary helplessness that students must walk to be successful :-)

@JeopardyTempest Apply the "StackExchange" test for asking questions: check the answer isn't already available through a quick Google/library/literature search; make (and be able to show) your own attempt at answering the question; stick to questions that "can be answered".

@corsiKa : sometimes asking questions may not be for the purpose of learning something new.

One common mistake grad students make is not asking for help when they need it, either from professors or advisors, out of a misguided belief that they're supposed to demonstrate independence or ability by not taking advantage of the resources available.
No, it is not frowned on to go to office hours.  If a professor goes out of their way to make a resource - like office hours - available to you, you should assume that it's intended to actually be available.

Not asking for help can be quite a mistaken idea of "independence". Namely, if "asking for help" is really backed up by a student's effort and ambition to improve themselves, then it rather speaks in favor of their maturity.

My experience and answer only covers UK academia; the situation in the US might be different (or not).
In the UK, graduate students are paying fees to University and also often contribute to research. I would be unpleasantly surprised to see a colleague who would frown upon such student seeking guidance and support. But to be honest I never yet seen anyone who would frown upon a student coming to office hours.
What is expected of graduate students, though, is an ability to become independent learners and researchers through the course of their studies. So I would expect such students, in particular, to demonstrate a  significant attempt to solve the problem, including (but not limited to) a list of literature they attempted to search/study to solve the problem. I would not frown on a student who came to my office hours completely unprepared, but I would perhaps send them back to the library to attempt to find an answer to their question first.

No. While of course "lazy" questions (e.g., indicating not having paid attention at all in class, and/or not having read the indicated readings at all) are not good... asking for advice in how to solve problems is entirely reasonable, if only for methodological help.
The notion that everyone is as-soon-as-possible supposed to be "independent" is a bit misguided, I think, if taken at face value by naive novices. Namely, to fail to benefit by the hard-won expertise of one's advisor or mentor is just ridiculous. It is not the case that everyone has to make the same foolish mistakes over and over. True, it's good to try oneself, but even if one does "solve a problem", that solution may be awfully sub-optimal, and it is important to hear "the optimized solution".
Further, as mentioned in other answers and comments, office-hour discussions can be more open-ended and wider in scope than class-time, and one can learn a lot...
So, no, I don't see any need for any sort of stoic Spartan-ism, like the person who had stolen a fox, hidden it under his cloak, and allowed the fox to chew at his vital organs rather than make a sound. "Cool", but not productive.
Also, the claim that "everything's on the internet" is sort-of true, but not reliably in a good way. That is, as with many dynamics, the easy-but-suboptimal (or wrong) pseudo-facts/solutions tend to be widely available, while the less-attractive-but-correct ideas often get swamped by all that noise. So "go google it" is often not a good methodology for subtle technical things.
And in the literal physical books, normally there are no detailed discussions ("solutions") of problems. In extreme cases, such as Atiyah-MacDonald's "Commutative Algebra", not only are there no solutions, but the problems are mostly significant theorems in their own right. Where is one to find the prototypes for such things???
Again, I see no reason for everyone to have to recapitulate all the dead-ends that eventually led to discovery of effective ideas. It is a waste of time and energy.

I don't mean to be rude, but a good chunk of this answer reads less like an answer to the OP's question and more like a (frustrated) rant.

@tonysdg, As you like, but part of the point is, as is often the case, a dispute with implicit hypotheses in the question, especially about implicit hypotheses about the larger context, and so on. Why "rant"? I'm only upset that people torment themselves over non-issues...

I sympathize (and agree) with you -- I'm pointing it out mainly because (IMO) it hurt the readability of an otherwise excellent answer.

Your paragraph about the "everything's on the internet" problem can be generalized to every single field of human activity, not just "technical problems." Well said!

The answer is like others indicated NOOO!
When I was a PhD student I was in my advisor's office daily. We were collaborating closely on a couple of papers. I found my advisor by going to his office hours, and eventually my questions started to push on the boundary of what is in the literature. At that point a thesis started to form, and we started collaborating heavily on a paper that addressed my question.
As a PhD student your job is to get up to speed as quickly as possible on the state of the art of your field. Once you get there, you start asking good questions about the world that nobody knows the answer to. Once that starts happening, you have a dissertation waiting to happen. The only way to find a question that nobody has the answer to, is to ask lots of questions. Until nobody around you knows the answer. And once nobody around you knows the answer you start to look at papers to see if people you don't know, know the answer. And if they don't know the answer, you propose to find the answer yourself.
That is the essence of science! Go to office hours and ask dumb questions. Ask them until people give you blank stares. Ask them until your professors say, I don't know. A good PhD student should push their professors to think just as hard as they push their PhD student.
Remember that the culmination of the PhD is when you defend your dissertation. The goal at this point is to be able to stand in front of a group of people that have PhDs and say, "I know how to ask good questions in this field and independently answer those questions. I am a researcher of the same quality as you folks are, and I am now your peer, and no longer a student.
TL;DR
Go to office hours and ask questions until it hurts!

On the contrary. Students who never come to office hours, who never ask questions in class, may sometimes be regarded as if they understand the material less than students who ask questions and are engaged in the class. Coming to office hours to learn better is considered a plus, not a minus, so is asking intelligent questions in class.
Don't you think also professors go to other professors to ask questions about subjects they are learning?

Depending on the dynamics of your department, I could see a couple of reasons why going to office hours -- but not seeking help more generally -- might be frowned upon (or at least seen as a bit odd).
Are office hours primarily for undergrads?
At institutions/in departments with a high undergraduate teaching load, "office hours" are often scheduled primarily with an eye to reserving that time to help undergraduate students. If you use that time, you might be depriving the undergraduates (who would typically have less easy access to the professor than a grad student, in my experience) of time they need to seek help. Of course, often times no one shows up and so if it isn't a busy time I can see no harm. (I've often had meetings with professors during their office hours with the understanding that if an undergraduate shows up, I'd bow out and head to the lounge or my office and the professor would retrieve me to finish the meeting once the student left.)
Does your department favor more informal interaction, as between colleagues?
Another possible reason it could be seen as odd is that it might seem overly formal. While there is still a teacher-student dynamic among professors and grad students, it's more collegial than the dynamic between professors and undergrad students. Ideally, an advanced undergrad student is more or less a (junior) colleague of the professor. It would seem odd if a junior professor took themselves to be restricted to meeting with a senior professor during their office hours. There could be a similar dynamic in play here.
From my own experience, whatever it's worth, neither my grad student peers nor I ever made a special point to meet during office hours. Depending on the professor's disposition and how often they were in the office, for a quick meeting (say, less than 15 mins) it would be common to simply drop by, knock, and ask if they were free to chat for a bit. If they aren't, then you could also use that interaction to schedule a meeting. If the professor in question doesn't appreciate drop-ins, isn't in the office much, or the meeting would be on the longer side then a quick email to schedule a meeting would be the usual practice. If they said "I have office hours [whenever], why don't you drop by then?", then that's when you meet.
Are you depriving the professor of necessary preparation?
Finally, depending on the nature of your question, the professor might need to prep a bit for the meeting in a way they wouldn't for a typical undergraduate office hours meeting. If you drop by during their office hours without advanced notice, they might not be prepared, resulting in a meeting that's less than fully productive. That's not ideal for you, since you don't get the best help, and it might cause them to feel slightly "ambushed" and slightly down about their lack of readiness. If a follow up meeting is needed, there might also be concerns (though very mild in all reasonable cases) that the initial office hours meeting was bordering on a "waste of time".
Another Voice in the Chorus
But, ignoring the specific issue of "office hours" and considering the more general question of whether it's frowned upon for a graduate student to seek help, I can only add my voice to the chorus of "No"s. (Obvious exceptions being the ones you note: bad to go in without modest preparation and clear purpose, and also bad to use these meetings as a crutch that prevents you from developing more self-sufficiency.)

While I agree with the "No" answers in principle, in practice I've noticed quite a few teachers / teaching assistants unfortunately frown upon anyone coming to their office hours. Especially in course without many undergraduates, some people assume that their office hours would simply go unused and they can continue whatever business they're pursuing as long as they're in their office. In rare cases I've encountered people who actually have the temerity to not be in their office during office hours (!)
So if OP, or anyone else, seems to be met with a frown, the reason could just be the surprise of actually having to carry out one's office hour duties.
PS - There was this one guy in particular who situated his office in a building on the far side of campus from where he gave his recitation, in this building where you had to take a spiral route to get to the top floor since some doors were closed during late afternoon hours when his reception hours were held. And of course, his office was at the end of the spiral. He had quite the look of surprise on his face when I opened the door to his office! ... that was my first-semester freshman year Calculus course, back in the day.

I'll add a caveat to some fine answers.  It's fine to go to office hours as a graduate student.  It's less fine to go to office hours without having adequately prepared.   Work hard, give yourself every opportunity to solve your own issues, and then go to office hours ready to tell the prof exactly what you're having issues with, and how you tried to figure out.
If something is really time pressing, you might skip this step, but it doesn't necessarily look great, and doing it all the time will certainly not help your image.

I'll take a twist and talk not about office hours, but asking questions.
Sure, you could figure everything (or at least: a lot) on your own. It also takes time. In my opinion, even for a fresh PhD student, it takes too much time. So go and ask a question if you have someone to ask. Not necessarily a professor, a fellow PhD student or a PostDoc might also know the answer. If you are asking someone higher-up and would like to leave a good impression, invest into a search for a question.
So, rather than "how to do A?" ask "I would like to do A, but dunno how. I've looked into X, Y, and Z and they all seem not to fit. Could you help me out?".
The background is that most people in PhD and beyond, including your faculty, typically have seen things somewhat akin to your problem and might have an idea worth looking at. Conversely, esp. with peers, you might know something that might help other people.
At the end, harnessing knowledge of other people and collaborating with them on a range of topics would be more productive than trying to squeeze out a single answer while sitting in the ivory tower and meditating on the problem.
tl;dr: Talking to people does not hurt!

No, it is not frowned on.  If anything, grad students who are afraid to engage are frowned.  Just plow ahead and get what you need to learn the material.  After all, that is what matters in the end.  And people will respect more those who are not so worried about how they look.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
Should I (an undergrad) call potential industry research intern supervisor by first name?
I am corresponding via email with an industry researcher regarding an internship. He always signs off his emails with his first name, Bill. Still, I have addressed him as "Dr. X" for several emails now. I realize that if I am offered this internship I wouldn't want to keep calling him this and would prefer to be on more casual terms. Should I just abruptly switch to his first name, or wait for him to actually tell me to use his first name?

Third option, ask him!

If a professor that I am regularly corresponding with consistently signs off their emails with their first name, I'll usually switch to calling them by that after a while. That may be a liberal opinion though. On the other hand, in your case I would continue addressing him formally as long as you are not yet hired.

@RogerFan How do you know that his first name isn't automatically attached to the end of every email?

@AustinHenley I don't. But I assume that any professor whose automatic signature is just his first name isn't going to care. As I said, this is maybe a bit more liberal than many people are comfortable with, but I've never had issues with it.

Since he is academically your superior and you are trying to get a research position, I'd continue addressing him as Dr. X. I'd continue doing this until he directs you otherwise.
Now, if you get the internship I would continue addressing him as Dr. In person, at least initially. Eventually you may notice other people who work under him that call him by Bill. That would be a good time to say "I notice everyone else addresses you as Bill, would you prefer I address you as Bill or Dr. X.?"
Either way, don't get in a hurry to be on a first name basis.

Easiest solution, ask him.

Dear Dr. X,
[Rest of the email]
P.S.: do you prefer me to call you Dr X, or Bill?

No mistake possible.

I don't like this approach at all.  By doing this you force Dr. X to choose between between friendly/polite to you or professional.  In such a position some people opt for polite even though they prefer professional and will resent you for putting them in that position.  If you want to be on a first name basis with Dr. X, give him/her the opportunity to invite you to call them by their given name.  When and if this particular olive branch is extended you'll know it's a genuine gesture.  Dr. X will appreciate it.

@par if you have to start second guessing a direct answer... What if he feels compelled to invite you to call you Bill? Or what if he thinks you will prefer to call him Dr X, even though he would rather be called Bill?

@par In other words, what kind of professional relationship is one where you cannot trust a direct answer to a simple question?

My point is that it's more polite, and in my opinion better, to be professional (i.e. formal) with someone you have a professional relationship with until they invite you to do otherwise.  I'm not suggesting you can't trust the answer to the question, rather that the question is inappropriate at such an early stage.

Consider the negative response: "Do you mind if I call you Bill?"  "Actually, yes I do mind."  Now what?  Is Dr. X arrogant?  Does Dr. X think you've overstepped your bounds?  Will you feel resentment towards other students that call him Bill?  Have you made it easier or harder to build a friendly relationship with Dr. X, who has just had to "put you in your place?"  This can be avoided entirely by simply respecting the unwritten rules of professionalism to begin with and referring to Dr. X as "Dr. X."

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to deal with email unresponsiveness?
I sent a research mentor an email (admittedly quite lengthy and dense) which he hasn't responded to in several days, nor my request within the email to discuss via phone / video call.
What should I do in this situation? Should I just resend the email?

A precious piece of advice I received many years ago at the beginning of my career was: never address in an email more than one issue, and keep the email as short as possible, no longer than a few lines (and sometimes even a few lines are too many: hey, have you read also the second line of my two-line email, haven't you? -- I frequently ask to one of my closest coworkers).

Use the phone.  If your advisor doesn't answer, call another graduate student in your advisor's group, or another member of your committee, or whoever is in the next office, or even the department head, and ask them to knock on your advisor's door.  Or call their home and apologetically ask their spouse/kids if your advisor is sick, and if not, could you please have their mobile phone number.

They dont want to. Talk in person.

Well, if your email looks like a spam, i.e., one in which you send to all universities in the world, then why would he/she respond? You are just fishing.    Spend some time tailoring your email.  Find out about the mentor.

Adapt the communications structure to the situation at hand.
A request for a video/call conference should be sent alone, especially if your researcher seems to disdain long e-mails. In the 1st such live communication, clarify with him whether it will be pointless to send him long e-mails, and whether instead you will communicate live, mainly through video/call conferences.

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


text:
Author on paper overly similar in content to previously published work
I was a summer intern at a research group while I was in high school. They submitted a paper with me as an author and it was rejected in large part due to similarity to their previous paper which I am not an author on. I wasn't aware of this misconduct and am concerned this could follow me into my future career. Also, what is a good way to explain not wanting to be an author on future submissions of this paper, even though I contributed significantly (in fact my work was the only novel part)? I also don't want to burn bridges.
Also, should I refuse to be an author on any future paper with them, even if the paper no longer looks similar to the previous work? At this point I'm not sure if I can trust my former supervisors.

There are different kinds of similarities.  Does similarity mean it was viewed as plagiarism?  Or just that the work was not novel enough to merit publication in that venue?

I'm honestly not sure, but they didn't cite their own previous work which methodologically was very similar (don't think they copied text or anything), which I believe violates the rule of the conference.

First of all, don't worry (yet). No one gets in trouble because a paper got rejected. If it had been retracted, that would be a different story.
Secondly, I would be slightly cautious on coming to the conclusion right away that this was misconduct. Work builds on old work. My latest manuscript was sent back because it didn't provide a proof that was 95% identical to a now 40 year old proof. If the paper is genuinely attempting to present published work as novel work (without mentioning that it was ever done before), that's certainly an issue. But if it's spends 80% of the paper saying "here are the things leading up to our contribution", that's fine. In my case, I resubmitted my paper with the proof, along with saying "this proof follows a nearly identical form as ...".
Finally, if you still feel that the work is, in fact, attempting to pass published work as novel, now you have yourself a situation. There's not really a nice way to handle it, but perhaps you could begin with saying "what do you think of the reviewer's comments about the work not being original?" If they do not give you a satisfactory answer, you can say "I'm sorry, but I don't feel comfortable putting my name on this work". As uncomfortable as that will be, the good news is that they cannot put your name on without your approval. Telling the group that you don't want your name on the paper will very likely burn a bridge, but it sounds like you may have more concerns by keeping that bridge intact.

If you don't want to burn bridges then I would continue to publish with them for now and observe whether their future behavior is appropriate. Assuming that you will need their support for your academic career to begin, it would be unwise to jump to conclusions and tarnish your relationship (which I feel that withdrawing authorship rights would probably lead to).
While I don't have the complete information about your case, it appears that they didn't engage in serious misconduct. Indeed, what occurred (not referencing their previous work and thus violating conference rules) might simply have been a mistake on their part rather than deliberate misconduct. Again I don't know exactly what happened but I can see situations where previous work might not be relevant to cite even if methodologically similar to current work (for instance if examining a different research question).

This response is well intended (therefore no downvote), but there is too much speculation about motives in this response. Cliff AB's response is more detailed as to which criteria should lead to which decision.


text:
How do pass/fail classes look to PhD admissions committees?
I'm a junior hoping to do a PhD. I'm in a graduate level class right now in a different field. I believe almost all the other students are PhD students. The first couple weeks of the course were just barely accessible, though very challenging. Now, however, I really find myself unable to complete the problem sets. There are no office hours either.
How bad would it look to pass/fail this class? It's not particularly related to my intended research focus in the PhD.
I believe I am a strong candidate aside from this class.
Also, I'm really not sure what grade I would get in this class. Probably a B at worst. I'd rather not mess up my GPA though. All of my other technical classes are A's or A minuses.

Is the class in question one that covers topics used in machine learning?

I'm sure someone could come up with a connection, but it's definitely pretty far from the field.

I think pass/fail outside your area is not a disaster.  A bad grade would be a disaster. // Please contact the instructor and ask for an appointment to get some help.  Just because there are no published office hours doesn't mean you can't ask for help.  If the instructor refuses to help, see a department administrator.  Perhaps they'd withdraw you from the class without it showing up on your transcript, under the circumstances.

Do you consider a B to be a bad grade? I could get a C if the final exam goes horribly. A B is the most likely outcome, it seems.

I don't think a lone B in a graduate-level class outside your target research area would be a disaster, even though that same B might be considered a "bad grade" for a PhD student in the same field as the class.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65359/phd-admissions-undergraduate-credit-no-credit-influence-on-acceptance/67775#67775

In short, this looks bad.
When I see a "Pass" or "S" grade on a transcript that I'm evaluating, my default assumption is that the student did work equivalent to the lowest passing letter grade (e.g. a "D" in the US system.)
I tell the undergraduate students that I advise that if they want to go on to graduate school they should avoid taking courses on the S/U grading scale.

What if those pass or S courses are electives? I have a similar grading system too, but they are only applicable to electives unrelated to my major.

"Unrelated" spans a large range.  I don't really care if a prospective math graduate student has an "S" in a yoga or music class, but I'd be concerned if the "S" was in a physics class and more concerned if the "S" was in a mathematics class.

At many (most?) US institutions, there's a policy that an S grade should be equivalent to C or better (or maybe C-).  A student who would get a D in a letter system is suppose to get a U in the S/U system.  Of course, some instructors might stretch this.

I just checked, and my undergrad is a C and my grad school is a C- (for undergraduate courses).

No one can predict how an admissions committee or anyone else, such as a potential supervisor, will interpret this, or any particular thing, really.
But, in general, it is the major courses (US system) that most people look at and care about for graduate study. A pass/fail in an upper level major course looks bad. But a pass/fail in an unrelated course, especially an elective, looks much less bad and other things in your application can overwhelm whatever negative aura there might be.
In the case here, dropping the course rather than changing to pass/fail might be another option (or not), and who is to say how a dropped course is viewed.
Elective courses outside the major indicate, to me, at least, that the applicant has a possibly valuable outside interest but didn't want to
"risk" GPA. Not a big deal and maybe a positive.

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


text:
How to ask a professor if s/he is interested in being a coauthor on a paper?
I'm an undergraduate at an American university. I have been working with a collaborator (at a different university) on a paper for the last few months. I recently set up a meeting to discuss the work with a professor at my institution who is an expert in one of the topics related to this work. In the meeting he clarified a lot of my ideas.
The discussion was only an hour or so, but as of now I do think at least one of his suggestions will make its way into the final paper. Thus, it seems clear that he should be an author. I'm wondering, what is the typical way that this subject is brought up? Should I just ask him at the next meeting, "Would you be interested in being a coauthor?" Is that the typical way this conversation goes? This is the first paper I've worked on where the authorship hasn't been determined at the very beginning, so I really have no idea how this works.

The Smiths already said it best: https://youtu.be/zoo9Vu1a9bU

Should I just ask him at the next meeting, "Would you be interested in being a coauthor?" Is that the typical way this conversation goes?

In short, yes. "I think you contributed valuable ideas to the paper. Would you like to be a coauthor?" would also do. If he rejects, you can insist, say, two more times for politeness reasons, and if he still rejects, go on without him. But also be prepared for an answer "it is too early to speak about my contribution; I did not do too much yet". The deal is: you would be trying to make him work on a paper (via writing, discussions, or by providing ideas) and would offer him a place among the coauthors commensurate with the contribution.


text:
Can images from wikipedia article be used for non-commercial use?
Foe example the following image in Wikipedia article.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2014.06.23._Charles_Aznavour_Fot_Mariusz_Kubik_01.jpg
To best of my understanding it has creative common license. Can I use it in my scientific paper without obtaining copyright permission?
Many thanks

It's not enough to know that an image has a Creative Commons license. There are a number of different Creative Commons licenses, with different terms. You have to look at the specific license used.

I'll also note that the wikimedia images aren't uniform in their licensing. You have to look at the requirements of each one. Many are CC-BY, but not all.

On the same page, under the picture you link to, it literally states

The copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed.

In other words, yes, you can use it without obtaining further permission. Note that other pictures on Wikipedia might have other licenses, but the terms are generally stated quite clearly.
However, you should also do your due diligence and try to see if the picture might have been published elsewhere before. After all, it might have been uploaded against the real copyright-holder's wishes, in which case the statement of license terms wouldn't hold water.

The page clearly states the CC-BY license for this image.  That means that the creator of the image has given permission for any use as long as you properly credit the source.  Whether this will be acceptable to your journal publisher is another question- they might require you to ask the owner of the image to sign some other agreement.  You'll need to contact the journal to get an authoritative answer.

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


text:
the date of PhD award in France
When a person is awarded PhD there is a date the Phd is awarded. This date is later used as an eligibility criteria for fellowship applications (i.e., time passed since the Phd was awarded). In France, there is a PhD defense. Assuming that the defense was successful, is the date of PhD defense becomes a date of PhD award? Or there are additional procedures and the date of PhD award is usually later?
Thanks.

Do you have a date on your PhD certificate? That's it, I would say. But when in doubt, ask the fellowship.

my question was: suppose someone has a planned defense for some date, will the date of the PhD be the defense date?

The date the PhD is awarded is almost always the date of the defense in France (and it is usually the date of the defense that counts for France-specific deadlines, such as qualification, post-doctoral scholarships or PhD awards). The only exception I am aware of is
if the PhD is not awarded on the day of the defense (very rare, but it can of course happen!).
Note that the diploma is not typically issued on that day (and, indeed, may take months to be issued), but that it is possible to get a certificate the day itself or in the next few days. Graduate schools are aware of typical deadlines and typically help the student obtain this certificate by these deadlines.


text:
How much research assistant in academia is paid in France
Research assistant (with master degree, currently PhD student) in France is hired to make some research related activity (e.g., running psychological experiments with volunteers). How much per hour a research assistant might be paid? I need to know whether it includes social benefits.
Many thanks!

If you are currently a PhD student in France, and if you are paid by your university ("under contract", « sous contrat »), chances are that you are not allowed to accept another job unless particular conditions are met. You can have a look at https://guide-doctorat.fr/fiches/DoctoratALaLoupe-13.pdf (in French) to know more about that. As for your question… it depends. Just ask, nobody can answer that question but your future employer. Also, if you are currently hired as a PhD student, you probably already have social benefits, and don't need them twice!

Does this answer your question? In which countries are academic salaries published?

In France social benefits are included with any kind of salary, it's mandatory.

Thank you for the answers! First, please assume that the person is eligible to work. The question is whether for example 2,000 Euro per month is a reasonable salary for the position I described? Note that "research associate" (Ingénieur de recherche) seems to be higher qualification than "research assistant" that I am asking about.

I don't know from where you are. Be aware that in France you will get 12 months, not 13 or 14. Refer to annual salary and chech out for the taxes.

@BrainResearcher assuming 2000/month is the net salary, I'd say it's quite good; but I wouldn't be surprised that this is the amount before taxes, in which case it's just ok I guess (btw take into account the typical rent in the city).


text:
What is a source for Richard Riley's famous quote about preparing students for the future?
A famous quote by Richard Riley, former US Secretary of Education, is as follows:

We are currently preparing students for jobs that don’t yet exist, using technologies that haven’t been invented, in order to solve problems we don’t even know are problems yet.

I have seen this quoted in hundreds of places, but never a full reference. I'd like to use this quote in an article that must adhere to APA referencing - does anyone know of the first place this quote appears?

See footnote 1 in this essay (pp. 351-52) where the quote is thought rather to be credited to Karl Fisch (whose video does, indeed, appear to be the earliest instance of the quote I can find). It's not that Riley couldn't have said it. The content of this article from 1995/6 comes close.

Generation Jobless by Peter Vogel has this quote at the beginning of Chapter 3, and attributes it to "Gunderson et al, 2004"
Checking this book's bibliography, we can find that "Gunderson et al, 2004" refers to
Gunderson, S., Jones, R. & Scanland, K. 2004. The Jobs Revolution: Changing How
America Works. Copywriters Inc
I would suggest you check there.

With the help of Darren Ong's answer and Google Books, I found the quote in The Jobs Revolution, phrased as follows:

Former Secretary of Education Richard Riley recently noted that none of the
  top ten jobs that will exist in 2010 exist today and that these jobs will
  employ technology that hasn’t yet been invented to solve problems we
  haven’t yet imagined.

An identical sentence occurs in Hearing on careers for the 21st century; the importance of education and worker training for small business, p. 90, freely available on archive.org. Unfortunately, neither source gives a reference, and the quotation is not given verbatim.

The earliest such quote I could find was from Windows on the Future: Education in the Age of Technology by Ted McCain, Ian Jukes, (2001, p. 80):

the Secretary of Education, Richard Riley in the Kentucky Teaching and Learning Conferences in Louisville on March 2, 1999, was quoted as saying that none of the top 10 jobs that will be available in the year 2010 exist today, and that these are jobs that will require workers to use technology that has not yet been invented to solve problems that we have not yet thought about.

They didn't give any source for their quote. But given how specific they were about when and where this was said, this quote is perhaps somewhat trustworthy.
Instead of directly quoting Riley, you can just quote the above sentence by McCain and Jukes like so:

According to McCain and Jukes (2001), Richard Riley stated "that none of the top 10 jobs that will be available in the year 2010 exist today, and that these are jobs that will require workers to use technology that has not yet been invented to solve problems that we have not yet thought about."

Note: The quote probably became popular with this video first released in 2006 by Karl Fisch (accompanying blog).


text:
In what order are graduate application materials reviewed?
Graduate applications consist of a number of components, such as a statement of purpose, a transcript, letters of recommendation, etc. In what order are these components reviewed? Of course I don't expect all institutions to follow the same order. Those that have GPA or test score cutoffs, whether they are official or unofficial, will obviously first go through the GPA and test scores of the applications.
I think many people would like to know the answer to this general question, though the reason I am asking this is because when writing my statement of purpose (SOP), I don't know if it would be best to assume that all of my other application material has been reviewed. If all of my other application components have been reviewed, then I could save time in my SOP by just referencing those other parts.
If it helps, the specific field I'm interested in is theoretical nuclear physics.
EDIT: I see that this question has already been voted to be closed twice. I suspect this is because some people think it's obvious that there is no specific order. If this is so, I urge those people to post an answer outlining their specific knowledge of the/a graduate admissions process. It is clearly not obvious to me that there is no specific order that the bulk of universities follow.

You're quite correct to not expect all institutions to follow the same order. In fact, you shouldn't even expect a single faculty member to follow the same order on all occasions. I've certainly reviewed applications in various orders.  I can, however, follow pointers. So, if your SOP refers to some other part of your application for some details, and if I'm interested in those details, I can interrupt reading your SOP and look at those details in the rest of your application.

"I don't know if it would be best to assume that all of my other application material has been reviewed."
You should not assume any parts of your application have been read before the statement of purpose.  At many institutions, the order in which the documents are examined is at the discretion of the person doing the reading.


text:
Is it a good idea to join a second group as an undergraduate researcher if I don't feel challenged enough?
I'm currently a second-year undergraduate physics major, and I joined an experimental nuclear physics (astrophysics primarily) group a few months ago. I joined the group wanting to work extremely hard to learn new things, apply them (and my intuition and previous knowledge) to solve problems, and present my findings and progress on a weekly basis, reporting to the group head on a more frequent basis though. It started out like that at first - the head made me solve a problem, write a GUI/applet for it (just to show that I fully understood the problem), and then implement that into a particular framework that would be used for an actual experiment later on down the road. I noticed that the head also didn't like to be a mentor too much - that is, he only liked to tell me what I needed to know for my task and nothing else, leaving extra learning for myself.
The problem with this is I'm left mentally starved. I've been assisting this other person in my group (relatively new graduate) on preparations for that actual experiment that I mentioned earlier, and that feels good. I've learned more of what's going on behind the scenes (significance of the experiment, theoretical implications of the results obtained, detector and equipment [and setup]) through publications, other people within the university, and asking the group head, but all of this was essentially on my own. As a result, I feel that any average joe with minimal work-ethic and intuition could thrive in a group like this. I've learned a lot more about nuclear physics/astrophysics (hence, more about this universe we live in) through sources that I might have otherwise not come across had I not joined the group, so that's good.
Also, just quick side note, the experiment is coming up soon, and I'm sure I'll learn a whole bunch through that process, and sorting out and analyzing the data after the experiment will certainly put me to work.
I've been thinking about possibly trying to join another research group, just so I can quench my mental thirst. There is a nuclear theory group at my university, and even though I know nuclear theory is probably way over my head, I'm willing to put a lot of time into working hard.
Here is my question: Is attempting to join another group a bad idea? Should I instead tell the group head how I feel, and see where to go from there, or would that be far too disrespectful?
Please excuse any ignorance of mine.

Is attempting to join another group a bad idea? Should I instead tell the group head how I feel, and see where to go from there, or would that be far too disrespectful?

These two options are not mutually exclusive. You can do either, both, or none of them.
As you see it, you believe your choices are

Talk to your current supervisor - You should absolutely do this, regardless of what you decide to do with respect to the other group. Your mentor has no way of knowing what you're thinking unless you tell him; it's up to you to let him know if you need more from the supervisory relationship. Of course, you should do this in a respectful and adult way.
Join a second research group - You should consider doing this if you're interested in the research the second group is doing. As an undergraduate, it's to your benefit to experience different kinds of research, different advising styles, etc, to help you understand what you need when applying to graduate school. Note, however, that research is very time- and energy-consuming, and if you spread yourself too thin, you will experience "research" only on a superficial level and won't get much out of it. Only you can determine whether you really have enough free time and energy to participate in two research groups in a meaningful way.

Finally, I'd like to comment on your statement

... all of this was essentially on my own. As a result, I feel that any average joe with minimal work-ethic and intuition could thrive in a group like this.

You seem to think that because your mentor gives you a lot of independence and doesn't tell you exactly what to do, that standards and expectations in the group are pretty low. That's not necessarily the case.
The ability to work independently is a highly valued skill in supervisees, and it's great that your advisor has given you the chance to show your capabilities in that respect. This means that he'll be able to write strong recommendation letters for your graduate applications - much, much stronger than a supervisor who could only speak to your ability to follow focused, specific instructions.
Research is not like coursework. It's supposed to be highly self-directed. If somebody is telling you exactly what to do and what to learn next at every step, you're not doing research. If you feel like you're not sufficiently challenged by what you're doing now, you are supposed to take the initiative to speed things up.
In other words, don't confuse a hands-off mentoring style with low standards. If the group in general is productive, does good science, and writes solid papers, then standards are what they're supposed to be. From your description, you are learning a lot of new things, starting a new experiment, finding out how research works, and overall describing a pretty excellent research experience.

To echo some of what ff524 has said, I think there could be some difference in your interpretation of what research should be, and what is mentally challenging for you.
Personally the few times I have felt like I was not learning enough, was not because my research was not challenging, but I was not actually doing research.  If you are directly given menial tasks by your advisor, that you are not thinking for yourself and just repeating a motion, it may feel not challenging enough.
However, it sounds you are given a good amount of freedom.  In that case, it could be that you are just not diving into the research itself.

I noticed that the head also didn't like to be a mentor too much -
  that is, he only liked to tell me what I needed to know for my task
  and nothing else, leaving extra learning for myself.
The problem with this is I'm left mentally starved.

To me, this sounds like you are looking for a challenging class, not research.  You want someone to specify a problem and you work through it with them and studying the necessary topic until you can solve it. Otherwise, I do not see how self-learning/teaching and exploring how to solve a problem is not challenging enough.
My suggestion is to talk to your advisor after thinking about what your really looking for.  Do you want self guided learning and research but your advisor is not allowing you to tackle challenging problems?  If so, first prove you can do the easy ones she/he has given you, and then bring up your need to 'quench the mental thirst'.  If you want a more detailed path, maybe think about taking more graduate level classes.

The process of becoming a good researcher is learning how to become an expert in a field you may know nothing about. At some point, every real research project becomes a "stab in the dark," as we have to do things that nobody has (or very few people have) tried before. So an advisor who doesn't tell you step by step what to do may be trying to encourage you to learn for yourself, and to take "ownership" for your project.
It may also be the case that, as your first time, you may be feeling bewildered and directionless. This sounds like a case where you need to talk with your advisor to better align your working styles: perhaps the advisor can suggest further directions to explore—and you could broaden your outlook to learning more about the field than just doing what you're told. (If you want to do a PhD, then there will come a point when your advisor can't tell you what to do—because you will be the expert!)


text:
Check plagiarism in a word archive
I have done a lot of homework.I get some help  (gather informations) from  articles,etc using the Internet.What I want is to avoid plagiarism.I get in some sites but it is English to English.I want English to my country language which is Greeks. I search but I failed.First , I want to help me (of course if you could)  with it to find a specific program.If not, I want to avoid plagiarism or another aspect how to handle this.

Do you mean a tool that first translates and then checks for matching texts? This will be hard, since not even back-translating a translated text on google will give you the original text (i.e. A -> B -> A' won't result in A=A')


text:
What motivates scientists to fabricate results in prestigious journal articles?
As is well known, Dr. Obokata was accused and fired for fabricating her paper on STAP cells.
Report on STAP Cell Research Paper Investigation
http://www3.riken.jp/stap/e/c13document52.pdf
I wonder what her motivation was if that is the case.
If STAP cells do not exist, sooner or later her paper will be recognized as invalid by the science community.
However, someone said your scientific paper's being accepted by a prestigious journal would be prestigious enough if it would not be found as a fabrication.

Please explain the reason for the downvotes. Otherwise I cannot improve my question.

You are asking us if it is worth cheating and lying to have a paper published in a reputable journal. No academic with self respect will say anything other than no to that.

I think the headline question is a bit off, "What motivates scientists to fabricate results in prestigious journal articles?" might be better.

I strongly disagree with the downvotes.  This is a perfectly reasonable, if not important, question whose answer happens to be OF COURSE NOT!

@BillBarth I edited the headline question as you suggested.

I down-voted because I suspect this question will degenerate the way the previous questions the OP asked about the exact same case did. If the OP used a different example, I would not down vote.

@jakebeal "I down-voted because I suspect this question will degenerate the way the previous questions the OP asked about the exact same case did."
This is irrational.
Please reset your downvote because it is not degenerated.

@Johanna I think you misunderstand the question.
I edit it to make it clearer.

Only if you're either really (really) stupid or desperate, or naive enough to think that you'll never be found out.
The person in question here seems to have been a serial offender. And I'd be very surprised if anyone who offends so blatantly has no previous history. Fraudsters always start out small and relatively inconspicuous, but confidence and brashness grows until they're caught.
Yes, fraudsters seem attracted by the prospect of fame – but I can't grok why you'd submit a fraudulent paper to Nature. Seriously!? Of course you'll be found out! But no, it's not worth it. Ever.

"Of course you'll be found out!"
What if it's a less important result and a less prestigious journal?

@MakotoKato Then you will probably also be found out, though maybe not as quickly as fewer people will read your paper.

@Johanna "Then you will probably also be found out"
I guess probably is one of the points of my question.

@MakotoKato If anyone at all reads the article, there is a chance you will be found out. That will definitely ruin your career. People who risk their careers on "probably" probably have very short such with sudden ends.

@MakotoKato if no one is ever going to care about your "research" enough to realise that it is fraudulent, why risk it in the first place? It's always a no-win situation.

@Moriarty Your numbers go up and you appear to be way more productive than you really are.

@o4tlulz Sure, until that productivity makes people start reading your papers, because you must have something interesting to say if you so much published...

As scientists, we are in the business of finding out the reality (or an approximation). Deliberately poisoning the understanding of what is out there, wastes everybody's precious time. I can only imagine two motivations for doing so: 1. someone who makes a mistake which catapults him to unknown fame and is afraid of retracting (I suspect the Schön case is one of these); 2. someone with a type of Münchhausen-like syndrome (I am not a psychiatrist, YMMV). Doing so deliberately (and, if it's important, they will be found out), the perpetrator will not ever be believed again.


text:
Should a scientific paper have copyright?
Should a scientific paper have copyright?
I guess not.
It seems to me that science and copyright are not compatible.
Let's say I wrote a very important paper in, say, cell biology.
Suppose I have the copyright for the paper(I think so under the copyright law of the US).
Then I also have the derivative-work copyright.
Can I exercise the right?
For example, can I refuse other people to use the original idea of my paper?
Or can I forbid them using an original technical procedure described in my paper? Or what about copying graphs or figures?

This question came to my attention after it got several votes to close as "primarily opinion based," because the titular question has no objective answer. Instead of closing the question immediately, I tried to edit it to highlight the objective part of the question (as stated in the second half of the question body). But the OP reverted the edit, so I have voted to close instead.

@ff524 "This question came to my attention after it got several votes to close as "primarily opinion based, because the titular question has no objective answer."
You need to answer two questions before you vote to close the quesion.

Why do you think it has no objective answer?

If it has no objective answer, why it should be closed?

I believe Pete L Clark has already answered (1); for (2), see the [help/dont-ask]. Open-ended discussion questions are outside the scope of this site, which is limited to practical, objectively answerable questions.

@ff524 Pete L Clark just says it's opinion based. Just saying something is true does not make it true. As for the help center, please quote the exact part.

@ff524
Do you think this question of yours has an objective answer?
http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20841/is-it-ethical-acceptable-to-give-a-lighter-penalty-to-students-who-admit-to-chea

Copyright does not protect ideas, just how they are expressed.  Copying text generally violates copyright (although there are exceptions in which quoting is permitted), but copyright places no restrictions whatsoever on using ideas.

For example, can I refuse other people to use the original idea of my paper?

No, using your ideas is not enough to turn another paper into a derivative work.

Or can I forbid them using an original technical procedure described in my paper?

No, copyright is not relevant.  It keeps people from copying your description of the procedure; instead, they have to rewrite it in their own words.  However, copyright has nothing to do with using the procedure.
Patents could be relevant, if the technical procedure is patented, but that's completely different from copyright (and there are no automatic patents, the way people automatically get copyright).  You could certainly debate whether patents are a problem for science, but this has nothing to do with copyright.

Or what about copying graphs or figures?

Copyright does prohibit reproducing graphs or figures (again with some exceptions, such as fair use in the U.S.).  However, it's OK to create a different graph/figure that conveys the same information.

"However, it's OK to create a different graph/figure that conveys the same information."
Are you sure of this? If this was true, you could change the expression of a part or the whole of another person's paper without changing its information and use it in your paper.
Thus the copyright law would be almost ineffectual.

Copyright law prevents direct copying, and in fiction it covers "characters" (e.g. Harry Potter).  The current law is quite effective - some argue it's too effective! But it does not present a problem for scientists who want to build on the ideas of others, because copyright does not protect scientific ideas. You certainly can re-write someone else's ideas and figures completely and use them in your paper, without violating copyright law. The closest thing to protection for those is a patent, which protect certain kinds of scientific and medical ideas, but patents also have some limitations.

Perhaps I should emphasize in my previous comment, although it should be clear: copyright has little to do with the academic concept of "plagiarism". There may be examples of copyright infringement that are not plagiarism (e.g. posting a final copy of a paper in a way the journal does not permit) and examples of plagiarism that are not copyright violations (e.g. taking credit for someone else's results).

@OswaldVeblen If the copyright law has little to do with plagiarism, what's the use of it for scientific papers?
What is it trying to protect?

Copyright deals only with direct copying.  If you steal someone else's ideas but describe them in your own words, then that's not a copyright violation.  You're right that from an academic perspective, stealing ideas is worse than most copyright violations, but it's a separate issue.

@AnonymousMathematician "Copyright deals only with direct copying."
Then what is the use of Copyright for Science and the science community?
What is it trying to protect?

It's protecting against unauthorized copying.  One can make a reasonable case that science could benefit from having fewer such restrictions (and the open access movement is taking science in that direction, by authorizing more forms of copying).  However, most of the cases you discuss are unrealistic.  The reason you are getting negative reactions to your questions and comments isn't that everybody thinks copyright policies in science are perfect, but rather that you seem to be trying to start arguments without actually understanding what copyright law says or allows.

@AnonymousMathematician "It's protecting against unauthorized copying."
This does not answer my question.
What's the use of protecting against unauthorized copying?
"The reason you are getting negative reactions to your questions and comments"
It doesn't matter. Just because my opinion is not popular does not mean it is wrong.
This is not political polls.

@MakotoKato What is the use of copyright for science and the science community? You are fundamentally missing the point.  Intellectual property law exists, and it applies to scientific activity just like it applies to non-scientific activity; you asked a question about copyright law, and people are trying to answer that question.  If you want to ask about how scientists protect and promoter ideas, you should ask another question that focuses on that.

@jakebeal "Intellectual property law exists, and it applies to scientific activity just like it applies to non-scientific activity;"
I'm questioning this very fact.
You are the one who is missing the point.
I believe scientific facts should be properties of all mankind.
They should not be monopolized by some elite.

@MakotoKato Copyright law does not restrict the use of scientific facts.

@jakebeal It does restrict the use of scientific fact indirectly.
At least, it does not help it.

@MakotoKato Copyright law does not generally discriminate between fields. There is no reliable way to write an exception to copyright law for scientific papers; to do so, you'd have to have a definition of "scientific paper" that would stand up in court as applying to scientific papers but not to, say, works of art that describe a scientific concept (e.g. a short story that describes a law of physics). On the other hand, saying it just protects expression and not ideas both holds up well in court and passably captures the difference between a scientific fact and a story describing that fact.

I really do not understand this purpose of your question. Do you want to copy verbatim from someone else? Do you want to forbid other from expanding your work presented in one of your papers? Both these have easy answers. In case 1, do not do it. In case 2, do not publish a paper. Then your idea will be all yours for ever (unless someone else publishes the same idea before you and then you lose). Publishing papers is about sharing results and ideas. Everyone can then expand those ideas as they wish. For protecting novel ideas there are patents and publishing scientific papers is not the way to do it.
You also forget what citation is all about. I can say in my paper a short summary (in my own words) of what you first told in your paper in my related work section if I cite you. I can refer to your results if I cite you. I can compare my results against yours (including those presented in your figures), if I cite you. I can expand your results if I implement your method and improve it significantly, if I cite you. All these are fair uses of your scientific work. If you do not want any of these, do not publish a scientific paper.
UPDATE: The tone of my answer is a bit hostile but two questions on the same day, one basically defending H. Obokata and the other one basically suggesting copyrighting ideas on scientific papers (most probably for profit or fame) shows a complete misunderstanding on how science and scientific publications are supposed to work. In that case, it is better for people (including the OP) to stay as far away as possible from things they do not really understand or "get".

"In case 1, do not do it."
That's fine with me(who is the imaginary person I'm pretending to be in the question).
My paper, which is very important for the scientific community, was written in handwriting.
The content of the paper is known only by a few friends of mine.
They urged me to publish it. For some reason I declined(maybe I thought it could be improved).
Meanwhile I died by a car accident.
Under the copyright law, it cannot be published or copied at least for 50(or 70?) years.
The progress of the science would be greatly delayed.

My answer is about scientific papers. If you have it in handwriting (without publishing it) then asking what it will happen to society if it goes missing, is out of scope for this forum.

I thought you would understand my point.
OK, I sent it to a university and allowed them to publish it but with only a small number of copies, say 10 copies.

...and allowed them to publish it but with only a small number of copies. Haven't you heard that most libraries are now online? You cannot just make 10 copies.

Since I'm copyright nervous, I didn't allow them to publish it online. They didn't have a choice.

@Makoto: If you want to ask very specific, hypothetical questions about copyright law, I suggest you hire a copyright lawyer and pay them their standard hourly rate.  They will be delighted to answer as many questions as you have.  But this site is not appropriate for such legal questions, and we are not working for you.

@PeteL.Clark "If you want to ask very specific, hypothetical questions about copyright law,"
That's not my intention. I'm just posing a question whether science and copyright are compatible.

@Makoto: Science and copyright law are obviously compatible in the sense that at present copyright law exists and applies in particular to scientific documents.  The question "Should a scientific paper have copyright?" is opinion-based and seems designed to engineer a debate.  It is not a focused, practical question about academia which has an objectively correct answer, so in my opinion it is off-topic for this site.  I have voted to close.

@PeteL.Clark "Science and copyright law are obviously compatible in the sense that at present copyright law exists and applies in particular to scientific documents."
You know this is not what I'm asking about.

@PeteL.Clark "It is not a focused, practical question about academia which has an objectively correct answer, so in my opinion it is off-topic for this site."
This is not Mathematics StackExchange .
We are talking about ethics in science.
The ethics tag is attached to my question.


text:
Is there such a thing as "too much overlap" with the PhD supervisor?
Currently I am applying for PhDs in social anthropology in UK. I have multiple applications going on at the moment. One of my possible supervisors is directly working on the issue I proposed for my research, and she is also undertaking her fieldwork in the same city I proposed. At first I thought this was a big advantage but when I talked to her, she suggested me to make minor revisions in my proposed fieldwork since there should be "a gap" between the supervisor and the student. Now I am not sure how much of an overlap is too much. Is there anyone who had a similar experience?

While I don't have similar experience, as you describe it, yes, there is too much overlap here. You don't want to be in competition with your advisor for publications.
You do, however, have a somewhat unique opportunity to discuss how your research and theirs can complement one another, leading to a better overall understanding of the underlying issues.
I think, also, that it will take more than just doing the same research in a different location unless that location has fundamentally different characteristics, such as being in a different culture (for some questions).
Another issue for you at the moment is that this person is probably ahead of you on the research path for this question. You are therefore at risk even if you get a position elsewhere with this project as the basis. I suggest that you rethink it a bit, perhaps generalizing, perhaps modifying. Don't be chasing someone with more experience who is already ahead.

Why would they be competing for publication? Surely the advisor would be a co-author of any publications made by the PhD student.

@FerventHippo Advisor co-authorship is not normal or desirable in many fields or sub-fields. Broadly speaking, it's not expected in the humanities.

@FerventHippo That's very generally speaking, it varies even across sub-fields. For example, in theoretical high energy physics, you find the advisor isn't automatically included. In experimental high energy physics, you get 500-author papers.

I understand from your question that you want to modify a project proposal to apply for a PhD position in the UK.
Ideally, you should be free to write a proposal that matches your expertise and interests, since you will be working on the project for at least 3 years. However, you also need to increase the chances of being admitted and maybe obtain a scholarship.
If your project has a significant overlap with that of your supervisor, your work might be seen as not novel and not "useful" to the department, because it is just a copy of someone else's work. This could also undermine the requirement of "independence from the supervisor", which is required in EU grants (MSCA and ERC), in case you decide to apply after the PhD.
You mention your potential supervisor is working in the same city of fieldwork and on "the same issue", so I guess you are referring to the same research question. If this is the case, then it's important that you modify your research question into a novel one.
Let's assume your research question is "to study how antisemitic extremism is spreading through school-age people in the UK", and you will apply feminist ethnography methodology by observing and conducting semi-structured interviews in the local  sports community in Bath,  you could modify your research question by restricting the observed community (e.g., only a specific age group, only a specific gender) or expanding it (e.g., school age but also university students), changing the fieldwork cities (other UK cities plus a comparative study in another country), using a different methodology (postcolonial theory applied to ethnography; adding computational methods), or even changing the object of your study (not antisemitic, but xenophobic extremism during Brexit).
If your research question is not the same as that of your supervisor, then changing the fieldwork city might be sufficient.
I hope this helps.

Note that MSCA and ERC are grants at the post-doctoral/faculty level, whereas OP is applying for PhD positions.

Yes that's exactly why I wrote "in case you decide to apply AFTER the PhD".

If I try to put myself into the possible supervisor's shoes, I imagine having already planned and started a research project on my own or with collaborators. I have a potentially pretty precise idea about how to do this and what to do with the results. There was some planning about resources and required manpower, and the decision was to do the project in this way, without taking on another PhD student for it.
I don't really see a place in this scenario for an incoming PhD student who wants to do the same thing. I wouldn't want to have somebody who has somewhat different ideas on the same topic which I'd have to somehow coordinate with my own (as a supervisor I'd be involved with the student project but I had made my decisions how to handle this project before the student was there), and obviously having exactly the same ideas wouldn't work either. So I imagine this to be rather awkward and I wouldn't be keen on it.
That's just for giving you an idea of what this person might think. I don't really have an answer to "how much overlap is too much", but I'd be happy to supervise a student who does something that has some clear connection to my research but that doesn't interfere with what I'm doing already. (I do realise that you don't necessary plan to "interfere", but this is how it'd feel to me; if I supervise a topic, I'd ideally like to help to make the work address this topic as well as possible - but this is what I'm trying to do with the ongoing research already. So then I'd at the same time have to try to give you my best thoughts on the topic but not those that I'm already using... confusing.)


text:
Will a dropped class hurt PhD application?
I'm currently in a Master's program for mathematics and I want to apply for a PhD.
I'm thinking of dropping one of my classes because it requires a final project which will be very time consuming. (I would have very little time to complete obligations for my other classes.) If I drop it, this class will appear with a grade of 'W' on my transcript which stands for "withdrawn". I'm worried how much this will blemish my transcript in the eyes of PhD programs.
I'm thinking this won't matter so much because this is the only class out of 11 classes that will have been dropped. Also, this is a physics class, not a mathematics class.

At a top 15 school with a W on my record. I do not think it affected me in admissions at all.

The unit with large final project, may be the best PhD prep in your course. (Depending on its structure).
(Particularly if it is a project so large that you have no other classwork for that unit say 1/2 of the semester)

If you have an otherwise excellent application, then withdrawing from a single course is unlikely to make much of a difference, especially a course in another field.  For example, if you get A's in four graduate math classes and drop a physics class in the same semester, I doubt any math graduate school will care.
It could look a little strange if the dropped course were on your proposed specialty (so people would think you'd be particularly enthusiastic about it), but even that wouldn't be a disaster.  If you aren't taking many courses and are getting worrisome grades in the others, then a W may look like you're narrowly avoiding an even worse grade, but in that case your application already has problems aside from the W.  Overall, the way I'd look at it is that the W might intensify other weaknesses in your application, but isn't likely to be a big obstacle in isolation.

Thanks! I thought this would be the case but I wanted some reassurance.


text:
Should my bachelor's degree match the graduate program that I am trying to get into?
I am an Italian undergraduate student of natural sciences, I would like to pursue a graduate program in the USA like a PhD or a MSc. Should I change my major in order to match the graduate program I will try to get into in order to improve my chances?
The graduate programs that interest me in order of liking, are:

Computer Science & Entrepreneurship (or other innovative programs with a scientific and entrepreneurial component);
Computer Science;
Oceanography/Marine biology;
Computational mathematics;

There is no universal answer -- you'll need to say specifically what fields are involved.

Rather than providing you with my opinion (I think you're aspirations are realistic), I think you should contact the admissions and academic advisers of your chosen post-graduate institution and ask them.
Ask them about your proposed course of graduate studies.
Ask them about how much course work you may need in order to "catch up" to other students planning to enter that major field of study.
I believe most institutions will allow you to start your post-graduate studies while you're still taking any undergraduate classes you may need.  The only way to know for sure is talk to someone at the University.


text:
Should I warn my professor about some errors that I've found in his paper?
A professor of mine gave me a paper, because he wanted to show me the kind of work that we might do together in future. It is the advance access version of the paper, but I've found some errors, like typos, and wrong references of some figures in the text. Should I warn him about those things? If so, what would be the best way to do that?
Update

I'm from Italy, but I would love to know about other different cultures as well, especially USA;
My professor is very open minded, nice and easy-going;
Let's put it this way: if I was a computer I wouldn't understood the meaning of the figures because the references in the text don't match with the right plot, but since I'm human being I've understood that he meant the other figures.

I believe that pride is less important than the truth, especially when it comes to scientific publications. I mean, everyone can be wrong, there is nothing bad about it in my opinion. But I know that not anyone think the same, so I've asked this question because I wanted to know if it's worth to risk what @littleScala pointed out, to spread higher quality articles around the world and to show meticulousness in reading the paper.
Basically I thought:

Maybe a professor could be nicely impressed by such a level of attention;
What if he find its own errors? He might think that I didn't read the paper with caution.

What is an 'advanced access version', is the paper published or not?

@CapeCode I meant "advance". The paper says " Advance Access published " so I believe that it has been published.

@Cape Code: Formulas like "advanced access" typically mean that the article has been published online in advance of being assigned to a particular volume of the journal; such an article typically has a DOI assigned but not a full bibliographic reference.

True story: As an undergrad, I proofread a paper about work done by a visiting Japanese post-doc and my American-born advisor.  I told my advisor: "Hiro's English just isn't good enough.  You're going to have to rewrite the paper."  My advisor's reply: "I wrote it."

@DanFox thanks for the precisions, I have never seen it before. In the journals I read the wording is 'epub ahead of print'.

@espertus you can't leave it there, what happened next?

One point to keep in mind, beyond etiquette: pointing out typos in a draft provides proof that you actually went through it, at least superficially. It can be positive at least in this sense.

Two crucial missing factors: a) what country (and academic culture) are you in? b) what's your professor's personality like? Also c) do the typos and wrong references change the sense of the paper or not?

@smci I've updated the question ; )

@Robert The exchange was by email, so that conversation ended.  He remained my advisor and mentor, and we are still on good terms decades later.

Ask him. It sounds like none of the errors is serious so if your question is just one of etiquette, all you need to say is that you think you found a few typos and little mistakes in the paper and ask if he'd like a list.
If the final version has already been sent to the publisher, it's probably too late to fix that, though there's the opportunity to correct small typos when reviewing the galley proofs. In many fields, people put their papers on their web page, too, so he'll probably appreciate the opportunity to fix that version, even if the version in the journal is already set in stone.

+1 for correcting galley proofs: many journals now make a paper available as soon as it is accepted, but it may actually be many months before it is finalized.

A sidenote: If some of the errors are of a systematic nature, the professor might be interested to avoid them in future paper. (Still, etiquette when asking applies.)

Regarding galley proofs: some publishers (ahem ACS) occasionally make a mess of papers when transitioning them into their in-house publication system. This could explain a mismatch between figure numbering in the text and on figures.

I don't know where you're writing from, but it would be perfectly fine for you to say something here in the US. I know etiquette varies with culture, though. If one of my students came to me with errors in my papers, I might be sheepish, but certainly not offended. On the other hand, if it's already published, and the errors don't affect the content or the point, there's probably not much of a reason to point them out. You'd be hard-pressed to find a paper that doesn't have at least one typo.

Yes, but ask in the form of looking for an answer.
How does this work?  I don't see how this piece aligns this way, or this formula looks transposed incorrectly, is it?

I'm sure they could have had it proof-read by many people if they wanted.  He gave it to you as an example of the work you might be involved in - not in order for you to correct.  There's no need for you to bring these issues to his attention, but keep it in mind when you write your papers - have it looked over by others even if you think it's perfect.
If you can't resist, though, don't ask us - ask him.  I'd make it a short throw-away question that's part of a larger discussion about what he really gave you the paper for:
"Thanks for the paper, I see that you've researched/studied x and shown y.  It looks like the next direction is z, or possibly a, or b. I'm interested in... " ... have the discussion with him that the paper is intended to start..."...Thanks, this was a useful discussion.  Oh, by the way, I noticed a few minor issues in the paper of a purely editorial nature.  Maybe it's too late to send corrections, but if not are you interested in having me mark it up?"
You aren't criticizing his work - in fact you just spent a great deal of time discussing it with him, hopefully in a positive light. You are offering your help in improving the presentation of the work.  If he declines, no problem.  If he accepts, go ahead.
Keep in mind that you may, however, be seen as volunteering to proof-read all the work he is involved with, and later that may actually become a burden you don't want to have.

There's a balance to be maintained.
First, I always assume grammatical and spelling errors to be matters of style and typographical errors. Clearly if someone has typed "teh" or "peaked" it should be noted. But otherwise, use the red pen to note style and readability.
But when someone more learned than myself makes claims I as a student would contest, it's better to frame that discussion as, "Could you explain to me why...?" Certainly the most expert among us make errors. But on both sides, it's more likely to be caused by ignorance than intention. As the mentor I might not have encountered a scenario that raises questions; as the student, likewise. So many, although one may be certain in a claim, frame it with a subtle doubt as I just did.
Beware though of your own hubris attacking someone else's pride. The professor can make a mistake and be grateful you politely advised them privately. Likewise many students are eager to raise their hand and say, "That's wrong!" only to invoke the ire of public humiliation as the professor either tactfully acknowledges their statement or more often suggests they engage in further research and report their findings.

Definitely no.
I did the same and it did not go down well. Smiles yes and thanks, but after that we had a bit of an icy relationship.
This nearly cost me my M.Sc.
Don't!

Please, can you explain a bit better your experience?

Sure. I pointed out some little errors and for my troubles I was met with sarcasm for the rest of the academic year with remarks like "oh I'm sure you know better than me" and "are you sure you didn't make a mistake here?". My point is you NEVER know how the other person will take it no matter how friendly they seem. We have an old saying in the UK originating from Lancashire.. "There's nowt as queer as folk". It's worth bearing in mind!

The positive thing is that you knew you did not want to stay with them for a doctorate, I guess.

I would wait until you are actually his student.  At this stage he probably has lots of potential candidates and it's important that he sees you as friendly and easy to work with.


text:
Hypothesis for an engineering project that can't be tested due to time constraints
Question: How can I formulate a hypothesis for an engineering project that I help to develop but probably won't have time to test?
Explanation: The project is to develop a system that will train clinicians to write a certain kind of research data. This type of data will be posted into a community where clinicians can discuss and collaborate on it. I am working on this project and it will be the basis for my master thesis. The value of this project for the company is to generate more of the research data and to thus to create a community that actively discusses its products. Thus, my hypothesis could be something like: The new system will help to generate more research data and support discussion about the company's products. However, I can't test this hypothesis because the marketing and acceptance of the system will take too long. Thus, probably when the hypothesis would be testable (i.e. the first people are using it) I must have already delivered my thesis. I can't think of a hypothesis that only includes the setup of such a system.
Can anyone think of something or give me some hints on how I can come up with a hypothesis or handle this situation?

As this question has received some votes to close, I'd like to highlight that (a) while the question in present form is specific to engineering, it is applicable to most applied research fields, and (b) it fits the category 'Requirements and expectations of academicians' as mentioned in the Help Centre.

I think the question is misworded. As I understand it you already have a hypothesis, but your real question is something like "How can plan the work to be able to write an acceptable thesis that must be delivered before the full results are available. There are some good answers towards that already.

Thank you both so much for your answers. Both of them have been very helpful and I will as suggested only focus on smaller parts that I can test in the given timeframe.

For your specific case:
You could create a basic version of the system in a short time and conduct a study with a small number of clinicians. Have one group of them use it, and one group not use it. Define metrics that capture user variables (ease of use, tangible benefits) and system variables (how much different features are used, how much it adds to any existing discussion on products etc.). Make small changes in the system to change these variables, and map the outputs. By doing this, you already have an alpha-test, which will help you pitch the system when it is actually developed.
For the general case:
Often it is not possible to test the actual system/design/product in a limited time-frame. A good solution is to identify different parts of the system/design/product, compare these with existing systems and isolate parts that are unique and/or critical improvements. Develop just these parts, and test them either physically or through some kind of simulation. If it is a simulation, do some validation testing to increase confidence. Document everything, and generate sensible statistics during testing. Honestly report all the positive outcomes, the flaws and methods to tackle the flaws.

So you are writing a thesis that does not contain experiments because the time frame is too narrow to test the constructed system. On the other hand, you are not writing a purely theoretical thesis because your aim is to solve a practical problem.
So you definitely need a hypothesis like the one you suggested. If you cannot do experiments yourself, you need to rely on the literature. You need to look up studies and other experiments that support the means and approaches that you suggest in your model. In this way you can have a hypothesis, make it plausible, without really "proving" it by experiment.


text:
If and how long a thesis parked on a restricted server will be indexed by Google?
My thesis has been archived on the repository of my university with restricted access three weeks ago. By "archived" I mean that it has been assigned an identifier online.
So far, however, I found that the item cannot be detected by Google Scholar. When I try to add it in my Google Scholar profile automatically my thesis cannot be found by Google, and when I add it manually in the profile there is no field for me to add the link of the identifier.
I understand that normally it will take from a few days to several weeks to find a new paper and include it in Google. My question is: in my case (thesis archived on the restricted server) if I could find it later until Google indexes my thesis? If yes, how long I should wait for? If not, how can I show an identifier for the thesis item in my Scholar profile?
Thank you very much!

How is the access to the thesis restricted? If you mean that only computers inside the university network can access the site, or that you need a username and password, then it will never be indexed by google because googles machines are neither on your network, nor do they have the password.

Lots of people seem to get really upset when a free service provided by people they don't know somehow manages to not instantly satisfy them...

If your thesis has restricted access, Google Scholar will not be able to access it. That's... sort of the point? ;-)

There are several reasons for not showing up in your Scholar profile. Depending on the configuration of your university repository, maybe Google can not access and index the document, just as Ian pointed out. However, even if it is online and available for anyone to see, Google can be blocked (robots.txt) or still have not index those pages.
So, all you can do is wait for Google to index (without any defined time to do so), or add your thesis to other repository or even to a personal website (if your university allows you to do so).


text:
Contacting the PhD supervisor directly via his email
I have applied to a PhD student position via the lab portal (as requested) and my application statut is "Application under review" for more than month now.
Is appropriate to contact the PhD supervisor directly via his email and ask for news.

Actually, I'd suggest this only under certain circumstances. But if it just anxiety, I'd recommend waiting.
But if you have decisions to make or if the deadlines are fast approaching it would be appropriate. Likewise if you have additional information that might affect the decision.
If you know that the decision will be made by a certain date then you should learn by then in any case. But if it is clearly open ended then it seems more appropriate to both state your continued interest and ask for any information. And a month or so, in that case, is probably fine.
And, of course, don't close out other options while you wait.