text:
Accused of violating NDA on thesis
I received my degree in Mathematics last year and spent my last semester working on my master's thesis. The topic was of interest to a private company, so I joined a project (4 months) partially funded by them. The final thesis that I presented to my university was purely mathematical, I had no sensitive information of any kind. The thesis included many different topics and it was far from being anything publishable at that state.
After I graduated, I was very interested in continuing with the company. They declined despite my insistence, as they were not satisfied with the project's results. After that, we never talked again and everybody moved on with their lives.
Following my graduation, I continued pursuing one of the topics (again purely mathematical) discussed in the project. I ended up working with other researchers who published a related article in the past, and who were eager to unite efforts. Fast forward 10 months, we managed to get a decent article.
I contacted one of the guys from the firm and showed it to him recently, as I wanted him to recommend me for a graduate application. Thought of this as proof of my hard work, as a proof that I am somebody worth endorsing.
Quite the contrary, he began saying many offensive things. Among them that I (and even the coauthors, he dared to say) will get banned for life in publishing for renowned journals, as I was violating an NDA that I signed. The only way for him not to pursue it would be if he appears as a coauthor (even mentioned bringing another guy from the company as another author). He basically treated me as somebody unethical who published stolen ideas.
Trying to think about it as objective as I can, I can come up with the following arguments:
His points:

Between the thesis and the newer article, there is one common topic.
On that specific topic, some ideas were born during the project time.

My points:

Again, I don't work with any sensitive information of any kind. So it's not like I am publishing any company's secrets or anything close to that.
Sure, they introduced me to the topics, but I consider the contributions (corresponding to the overlapping topic) mine. Because the end of the project (and thesis' deadline for submission) was approaching, we didn't have time to discuss them. I presented these ideas in the final draft and when they reviewed it they didn't find any gaps in my arguments. After this we never talked about them again.
The article is extensive, most of it are ideas that were the fruit of correspondence with the coauthors. Also, even on that repeated topic, the proofs are different and formally prooves statements that were posed as mere conjectures in the final draft.
Work is my master's thesis, so I am sure anyone from the university can read it. So as a former alumnus, why a citation is not sufficient?
In the acknowledgments section of the article, I recognized the support of the company.

Just pisses me off that they gave up on the project but I did not. It would be very unfair that after all this subsequent effort, that they appear as equal contributors. Nobody reached out to me ever again, and now when we have something, they want to take credit. And besides, how could I bring up these new co-authors out of thin air to the actual ones? They are of course, unaware of this.
Despite my emotions, in the end I just want to do the right thing. I frankly do not know anybody who could advise me on this and hence I am posting it here. What is the best way to proceed in this case?

To clarify: setting aside all the NDA stuff, is it your considered professional opinion (and/or of your coauthors) that Guy From Company has not made a substantial intellectual contribution to the paper, such as would normally qualify him for coauthorship?

‘I (and even the coauthors […]) will get banned for life in publishing.’ By whom, the Publishing Central Committee?

Are the existing co-authors party to the NDA?

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

Not a full answer, but I think worth noting: seems to me that have an NDA get settled by "making people in the company co-authors" is suspicious. IANAL but sensible requests would be to either a) make you retract the paper or b) ask for monetary compensation for damages. Them being coauthor does not protect the company's economic interest, which is the reason NDAs exist.

@MarcoCapitani this is not just suspicious, depending on the circumstances, this might pass the bar for blackmail which is a crime in most jurisdictions.

"It's a violation of your NDA! But not if I'm included as a coauthor." As if his involvement makes the information no longer sensitive... (well, it almost certainly wasn't sensitive to begin with.) But it cannot be both sensitive and not sensitive on condition of his inclusion - it either is or it's not. This person is toxic, manipulative, and spouting nonsense. But as others have suggested, do what you can to armor up legally.

As they are accusing you of violating the NDA you apparently signed, you probably should stop communicating with them and seek legal advice. If you are currently affiliated with a university, contact their legal team. Otherwise, seek support from the legal team of the university you did your MSc at.

And, specifically, the right course of action is not to settle the matter by making them co-authors.

Wolfgang's suggestion to not settle by giving away co-authorship is even more important if future work in that field is intended by the OP.

@user1110 To reiterate, stopping communication is fundamentally important. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a lawsuit. The moment the (ex-colleague at the) company brought up NDA violation, this stopped being an academic dispute over authorship and turned into a  a legal dispute (NDA breach). OP, you should treat it the same. Forget about academic ethics doubts and Academia.SE, talk with a lawyer.

An NDA violation is such a serious accusation that this should be immediate "speak to my lawyer" event. You need to recognize what you can screw around with and what you can't. NDA falls in the latter category.

@WolfgangBangerth Although definitely keep the email where they suggested that, because "We'll ruin your career if you don't make us coauthors" isn't a solution to an NDA violation (since it doesn't stop anything from being disclosed); it's attempted blackmail (IANAL, but if you provide those messages to someone who is, they'll likely find it wonderful ammunition).

An NDA is a legal document managed by the company's legal department. This department will pursue or not pursue if it learns that there are concerns with the NDA.
The "somehow" in your case might be your ex-colleague.
I am writing "might" because technical people usually only have a vague idea of the NDA, and they would need to raise an alert with the legal team if they suspect a problem. Only at that point does the topic start.
They have exactly zero capacity to decide about this NDA and give you conditions. So whatever they say is not really interesting.
Now, they can alert the legal department out of spite, and then you have to discuss it with an attorney. Do not discuss it with the ex-colleague at all.

This seems level-headed to me.

There is a long and time-honoured tradition of people at companies, sometimes with no authority or expertise whatsoever, sometimes without even permission to represent that company in that matter, trying to give unsolicited legal advice to employees (or in this case ex-employees) as a means to persuade them to do something. I suppose in some sense, if you have no idea whether or not something you say is true, can you truly be said to be lying? Yes. Yes you can.

-1. This is far from certain. Maybe 1/4 of the companies we have partnered with in an academic setting are big enough to have a legal department. This is because there's funding and structures to encourage small businesses to work with universities in the US.

@user71659 in no case an NDA is created and enforced by a regular employee. Either you have a legal team or you appoint an attorney.

@SteveJessop yes of course, this is why I mentioned that whatever they say does not matter and to not discuss with them

@user71659 And do those companies write NDAs for you to sign? If they do, as WoJ says, they either have a legal team of their own, or they get an external legal advisor or attorney to write the NDAs for them … or they very stupidly try to write their own NDAs, risking that they’re completely invalid because they don’t know what they’re doing.

@JanusBahsJacquet They copy somebody else's NDA, which is basically what a lawyer would do anyway.

The company knew you were writing your Master's thesis on this work, and they had no objection to you disclosing that non-confidentially to your institution. So it seems to me rather unlikely that the company even imagined that the work was anything they wanted to protect under whatever NDA you signed.
This is especially so if your Master's thesis was "published" in any weak sense, even just a copy lodged with the library. It further seems likely that the same is true of your more recent paper, since it builds further on the same work (or work from the same project) that the company already consented to you releasing before.
Companies whose research is confidential will have that conversation before you leave, not after, because they want to stop you publishing the confidential information, not leverage the NDA after the fact for a trivial gain.
To-do list:

Find another referee. Do not under any circumstances negotiate with this guy for a reference. It'd be tainted by his proposed quid pro quo.
Distinguish in your mind the ex-colleague and the ex-employer. You signed an NDA with the ex-employer, not the ex-colleague. The ex-colleague is demanding co-authorship, not the ex-employer. Is he the CEO, who decides what the company cares about? I assume not. So if he's telling you that he will pursue the matter with the ex-employer unless you give him co-authorship, then this is bluster. The ex-employer would take a very dim view of him offering not to pursue it with them, since that would be him collaborating with you to breach your NDA, in return for a co-authorship that is beneficial to him and not them. If he's telling you that the ex-employer will pursue it unless you give him co-authorship then nah, it'd be the company's lawyers writing that letter. You could then take that letter to the other co-authors and the journal and say, "hey, look at this, what should we do?".
The ex-colleague has threated some kind of enforcement of the NDA, if not explicitly mentioned a legal action. Keep all the emails to this point. Don't discuss the issue with him any further. Ideally you don't talk at all to people who have threatened you with legal action until your lawyer has spoken to their lawyer and advised you. The advice might be to continue not talking to them.
Find someone who can advise you on matters of academic publishing. If you're not currently affiliated with an institution, try your former institution or perhaps even the co-authors and their institution(s). This threat is probably absolute nonsense, but it will make life easier for you if some qualified person can look at the specifics of the case and tell you the same things you've been told here in comments. There is no list of NDA-breakers that journals use to ban them for life. There is also no rule that everyone you ever talked to about a bit of work, is a co-author on every paper you write in future about that subject.
Consider whether this former colleague's contribution to the original project actually deserves a co-author credit or not on this new work. This is something for the authors as a group, not for you alone. Arguably you may need the company's (not the ex-colleague's, the company's) express permission before you can even discuss his contribution with your co-authors. It's all under NDA, remember ;-)

I would suggest that you re-read the NDA you signed, except that it almost certainly is some boiler-plate thing whose language is extremely one-sided in favour of the employer, refusing you the right ever to say anything to anyone about anything involving the company. The question is not what it says, but what is enforceable. Find it, though (and any employment contract you had), because if you get as far as speaking to a lawyer then they'll need to see it.
"Just pisses me off that they gave up on the project but I did not. It would be very unfair that after all this subsequent effort, that they appear as equal contributors" - well, co-authors are never precisely equal contributors. Some contributed more work, or more crucial ideas than others. That's fine. Forget about that, focus on whether he meets the bar as an author. The fact he appealed to an NDA has no bearing on whether he contributed to the paper or not. Reserve your pissed-offness for the fact he waved the NDA at you! That's what potentially, if the threat is real (which it likely isn't) isolates you from your co-authors. They never worked there and never signed the NDA.
I suppose the worst case scenario here is if all the following happen:

It's potentially bad if the company actually does care about the NDA, and does not want the work published.
It's potentially bad if the NDA is even vaguely enforceable in your case, that is the academic work is somehow sensitive, and publishing it causes the company material harm. Failing to crediting the ex-colleague is not (I claim, in my unprofessional opinion) a material harm that needs protection via NDA. He can take that up himself with your co-authors and/or the journal if he wants.
It's potentially bad if you never told your co-authors about the NDA (because it didn't occur to you it could be relevant), and they feel like you've opened them up to a problem that could get their article withdrawn (which is only if they think it is relevant and you should have known).
It's potentially bad if you have nobody who can advise you in any official capacity, and can't afford to consult a lawyer of your own with experience of NDAs.

This all depends on details not provided here (and some that you can't provide to the internet at large). But, do what you need to, to establish that you're not in the worst case. Even if one or two of the "potential bads" is true, that still doesn't mean you're in any trouble. You'd need a lot to go against you.

Ah, just re-read "I joined a project (4 months) partially funded by them". So, were you even employed by them for 4 months? Whoever organised the project on the side of your University might be interested to know that this company is funding projects and then threatening the students on those projects with NDA violation for using the results of the project done in collaboration with the University. By "interested", I mean both that it's in the University's interests not to permit funders to veto publication, and that it gives them a reason to give you the advice you need.

It's also not in the University's best interest to work again with such companies again of it's not just one person blustering about. Informing the relevant university people about this is important, not just for OP but also for new students and the university itself.

Synopsis: if the NDA contains a clause about arbitration, you need to be careful
Unfortunately, you need to take the thread of being held in violation of the NDA seriously, even if there is no objective violation. NDAs often contain language that enforces arbitration, which is a process in which a corporation can cause the other party so many legal fees that a private person of limited means has to submit to illegal claims. Thus, you need to engage the help of the university through which you made the NDA. A private lawyer at this point is too costly. The university however has a duty to protect you since you were a student of your university when you signed the NDA as part of your student activities.
Second, as others have said, the employee is not speaking for the corporation and the extortion of you based on the NDA is not the company acting. If you talk directly to the corporation, or indirectly through your advisor, they might be astonished by the behavior of the employee, which could be a tort that could result in civil action by you. (Not that it would be worthwhile pursuing since you would need to prove negative consequences). The corporation would be the only one that can decide whether they would be seeing the publication a violation of the NDA. From what you tell us, this would be unlikely.
Third, even if you were held in violation of the NDA, your capability of future publication would not be restricted. This threat at least is not based on reality. However, if you would have violated an NDA by publication, a publisher would likely not want to publish that particular work.
The most likely outcome is that you are free to publish your results. Your co-authors could of course be sued in civil court, but the case is most likely to be dismissed before it comes to trial. This is because they do not have signed the NDA which an arbitration clause.


text:
Best approach to relocate with family while studying in the US
I am intending to pursue a PhD program (pharmaceutics) in the US. I will have a student visa. I am trying to figure out the best approach to take so as to move with my family (wife and 2 children who are currently aged 4 years and 10 years respectively).
I will be funded entirely by stipends I may get while studying, so I am wondering:

Is it possible for student stipends and on-campus/off-campus jobs
support the entire family expenses (basic things, accommodation and
school fees for the kids) while pursuing my PhD?

What are the chances or ways to get my wife a job?

Which state can I find affordable houses that can accommodate a
family of four?

You need to check what a student visa allows you to do in the US (off-campus jobs are not allowed I believe, but I'm not an expert). And you wife would need a visa allowing her to work, which may not be easy to obtain. Public schools are free in the US.

Your wife will be on F-2 visa. It's not easy for her to get permission to work.

In general it's hard to immigrate to the US. We've had politicians and political parties who tell people that the reason they don't have a better job is because it was stolen by an immigrant, or that immigrants are violent threats (these are wrong, but politics isn't required to be right). A student visa is easier to get specifically because it is not a direct pathway to permanent immigration.

"school fees for the kids" primary and secondary education in the US is free, unless you insist on private/religious schooling which would definitely make this whole thing more challenging ... likely the yearly fees are your entire stipend.

There is no standard way in which graduate students are funded in the US. It ranges from students who pay for everything (food, rent, fees, tuition, office supplies, computers, travel to conferences and health insurance, etc.) to fully-funded positions that cover all of these. Yes, including meals, and I know because I had such a position while a graduate student. Departments offer more to attract better graduate students, so you can expect the better funded positions to be more competitive. Between those two extremes, everything goes. Most graduate students get a tuition remission and earn their rent money by working as Teaching Assistants, that is, teaching courses or labs.
It is entirely possible for a family of 4 to support itself while one of the parents goes to graduate school. I did exactly that. There are too many factors to discuss in a short answer here, but in short trying to find such a spot in a New York City or anywhere in California is  impossible, while entirely possible in the south of the US and in Midwest states. Catholic universities have a tradition of supporting students with families with subsidized housing and other incentives.
Student visas only allow you to work on campus, but finding such jobs will entirely depend on the university. Some universities offer good jobs at at good pay (e.g. museum assistant, library work, research assistant, office work, etc.), while at other universities competition for any kind of on-campus job is fierce and the jobs not nice (e.g. night shift at study hall, event catering, etc.). It's entirely possible to hold more than one job, although, of course, the more jobs you have the less time you'll have to work on your research. But what people don't understand is that for many international students, the alternative is not extra jobs vs. not driving a nice car, but extra jobs vs. not getting a PhD at all. One needs to pay for food and rent, there's no way around that.
As the spouse of a student on a visa, your wife will not get a work permit. But off-the-books jobs in the US are plentiful, and in fact, the entire economy depends on a subclass of people working but receiving no benefits like social security, unemployment benefits, worker's comp, etc. I am a US-born natural citizen but grew up in another nation, so I identify more with immigrants than with my fellow US citizens, and in graduate school mostly socialized with immigrant students. Their spouses held a myriad of jobs, e.g. picking fruit, working in factories, bartending, construction, landscaping, that is, every job US citizens balk at doing because of the harsh conditions and low pay. Which jobs your spouse can get will depend mostly on the color of her skin and accent. If you are Irish or English, she should easily be able to jet a job as a bartender or high-end nanny. If you have brown skin and an accent, then it's construction, fruit picking, meat factory, cleaning, etc.
The trick to making ends meet as an immigrant family of a graduate student is to ask other immigrants. Most US citizens are oblivious to the lives of immigrants, except for what they watch on TV. But immigrants do find a way, and it's not impossible.

"It is entirely possible for a family of 4 to support itself while one of the parents goes to graduate school. I did exactly that." To clarify, did you do that while your partner did not work?

@AzorAhai-him- She worked for about 25% of the time while I was a graduate student. Lots of factors went into the decision.

Is it possible for student stipends and on-campus/off-campus jobs support the entire family expenses (basic things, accommodation and school fees for the kids) while pursuing my PhD?

It's a stretch.

These stipends are usually sufficient for a single student to find a decent apartment (often shared) and buy meals and other necessities. Stretching this to cover a family of four will be tough.
Your wife will probably not be allowed to work (legally) in the US.
It is unlikely that you will be allowed to work off campus. You would have to apply for permission from ICE, and their guidelines state that such applications will be approved only after you've been here for a year, and only if your economic situation has deteriorated from what it was during that first year, due to factors beyond your control.

Which state can I find affordable houses that can accommodate a family of four?

You can look up cost-of-living calculators. But bear in mind that schools in less expensive areas usually offer lower stipends, whereas schools in more expensive areas may offer subsidized, on-campus housing. So it's not necessarily as simple as "which state is cheapest."
I recommend reaching out to some of the schools you're interested in and ask if there are any grad students in a similar situation to you that can tell you what worked for them.

In general, it is the big cities that are expensive here, especially housing, especially the Bay Area of California. A more rural university (in any state) might have cheaper housing, but possibly not if the university is large. In your field(s) this might be a problem due to the location of suitable universities. You will need to do some research on that.
Your spouse probably won't be able to work for pay, but you might be able to reduce living expenses a bit by sharing some things (child care) with other families.
Schooling for children is free here (public schools). In university towns it can be quite good. Private schools are expensive, sometimes very expensive.
There may still be a few universities that provide low cost married student housing (small 2BR apartments) for graduate students, but this seems to be disappearing, I think.
Grants for graduate study are rare in most fields, especially for international students. Most of the funding is for Teaching Assistants, but only in fields and places that have a large undergraduate major in that field, requiring lots of assistants. There are also Research Assistantships in some fields, but less common. This might be your best bet, given your field. A TA stipend is generally sufficient to live (cheaply) for someone with a family. Can your kids share a room? Harder if not.
Moving from a student visa to a permanent one might be an issue in the long term if that is your desire.
If you have some special qualifications that add value to the department you wish to join, special experience or skills, you might be able to negotiate a bit. But this is also rare, unless you can appeal to some professor (PI) who is well funded and needs your skills.
Good luck.

I'm not quite as pessimistic as Bryan Krause, though what he says is true. But academics will be more welcoming of immigrants than politicians. I expect that if you can make it work at all, you won't find many issues at the university or among the university community. Your spouse, for example, might be able to join a circle of student spouses that can be rewarding, though not financially. With shared child care, your spouse might even be able to become a student there.

I wasn't intending to be pessimistic, just realistic: student visas may be an immigration pathway in other countries, they may have been in the US in the past, but these days they are pretty much orthogonal. The only way they interact with long-term immigration is the local networking that opens up other opportunities (jobs to sponsor a work visa, a citizen to be a spouse - not particularly useful for OP) and the skills learned. There is no simple answer like "complete these forms" or "follow these steps" available.

@BryanKrause, I understand, and, unfortunately, the places where the politicians seem to be worst are also (some of) the places with lower living expenses, I think.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to answer ambiguous true/false questions?
For example if there is any statement like:

Genetic drift occur due to change in gene pool by chance. It could be due to bottle neck effect, founder effect or migration.

I know that most of the time genetic drift occur due to bottle neck effect or founder effect. Migration can also cause it but most of the time it happen due to other factors.
So if in exam a True/False question came as follows:

Genetic drift is caused by migration. True/False

Then what should I do as I know that it could occur due to migration but some other factors are more prevalent.
How could I know what is inside examinar's head?
I don't know if this forum is correct place to ask exam like questions but I found it has 'Exam' tag so I asked it.

We can't know what's inside the examiners head either. Such questions should optimally asked in such a way that there is an unambiguougs solution. If there isn't, the question is not good.

Ask the invigilator. If that's not possible, put your best guess and get ready to defend your answer

Genetic drift is caused by migration. True/False

Answer with "True". If the correct answer turns out to be False, be ready to argue why True should also be acceptable. This is better than answering with "False", since strictly speaking, a "False" answer here implies that genetic drift is not caused by migration, which as you've said is not the case.
See also this question.

The proper answer would be True, since it doesn't ask if that is the only cause. But, you might have to argue that point with the professor and you might not win such an argument if they are overly rigid. But to answer False seems to be much harder to justify.
If you get marked down and also get pushback, then you might want to have a few other students join the argument with you.
A better phrasing of the question that would remove the possible ambiguity would be either

Genetic drift is caused only by migration. True/False

or

Genetic drift is possibly caused by migration. True/False

Since True/False answers don't admit ambiguity, neither should the questions.

The best approach to hypothesis testing is as such: Are there any cases where the posted statement is absolutely not true? If so, the proposition being made is false.
A true/false question on an exam might to first order be answered properly with the same approach.
Certainly, the validity in the above approach is based on a foundation that any proposition posted for yes/no validation is well-framed. An example of an ill-framed proposition relevant for your case is one that leaves some aspects of the exact cause-effect relationship that is being posited as ambiguous.
Pushing the original statement as true is somewhat as though you are agreeing to the inverse statement ...

Migration causes genetic drift.

... but also accepting that other factors are at play. Some better-phrased statements that capture the proposition are as below.

Migration can cause genetic drift. (TRUE)

Migration does not cause genetic drift. (FALSE)

Genetic drift can occur due to migration. (TRUE)

Genetic drift is not a contributing factor to migration. (FALSE)

Genetic drift can occur only due to migration. (FALSE)

From my understanding, you should read the question very carefully and answer the question logically and technically correct. If the examinar had something else in mind that is not written there, and he wanted you to answer the question in a different way, thats not your problem and you can contest the grading.
For your example, from my understanding, the statement can be written in the active form instead of the passive form, without changing the meaning, which makes it more clear what the meaning of the sentence is: "migration causes Genetic drift". Now you can see more easily that the statement is True.
If the statement would be: "Genetic drift is only caused by migration", then the answer would be False.

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


text:
How possible is it for me to switch from EE undergrad to pure mathematics for grad school?
I got admitted to a bachelor's in EE at a public university in my country (Malaysia). In my country, to apply to uni, we rank our choices 1-10, and then the automated system goes one by one until we get accepted to one or none at all. I put maths and CS courses for my first 9 and only put EE as my safety because this safety school does not offer a CS or Math program. I guess I got unlucky and only got accepted by the safety school.
It really is sinking in right now that I might not be able to switch back to mathematics for grad school which is my passion. The general advice for switching is:

taking graduate courses (not really possible but I'll try asking),
taking more math courses (not possible because our math department only offers courses oriented toward engineering and I am already taking them all), and
getting research experience (I can try asking for this too but probably not possible).

I am determined to study a lot of mathematics on my own and also try and ask to shadow or assist in maths research at a uni near my home (higher ranked, dedicated math department) but I have no idea how to convey that in grad school applications or if it would even carry any weight. I'm worried the amount of mathematics I'm taking wouldn't even let me apply to some masters which are more lenient in requirements.
I've been looking into doing my masters in Germany, China, Canada or at my local uni with the top math department in the country. Unfortunately my math department doesn't offer proof-style courses and there are only 3 dedicated math departments in the country as it isnt a highly desirable degree here.
What's my best option? Would accredited online courses carry much weight? Or should I try to focus on switching to a math-adjacent field like CS or Physics?

This depends on where you intend to do graduate study: which country or countries.

EE uses a lot of computational math; it doesn't necessarily use mathematical-style proofs or the sort of infinite dimensions that math graduate schools use.

Yes to @JosephDoggie ... you will need to take the standard proof-style math courses during your bachelors study.  Including abstract algebra, real analysis, (and maybe topology).  I don't know how possible this is for a EE student in Malaysia... especially at a school with no math program!

I've been looking into doing my masters in Germany, China, Canada or at my local uni with the top math department in the country. Unfortunately my math department doesn't offer proof-style courses and there are only 3 dedicated math departments in the country as it isnt a highly desirable degree here. Does anybody know how much weight online accredited courses would carry if i did those? Will switching to math adjacent disciplines like CS/Physics be easier? I am super grateful to anyone who took time to respond. :)

Some things to keep in mind:

Most of the options you list (attending "the top math department" in your country, or studying abroad in Germany or Canada) are extremely competitive even for the best students. Especially if you're not wealthy enough to pay $100K+ USD in tuition out-of-pocket.
If you don't have a math degree, nor any coursework in proof-based math, then you will not be one of the top applicants. Sorry to be blunt, but it is better to know.
An EE, physics, or CS degree is not easy to get. If you are not really interested in this material, then I suspect you will really struggle to perform well.
It is unusual for undergrads in math to perform research. I do not expect that the professors at your local "top" university will have much interest in advising a student who is enrolled at a different university and is not even a math major.
Self-study doesn't really count for much, since there is no way to measure what was learned.
Online accredited courses are much better, since there is a clear syllabus and grade. I do not know how much time you would have to devote to taking courses at a different university, however. If you devote all your time to taking these online courses, then your "real" GPA is likely to be low, which could make it very difficult to proceed.

I am sorry that you are in this situation, and I don't know your country's educational system well enough to advise you. But I would certainly consider re-applying to other undergraduate programs that do offer math degrees. Not sure how (or if) this would work in your country, but it seems much more realistic in your case.
I would also urge you to keep an open mind. If you've never done proof-based math, I am not sure how it is possible to know that math is your "passion." It could turn out that EE is actually a great fit to your interests, and a better foundation for a future career. And there are parts of EE that are very abstract and "mathy" (even proof-based, in places); it's not all soldering capacitors together.

I can mainly speak for the German system, but I suspect that others are somewhat similar. Regarding admission into masters, what you know or the name of your degree does not matter that much. What matters are mainly the courses you can prove you took.
The problem is that for any master in mathematics, the admission requirements will have a long list "classes equivalent to", which will include mainly proof based courses you will be unable to take if your university has no mathematics program. You might try with online courses, but this will likely be an uphill battle even if you hand in nicely printed paper certificates for all of them.
One option you already mentioned, which is reapplying, ideally to an actual math program. Normally I would say that even physics or cs are a step closer, but at an university without a math department, those will likely be as applied as your EE-degree, as they will still not have the classes that you need.
What I would suggest instead, is to look into programs at the intersection of fields. E.g. I know that some universities offer degrees named "computational engineering" or similar, at the intersection of engineering, cs and math. Getting in one of those should be possible with an EE-degree and the courses offered to you at your university. Once you are in such a program, ideally at a place also offering normal mathematics, you could then focus your elective classes in a mathematical direction and possibly even take additional courses offered to regular math students. If you do well, this would set you up for a PhD in some parts of applied mathematics, e.g. numerical analysis.


text:
Article that plagiarized our paper is still available and gets cited - what to do?
One year ago, we discovered that one of our papers published in an IEEE journal was plagiarized by another paper published in the another journal.
I wrote the both journals; the journal I published in said they could do nothing, but the journal with the plagiarized paper did an investigation. The editor in chief (EiC) of this journal told me that he met with the author of the plagiarized paper, who confessed their misconduct, and the paper would be retracted. However, a year later, this has not happened, the EiC is no longer returning my e-mails, and the plagiarized paper continues to be cited.
We are seeking advice on how to best handle this situation.

@Salva For some perspective, see the 293-page book https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520205130/stealing-into-print which deals with these kinds of issues in great detail.

Thanks for the book recommendation @eigengrau, I will take a close look at it

Is there a bibliographic database in your field that might also get involved?  In math there are Mathscinet and zbMath, but these equivalents don't seem to exist in all fields.  (Both Mathscinet and zbMath publish reviews (sometimes quite cursory) of all math papers; some of the reviews of plagiarized papers are quite funny.)

Mod's notice: we do not allow serious allegations against named individuals, per this policy. Normally we would have deleted this question with all its answers, but since considerable effort was already expended before we noticed the violation, we have instead redacted all mentions of the journals / papers / authors in question (at considerable effort). Please avoid including such details in future posts.

To build upon Buffy's good answer, check out Retraction Watch.
Specifically, their advice on what to do if you find misconduct.
You're already followed most of their recommendations, but might also consider posting on https://pubpeer.com/.

Yes, I already wrote a comment on PubPeer, and some moderator has included some additional information. Not sure how PubPeer works and the impact it may have in these cases. Thanks for the advice!

Hopefully something happens from this post. If nothing else, this plagiarism has been publicly documented. Sorry if you cannot get any more resolution than this.

Since plagiarism isn't normally (some exceptions) a legal issue, complaining to the other journal is about all you can do. You can specifically ask that journal to take the paper down and they might comply.  If they don't, you can ask for justification, which you might get - or not.
If you want a large task, however, you can inform those who cite the other paper that it is admitted plagiarism and point them to your original. That is probably more work than it is worth, however, and may not be effective.
You may just have to let it go after a bit of trying. Bad things happen to good people. Sorry.

Since plagiarism isn't normally (some exceptions) a legal issue - does the publisher of the original not have some kind of copyright rights? Or is that rather an exception than the norm?

@FlyingTeller: Those are different things. Copying a whole paper verbatim with proper attribution is (usually) a copyright violation, but not plagiarism. Presenting a novel idea that someone else had in your own words without attribution is plagiarism, but (usually) not a copyright violation.

Thank you for the clarification

I would say this is worth pointing out a lot more than the usual "you might be interested to know about this work" (i.e. please cite me) email. It would be quite helpful for the community (and to anyone reading their papers) to point to the original work rather than some people who will clearly not be the right people to watch/get in contact with if you are interested in those results. It might be some work but I would try to set up some citation warning for the plagiarized email so that you can easily email everyone who wrongly cites it.

(cont'ed) You only need to spend some time crafting a clear email explanation (probably quoting the confession) once. After that you can reuse it. Hopefully after some time the community becomes more aware and this becomes less necessary.

Thanks for the advice, Buffy. One year ago, I did what you said, I wrote to all the authors who cited the plagiarized paper to let them know about the issue. I have an alert on Google Scholar and will continue to do so in the future. Not only that. I also checked all the other papers of this author and realized he also plagiarized at least 10 other papers. It was not difficult to check. I just click on "related articles" on Google Scholar, and the first entry was the original paper he copied from. So I also wrote to all the authors of the other papers to let them know.

About the original published, I'm not so sure about the legal issues here, but all figures are just copy-pasted. I have contacted the copyright section of the journal to see if they can offer some advice.

To expand on Adam Přenosil's comment - ask the second journal to retract the offending paper. Note this requires extensive plagiarism (a small amount of plagiarism might lead to a correction instead) and I have not looked at either paper in detail. However, if there really is extensive plagiarism and the EiC agrees, they should be able to retract the paper.
Retractions are a big deal (they definitely don't happen often) so they're not a quick process, with several different people involved.
If the EiC does not do anything, file a complaint with the publisher (in this case Elsevier).
Finally, retracted papers do continue to receive citations (example) so if your goal is to make sure the offending paper not get cited, it might not be achievable.

For what it's worth, the plagiarism is really obvious and inexcusable. After less than 15 minutes, it is clear to me that not only are there massive textual overlaps, the second paper also contains the same equations with the same numbering (with minor changes to the symbols used), the same figures (but with a different color theme), and the same summary tables (with tiny amounts added or subtracted in each cell). The second paper also contains material not found in the first paper, so the authors may be plagiarizing from another publication as well. The second paper needs to be retracted.

Yes, as Schmuddi15 said, the second paper includes the same formulations, figures, and tables with results. They changed the second decimal or something like that. The EiC agreed it is a clear case of plagiarism, but nothing has happened in a year. I also wrote a complaint to Elsevier. Thanks for the advice.

With massive textual overlaps, the same equations with the same numbering, the same figures, and the same summary tables, you probably are looking at a copyright violation. This moves beyond civil tort law and places the publisher in the uncomfortable position of federal criminal. Consult a copyright lawyer.

It may be possible to issue a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) takedown request if the plagiarism involves copyrighted material. You could send a formal, written complaint to the editor-in-chief requesting that the plagiarized article be retracted and removed from their website.
If the editor is unwilling or uninterested in working with you on this, you can file a DMCA takedown notice with the website hosting the plagiarized content.
I'm unsure as to whether you should reach out to the authors who have cited the plagiarized paper to provide the correct citation.

This probably depends on the licensing agreement an author has with their journal. If they've transferred the copyright, then they probably no longer have legal standing under the DMCA; it would have to be the journal that issues the DMCA takedown request.

I would strongly encourage anyone to consult a lawyer prior to issuing DMCA takedown request, or any legal action, as it opens yourself to legal liabilities.

Besides the question of whether this is applicable, it seems un-scientific: Science thrives on transparency, especially in case of disputes and misconduct allegations.  If the plagiarised paper gets taken down, then existing citations to it are left dangling, the plagiarists can hush up or downplay the situation as much as they want, and later readers have no way to judge the allegations.  If it remains accessible but with a clear retraction notice, then people are directed to the correct work but can also confirm the plagiarism for themselves.

I decline to give legal advice on SE or any online forum, but there might be benefits to consulting a lawyer before trying to file a takedown request. At a minimum, it might be wise to review and give consideration to 17 USC 512(f). Commentary on that section is available at https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/nlj/vol14/iss1/8/ among other places.

Thanks for all the advice. I'm not so sure about how these things work legally, so I'm waiting to see what Elsevier and IEEE copyright office have to say. As PLL suggested, just adding a retraction notice could be enough.

Consider submitting a comment on that paper to the journal. In your comment, you can criticize their paper and explain that its main results were previously published. Comments are pretty common, so you can try.
Theoretically, the editor might reject the comment, but then you could persuade them by suggesting that you might share widely what happened (including the refusal of the editor to accept the comment). Of course, don't make it sound like a threat; just say that if the comment is rejected, then the only option left for you to set things right is to share the whole story with the research community. This, by itself, isn't a threat; it's just a statement of fact. The editor will figure out on their own how this could reflect on them and the journal.

"This is the most common way to address such issues in the research community." [citation needed] "you could persuade them by suggesting that you might share your correspondence widely, which could reflect poorly on both the editor and the journal" I am sorry, but this is a terrible recommendation.

@AdamPřenosil I've just edited the answer in response to your comment.

I don't think your edit really changes anything. Your distinction between a threat and a statement of fact is largely fictitious.