text:
I want to remove an article in IEEE, accepted but not published yet
Now I am facing a very serious problem that I have to remove an article which is accepted by IEEE but will be published till the end of 2019.
Due to some conflicts of interests(we finished this manuscript last year, this is my idea at the first place, and I finished the data analysis and processing part, all of the experiments, professor X wrote part of the document), he wants to hold the paper and wait for a top journal, but I'm in an urgent circumstance to graduate. So after half a year anxious waiting, I submitted this paper without noticing him.
Until this paper was accepted to be published, I struggled for a very long time, so after I realized my mistake, I took action on this matter immediately. Firstly I negotiated with the professor X, He was tough on this thing and disagree with my behavior. After mature consideration, I want to completely remove the article and contact with IEEE Journals Coordinator immediately.
This negotiation has lasted several months，and now I hold the firm attitude that I have to remove this article no matter what kind of excuse it will be given. It cannot be seen on any version no matter online or offline. Still waiting for IEEE's reply, and could you all please give me some advice under this circumstance? Many thanks!!

So, the issue here is that you submitted a paper without the consent of one of your co-authors? Write to the editor of the journal explaining that, and ask for the paper to be retracted. Even if you’ve agreed to give them your copyright, your coauthor hasn’t, so they wouldn’t be allowed to legally publish it anyway.

Thanks so much for your reply. Now all the things co-author wants to do is remove this article from IEEE Xplore completely. Because he wants to submit it again in another journal. This paper has already shown on IEEE Xplore, and IEEE coordinator said that they cannot remove anything from Xplore. They put a notice online said that our paper is not recommended to be published. That’s all.

@zhang77 Talk to your university’s legal department about maybe filing a DMCA takedown request. Electronic publication is still publication, and they can’t legally do that without the consent of the copyright holders.

This is very good advice thanks to you, I will talk this to university’s legal department and see what will be done in the next step, I will update the process under the comments, thanks again for your kind support.

@nick012000 If the paper was accepted and they submitted the final files, they 100% signed a document to pass the copyright to IEEE (or any publisher for that matter). Also in the submission process, they agreed that all authors are aware of the publication. A retraction does not make the paper disappear and I highly doubt a higher ranked publication will accept this paper.

@o4tlulz "Also in the submission process, they agreed that all authors are aware of the publication." The problem is that they lied when they clicked "yes" here, and the co-author has refused to consent to the publishing of the article.

You have the right to withdraw your paper, but subject to any formalized agreements you have with IEEE. You may already have signed away your rights. But even then, the journal does well to agree to your request and to return all rights to you that you may have relinquished.
One problem, however, is the "several months" issue. IEEE has taken actions, that may have cost them money, over the time span and may be reluctant to abandon it. They may need to fill the allocated space they have scheduled in a print journal.
But if you press them, I assume they will agree, thinking that a long term relationship is better than forcing you into something you don't want.
You don't say how long you have waited. If it is more than a few weeks, ask again and press the issue.
But, since we are close to the end of 2019 already, the worst case is that the print version has already been finished. In which case you will meet a lot of resistance. Then, a lot of money is involved and it may be impossible to undo the situation.

Thank u so much for your patient reply and kindness. IEEE coordinator said that post a notice on this article website page is all they can do, they cannot remove anything from Xplore, this article will not appear in a printed issue. it means this article will exist online permanently and my co-author cannot publish it on other journals. This may make him angry and told me to remove it anyhow.


text:
What is the difference between project leader and postdoc at Max Planck?
I can't find info on the project leader position at the Max Planck Institute. I know it is not the same as group leader. Is there a difference between project leader and postdoc at Max Planck?

I have no experience with Max Planck, but Fraunhofer - I am not sure if the model is similar, but maybe it helps nevertheless.
Here, a group leader is a career step / leadership position: someone who leads a group of scientists working on a specific topic. A working group will work on many different projects. In the group, there are PhD candidates, postdocs, and also master graduates that do not plan on obtaining a PhD.
A project leader is anyone from the group who holds the main responsibility for a project, in some cases that will be the group leader, but in others it will be the PhD candidates or the postdocs.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can the translation of a research paper be appropriate for final year research project?
In my final year research project, my supervisor sent me a random research paper of 20 pages and told me to translate it to my native language, using all of the commonly known translation techniques. That was in the field of colonialism and its aftermath of natives. My question is: Does such a thing (translating a research paper) exist internationally in other universities and count for final year research project?
I aske this question because it seems to me unusual that translating a random research paper and counting it as final year research project. The usual idea in my mind is that when a student reaches the final year, they should look for a topic in any field and start their research journey?

Is this for undergraduate work?

Probably a basic question, but you aren't studying translation, correct?

Is there any chance that the professor wants this paper translated for a "real reason," rather than just as an exercise for you? Along similar lines: are you sure that this translation is the entire project, rather than just a first step?

Is "your native language" your field? If yes, it makes sense.

I think the key issue is that there is no universal standard rules for what a 'final year research project' is supposed to be. Your university has a list of requirements to award a degree, I assume in your case a bachelors degree. This list of requirements includes a final year research project and presumably some rules on what does or doesn't count for such a project at your university. As Buffy pointed out, the specific rules often depend on your department as well and are not the same even across your university.
So I would recommend to check within your university and department what the rules for a final year research project are and to ask around what other students at your university have done for their research projects. I don't think there are any general rules that can decide whether translating a paper would count at your department and unviersity or not.

Any such regulations are more likely to be department based than for the university as a whole. The field has a big impact on what is appropriate.

@Buffy Very true, I added in department dependence.

Yes, it is uncommon, at least at the place I currently study, if you are only expected to translate the work without adding input to it. Usually, this comes in the form of annotated bibliography or literature review (which you might need to read more works) in order to incorporate with your research or projects. That being said, some instances of translating previous work are considered appropriate.
In defense of that, translating the work can be viewed as the demonstration of the understanding of the work and the necessary knowledge in both field knowledge and communication to translate the literature, which might make this appropriate. That being said, there are other ways to assess this comprehension.
Nevertheless, consulting the university guideline and department policy would help you understand what to expect as others have pointed out that there are no general rules for this.

(+1) Even for undergraduate mathematics in the U.S. (about as far as I think you can get from actual research in a given subject in a given country) I think such a translation should include many filled-in details, references to later work, additional exposition about connections to other topics, etc. Whether this is done in-line (maybe separated apart using smaller font or other means), as bottom-of-page footnotes, as end of-the-work footnotes, etc. is something an advisor should clarify. But a translation with nothing else seems to me something you'd do for a Foreign language project.

I don't think this would be common, but if your supervisor thinks that it is appropriate then there should be no reason why it should not be allowed. They think you will learn something about the paper that is deeper than you would get from just reading it.
If you are taking a deep view of a topic you may gain some insight that would be hard to get otherwise.
You may even need to read, if not formally translate, some other papers to understand this one, say, the papers it cites.
Most people won't really count this as research, but reading and understanding the literature is a necessary first step. I would probably ask for more, such as an analysis of the paper (at least), but can't disapprove of your supervisor's position.
A doctoral dissertation usually starts with exactly such a step, though probably not with a written translation.

Reading a paper is a first step, but by just making a translation OP will not even be writing their own summary of the literature, never mind carrying out the main step of actually doing something of their own

@Oliver882, agree, but all such requirements are local.

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


text:
Can a review paper have the same title to another review paper
I am a first year college student and this is my first time making a review paper. I am working in a group and I was assigned to do the introduction. I noticed that our title is copied from another review paper and it was just published last year. I tried telling them that We should change the title but they claim that we are 'just' reviewing the paper and so there is no need to change.
I still believe that we should change it as the content and references are very much alike. In addition, it will be in our references as well.

Is this for a class assignment?

It is a requirement to passing the semester.

That's not what I asked?

Yes, a group project.

I think you should choose a different title, but you write:

I still believe that we should change it as the content and references are very much alike.

...this is probably a bigger problem than the title. A review paper, even as a course assignment, should not merely recapitulate a previous review and have content and references that are "very much alike".
In particular, if you use many of the same references and just "reword" the content, you are likely plagiarizing the paper, even if you reference it. Under the forms of plagiarism listed on Wikipedia, this would likely constitute "Idea-preserving plagiarism" which includes "Appropriation of ideas or concepts" and "Reusing text structure" (see also the concept of "too-close paraphrasing".
I would seek further advice and expectations from your course instructor.

Thank you, I will convince my group to change our topic.

@Glydel You don't need to change your topic, you (as a group) just need to write your own paper. For a "review" paper that means reading lots of different sources and summarizing them together, rather than using another review paper to summarize the different sources for you and then pretending that you did it.


text:
How to give credit for a picture I modified from a scientific article?
I plan to show a picture in my scientific paper. This picture is a modification of pictures from another scientific paper. How can I annotate, explain and quote the picture ?

What are the copyright terms of the original picture?

Does this answer your question? Attribution when creating images from other sources

It is important to provide credit where credit is due. If you see a figure and modify it to suit your needs your can provide credit by referencing the figure as "modified from xxx(yyyy)" or "based on xxx (yyyy)" or something similar to that.
The scientific world is full or figures that have been modified. I found one of my figures being the basis for a figure in one of the IPCC reports but where the modifiers having missed the point of some of the graphical aspects of the original figure. In other words, do not just copy a figure, make sure it reflects what you need to show and do not leave aspects of the original figure that is not relevant for your purposes.
There will always be a discussion on where the boundary lies between just copying a figure and modifying something to suit a specific purpose. Back in the days no one really cared, having a figure replicated or modified was treated as an honour. The important aspect will always lie with providing the proper source for the original figure so that the originator gets its (their) credit.

"Taylor & Francis" (publisher) is a signatory to the International Association of Science, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM) Permissions Agreement. This allows for reproduction of limited portions of text and illustrations at the individual article level, without securing formal permission by signatory participants.

I am not sure what the comment is really trying to say but obviously one has to consider publisher constraints and seek permission where it is necessary. It is, however, sad when publishers try to limit the originator's rights in different ways (often written over in a general contract at the point of publishing). Copying is always different from being inspired by and unfortunately the boundary is up to the legal system to determine whether they have the expertise or not.

I did try to reach out to a third party (graphics owner) several times and it never worked. My private emails were probably considered spam. So, the main issue is practicality.

I can clearly sympathise with that notion. It is not always a responsive counterpart one encounters. But, the general principle should apply, one can modify other's illustrations as long as they adhere to the publications in which they appear and are not just a "cut-paste" copy but reworked to fit seemelessly within the new publication. I clearly understand how difficult or subtle this bourndary may seem to the uninitiated.

@TheMatrixEquation-balance you should reach out to the publisher. Some of them provides you help in how to proceed (see an example here https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/copyright/permissions ). The graphic owner is very rarely the graphic creator or the grafic user, it may be tricky to ask the right person.

"Adapted from [Reference to the Original Article], with permission from [Copyright Holder]." is commonly used but it may also depend on the Journal where you want to publish your paper. Check with the Journal's referencing guidelines if they have any specific format.

" with permission from [Copyright Holder]." Please note youu need to obtain permission first, it is not a pro-forma sentence!

Some figures are licensed under, for example, "CC-BY" in which case you should state that instead of "with permission from [Copyright Holder]".

Do you have to state the licence or that you obtained permission? It seems like clutter to me. (Interesting to lawyers perhaps, not to your scientific readers.) E.g. does CC-BY not just allow using it without mentioning the license?

@Kvothe I think that could be posted as a question on its own, but my reading is that CC-BY 4.0 does state that attribution must include a notice of the license, among other things.

You can write something along the lines of:
Inspired by X et al. and Y, we present a process overview diagram, see Fig. 1. In the figure, we combine the perspectives of X and Y and have added our specific use case.
This way, it is clear that the idea comes from someone else, however you have added some contribution to it. A contribution can be stylistic, for example, you took someone else's figure and recreated it to your liking. Or, more substantial as adding/removing parts of the figure.
If you want to contrast yourself against X and Y, highlight your contribution using different colors/line widths/patterns.


text:
What happen when a 'new topic' emerge during the analysis of my data?
I am writing my master thesis (sociology of migration) and I've started my data collection process with some research questions in mind, so my interview questions went in that direction. However, at the end of the data collection, when re-reading my interviews and analysing my data, I came across some interesting 'patterns' that made me want to discuss my material under a critical lens that was not planned at the beginning.
Now I am in the situation of finishing my thesis and my supervisor told me I have to incorporate somehow those new approaches into my theoretical background, otherwise, my discussion/conclusion will sound detached from the rest of the thesis. BUT at this point, I don't feel like changing my research question because 1) I haven't asked any questions regarding this new topic; 2) I feel like lying about my research process.
So the question is: how do I make clear in my thesis that this new 'topic' emerged naturally and unexpectedly during my data collection? Can I write something about it in my methodological part? If so, how would you do that? And how can I write my theoretical part in a way that does not sound that those theories guided my research (because I actually added them later)?

A thesis is not a retelling of the work in chronological order. It exists to get a point (or points) across to the reader. New insights come up during research - that is kind of the point of the research in the first place. If you knew the answer before starting you aren't doing anything new.

Thank you for your answer! I did not know the answer before starting, I was just looking at a different angle and then something interesting came along. I cannot change the all structure of my thesis but I would like to find a space where to briefly explain those unexpected insight.

"how do I make clear in my thesis that this new 'topic' emerged naturally and unexpectedly during my data collection?"
Here is a big red flag about the whole field of sociology ... how is that? people are required to state that data collection is not biased? It sounds like either it is an awful political work, or a very simple statistical sample description ...

Dear EarlGrey, I am just a student and I am still very inexperienced and probably unable to express myself properly in 'academic jargon. In my research, I've used a qualitative method, composed of interviews and fieldwork. So there is no statistic involved, just qualitative observations. My question about the 'natural way' was not to protect myself from the accusation of biases, was just an attempt to find a proper place in my thesis where to explain what happened during the research process.

I suggest that you add a section to the thesis to discuss "interesting insights that arise from the data". This keeps it separate from your main theme. It can also lead to future work to follow up on those insights. Having future work is always a good thing.
But, I agree, that changing the "research question" leads to too many issues, some of which are improper.
While your data may "suggest" things, other studies may be needed to confirm them. Some things that are just noise can seem significant. So, additional research is probably needed.


text:
Working in an isolated environment
A while ago I got a job as a theoretical interdisciplinary modeler in a purely experimental lab of a different field from my own. It was an experiment for the lab and a big change for myself.  It was risky for both, but also potentially a great opportunity.
Unfortunately I ended up feeling professionally isolated.  Most people here know little math, some very little.  There isn't anyone I can discuss the details of my work with, only the "big picture" and results.  It turns out that I am the kind of person for whom discussions and interaction is essential.  Without them my thought seem to gradually slow down and stop.  When trying to solve a mathematical problem, I find myself unable to see obvious things and can barely make any progress.  Yet when I get the opportunity to discuss it with others, suddenly everything becomes obvious.  It's often not even necessary to get feedback from someone, it's sufficient to explain what I am doing, to put it into clear terms, and the solution just pops out.
The big question: How can I work efficiently and maintain my creativity and productivity when working in isolation?
I have tried several things.  I tried to maintain contact with former colleagues through VOIP, though this is not too practical.  Then I noticed that sometimes it is sufficient to just think about how to explain a question to someone, and the solution comes to me before even calling them.  Purely imaginary discussions help too.  I think this is where the solution to my difficulties should lie, but after realizing this, I am still struggling.  I also tried writing down the problem to force myself to articulate it better, but this turned out to be ineffective and extremely time consuming.
Has anyone else encountered similar difficulties?  Is it a common problem?  There are famous scientists like Ramanujan who are said to have worked as hermits and still made great leaps.  I imagine that what works best differs from individual to individual.  I suspect that I am particularly susceptible to grinding to a halt once I find myself in isolation, despite being an introvert.  But I do believe that there should be a way to improve the situation.
I have already decided that in the future I must avoid such situations. But until then I must find a way to be more productive while working alone.

Is there a different job someplace else you would like better?  A friend who was a therapist (not mine :) once remarked to me that people tend to avoid making changes until the pain of staying where they are is worse than the pain of changing.  Could this be one of those times?

Why was writing down ineffective? I am surprised since keeping a research journal is, in my experience, essential not only for self-articulation but also for long-term preservation of ideas.

@BorisBukh Partly because it takes too much time, partly because I have the difficulty with writing itself (although to a smaller extent).  I fully agree that writing is essential, but I prefer to do it only when I have already found a solution to a (sub)problem, not while trying to solve it. After trying to substitute writing for discussion, I ended up writing much more and throwing much of it away (replacing with something better in the end).

"Then I noticed that sometimes it is sufficient to just think about how to explain a question to someone, and the solution comes to me before even calling them."  Among software developers, that's often called rubber duck debugging: "Many programmers have had the experience of explaining a programming problem to someone else, possibly even to someone who knows nothing about programming, and then hitting upon the solution in the process of explaining the problem."

@JoshuaTaylor You should make an answer. Rubber duck debugging was the very first thing that came to my mind as well. There are so many cool rubber ducks out there, everybody can find such a little buddy that sits on the desk.

@JoshuaTaylor Also the first thing that came to mind. I suggest you do as Johannes mentioned and create a post out of it.

@Johannes_B I added it.

Lots of good ideas have been contributed in answers and comments.  There's one I didn't see -- seek out online relationships with other people who for whatever reason also feel a need to interact about ideas in your field remotely.

I was in a pretty similar situation, so I can sympathize. Although, personally I found it less critical for me to have these interactions. Don't get me wrong - it was not easy to work this way, but I saw it as an opportunity/challenge to develop my independence as a researcher.
However, I was able to get some ideas and interactions in the following ways:

Presenting my work at various forums - any size, from group/lab meetings to seminars and conferences.
By establishing a collaboration/semi-collaboration with relevant people at a different institution.
In terms of ideas - sometimes just reading a lot of literature helped (but this can be field-dependent).
By interacting with the "mathematically unskilled" people at my lab - might sound surprising, but sometimes you just need someone to interact with and ask basic questions even if they are not knowledgeable.

Personally I also found that I don't need these interactions to be very frequent, sometimes it is enough to interact, get a seed of an idea, and then go work on it for a month on my own.
Good luck, for me it worked out very well in the end and I can say I developed significantly as a scientist, and both sides benefited.
One more piece of advice - while you are dealing with the math, don't forget to keep in close contact with the experimentalists so you don't drift away trying to solve some problem which is not relevant.

(+1) for point 4. I found this indeed useful throughout the academic life.

Similar problems have been discussed before in the following Stack Exchange sites.

Academia.SE: My advisor does not provide any solutions and wants me to work alone
Workplace.SE: How to be more effective when working “alone” and with no prompt feedback
Productivity.SE: What methods exist to keep yourself motivated when working alone?

These posts ought to be able to provide you with suggestions that would assist you to help yourself through this situation. But none of which could be a black and white solution for the problem. It depends on the individual.
From your description, you share qualities of both an introvert and that of an extrovert. It seems like you could be more of an ambivert (as I am). I was in a similar condition before during my first semester of research -- research in total isolation, being the only human in the room, but never complained. In such situations, you ought to understand to what extent you could control your environment and make it suitable for your purpose. Whenever a little extroversion was needed, I just meet my peers and then get back to work. It did take a little practice. My supervisor was also of great support as I frequently report my progress too. I'm in a more of an extrovert's environment now and still making progress at the same comfortable rate.
Sometimes the constraints that you are put through could make you better. Take the change of environment positively and make do with what you have.
Hope this helps, all the best.

You mentioned one thing about part of the social process involved that particularly stood out:

Then I noticed that sometimes it is sufficient to just think about how to explain a question to someone, and the solution comes to me before even calling them.

Among software developers, that's often called rubber duck debugging:

Many programmers have had the experience of explaining a programming problem to someone else, possibly even to someone who knows nothing about programming, and then hitting upon the solution in the process of explaining the problem.

Rubber duck debugging doesn't address all the issues that you've described.  I've solved plenty of problems with rubber duck debugging, but I haven't had the same kind of inspiration and collaboration with a rubber duck on my desk that I've had with colleagues at a whiteboard, so this isn't a complete solution, but it's definitely part of the "working remotely" or "working in isolation" picture.

Thank you. On TeX.SE we like ducks. Feel free to join chat some day. :-)

I'm in a very similar situation myself. I work as a software engineer in a non-software company, and so there is almost no one with the knowledge/skills to solve the types of problems I run into. I too find that talking out problems helps me immensely, even when the person I'm talking to has no idea what I'm going on about. It's hard to be on your own, so don't feel bad about struggling with it! There are a few strategies that have worked for me, though.
If I just need a minute or two to chat about it at a high level, I'll go to the break room and catch somebody refilling their coffee or heating up their lunch. I'll ask them what they've been working on, and their response will let me know how receptive they are to chatting. Usually they will reciprocate and ask me the same, which gives me an opportunity to work out the problem verbally. Most people will be happy to do this if you open by asking about their work first. If you randomly approach people and start jabbering about stuff they don't understand, then they're going to feel that their time is being wasted.
If I need to talk more in-depth, then I save it for after I get off work. I'll generally use my husband as a sounding board, but friends work just as well. You could even go to a bar and chat up random strangers if you are comfortable with that. Again, ask people about themselves first,0 and they are generally happy to converse about anything!
If you use the above two strategies for when you just need someone (anyone) to listen, then you can save your expert contacts for when you are truly stuck and need their expertise to get you unstuck. This will allow you to grow your work relationships, not waste anyone's time, and get the type of help you need when you need it.

Maybe you can find one of your new coworkers is interested in your work.  Even if they don't know the high-level math, they might understand or at least be interested in the process, the outcomes, or just be looking for conversation.
Maybe some or one of the people who don't know the math just don't remember or are into that level or type.  E.g. an Engineer (or any STEM person) may have done 40 hours of Calc and higher, 20 years ago, and wouldn't know how to do some, but would be happy to talk about it in words.
You can also post questions to stackexchange.  Just formulating the question might help as you stated.
What about your supervisor?  Maybe talk to them.
Maybe hire another person in the lab.

I'm not quite in the same situation myself, but I sympathize - I travel enough that I often find myself similarly isolated. You said that sometimes just explaining your ideas clearly does the trick, without needing actual feedback - I'm exactly the same way. What I've found works surprisingly well is talking to a friend who's completely outside the field. Since she's a layperson as far as the material I work on is concerned, neither of us expect her to actually understand what I'm talking about - but an interested expression and a couple of nods go a long way. It's immensely helpful to just get the opportunity to organize my thoughts verbally like that. Also, occasionally she'll ask a question - nothing deep, but almost always something I never would have thought to ask myself. Things like "Is that related to this other thing you were talking about earlier?" Questions like that are really good for pushing me out of whatever rut I'm stuck in lately.
Also, going to conferences and talks is helpful. I'm in mathematics, not physics, so I'm not sure how this works in your field; but math conferences happen all the time, all over the place, so it's easy to find one to go to. Even if you're not presenting, the environment does wonders.

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

authors: Ραφαηλία Αδαμ


text:
Notetaking with Latex and collapsing text for research papers
I am looking for a note-taking software with the following features,
I would appreciate any advice!

Collapsing or folding text (Like FoldingText or other outliners)
Ability to quickly write up formulas (Like stack exchange's Markdown)
Relatively pretty
Nice writing experience
Hopefully cheap

This would be helpful while taking notes from research publications side it is highly unwieldy to have a sparse collection of text files.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's not about academia.  (This site is for questions about academia itself, rather than software that could be useful in academia.)

@AnonymousMathematician: It may be so (under strict perception). But I don't this deserves to be closed either. The specified tags do fit well in Academia.SE and the question itself doesn't seem to be in the 'do not ask about' section.

You could use Emacs/org-mode. Advantage: It is a simple yet powerful (and in principle infitely extendable) plain-text outliner with all the features that you require. Disadvantage: It requires some familiarity with the Emacs-editor, which has a relatively steep learning-curve.

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


text:
I'm writing a book and refer to quick references to spark creativity but also learn other words to improve my vocabulary. Is this plagiarism?
If you're a writer and you pull other words from an author's work to apply to your own vocabulary and work, just words, not full on sentences, is that considered plagiarism? I'm trying to learn and improve as a writer so when I'm reading other books from other authors and come across words I've never used, and from there, begin to use and apply them to my own vocabulary, is that plagiarism? I just want to ensure I'm not violating any rights or incidentally plagiarizing. I'm very torn on this. Can someone help?

I do not think that it falls under the formal definition of plagiarism, however I am not sure whether such a thing is within the spirit of plagiarism. In any case, I want to point out that this is a very good question which will probably be particularly appealing for people for whom english is the second language (including yours truly).

You can't protect a language as "intellectual property". You seem to be following a good practice on improving language skills.

Plagiarism comes into play only when use use the work of another without proper attribution. I don't suppose would be called plagiarising the work of another by merely utilising the vocabulary.
The following are the things you should watch out for:

Copying whole sentences
Copying the base/novel concepts themselves (even with rewording/rephrasing)
Copying figures
Copying tabulation

If any of the above is done without citation, it could be recalled as plagiarism. Furthermore it is always advisable to use figures and tables with permission from the publisher and first author (depending on the copyright policy of the respective article).


text:
Are tenure-denying decisions public?
Following this question it is natural to ask a basic question:
Assuming a tenure-track faculty member in the US or Canada was denied tenure after their case has been submitted to the University. Is this information public or confidential? Both in practice, and formally speaking.
Edit: to clarify my question: I am interested to know whether this information is formally confidential. I.e., panel members are not allowed to discuss it with colleagues, just as they are not allowed to discuss paper rejections with colleagues.

A positive tenure decision usually results in a formal and public vote to award tenure by the university regents or governing board.  However, if the decision is negative, the matter is typically never presented to the board- rather, some committee or official at an earlier stage in the process simply doesn't reocmmend in favor of tenure.  In such cases, there probably wouldn't be any public record of the decision.

@BrianBorchers - sounds like an answer, please put it in the answer box.

Generally speaking, personnel matters would be confidential, and that includes tenure denial.
However, if someone is familiar with a university, they would know that an assistant professor was hired on date X, 90% of assistant professors submit their tenure application by customary date Y, and a decision normally comes on date Z.  If date Z passes and the assistant professor's tenure is not announced, then there is 90% certainty tenure was denied.

To add to this: at least at my university, board of regents meeting minutes are public, and they list successful tenure/promotion cases, but not (I don't believe) unsuccessful ones.

@Kimball The minutes are public, but almost certainly not the supporting documents if they pertain to personnel matters.

@WolfgangBangerth Sure, I don't imagine the regents even look at tenure files.  I was just trying to point out a way in which one can publicly check successful tenure/promotion cases (but not denials).  I don't know how else you would tyr to find this info, except by checking individual faculty CVs (which are often not available, or not up-to-date, and even then there are a few cases where promotion from Asst to Assoc Prof doesn't coincide with tenure).

@Kimball Ah I see. Yes, the yes/no decision should be recorded there, unless that also counts as a personnel issue.

Thanks. Yet a related question is it strictly confidential, i.e., are the committee/panel denying tenure allowed to speak about it to others?

I’m not sure what you mean by “public”.  The decision is technically confidential but basically nearly every person in the department will soon learn of the decision since someone is leaving. The Chair or Head will promptly know as there are now courses to be reassigned or removed from the timetable.  If the person had a research group then the students have to be reassigned.
Now I don’t think the decision is announced by the institution no more than announcement are made when someone leaves (so in this sense it is not public), but such a decision rarely remains confidential for very long.

Yes, in the department people will know you are leaving. But they won't know the reason necessarily.

@Dilworth this is the kind of information that never be kept secret: everyone but undergraduates will know pretty rapidly.

My question is (also) is this information confidential? For instance when a paper is rejected it is confidential information! I am not supposed to talk about this rejection with peers. Is it legit to discuss tenure-denial with colleagues?

It is no more or less legit than discussing rejection of a paper.  Or no more or less legit than discussing why this one candidate was not hired, even if the decision is not public.  This type of decision is not advertised but as there are obvious consequences discussions (not necessarily for nefarious reasons) are unavoidable.

At my big state R1 university, the whole tenured faculty will be aware of a committee recommendation against tenure, and/or have actually voted on the issue.
In some cases, the untenured person is "counseled out", so the issue never comes to a vote. This part of the process is less sunlit, since "private consensus" that the person's tenure vote would fail (in the dept) is potentially very subjective/volatile.
(I have indeed seen more than one occasion in which a senior faculty person down-talked a person who'd been approved by the committee... effectively "black-balling" the person, since our dept insists on a substantial super-majority to approve tenure. That event was not made public, etc. On at least one occasion, a grievance was filed, and (I know because I testified...) the higher-ups' conclusion was that there was a "procedural problem", but no change in the conclusion. On another occasion, a senior faculty person apparently exercised inappropriate influence in the (otherwise rubber-stamping departments' recommendations) "Dean's committee"... the Dean recognized that something was fishy, and, by chance, I did personally go to talk to the Dean about the weird outcome, ... so in that case the craziness was avoided. But, to respond to the literal question, there was not even a private, much less public discussion of the process or the craziness.)
So: it's effectively private, but faculty have not signed NDAs...


text:
Should I let minor grammar and spelling errors go during peer-review to speed up the process?
I recently reviewed a paper for the second time. The authors competently solved all issues that were raised in the first review round, and the only remaining issues were minor grammar and spelling errors (resulting from the authors not being native speakers I would guess). I marked those errors and nevertheless handed in the review as accept, because even though there were those minor issues, those seemed like the kind of things that could also be corrected in proof-reading, and did not have anything to do with the content or the overall quality of the paper itself.
After handing in the review a couple of weeks ago, I just received the paper for review for the third time, and as all reviewer comments are added at the end of the manuscript, I could see that none of the other reviewers had any more comments. This means that the extra round of reviewing was basically caused just by me, resulting in another delay for the authors until their paper will be published.
I now wonder if it was right to address those minor errors (resulting in further publication delay), or if it would have been ok/better to "overlook" those, since they might be caught in a subsequent proofreading stage (which will happen anyway no matter how many rounds of reviews take place). I am asking this, because I know that the (at times) very time-intensive publishing and peer reviewing process can be stressfull and unnerving.

If by "proof-reading" stage, you mean professional copy editing, I wouldn't assume that there will be a such a stage. This only happens in the very topest of top flight journals, and even then is getting less common.

It doesn't sound like you have anything to feel bad about. You classified the review as "accept", clearly indicating that you didn't need to see it again (even though there may have been typos, etc, to fix before publication). It was the editor who decided to waste time by sending it out again despite this.
I think it is definitely worth commenting on these issues. By doing so, you give the authors chance to correct them when submitting the final version, which they can do in their own time. If you fail to point them out, the best-case scenario is that they add a lot of extra changes at the proof stage, and since journals often have very tight deadlines for checking proofs, and they may arrive at an inconvenient time, the authors may not have time to check the proofs carefully.

"It was the editor who decided to waste time." - Possibly the editor decided to be lazy and rely on the reviewer to check if the spelling/grammar errors where fixed rather than checking themselves or trusting the author.  This is somewhat obnoxious.

I now wonder if it was right to address those minor errors

You were right to point out the errors in the paper. Errors in grammar and spelling are distracting, and can sometimes confuse the reader - especially if they're struggling with the material itself. Plus, after all, you did accept.

Resulting in another delay for the authors until their paper will be published.

The authors can put their paper on arxiv.org or their homepages in the mean time.

I just received the paper for review for the third time ... I could see that none of the other reviewers had any more comments.

If the editor decided to hold the paper over for a third round of reviews strictly due to comments on spelling and grammar, then it's the editor's mistake, not yours. The editor could have accepted subject to proofreading, which doesn't (typically) need reviewers' involvement.

I think that both the journal and the author, not to mention readers, would appreciate you marking the errors. Some reviewers make very specific comments about language errors, as in "Change 'interview' to 'interviewed,' p. 30 line 6." Others (the majority) make only a general comment: "This paper contains many language errors. Please have it carefully checked by a native English editor." Whether you flag each error or make a more general comment may depend on the number of errors and how much time you have. Perhaps you could also recommend publication  condition that the errors be corrected. Then it's up to the journal editor whether the corrections get checked in a subsequent review. I've certainly seen a great many errors in papers by non-native English writers. Standards and extent of checking vary---some journals apparently have a high tolerance for errors. Your thorough approach is better for all concerned.

"Please have it carefully checked by a native English editor." That comment should be avoided, as it is considered offensive by some. There are non-native editors who are exactly as proficient as excellent native ones (and not every native editor is excellent).

I work as an editor for nonnative English faculty and I see this comment all the time from reviewers. My clients don't find it offensive; they're realistic about their level of English. I disagree with your statement about nonnative editors. I'm fluently bilingual and would never attempt to edit journal articles in my 2nd language.  It takes decades to develop a mature level of academic vocabulary and writing skills and produce polished prose in your first language. Editing standards may vary by location. In the U.S., university faculty would never consider hiring a nonnative English writer.

It's primarily offensive towards authors who are actually native English speakers and for some reasons were assumed to be non-native speakers by the reviewers (whose own English competence might be imperfect anyways).

My experience is quite different from yours: I'm a non-native English speaker and regularly get positive reviewer feedback for clear and easy-to-read writing. Probably it's hard to imagine for someone whose first language is English, a language that is unseconded in its role in science and western culture in general, that other people could become as proficient in it as a native speaker (in limited the scope of scientific writing, anyways).

Yes, that comment should be avoided, not only because some non-native speakers can be just as proficient in English as native ones, but also because of the nasty unstated assumption that English speakers have (or should have) some sort of special indispensable status in academia. It is dismissive towards researchers working in non-English-speaking countries. It is also a stupid thing to say because the clarity of your writing has little to do with whether you are a native speaker. I have seen plenty of horrendously unintelligible writing by native speakers.

I noted above that often reviewers say, "Please have this paper carefully checked by a native English editor." This is in cases where it's clear that the author is a nonnative English writer. I work with many Asian clients, and I think this kind of feedback is very useful for them. It gives them a realistic assessment of their English skills and language goals to aim for.

If you find "native English editor" problematic due to "native", you could replace "native" with another term, like "proficient user" in CEFR-terminology, even though a native editor can be more proficient. However, based on my experience most of the spelling and grammar mistakes are fairly basic. My main concern would be if they understood the term "proficient".

Maybe it is just me, but depending on the severity, let it go.
I once had a 2 Months delay because of minor mistakes.
Like, I forgot a comma in a place not obvious, even after letting 5 people proof-read before handing it in.
And then there was a sentence that was grammatically correct but not "good". After 2 months he finally accepted it but told that my grammar should be reason for me to give back my title.
Pendantic people like that can really get you down and it hindered me in so much work and I got anxiety. I always had to wait days just for something like "oh it is a reverse sentence and that means that you should this word instead of that".
I have written a paper about a software project, not about the german language.
On the other hand if it is really obvious errors, like misspellings or wrong use of words it should be corrected.

One approach, which has often worked for me, is to explicitly tell the editors that you feel the paper is already in good shape. Something like:

The authors have ably addressed all of the reviewers' concerns. I have a few minor suggestions (listed below), but these are entirely at the authors' discretion. If the other reviewers are also satisfied, this paper should proceed straight to publication; I do not need to review it again.

Although grammatical and spelling errors are relevant, pointing them out is often the lowest kind of value an expert peer reviewer can add. That is a proofreader's job. Although this point might be controversial, I consider it a waste of a reviewer's time to try to point these out in detail, and although constructive, it is probably the least constructive of any constructive aspect of a review report.
That said, this does not mean that such errors should be ignored. While I do not pick through such errors when I review an article, I do say something about them. I have one of two standard ways of handling them as I review an article:

If grammatical or spelling errors are so severe that they hinder my understanding of the article, then I consider that a rather major issue and then address it as such, along with my other critiques. In particular, I make it clear that I cannot appropriately evaluate the article [that is, I cannot recommend acceptance] without these points being corrected and clarified.

If grammatical or spelling errors do not signficantly hinder my understanding of the article, then at the end of the review, I write something like this: "There are some grammatical and spelling errors in the article. For example, [I always give one or two examples]. I recommend that you send the final version of the article to be professionally proofread." Note that I do not ask them to have the next revision professionally proofread. It would be expensive and unreasonable for them to pay to proofread each revision, especially if the errors do not hinder my understanding.

I don't actively search out typos (e.g., read it backwards), but I do mention any I happen to notice--it just feels collegial. I also think it makes an totally positive review seem a bit more serious: Look, I did actually read the paper!

minor grammar and spelling errors...might be caught in a subsequent proofreading stage

If there is a discrete proofreading stage in your publication cycle, then it seems to me that "minor grammar and spelling errors" would routinely be corrected by whomever does the proofreading work.
(As an aside, it strikes me as strange that you wouldn't already be aware of this, and that it's not already part of your understanding of the workflow at the location where this paper is being considered for publication.
If you know that there is typically a "proofreading stage" then what else would you expect them to do, other than correct "minor grammar and spelling errors"?)


text:
revised manuscript
I have got major revision from biosensor and bioelectronics and the deadline was 1 month. I finished revision within 10 days and submitted the revised paper. now for one week it is with editor. when can I get a decision from the editor? two reviewers gave minor revision, but still, an editor named it major revision.
Thanks

The only person who can answer this is the editor.

One week is not very long, especially when the editor gave you a month and likely expected to look at your manuscript after that month's time. If you haven't heard from them in a few more weeks, get in contact with them again. Until then, be patient and remember yours isn't the only paper they are working on.

One week is a mere instant in "editor time".


text:
Make some papers in PhD
I am a third year PhD Student in math. I am studying abroad from my country. I need some advice.
I have three main problems that I would like to share with you.
1) It seems, I will be graduated with 1 published paper. As you know, finding postdoc position is so difficult even though I would really like to keep doing research in mathematics. Do you have any advice to me for 1 year left of my PhD so that I can get postdoc position easier than now?
2) My supervisor would not like to work with me. Moreover, he is so busy. Whenever I can ask questions from him, he thought about my questions at that moment, not anymore.
I found out I have to work by myself. Unfortunately, I do not have enough experience to work myself and I need to work with someone. I decided to work some mathematician who I met them in some conference. I had some bad experience. Would you please tell me how can I talk to some mathematician so that we make a paper together? In particular, I will meet a great mathematician that I have been following his work since 2017. I made some progress and i would like to show him and convince him to work with me.
3) How much I am good in my field, I am terrible in other branches of mathematics. Let me give an example that show that my question clear. I do high level things in mathematics but I forgot some basic things from other branches that I have learnt several years ago, such as graph, Algebra,number theory,... Is it bad things? What is your advice?

I suggest posting each of these separately and providing more detail for each

I was in your exact position couple of years back, not that the supervisor didn't want to work with me; rather he left the university and I had no supervision!; and I had to finish up and defend my thesis. So here's my advice to you:

Start Your Thesis: You have to start writing your thesis right now! It is a toxic environment when you are 2+ years in and the supervisor is not responsive; and you are still trying to figure things out. So, have a template, and start adding things; and so on. Time is running out and you are responsible for your thesis at the end of the day.
Regular Meetings: Send calendar invite to your supervisor for a weekly meeting. If he is not responsive you must inform the head of research group. If you don't you cant say "well my supervisor is unresponsive for the last 4 years and I need to finish my PhD" they will ask you why you didn't inform them sooner.

You might ask: what about papers? Well, you could take part of your unfinished thesis and turn it into a paper. Ideally we want to make papers and write a thesis about it. But when time is running out and you have no direction by the supervisor, you must start writing your thesis, to see what parts of your work need more focus.
That's it! Two important points to finish up your PhD. Finding a postdoc position is not your problem at the moment! You need to finish off your PhD first. Being a Postdoc is not that different from a PhD, what are you going to do if the supervisor is busy again? You need to develop your skills first. So, finish up your thesis and think about defending it, as soon as you can.

Thank you. That is very good point. I have not thought about it. You are absolutly right. I have to start to write my thesis.

Just to add to this answer, it’s possible that your institution has a document detailing minimum supervision requirements. My own institution, for example, details a number of instances of expected contact and has yearly research reviews. It might be worth checking that document (if it exists). Fees (or funding) should pay for supervision.

It seems to me that none of your problems are especially unusual. They just come together to make it hard to advance.
First, not being very adept outside your specialty is very common. It has been about 100 years since anyone could understand all of mathematics. Extreme specialization is normal. Of course, it is good to retain basic things, but deep knowledge in your specialty is the most important thing for a researcher. My own experience is that mathematical insight is not general, but specific to some small set of fields. For me, Analysis and Topology came fairly naturally, but Algebra was always a struggle.
Second, I think it is also common for students visiting other countries to find difficulties. Especially if there are language or cultural differences, though you don't indicate that as a problem. But your advisor not having enough time for you or being willing to give you some efforts is a serious problem. If you are inexperienced and not finding help it is difficult to advance. My advice would be to try, somehow, to solve the advisor problem, either with this same person or finding another. It might not be too extreme to move to a different university to find the help you need, actually. Expensive and disruptive, of course.
But in today's market, you do probably need some more publications, but that might depend on the quality of the one you have. One way, that you already recognize, is to collaborate and, perhaps, write joint papers. If there is no one at your current university suitable for this then it is much harder, so again, another university might be a better option.
But, as for contacting other mathematicians, you need to ask, but you also need to give them a reason to want to look at your work. This might be hard or not, but it is easier if you are familiar with their work and can make suggestions about how it might be improved and extended. You don't explain the bad experiences you already had with this, of course. But, you could send this new potential collaborator your work and ask for feedback on it. If the feedback is positive, you could ask whether collaboration is possible. But even if it is negative, you can ask if the person can give you some direction for your studies - papers to read, for example.

Thank you very much for your advice. My bad experience was : i asked some question from a mathemaciam nad give him some idea to work together. He just said, that is good idea. Then, he published a paper with my idea in some months.


text:
What happens to project money?(USA, federal)
I was involved in several projects which got considerable funding from the US federal government.
In retrospect I feel there was a substantial amount of equipment that should have been purchased/built but wasn't and the PI did something else with the funds but I don't know what. I always felt the whole thing was fishy at a department level since there was a big gap between what needed to be purchased and what was.
Does the university encourage PIs to keep the money for other uses? How does this work? It's certainly not being given to graduate students.

This is pretty vague. You say you feel money should have been spent on certain things, but does that match what was actually requested in proposals and funded?

IIRC they get a couple million grant, spent maybe 10K total on equipment, the grant was in part to develop machine vision algorithms for certain conditions but the PIs refused to spend money to build systems for data acquisition.

@FourierFlux How many people worked on the project, and over how long? For most US federal grants, it's not permitted to spend the funds on computing equipment and other similar resources.

Generally, "equipment" (that exceeds some monetary threshold, e.g. $5,000) cannot be purchased or built on a grant unless it has been explicitly budgeted in the proposal. Even then, funding sources may limit or outright prohibit equipment spending. (Instead, there are specific grants solely for the purchase of equipment)

The confusing thing is the project were completely pointless without the equipment being available which were fundamental to the success. There's no way the projects would work(and they didn't tbh) without having the tools available. My time working on it basically turned into an exercise of creating a fake problem to provide a fake solution to.

See Anyon's comment: did you look at the budget section of the grant? What did it say the money would be spent on?

The grant proposal has to say how the money will be spent, including equipment purchases. But the granting agency can decide to find a proposal partially, instructing the university (and thus the PI) to reduce the budget by a specified amount. Such a reduction could drastically cut equipment purchases, especially if the agency or the PI wants not to cut (for example) student funding.

@BryanKrause Things have changed a bit with regard to computers: you can buy with federal funds if they are "essential and allocable", even if they're occasionally used for other stuff. That would definitely cover a data acquisition system, though the purchasing office will often still fight you!

@AndreasBlass, that's a really good point.  Some sponsors will definitely line item budget items, and equipment is at the top of the list.

Research administrator here.  It appears that you are accusing the PI of fraud, is that right?  Let me explain the proposal and award process roughly for government grants and contracts before we jump to that conclusion, although some PIs do commit fraud.  Please note that the sponsor and exact solicitation will vary the rules which I cannot speak to without knowing this information.
When you put in a proposal, you respond to a specific solicitation (RFP/BAA, etc.) that will put forth some rules, potentially what cost categories you can spend on.  E.g., with NSF, the MRI program restricts the entire budget to a piece of capital equipment. The REU and RET programs focus on training undergrads or teachers.  Some solicitations are very open, and you can propose a budget with "any" cost category.
There are federal restrictions on what government money will fund, however there are exceptions if you put the costs into your proposed budget and the government agrees to fund it.  An example would be with studying alcohol.  Alcohol as an entertainment expense is not allowed on federal grants, but if you are studying alcohol, it can be cited as having "unlike use" and then you can classify it as a lab supply.  Similarly, "office supplies" are not allowed on grants as they are part of the "indirect cost" line (typically ranges from 50-70% of the direct costs), but if you were to propose a project that has a large focus on surveys, it would be reasonable to ask for paper, envelopes, and postage as a direct cost.  As for computers, in 2014, the passage of Uniform Guidance changed the rules for charging computers to grants.  It used to be that they had to be "sole source", e.g., running a piece of equipment.  Now you are allowed to split-code them between multiple projects.  However, you still have to meet the burden of determining the allocation.  If a computer should be split between 10 funding sources, one could argue that it is similar to an indirect cost, and thus does not belong on any grants.  In my computer science department, we do not charge student computers to grants for this reason.  We do not want to have to track usage.  However, when really fancy computers are purchased, we do budget for them upfront because they are beyond the normal administrative machine for email, etc.
As charges hit the funding, there are research administers who are hired to monitor the spending, and requirements for internal controls mean that audits are periodically performed on expenses.  It is very possible that when costs are proposed to a research administrator (like myself) the proposed costs are not considered allowable on the project.  The sponsor may have restrictions preventing a rebudget or the exact thing (which appeared to be in the proposal) cannot be purchased for other reasons, e.g. strategic procurement could block an equipment charge.  Sometimes I have found conflict of interest problems because the PI wanted to buy equipment from a small business they have too large a stake in and the university blocked it.
It's always possible that the funds are also unspent and not misused.  Unless you are privvy to the exact spending, you cannot know how things were spent to know that funds are misused.  At the end of the day, the institution will send financial reports to the sponsor, and the PI is responsible for sending annual (or more frequent) technical reports.  Are you assuming the technical reports are fraudulent and are falsely reporting progress on the project?  Also consider that if your institution has an indirect cost rate of 70%, a $500k project is only $294k of direct costs.  If you have the PI's effort, fringe, and a student's effort and tuition to consider, and the project is three years, you are talking less than $100k per year to distribute.  At my university, many PIs don't take any salary because this money is so little, and students and postdocs are so expensive.  $100k direct annually won't even get you a postdoc for a year in Computer Science, and not much more than a student.  You can likely look up your indirect ("facilities and administration") and fringe rates as most academic institutions publish them online.
If you are still concerned, you can see if your institution has a whistleblower option and let an internal group investigate.  However, if they find no fault, you have to accept that you just don't know how grants are run and there is nothing wrong with that; you just are not privileged to know this information.
Please note that if any student or postdoc asked for information on a project that they are paid on, I would only be willing to give them the award number for their publications' acknowledgment section.  I would never discuss spending with them or anyone who is not the PI.  I even limit conversations with Co-PIs to the spending they oversee.

I don't think the professor took it for himself but I suspect the money was saved for something else or in general it was just extremely poorly managed.

That's not how it works.  You have to send the money back.  If what you say is true (saved for something else), your institution could be sued by the government because the feds send grant money as cost reimbursable -- you can only bill for your spending that benefits the project.  At some point you have to decide it's fraud and whistleblow or let it go.  I vote let it go unless you have concrete evidence where they admit to misuse of funds.  Not using it as you prefer or in the best possible way is not misuse of funds.  The PI would have to break a law and the internal controls failed.

Generally speaking grants, especially those from federal agencies, are administered by the university through a "Grants Office" or similar. The PI doesn't get the money directly. This assures that the university stands behind how the funds are spent and provides a way to audit the grant.
So, if bad things happen, lots of people are involved, not just a "rogue" PI. At R1 universities, which might be just about the only place that such a large grant might occur, the accounting is very strict and all expenditures need to be justified and accounted for.
The university also takes a substantial part of the grant for general overhead (heat, light, lab space, buildings, maintenance, etc.). None of that stuff is free. IIRC, 40% is a typical overhead charge.
If there were RAs working on the project, they might have been funded via the grant, including their "forgiven" tuition and such. Yes, they might have been funded anyway and it may just be an accounting "trick", but it does work that way.
I've even had private grants (from corporations) that are administered this way. But, federal grants are in almost all (all?) cases handled by the university. It isn't just free money - do what you like with it.

Why wouldn't PI be willing to invest into equipment which would make the project actually viable then? The whole experience was ridiculous in retrospect. Terrible planning/project.

@FourierFlux did you actually read the answer? How do you know there was any money left to spend on equipment once all of these expenses were paid? Also the comments: how do you know the grant even covered the necessary equipment?

The premise of the project(which was written into the grant summary) was to evaluate and develop algorithms for a specific application.
Unless you have a way to get data in this environment the project is cooked, there was an inherent implication in the proposal that this stuff would be done even if it wasn't enumerated.


text:
Are there any industry related jobs for a Discrete Mathematics (Combinatorics, Graph theory) PhD?
Apart from being an academic, what can a Discrete Math PhD do?

Short answer: Everything.
Long answer:
Mathematicians are often not (solely) hired for the graphs and algorithms they know, but for the skill to logically dissect a problem, come up with a solution, consider all possible cases, etc.
With discrete math, a career in software development would be possible for example. Look for R&D departments or positions and they might prefer a PhD with strong background and some coding skills over someone who has developed for years but is not able to turn a Wiki article on some algorithm into proper code because the math is lacking to understand it.
If you don't mind extending into statistics a little bit, data science and machine learning would open up, where also a lot of mathematicians are wanted currently.
The problem solving skills I mentioned above are also often liked by consultant agencies, where they care not so much about what you know (as you will need to learn and use their products either way mostly) but rather that you can take a client's problem and solve it. Also these guys really like PhDs, as that looks cool and they can bill you out higher than someone without one (even if your PhD is not that relevant to the client).
So, medium long answer: There are a lot of options, you simply need to get out there and look for them. You will need to do some convincing of the form "yes, I am missing these two skills you require, but I can more than make up for it by ...", but then you should be able to get into many fields.

There is a separate question however. You speak only of qualifications for various positions. The other consideration is whether there are actual jobs being offered.

@Buffy Right, you need to also consider that of course, yes. There are a few jobs that specifically look for mathematicians (with PhD), but there are way more jobs that didn't even think about it, but where there is a chance to convince them with a nice cover letter why your math skills are more valuable than the degrees they put on the job ad.

Indeed, the hard problem is to find those opportunities. My experience from industry is that everyone would love to hire the mathematicians for their problem solving skills, but only if their is no other appliciant who actually has some experience/knowledge in e.g. data science/machine learning..

Logistics, routing, navigation systems would fit the bill (I've heard that TomTom has a lot of discrete math people, for example).
You may also move in the direction of discrete optimization and then you may sell yourself doing operations research.


text:
Is validating the results of an article important before citing such an article?
During writing my academic paper, I need to cite accuracy values of cited research paper.
I have been advised that if you will cite a paper, you need to read that paper entirely. But in this case, Do i need to validate results that they achieved.

Reading yes. It is important to avoid extraction of sentences or results which can be less general than as they appear at the first glance.
Validating not at all, unless you feel you must do it because something is suspicious or you think to deal with a particular or new case.
You can't validate each statement for every cited reference, and you can't do so for several reasons.
Also a referee does not. Papers exists to be used. That is an implicit form of validation.

This depends on the situation. In some cases it is impossible to do so, not having access to all the necessary materials. If you can do so with reasonable effort, however, it is good to do this, just to satisfy yourself.
But, another consideration is the quality of the source/journal. If the journal is of high quality with a good reputation, then you can probably depend on the journals review and editorial process to give assurance to the results of the paper. It isn't a perfect process, of course, but it adds some evidence of validity at least.
But, it is poor practice to cite things without reading them, as you say. It is also poor practice to cite things that you either don't understand or believe to be incorrect. The first requires more work, and the latter may require more research and a correction.

You should do enough work to convince yourself that the paper you cite is valid (or that it's invalid, if you're citing them to critique them). So that means:

Reading enough of the paper that you are sure you understand the part of it that you're referring to when you cite it. If you're using paragraph 4.2, make sure you know what section 4 as a whole is about for example. You don't want to be surprised if someone points out that paragraph 4.4 contains some limits on what 4.2 does.
It's probably safest to read the whole paper, but you don't have to read equally "deep" in the parts that aren't really related to what you're doing. But make sure you read the introduction, look through the related work, and the conclusions.

To convince yourself that the paper is valid, you look at several different things that can show you that there are problems or that can show that it's high quality:

Is the paper written clearly, with the normal structure you would expect for a paper in your academic field?
Are experiments clearly described? Does the methodology seem reasonable?
Are the results properly described?
Do the conclusions the paper draws make sense, given the results?
Is the paper written by someone with a good reputation, someone with experience in that field? What was their academic title when they wrote it?
Is the paper published in a journal with a good reputation/peer reviewed?
Is the paper cited by others? What do people citing the paper (in Related Work sections for example) have to say about it?
Look at the References section of the paper; who does it cite? A possible sign of a bad paper is that it doesn't refer to the normal literature for that topic. That could mean it's a crackpot working on crazy  theories and disregarding normal science in the field.

Doing these things, you can get a good impression of whether a paper could be valid or not, without having to re-do all their experiments.

The idea of peer review is to remove this element of research. If you had to validate all previous work you are building upon you would need to start science from scratch each time...
If the work is published in a reputable journal - then validation is absolutely not necessary. However, you should always read the work you are citing!
If the paper is not published in a reputable journal and you are dubious about the results, then either find a higher quality citation or try to replicate the results (if possible).


text:
Masters in Financial Engineering with C's and B's to PHD in Math
I'm about to graduate with a degree in Financial Engineering from a top 15 program. I'm thinking about transitioning to a PHD in mathematics as I find it quite interesting. Unfortunately I've only managed to receive 3 B's and a C+ in my 4 math courses - no A's). (B's and A's in the non-pure-math courses like stats/programming/finance).
Would it be unreasonable to work for a couple of years then come back with these kind of grades, or would my chances of getting into a PHD program be untenable? Secondly would it even be worth it for me to pursue this path. Despite my interest in the field watching some of my classmates (admittedly they're graduates of places like Beijing) receive A's in some of these classes without as much effort makes me believe I may not even be capable and would just be wasting time applying.

Why do you want a PhD?  If you sufficiently far down the rankings (and I'm not sure "sufficiently far" is that far in this case), you could probably get a department that will admit you, but then you would need to have exceptional research results (by the standards of that department) to be able to get an academic position afterwards.  Not all PhDs are equal.

Your chances of admission to a Ph.D. program in mathematics will depend strongly on some factors that you haven't described in your question. I'm thinking particularly of (1) the content and level of the courses you  took and (2) the letters of recommendation from your professors.
The level of preparation that my department looks for in Ph.D. applicants is described on our web site at https://lsa.umich.edu/math/graduates/ph-d-programs/applying.html under the heading "General requirements for admission". I think other universities will also have descriptions of their expectations on their web sites.

I believe the answer to your question depends a little on where you're hoping to pursue a PhD, and I can only answer you if you plan to attend a PhD program in the U.S. To apply to a PhD program in the U.S., you'll almost definitely have to take the GRE, as well  as the GRE Subject Test in Math, both of which you can prepare for with practice tests. I  don't know how it works outside the U.S.
If you do reasonably well on the GRE and the GRE Subject Test and if you can get decent recommendations from a couple of your past professors, your chances of getting into a Math PhD program are decent, especially given your undergraduate program.
In my PhD program - when I got my PhD  - there were students at all sorts of levels of ability with all sorts of backgrounds and different levels of preparation in the beginning. That said, several did drop out in the first year. Those with more math preparation behind them, including non-pure math like statistics, had an easier time of it, so you have at least a little of that going for you.
All of us had a fighting chance, regardless of our backgrounds and levels of preparation,  as long as we consistently attended classes and did homework. By the time I graduated, it was very clear that those with a good work ethic, with self-confidence, and with a lot of tenacity were the ones who made it.

Thanks Jamie, actually I should have clarified that I'm currently a Masters student. I've already taken the basic GRE to get into my program but not the specific math GRE. My undergraduate degree was a double major, one of them being math.


text:
Do One-year MS/MEng Programs Prefer Candidates With Research Experience?
I am a first-year undergraduate student studying mechanical engineering in the U.S. I want to either do the 5-year BS/MS program at my university, or - preferably - do a 1-year non-thesis MS or MEng degree from a top university such as MIT, directly after undergrad. I am already in a design team as well as Engineers Without Borders, and as such my schedule is quite full already. Research is interesting to me but not as interesting as my current extra-curriculars, and I would have to give up at least one of those or get worse grades in order to pursue undergraduate research.
I was reading an article written by an MIT student that said graduate programs look for undergraduate research experience when considering candidates, and strongly prefer candidates that have some, but don't really care about any of your extra-curriculars. However, this was discusssing 2-year MS degrees with a thesis. Since I'm only planning on doing a 1-year non-thesis degree I'd like to know whether it would be worth it to pursue undergraduate research, or whether it won't make much of a difference to my chances of being accepted into a 1-year masters program.

Why narrow so early on a 1 year MS? The actual decision point for you is years away. Yes, research is a positive thing. And "extra curriculars" mean almost nothing for grad school unless they are field related.

@Buffy I may change my mind, but I currently think that a 1-year is better for my needs than a 2-year because I am doing engineering and don't plan on working in research. Also, my extracurriculars (especially my design team) are related to my degree (that's kind of the purpose of a design team).


text:
Advice on what to do about academic situation that ended badly?
(Content warning - some people may find this post distressing due to discussions of mental health and self-harm.
Hello academic community - I could use some advice! I’m a 1st year PhD student, and I went through a difficult time during my MA that I’d like to get some help with.
I worked as an Residential Advisor (RA) on campus for 4 years before my MA and during. It was a great job, but was also a lot of responsibility. The final year I was there (which was during my MA) I had a student living in my halls who was experiencing severe mental health issues. This was not a new situation, as sadly lots of students need extra support, and I had worked with students like this before.
One night, I received a call on the emergency cell from this student, at about 3am. They had attempted to take their own life, and due to issues within my RA team, I was the only one available to help. I went to the student’s room and saw the situation, carried out emergency first-aid, phoned the ambulance and then accompanied them to the ER.
I stayed with the student for the night until they were discharged, and arranged for further support. However, to cut a long story short, the student began to contact me both day and night via email and phone, saying that if I didn’t go to their room to speak to them as and when they asked, they’d do it again.
In the end, I was diagnosed with PTSD in relation to what I saw when I went to the student’s room that first night. After this, they called me repeatedly, hourly, 2, 3, 4am, and sent emails several times a day.
I sought help from the higher ups in the RA team, as we were supposed to in this kind of situation, and though they were aware of this student and the issues going on, they said they couldn’t do much to help me. I began to experience severe anxiety myself and became quite ill. In the end, I quit my job as an RA and had to move back to my parents’ house. This was over 2 hours away from campus. After this, I found my MA very difficult, and due to a combination of all of these circumstances, I was rejected for PhD funding a few months later. I wanted to explain to my Department what had happened, but felt too worried about breaching confidentiality agreements myself and getting into trouble in terms of the contracts I'd signed to be an RA.
When I didn’t receive funding, I spoke to the Head of Department (as in, my academic Department, not my RA team) about what my possible next steps could be in terms of funding, and almost told them, but instead I ended up getting upset and crying in their office. I said that I felt that I had been abandoned by my academic Department. The Head of Department was clearly upset themselves that I felt this way. It wasn't a nice interaction (though wasn't an argument) and after that, I didn't speak to any staff in the Department again. I just stayed home and tried to study and get better.
In the end, I left the University with my MA but also with no one and very few support networks, having isolated myself from everyone. Now I’m a PhD student and I did get funding. However, I feel regret about the way my education ending at my MA institution, which was a fantastic place and which I loved.
I also feel terrible every day about what I said to the Head of Department. They were the best teacher I’d ever had and they are also one of the foremost scholars in my current field. Eventually, the investigation into what happened with the student was closed quite recently - nothing ever came of it, and they graduated after an extra year out as far as I know.
My question is whether I should try to reach out to this academic to explain what happened to me and why I acted how I did and to apologise? If so, how should I do it? Via email, or in person? Or maybe it’s too late? I just feel terrible because to them, it must have looked like at one point that I just withdrew myself from the Department (when I was previously a hugely active member of the PG community there) and then blamed it on them.
Thanks in advance.

The only thing I can say is that if I were the Head of Department in question, I'd appreciate a lot to hear from you and having such an explanation. Doesn't really matter in which way. Your writing looks like the situation may not have been clear enough for the HoD to properly understand your situation, and the HoD may perceive you much more positively with a proper understanding of what went on. (I can't guarantee that of course - depends on what kind of person the HoD is.)

In any case I'm glad to read that you got your PhD funding eventually and were able to leave this bad situation behind you!

I also feel terrible every day about what I said to the Head of Department. They were the best teacher I’d ever had and they are also one of the foremost scholars in my current field.

I think what you said to the Head of Department should have been expected and I think you should have been better supported.

My question is whether I should try to reach out to this academic to explain what happened to me and why I acted how I did and to apologise?

Given that you feel terrible, I think this might be a good idea.

If so, how should I do it? Via email, or in person?

Personally, I'd write a handwritten letter, and open the possibility for a future in-person meeting.  Ultimately, you should make contact however you feel the most comfortable.

Or maybe it’s too late?

It's never too late.

Before proceeding, you could talk to a professional.

Regarding, "the investigation into what happened with the student was closed quite recently - nothing ever came of it," do you mean the support system for RAs has not changed? If so, then you could raise this - at some time in the future - with the Head of Department, since it seems change is necessary.

The support system was investigated, and I found from speaking to other teams on-campus that the team I was in was actually pretty poor in terms of support. As far as I know, the manager of my old team has now been replaced (not as a result of this, though). I agree that change is necessary, but I am no longer at that institution - I am not sure if I could still raise the issue as an "outsider" now?

There's no reason why you can't raise the issue as an "outsider". An inside intermediary, e.g., the Head of Department, may be able to help. For instance, they probably have senior contacts (above your old manager) in positions of power.

The immediate problem here seems to be that you have a conflict between confidentiality obligations in relation to your past work, and giving a frank explanation of something that caused your academic work to fall behind.  In this circumstance, I would recommend you contact your past employers in your RA position and see if they can write you a generic letter of reference that explains that you were impacted by an attempted suicide by another student, and subsequent events relating to that, and this negatively impacted your academic work.
It should be possible for your previous RA supervisors to write you a letter in a way that gets across the important information, without breaching privacy/confidentiality obligations to the student you helped.  (All that is really needed here is to avoid giving the identity of the other student or any details that would make them identifiable.)  Here is what I would write if I were in their position:

To whom it may concern,
Gemma Murdoch previous worked as an RA in our residential hall during her Masters program at [University] from [date] to [date].  During that time she assisted in a difficult matter involving another student who attempted suicide, and she was also involved in a number of follow-up interventions in this matter.  We observed that this matter had a significant impact on Gemma in terms of stress and time-obligations devoted to this matter over subsequent months/years.  We believe that it negatively impacted her academic work during this period.
We are writing this letter to explain that Gemma's academic work over this period may not reflect the full extend of her academic abilities, and we hope that this circumstance can be taken into account in any future applications she makes for entry or funding for academic programs.  Privacy and confidentiality limitations prevent us from giving any additional details on this matter.  Suffice to say, this was a circumstance beyond Gemma's control and she endured significant hardship to help another student in crisis.  We commend her for using here own academic time to help another student in crisis.
Yours sincerely,
[Name]

If you were able to solicit a letter of this kind, then this is something you could include in the materials for any future PhD funding application.  It would then be taken into account in assessing your suitability for entry/funding for a program.


text:
The importance of finding potential mentor before applying for a postdoc
I am going to apply for a competitive European research grant as a postdoc. How does finding a potential mentor in department help me to get postdoc position. Does it really increase my chance to give my application a priority?

Hiring postdocs is not like bringing on graduate students, normally. If there is a job posting for a postdoc, it is usually for a specific purpose. Your context could easily be different. But, as a US national lab manager, my postdoc postings are for work with specific staff. Talking to other staff isn't going to help.

It is different in some places (e.g. Italy, see my answer): the calls may be topic-specific or even generic, and you can apply without knowing anyone.
It is in general however not encouraged, since getting to know the people you would work with beforehand will help you better understand whether you do want to work with them.

Since you explicitly want to apply for a scholarship, the answer depends on the specifics of that scholarship; the application process may require you to specify a mentor. But please be aware that the most common funding option for post-docs are positions in projects, and these don't require you to find a mentor.

What do you mean by "scholarship", what kind of scholarship? Afaik scholarships are for students, but postdocs are staff positions.

@Erwan, some organizations (such as the NSF in the USA) provide post doctoral fellowship to the post doc. I think most (all?) of NSF ones require the post doc to already have a hosting institute.

@RichardErickson Does having a hosting institute (agreement with potential mentor) increase the chance of winning the grant?

My guess would be yes. Without a hosting institute, your proposal would seem much less thought out and developed.

Are you talking about fellowships such as Marie Curie or ERC? If yes it's practically a must to have a host institution, otherwise your chances are very low.

It is in general a good idea, not just for your chances but to ensure you will find a productive or at least welcoming group to work with.
The impact on your success chance I think depends on the country of choice: in some countries (e.g. Italy), postdoc calls are advertised as a public competition with a committee that should judge your CV impartially.
In other countries, a professor may hire a postdoc on his personal funds and choose the candidate of his own will. In the latter case having at least some prior contact may be strictly necessary.


text:
Will submissions to special issues of journals be sent to referees only after their deadline?
I have submitted a manuscript to a special issue of a math journal one month ago. The deadline for submission papers to that special issue is 30 of January 2025. Do I have to wait to the end of January, or will the manuscript be evaluated to be sent to reviewers/desk rejected before the deadline? I ask because the status of my manuscript has not changed since I submitted.

I don't think there's any universal rule. It could be either, depending on how the editors choose to organize it.

I'm not the editor, but if I were, I'd act as follows. I think many others would act similarly, but there is no universal.
I need to assume that as editor of a special issue, I'm something of an expert in the stated topic of the issue, not just a publisher's functionary.
You might get desk rejected almost immediately on submission. I'd want to review submissions more or less as they occur and if they are off topic or "cranky", you would get rejected "now". This clears my desk.
I'll also assume that the special issue has a more or less firm publication date, some months beyond the deadline date. Given that, I would not want to wait until the deadline to begin sending out review requests. This gives reviewers more time and makes completion prior to review deadlines more likely. I wouldn't want to get backed up to the production deadline. Also, some reviewers might look at more than one paper if they finish a review quickly.
As reviews come in, I would keep a more or less sorted list of the submissions in likelihood of publication acceptance. But I wouldn't send out any acceptances or rejections until the submission deadline. I would, however, be fairly likely to send out revision requests as it becomes obvious that they are warranted, even prior to the submission deadline. I want the best possible issue and it is also courteous to give "hopeful" papers maximum time to improve.
Note the two assumptions. First, I know the topic, and second, I have a production deadline. Without those it could be quite different.
And note that the online notice (accept/reject/...) won't be updated until decisions are made and maybe not at all until the submission deadline.
Finally, note that a possible further assumption is that the editor works periodically on the issue rather than wait until they absolutely must act. In that case, you won't learn much of anything until late. I dislike that system both for my personal work habits and for fairness to everyone involved, giving them options.
Under my system, you probably haven't been desk rejected and probably won't be unless the paper is fairly marginal and submissions are slow.


text:
Journals with title "Bulletin"
I am asking this question to understand the difference (if there exits any) between reputation of some journals in mathematics which includes "Bulletin" in their title with other journals? In the Scopus ranking they are named general journals.

Don't read too much into the nomenclature of journals. Some of them are very old and the names are just traditional. The purpose of some may have evolved over time a bit but not the names. Each different society may use its own naming conventions as may each commercial publisher.
Nobody has looked at the whole field and tried to rationalize it. And even if they tried, the traditional names would stick.
But Bull. AMS is explicitly for expository articles, not the latest hot topic research. Therefore its "reputation" is different in kind from that of Trans. AMS, though both are high quality.