text:
Famous professor at relatively unknown university for post-doc
I am about to finish my Ph.D. soon. It was in the field of computational sciences and was done from a well-known European research lab. In my own assessment, it has been a mediocre Ph.D. for me (2 paper in top tier conference, 2 in average ones, no journal yet).
I am looking for post-doc as the next step. I already have a couple of offers for post-doc, and one of them is from a famous professor in my field. However, he happens to have setup his lab at a relatively unknown university in a small city in central Europe.
I was obviously aware of this while applying, and I honestly thought this wouldn't bother me at all. However, now that things have moved forward and the time has come to finalize a decision, I do find myself a bit bothered with the stature of the university. I have tried to seek advice on this matter from my current Ph.D. adviser. However, she knows my prospective post-doc supervisor in person and has been offering highly diplomatic suggestions about the matter.
So I thought it might be a good idea to ask this question over here. Please share your opinion on this. How much does the stature of the university matter in a post-doctoral position, given that the particular lab I am going to be associated with is headed by a famous name and the job description seems to suit my research interests quite well? I have other post-doc offers from relatively younger/less-famous professors from better universities. Given that the area of research is more or less similar in all the cases, what is more advisable for a career in research?

"...has been offering highly diplomatic suggestions". Could she possibly be subtly trying to warn you off working with this professor?

@astronat Yes, as a matter of fact, I have been doubting that all along. The possible downsides of working with this famous professor could be: 1) extremely challenging work which is not a direct extension of my Ph.D. research, which would inevitably mean a few months or more lost to background study (but I am not sure if this is a disadvantage at all, some might say this is preferable) , 2) very small group and no support at peer level, which would imply: it would be me, one/two other Ph.D students and some masters students/engineers is all that the group would have...

...plus, I am definitely not fond of the city. Compared to the other offers I have at <80 world rank universities in nice cities at research groups which are large and vibrant (but under younger professors)..... I am still not clear about the way ahead.

It sounds to me like you have already made up your mind, but you can always try the coin toss trick: flip a coin, heads you go and work with this famous professor. The coin lands on tails. Are you disappointed it wasn't heads?

No, I haven't made up my mind yet, although I am starting to realize that is how the last comment sounds like. But let me clarify that I'm truly undecided. In fact, I might even say I'm a tiny bit inclined towards the more challenging option.

Once a very successful professor told me "look either for a very recognized boss or a very good university. Nothing in between ( unless you have other priorities like a family). Besides that when I've applied to him none of the above conditions was true, I am convinced that it is the line to follow. Moreover look for what happens to the former students and post docs of a professor. Some push their folks, some are for divide et impera and one will marginally gets beneficial effects of having worked hard......

Just opinion, of course, but I would suggest that a great professor at a small school, no matter its reputation, would be a huge asset. You will have a chance to work closely with a mentor that you wouldn't get to do as well at a larger place. I realize of course that size and reputation aren't necessarily the same.
But it is the letters you get from the professor if they are well known that can set you off on your career and, if you do get the chance to work closely, that association can pay dividends for a long time.
While a degree from a prestigious place has value, I think a postdoc with a leader of the field is a great asset.
And, of course, "relatively unknown in central Europe" is itself relative. Lots of people don't know about, for example Charles, and such, depending on where they are from.

Thanks for the answer. Just curious: does this answer change if I decide to go for an industrial research career after the post-doc?

A bit harder to say, perhaps. Is the prof known in the industrial world? But since it probably still depends more on what you do than on the name of the university, I'd guess I'd give the same answer. If you can work closely with someone good, you can do a lot.

Yes, he is well known in the industry too. But I like your opinion. Thanks for your response, much appreciated.

This depends on whether you will stay in the same field in the future.
If you stay in the same field, a strong professor is better. People will know him and value your collaboration with him more than the university's prestige.
If you change field, almost no one will know him, and the university's prestige becomes more important.


text:
Authorship Guideline for unused experimental results
I am a Ph.D. student and an intern worked with me on a project that is going to be submitted for publication in a prestigious conference.
However, the work that this intern did is not being used up in the paper. It was a supplementary experiment (not strongly related to the core contribution) which could not be used up since the final results appeared to be too obvious and did not add much insight. Also, this being a conference, there are tight restrictions on the maximum size of paper, and we are struggling on the borderline. Hence, it seemed prudent to leave out the said experiment.
With all the results being thrown out, there is now a moral dilemma about authorship of the intern. Me being the first author, I have a say in this matter and my supervisor has not intervened so far. It is likely that what I suggest/recommend will have an impact on the authorship decision. It is true that this particular person has put in considerable hard work to do what was asked of her and it is entirely unfortunate that those data are not being used up in the final paper. I feel bad for her, but at the same time,  as it stands now, there is no contribution of this person in the final draft (except a few grammatical/typo corrections etc.).
From my understanding, simply mentioning her in the acknowledgement seems to be a bit disappointing, but the most appropriate thing to do. However, I would like to ask the broader community, what would be the proper academic etiquette in such a case?

Is there any possibility for a second paper? Do the other results say anything significant?

@Buffy: it can possibly be developed into a second paper if it is pursued aggressively. But nothing in the short term, some work needs to be done before it can possibly become significant enough to justify a paper on its own.

There's no moral dilemma because you all contributed to the project as a whole, and the proper etiquette is to consider the intern as a coauthor. That the results were too obvious is something you observed after their experiment, not before.

I think in a larger sense your intern certainly did contribute to the project... whether or not the specifics reflect that. They were part of the team. Many things in team work are unpredictable... but everyone on the team should get credit. Otherwise, think of it, people will not agree to participate and exert effort in situations where they're not guaranteed a good PR outcome. That attitude would wreak havoc with genuine scientific/intellectual inquiry.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Some questions about the time for a PhD program in the USA?
I'm an undergrad who plans on applying to PhD programs in an EECS area very soon. I have some questions about the time it takes for a PhD. 5-6 years seems like a very long time to do a PhD. My question is: why does it take that long? I thought that you just needed to publish a sufficient amount of new research.
In that case, why would it be very hard to finish in about 3 years? I've known a chunk of undergrads applying to grad school with 1-3 publications in good journals acquired by working several months over the summer or doing part time work in a lab (me included co first authoring from a summer research), so I don't understand why finishing in 3 years is so rare (according to what is said online). Also, since GPA doesn't matter at all for grad school, I would think a PhD student could put in minimal effort for some C's and pass the class, and if they have a stipend, they wouldn't need to teach.
I looked at a PhD thesis from a good university, and it only has about three papers in it. Furthermore, the PhD candidate himself wasn't sole author so I can assume he had plenty of help.
Also, I'm just curious, if you happen by luck to stumble on something groundbreaking during your first month there, is it possible to finish your PhD in less than a year?

Every school is different. You'll need to complete coursework, pass qualifying exams, begin research, pass prelims, write your dissertation, and defend. That's why the timeframe is usually four to six years.

Not every PhD project is created equal either. I know people in physics who needed ~6 years to build the experimental setup they needed to start taking data. Getting said data and analyzing it is hardly an immediate matter either. For others, they needed to schedule time at a facility to conduct their experiments. After a long lead time, tough luck, the machine's down during your scheduled time, and it'll be shut down the next 1.5 years for upgrades...

I know plenty of people in the human sciences that require two years easy just to collect data, that doesn't include design or analysis time

Why do you want to rush? There's nothing to be gained from a fast PhD.

@astronat I think 5-6 years is too much of a time investment for a PhD when an alternate route like a 1 year Master's degree promises a lot more in terms of earnings.

The requirements for a doctorate in the US vary both by state and by institution, but you seem a bit misinformed as to the general process. Some institutions have required courses and you can be asked to leave if you don't do very well. A C in a doctoral level grad course is like a D- or F in an undergrad course. It is not acceptable. One or two out of the set might be ok but more and you will not be invited to continue as you don't show sufficient seriousness. While the GPA itself may not be too important, you need to demonstrate that seriousness.
Even if there aren't specific required courses (which are there to assure you have knowledge of the breadth of the field, primarily), you will certainly be required to pass Qualifying Examinations. There is usually a set of these (maybe three or four) and again they cover breadth, primarily, but at an advanced level. They are normally hours long. Fail any of these and you can (probably will), again, be asked to leave. The courses, required or not, prepare you for these exams. The exams are quite rigorous as are the prep courses. It is even possible to be asked, in an oral, a question on an unsolved problem, just to see how you attack it.
The "sufficient amount of new research" is required, also, to be of a fairly high quality and you will need to show in this research that you have delved quite deeply into some, usually small, area of the field. This normally requires spending time in seminars with a professor (and group) who specialize in that area. All of this takes some time. It isn't just a paper count, but something that the faculty considers significant.
It used to be regularly doable in about four years, but that has been extending for quite a while. Often this is partly due to the fact that students support themselves working in labs or teaching, which, again, takes time and adds to the total. If you are self funded and can devote yourself full time (60-80 hours per week) then you can shorten the time.
My doctorate had two requirements. Pass the qualifiers (both written and oral) and write an acceptable thesis. I don't think I knew anyone who did it in four and this was many years ago. No professor will want anything to do with you unless you show seriousness of purpose. Poor grades and low expectations won't get you there. It is quite a bit more than putting in minimal effort and checking a few boxes.
On the other hand, it can be exhilarating to be associated with a community of scholars, both helping and being helped by smart and dedicated people.
Every once in a while an Einstein or Feynman comes along and if they are lucky and recognized early, may have a shorter path. But likely not. Seriousness of purpose.

Most US doctorates now have credit requirements (some number of classes), some sort of qualifying exercise, and the thesis as requirements. The seminar is highly field-dependent (unless you mean the “group meeting”-type as opposed to the seminar course (as is often encountered in the humanities).

@aeismail, I studied mathematics, actually. The seminar was very small, led by our common advisor. It was intended to get us deep into the weeds of the esoteric subject area we worked on. It wasn't for general consumption, but gave the few of us the depth we needed to solve our dissertation problems. One professor, two students, with another professor or two who also wanted to go deep. This was in a department with 70 full time faculty and 140 teaching grad assistants. When I studied (around 1970) many programs had credit requirements. Mine did not.

Fair enough that it also applies in math. But you don’t have that in a lot of engineering fields, for instance. You tend to get group meetings where people present and discuss their ongoing research once or twice a semester.

So is most of the time spent on classes and preparing for exams? I had thought that classes, exams, and the such was abandoned at the PhD level. I thought a PhD was merely a low paying job producing research papers rather than being a student needing to pass exams.

Just a note for potential students reading this: if you want to finish faster, working 60-80 hours may not be ideal.

@A_Happy_Student Not most of the time; in the U.S., you're often done with classes and likely the qualifiers by the end of year 2.

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


text:
Does your areas of research matter for graduate school?
I know research is important for a Ph.D. program, but I'm wondering if research in a not-very-related field is still as useful?
For example, in the past I've done research in bioinformatics. I'm thinking of continuing just because I really like my advisor. However, I don't see my self doing a Ph.D. in that field. I am more interested in AI and/or embedded systems.
I am wondering if continuing to do work on a project in a field that I don't intend to do a Ph.D. in wouldn't be very helpful for me for grad school admissions, thus I should find a new project that will be more in line with my future interests.

Yes, definitely, at least for the two examples in the OP. Bioinformatics is very related to AI. Having successfully completed research in a data-driven scientific field does help show your capabilities to do so as a grad student in a different data-driven scientific field. Research in a farther away field, like sociology, might not help as much, but generally speaking it's good to show that you have the capability to take research projects to completion, to write well, and to navigate the publication pipeline. Most importantly, it's good to do research you're passionate about! Doing research in bioinformatics might give you a special expertise that would help down the line in AI research.

I am wondering if continuing to do work on a project in a field that I don't intend to do a Ph.D. in wouldn't be very helpful for me for grad school admissions, thus I should find a new project that will be more in line with my future interests.

In addition to what the other answers have stated in regards to transferable "soft skills" like learning to write reports, complete research projects, demonstrate project management, etc., having domain knowledge outside of pure-AI/computer science is incredibly useful. Our lab group (which does large language/AI modeling) has a lot of people who came in with only computer science/AI backgrounds, and frequently overlook or miss nuances in the data they're working with that others with chemistry/biology domain knowledge will catch.

Absolutely! There are always opportunities to create/foster/cultivate cross-collaboration, and yours is a prime example of how to do this most efficiently. I, for example, have a Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership & Policy, and I am currently a faculty member in a Criminal Justice and Criminology department. We have balance and harmony because justice is our joint 'co-frame'. That is to say, you have the opportunity to create inter- and cross-disciplinary avenues that do not necessarily (already) exist. Moreover, you can opt to continue working with your advisor in this new capacity as well. How exciting!

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


text:
Will working as a Teaching Assistant as an Undergrad help for Graduate Admissions?
Graduate admissions in an EECS field, either Ph.D or Masters. I know research experience is the most important but is having prior teaching experience also desirable?
I want to TA (it seems fun), but I'm debating on whether it will be worth it or not if it won't help me with either job prospects or graduate school.

Here's my opinion, based on being a faculty in a math department. When you apply to a graduate school, it's really a two-in-one application, i.e. there are two questions to be decided: will you be accepted or not; and if yes, then with or without financial support.
Having or not prior TA experience probably won't have any effect on your admission to the program. But getting financial support is a whole different story. If you have existing connections with a research professor in the department where you're applying, then he/she may be able to support you out of their research grants. Otherwise, especially for departments with a lot of service teaching — such as math or computer science, for example — having teaching potential can be decisive when it comes to awarding graduate assistantships. Of course, prior TA experience would be a huge plus for that.

I'm not sure how much of a difference prior teaching experience really makes for graduate school admissions, as it's not something we normally look for. It's certainly worth mentioning and will help for your career in the long-term to have had the teaching experience, whether or not you go into academia. (Somebody who is capable of teaching others is a valuable commodity!)
The only way a department would likely be looking for such experience is if it has to do a lot of "service" teaching, such as a math department. But even then it's more of a "plus" factor rather than an expectation.
I agree with Leon Meier that you should do it if you have a purpose for doing so.

I was a teaching assistant as an undergrad, and there are a few very direct ways this experience can help in work and admissions, a way in which it may or may not be helpful, and at least a few other effects that aren't on your list, but may be worth your consideration.
The most direct way this was helpful ended up being that the professor I was a TA for was great, supportive, and I learned a tremendous amount from him. I had the opportunity to work more with the professor than I would have otherwise, this gave him many interactions with me to base his evaluations on, and he ended up writing very supportive reference letters for me that helped me get a research internship, prestigious fellowship, and in graduate admissions as well. Good opportunities and experiences can snowball on themselves.
The second benefit was that I was a TA for statistics, and I greatly increased my depth of understanding of the subject through trying to teach it to others; this in turn aided my research as an undergraduate, improving my ability to gain meaningful research experience. This experience improved my CV, helped in writing of the personal statement, and helped me figure out what I actually wanted to go to graduate school for - all of which is helpful in admissions.
Now, on the "may or may not help" front, is just getting to list my teaching experience on my CV. No one particularly mentioned this was a big factor in any of my admission offers by itself, but no one mentioned that it was problematic. It seems to be viewed favorably, but it's rare and doesn't seem to be important to most people just by virtue of having done it.
The first side-effect you should consider is that it's an opportunity to take a real look at a piece of what it's like to teach and work with students, which is rather a big part of most academic lives. I was strongly evaluating whether or not I might like to be a professor at the time, and the positive experience helped alleviate a lot of concerns I had, so I could pursue graduate school with less worries about future job fit.
The second side-effect is that the experience of teaching allowed me to work with students across many backgrounds, including low socio-economic class, single parents, non-traditional students, and from historically under-represented populations. This experience allowed me to talk intelligently about "Broader Impacts", which happens to be a big deal if you are considering national fellowships like the NSF GRFP, and all three of my reviewers explicitly called out my experience in teaching and outreach as a major factor for positive reviews under this particular metric. It wasn't why I chose to be a TA in the first place - but it turned out to be an advantage of the experience that I had not anticipated, as this is a socially important issue in industry and academia.
Now, I will say there is one major downside that you have to consider: being a teaching assistant tends to take up a whole lot of time (20 hours a week of real, focused time is not unusual), emotional/mental energy, and takes up a lot of head-space for the whole semester. Also, most people dislike (or hate) grading, but it comes with the territory. Ultimately, this means all this time and energy has to come from somewhere. If you are just being more active and productive and this takes away from time you'd otherwise waste on things you don't really care about, great! Or if you use the time pressure to get better at time management and efficiency, even better. But if you let it drop your grades, wipe out your social life, disrupt your sleep, miss out on research or employment/internship opportunities, or otherwise drain you in unhealthy ways- well, then you probably won't appreciate the experience in the end. The person you are working with can make a huge difference on what you get out of the time, but that is very hard to predict in advance.
Overall, it's really hard to predict what you might get out of being a teaching assistant. I wanted to do it, did it, and am really glad I did - but YMMV, naturally. Think about the time you have, what you will need to say no to if you say yes to TA, and consider what you know about the person you TA for and the class (if you have any info on that at all). This will put you in the best position for making an informed choice, and best of luck to you!

As for your first question, usually teaching is not required for any of the two admissions, but it depends on the process at the particular institution after all.
As for your second question, all people are different and thus have different reasons. Do TA only if you exactly know why you are doing it (and not invest your time into something else). If fun is reason enough for you -- do it. I knew a couple of students with exactly the same motivation: they were happy.

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


text:
Grades from transfer university, impact on graduate admissions?
I am wondering about what the impact of a poor grade that is taken as transfer credit would be.
I am taking a core EECS (Logic Gates) class at a different university for some transfer credit because I am working full-time this school year (as a co-op). Since my university required only a C for transfer, I was not planning to put much effort into the class because I'd be busy with work.
However, I recently found that some universities like Berkeley require transcripts from all schools attended. In this case, I'm sure that it'd look bad, but I am wondering how bad it would be?

Not to speak on what admissions would want, but a thought question: Would you prefer to have someone work for you that puts in the minimum level of effort or goes all in? Only you can decide your priorities and you can rationalize just about anything, but only you can reference your goals.

For graduate admissions, transfer credit is treated the same way as regular credit.  Most universities will want all your undergraduate transcripts for graduate admissions.


text:
In general, how in-depth do graduate schools analyze the difficulty of the classes you take?
For example, I am considering taking a proof-based linear algebra course that caters to math majors, when I could be doing a much lighter class focusing on applications rather than proofs.
Do graduate admissions look at your courses close enough to evaluate the difficulty of each one? To make things worse, not all more difficult classes explicitly say "honors" or emphasize that it is more difficult through the title.
Will graduate admissions care enough to look at it closely?

Based on what others have said, some universities ask which textbooks were used in your classes.

@mkennedy Both classes use the same textbook at my school....

When it comes to linear algebra, there are two basic types of course, proof-based and more cookbook, that just goes through the procedures, manipulating matrices, finding eigenvalues, and so on.  (As you described in your question.)  I can't say whether a graduate admissions committee would care which you took, because:

It depends on what field you are applying for.  For example, if you are pre-med, no one will care if you can write a proof.
It depends on the approach of the university you are applying to.

However, I can answer a similar, related question:
How do colleges and universities evaluate the two types of linear algebra classes when making transfer credit decisions?
In this case, there is a clear distinction between the two.  If you took your linear algebra at College A, the institution you are transferring into, call it College B, will look at A's course description carefully.  If the course you took at A was primarily procedural, you won't get credit for B's proof-based course.  And if they don't have a procedural version, it will just come in as an unspecified elective.
Please feel free to specify your field and a particular university you wish to apply to.  No guarantees, but that might help you get a more useful answer.
Editorial notes (feel free to ignore): if you're interested in doing research in STEM, unless the proof-based course is very badly taught, you'd get much more out of taking that one -- even if you don't end up with an A.  Proofs are like green leafy vegetables -- they're good for you!  On the other hand, there are no prizes given out for completing a Bachelor's degree in record time.  Linear algebra with proofs is an important foundational course and deserves to be savored.

@A_Happy_Student First, you can study hard to get an A in an advanced class. Second, if you want to compete with other students applying MIT or other good schools, you better have an A in advanced linear algebra.

@scaaahu I am already studying hard and beginning to drown. I will do my best but I'm just curious of how it will be perceived... And of course there is the chance that I don't do well. Is it worth the risk or better to just do better in an easier applied class?

@A_Happy_Student If you just want to go to some mediocre schools, you don't need to take advanced class. But, I thought you want to apply to MIT, then, yes, advanced, proof based linear algebra is a must.

"I am already studying hard and beginning to drown" -- The last year is often the hardest.  See if you can spread things out a bit.  Consider taking something over winter term, consider summer study, and consider taking an extra semester to finish.  Linear Algebra with proofs is a great course for increasing one's mathematical maturity.  It's like Popeye building muscle fast with a can of spinach.  It will stand you in good stead in the long run, in any STEM field of graduate study.  But it's not a class to take when you have more than 12 OTHER credits in your schedule.  In my opinion.

You've heard two opinions -- now it's time to reflect, on your own.  At the end of the day, it's a very personal decision.


text:
Searching for remotely working industrial Scholarship For university department Students
I am biomedical Engineering student and CEO(chief executive officer) member of one new Medical device manufacturing Company (from third world countries), we have here many Students with no specific purpose and Experience in manufacturing some simple medical devices (such as Dental Vacuum former) with long time surfers and know if the university student of this field can want to do this works they have may problem to solving (like needs to multitasking designing, finding funds, market knowledge and ...).
So Two days ago, One of my University Professors said that there are some Scholarship  via internet which are between industrial or university organization based of their needs that could be done by remotely workers and no need to move from my base country.
Based of my working field and some other concerns (like money and ... !!!), I like to know more about this kind of Scholarship.
Specifically, about how could we create this kind of corporation between those Scholarship Investors and my University Biomedical Engineering Department with some goals like using  developing some of our industrial planes (Like Rehabilitation Exoskeleton designing or Step Climber Wheelchair ...) with sharing them with others organization with multi side benefit agreement? (Creating money for our university, Students and our company and ...)
I have read some answers to post like this:

One of the hardest parts of remote collaboration is making sure
  everyone is on the same page. Agreeing on work flow in advance is
  critical. To me the most important thing is that everyone has a good
  understanding of the roles and expectations of the individuals. A good
  timeline, that is flexible, is also very useful. Agreeing upon
  software, programming, and writing style issues at the outset is also
  useful.

So thought this kind of works needs to have some more specific requirements and some symmetric searching fields between universities Professors and the second part, So I be happy to hear more about those.
I  know A little about the available platform for this kind of works (like GitHub and git) and eager to know your experiences in this field as well as you suggested measures to establish such partnerships in the absence of them.
I thought I can ask this question here based of this kind of question (What are useful tips and tricks for collaborating remotely?) and thought by myself maybe some university professors or student which involved on this kind of scholarship and hope to ... if this is off topic please advise me to Edit my Question to be more this forum oriented.
I really appreciate your help. Thank you.

Are you asking about a scholarship or work?

@moha_alpha-web.net,
Do you mean Remote base work for Student, like an Intern? Right.
If so, I will like to recommend some website to you whereby you can get a different type of remote job;
Like:
Remotely.com,
outreachy.com,
Landingjob.com,
vanhack.com,
I will like to know if you find any help with this.


text:
About making a video for pre-presentation of the PhD Thesis for the Master Judge
I was in one PhD Thesis Presentation Ceremony last week and have seen some aggressive Attack from one of the judge masters to the Student which had presented its PHD thesis.
I guess some part of this situation has been done by prejudging the student works and not having enough time for reading the content of thesis and having too much question about the thesis which could not be possible for asking during that one meeting.
So I have seen the MSC student presenting their seminar by recording one 15 minutes video about their power point of their seminar and uploading it at some video host like YouTube, so  I have one suggestion for our faculty, by doing this process as one Pre-Presentation for the PhD Thesis Presentation Ceremony process, too.
This work would help the masters to better review and understanding the student thesis and save many of their time for reading the huge papers of one PHD thesis, also it would help them to remove unnecessary question and ask better question for helping the student to make their final presentation better.
if possible I like to have your comment about the suggestion of:

giving a PRE PRESENTATION  PhD Thesis Presentation Ceremony  by a recorded video to the Master Judge .

Thanks.

The somewhat random bold formatting of this post seems to make it a lot harder, rather than easier, to read. My tendency is to pause and yell out each bold section.

I have some worries, to be honest. It is hard to make a firm recommendation without knowing something about personalities, but such a thing could backfire.
First is the question of whether anyone in the target group would actually watch it. Those with an interest in it or who were closely aligned with the ideas, might, but someone who isn't going to take a deep dive into the written work may not bother.
Second, watching a video doesn't give the opportunity to ask questions at the moment and it might be possible for a viewer to reach misconceptions of the work. It might lead to more questions or, in the worst case, more hostile questions. But that is a personality matter.
I would look for some evidence that this has been actually tried successfully before attempting it. And evidence from my own field. Some research into the effectiveness of such things might be required.
If you make such a video, I'd strongly suggest that you get feedback on it from a few people you trust. Unfortunately, that can make the creation a long and involved effort.
Another thing to consider is what your advisor thinks and the role that they play in the defense. In my own case, one of the  members was from a different sub field and admitted to me after the (successful) defense that he didn't really know enough of the background to be able to offer much help, though he gave a positive "vote". But that was at least in part because he could depend on the reputation of my advisor that everything was "solid". In fact, it is a fairly common practice for committee members to ask the advisor to assure them that "all is well."
I hope that aggressive attacks are rare and I suspect that they depend on personalities - or even departmental conflicts. Even large mathematics departments can be very political with various factions constantly at war. But a video presentation isn't going to save anyone from that. Maybe the opposite. "To the barricades!!!"


text:
Put good GRE scores on resume submitted with grad app?
If you have good GRE scores, is it a good idea to put them on the resume that you submit with your grad school application?

As said above, I would leave them off. Keep the resume for university and experience you've had.

You typically have ETS send the school your official GRE scores anyway so this information is going to be redundant.
It shouldn't bother most people if it is on there but I don't see it helping you really either. I would only do it if I have some space needing to be filled on my resume and my scores were really high.

authors: 英雄本色jackie生日本末倒置_jackie电影图穷匕见


text:
Do I need IRB approval to study myeslf?
I am attempting to do my PhD "in the open", to treat the entire project of getting my degree (whose research is unrelatedly Computer Science), as a study. That is, I am going to collect my thought processes and outputs in an Open Notebook Science way. To legitimize this I am creating at Data Management Plan, and it asks if I need IRB approval?
On the one hand, it seems silly that I should need approval to study myself; but I am a human subject. Do people typically need approval to study themselves?

This could be readily answered with an email to your IRB.

Would the data you put in the Open Notebook include your advisor's thought process? If so, I think you need his consent.

I don't understand. If you are recording your own thoughts and ideas as you carry out a CS PhD, this sounds like documenting your process of research, not as studying yourself. Certainly we don't need IRB approval to keep a careful lab notebook! What's the difference?
If you intend to study the psychology of doing CS, I can at least see why you might ask the IRB. But if you're just doing open science, I personally cannot see what the IRB has to do with it.

@Corvus the OP plans to "treat the entire project of getting my degree (whose research is unrelatedly Computer Science), as a study" which suggests something more than just open science. I have no idea what that means, though, just took it at face value.

Very unclear. What sort of study do you anticipate "the entire project of getting your degree" will be? Ethnography? Project management? Pedagogy? Psychology? Psychiatry?

it asks if I need IRB approval Would you please explain who is this it?

In general, single subject studies often do not require IRB review in the United States because they do not meet the federal definition of research (they are not "generalizable.")
However, there are some exceptions to this rule. For example, a single subject oral history study or a single subject retrospective case study does not generally require IRB approval, but a single subject clinical study that involves collection of data that would not ordinarily be collected in the course of treatment does.
If you'd like to be sure, I suggest an email to your IRB.

Researching using one "subject" is in principle generalizable to a larger population, thus is research by federal law. This happens all the time in linguistics and various ethnological fields. Ithaca simple made a different concrete decision, which they are allowed to do. The best solution is to focus on the fact that "subject" is not defined. A "subject" in the ordinary understanding of the term is not a professional colleague who is involved in designing and executing the research. Until the regulations are revised (setting aside medicine)...

one should assume ordinary meanings of words. Medicine has to be set aside since it is a separately-regulated industry (unlike social sciences). A local IRB may, nevertheless, have rules that don't make sense from the perspective of federal law, but that's part of their power.

What you describe in your question does not match your title, but let's assume you are interested in the question in the title. My field is related to medicine and in general to the question of whether ethics approval is necessary or not, experiments on oneself are not treated differently than experiments on any other human being. Which means, you do need ethics approval. According to this article from the Harvard Gazette

Some [institutional review boards] have categorically excluded investigators from their own experiments; others have considered the issue case by case.

Moreover, self-experimentation is very likely to give useless results (there are notable exceptions) because of the obvious bias present when subject and experimenter are the same. Think about all the efforts we put into designing double-blind studies, placebo control groups, etc. not to mention you'd end up with a N of 1, hardly enough to draw meaningful conclusions.
I can't find the exact document but I remember that the NIH formally disregard publications where the experiments were conducted on the authors themselves.

Related to medicine, at least some experiments on yourself should be treated differently because of safety aspects. For some experiments, e.g. a drop of your own blood may be the safest possible drop of blood for you to play around with (infection risk). For other experiments, it may be a huge risk to use your own cells (no immune defense against your own cells).
In addition, ethical approval for self experiments is meant to ensure that the self experiment is of your own free will (and not your supervisor putting pressure so you to donate samples).

@cbeleites it's for whether it needs ethics approval that they do not differ. Ethics boards can then differentiate and approve, or not, using some of the arguments that you mention.


text:
Delayed second review of a reputed journal
I had submitted an article and I got first decision. I wrote answers and explanations to the reviewer comments and re submitted the article. After 2 months it sent to the same reviewer (as per info given at help section) and i am told that the reviewer has not accepted the invite. It is very surprising, why would the same reviewer who reviewed my article once would not accept the invite to see my answers. Or why would the editor wait for almost 2 months for the reviewer to just accept the invite the review.

Did you re-write the article itself, or just write separate answers and explanations?

What was the first decision? If the decision was 'conditional publish' and you tried to fullfill the conditions, than this behaviour is very odd. If the decision was 'publication rejected' for some stated reasons and you addressed the reasons it seems well within their rights to refuse to look at the same paper again.

After 2 months it sent to the same reviewer (as per info given at help section)....[W]hy would the editor wait for almost 2 months for the reviewer to just accept the invite the review[?]

The timeline seems to vary a lot by field, but sometimes the journal publication process is extraordinarily slow. On the whole, 2 months doesn't seem out of the ordinary to me. If it was just the editor waiting to ask the reviewer, I agree that seems strange, but there may have been some good reason for the delay (e.g. back and forth with this reviewer to see if they would be able to accept it or not).

and I am told that the reviewer has not accepted the invite.
  It is very surprising, why would the same reviewer who reviewed my
  article once would not accept the invite to see my answers.

Unexpected things can happen. For example, the reviewer had some personal tragedy or health emergency. You simply cannot tell, so the best thing you can do is to discuss with the editor of the paper what to do next.

Why would the same reviewer who reviewed my article once would not accept the invite to see my answers?

Lots of possible reasons:

They're too busy.
They retired/left academia/changed universities/passed away etc and the editor wasn't aware of the new development.
You didn't address their questions properly and they decided they didn't want to waste any more time on your paper.
They started up a collaboration with you in the interim, which made them have a conflict of interest and therefore are recusing themselves from the paper.
... (you can probably think of a bajillion possible reasons).

Why would the editor wait for almost 2 months for the reviewer to just accept the invite the review?

As implicit in your question, one would expect the same reviewer who reviewed your article once will accept the invite to review the revision. The editor undoubtedly thought the same, so they chose to wait almost two months in your case, even though for a new reviewer reviewing a fresh submission they might wait a shorter time.


text:
PhD transfer from European to American University
I am a non-EU PhD student in a European country. I am 5.5 months into my program. However, I am facing a lot of issues adjusting to the social aspect.
Due to the virtual nature of the setting, I haven't met any of my lab-mates, except for my supervisor. This is expected, given the current situation. However, this isolation is made even more difficult by the fact that I was racially abused by some teens very close to my apartment. At one point, I even felt physically threatened by their behaviour, and I just walked back home. I didn't go out of my apartment for two days after this incident. I had a similar experience while buying a SIM card. The place doesn't have much to offer in terms of social activities.
On the plus side, my supervisor is a genuinely good advisor and kind person, and very well connected in the field. The field is also pretty new in terms of the possibility of scientific problems that can be solved. The University, however, is not highly ranked, and, will leave me with limited options if I choose not to continue in academia, or continue in the same field. I am also unsure how a degree from a lesser ranked program will pan out in terms of career options if I want to continue in academia. And these, are magnified if I decide to go back to my home country.
I spoke with a mentor in a University in the US, whose research overlaps with my current research. After discussing the pros and cons, advised me to discuss my issues with my supervisor here in Europe, and, also, prepare applications to grad schools in the US. He is willing to write LORs for my applications.
I know that no place is immune from the issues I mentioned above.  I believe that having a social bond helps in dealing with issues like this. And, there are lot of students from my country in the US, which makes the social isolation part a bit easier to deal with.
I know that it will not look good to any admissions committee, if my current supervisor doesn't write an LoR.
How do I

Broach these topics with my supervisor? I have just started working on a project that is exciting.
Write about these issues in an SOP without using any controversial words?

How do I mitigate this while writing an SOP without actually using terms like racial abuse, etc.
If it helps, I made the decision to come here when the pandemic was ravaging across the US,and funding, visa, etc., in the US was uncertain late last year.


text:
In addition to the grammerly software, are there other better tools in English writing?
For non-English speakers, are there other useful tools besides grammerly software in English writing? Mainly check whether the sentence is authentic.

I test them with this: https://www.thoughtco.com/spell-checker-poem-by-mark-eckman-1692348  and not found one that finds all the errors... But I have the advantage of mother tongue... However, you might get better info by asking on the English Learners Stack. And is it "Grammarly"?

Should it be "grammarly" or "grammerly"?

Your best bet is to get someone to look over it for you. While leaps and bounds have been made in CS related to looking over papers (or just sentences), not one catches everything.
Your university may have a "homework help" department that students(usually undergrads) can use to get their material looked over (mine had services to help with writing and mathematics specifically). While I think it would be a little out of the ordinary I think it would be worth a shot to see if they would check over your paper for comprehension.


text:
US v/s European SOP (Motivation Letter) for Ph.D
Is there a difference in the kind of SOP you write for European Ph.D. vacancies/structured programs v/s US grad school? -- in terms of length, type of content to be covered (completely technical v/s story-like), or any peculiar difference?
I am writing Motivation Letter for European Ph.D. admits and I don't know what they are looking for in a Motivation Letter.
(I have already applied 15 vacancies, but, no success. I didn't even get interview calls.)

The motivation letter may not be the reason you have not had any success.

I get your point, but, I am trying to rule out every possible reason for rejection. (whatever is in my hands.) ; motivation letter is one of them. I have written US-style SOP, so, I am wondering if that is different from what a European admission committee is looking for.

If you know any, you could ask some successful past applicants to take a look at their SOP. You might have trouble getting a useful answer here because few people have seen many European and many US applications, and within each group the styles of statements probably differ a lot (as Solar Mike said, it's only a small part of the application).

If anything, a European letter should be more focused since candidates normally start doctoral studies with more background in field.


text:
Advice needed on publishing a textbook!
I have authored a large textbook on Male Pattern Baldness already in 2015 in my native language, Greek,
I have finished the translation in English and looking for a publisher.
It is a unique medical textbook, addressing multiple disciplines in a very detailed manner.
Springer has been interested in publishing my work but does not offer remuneration per chapter download, which is the most distinctive aspect of my book since there are 129 dedicated chapters for each separate issue!
I am interested more in "fame" than "fortune" but knowing that most of the revenue from my work will be generated in a way that I get no remuneration at all will be at least annoying.
Can anyone suggest any other reputable publishing house that is offering a fee -per-chapter download as well?
Can anyone suggest a house that can guarantee visibility and spread of my work as good as Springer?
If making ay considerable money out of this huge work is not possible, would you suggest Open Access for increased visibility?
Thank you for your time!

Your current publisher should be able to give you suggestions/use their contacts...

Industry standard here is to offer royalties based off the revenue made. If Springer is selling your book, then each chapter download should not be free, and some percentage of that revenue goes to you.
I'd be surprised if anyone is willing to offer you remuneration based on downloads, since the same buyer might download the book several times.

The chapters downloadable at Springer's website are not free but there is no percentage revenue for the author. Do you have any suggestions for the other 2 questions?

@KonstantinosAnastassakis is this your website? https://hairclinicgreece.com/dr-anastassakis/ If so I'll ask an acquisition editor from a publisher I know to contact you.

Yes this is mine, thank you! which house is he working for if I may ask?

@KonstantinosAnastassakis I asked World Scientific, did you get an email from them? If you don't want to publish with them I can ask another publisher too.


text:
Unreasonable reviewer request (grant re-submission strategy)
For a grant proposal for my home country's key funding agency (e.g., NIH equivalent), I received a rejection.
Unfortunately, the review panel picked up predominantly the comments of one of the three reviewers stating that there is a putatively better method available to address a key aspect of the research question.
The technical suggestion is possibly true. However, there are zero groups within my country that apply this highly experimental technique. The two to three European groups applying this technique only work with healthy volunteers for physiology studies (i.e., no patient examinations).
As a putative example, think of some 'fancy' MRI device that is used for experimental patient imaging in only two to three centers in the world.
Considering that a brief point-by-point response is required for re-submission:

Would you just add a collaborator in the closest neighbor country
plus patient travel costs to the grant (drastically inflating the
costs)?
Would you consider objecting to the review panel
highlighting the impracticalities (i.e., requiring study patients
to travel internationally)?

I don't know if there are any particulars to your situation (e.g., EU membership) that would make it easier, but I can't even fathom writing an IRB application to my institution that would involve patients traveling to another country.

Kind of cut myself off at the question part of the previous comment...I meant to ask: is there a reason you think this is feasible? That is, is this (shipping patients to the closest neighbor country) something you're familiar with doing or other people doing?

I gather you are re-submitting to the same funding agency? Did they actively encourage to do this? Do you have any idea about the chances of having a modified resubmission with a point-by-point response accepted? When this kind of thing happened to me I was told by knowledgeable people within my institution that it's rather hopeless but it's still better to file a response because this makes a good impression in case you later apply for something else. With that information I didn't lose much sleep over how to do it. But of course your situation/funding body may be different.

@BryanKrause: I work in the rare disease space. About 60% of our patients come from outside of my country and are also seen by other doctors elsewhere. A signficiant fraction of them (~50 %) would be will to go somewhere else in addition (if the purpose is explained to them).

@BryanKrause: A 'joint' IRB submission would be difficult (especially since the device is not CE-marked and requires special, country-dependent regulations). It would be two separate studies (with data-sharing agreements in place), and patients would be encouraged to participate in both.

@ChristianHennig: The was no 'specific invitation to resubmit' in the text. However, the letter states explicitly that the commission acknowledges the high relevance and importance to the field (as stated by the three reviewers).

@William I see, well, I think you likely need more specific advice than is typically available on this site. Option 1 seems like it's only going to help you if you're able to convince the granting org that this is all reasonable, like if you can point to previous studies where you or your collaborators have done something similar, or add personnel who have experience doing these sorts of multi-country clinical trials. Option 2 is kind of the opposite: if Option 1 is feasible, then it seems not very convincing that you could also argue it's impractical. It seems to depend on your situation.

In general, I'd recommend favoring emphasizing the benefits of your proposal over downplaying the drawbacks of not being able to do something else. Funding orgs want to fund exciting stuff, not fund what's merely the best you can manage.

Peer review actually worked here: The reviewers picked up on a substantial flaw of the study, and pointed it out. They did not know that you considered the idea (or maybe you didn't -- that doesn't actually matter here) and discarded it as impractical: But that's a problem in the proposal. It is ok to state in a proposal that there is a specific method around, but that it is not practical for you to use it because of X, Y, and Z. If well explained, reviewers typically accept these sorts of reasons, but it's your job to make the case for or against something.

Thank you to @BryanKrause: The 'want to fund exciting stuff' part makes sense to me, and I will go for the 'adding an international collaborator' variant. (Of course, the more difficult logistics might provide an 'attack surface' for the next reviewer.)

@WolfgangBangerth: Thank you for your thoughtful comments! Yes and no. The peer review worked (reviewer 2 comments were critical, but technically fine), and my proposal could have anticipated/justified such comments. Nevertheless, the funding agency panel somewhat failed. At least in my field, there is always somewhere in the world a better experimental imaging device for some lesion subtype. Even if I accommodate the request of reviewer 2, a new reviewer can easily come up and mention 'some novel technique used in 3 patients in Tokyo'.  Of course, unlike mice, patients can't be 'shipped' ...

@William So make that point: "We will image patients using [method X]. While there are better techniques available today, we chose [method X] because it is locally available at our institution and because the resolution we can get from this method is sufficient for our purposes."


text:
Is my text lacking of citations?
I've started my Masters in Computer Science this year and i'm facing some questions about citations. Papers and dissertations i've seen so far have a lot of citations even for the most basic subjects.
Now, i'm working on a paper and i have this question: should i explain things with my own words or use anyone's definition and properly cite their work?
I'd like to know what is the usual way of doing citations. I don't know if i write with my own words and look for citations (or even when to cite).
Thanks in advance.

You should explain things in your own words and cite their work.

To avoid plagiarism you need to cite most things that you use (exceptions below). It isn't a question of paraphrasing or not. If you use it cite it. Sometimes it is better to quote than paraphrase, but using other people's actual words is more a question of copyright than plagiarism. Plagiarism is making it seem like the work of others is actually your own.
The main exception is "common knowledge". You don't need to cite the fact that the Earth is roughly spherical and not flat (Sorry, Terry Pratchett, RIP). You don't need to cite the definition of the derivative in math. But if you get something out of a paper, it is most likely that it needs citation.
And, citation requires more than just the name of the original source. A reader of your work needs to be able to go back to the original and see the complete context of the idea, including the paper it came from and any references that appear there. A chain of evidence is vital to scholarly work.

Thanks, plagiarism is something terrible. In the other hand, i feel like we should balance original writing vs a huge compilation of citations. But you gave me a start point. Thanks!


text:
Is it ok to quote a line from a fantasy book in a scientific paper?
I am writing a scientific pre-print and I found a widely known quote from Tolkien that would be very relevant to my introduction, is it appropriate to include it or would it sound unprofessional?

Depends upon your journals and subfield. Some journals allow you to start of sections with quotes. Others do not. I've seen books in ecology reference relevant quotes. For example, Hal Caswell references Alice in Wonderland in his book on matrix models.

@RichardErickson Books are different from journal papers, though. In my experience this is much more common in books than in articles.

@FedericoPoloni I agree

Somewhat between a paper and a book is the book chapter The historical development of uniform, proximal, and nearness concepts in topology (freely available here) in which it seems about every other page has a quote. The quotes are from the 1979 movie Being There, Jerome K. Jerome, Lewis Carroll, Edward Lear, and others.

Are you somewhat famous (at least a prof)? Then you could get away with this more easily.

@user111388 I am not famous at all but it would be sad to accept that only famous people have the privilege of doing that

It might well sound unprofessional, but most people would forgive you. If it "connects" people to your topic it might be worth the risk. But Tolkien, in particular, is best known by only a portion of the adult audience. The same is true for Frank Herbert and Robert Heinlein.
But think about what it adds to your work. If it is fairly positive, don't hesitate. If it adds very little, then give it up.
If the work is strong in general then it won't even matter if the cognoscenti roll their eyes a bit.

All those great writers are less known by the smartphone generation... and many have not read the full book just the “short” or condensed version for the exam - and how do I know - I asked the students...


text:
How does a good weekly progress report look like?
I'm on my third year of my PhD and I just realised I don't know what a good progress report looks like.
I've been writing them from the beginning and was given templates to follow but feedback seems inconsistent. My needs change and my so do my supervisors. I also feel that some weeks are slow and there is nothing useful to report or I plan to do something and end up having to adjust plans halfway through.
What should I tell my supervisor in my weekly progress report?
Similar question but not exactly what I'm asking:
What should a progress report contain?

Why isn't the linked post enough?

@Buffy That question seems focused on longer reports. Would it work for smaller ones too?

The accepted answer seems pretty good as an outline. In some weeks a section might only have a few words, or even be omitted. In some weeks maybe something added. But what you are experiencing sounds pretty normal, actually.

I'm on my third year of my PhD and I just realised I don't know what a good progress report looks like. Hmm, I got my PhD more than five years ago, and until now I didn't even know that such a thing like weekly progress reports exists... ;-) On a more serious note: May I ask what field you're in and whether this is common in your field? It strikes me as quite bureaucratic.

@JochenGlueck I'm studying Computer Science and I'm also partially sponsored by industry, so maybe its a manager thing. Funny because I don't feel managed. Other students have weekly progress meetings but not written reports.

@Marcus: Thanks for your response!

Given that the report is weekly, you can keep it short:

what have you done last week? (in a few short sentences, maybe a graph or two if you have data to show)
what did you plan to do?
if 1 and 2 are different, why?
do you need help with anything?
what are you going to do next week, and why? (keep it small and realistic)
how do the weekly plans fit with the longer term plan?

You may not need to discuss point 6 every week, and 1-5 can be kept very short: if a longer discussion is needed you can use point 4 to request one outside of the weekly updates.


text:
How to cross-references sections in a thesis?
When using cross-references in a thesis for cross-referencing to specific sections, do we have to use section numbers or section names would be fine too?
example:

As discussed in the Discussion section, ...

vs

As discussed in section 3.4, ...

If possible, please answer with a citable reference.
I remember reading that both are correct, but know I cannot find it! I think it was in the book "How to write a better thesis?" by Evans, Gruba and Zobel.
Thanks!

Intuitively, it's a matter of taste.  Both are indeed correct.

As discussed in the Discussion section/Section 3.4

But the former is less usable, because finding the Discussion section is harder than finding Section 3.4, so I strongly advocate the latter.

I agree, but would also advise that the OP check any specific regulations their institution might have with regards to thesis formatting.

@user2768 Thanks! Of course, as I mentioned, I am looking for a citable reference. Because it seems my thesis reviewer haven't found many issues, and instead directed me to change the whole cross-reference styling!

@RFNO Which style have they suggested?

@user2768 I have used the first style (Alphabetical -> Discussion section) in my thesis, but the reviewer asked to me change all of them to the second one (Numeral one -> Section 3.4). If I was using Latex, I would have changed it right away, but as you know, cross-referencing is not Microsoft Word's strongest suit and they don't go hand in hand! Right now that I have a 200 page document, even simple meddling with cross-references, breaks the document in multiple places!

@RFNO Although this is a matter of taste, your style is rather unusable, which is why your thesis reviewer has directed you to change it. How has the direction been issued? Are you required to make the change or is it merely a suggestion or ...?

@user2768 I have to change it, but my supervisor told me it is not obligatory in his mind and we should push back! He also sent me some links to cite and not change the style, because he thinks the reviewer has made unfair comments when he could have just let it go! But the links my supervisor has sent are mostly regarding styles of 'table of contents' and not 'cross-referencing'! May I ask why is it unusable?

@RFNO I agree with your supervisor: It isn't necessary and you should push back. Personally, I'd suggest you explain the lessons you've learned. Regarding, why is it [rather] unusable?, because every reference is indirect (see reference, look-up section in contents, visit section), rather than direct (see reference, visit section).


text:
Is it fine to submit a paper with acknowledgements in it?
My friend who is a senior lecturer says it is wrong to submit a paper with acknowledgements and you should add them once the paper is accepted, not to interfere with the review process. Is this correct?

Is it fine to submit a paper with acknowledgements in it?

There are two possibilities:

If the review is double-blind, then no -- you should remove the acknowledgements section prior to submission. This is because usually, this section would reveal something about the author's identities. See here for why it is OK to not acknowledge grants/funding at this stage.
If the review is not double-blind, then it doesn't really matter. However, personally I would wait until after review to add acknowledgements, because one of the people I would always thank is the reviewers. It would be strange to submit the paper to review with

we thank the reviewers for their helpful comments

when they have not actually written those comments yet! If worried about space limitations (as in the thread here), then you can write the acknowledgements, but comment them out prior to submission.

My friend who is a senior lecturer says it is wrong to submit a paper with acknowledgements and you should add them once the paper is accepted, not to interfere with the review process. Is this correct?

Overall, I agree this is correct. But it is not a serious matter, and different people may have different ideas about this.

I disagree that it doesn't really matter. I agree acknowledgements would reveal something about the author's identities, but don't consider them particularly revealing, that said, it depends how they are written and what they include

@user2768 If you don't consider them particularly revealing, then why do you disagree with the answer? +1 to your answer btw. When I say "it doesn't really matter" I just mean that it's not a big deal. Personally I would leave them out as well.

I think it can matter for the reasons given in my answer. That said, it's not a big deal, albeit, friction can be caused with some reviewers, which is something we all like to avoid! Nonetheless +1

Read the author's guidelines of the journal. I know this may be different for different fields but I have seen journals specifically instruct that you have to mention funding source at the end of the paper, in the acknowledgment section. So, it's better you check the guidelines first. If the journal is double-blind, it will instruct accordingly.

I have seen journals specifically instruct that you have to mention funding source at the end of the paper for review or before publication?

I have not seen any journal specifically mentioned anything about before or after. Actually this thing never came to my mind before seeing this post. My supervisor told me to write the acknowledgment part before reviewing and he did all his life. I don't think this is a big deal.

Is it fine to submit a paper with acknowledgements in it?

Your acknowledgements may signal favor/support/etc. from those acknowledged, which could influence reviewers. Any such influence is avoided by omitting acknowledgements until after review.
Even when acknowledgements have no such influence, some reviewers may perceive their inclusion as an attempt to bias the reviewing process, which works against you.
That's perhaps why a senior lecturer says it is wrong to submit a paper with acknowledgements.


text:
No publication in MS
I completed my MS-by research (thesis) in US in EE (well-renowned university and advisors)  and unfortunately, I do not have any papers published.
At present, I am leading (read it as pitch idea, receive funding, setup lab, perform research) an international research collaboration in Industry. I have conceived this idea that has the potential to solve long-standing problems in this particular industry. What is that I am doing differently is application of this concept in this sector of Industry ( and of course solving the problem).
The only thing that is keeping me away from applying for P.hD. program is that I do not have a publication.
Is there a suggestion what I must do in the current research? Advisors under whom I want to work for PhD is top 5 in universities.

If you're already leading an international research collaboratin in industry, are you sure you want / need a PhD? It sounds like you're doing something pretty cool right now.

I don't think the lack of publications will be much of a barrier, but I also think you need more realistic goals. Top five US universities is a pretty small (minuscule) cross section of what is available. The total number of positions in any given year is small and the demand is gigantic.
Any application to a doctoral program in the US will be judged on a variety of things, including letters of recommendation, rather than on any single criterion. The admissions committee wants to be able to make a fairly solid prediction that each candidate is likely to be a success. Given your background as you state it, you can probably get admitted somewhere. But your chances at only those top five places is pretty tiny.
I suggest that you apply to a range of R1 universities, including those if you like. Maybe you get lucky but you will be more likely to find something suitable if you cast a wider net. Look at the top fifty, say, and see what they offer. some of the State University programs, for example, are larger and have more slots available, due to a large faculty. But also look for professors with working groups in and area of interest. The right advisor can make all the difference.
And, if you have the time, there is no reason you can't still publish as an independent researcher.


text:
When citing a thesis, do I list supervisors as coauthors?
I am citing someone's bachelors thesis, and someone else's PhD thesis. Do I include the supervisors for each of these works as a coauthor of the thesis?

What does the theses your are writing say - ie- who do they list as an author? What does the citation style you are writing to say (if anything) about citing theses?

@nabla The title page lists a single author (the student), then explicit states the name of the supervisor, e.g. "Superivsor: Prof ABC". I am not required to use and therefore not using any formal citation style—I'm using whatever BibLaTeX's authoryear style gives me. I don't believe this style says anything about citing theses.

When citing, you should include the document's author(s). For a thesis, that'll be a single author. You needn't name any other contributors, e.g., any supervisors.

that'll be a single author At least, I cannot think of an exception...

In some countries (for example, Sweden), bachelor's and master's theses can be developed by multiple authors. I think there even exist historical cases of multi-author PhD theses in the former German Democratic Republic.

Could we compare citing the supervisors of a thesis to citing people in the acknowledgements of a paper? Even though the supervisor contributed, the thesis was solely written by a single author. Much the same, as people who I publicly thank in the acknowledgements may have contributed much, the paper was written by me and my co-authors.

@lighthousekeeper I preempted your comment ;-)

@DohnJoe A better comparison would perhaps be citing a poctdoc's supervisor


text:
Researching with someone as a stopgap
I am currently an undergrad student looking to research with one particular professor. On talking with his colleagues, it was suggested that I first get some research experience under my belt; the professor in question is a high level professor who is currently not looking for students and it would significantly help my cause when he opens up if I have research experience already.
There are other professors that I'm not particularly interested (interesting, but not amazingly interesting to me) in working with, but are open and would be willing to take me in currently. Is it ok to use these professors as experience builders on the premise that I would switch as soon as the professor I would like to work with opens up? If so, should I tell the stopgap professor that I intend on switching as soon as the other group opens up?
Just to be clear, I would put in the time required for the stopgap work - I would not just blow it off. I am just concerned about using someone as a stopgap and potentially leaving them high and dry if they expect me to be there for the next 3 years of undergrad.

I've been told to do the same thing, and I think its normal to have worked with different professors throughout your undergrad career. As long as you don't burn bridges by "switching as soon as" possible. The other professor's research interests would ideally be similar to the high level professor's field. It wouldn't hurt to reach out to the high level professor and ask them what type of experience they are looking for. Maybe they only accept grad students or very exceptional undergrads.

What are the reasons for the preference for the high level professor? Personally I'd think that it may be better to start working with another professor with an open mind and give them the chance to win you over based on an interesting project and good supervision.

@Lewian That's the specialization I'd like to go into. It's extremely niche. Literally the reason I'm going to the university I am is because of this professor.

If you came to me and said upfront that you wanted to get research experience and wanted to work with a variety of professors rather than making a full commitment to only one, I would try to find a way to accommodate you.
Or at least I would let you know what my expectations are. But, in any case, we have an honest relationship.
Now there would be no question of an ethical bind if you later decide to work with a more prestigious professor.
But the honest relationship is very valuable given that the professors know one another and you don't want to get caught in a bind between two professors.


text:
Approaching unresponsive high level research professor as an undergraduate without any program
I am currently a freshman at an American university double majoring in CS and Econ. There is one professor in my university that I am looking to work with, as his main research focus is algorithmic game theory, something that for obvious reasons holds great interest to me.
However, I do recognize that it would be difficult for me to keep pace with his research, being highly theoretical in nature. However, I have written to him multiple time about meeting with me for a few minutes to talk about his research or to advise me about what next steps I may take to best prepare myself for that kind of research with no response. I even tracked him down once, after the 1st email, and asked him about this, where he told me to email him as he is busy. However, it has been months without any reply.
I'm at a loss for what to do; what further steps can I take?

I'm a little confused; I was reading up on this and came upon this post that details how this is a bad idea. Are you suggesting something different than what the linked post suggests against?

@user760900: Talking to a PhD student about doing research with their advisor, how they are to work with, good ways to contact them: fine.  Involving the PhD student in your research project, or taking the PhD student as a de facto advisor in place of the professor: not fine.

I'm unclear what you actually want. Your title suggests working with him, but the body suggests you are looking for less than that, at least initially. It is likely that there is some sort of seminar series in the Department. If there is, go to any that are given by any members of his research group. That will expose you to their ideas and show you what they are working on.

@JenB I mean the idea is to work with him, even if it takes a semester of doing less so that he may warm up to me

Well, faculty-student research is a two-way street, and for whatever reason, it certainly doesn't sound like this professor is showing a lot of interest in working with you.  This is not necessarily anything about you or your abilities; he may just be busy with other things, or not very interested in working with undergraduates in general, or too disorganized to keep track of potential research students.  But any of those would suggest that this is not someone that would be a good research supervisor for you at this time.
If you did start a research project with this professor, you'd be counting on him for actual supervision: advice on what to learn and what to work on, feedback on your progress and on your products (papers, code, etc), availability to meet to help get you unstuck when you are stuck on a problem, signing necessary university paperwork, collaboration in writing and submitting papers if you get that far, and so on.  You can see from many questions on this site how frustrating a research experience can be if this sort of support is not forthcoming, and it will be especially important in your case since it's apparently your first time getting involved in research.   And the fact that he is already so unresponsive to something as simple as "I'd like to talk about research opportunities" is reason for serious concern that he'd be similarly unresponsive when you really need his participation.
I would suggest that, at least for now, you move on and look for research opportunities with other faculty members - ideally, someone with a record of working successfully with undergraduates, and who shows clear interest in working with you.  I think these are more important than a perfect fit of research interests.
You have plenty of time to consider approaching this professor again in a year or two.  In the meantime, you might try to talk to other students he's supervised (either undergraduate or graduate) and find out how the experience was.  This may give you some ideas about how to get his attention more effectively, or it may convince you that you don't want to work with him at all.

I have been struggling with this exact dilemma, as I am extremely interested in algorithmic game theory. Given the circumstances, I came to much the same conclusion you did, yet it still feels wrong to give up on this topic and move to one that doesn't interest me. To give some background, the prof in question just became a prof and is trying to establish himself (although he recently became a bigshot due to a recent paper). I figure this is probably why he doesn't want to waste time on undergrads. However, I did contact other profs in the theory group (albeit once), and none responded.

Just to clarify - I understand if they respond saying I'm not good enough or something of the sort. However, I just write an email saying I'm interested in some of their research and would like to talk to them about it despite being a freshman, which elicits no response so far. I understand theory groups are harder to get into, yet this feels slightly ridiculous. Is the only option just abandoning this for a year or two and doing research on unenjoyable topics while I get "good enough" to be on their radar and contact them?

@user760900: As I said, I really don't think it has anything to do with whether you're "good enough".  All I'm saying is that working with a professor who isn't responsive or forthcoming with their time is likely to be a painful experience, no matter how interesting their research is.  That's why I'm suggesting, at least for now, that you focus instead on finding someone who is good to work with, even if their research area isn't your first choice.

@user760900: It's also a good way to explore other areas that you may discover a stronger interest in, and even if you don't, the breadth of research experience is valuable; what you learn here may connect to other things you are interested in, down the road.  Conversely, there is some danger in focusing exclusively in a single area too soon.

@user760900: The process of developing research relationships will get easier later in your undergraduate career, after you've gotten to know more professors (and how they are to work with), built up a stronger background of general knowledge in your field, and generally continued to mature as a student.

@user76090 it still feels wrong to give up on this topic and move to one that doesn't interest me -- don't give up! The beauty of research is that you can pursue one thing, unrelated, but keep your interest in this area. For your long-term goals, it makes sense to (hopefully temporarily) get research experience with someone else if this professor isn't being receptive. Also, it would be good to find a trusted mentor in the department you can talk to about this, maybe one of your other professors.

It's a two way street in both directions. The OP is not offering anything of value to the professor, either! OP has admitted to not being in any position to assist the professor at this time. Edit: Removed bits that were clarified in other comments.

One option is to take a class he teaches and do a fantastic job there, especially if it is a graduate-level one. Those classes often involve projects that deal with the actual research in the field. Very often those projects are open-ended and can potentially result in publications. I even suspect that some professors deliberately use their class projects to look for new students.  If you can make yourself stand out from the crowd there, it is likely to open some doors for you. But since you are a freshman, make sure you are actually well-prepared to shine in such class before enrolling. Sometimes it is better to be patient and prepare well.
Another thing is to not get fixated on a particular sub-field. Research interests evolve over time, especially at an early stage. It is likely that in a couple of years you will be super hyped about doing something else. So enjoy your time at the university, learn as much as you can, and be open-minded about what you can do with your knowledge and intellectual abilities!

I tried to do this, but he keeps switching the classes he's teaching and he dropped the one I planned to take with him next semester (he's not teaching a class next sem ಠ_ಠ). But thank you for your response - I will continue to try this.

@user760900 You describe this professor as somewhat highly valued by society. If that is so, make it worth his time to meet with you. Proving yourself is one way to do it. Offering an inexpensive gift that recognizes his person or talents is another, along the lines as a well-prepared, home-cooked meal, or some cookies; Or, offer to be a guinea pig for his research, if that is applicable, Talking to TAs will give you more insight into how to approach him.

@jpaugh Would you be able to expand more on how to offer him an inexpensive gift? To me it seems to come of as slightly nepotistic, to offer an essentially random professor food (it may be that I am slightly socially awkward, but I don't see any way of smoothly doing this). I am fine with being the guinea pig for the first half year or so, but even getting into contact with him is proving to be difficult. I will try the TAs. Thank you!

@user760900 I think that making gifts in this context is a very bad idea.

@user760900 I'm just suggesting to approach this professor as a human, first. I'd have to know the context to suggest an appropriate gift, but it should absolutely toward the "insignificant, but meaningful" end of the gift spectrum. E.g. giving a stamp to someone who already has a stamp collection.

@user760900 Also, being nice to someone doesn't magically make you a part of their family, or mean they owe you a favor.

@jpaugh Given the fact the OP has already contacted the professor in question, a gift can be considered as a bribe or an attempt to ingratiate which might backfire.

I'll just guess that he doesn't think you are ready and that he doesn't have the patience to deal with you at your current state of development. But, just a guess, as I said. You might have better luck in a year when you have a few more courses under your belt and some "seasoning". If you close the intellectual distance a bit you might have a better chance.
But another option, that might work, is to work through a different professor who has a high opinion of you and might be willing to get you connected to the "big guy". A recommendation from a colleague holds some weight where an email does not.

I see. Thank you. Considering you are a CS prof, that this is a theory based research prof, and my understanding that most theory groups take only grads, what can I do to increase my competence? While I do understand I am a freshman, I think, hopefully not narcissistically, that my current level is approximately equal that of a mid year junior to give you some background.

@user760900 I guess you basically need some proof that you are competent -- e.g. research experience with someone else, or some important graduate-level courses under your belt. If you are a freshman and cold email someone, they may just ignore it unfortunately, as there is no proof you are competent.

@6005 I would assume the same, but I simply cold emailed asking to talk about their research. In no place did I mention my competence level, which is more my cause for concern; a response saying I am incompetent leaves room for joining later, but no response gives me more concern towards even future viability

@user760900 The fact you did not mention competence is exactly why they may not respond. Moreover, no response is not cause for concern in the way you think. It just means they did not make time to respond, the reason they are not interested at this time is not stated. It isn't necessarily true there is no room to join later.

You may have heard, "It's publish or perish in academia."  His time is limited.

As an economist, my suggestion would be to move on and focus on course work, then come back to this idea later, or in graduate school.
First and foremost, professors are often facing more students wanting to work with them than they have room for.  This is especially true if they are

More senior
In a trendy field
Well known in their field
In a department where not a lot of other faculty are in their field
Teach graduate classes

As a freshman they don't know, you haven't passed any of the gate keepers they likely use to help filter the load of interested research assistants.  This is going to make it very difficult for you to get your foot in the door, so to speak.
Another reason that an economics professor is highly unlikely to be interested in performing research with undergrads is that undergraduate economics education really isn't much like graduate/professional economics research.  As just one example, you can achieve an undergraduate economics degree with just calculus 1, and sometimes not even that.  You often can't even get into an economics PhD program without differential equations and real analysis, but at the bare minimum multivariable calculus (usually calc 3).
Even if you're somehow a shockingly experienced freshman, go back to the point that this professor doesn't know you, and is therefore judging you by what he knows of freshman in general.
So specifically, my suggestion would be to do the following:

Take a class with that professor
Do well in that class.  Go to office hours.  Make sure they know who you are.
Take more classes relevant to their field, particularly anything to do with research methods.
Try again as a junior or senior, when you've got your eye on grad school.

I applaud your enthusiasm for research though.  Good luck.


text:
Should prospective cheating be reported
Over the past 3 months due to Covid-19, many of my peers have pinged me during exams asking me for answers to questions. I, of course, turn them down (albeit after I'm done with the exam so even if I sent it they wouldn't gain much due to the limited time left). I am usually at the top of my class, so I don't suspect that they ask many more people after me. So far, I've only reported cheating that I knew is actively taking place.
Should I also be reporting this type of prospective cheating where the other student doesn't actually receive any benefit? It feels wrong to me to punish those that gained no benefit, yet a friend I was causally talking to said that these people should be reported too.

Depends of course on your school’s requirements. The honor code at my undergraduate institution required reporting such requests.

What does your honour code say? To be honest, they shouldn't put you in this situation. Probably least bad of all bad solutions is to warn them that you are expected to report them, lest you become accessory to cheating (and will be punished, too) and next time, you will. What I do not understand, though, how come they have a mobile device with them in the exam? Is that permitted?

@CaptainEmacs No, of course it is not permitted, but they are taking advantage of the Covid-19 situation.

It would be good if the professors know how easy it is to cheat so that they can provide better procedures. And I don't mean more restrictive procedures, actually.

@Buffy I doubt they don't know how easy it is to cheat, but I feel morally in the grey if I were to report people asking for help if they don't receive any, despite what the university guidelines may say.

@Buffy, we are in a tight situation. We are required to give exams, but cannot have them in person where we have a good chance to proctor. We know some are cheating but feel unable to do anything about it. I like Captain Emacs' answer, but if someone repeatedly asked, I would report them. They aren't buying a degree, they want to get an education.

@DeboraWeber-Wulff, true enough, but we can't just assume that using methodology designed for another world will work in this one. We educators need to find better ways. One university in the US has decided that fewer levels of grading will be assigned. A/A-, F, and Incomplete, if I remember correctly. Others have decided to use Pass Fail for the short term. This lessens the need for fine-grained distinctions and recognizes the other stresses that affect students.

How could you not understand that whether they got an Answer could never matter?
Asking is trying to cheat, is cheating; that's all there is to it.
In my view, anyone dumb enough to think a Question like could ever be justified, should automatically be sent down from any institute of further education.
Does anyone believe I'm being too harsh?
Equally, any invigilator who allowed it to be possible for a cheat to ping during exams should be struck of all academic employment, forever.
Why did he or she fail to ban pingable devices?

@RobbieGoodwin Covid-19 forced us to take exams at home which allows certain freedoms to bad actors otherwise not available to them

Ah! Sorry, invigilators!
Meanwhile, doesn't 760900's point make the whole Question meaningless?

If you are bound by an honor code, you should respect it as always. Some require reporting attempts at cheating.
Otherwise, I'd suggest that you just tell the prof that you know it is being done without naming names. Complain that if there are any competitive aspects to grading (curve...) then you are being disadvantaged by a system you can't control. Such systems don't fairly evaluate your competence in the subject and you have a right to that.
Unfortunately, some such systems just assume that everyone is honest. It is a poor assumption if the performance of one can affect the outcomes of another. But if you get the grade you have earned then it may not affect you if others get a grade they did not.
Other systems assume that everyone will cheat and try to set up technological or other means to carefully watch and monitor every action. This might actually have the perverse effect of increasing the amount of cheating. Prisoners of war, for example, seldom willingly follow the rules set down, finding them pernicious. It creates a destructive environment in any case. I find these systems to be the worst, since students can be "caught" and accused of cheating when they were not. Other questions on this site attest to this problem.
But, if the system is to improve, students and others need to point out its flaws. You don't need to accuse anyone to do so, however, except in extreme cases or in case of an honor code that you have agreed to.
And good luck. Life should be a bit fairer than it is.

These students are attempting to cheat. “Prospective” is not the right word here. They have already crossed the line from just contemplating cheating to actually doing something. The fact that they derived no benefit (as far as you know, that is), while perhaps relevant to the significance of the offense and the punishment they might receive, does not change that fact. It’s clear misconduct and not at all morally grey.
To put it differently: if you saw someone attempt to rob a bank but fail, would you think you needed to report it? If you saw someone attempt to kill another person but be foiled by a lack of assistance from someone they turned to for help, would you report it? Etc.

Just to inform you that there is another perspective...
If you can "cheat" in an exam, then the examination itself may be flawed. I remember open book exams, take-home exams during my undergrad studies that even if someone "cheated", they had to learn at least something during that.
I consider that approach lazy at best.
I have no idea about US culture (and THAT level of competition) but my view on cheating is:
What would happen if some are cheating? Did they learn anything? If yes, that can even be considered "group study" by some stretch. Do you think you learn anything significant in undergrad? Whole undergrad can be covered in a year of M.Sc.
Will they really have a competitive advantage over you? Assuming they did not learn anything, you have the advantage. You know, they don't. Build upon that. Instead of losing your time asking this question, reading answers, you could have learnt a couple of things already. See the big picture, try to reach higher, read some papers or books.
I wouldn't care if a student A had higher grades than student B. I would choose B with lower grades if they have read a bunch of articles, have some questions about them and can think of novel ways even if naive.
Do whatever your code of conduct or whatnot says to be a "good citizen". Study further instead of pondering over petty details to be a "good scientist". Yes you can be both, too. I am not that interested in former though, I just care about my studies.. People are people.
I am not saying you should close your eyes to unjust. I am just saying that what you see as unjust is just a kid stealing another one's toy in a playground. Yes it technically is unjust but...
My best advice would be to go as much as forward you can so that world's best cheater can't reach you. Find your passion.