text:
Should I change my PhD advisor when I find I got not enough advising?
UPDATE: My program is Computer Science and Engineering.
I chose the current advisor for mainly three reasons:

I'm interested in a general research area, and he's in a group doing the stuffs.
He has good publications in top conferences and journals in recent years.
Applying for other graduate schools is exhaustive, and I didn't search for other programs.

Here are some reasons which make me consider changing an advisor:

I have no regular individual meeting with him. In the first semester, I had no idea about what I should do to find a research topic. Then in the second semester, I only talked with the post-doc in our lab, who graduated with a thesis in another area very different from the general topic in our lab.
In group meeting, we present our works to him and he gives some advice (for me, you don't understand the paper you need to redo it; for others, this paper was not published in a good conference/journal...). I think he doesn't try to understand some meeting contents, because he's even not focusing on the it, doing something else. Once he left early because he thought the presentation was not interesting.
I wrote weekly report, and he forwards it to the post-doc for how I'm doing.
We are not doing the research that attracts me. And no one in our group knows how to do it.

But I still have considerations to change advisor:

I have few options in choosing a new advisor in a related research area.
I don't have a target group I want to move to.

Could you give some suggestions on how I could handle this situation?

Have you organised any meetings, one to one? If not, what else do you expect?

@SolarMike He said once in a meeting, that junior student should go directly to the post-doc or senior students instead of him. I asked for a meeting two weeks ago and tried to explain what I'm doing. He said it is not meaningful but I could explore it in summer. Before this meeting, I sent my summary and also papers I mainly referenced. But it seems he didn't read it.

Applying for other graduate schools is exhaustive, and I didn't search for other programs — Perhaps you should start now.

@JeffE Why to find another program is better than changing advisor in my current situation?

I didn't say one option was better than the other.  But in general, having more options is better than having fewer.

There are some students who don't need a lot of direction and can find and analyze their own research problems. There are others (many others) who need more direction and even suggestions about problems. Likewise there are advisors who want to give a lot of direction, sometimes too much. And their others who don't, or who prefer to work only with their most advanced students. It can be a problem if there is a mismatch.
The two ways of curing the mismatch are begging for help and hoping that the advisor responds positively, and finding a different advisor who is more helpful at the point at which you currently are.
Perhaps your advisor depends a lot on those senior students and postdocs to give direction to the newer members of the "team". If you can find and exploit that help there, you can probably be successful. Otherwise you should consider your options for another advisor.
Don't spend a lot of time hoping it will get better. If you, or someone, takes some action that seems to be moving in a positive direction then you may be able to see what happens. But if nothing does, protect your options and your future.

I was given one paper to understand in the first semester and I tried really hard to understand it and some related works. And my advisor said to me "Your research progress was very slow after the first semester and I didn't expect you could explore something from it" and he commented on my presentation in group meeting as "You don't understand the papers". I asked him how could I understand the papers better, what I got from him is "It takes sometime."

I also struggled to read papers and find a research topic. Tried to read more papers that linked to the paper given, and I discussed what I found with the post-doc. But unfortunately he knows no more than I presented to him and information given by another student who works on a similar topic (Yes, this is not my advisor's expertise, neither). I also tried to explain my topic in details and high level idea to my advisor, but I couldn't get directions from him ("You should improve it more than blahblah, if not no one else will look at it.").

It is not uncommon for advisors at R1 schools (especially in experimental sciences) to really serve as funders, recruiters, and very absent managers.  But not "advisors".  You should look to yourself and see if you can just figure things out and run an experimental campaign.  In many cases, the answer is yes.  But some students are weaker.
What I am saying is try to be a little contrarian and just ask yourself "do I even need an advisor" or is a lab bench and an expense account to buy reagents and equipment enough.  Particularly if I can use my own initiative to get help from other grad students, postdocs, out of group members or out of group professors when I have a very particular blocking point.
I mean, yeah maybe it sucks that you don't get this wonderful apprenticeship.  But honestly, that is a huge myth (in my experience and my friends).  But the real world is fine.  Do your own thing.  Heck, I honestly wouldn't want the old man to have messed with my plans.  Just get out of the way and let me do things my way.
Edit:
"4.  We are not doing the research that attracts me. And no one in our group knows how to do it."
Now this is a problem.  Don't do his program.  Do your own.  Believe me, you will probably get attention when you just blow him off.  You think I'm joking, but I mean it.  Throw a little pepper in the stew. See what happens.  Make him have to come here for advice about how to handle the situation. ;-)

Heck, I honestly wouldn't want the old man to have messed with my plans. He said he cares only about results but I really need to discuss what I find and make sure it is a good research problem. "4. We are not doing the research that attracts me. And no one in our group knows how to do it." I talked with him on general topic interests me, and he thinks it should be put as a mid-long term plan.


text:
What do you think about romance between faculty members?
Romantic relationships sometimes develop in academic departments between faculty members.

Has anyone had the experience of developing a romantic relationship with another faculty members? How did you deal with the situation?.
If you haven't encountered this situation, what do you think about romance between faculty members?
Is it ethical to develop such a relationship between faculty members, and is it ethical between professor and a post doc in the same department?

What exactly is your question?

I just added my question..sorry. what would you do if you encountered situation that you are attracted to another faculty member?

Your question is still not yet a good fit for the site. Asking for experiences or general thoughts about a thing is not specific enough. More specific questions might be. Is it ethical? Is it acceptable? When might it be considered sexual harassment? etc. Or you can make your question more specific, i.e., addressing a more particular situation and a particular challenge associated with that.

Is it ethical?. I included that already in my first statement. So yes that is my question. Also, is romance considered ethical between professor and post doc?

I don't see anything wrong with a romantic relationship between two faculty members as long as one of them doesn't supervise the other. Same thing applies to professor and post doc.

I suggest choosing one of either faculty-faculty romantic relationships OR faculty-postdoc romantic relationships for the focus of your question, not both.

I am not aware of any reputable university (in North America or in other parts of the world with broadly similar cultural mores) in which there are any rules against romantic relationships between faculty.  On the contrary, it is relatively common for faculty members at the same university or in the same department to be married or otherwise openly declared as long term partners.  In most cases the faculty members were in a romantic relationship prior to arriving at the university, but certainly not all.
For the most part, the ethical issues here are the same as for any workplace romance.  The big one of course is:

One should avoid situations in which the romantic relationship generates a conflict of interest.

Thus for instance it is fairly common for faculty to evaluate each other in various professional capacities: e.g. when it comes to determining annual raises, for tenure and/or promotion, for departmental and university awards of various kinds, and so forth.  One should not take part in the professional evaluation of someone with whom one is engaged in a romantic relationship.  So for instance when in a faculty meeting we are evaluating Professor X whose spouse is Professor Y, then Professor Y leaves the meeting during the evaluation of Professor X, even if she were otherwise entitled to be there.  (If applicable, someone comes to get her afterwards.)
In general, one should arrange work assignments so as to avoid these conflicts of interest.  E.g. if Professor X is a chair of committee A, then his spouse Professor Y should probably not be a member of committee A, if avoidable.  Similarly neither Professor X or Y should be a teaching or research mentor for the other, and so forth.
This brings up the following point:

A romantic relationship between faculty members should be declared, so that conflicts of interest can be avoided.

For instance, if Professor Y is the department head, then some kind of special arrangements need to be made so as not to put herself in a position of power and influence over her spouse Professor X.  Again, it is my understanding that similar practices exist in (at least parts of) the workforce.
Finally, your revised question seems to be asking for anecdotes / advice about starting up romantic relationships with faculty members in your department.  For my part, that is a bit too personal for me to want to relate my experience or lack thereof in this kind of forum.  But I can advise that a romantic relationship with someone for whom one is likely to have a professional relationship spanning years or decades is something that is best done thoughtfully rather than impulsively.  Again, this is really common sense and applies much more generally than just in academia.

I think what you just mentioned about promotion and peer evaluation is important to keep in mind when considering romance with a colleague, and yes this is true everywhere not only in the academia. To proceed with caution is very important or to avoid it at all if posdible

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Authors are not responding to my request for additional research reports that were announced as 'available upon request' - should I try to once more?
Some authors have published a very long complex research paper (on ArXiv, theoretical computer science, math, category theory) and it contains references to three additional research-technical reports, the references of two of them included the note "available from authors upon request".
I have contacted the authors with kind request to receive those additional reports, but currently I have not received any answer. Three days have gone, I am patiently waiting, but I am loosing my hopes.
There is additional context to this story. I have posted some questions in the forums about this paper. Some threads have grown fairly large and contain valuable content. Some are not. I have been in loose touch with authors before and they indicated to me that they were feeling offended by my public questions. Although I have not seen anything offending in them (except for one post, but it was made by top notch scientist who was just jealous, it can be felt pretty clearly. It is not the usual course of actions, of course, but it happened this time, maybe the vibe of my post was a bit informal) and now I am afraid that they doesn't want to hear from me. Otherwise the authors have been very supportive and very open to the suggestions that can improve their article, but I have made almost none (others have made a lot as one can see from the 3rd version and from the acknowledgments).
It can be hard to decide. From the one side - I should be able to feel when "no answer" is answer too. From the other side - maybe apologize and more explanation can help?
It may be possible that the authors are on the Summer vacation.
There is some personal story as well. I have spent endless hours past year trying to read this article and all the necessary books, referenced articles. I have really postponed many assignments and duties and even incurred some loses due to this. So, it is very sad no to receive any answer. From the other side - I have managed to understand this paper and I can survive and do my research without those technical reports, I have ideas that are superior to any such report as far as I can guess about their content. But ideas are can not be comparable to the real work done and real report written, so I should be humble.
So - should I be ready to accept that no further communication is possible or is it tolerable (after some week) to try another (very small, gentle and final) communication effort?

I removed the reference to the publication dates because it could be used to identify the paper given all the information and it is best not to identify individual works here. Also, two out of the last three days was the weekend ...

It also seems like you are not a native English speaker. The tone of your post is not exactly "kind," and so I'd like to gently suggest you ask a native English speaker to take a look at your emails, as it may be possible your "kind request" did not come off very well.

It seems like there is a lot more going on here, and your life is unusually connected to this project by other people. That could easily become very exhausting for them. Based on "I have really postponed many assignments and duties and even incurred some loses due to this" it sounds like it's having a negative impact on you, too, and I'd recommend getting an opinion from a mental health professional on how to balance different aspects of your life. This is not something that Academia.SE is going to be equipped to handle.

UPDATE: The leading author replied to me that the reports will appear in ArXiv in the next weeks or even days, the format would be improved. Actually, that is great! It is OK to wait a bit. I had the impression from the references, that the reports will remain unpublished and available privately only and that is why I made this request. Of course, it is far more better that everything got published in one way or another, if it is posted in ArXiv, then even better.

You seem very impatient. If it were three weeks instead of three days it would make sense to ask again. Don't you ever go "offline" for three days?
Patience is suggested. They are possibly on vacation and possibly very busy. There are, perhaps, another hundred explanations for a three day delay. Relax.
To be clear, I suggest you don't contact them again after so short a wait.

@TomR: If it were three weeks instead of three days it would make sense to ask again. --- I found myself rereading the first few sentences of the OP's question several times because I thought "three days" was a typo of some kind, or something whose precise context I had misinterpreted or whose precise context had not been correctly indicated by the OP. A couple of years ago power was out where I live for nearly 7 days, and about a year ago my wife and I spent our 30th anniversary (continued)

at a hotel close to this park and I was offline for at least 2 days, maybe 3 days. Anyway, in this case there was some additional context by the OP (which I originally missed because being in math, I tend not to go to later sentences until understanding earlier ones), but it doesn't really explain why 3 days would be considered especially unusual, but rather a possible reason why no reply would be forthcoming (e.g. they indicated to me that they were feeling offended by my public questions).

@DaveLRenfro, I once spent about 4 days cycling along the Potomac into Washington DC. Very fun except for the serious encounter with a patch of poison ivy. That made me grumpy for about a month.

It currently august, and at least in the northern hemipshere the typical time for someone to take a holiday (especially if they have kids). From personal experience people take holidays in multiples of a week. So three days is not enough to say they are ignoring you, they maybe ignoring everyone equally by not reading their email on holiday.
I would wait a couple of weeks before getting worried.

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


text:
Is it a good choice to join a sandwich doctorate (doctoral stay)?
I am currently writing my dissertation for master's degree course and I intend in the future to join a sandwich doctorate in my field.
Do you have any experience to share?
What advice would you suggest to me?

An online definition I found. A Doctoral Stay is a stay you do in a different university than the university you registered in. For example, you are studying in a PhD at  University A and you come for a 6-months stay in the laboratory of the University B.

It's hard to advise unless you tell us what you're trying to achieve by doing this.

I intend to bring to Brazil some electrochemistry forensic skills and ideas that we haven't worked yet. Edit: I looked for people in this field on the internet and I found most of these researchers are from England and North America

Sandwich doctorates are used in countries without developed higher education to bring their academic elite up to high international levels while limiting the costs. More importantly, since a full doctorate can last about five years, the graduates of a sandwich program will spend considerable time in their country and are less likely to grow roots in the host country. They can also maintain family ties better.
In Uruguay some ten years ago, the sandwich programs worked out well for all parties. The students would probably have become better researchers if they had stayed longer in their host institutions, but the goal was to develop the local capabilities.
In short, sandwich doctorates are a good, reasonable way for the student to get a good doctorate. In many cases, they would not be able to be accepted in the host program otherwise.

First, I have no experience with this. But you asked for advice, also.
One consideration you will need to face is whether you get sufficient good advising, either locally or at the host institution, or preferably both. This is something you will probably need to work continuously to attain. Along with this, make sure that language isn't a serious issue.
Depending on what communication facilities are available you might also miss out on group discussions and seminars. This might matter or not, depending on local resources and also on your own ability to work independently. People differ greatly on that last point.
Second, since your field is Chemistry, you need to be assured that you will have adequate (lab) facilities to carry out any research. This might be easy or hard, depending on what is locally available to you, but make sure you know that you will have the needed materials.
Good luck.

Note that I taught in a doctoral program in which students were dispersed widely throughout the US (mostly). We met as a group once a month for the sorts of things that couldn't be done over the internet. It worked because we had a continuous connection among students and faculty in which all participated. It wasn't what you are looking at, but note that communication was key. (Labs weren't an issue as this was CS.)

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


text:
What is more important, one semester less or a top final grade?
So I (in Germany) have two options:
Option 1:

finish my bachelor's in Maths at a renowned university now, with a very good grade (1.x), but not a top grade ("ausgezeichnet")
finish my bachelor's within six semesters, which is the normal duration (Regelstudienzeit), but which is also lower than the officially extended Regelstudienzeit due to Corona

Option 2:

finish my bachelor's in Maths at a renowned university a semester later, highly probably with a top grade ("ausgezeichnet")
finish my bachelor's within seven semesters, which is longer than the usual Regelstudienzeit but is also still lower than the officially extended Regelstudienzeit due to Corona
I'll probably also be able to do my master's in three semesters, so my whole studies will take five years (as usual)

Which option is worse?

Sorry but that question is far too much dependent on individual factors. And in the long run the answer is probably it won't matter at al

Which country is this? (Seems to be a German speaking one, but which of them?)

Country is Germany.

I'm not sure I find the close votes convincing. The dilemma in the question (should one study an additional semester in order to improve one's grade from (very) good to the best possible?) seems likes something that is common enough and which can be reasonably answered by pointing out relevant observations and (non-)consequences that many students might not be aware of.

@KGM: Thanks for the clarification. Does your university really use the term "summa cum laude" for Bachelor degree's with grade 1.0? I'm a bit surprised since it's a notion that is typically used for the best possible grade of  PhD degrees (although, semantically, it makes sense for other degrees, too, of course).

it uses the term "ausgezeichnet", which is a grade of its own, i assume it is equivalent to summa cum laude.

Have you encountered anyone or any institution that would care? I am from Czechia (so not Germany, but usually close enough) and I have yet to find anyone that would really care.

Its of course not that important, the question is, which is (slightly) worse... (I know neither option is really bad)

For what it's worth, I would definitely choose finishing asap.

What's your goal afterwards? For example, if you wish to do graduate studies abroad, some places only enroll new cohorts in Fall, but if you want to a short internship before graduate studies it might be perfect.

Afterward, I'll continue doing my masters, and I would probably be able to do my masters in 1 semester less so the overall time is normal.

(1) I took 8 years to do my bachelor's in engineering because I was doing it part time while working. When I graduated in 2021 and was looking for work the duration itself didn't come up even once with recruiters, we discussed the experience I gained in that time and it led to a positive outcome (multiple offers from various employers). My conclusion is that a resume with higher achievements, even if achieved over a longer period, is just as good if not better than one that showed lower achievements quicker.

(2) Then again, if your goal is to do a master's then that's the grade that will matter once you get it, nobody will look at your undergrad, so whatever gets you in the master's program quickest might be what's best for you right now.

Can you clarify why switching universities is an option?

Some employers or universities might be impressed by summa cum laude, so this could help you on the academic or job market in the future.  I'm not sure if Ausgezeichnet carries the same connotation.
I doubt either would even realise you spent a semester less on completing a degree.
So, if your goal is to have something to impress with on your CV, the chance of summa cum laude is more valuable.

Uh-oh… I've just edited the original question to remove the expression "summa cum laude." to reflect that, when questioned whether the BA grade was truly a "summa cum laude" (since the term is usually reserved for PhD grades in Germany), the OP conceded that this was their own translation of the German "ausgezeichnet". But now your answer doesn't fit the question anymore… How should we fix this?

Here is a bit of general advice regarding the question "is it reasonable to spend additional time with my degree in order to obtain a better overall grade"?
Disclaimers: The following points are based on my experience with mathematics in Germany; things may vary considerably in other countries and, to a certain degree, maybe also in other fields. Not each of the following points might be relevant for the OP, but they might be relevant for other people who are facing a similar situation and read the question (and its answers).
Things to keep in mind.

The OP mentions an improvement from the grade 1.X to 1.0. While this might be obvious, it is quite revelant what the value of X is. An improvement from 1.9 to 1.0 might be very significant, an improvement from 1.1 to 1.0 much less so.

I would suggest not to look at the grade only, put also at the relative position of the grade within all students who complete their degree within one year. If there are, say, about 30 students per year who obtain a Bachelor's degree in maths at your university, then an improvement from position 2 to 1 might not be particularly significant, but an improvement from position 10 to 2 might be.

The points made above might be particularly relevant if you are about to apply for somekind of scholarship during your Master's degree. For instance, for an application to the "Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes" it is likely to make a significant difference if you are one of the very best students in the same year of your Bachelor's program or if you're only in the top 30% or so. (E.g., I think they somewhere have a rule that an applicant should typically be in the top 10% of their year. But I don't know how strict this rule is.)

While the OP asks about a Bachelor's degree, I think it's worth mentioning that the points mentioned above might get more relevant for a Master's degrees, in particular if you want to do a PhD afterwards and are planning to apply for a PhD scholarship. Many such programs tend to be competitive, so depending on the program and funding institution, a somewhat better grade in your Master's degree can sometimes be relevant.
(Please don't overinterpret this, though. It's probably not worth losing your sleep on a 0.1 difference in your grade. It's just one of several aspects that might sometimes be somewhat relevant.)

Another point to consider is that it's not only the overall grade that might be relevant, but also the grade of individual subjects. If you want to specialize mainly in Analysis, taking an opportunity to significantly improve your grades in two analysis courses might be more worthwhile than improving your grades in a course in algebraic geometry (the same is, of course, also true vice versa). (But again, this reasoning is more likely to be relevant during a Master's degree and probably mainly if you intend to do a PhD afterwards. And even then, I again suggest not to overinterpret this.)

On the other hand, some things to keep in mind when making decisions about the length of your study in Germany are: (i) Does this potentially affect your elligibility for "Bafög"? (ii) Will the additional time have consequences for the cost of your health insurance? (iii) In case that you are receiving somekind of scholarship, how will this affect the scholarship? (iv) And obviously: How does the additional time affect your overall finanical situation?

As a general rule of thumb: Once you have a Master's degree, chances are that people will pay less attention to your Bachelor's degree (regarding the grades and regarding the time you took for the Bachelor's degree).

Another general rule of thumb: Whenever your are facing a situation where somebody has to make a decision that somehow relies on your degrees, then the difference between one semester less and a slightly better grade is unlikely to carry much weight unless your applying for something very competitive (as, for instance, some scholarships that I mentioned above) or there is somekind of "pre-decision" made by a inflexible general rule or (worse) an automated system (but I'm not not sure how often this really happens). As soon as the decision is made by individuals who have personal interest in finding the most suitable candidate (say, a potential future boss, no matter whether in industry or in academia) chances are that these people will give much more weights to other factors, because they understand that such fuss as "did they take half a year more or less to study" or "was the overall grade 0.1 points better or worse" is a bad proxy for your performance.

Story time:
When I was applying for jobs in the industry after my PhD, I had two (very similar) Bachelor's degrees which both took me more than "Regelstudienzeit", a Master's degree which took me less than Regelstudienzeit, very good but none-top grades in each of them (1.3, 1.3, and 1.2) and a PhD. Nobody in any job interview that I had, gave a damn about half a year more or less or about why my grades actually weren't the best possible.
After I joint a company in automotive industry (not for long, though), I participated in a number of job interviews on the company's side, and again the same picture: nobody who was allowed to make hiring decision cared for such things. Everybody was much more interested on whether the applicants could actually explain, say, what they had been doing in their thesis, and why and how they decided for their major, and whether this person seemed liked someone you can easily work with. If there was a significant delay in one's CV, the question could occur what caused the delay - but this was mainly to see whether the applicant would give a reasonable answer at all.
I've been back to Academia (still in Germany) now for a quite while and the overall picture is the same. When professors hire people for PhD positions or as postdoc, they will of course have a look at the people's CV. If there's something really uncommon in the CV, this might give rise to a question or two during a potential interview (but again, many people will be completely satisfied if they get a reasonable answer). But it's very unlikely that an individual professor's hiring decision will depend mainly on such things as whether your Bachelor's grade is 1.2 rather than 1.0, or whether it took you half a year longer to complete your Bachelor's degree. People usually understand that human beings are not machines.
What to do?
Obviously, no one except for yourself can make this decision for you. I suggest to take the points mentioned above (as well as the points from other answers and comments) into account, check if some of them are particularly relevant to your situation, and then make the decision which fits your personal situation best.
My main advice regarding all of this: Relax. The matter is worth making a conscious and well-thought decision. It is not worth losing your sleep over it.


text:
What is the best way to retain learned materials
No matter who you talk to, students or professors, they all say that the materials they once learned can be quickly forgotten without further experiences that utilizes or enhances on that prior experience.
I fondly remember a professor once telling me that his final year in undergrad was the happiest year in his life, at time when he felt he could do anything, from nuclear physics to parallel programming to electromicroscopy to constructing an audio amplifier...then one year later he has forgotten almost everything.
This is more noticeable in students, where it is often exaggerated to the cliched phrase "you never actually use anything you learn in school".
This is problematic for students who aspire for higher learning because much of the material or understanding is accumulative. It amazes me how people manage to get all the way to the top of the academic ladder (PhD, Post-Doc) without losing previously gained knowledge along the way. I'm sure there were important theorems, relations or techniques that I once learnt, maybe was even an expert in, the question is how do I unlock these memories so I can be more effective in tackling the problems I have today?
How do people deal with the inevitable loss of knowledge from years of disuse? Do you start from scratch? Can someone offer good ways for retention of class room materials?

Teach it (even if informally).

Not only subjects are different, but people are also different. They learn in different ways and remember in different ways.

If you forget it, just learn it again. It happens a lot quicker the second time.

Anecdotal: Bit I agree with @Nathaniel - once I've learned something once and studied the area around it, I can usually rapidly pick things back up even after several years. Taking a couple of days to get back up to speed is usually expected on a new project, even if you've not forgotten important material.

This is problematic for students who aspire for higher learning because much of the material or understanding is accumulative.

Actually, that's precisely why it's not problematic.  If you had to memorize random trivia, it would become more and more difficult as you had to remember more unrelated things, but academic studies work in the opposite way.  Because it's accumulative, you are constantly practicing and applying what you learned before, which helps you solidify your understanding.  Furthermore, the more you learn, the more connections you can see, and these relationships help you organize and retain knowledge.  Of course you'll still forget some details, but you'll forget less than you expect and recover it more easily.
My impression is that severe forgetfulness in students typically occurs when they are studying ideas in isolation and setting them aside as soon as the class is over.  Instead, it's important to play with ideas constantly.  How are they related to your past studies?  To other interests of yours?  Can you think of further applications or connections?  This can help bridge the gaps between how you learned these ideas.  This sort of exploration is almost essential if you want to do research, and it's a useful study technique in any case.

To add: it is easy to forget things that you never need to use in years - but then, is it any bad?

After exercising: "Those muscles hurt because you haven't used them in years" - If I haven't used them in years, why am I bothering to exercise them? The human brain is designed in the same way, but recovers much faster.

@JonStory, Citation Needed.

@Pacerier I'd call it assumed knowledge, unless I'm a significant outlier. Example: I didn't touch a rubiks cube for 4 years, couldn't remember how to do it and had to work it out again. I figured it out in a couple of hours as compared to the several weeks it originally took me. We forget specifics, but we retain a certain amount of knowledge: is that not obvious? Perhaps it's just me

@PiotrMigdal, Of course it's bad. How could it be any good? Time is being wasted.

@Pacerier Well, unless you weight all random trivia as of the same value, you shouldn't put extra effort in remembering things that serve no purpose. BTW: For that reason, with the sole exception of learning languages, I don't see a benefit of learning things by heart: either you use it and it will stay, or yo don't and it won't.

@PiotrMigdal, But the effort and time has already been spent. So it's bad if we forget it and good if we remember it.

@Pacerier So the next effort could be spent more wisely. (If it were at no cost, it would be a different story.)

@PiotrMigdal, This is depreciation at its worst.

I think that there are two fundamentally different types of learned materials to think about here, one that really matters and one that does not matter so much:

First, there is deep knowledge, which is the foundations of a subject, such as the principles of
abstraction and recursion in programming, or asymptotic analysis in algorithms.
Second, there is the more surface knowledge of formulas and methods, common facts, artifacts, and patterns by which the foundational core is put to use, such as particulars of Java programming or the difference between Shell sort and radix sort.

The second is rapidly lost, while once you have grasped the first, I think that it never really fades, just gets a bit rusty.  Many students, however, never really grasp the deep knowledge of a subject while taking it.  You can often even get an A in a class just by brute force in drilling yourself on the surface knowledge of the subject.  Worse yet, many students are encouraged to do this by a primary and high school education that intentionally focuses on "facts and dates" rather than principles.
I don't think that you need to worry about losing the surface knowledge of a subject.  Surface knowledge is just the "working set" that you're currently most familiar with, and it changes all the time.  More to the point, you can re-acquire lost surface knowledge quite quickly, if you know where the gap in your knowledge is (which deep knowledge will help you with).  In fact, you should expect to lose surface knowledge quickly about anything you aren't actively using (one might think of it like a computer's cache).
Acquiring deep knowledge, on the other hand, affects how you see the world.  As long as you lead an active intellectual life of any sort, you will somewhat see the world through the filters of the deep knowledge that you have acquired, and in doing so you will keep exercising it and retaining it.  For example: anybody who has ever really understood basic physics will always have conservation laws popping up in their head;  anybody who has ever really understood basic chemistry will keep noticing things about crystal structures and states of matter.  And it goes for more advanced subjects too: for example, anybody who has ever really understood computational image processing will be influenced in how they think about Facebook image tagging and their camera and generally the images they see.
In short: don't worry about forgetting facts, and any subject that you truly completely forget is one that you never really understood in the first place.

I come from a programming background, so maybe my answer is not applicable here, but I think a very good way to retain knowledge is to teach it. I have started teaching some kids and older ones that were interested in the subject and I think it helped me a lot retaining the knowledge, plus they loved it!

One option would be to use a spaced repetition system. This would mostly be useful for facts, but you might be able to use it for processes too if you can phrase it as a question and answer.
Spaced repetition systems are essentially a computerised flash card database. These help you avoid the problem of a paper system: spending too much time on facts you remember easily and not enough on facts you forget, because the process of recalling a memory actually impacts our memories. To transfer data from the short term to long term memory you need to remember the data at a frequency somewhere between those extremes.
The difference from paper flash cards is that a database can store information for each card, such as a difficulty level and the time of the last card review. Using some complex maths I haven't looked into, the system will predict when you will forget each card and only ask you to remember it at that time. For some cards that could be every couple of years, for others it will be every day. With regular use you can maintain a database of tens of thousands of facts with only 5-10 minutes of practice each day.
One popular and free spaced repetition system is called Anki. It allows you to use multimedia in your cards, which could be very helpful depending on which memories you want to retain.

I doubt there's any complex maths going on. It's probably some dead simple algorithm + some randomness mixed in.

1) By repetition
If you really would like to keep the knowledge you have, you have to repeatedly apply,read or learn it. E.g. write small cards with a question on the one side and the answer on the other and store them on your toilet or use some apps to do so. If you put a poster on your toilet like this one describing a cell signaling pathway and study it every day for about one or two years, you will remember it quite a long time.
2) By emotions
I can remember things pretty well, if I had some emotional moments while learning. Unfortunately that rarely happened with the stuff for university.
3) How to deal with the loss of knowledge ? I know where to look it up. Once you got the concept of something you will remember where to find the details.

Interesting perspective. I like the emotional bit but it is sort of a double edged sword. A partner who I was assigned to do assignments with actually passed away at the tail end of a very difficult course...I went into a whole new persona afterwards and emerged with one of the highest grade, but now I couldn't bear to look at the material without tearing up. It is all about how the neurons are connected and strengthened over time and if you could just connect it some how with the amygdala then you are set for a very long time.

There are many ways to reinforce what you have studied. Apply knowledge in different fields,like a person having studied JAVA can use that knowledge for developing softwares based on JAVA and softwares can be for Human Resource Management,Inventory Management,Data Mining etc. Teaching,helps to not only earn but also to find new avenues and new ways of expressing things. Revision at short intervals, this also reinforces learning. Sometimes people find their own unique of reinforcing knowledge like draw sketches,or use model language to prepare gist of what they have learned in such a manner that it takes only few hours to reinforce what they have learned over years. Software like Anki can also help if used regularly.

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


text:
How can I best prepare my application for a switch in Major for Master's programs?
I am currently a software developer in India and have been working for 3 years. I also have a bachelor's degree in Electronics and Communications Engineering. I have been shortlisting universities for my Master's degree and I am going for universities that offer an MCS/MEng program or a Course/Project-based MS CS program.
Please can you guys tell me how I can best prepare my application to counteract the preference universities have towards Computer Science graduates and prepare a good application?
Here is what I have done so far:

3 years of solid experience in a startup as a software developer, with multiple leadership positions held.
Final year project in Embedded Systems involved a lot of concepts from CS and could be accepted as a good CS Final year project as well.
Pet projects which showcase the skills I use in my full-time job (should I be focussing on technologies I don't use on my job? What looks better here?)
Azure Certifications - started with the fundamentals, planning to do more once I apply - should be visible on my website and Linkedin
Competitive coding - I have picked it up, will be putting more time into this once the application is complete. Links to Codeforces, CodeChef, Leetcode profiles in resume so that the committee always has the latest info.
Helped teach coding to students in underprivileged societies via NGO once COVID-19 hit.

Thanks in advance!

Why do you believe there is a preference for CS?

@Buffy Because they ask for it in the information about the degree, especially Canadian Universities. Some say they want CS grads, but are willing to take candidates from other backgrounds if they have relevant experience and a few pre-requisite courses. Some say they want CS grads only.

I can only speak for the US, not Canada, but here it is pretty common to switch majors/fields when entering graduate school. While there may be a "preference" for those with the undergraduate knowledge that you get in a major in the same field, it isn't considered essential. But, it is easier to switch if you are entering a doctoral program, since there will be more opportunity to fill in any blanks.
And, FWIW, I don't find your undergraduate major/degree all that distinct from CS as to be a barrier.
But for your situation, I don't find any of the six items to be especially helpful to an application (US). They basically all say "I can program effectively", but programming is just the base level skill that is acquired in an undergrad CS degree. Programming, even effective programming, isn't the goal, but only a tool for exploring deeper things; especially theoretical things.
None of the six are negative, but they are just a bit "marginal". If you have the knowledge required of a CS graduate (or most of it) they would be helpful, but not so much if you have serious gaps. In particular, they don't substitute for required knowledge.
You may actually have the required additional knowledge and just don't state it here, but you need to be "up" on data structures and algorithms, operating systems, database theory (not just use) and probably a few additional things (Network theory...). Your undergrad degree certainly suggests you have some, perhaps much, of it. In that case the "preference" for a CS graduate may not apply to you.
To see what you might be missing, look at the undergraduate curriculum of a good CS program and ask which of those courses you are missing knowledge. Find a way to get any remaining knowledge. The best way is to take actual university courses that provide a transcript, not just online courses that provide less evidence of actual competence.

Note that in the US, a MS isn't a requirement to enter a doctoral program. If such is your ultimate goal, you might think about applying for a PhD directly.

Thank you @Buffy! That makes a lot of sense. As you mention that the points that I have stated here are marginal, how would you suggest I can improve my profile? Would doing the mentioned courses on Coursera help? I have studied network theory and DS Algo before, but not OS and DB.
Also, how should I go about choosing the topics for my project - should I be doing projects with different technologies or focus on the same ones I use at work? Are these projects important considering I have work experience?

@omkar: regarding Coursera: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21526/what-is-the-value-of-a-coursera-certificate

The gold standard is a university course. Some universities will let you take a course as a non-matriculated student (usually for money). But you use what you have available. A university curriculum website will often list books. You can study from these (doing a lot of the exercises, not just reading). But you miss the feedback that you get from a proper course. Stress the theoretical aspects, not the practical ones. Hence, DB Theory, not just learning SQL. Used copies of some of the classic books might be reasonably priced (though some are exorbitant, too).


text:
What are some good ways to provide computer labs for the students?
Our university provides computer lab rooms for the students. We will soon build some new ones, and possibly re-build some of the old ones, and we are looking for new solutions.
What we have now looks like this:

From my experience, and a Google image search on "university computer lab", it seems similar to other universities all around the world.
But we would like to re-think the old ways and provide a better environment for the students, as envisioned in CDIO workspaces ("Workspaces and laboratories that support and encourage hands-on learning of product and system building, disciplinary knowledge, and social learning").
Perhaps a new floor plan with smaller rooms,
or new furnishings, something like what is described in
New Design and Synergistic Collaboration Revitalize Gallaudet University's Harkin Computer Lab?
We would like to hear from others who can share experiences from some alternatives. What have you tried? Did it work?

If students are working as a group, what tends to happen is that they try to arrange themselves in the opposite arrangement from what that link shows: Humans on the inside of the circle, computers on the outside. They want to see each other's screens easily.

I notice wall space that should have whiteboards. Lots of them.

Just a couple of comments from local experience (CS Biased).

When building your lab, you have to ask what it is that makes it special. In many universities, you can expect that some very high fraction of the students are going to have their own laptops (this will vary by discipline, of course). Simply providing a generic computer may be a waste of resources -- a desk and a power-plug, with an external monitor and keyboard could be sufficient.
My take is that a computer lab today should serve a distinct purpose: Teaching a course on computer graphics: Have a lab with beefy hardware that will minimize waiting time when attempting renders. Teaching a physics lab? Perhaps have a data-capture system integrated into the workstations.
In the same vein, labs get used more when students see the value of going to the lab. A lab with large (or even dual) monitors will get used more, because it's A) less likely the students have that equipment at home B) more likely the students will understand the value of using that lab -- higher productivity  for example.
Consider a 'virtual lab': If the reason the lab is there is because of a peculiar software requirement, think about providing a virtual machine instance of the lab machine for the students to use at home. This can ease the grading workload on TAs too, by eliminating platform differences as an excuse.

As Matthew says, many people may have their own laptops. Obviously, this depends on the university. I know of universities that make laptop ownership compulsory. Perhaps you could comment on how common it is for students to have their own laptops and bring them to the university. So you should think about what kind of value you can add for such people.
One possibility is to have laptop docking stations available. Or if not, at least have external keyboard, mice, monitors available that can be plugged into a laptop.
Nice big good-quality monitors (26 inches or larger) are a good idea, and are not that expensive these days.
Good ergonomics is a must. Buy the best workstation chairs you can. I have the Steelcase Leap, which is not perfect but a decent chair. Keyboard trays are probably also a good idea. Humanscale is popular. Of course, there are many other brands, depending on location.
Adding some whiteboards around the room would also be reasonable.
If you are keeping actual computers in the lab, then consider having computers running operating systems different from those students may have encountered. Encouraging people to use the free Unix-like systems that are now common in scientific enterprises is a good idea. E.g. the systems based on the Linux kernels, the various *BSD systems. If such systems are already widely used in your university, this is probably unnecessary.

I would hope that at a larger institution, such a lab would have terminals for a large-scale server farm, not workstations.


text:
Finding a place in interdisciplinary sciences as someone who develops computational methods and algorithms for other fields?
I have a strong background in programming and I'm interested in solving computational problems in other areas like physics or economics. During my bachelor studies I have been involved in several research projects. However, my contribution was mostly limited to solving computational problems. The theoretical side of our research was done by others and I'm far away from really understanding it.
Is there a possibility for someone like me to find a suitable job in academics? Someone, who likes to apply computer science, but not just as a tool for solving simple problems. I'm thinking more in terms of developing algorithms or methods for other sciences, which can be reused and published.
Or is it the fate of computer scientists, who work interdisciplinarily,  to only be "used" for programming purposes and not contribute to their group's research any further?

You want us to help you to choose among computer science, physics and economics or possibly something else. Vote to close as this is a shopping question.

This is a request for advice. Maybe there's someone who has good or bad experiences with working in interdisciplinary fields such as I explained.

@sfat I've had a lot of good experiences working in interdisciplinary fields, and would be happy to offer information about doing so.  I'm afraid, however, that I cannot figure out what the answerable question is within what you have written.  What is is about interdisciplinary work that you are wondering?

@jakebeal I'm good at programming and applying my skills in new areas where I have little knowledge. But I am afraid that I will end up as the IT guy in research projects and will not be able to contribute beyond writing some code for someone else. Should I give up on my approach and focus on a single field? Or is it reasonable to only do the manual labour and let others think and write the bulk of the paper? Or is there some other solution?

@sfat If the computer component is just IT, it's not really interdisciplinary research.  Computer science is about a lot more than just coding.  Can I suggest you attempt to focus your question on this issue? It will then likely draw a number of useful answers for you.

"I wanted to do research, but I noticed that I just wasn't good enough to do research in computer science." 1. How much time have you spent trying to do research before noticing you are not good enough? Do you know that many famous scientists were not appreciated for years and even were told that they won't do any good in research (i.e., Einstein)? 2. Do you realize that, even if you've observed yourself for quite some time trying to do research, your conclusion that you aren't good enough for it might just be an indication of your low self-esteem, which is by definition subjective?

@jakebeal I see the problem in my initial post. I will edit it accordingly.

@AleksandrBlekh 1. The time I have spent with research in computer science is limited. The thing is, when I am around computer scientists, I am nobody and everybody else seems to have a better understanding of all the topics I am interested in. When I am around scientists from other areas, they actively ask for my advice with their problems and value my expertise. 2. That's a good point. Thanks for bringing this up.

@sfat: Perhaps, your intuition is right (unless it's #2; and you're welcome) and it might be a good idea to try to engage in some non-pure-CS research, such as either interdisciplinary, or simply from different, but adjacent field (i.e. computational social science, econometrics, HCI). It is not easy to find yourself. I think that it takes both time and trying different directions. Good luck!

I've edited your title further, since what you are describing is not exactly "computer science" (and will reopen)

What point in your career are you at? Choosing a field (e.g. biology, physics, finance), making a PhD or couple of years postdoc there can make you a successful researcher of that field, IF you are willing to put in hard work to learn that field, too. If you just want to do software here and there, and do not have specialized knowledge of the field, most probably you will stuck in this situation.

@Greg I am currently thinking about either specializing in a specific field first with a master's program (e.g. biology, physics, finance), continuing with a computer science master or doing a PhD right away.

There is a concept of a research programmer, but it's pretty rare. My primary degrees are in maths and social sciences. While my PhD is in computer science, I use programming as a tool to do social science and am not really a great programmer. However, there is a lot of programming in the research projects that I tend to be involved in. For some projects, we would include a research programmer - someone with excellent programming skills who is doing methods development research. That is, the person would be developing new algorithms to solve some social science problem and implementing it. It sounds like this is what you are trying to find.
If so, such jobs do exist. However, they do not lead to a stable academic job since there's not a clear set of subjects that such a person can teach. Furthermore, the jobs are fairly rare.
Nevertheless, if you want this sort of job, you really need to work out what you ARE interested in. That is, economics or physics or whatever else. After that, you can think about what sort of problems are amenable to computational methods for their solutions. For example, look at computational social sciences (I do network science and agent-based modelling) and computational economics.

Good to hear that this is an actual job. However, I am actually looking for a more stable position in academics. My previous research topic also included agent-based modeling. What do you think of the future of this area? I hear it is not doing too good in central Europe, but currently rising in southeast Asia.

It is hard to tell what will happen in Asia in 5-10 years, however support positions like this tend to be rather weak for two reason: these are generally staff positions payed from grants, i.e money with fixed terms, also they are project oriented ie no long term direction that would easily  justify long term contracts.

I would think you have a phenomenal career in store as an informaticist or data scientist/analyst. Perhaps look into such programs -- they will typically be newer. If you're not keen on another degree, you might even be able to secure a job doing data science now, for that matter.


text:
Is it acceptable to contribute a poster to a conference without actually attending?
I have a poster presentation that I cannot attend but I have prepared a poster to tell my friend to post for me. Is it common to do a poster presentation at a conference/meeting without being there in person? I have been to a quite a number of conference and this seems like a norm.

Are any co-authors on the poster attending?

What field are you in?

Chem and Biochem.

Without knowing the particular field or conference:
No, this it's not common to have a conference poster without presenter.
It often happens that poster are on display for the whole conference and nobody stand by their side to explain them and this may give you the impression that there is nobody there to present them. However, usually there is one slot called "poster session" where the presenters are supposed to be with their posters and the all other participants are supposed to walk around and get into discussions about the posters.
However, more importantly:
There may be a rule on attendance stated by the conference.
It may happen, for example, that if some poster had no presenter, the paper that belongs to an accepted poster will not be published in the conference proceedings (or removed from the online proceedings).

Respect your comment but I simply stated the fact of what I observed. I have been to several meetings/conferences and a lot of people did not stand by their poster. Most of them take the opportunity for networking or looking at others posters. Sometimes food served on site is a distraction too. If there are rules, I don't think they are enforced.

That may very well be true. For the meetings where I have been poster sessions were quite different - sometimes similar to what you describe and sometimes active discussions on all posters.


text:
Writing PhD thesis by copying and pasting paragraphs from publications I authored or co-authored: is this plagiarism?
I'm planning to write my PhD thesis about the work I authored or co-authored in published journal. In this case, is it okay to simply copy and paste the paragraph from the paper to my thesis? Is this considered plagiarism if I am the author or co-author of the paper? I'm particular concerned for those papers that I'm not the first author.

What did your advisor say when you asked him/her this question?

Related: How much overlap is permitted between a submitted journal article and a thesis?, Can I reuse part of a paper for my thesis?, Self-Plagiarism in PhD thesis

Also see What is a “Sandwich thesis”?

He said I can write whatever I want but I'm worry about my committees..

I marked as a duplicate the question about third-authored paper because you said you were especially concerned about the papers where you're not the first author. but note that there are also highly relevant answers on the other questions I linked to in my comment above.

okay, thanks. I'm very happy I found my answer-I can staple all my publications and sent them to my advisor..

Uh, that's not the answer... this is the answer. You should really read all the answers to all the posts I linked.


text:
What to do: PI lied to me and is keeping my grant!
I've written 14 grants for my principal investigator (PI), from conception to writing the entire thing, which has resulted in over $10 million in funding for my PI.
I refused to write any more grants for him; however, he threatend to fire me if I didn't. I was fine with that, at which point my boss told me that if I wrote the 14th grant and we got it, I could take it with me.
Well, I did and we did get it.
Now he's refusing to give it to me, threatened to fire a technician/friend of mine, and has insisted that we got the grant because of his name (not the idea/grant itself). He knew his name was there from the beginning — how can he argue that at this time? This grant would have been submitted as a K99 for myself, but instead I had written another, independent grant thinking I'd have two shots to get a grant. I didn't get the K99, but the other grant should be mine.
This is/was my key to obtaining a faculty position. I also have previously filed an initial patent form indicating that the idea was conceived and developed by me. I'm on the grant as co-investigator (my boss said I cannot be listed as a Co-PI since I work in his lab) but no budget has been given in my name.
What should I do?

From a legal/administrative standpoint, was your name on it as a co-PI, and were you given a budget on the grant under your name?

I'm on it as co-investigator (my boss said I cannot be listed as a Co-PI since I work in his lab). No budget has been given in my name.

I ask because I fear that this is a case of "he said/she said", as unless you have some kind of documented proof that you are responsible for part of the funds in the grant, it will be hard to "give" you money from the grant - especially if you're going to another institution. I fear that, because you have no part as a co-PI, you're not entitled to any of the funds in the grant, but I'm not intimately familiar here.

my boss is not denying that he told me I could take it with me. There are many people who would back me as they know this was my 'baby' so to speak. I had joined this lab with the hopes of developing this platform - and now, it seems as though I have to sit and watch my boss (who is really an awful human being) take credit for my idea and receive funds that should have paved the way for my own academic position... unfortunately, I can't do that, so we'll see what happens.

There are two options: to fight and to get as far away from this job as possible. Since you worked as his slave 14 times and even after that had strong faith in his words, I suspect the first option is not for you (in legal matters being right is secondary to having strong stamina and lots of money at best). So, just look for a new job far and wide.

Everybody say it with me: Don't walk. Run. To a lawyer's office if possible, but in any case out.

only reason I stayed this long was to finish my projects and get publications (3.5 years of work is to much to just walk away from).

Are you a post-doc, PhD student, what?

@daaxix K99 grants are for postdocs, so OP must be a postdoc.

This kind of thing is why I have started insisting on correspondence about such things (and other things like dean directives) are in writing whenever possible, it protects everyone (when everyone is acting in good faith).

You have gotten your PI 14 grants in 3.5 years? What are you some kind of superhero?

Also, you can be listed as a co-PI. That is bologny. Your PI is lying about that. You need to get on the next one as co PI, or better yet, get that K99 asap and get the hell out of there.

This is sad. why universities often treat postdocs as slaves?? if in a well-known research centres, they are the full-fledge staffs like everyone else, being treated equally.

I believe that you need to obtain qualified and competent legal advice, not just anonymous advice from a Stack Exchange site.
However, there are some obvious things you can do:

Make sure you have meticulous records of everything you claimed, including the previous grant proposals, showing that you were the one responsible for their execution.
You really need to have some form of hard evidence that the PI promised you could keep the grant you earned.
Make sure everything you do from here on is also documented.

But this is a tough situation, and I'm not sure what your options outside of the legal system will be. You might also want to contact the grant sponsor to see what your options are.

ok - I think I will approach the director of the division for which I am in first, to see what he has to say (that way the institute shares responsiblity in either protecting my PI or helping me out). Can't let this one go - I was planning to base my career on this grant.

You may also want to talk to your Office of Sponsored Programs as well as your local union/association if available (ex: a postdoc association, staff association, etc.).

Excellent answer. I would add that the NIH is very motivated to maintain high ethical standards, and it's easy to find contacts to this end. So I would start with treating this as a departmental grievance, escalate to the faculty level, and around that point, also contact the NIH. Although I agree you shouldn't let this go, I also think you're too successful to let a failure to get a K99 undermine the base for your career. You should do the right thing, and you'll probably also land on your feet.

Appreciate the encouragement. We'll see what happens...

Be cautious going to faculty in your department. Your advisor likely has many friends there.

@youns: The university bureaucracy will almost certainly support the PI. The PI is one of them, while you will disappear soon either way. And fighting this in court seems extremely unlikely to succeed. The only contract in place is the employment contract. The work was clearly work for hire -- as you say, you did it for the paycheck ("he threatened to fire me if I didn't"). Bosses often change their plans, and employees are often upset. Nothing strange there. If you got your paycheck, the court will almost certainly say he gets to decide what to do with your work.

@youns: Sure, you feel really burned right now, but in the long run the difference between a strong (vs. negative) recommendation letter from your PI could easily be worth more than the difference between 0 and 1 grants. Start applying to faculty positions, that is your real goal.


text:
Questions about masters admission in Canadian universities
I currently have a 1.96 CGPA due to me failing some first year math courses. But, all but one of my third year/fourth year courses have been either a 3.7 or a 4.0 GPA. Unfortunately, I took a third year complex analysis course this semester as part of my Math Major but I barely got a 57 in the course. That being said, I'm also a stats major and all my other third year stats and math classes have been either a 3.7 or 4.0. Also got 2 years of work experience for one of the biggest companies in Canada as a Data Analyst Intern and my references are pretty strong as well.
I will be primarily trying for a Masters in Data Science/Data Analytics programs at RyeU, Uoft or UBC. My question is, how badly will the 1.96 CGPA affect my admission process. My last 2 years GPA (which Canadian universities look at) would be around a 3.3 - 3.7 per semester. And how badly would a third year math course affect my chances because my masters degree won't be in math but in stats (which I've done good in).

It's extremely hard to say without consulting the individual programs; I would suggest writing to the administrative contact for the programs you are interested in (although you might not get an answer).
The answers would depend on

any mandatory thresholds; my (Canadian) university has a university-wide policy for master's admissions requiring

B+ (B- for Engineering) minimum average, based on a full year equivalent of final year courses (3rd/4th level) relevant to the program

(you should be OK under this rule).

how competitive the program is; if there are other students with better GPAs, you might fall to the bottom of the list (and not even have the rest of your application reviewed carefully)
how much the particular program is looking at elements other than grades
I, personally, would worry that uneven grades might indicate that you had a hard time motivating yourself to work on topics you didn't enjoy; while there's no way to prove that the issues that led to your poor grades wouldn't repeat themselves in a master's program, you should definitely address/explain these grades in the narrative section of the application.


text:
How bad is a 2 year publication gap in your CV for an early career researcher?
I am currently at the end of my second year as a postdoc in the life sciences field, with my contract lasting a total of three years. I did my masters and PhD at other institutions and then started at my current lab. I finished my PhD in 2018 and worked for a year as a temporary lecturer at my home university before starting the postdoc. As I am in a very experimental heavy project, I still have not published anything from the postdoc, with my last publication from the PhD having come out in 2019. I believe we will publish something from my current project probably next year in a relatively high impact journal. I guess my main concern is to what extent this 2 year publication gap (2020 and 2021) might affect my CV when applying for jobs later.

Publication expectations vary greatly by field and location, and what type of jobs you're looking for.  Have you tried asking senior faculty in your area about this?

@Roland I think we will have more than one publications from this project, the more immediate ones that come to mind would be two. I have a few collaborations, but those (also quite experimental) will probably lead to publications a bit later down the line. Thx for the input!

What would you do with the answer? Since you cannot change this.

@AzorAhai-him-I just wanted to have a feel of how people perceive this issue and check if this could be a deal breaker

If you had been idle for that time it might matter, but if you are doing significant research, then you can't schedule results. Schedules work for known things, but not for the unknown.
But, your past is your past. If you work to produce good results they will (probably) come eventually.
The CV may show a blank section, but if asked about it, you certainly have some reasonable things to say. Focus on the quality of the research and results, not the time it took to get there.


text:
What are the major differences between PhD programs in mathematics and PhD programs in other STEM fields?
I am currently two years into a math PhD program at a mid-tier state school. I read a lot of advice about getting a STEM PhD on the Internet, but a lot of it seems very inapplicable to mathematics.  I don't have a lab or a PI, I don't need data, and my assistantship consists solely of teaching.  None of the advice I read sounds anything like the experience I'm having here.
Compared to other STEM fields,

How common is it for math students to be supported by external funding (e.g. NSF GRFP) rather than a TAship? How common is it for math students to do internships in industry to gain practical experience?  How common is it for math students to do outreach or volunteer work during graduate school?
Does a math department generally provide support and guidance to students when it comes to finding and applying for fellowships and internships?  Is it a common attitude that it is the student's responsibility, if he wants those things, to undertake all steps of this process by himself?
Is it normal for math departments to disregard students' research interests in favor of mandatory coursework?  For example, because all of my time is tied up in the 1st/2nd year courses and exams, I have been unable to do any research for the last two years, despite being very prepared and capable on my first day. (I published during undergrad and was chasing several promising ideas when I arrived.) When I asked to be allowed time to do research instead of taking classes, I was rudely shut down.
How often do mathematics departments get together in social or community events, such as departmental happy hours?
How is networking different in mathematics?  Do professors generally have connections in industry or prominent members of their field, or is that a rare thing?

(Note. I'm sure it is evident from some of the above questions that I am feeling a little put off by my department. The point of this question is not to seek out sympathy or validation.  The department just seems stubbornly uncooperative, and completely uninvested in my future, which is not what I was expecting. I want to know how common this is- whether it is unique to my department, or the nature of the discipline.  But this is a peripheral point, the question I'm asking is about how these factors work in general, not just with me.)

...I was rudely shut down. — Time to find a new department.  Walk away.

You ask many questions. Please ask one at a time. Also, please clarify that you are studying pure math or applied math? If pure math, why do you need internship? Internship to do what?

I know grad students in many different fields who did not have much time to devote to research in their first two years because of classwork.  If that is what your program expects, it's fine.  (If they're rude about telling you that, or you otherwise feel uncomfortable in the department, that's not fine, but that's a separate issue from what the program requirements are.)

Do you have an advisor yet? If so, have you discussed your concerns with him?

"...in favor of mandatory coursework". If the coursework is mandatory, well it is mandatory. Do you want to make an exception just for you? "..all of my time is tied up in the 1st/2nd year courses and exams". You did have summer vacations and weekends didn't you? A PHD is not a 9-5 job. I believe you could find a solid 3-5 months to work on your research in a two year period if you tried. There are people doing PHDs having families and jobs on the side. If they can do it, so can you.

I may not be qualified to answer this fully but with the limited knowledge I have and your question on math.stacksexchange , I really do not think that you are ready to start your own professional research yet. Instead, it sounds like a good idea to learn as much as you can in the graduate courses that are being offered, it will give you a better insight of mathematics as a whole and it may also influence your interests in the sub-fields.

In brief, many aspects of math grad school are very different from CompSci, for example.
The vast majority of math grad students are funded by TA-ships, although some have NSF and other fellowships. The (large) size of typical math depts is tied to their role as service departments, teaching lower-division math, and this is what funds the large number of math grad students.
Internships in some applied math fields are desirable, but non-trivial to arrange.
Outreach and volunteer work are not strongly connected with these other questions.
It is not that math depts "disregard students' research interests", but that, almost universally in the U.S., further coursework beyond undergrad work is ... wise. If one has an unusually solid background, there are usually procedures by which to "test out" of requirements. On another hand, I am well aware that a certain number of grad students do feel that they're all ready to do research, and that coursework gets in the way. The "problem" is that "research" at a professional level in mathematics is not necessarily an immediate continuation of the sort of "research" typically done in undergrad projects. Another "problem" is that mathematics is an old subject, and there is a lot of very useful, helpful, enlightening stuff already known... and whose relevance to any given research project is very difficult to guess based on ignorance. I am absolutely not in favor of "oppressing" students by pointless busywork, but I am equally opposed to ignorance. Accurate perception of a given situation is difficult, and both students and faculty often have pre-existing biases... Again, testing-out of requirements ought to be a viable option, if one is well-prepared. If one doesn't see the relevance of the requirements, I'd tend to interpret this as reflecting a need to better understand the content of the required subjects. (Because they are relevant.)
In particular, depts to not "disregard students' research interests", except as not automatically exempting students from "requirements". Further, there are many hours in a day...
As to social events... it depends.
Networking? People know people. "Industrial connections" would exist only for very applied people, although connections to applied science research groups inside the university are common.
And/but none of what the question describes strikes me as unusually "uncooperative". In my observation, it is very common that math grad school is quite different from what people are expecting, exactly insofar as many students expect to immediately "start research" (perhaps parallel to the impression given about other STEM fields' programs), rather than having any required coursework at all. Also, there seems to be a not-uncommon disaffection with TA-ing, as though this were lowlier than having a fellowship of some sort or research assistantship... and is construed, again, as "obstructing research". But without all these TA-ships, many fewer math grad students would have any financial support at all. (There's little grunt-work available in mathematics that would compare to the low-level research-support work in some other STEM fields, which does (by tradition) get the student's name on a published paper, etc.)
So, yes, mathematics is somewhat different from other STEM fields. Further, the fact that a program is not what one presumed it would/should be is not at all a strong indicator that something's wrong with the program (although, of course, there are dubious programs). The greatest resentment I see is among students who believe that they're fully-fledged "researchers", and are offended to not be immediately treated as such... While this message can be imparted rudely, and perceived as "a rude shut-down", the many issues of professional competence are not easy for novices to judge.
(One more time: one can see about "testing out" of requirements...)
Edit: prompted by Brian Borcher's comment... Teaching is an important part of an academic mathematician's job! The question of "how much" is secondary. The TA experience is very important to get up to speed on teaching, and, in unhappy cases, to discover early on that one hasn't the taste for it, if that is so. (I had one PhD student who discovered this unhappy fact in his own case, so he did not take the academic route.) Part of what one should try to learn is that "teaching is not a burden"... !!! ... to say the least. :)

I'd add that for some reason many graduate students assume that teaching isn't really important, when in fact most of the new PhD's will end up teaching undergraduate courses for a living and very few will end up working in research.

@BrianBorchers, yes, indeed, that point deserved more emphasis in my answer!

While I think some of your questions point to genuine weaknesses in math departments (a lack of an internship pipeline, for example), a lot of them reflect a really unrealistic idea of what "cooperation" means.  Your DGS, chair, etc.  have met a lot of 1st/2nd year graduate students, and thus they know that very few of them are ready to do serious research, and in fact very few of them really know what that would mean.  It wouldn't be looking after your interests to leave you to do research on your own, with no way of checking that you aren't just wasting your time. 1st year classes exist to cover basic material that any mathematician should know.  If you know the material, it would have been reasonable to skip them (and usually departments will give students flexibility to do this), but as I say below, if they are taking up all your time, that gives the lie to your suggestion that you were already ready to do research.
How common is it for math students to be supported by external funding (e.g. NSF GRFP) rather than a TAship?
Rare, outside the very top schools.
How common is it for math students to do internships in industry to gain practical experience?
Rare in my experience in pure math departments.
How common is it for math students to do outreach or volunteer work during graduate school?
More common.  I've known lots of people who taught (for example) in prisons as volunteers, or worked with K-12 students.  Depends a lot on what's available.
Does a math department generally provide support and guidance to students when it comes to finding and applying for fellowships and internships?
For fellowships, they should but the reality is more mixed.  In my experience, the problem is more that students aren't willing to go through the application process, so faculty have been burned a few too many times to be proactive about it.  It might require a little initiative to get help with this.
Is it a common attitude that it is the student's responsibility, if he wants those things, to undertake all steps of this process by himself?
Yes.  Graduate students are adults, and responsible for themselves.  It might happen that someone in the department is looking for graduate students for an opportunity like this, but at the end of the day, it is up to you.
Is it normal for math departments to disregard students' research interests in favor of mandatory coursework?
This is pretty insulting: obviously the department requires the coursework because they believe it is in the students' interests.  Of course, it's hard to have a system that fits everyone, but very few students could be successful in grad school in math without taking a couple of years of classes (again, with the possible exception of the best schools).
For example, because all of my time is tied up in the 1st/2nd year courses and exams, I have been unable to do any research for the last two years, despite being very prepared and capable on my first day. (I published during undergrad and was chasing several promising ideas when I arrived.)
If you were very prepared and capable, then your first year classes should have been easy, and you should have had plenty of time. If they were hard enough to take up all your time, you didn't know the material.
When I asked to be allowed time to do research instead of taking classes, I was rudely shut down.
I can't comment on whether it was rude or not, but I can't say it was a surprise that this approach did not work.  Since you haven't mentioned a research advisor, I'm going to assume you don't have one.  Very few students would be capable of doing this, and I have trouble imagining that your undergrad publications were so strong and independent that the department should have had faith that you were one of them.
How often do mathematics departments get together in social or community events, such as departmental happy hours?
Depends.  Departmental happy hours aren't a strong tradition, but department teas are, and usually departments have a department-wide social event like a picnic or holiday party every semester or so.
How is networking different in mathematics? Do professors generally have connections in industry or prominent members of their field, or is that a rare thing?
Rarely in industry, usually with prominent members of their field, but this depends a lot on the definition of "prominent" and "field."

It is impossible to emphasize too strongly: "Graduate students are adults, and responsible for themselves." It is often challenging to shift from an undergraduate mindset to a professional one, but the sooner the shift occurs, the better chances the student has, in my opinion.

The thing that I don't like is that it seems like I'm only an adult when it's convenient for them.  If I want to manage my own learning, which I've been waiting to do for a long time, then I'm inexperienced and don't know what's good for me.  If I request help securing funding, I'm an adult who should have known about this 10 years ago.  Really it seems like the whole "be an adult" thing is not so much a criticism of my behavior as it is a way of displacing blame whenever they don't feel like living up to their part of the bargain.

I also want to say that though I haven't picked an advisor, it is between three professors, with whom I have been working on research problems during my sporadic free time. My research was published in a top journal as an undergraduate, and I was the sole author. I tested out of coursework in my field. The reason I'm having trouble with other courses is that I'm having a troubled time dealing with the growing resentment I feel from being overbearingly micromanaged. The material is not hard, but I would be much, much better off teaching it to myself. I know how I work.

Anyway, I want to thank you for posting this answer, and addressing all of my questions. (I'm sure my response sounds bratty, because I'm venting frustration, but I don't mean to direct it at you.)  Again thank you genuinely for the response.

I'm going to focus on the third question: "Is it normal for math departments to disregard students' research interests in favor of mandatory coursework?"
In comparison with PhD programs in many other fields, PhD programs in mathematics in the US typically have quite a bit of required coursework and often include preliminary/qualifying exams that cover a very broad range of topics.  In my experience, graduate students working in other STEM disciplines typically have fewer required courses to take.  Thus the answer to your question is "Yes, this is quite common."
For example, as a graduate student I took required courses in abstract algebra, real and complex analysis, functional analysis, and topology, even though my dissertation was in computational optimization.
It's traditionally felt that mathematics PhD's should have a broad background in mathematics so that they can easily teach undergraduate courses in almost any area of mathematics.  The required coursework helps to develop this breadth.
Keep in mind that the academic job market for PhD's in mathematics in the US is very different from the job market for PhD's in other STEM disciplines.  Most PhD's in mathematics will end up working in teaching positions at community colleges and regional comprehensive 4 year colleges rather than in research oriented positions at universities.  Having a broad background in mathematics (and experience as a TA) is helpful preparation for teaching oriented positions.

In my mind, it's not only that the students may need to teach in various areas. Part of holding a PhD in mathematics is having a broad expertise in the field. So, for example, even someone who will only study finite combinatorics will often need to pass exams in real analysis. Having a PhD in math means something both in terms of depth of knowledge (in the dissertation) and breadth of knowledge (in coursework and exams).

My goals are purely research, whether be in academia, government, or industry.  Do you think that leaves me out to dry, if my field is mathematics?

I should clarify that I don't mind teaching. In fact, I like it and think it is very important. But I would consider teaching secondary to my research goals, to be realized as a peripheral benefit if I take the academia route.


text:
Should I write something to the reviewer who rejected my manuscript?
I have just received a decision letter for my submitted manuscript to an Elsevier journal. It was a revise and resubmit. One of the reviewers recommended rejection and his comment was just "the contribution isn't strong enough". I don't really know how to respond to his comment. Should I write something to convince him that my contribution is relevant or only respond the other reviewers comments?
What do you recommend me to do?

You really should respond to all reviewers in your response.  If the only comment was "the contribution isn't strong enough", then you need to reply showing why it is, in fact, strong enough.  You can say something like "We feel that this topic is relevant because x, y, and z, and this manuscript contributes a, b, and c to the field. We have reorganized the introduction to more clearly outline the need for this contribution, and have added a paragraph to the discussion demonstrating the importance of this work."
The second part is important because it shows that you're actually improving the manuscript in response to the reviewer's comments, not just blowing them off.

This advice is sound.  Try to gather more evidences to show the significance of your contributions.  As an aside, once I was the critical reviewer who recommended a reject on a manuscript.  Other reviewers were happy.  The authors decided to ignore my comments.  Unfortunately, for the authors, the editor sided with me.

Suggestion: In the discussion section, find literature that supports why your findings are important. Then in your response to the reviewers, write, "We have edited the discussion section to provide additional explanation of the importance of these findings. We have also added additional literature that highlight the importance of these findings to the field."


text:
Are there small citation mistakes in published papers and how serious are they? How often are they spotted?
I have read that even in published papers there are citation mistakes such as putting an incorrect word in cited text, missing a word, etc. I have even noticed these mistakes myself in some papers.
Can such a mistake ruin a career? Obviously there is no intention to use someone's words as your own, just a mistake that everyone could make. I'm a young researcher worried that sometimes I will make such a mistake. I think that making mistakes in this job is inevitable. I'm an over-thinker and would like to know how much is tolerable.

You will only ruin your academic career if you didn't make mistakes, but instead you purposely mislead/copied/etc the system. We all make mistakes. Sometimes serious serious mistakes in papers that invalidate them completely. None of that ruins your career, unless you did it on purpose.

Are these mistakes considered plagiarism or just mistakes?

Plagiarism is not a mistake, its something that by definition, requires to be performed knowingly.

Take a deep breath and relax: mistakes happen all the time, and most of the time they do not matter.
The only really important questions here are:

Does the mistake change the meaning of the quotation?
Is the mistake worth correcting?

If the mistake doesn't substantially change the meaning of the quotation, then  it's almost certainly not a problem. For example, if a typo or transcription error caused a word to be duplicated, mangled, or dropped, then it may be clear that there's an error, but the intention of the communication will be clear. An easy example generating this is when a copy-paste runs into problems with ligatures or text selection order. If it makes it past not just you but also some peer reviewers or copy editors, then clearly it wasn't a big deal, and nobody will hold it against you.
Even if it does change the meaning, you are presenting the material in some interpretive context, which should make clear what the quote was intended to contain. Again, if you aren't distorting or misrepresenting the actual contents, you should be fine.
Now, as to whether it's worth correcting: my general opinion is that it's worth correcting if the mistake changes the meaning, or if you just can't live with incorrectness once you've noticed it. Issuing a correction is often a hassle, however, so if it's just an inconsequential typo, I would let it stand.

Thank you so much. I realized that instead of "product" I wrote "product group". I know it's not the same, just while I was paraphrasing I made a mistake. However, it's a long citation (more than 3 lines), and everything else is fine. I can still change it, however. I have already seen that these mistakes happen, but I l'm so angry with myself because od this.

And even for a mistake that does end up seriously misrepresenting the quote, e.g. on the order of the Wicked Bible, the result would be that you'd have the journal publish a corrigendum, and then you move on with your life.  The professional effect is mild embarrassment, nothing anywhere close to "ruined career".

Are these mistakes considered plagiarism or just a mistake in cited and paraphrased text?

@Academicaeconomica Plagiarism is representing another's work as your own. Presenting another's work incorrectly cannot be plagiarism, because you are clearly saying that it was done by another and not yourself.

As to "how much is tolerable": There is no clear upper limit for a tolerable density of citation mistakes. You navigate between two conflicting issues:

It is obvious that you should try to avoid citation mistakes altogether, so your goal should be to have zero mistakes.
It is equally obvious that we are all human and consequently are prone to make an occasional mistake.

So a single (minor) citation mistake will, under normal circumstances, not ruin a career or invalidate findings in a research paper, as long as it is an honest mistake, even if it is noticed by somebody. It becomes problematic if the density of mistakes is high enough to give the impression that you do not take the goal of avoiding the errors seriously.
For example, if I find a single citation mistake in a paper, I would assume an honest mistake. If I spot a second mistake, I start to suspect that there might be a problem.

Are these mistakes considered plagiarism or just mistakes in citations ana parphrased text? Thanks.

@Academicaeconomica, that depends on the definition of plagiarism you use. In certain contexts, it might be considered as plagiarism. If you want a more detailled answer, ask a separate question or search on this site for answers.