text:
Withdrawing paper from a conference after presentation due to error
Please refer to the following link for details. I am planning to send an e-mail to the conference chairs regarding my withdrawal.
I wanted to seek help from the experts in the community for drafting the e-mail since I believe that it should be very carefully crafted since it is going to cause inconvenience to the conference committee(even though I haven't submitted the copyright form and the paperwork hasn't started yet).
What are the details that I should include in my e-mail? Do I need to be specific about the error or just write that I've discovered an error in the paper(considering the fact that I will continue to work on the paper and submit it to a journal)? Also, what possible responses should I expect from them?
Any help would be highly appreciated. I am having problems sleeping since the day I've discovered the error and cannot concentrate on my work. I just want to make the fact explicit and move ahead.

You are overthinking it. A simple note is all you really need. "The paper needs to be withdrawn as we have found a serious error that we don't believe can be corrected in time for the conference."
This won't have been the first time that a paper has been withdrawn. It is a matter of scheduling sessions for the program committee but some of the members are probably familiar with that. There may be some scrambling, however, if proceedings have already gone to press. But they should have copyrights in order before that happens. If they don't, then it is their problem, not yours.
No, you don't need to detail the error, just that it exists and that you don't have a ready fix. If the conference is part of a continuing series you may have it ready by next year (or whenever).

I upvote and add to this that while withdrawing seems to be strictly necessary for the proceeding, it is still possible that part of OP work can be presented either by a poster or a talk as scheduled. This depends much on the field, the conference, and the whole of the data / results. Also often presentations do not really correspond to the programmed title.

"proceedings have gone to press" — where in the world are physically printed proceedings still a thing?  Or did you mean figuratively?

@Alchimista I have already presented the paper and the proceedings are already shared with the delegates in a USB stick. However, they are not yet published in the digital proceedings

@gerrit, at ACM SIG conferences the proceedings are distributed to attendees in printed form (or were a few years ago). They are later distributed to SIG members, though it may be an updated edition. It is possible the practice has changed since my retirement.


text:
How do you change the author link of an article on Google scholar?
In my list of article suggestions on google scholar, I can click on the name of an author, and I am link to the page of someone having the same name as the author but on another topic. The true author with the same name also has a page on google scholar, and the article appears, with exactly the same reference.
It turns out that the author is my PhD student and so I would like to help this person to update, but I do not see how. It would be better if the link from the article goes to the right author and not to the other one. Is asking the "false author" to remove the article from the list or asking directly google scholar the only options? Is there no way to say that people are authors of articles like for researchgate?

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How can I publish my computer algorithm where it will get recognition?
I did not attend university, I left school 4 years ago and and I am not affiliated with any but I have an extremely useful compression program which I've created and I want to publish it but have little idea on what to do next. Any help would be appreciated.

First order of business: are you sure it is novel? You should read extensively in the field to be sure it hasn't been published by someone else already.

Like anyone else, you can write a scientific paper describing it and submit to an appropriate journal. Before you do so, however, explore the candidate journal a bit to see what they publish and how those papers are presented.
The editors and reviewers at the journal will give you additional advice on suitability of your work.
In computer science, annual conferences are also a good venue. Actually they are the preferred venue for most work. ACM, IEEE, and others offer such conferences.
A paper can point to a repository in which you have stored the code if that is appropriate to your purposes.
You don't need an affiliation to do this. "Independent Researcher" is fine as an affiliation.

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


text:
How to cite a subsection of a book for IEEE
For example, we use pp. 4-7 for pages from 4 to 7 and ch. 2 for chapter 2, but how should we cite a subsection of a book when a chapter is divided into multiple subsections, e.g. 2.1, 2.2, ... in a way that's compatible with IEEE writing style?

how should we cite a subsection of a book when a chapter is divided into multiple subsections, e.g. 2.1, 2.2, ...

Rather than citing the entire book, e.g., [1], you can cite a particular subsection, e.g., [§2.1, 1], [§2.2, 1], ..., meaning section 2.1, 2.1, ... of [1]. With Latex, you can use \cite[\S2.1]{X}.

Thanks, but I was looking to see if there are special characters for subsections like ch. is for chapter or pp. is for pages or p. for page, etc.

@FriendlyFella I've given that symbol: §.

Going by this description of the IEEE citation style, you would just cite the page range, like this:

Chapter in book
[2] L. Stein, “Random patterns,” in Computers and You, J. S. Brake, Ed. New York: Wiley, 1994, pp. 55-70.

It doesn't seem to be necessary to give the exact chapter/section number.

I don't understand the downvote, since this is what the citation style guide says you should do.

Would someone explain why this answer is downvoted? I accepted the other answer, because it suggests using "§" for sections and that is concisely what I was looking for, but I don't see why this answer would be wrong.


text:
How do I cite an article with no page numbers and only a DOI number (APA format)?
I am writing an article that requires citations in APA format. As you may know, that format requires page numbers
I am pulling quite a few articles from the journal of Remote Sensing (MDPI), which publishes almost all content as open access articles online. The problem is that they publish the articles online, and do not indicate a page number. For example, an article entitled "Time-Series Multispectral Indices from Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Imagery Reveal Senescence Rate in Bread Wheat" has the following short citation:
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 809; doi:10.3390/rs10060809
(https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/10/6/809)
From further investigating, I think the number 809 is the article in the volume, not the page number. Am I right on this? If so, how do you cite page numbers for a journal where they are not given?

According to the 6th edition of APA:

When using the exact words or a close paraphrase or summary of a source, a page number must be provided as part of a complete in-text citation. However, some publications (such as websites) have no numbered pages. To help readers locate the words being cited, include one or both of these elements:

Paragraph number (counted by yourself or as indicated in the text)
Main heading or sub-heading within the text (if available and appropriate)

So, if you are using a direct citation the approach with manually counted paragraph number and sub-heading section is recommended. The link above provides the following example:

According to the 2012 Canadian Survey on Disability, “[o]ver 11% of Canadian adults experienced one of the three most prevalent disability types: pain, mobility or flexibility” (Statistics Canada, 2013, para. 2)

However, if you are referencing for a purpose other than direct quotation or a close paraphrase, you can simply use 1–N, where N is the number of pages in the cited paper:

Simon, S. L., Field, J., Miller, L. E., DiFrancesco, M., & Beebe, D. W. (2015). Sweet/dessert foods are more appealing to adolescents after sleep restriction. PLoS ONE, 10, 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115434

Often times, it depends on the journal requirements. For instance, looking at the journal of Weed Science, they actually give an outline to how they want these kinds of articles to be cited:
Hassan MA, Yang M, Rasheed A, Jin X, Xia X, Xiao Y, He Z (2018) Time-Series Multispectral Indices from Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Imagery Reveal Senescence Rate in Bread Wheat. Remote Sens. (10), 10.3390/rs10060809


text:
Unclear answer from my prospective PhD Supervisor
Is it positive to get the first reply from potential PhD Supervisor such as this:
“Thank you for your interest in our PhD programme. I take it that you have looked at our admission criteria. If not, I suggest you do so. Otherwise, it will be nice to discuss your research idea.
I am a bit confused as to how to correspond to this reply, whether he interested or not?

"Otherwise, it will be nice to discuss your research idea." He said that, if you fit the program admission criteria, i. e., has a chance at being accepted, then he is interested.

What country is this?

Perhaps a picky point of language, but "potential" really is the right word here. After some positive further dialog, they might become prospective.

You'll have to specify what you wrote in your email if we have much hope of deciphering their reply.

I would guess that you received the professor's standard (if poorly worded) reply to prospective Ph.D. students. Of course, it is also possible that the professor looked at your CV or resume and doubts you fulfill the admissions requirement, but I would not read that far into the reply.
Regardless, be sure  to cover the following points in your reply:

Reiterate your interest in the program.
Indicate how you fulfill each criterion for admission to the Ph.D. program (attaching a resume or CV if you did not do so in your initial email).
Identify potential research threads that you would be interested in working on with the potential adviser.

The goal is to convert this cryptic email exchange into a productive correspondence that makes a potential supervisor excited to work with you. Addressing the three points above would likely achieve that goal.

He is saying you need to check whether you would be accepted into the school first. This information is probably on the school's web page. Possible things they might require are a certain level of grades on a relevant undergrad degree, letters of recommendation, maybe you need to be a citizen or landed immigrant in the country or you will need to pay foreign student fees, etc.
The school should also be able to give you advice on the normal process of entering a PhD program at the school. Admissions, deadlines, fees, applications for various things, etc.
Once you have navigated those hoops... He is saying he would like to talk to you about the idea you have for research. He has not committed yet. It may be that you can convince him, depending on how the conversation goes.
So, first, check that web page. If you don't find the information, dig deeper. Maybe you will need to find who is the admissions representative at the school. Maybe you need to email them. Maybe there is a phone number on their web page. Get that information. If it looks like you will be qualified to enter the program, then go on.
It may mean you need to provide transcripts, letters of recommendation, etc. If you have some kind of scholarship, grant, fellowship, etc., that is a huge bonus to admissions.
NOTE! Many scholarships do not consider you unless you apply. So find out from the school what scholarships exist that you could apply for. A few $thousand extra in the bank is usually not a bad thing for a PhD student.
Schools usually try to make some kind of financial arrangement so that you can at least pay your rent and other living expenses while at the school. But you may wind up with some debt after your degree. You should figure that out in advance. If the debt you will come out with is too much, possibly you need other plans.
Then contact the prof and try to set up an interview. Maybe the first one is by phone or skype or something.  If that goes well, maybe you have another interview in person, possibly with more people there than just the prof. Maybe you meet other people he works with, his other students or his post-doctoral fellows or research associates, etc. Maybe you meet some other profs who work with him at the school.
The in-person interview is likely to happen only if you are accepted, or extremely likely to be accepted, at the school.
Maybe you and he don't match and the result is no. Maybe you and one of the other profs are a good match, and the other prof suggests you join him. Or maybe this prof suggests you join his group. If you can, you should make up your mind in advance if joining any of these folks is good for you. And you should be keeping your eyes open during the interview for indications that you would or would not be a good fit there.
Try to have a positive outlook. To prep, try to look up some of the recent papers of "your" prof, and maybe his work group. And maybe some papers from other profs in similar research areas at the same school. You don't need to be expert level on them, just be basically aware of what research they are doing recently.  Especially examine papers that might be related to the research you want to do.
If it's a basically physics thing, then arxiv.org is an excellent resource to find research by a particular prof. There will be similar resources for other topics, but I am unable to point you at them. Google is your friend.
Hope this helps.

This mail is rather neutral. Such short statements are not unusual and mean nothing bad.
To increase your chances, you should really follow them. If  there are any perquisites listed in the guidelines and things to do for you, make sure you followed them.
Then contact him and you may get your chance to discuss your idea. With this mail he probably tries to avoid wasting time for discussing your idea, when you do not meet all criteria and thus cannot become his student anyway. The criteria may also contain some points how you should be prepared for the discussion.
Make sure that you fulfill the necessary criteria and follow any additional guidelines published together with the criteria and then you're fine.


text:
Uploading articles to Google Scholar
How to upload my journal articles to Google Scholar and get it appeared immediately?

Log in, go to your profile, click the "+" icon, and select "Add article manually". Then fill in the details and it will appear on your profile immediately.
However you cannot upload a pdf to Google Scholar or anything like that. Google Scholar is not a repository. And the citations will only appear after the crawler finds it on the internet.

Thanks for the answer. So how to ensure Google Scholar finds the PDF in short time? I have one paper already on the journal home page as well as on Scopus. But the PDF is not available on Scholar after one month now.

@Esen contact google scholar for detailed help.

Crawler need few days, usually 5 days is enough for it to find a paper/article...

@SolarMike One does not simply "contact Google", unfortunately.

You can not upload anything directly to Google Scholar. However, if you upload your document to an appropriate repository that assigns you a doi (a preprint server, zenodo, OSF, etc), it will appear on your GS in a matter of days. If you have in mind something like an accepted version of a paper, it will depend on how much time the editorial team requires to assign the doi and make the document public.


text:
Rejection of a job offer in favor of another. Is it worth trying to fight back for the first one?
I have a problem - I am looking for a job and I was on one of the job interviews, which due to the type of this job(electronics constructor/designer) it was the "target" choice that I dreamed about. The only drawback of the offer itself was that it is in a city far from the city where I come from.
Although I like this city anyway, the fact of moving and arranging my life completely from scratch has made me feel that I have to be a bit more careful with job searching, otherwise the possible failure in new job will cost me much more.
Unfortunately, it is not without significance that in my own region to find a similar job is almost impossible without experience - and my experience is only as hobbyist and and a little from the university (master degree).
In the meantime, however, after I agrred to join #1 workplace and waiting for a job letter with official employment offer, another company called me, but now in my neighborhood, to which I applied a long time ago and arranged a job interview the same day, 2 hours after. However, they offered me a completely different position in the office, related more to the supply of electrical parts.
On the one hand, at first, they offered financial conditions very similar to 1 # job (it was suspicious, because I used to be in the internship four years ago in #2 workplace as an electrician and I know that in general they paid very little to most employees), but this kind of job was not my dream and I still preferred to be in the electronics developing team - just like in # 1 job.
However, after all, after 2 days (although the boss from 2 # job insisted at the beginning, to let him know about the decision on the same day as the conversation), I chose the second job, which wasn't an easy decision. I still had remorse, but somehow I was explaining myself that it would somehow go away.
At the end I will write why I did not finally take the first offer.
But then something that disappointed me happened. The company boss # 2 arranged all terms of cooperation with me (including monthly wage) with me and directed me to make occupational medicine before work. On the second day I was to receive a referral for this research, but an hour before HR recruiter call me and says that the boss decided to reduce the monthly salary by about 20%, which made me (dutifully or not) angry. I quit this offer no. #2 finally, but and I know that if it was not a fraud and missing a promise of the company, I would choose the first offer (#1).
Why I rejected #1 job at first? I analyzed my fears, motivation, all pros and cons (both a few days ago and at the moment) and I know that:
1) #2 job boss pulled the wool over my eyes with potential opportunities, "fake" salary and why am I the most suitable person. First workplace employees were more careful and conservative when it comes to talking about work. Once, they even stated that their work is specific (after all, a work related in a way to the military industry). More infos I really learned from the profiles of other electronic designers from their linkedin profiles. the fact, however, that they called me for an interview a little later than they promised, in addition, they asked me for patience, because the recruitment is delayed in time.
I already sensed that they did not like someone like me with a miserable experience, but now I was sure they were waiting for somebody more experienced - and ultimately they might take me for lack of other possibilities. And that's how it initially happened - before I rejected their offer in favor of work no. # 2, I rejected # 1.
Now I see that I lost with my naivety and ability to persuade skill of the boss no. # 2. I lost also with my fear of the unknown, which in combination with moving so far from my home, probably also a lack of believing in my own abilities caused that I got scared of offer # 1, which I regret; c

Welcome to Academia. However, your question does not seem specific to Academics. Perhaps your question would be a better fit for Workplace SE.

It could never hurt to contact job #1. Maybe they will still need you. I would recommend that you avoid telling them that you are only applying to them because another job rejected you. People do not like being the fallback plan. Simply explain that with more time to consider your options, you came to realize that Job #1 is an excellent opportunity and that the move/distance from you current location should not be a barrier to pursing the important opportunity with #1.
Understand, of course, that they may have already filled the position with someone else. In that case, all you can do is move on.
p.s. Never deal with people who renege on agreed to terms of employment. That should never be tolerated.


text:
What are the steps I need to take when an author won't answer clarification questions?
I have recently read a paper in the Journal of Empirical Finance.
I was interested in the methodology that the author was using, but in terms of the data collection, the writing was particularly brief and I struggled to replicate their results.
This could have been clarified easily by the author, but they choose not to reply.
Is there anything I can do here or is it the authors choice not to answer questions about a published article?

How long has it been since you emailed them? It could just be that they are busy and haven't had time to reply, or maybe your email ended up in their spam email box.

This is no different from any other situation where someone doesn't answer your email.

Have you discussed the methodology with your advisor? It may be the author regards that methodology as self-evident and won’t reply.

@SolarMike It seems the OP is interested in the data collection specifically, which is not something the OP's supervisor would know.

To paraphrase Yogi Berra, "if people don't want to answer your questions, how are you going to stop them?"

Was the author indicated as a "corresponding author" with their contact info in the paper, or did you just search for them? If it's the former, one could argue that the author "owes" you a response, but it might be an outdated email address.

Once a reasonable period has passed, write to the current editors of the journal, enclosing your failed correspondence, your questions, and your work to date. Ask them for assistance. They'll ask the author, and if the author hopes for future publication, that may encourage them to respond to your reasonable attempt at replication. Next, write to the head of school of the researchers concerned. Finally, note the "funding" acknowledgements, check those funders' policy on cooperation with replication attempts, and include the correspondence with the editors and the head.

I would consider it all right if you write one or two reminder emails, maybe after three weeks and six weeks.
A lot of people just forget about emails, or put them aside, especially if they cannot answer the questions immediately.
Furthermore, try to make your email as "easy" as possible, so if your email is a wall of text or more than five bullet points, it is much less likely to receive an answer as if you just ask one short and precise question.

For unsolicited contact, I would say one reminder email at most. If they want to answer, they'll keep the email and eventually answer. A third unsolicited email on the same topic would simply look demanding.

@GregMartin I have seen too many professors who follow the principle: Either answer an email today or never. I have never understood why they don't mark emails which need a reply. Probably they got used to the fact that if something is important, people will send the email a second or a third time.

What is important to the email-writer is not necessarily the same as what is important to the recipient. Sending repeated emails ignores this fact, and it looks bad.

Actually, I consider it rude if someone chooses not to answer an email with a reasonable question (I don't mean forget it, but ignore it on purpose). So I see nothing bad in reminding people. People often argue with lack of time, but nobody can tell me that he/she does not have the 20 seconds to write a reply like "Sorry, I don't have time to answer you question in the next months".

I get far more emails than I can reply to, but occasionally I do reply to random emails from people I don't know concerning papers I have written.  The main factors that lead to me replying are: (1) I can see that the person is genuinely interested and has tried pretty hard to understand. (2) The person has a very concrete question that I can easily write down the answer to. (3) I am not overly pressed for time from other obligations.
In your case I cannot tell what kind of email you wrote.  But if it says roughly "Dear X, I am interested in your paper but I don't understand your data collection methodology.  Could you explain it in more detail?  Best regards, Y." then I would ignore it for sure.  Why?  Basically the person has written a minimal-effort email, and so I assume they probably read the paper with minimal effort too.  And what they want from me is completely unreasonable: They want me to write an expanded methods section just for them.
On the other hand, if the email would show a deeper understanding of the topic, and they would clearly explain their confusion and ask a specific question that I can easily clarify, then I am happy to do so, even if it takes a couple of paragraphs of explanation.  However, such emails are rare.
When you publish a paper, the paper stands on its own, with all its strengths and weaknesses.  A paper does not come with any warranty or guarantee that the author will freely provide all interested readers with further personalized instruction on the topic of the paper.

Ideally, all researchers respond to reasonable* requests, however, quite often they don't. Here are a few things you can do to increase your chances they even get your email (adding to Fabian Meier's answer on how to increase your chance to get a response):

make sure you have the correct email address - many people change institutes and are no longer checking old accounts, or have left science altogether, even for papers that were just published

try contacting co-authors, if any. If possible, aim for those that might know something (in case author contributions are published; generally reserch assistants, PhD students, postdocs; less likely old professors and co-authors from a different institute)

for recently published papers, check outlets such as twitter for posts by the (co)authors metioning the paper, and reply to those

However, in the end it is the authors choice to answer your question. Unless you are a reviewer, then you have a bit more leverage - but still cannot force them (the editor might, but they could refuse and even retract the paper).
** something not obviously stated in the paper, basic knowledge in the field, or probably suggestions for future studies etc

It is the choice of the author to answer emails, or not.  Presumably the contents were sufficiently clear to warrant publication, so if the authors choose not to reply there remains the indirect route of extracting details from several papers on the topic, either by the same author or by others cited in the bibliography.
Note that you might have more leverage in getting data from the authors, if this is possible.

Write a paper detailing your failure to replicate their results.
If you replicated their methodology and got a different result, then that's something noteworthy in itself. As a result, the most logical thing to do is to write a paper citing their paper, and then explaining how in your attempt at replicating their paper, you have obtained different results. Given that the ongoing replication crisis is apparently affecting economics, producing proof that a paper has failed to replicate should be eminently publishable.
It might be polite to give the authors of the original paper a little bit of warning of what you're planning on doing, though.

I don't think this is all correct. You are talking about reproducibility, not replicability. I can firmly say that majority of researchers (including myself) in this forum can't even reproduce their own results just based on methodology described in the published papers.


text:
PhD student who should be the correpsonding author
I am a PhD student, should I put my supervisor as the corresponding author, will this increase my chance of publication?

I'm assuming your advisor is actually an author. Yes?

Are you asking because you want to obtain knowledge or because you are really in this Situation?

If the latter, did you ask the supervisor if he wants to be corres.  author?


text:
Postdoc Mentor wants me to leave
I recently finished my PhD and work as a Research Tech for a bit. At that time, i got two postdoc offers. I joined the one which gave me my own postdoc funding for two years. I worked there for 9 months. I was given another offer from another university. They mentioned about the quality of research and how lab is well funded. I gave away my funding to join this new position. within first three months, I realized that this was a big mistake because of the work environment. In the first week of the appointment, i asked him if we should buy the multichannel pipette to reduce the pipetting errors. His old postdoc jumped in and said "We never used that in past and he is saying just because of lot of work". At another occasion she said "If you want to work here you need to ask people before doing anything"
My mentor is obsessed with her. when i tried to discuss with him he said if this is not the place for me, i have to find other lab. I have been continuously doubted and humiliated in lab meetings. They criticize that my PhD training is below the level of a masters student. I am really concerned where my career is going to move. I cant even apply for other jobs as i switched two labs in last two years. I would appreciate if i can get any guidance in this forum. I am really really scared and feel like my career is finished.

Who is "he" and who is "she" in your story?


text:
Publishing master's research while in a different PhD program
I would like to ask about a situation when a research done as a part of a master's thesis at one institution is submitted for publication and published while attending a subsequent PhD program at another institution (US university). The content of the paper is mostly unrelated to the subject of study in the PhD program, and it is not supposed to be used towards earning a PhD degree e.g. by including it as part of the PhD thesis.

Is there something unethical about this? (I personally do not see any problems, but it seems better to ask anyway.)
Is this common, uncommon, rare? (It seems to me that such situations ought to arise whenever there is a master's thesis work that is to be published, because I imagine that rewriting the thesis into a journal paper form would be usually done only after the thesis defense, hence usually during another PhD program. Yet I do not know of any such cases personally.)
In that case, should one list as the affiliation the present institution (i.e. the university of the PhD program), or the institution where most of the work has been done?

It's fine.  Similar things will happen after the Ph.D., after job changes, etc.  Your current advisor doesn't need to be listed or involved in the process for work done elsewhere.
It is frequent (but unfortunate) that people write the thesis first and then produce articles.  However, I think it is better to be publishing along the way.  And this is not unusual at all either--so you are a little wrong that it is never done.  All that said, converting thesis chapters into papers is very normal and fine.
List the previous institution first with a footnote or parenthetical for current affiliation and contact email.  Do not list the old email.

There is nothing unethical about it. I did it, and my Masters paper  appeared in the same issue of the same journal as my first PhD paper.
So it’s also not that uncommon.
My Masters paper coauthors were still at the Masters university where the research has been conducted so there was some acknowledgement of that place, but I gave my present affiliation (at the PhD school).


text:
About legality on self-plagiarism when publishing an article
I found out that a collegue published about 5 years ago a paper in the proceedings of a conference about education in engineering (proceedings has ISBN, but publication has no DOI, in case that matters for this question). Then reworded the whole paper but kept literally the same references, same research questions, same arguments all over the paper and published in another conference (IEEE, this time with a DOI). So I imagine he purposely reworded and made up two papers with "the same" content, though he obviously rewords paragraph by paragraph (changes sentence order, synonyms, etc.). I thought this practice was not allowed but does anyone know the legality of publishing the same paper (though reworded) in two conferences?

what do you want to happen?

I don't know of any legal regimen in which self plagiarism is an issue. It is scientific misconduct, but not illegal, to use your own words and ideas without citing them. This is a case in which the legal and the ethical aren't the same.
It isn't "stealing" ideas when you self plagiarize. It is just sloppy scholarship that makes it harder for readers and other scholars to find the complete context of the ideas expressed.
Of course, if you have given up copyright to some words, then using those words again may violate the copyright that you once held, but no longer do. A publisher that holds the copyright might make a legal claim against you, but it isn't because of self-plagiarism, but copyright violation.

I don't think there is anything illegal. However, it does sound like an academic misconduct, namely case of Duplicate Publication.

Duplicate publication, multiple publication, or redundant publication
  refers to publishing the same intellectual material more than once, by
  the author or publisher. It does not refer to the unauthorized
  republication by someone else, which constitutes plagiarism, copyright
  violation, or both.

Scientific ideas presented multiple  times, even reworded, are not useful for community, and might distort impression of your output. At best, you waste your own time, at worst you are wasting time of others by presenting old research as novel.
On the other hand, I can imagine someone writing a "review" of their own paper, but then they still have to cite the original.


text:
Issues with a patent overlapping my work
I am a PhD student and recently found that a patent exists with significant overlap to my work. I.e. my situation is roughly similar to that described in
Proving that the PhD work was done prior to someone else's patent
except that I unfortunately did not publish my findings before the concurrent patent was filed. I however published it - unknowingly - while the patent was pending but before it became publicly available.
About two years before the patent was filed I mentioned the idea in talks, but none of them was video recorded. It was also discussed in various personal communication. As far as I heard about patent law, this would already qualify as sufficient publication to prevent protection by a patent. The principle is shown in my talk slides and I routinely host my slides at a cloud hoster, so it may be possible to get an external confirmation that the slides existed in this form on the date of each talk respectively.
Question 1: Can this be used to invalidate or weaken the patent?
I am not worried about conflicts with my research - as far as I know research and teaching are not affected by patent law. My worry is that the patent could block various applications. In typical patent manner it claims a very wide range of applications.
Actually, the patent aims to scope a wider use case than the proposed method can actually serve. I think that I can give counter examples that show the limits of the method as described in the patent.
Question 2: Can such a technical weakness invalidate or weaken the patent?
Following the answer in the question linked above I contacted the patent guys from my university, but they turned out to be rather uncooperative. It seems like the university has some cooperation in other areas with the company that is filing the patent and they made clear that no support from the university would happen against this company. In my eyes, there is likely a conflict of interest in effect.
So far I concluded that I should get advice from an external lawyer.
Question 3: With this post I am asking for ideas, hints and advise to make such a meeting as efficient as possible. Further ideas what else I can do would be appreciated.
Another aspect is that I have loose contact to the authors.
Question 4: How should I deal with that? / Can it cause even legal issues to be in contact? / Should I seek for some sort of consense with them, but how would that look like?
The patent is just entering review phase as it is publicly observable for almost six months now.
Yes, I am going to discuss that with a lawyer, but any information I can get about this in advance would be helpful.
Question 5: What are the possibilities to intervene this process, e.g. point the reviewers to supplementary material? Is there a deadline to consider?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because you need to clarify this situation and all ramifications with a lawyer and, of course, your advisor.

My goal is to gather as much information as possible beside the lawyer and advisor. Do you see a chance to keep at least part of the question? Or file a subset as a new question?

I would also appreciate any hint where it could be posted on-topic.

Okay, I had overlooked that there is an ask-patent site https://patents.stackexchange.com/. I will migrate this question to that site in some form. (After checking for duplicates...)

Are you worried about the patent because it proves that (some part of) your thesis is non-novel?  Or because it interferes with future commercialization options that might be profitable to you?  WRT the first, while writing up my thesis I found a paper in a previously overlooked application area (it was using completely different terminology to describe the work) that covered the first 20% or so of what I thought was novel.  So my novel contribution diminished by that much.  At that same time, my argument for importance became much stronger (added applications in a different field).

It's more about future commercialization options. I am somewhat confident that I understood and worked out the principle much better than the patent authors. So there is plenty of novelty. The patent leaves open an essential part as kind of "black box" and just suggests two approaches each of which I know is too naive in general. It's a bit like patenting a car and saying "here one puts some kind of motor, e.g. a steam machine". This can still interfere with future attempts by others to build and sell a proper car. It will be lawyers that figure this out, not engineers. That's my worry.


text:
Additional pre-tenure review requested
I teach at a small liberal arts college in the midwest, and am two years through a four year tenure clock (I came in with two years of constructive credit).  After my recent pre-tenure review, the Personnel Committee, in their letter to the Dean, recommended an additional pre-tenure review next year.
My question is: is such an additional pre-tenure review likely to be a condition of my employment?  Can I just refuse, and take my chances at the actual tenure review in two years?
NB: I understand that you may think it unwise to refuse the advice of the committee which will then be reading my actual tenure file (with I assume largely the same members).  My question is about the legal matter.  Do they have the legal right to fire me if I refuse to do an additional pre-tenure review?

You have to read your employment contract if you want to know your legal rights.  If you don't have one, then in most parts of the US, you are an at-will employee and can legally be fired at any time for any reason or no reason, other than specific forms of illegal discrimination.

Voting to close, since you say you're interested only in the legal, not the academic, implications of refusing (which no one can say without reading your contract).

Normally an un-tenured faculty member in the US serves on a fixed term contract, usually a year, but maybe more. It isn't that they have to fire you. They just don't have to renew your contract.
It is only after earning tenure that you have a continuing contract and need to be fired for cause. I strongly recommend that you get legal advice or go along


text:
Is it ok (ethically speaking) to rename features of a dataset for publishing?
I work in the machine learning field where I deal with datasets provided by an industrial partner, and one concern of the project is the confidentiality of the data.
My team is working on a fault detection system using those datasets which includes features or columns, with names as Motor_sectionA_speed, Motor_sectionB_torque, Valve_sectionC_pressure, etc. which are subparts of a big system, and if the context is known, they could be traceable to details of our partner machinery and operation.
For publishing some results two options have appeared regarding naming those features:

Name features as Feature A, Feature B, Feature C, etc: I have seen this for synthetic datasets, where the focus is to highlight the algorithm where the importance of the feature is in its nature (distribution, range, etc) not its name or meaning.
Name them as Motor_1, Motor_2, Valve_1: One person stated that from training she/he had, the previous option could be unethical because the meaning of the variables is lost and might be misleading. Instead, names can only be simplified as Motor_1, Motor_2, Valve_3, etc.

Is it the first option considered unethical in all cases? or is this a "depends"/gray zone matter?

There is nothing unethical about renaming features unless you do so with the purpose to mislead or fabricate results. It makes perfect sense to rename features to keep a company secret.
However, a publication stating (for example): "I have some features and use them to predict manufacturing errors with 99% accuracy" has no value whatsoever: for all the reader knows you could be using the phase of the moon, dice rolls, and the position of tea leaves in your cup. The reader would be unable to tell what is going on, and unable to verify, reproduce, or use your results. This defeats the point of publishing and the paper would probably (and hopefully) not be accepted.
If you wish to publish something else, such as a new algorithm, it may be possible to use an entirely different dataset. You can still mention the actual application you worked on and simply explain that these data cannot be shared.
Also, you may be underestimating the ingenuity of others and the power of data. Are you really sure that renaming the features is enough to prevent others from deducing what is going on?


text:
First authorship in different fields
In most fields I'm familiar with, first authorship is for the lead author. But I've heard that it wasn't the case in some fields. Is that true?

Math seems to generally have an alphabetical listing of authors.

@JonCuster that's what I heard! Any other fields? I'm quite curious, as in some fields it even seems that the last author is important too!

In different fields, the order in which authors are listed may be interpreted differently, that is true. In some (math, CS) authors are generally listed alphabetically, so you can't conclude anything from the order. In some fields the final author listed is the head of the lab in which the work was done. This person may be responsible for a lot or a little of the actual contributions.
In some fields the first author listed is understood to be the one that did the majority of the work, but in some of those fields the first author listed is also just assumed to be riding on the coattails of the last (supervisor) author.
It is very complicated. In some fields people fight over the ordering very bitterly and many questions come here for "resolution", which we can't provide.
In some fields, sole authorship of work derived from doctoral studies is the norm and others who help get acknowledged, but are not co-authors.
There have been a few papers, in the sciences, in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself. I think there was one case where there were so many authors that it ran afoul of the journal's page limit. Imagine how many people contribute to major work at CERN, for example.

Imagine how many people contribute to major work at CERN, for example --- This paper has 5,154 authors.


text:
Am I being overambitious with PhD applications
I recently applied to a fairly prestigious PhD programme in the UK and a very short time after receiving a confirmation email I was rejected. The requirements were listed as a 2.1 in an undergraduate degree, which I do not have (I got a 2.2) however I am currently studying for a relevant postgraduate masters and expect to get a good grade. I also have a large amount of research experience through internships and work experience.
I know programmes of this sort are very competitive and there could simply have been more qualified applicants but the length of time between my application being received and rejected makes me think that they didn't really look at it, just made a decision based on my undergraduate grade.
My question is, am I being far too ambitious with PhD applications and will my masters degree and relevant experience be overshadowed by my poor undergraduate grade?

The requirements were listed as a 2.1 in an undergraduate degree, which I do not have (I got a 2.2)

You'll receive "desk rejects" from institutes that insist on this requirement. However, since

I am currently studying for a relevant postgraduate masters and expect to get a good grade.

Your undergraduate degree might be ignored by some institutes, in favour of your postgraduate degree.
Also, rather than approaching an institute, try approaching potential supervisors. They'll know how to navigate their institution's rules.
You should also consider whether a PhD is for you. You don't have the required grades. Perhaps something went wrong during your undergraduate degree; perhaps you'll achieve better grades during your postgraduate degree. This is perhaps something you've already thought about.

In the UK, admissions are done via the admission team. Many supervisors do not know the exact admission rules and will simply redirect a candidate back to the admissions@university.ac.uk.

@DmitrySavostyanov UK supervisors surely know how to navigate problematic aspects of their own institute?

@user2768 I see nothing problematic here. Admission teams manage admissions, and supervisors do the supervision.

@awjlogan In the UK, supervisors usually can't challenge the admission decision when a candidate does not meet the minimal requirements. This is also because the PhD funding normally does not come from a PI's own grant, but from a central "pot" controlled by the University. There might be exceptions but I never came across them.

@awjlogan Can you give an example of a funding source in the UK which is awarded to PIs (not Unis) and allows funding for PhD students? I know only one, and I'd like to know more.

@DmitrySavostyanov - this was from 12 years ago, so I'm definitely not up to speed with the current scene (I'm sure it's not better!). I'm happy to delete the comments, sure you're in a better position to know now. :)

supervisors usually can't challenge the admission decision when a candidate does not meet the minimal requirements, surely supervisor can work around the rules, @DmitrySavostyanov? E.g., a student doesn't meet requirement X, for some exceptional reason, but they meet some other requirement Y, which makes X redundant anyhow. Surely a supervisor, especially a professor, can have some sway with the admissions team. (If they can't, then surely their institute is doing it wrong.)

@user2768 Are you familiar with the UK realities, or do you just describe how things ought to be in your opinion?

@DmitrySavostyanov I'm asking you about your reality. Personally, I'm familiar with many who get around bureaucrats.

@user2768 is right. Exceptions can be made. Grades are important, but do not represent the whole picture, and there can be candidates with a particular balance of skills, even if with gaps in some, and supervisors know that. Of course, there may be institutions which do not make exceptions. Those I know, are able to do so.

I'm not a big fan of minimum requirements, but if any institution has them, then you have to meet them or you get immediately rejected as you see. But perhaps you just need to look around a bit more to see which programs you actually do qualify for. Make application to those and see what happens.
Further education may help you, of course, in getting admitted to a doctoral program, provided that you do well enough to meet the standards.
Many institutions will weight your most recent educational results higher than older ones, so the undergraduate experience means less as you go along, provided that you improve.
But if you have only applied to one program then you haven't really explored the landscape of what might be open to you. I'd suggest you look further along with your current studies. You may be in a better position than you know.

@awjlogan, then they aren't minimum requirements, are they? They are just suggestions, perhaps. Or maybe even a way to discriminate. Sorry. Don't suggest that the OP waste time applying where they won't be admitted. Please!

@awjlogan Are you familiar with the UK realities, or are you just describing things as you think they must be?


text:
Can I do my graduate studies in Computer Science with computational physcis bachelor degree?
I have graduated in computational physics with gpa 3.1. I need to do my graduate studies in computer science in USA or Europe.

Considering that my bachelor's degree is in physics (not computational) and my doctorate is in mathematics, I infer that a transition like yours should be possible. I would not, however, infer that it's possible from every university to every university.

The best advise I can give you is to check what the prerequisites for graduate studies in computer science are. Check the homepages of the programs of different universities in the USA or Europe.
Some might require a degree in computer science or a related field, other just a certain amount of points related to computer science.
To find out if a university considers computational physics as a related field you have to ask.
I am European, so I can't tell you if a GPA of 3.1 is good enough or how it affects your ability to get into a university in Europe.
You have to check and find out yourself.
After graduating you should be able to do that.


text:
what is the difference between a double major and dual specialisations in regards to a masters degree?
I'm reviewing a masters programme in counselling and consulting psychology, but am confused as to whether this is a dual specialisation or double major.
What are there criteria for both?
Points to note: the time frame is 30 months (2.5 years)

I would advise you to ask them. Typically masters do not have majors like an undergraduate degree so you have a focus. My focus was on GIS in a Geography MA, it states this on my transcript. I could have a dual focus named on my diploma. GIS and Remote Sensing in Geography  MS but I do not.

Specifying the region of the place where you are looking will also help, as these sorts of terminology issues tend to have a strong language/country element. In the US for instance there is no clear meaning difference between the terms that is consistent between University's/departments, so there would be no way at all to know without additional information from them directly.


text:
Affect of not finishing degree within 3 years due to a disease
I am currently pursuing a degree in bsc. Hons is of 3 years in an esteemed university in india. I am at the final year now. Through the two year my grade was of around 7 cgpa. But at the last semester I am affected with a disease and can't appear in the exam for final semester. Although I am pretty sure I can complete the degree within 4th year, but my dream is to go to foreign so I am scared that it may hamper my dream to get admission in grad school in foreign universities, despite of having good work experiences as I have done 3 internships and one conference. So it will be great if any one can tell me how much not finishing my degree within 4 years will affect my chance of getting a good grad school.

Perhaps take a look at https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/122576/will-my-cancer-ruin-my-chances-of-going-to-graduate-school-in-math

I am afraid that although I am not taking 8 years of my life but my disease isn't as serious as cancer although serious enough so I have to get admit to hospital. So I am concern about that after reading it also

My intention was not to compare your disease to cancer, my intention was to point you towards answers that have been previously given. I think those previous answers will help answer your question, at least in part.


text:
How to respond to an editor who suddenly stops answering your emails
I've been corresponding with an editor at a university publishing company, but he suddenly stopped responding to my emails. Most recently, I sent him my book chapters and a summary of my book, but he has not gotten back to me, even though it has been a month since I sent him the email (in the meantime, I sent him another email, and also called him to confirm).
Should I take this as a sign that the editor is no longer interested in my work? Or should I try reaching him one more time?

I'm guessing that the explanation lies elsewhere. If he loses interest he would most likely tell you to "buzz off" using some polite language.
More likely is that something has come up in his real or professional life. Also possible is that you were a bit too chatty, requesting more feedback than there was time for. It is also possible that things have been going along well on the current state of your work but just isn't ripe enough for action at this time.
But you can certainly ask whether there is anything you need to do now and what time frame  can you expect for the next required action.

This is sadly a really common problem in the world of humanities publishing. Acquisition editors are often overworked, trying to balance the responsibilities of developing new projects, editing current ones, and moving projects through peer review. Given the importance that book projects have for careers, however, this isn't great.
You've been doing the right things – "in the meantime, I sent him another email, and also called him to confirm." I had a graduate student in a similar position, and here is what I would recommend:

Send another short and firm e-mail, asking to acknowledge receipt and noting that you understand the busy workload. I would try to keep this a two-sentence email.
If you don't hear within two weeks from that, if you need this for tenure/promotion/hiring, I would begin to find another university press. If they're lagging at this stage, they're going to lag at other stages: (a) finding peer reviewers (if applicable); (b) working with their Board of Directors; (c) moving this project to production.

Good luck. It isn't a comment on your work, likely, but rather a representation of their disorganized working habits.


text:
Extra Masters before PhD
In my field it is common for Americans like myself to do a 5-6 year PhD where the first two years are basically a masters degree. However, when I first applied two years ago I was rejected from all PhD programs and instead did a free-but-unfunded MS. Now I am applying again and got an amazing offer from a top 10 US program! If I go there, will it look bad in post doc/faculty applications to have a 4 year undergrad, 6 year PhD(+MS en route), and a separate 2 year MS in between?
I am also still being considered for funding by the very top non-US program for a 3 year PhD where a MS is required beforehand. I had initially thought a longer PhD was better in order to do more research and make more publishable discoveries. But is the potential CV oddity worth considering if I get into this other top program?

Note that if you join a Master+PhD program and already have a Master it is quite common that you can shorten the Master part of the PhD program somewhat. This depends a bit on the field, but usually the Master part consists of optional courses and obligatory exams. The courses provide the material for the exams but if you are able to pass the exams without taking the courses (because you studied the material before in your first master) you are usually free to do so.

No, given everything else you say, no one will give it a moment's thought. You've been on a steady path and seem to be a success at it.
And, almost any other option will be worse. A different doctorate would shorten your time to completion, but, as you say, this one gives you opportunities.
People will look primarily to your most recent accomplishments in any case. It is just how it works.
Just. Do. It.


text:
Should I retake a course for an easy A or focus on research?
I’m an incoming PhD student deciding on courses to take. A normal course load is 3. There aren’t many being offered this semester, the only third option is a course I took as a MS student last semester at another school (we have no transfer credit policy). I could take the course for a slightly easier A, since my program has high grade standards and my peers seem highly capable. My study adviser suggested this as it would free up time next year to prepare for the qualifying exam. However, I want to continue an old research project from my MS in addition to starting a new research project. During COVID times, I figure a light courseload is best, and any extra time translates to research progress. Next semester I can take 4 courses to make up for it.
After deciding on just 2 courses this semester, my friends and study adviser still suggested I retake the 3rd course. The lectures are just 2.5 hrs a week, but even if they are easy homework/projects might add up and research is my top priority. As for the course material, I loved the course last semester, but with less novel material it might be less interesting.
Should I follow my friends and adviser’s guidance, or should I focus on research now until I finish my old project and have a lighter first PhD/COVID semester?

Do you have a research advisor at the new institution, or a faculty member who you'd be working with on your proposed project?  Have you asked them for advice?

Are you required to take a certain number of credit hours of classes (either per semester or during the entire PhD program)?

By lightening your course load for next year, I suspect this means the 3rd course would count towards your PhD requirements? Your friends and advisor know your situation best. Additionally, knocking out course requirements is guaranteed to get you closer to graduation, while this research may not.

I am required to take 10 courses in the first 2 years.

I disagree that research doesn’t get me closer to my goals - no one will care about my grades so long as I graduate. What matters is how many publishable discoveries I make. Courses, while enjoyable, are just checklists I need to mark off. I guess it is better to do so sooner, but with COVID I feel like now is not the time to overload.

PhD students are judged on their research publications, not their coursework.  It is good strategy to minimize the time you spend on courses.

we have no transfer credit policy

If there is no policy, ask for one.
I would recommend taking a low effort course over a high effort course; not to reduce effort expended, but to direct that effort to research.  If a course helps you with your research, then take it.
I would not recommend lowering your coursework efforts to the point that you fail; in that case you will need to repeat the effort, which is not efficient.

This is not right, my PhD programs are very clear: if you fail courses you get removed.

@FourierFlux That's an unusual consequence for failing one course, but no matter what the consequences of failing are, I do not recommend it.

While I like this answer, it is a bit general. Should I take this easier A course now, even when I could fill my plate with promising research? Or maybe there always be plenty of research, and I should take this opportunity to knock a course req out? But my old/new projects right now are so cool, and the advisers would both like sooner results.

There is a strict GPA requirement my graduate school takes very seriously. One screwup is fixable, maybe. Two though? You're done.


text:
Amount of details in a professional paper
My co-authors and I sometimes have different views on the organization  of our papers (in mathematics). While some of them insist on writing down all the details, I try to keep emphasis on the main lines of thought and avoid diverging from them whenever possible.
This difference of opinions comes up in several aspects: whether to discuss all the results (positive and negative) that we obtained in the project or select only the most important/interesting; how much details should the proofs contain; etc.
My two questions are:

if there is a way to make a paper contain all the details and at the same time have a clear structure not obfuscated by these details? Are there any organizational tricks that help to find some balance?

reading and writing research papers, what do you value more its comprehensiveness or clarity?

I would like to emphasize that this question is only about what should appear in the final draft after all directions of research have been explored and all proofs have been completely checked and re-checked.

First, you should ask a single focused question.  Second, you do need to select and prioritize what you want in your paper.  It can't be everything for everyone.  Think about your main target audience.

This is a hard question to answer.  An experienced writer will omit some details because he/she knows that the community or target audience is well verse in certain concepts or should 'get it' or make the necessary jump in a derivation without issues.  However, a newbie may write down every little detail or information that is considered too basic, which is likely to annoy an experienced reader.  To balance this tradeoff, you may want to leave the details in the appendix of your paper.

I would say that clarity should be the king in the sense that if you want the paper to be read beyond the introduction and built upon, the best thing you can do is to present the main idea (or ideas) in the simplest nontrivial setting where you can spell everything out with all due details without making it a technical nightmare.
The standard trap people fall into is trying to present the strongest and the most general result they can prove. Nine times out of ten it turns out that the direction of the generalization they chose is not the one the other people get interested in later and one has to spend hours or weeks undoing all the sophisticated build-up and reducing the proof to its core from where everything else has to be rebuilt in a completely different way. So clearly presenting this core from the beginning would be very beneficial, IMHO. The word "clearly" means "with all relevant details and with minimal number of outside references"+"in as easy to comprehend way as possible".
By tradition, a mathematical paper has to contain some new result (preferably a solution of some reasonably old unsolved problem) just to prove that the techniques you promote are worth something but, for majority of articles, the results themselves are of much less interest than the new twists in the proofs. Your "central theorem" will, probably, be either forgotten or greatly improved in a few years but some little lemma may easily get an independent life and the simpler that lemma is, the more chances it gets (provided, of course, that it is above a certain threshold in terms of novelty and ingenuity).
The main "organizational trick" is to try to write about one thing a time. There are cases when you can and should set up "explosive fireworks of ideas" but they are rare, few people are capable of that and even fewer know how to do it in a way that illuminates things rather than blinds and confuses the reader. So, the (in)famous KISS principle is a good rule of thumb on most occasions. That one and the classical "divide and conquer" approach can work miracles as far as the clarity of communication is concerned. I heard once that a bad lecturer is always thinking of whether he forgot to include something into the course and a good one is worried if he put in something unnecessary. The same applies to mathematical writing if you want your papers to be read rather than just quoted in long reference lists under the category "and Vasya also was there and did something that nobody has ever really looked at but it would be impolite not to mention him".
Proofs should be complete and fully spelled out. It is often said that two omitted trivialities in a row can create an impenetrable barrier to the reader. Prove a weaker or a less general result than you can, if you feel that the argument becomes too entangled otherwise, but prove it in full and spend some time thinking of how to present it in the most logical and easiest to understand way. One hour spared by the writer often results in a few days wasted by the reader (which should also be multiplied by the number of readers).

There is no hard-and-fast rule, because good communication is as much an art as a science. However, in my view, the majority of mathematics papers are written with too little detail. It is possible to give too much detail, but in practice I almost never see it. So I would encourage you and everyone else to err on the side of more detail, rather than less.
If you are worried about details distracting from the main thrust of the work, the best way to mitigate this is to organize the paper very clearly, with lots of signposting. Divide long arguments into lemmas whenever it makes sense to do so. This allows the reader to skip the details they don't want to read.

I don't know about the majority.  By number, there are a lot of papers of minor results of little interest to anyone, but that's not what your reading.  I think some people might say the majority of papers shouldn't even be published in the first place.

Appendices, footnotes/endnotes and supplementary materials are your friends
I am in your camp here, insofar as I prefer to write in a way that "flows" well by sticking to the main lines of thought and avoiding diverging into side issues that distract the reader.  The first three rules of good writing are: clarity, clarity, clarity.  Consequently, almost every mathematics paper I write shifts substantial amounts of material out of the main body of the paper.  I like to put proofs of theorems in appendices (unless the proof method is important to understand the material in the body), side aspects of the material and minor caveats into footnotes, and coding and other materials into supplementary materials.  This allows me to write in a way where the main body of the paper flows naturally and gives the reader a clear and intuitive discussion of the research problem at issue.

Don't be afraid to give heuristic assistance/discussion: At the extreme end of brevity, some mathematics papers and notes are essentially theorem-proof-theorem-proof, etc., and it can be difficult for the reader to see how the authors figured out to use the methods under use.  In my view, it is useful to break this up by giving at least some heuristic discussion to assist the reader to understand why a particular theorem or method of proof was chosen, and what motivated it.  It is okay to speak heuristically here, and a small amount of additional detail on motivations, methods, etc., can make a world of difference in understanding the topic.

You can often put proofs in an appendix: In some cases a mathematical proof can highlight important aspects of the subject under discussion (and in this case you might want it in the body of the paper), but often the proof is there just to ensure that the theorem is proved.  Moving proofs to an appendix allows you to just assert your theorems and then discuss their significance, and interested readers can look up the proof if needed.

Footnotes/endnotes can be used to prevent interruption of arguments: Often you want to have a main line of discussion where you speak in general terms, in a way that does not tax the attention of the reader.  In some cases there may be some minor technical caveats or other minor points you want to make, but you are afraid that they will interrupt the flow of argument.  In such cases, footnotes provide a useful way of dealing with a minor caveat without interrupting the flow of argument for the reader.

Supplementary materials are good for, well, supplementary materials: Some mathematics papers are augmented by computer simulations, reproducible coding, etc., and in such cases these should generally be made available in supplementary materials.  It is rarely useful to include large amounts of computer code in a paper (unless part of your task is to explain how to implement something in computational software) so it is usually best to move this out of the body.

Also when the coworkers want something in you can always say:'yes! let us put it in the appendix'

This advice may be good for papers in applied math. But in pure math, the difficulty/novelty of the proofs is the main thing your paper is judged on. Appendices are useful for long-but-routine proofs that won't impress anyone, but a paper won't get into a decent journal if a significant fraction of the proofs are in the appendix. People will see the paper as trivial. Again, I'm speaking only about the publishing culture in pure math here.

I have never seen an appendix used to provide proofs in a pure math paper.

@AlexanderWoo I have, but very rarely and only for proofs which can be summarised as "follow the proof of [similar lemma] from [previous paper] making the necessary minor changes". This can be good if you want the paper to focus on the new parts of the proof while still being self-contained.

@anon: With respect, I feel like I covered that case specifically in the answer; I have said that if the proof itself is important then it should be in the body.

Realistically, none of your readers will read past the introduction.  Write a long introduction with your main lines of thought.  For a long paper, people frequently now even write an introduction to the introduction, so that the first page or two says what the paper is about, then the next four or five papers lays out the main ideas of the paper, and then the remainder contains all the details.
Particularly technical lemmas whose proofs are long but not enlightening can be proved in sections at the end of the paper.  In particular, you do not need to always give the proof of a statement before you use it, though if you defer a proof you should be careful to make it clear that you do not have a circular proof.
As to what level of detail to include, my suggestion is to pick some specific person as your intended reader for the paper, and include all the details that will be necessary for them.  Do not pick the leading expert in your field or one of your close collaborators.  Frequently it is best to pick a graduate student, and it's okay if you're not more specific than X's hypothetical PhD student who is just starting research.


text:
I'm an F1 PhD student, but I'm continuing my PhD remotely. Can I work (legally)?
I'm doing a PhD at a university in the United States. I am in dissertation status. I am continuing the PhD remotely from outside of the US for the foreseeable future. I am not a US citizen, so am on an F1 visa.
I would like to do some work. Not a lot--just consulting a few hours a week for experience. My advisor is supportive of this.
However, there's the legal question. Generally I would not be allowed to work on an F1 visa, and would need to apply for OPT. However, this law exists to protect US workers, so since I am not residing in the United States, it seems the purpose of the law would not apply in this case. Any work I would do is work that others outside the US could also do.
So my question: does the prohibition on F1 students working applies if they are living and working outside of the US?

Are you trying to work "in" the US? Or in the country you live in?

Either. Meaning I'd be interested both in doing consulting for US companies and non-US companies.

Here's what Northeastern University's Office of Global Services write:

Students physically working outside the U.S. do not require work authorization from the Office of Global Services. Authorization must be given for work that physically takes place within the U.S.
NOTE: If you are returning to the U.S. while working abroad or on international co-op to perform work for a short period (such as a business trip or conference), this would require authorization.

The same point is made in the answer to a question at the Expatriates SE. But I would still recommend double checking with your university's International Office that it applies to your situation before acting on it.


text:
Dual Job by a Professor in Europe
I have seen many professor are working in a research institute and also a full-time professor at a University. How is it feasible? Are they involve in the dual job and getting a salary from a research institute and university?

Some such institutes are part of a university. And sharing relationships are possible in other cases.

@Buffy - not just possible but by design.

At least in Germany, non-university research institutes cannot award PhDs.  That is one reason why many group leaders at such institutions also have a university affiliation.


text:
Dealing with inconsistent feedback on your dissertation
I'd appreciate advice on how to navigate the final stages of the dissertation with an inconsistent advisor.
I've been struggling with my advisor for years, but there is no one else to advise a dissertation in my specialization.  He isn't unkind but is disorganized and expends little energy on students.  I first suspected that he wasn't reading my work when my fellowship applications were routinely rejected.  I hired a general editor, and subsequently received three major fellowships, which have provided a vital support network.  While I was away on fellowship, I kept in regular contact with my advisor and sent my writing.  I received no feedback on this work, and often, no reply at all.
I recently received my advisor's comments on the first half of my dissertation and have become concerned.  I'm happy to revise, but many of the comments indicate that he didn't read the entire document.  For example, he stated that one-hundred pages should not be spent on a particular topic when that subject only occupied the first thirty pages.  He also expressed concern about the overall trajectory of the project, demonstrating that he either didn't read or doesn't remember my fellowship applications, previous writing, or our conversations.  He also criticized aspects of my research that have been universally praised by my fellowship mentors.  I replied that I'm happy to implement his suggestions, and he responded, retracting much of his criticism.  I believe that much of this is posturing to appear like a participant in a project in which he has taken no part.  I'm utterly confused and just want to graduate in the next year.  Every Ph.d. guide tells students to do whatever their advisor wants in order to graduate.  I'm happy to oblige, but what do you do if your advisor's comments make no sense?

Say something about how dissertations get approved. In some places only the advisor's opinion means much of anything and they have to sign it. In other places there are independent judges. Give some background.

The dissertation gets approved by a committee of four scholars (three faculty members and an outside reader).  The advisor leads this committee, and their support is critical.

Is the advisor disorganized in general? Do you discern some disinterest specially directed towards you? These might help get more relevant answers.

He is generally disorganized, so I don't think I'm the target of any special disinterest.  Inexplicably, he takes on many projects that seem to have little purpose or reward. Other advisees have had similar experiences.


text:
Reconsidering PhD?
I don't know if this is the right question to ask, but I have been seriously reconsidering whether I want to continue with my PhD. I am currently a first year graduate student in mathematics (PhD track). I had wanted to get a PhD in mathematics since I was a freshman in college. I got into my top choice for graduate school, have already passed two prelims, and really enjoyed my first semester.
The prospect of being a professor has always interested me. I do not want a research position, in fact, I would prefer a job at a smaller liberal arts school. I have really enjoyed my time as an instructor much more than I expected and would enjoy a job that is more teaching focused.
However, I have heard multiple stories of people in my program applying for 70+ jobs. This seems very stressful to me and I am worried I cannot handle it. I also have geographic limitations. My entire family lives in new england, so I do not want to leave this area. I am also worried that I could be on short term contracts for several years of my life. It seems stressful to be entering a job and immediately start applying for new jobs.
All of this has really made me question whether or not to continue with my degree. I know that the jobs are scarce for research positions, and thought that I was being flexible with the prospect of working at more liberal arts schools. However, it seems to me that people are struggling to get jobs that are less research intensive. I do not want to leave my program (I am doing well in it and really enjoy it), but I have just been super stressed about the future.
I am nervous to talk to anybody about this because most people seem to not care about where they live and don't mind bouncing around from appointment to appointment. However, I do!! I feel like I am alone in caring about these things! Does anybody have any advice? Is this a sign that I might not be cut out for such a profession?

I don't have an exact count, but I would estimate there were about 10 permanent jobs that were advertised at liberal arts colleges in New England this year.  (Most of them advertise on Mathjobs, so you can go there and get an accurate count for yourself.)
Each of those openings will get several hundred applications from people who meet the minimum qualifications, and probably at least 50-100 highly qualified candidates.  I assume you understand the Pigeonhole Principle.

Only you can decide whether the possible rewards of an academic career outweigh the cons of an extremely competitive job market.  It's a very subjective choice.  There are lots of available statistics that can help you to better understand what is going on, but even with that information you'll end up having to take a chance on an uncertain future.

To add to what @AlexanderWoo said, even professors at liberal arts schools are usually highly accomplished researchers and do research as a significant part of their job, so your perception that these jobs are not “research positions” or that they are “less research intensive” is not entirely accurate, although there is a kernel of truth in it.

@Dan, Thank you. I went to a small liberal arts college for undergrad and few of the faculty are actively publishing. I just wanted to be clear that I do not consider a non-research position a failure (as Drecate mentions).

Ok, that’s interesting. Perhaps it depends on the college. I know many excellent research mathematicians who are professors at liberal arts schools, so that’s the main source of my knowledge. It would be interesting to hear from more knowledgeable people on this question.

@Dan - there is a big difference between Amherst and Stonehill

Sounds like the contradiction in your situation is that you 1) want to become a professor at a smaller liberal arts college, but 2) don't want to go through the job search necessary (70+ applications, having to do postdocs where you move around constantly, etc) to get there. Unfortunately, you can't have both. You'll have to choose one or the other.
If you choose to become a professor then you'll have to put up with the job search process. That's just the way the job market is (see Alexander Woo's comment). If you can't put up with the job search process then you'll have to do something else for a job. Make sure you know what the jobs you can get are. Search your local job portal and see what jobs are available in New England to people with undergraduate Math degrees. See if you like any of those jobs. Then search your local job portal for jobs that require PhD Math degrees. See if you prefer those jobs. If yes, you have a fallback plan for if you don't get one of the few teaching professor jobs available. If not, then you might as well apply for those jobs now and quit the PhD if you get one. You might even be able to apply for a sabbatical in your PhD to let you "try out" the job, returning to the PhD if the job doesn't work out.
By the way: even in non-academic jobs, there will be competition, and the competition can be fierce. Expect to have to send at least 20+ applications. You will be more stable though, and not have to float between postdocs.

Thank you for your honesty and your post.

There is nothing wrong with having specific needs when it comes to job search, and that does not disqualify you for a PhD. To really understand the current state of the job market a good place to start is to talk with people in your field who have recently been on the job market, even if they didn't share exactly the same concerns as you. In the end whether to get a PhD or not is a personal choice; if you can justify to yourself that there are jobs outside of liberal arts colleges that you want and that require PhD, then stick with it. Also keep in mind that there may be jobs in industry, government, consulting, etc. that may have some teaching component that could be a good fit for you.

Do you think that people in my department (specifically prospective advisors) will be concerned if I bring up such a matter?

well... there are certainly still people who believe that anything other than a tenure-track research position is a failure (and such positions are worth pursuing above all other concerns). Just be sure to avoid those people.

I am confused by the line "if you can justify to yourself that there are jobs outside of liberal arts colleges that you want and that require PhD, then stick with it." I work at a small liberal arts college. A PhD is required. So if the OP wants such a job, they should complete their PhD.


text:
Stuck with a mediocre topic for my master thesis
I am a masters student in Germany.
On the contrary to how most people's thesis work turns out, mine looks like it is quite far from what I planned to gain expertise in, in that it seems like it is an oversimplified topic. I was looking to work with machine learning as a center point of focus ( did a bunch of courses in data mining, information retrieval) , but after working as an intern for nearly 5 months in the institute, the topic I was offered was to do with optimising pairwise intersections of lists for which I do not need to make use of any machine learning tools.
I am afraid, this will make it very difficult for me to get a job in the industry and also, I feel like, the topic is not really giving me much to write as part of the literature survey in my thesis report. The whole thing has gotten me really worried sick.
I would greatly appreciate any guidance on where I stand and what I should look out for.

This might be just a question of how far you've advanced since you started. You've learned a lot so what once seemed hard, now seems easy. This is a natural progression - much to be hoped for.

"The whole thing has gotten me really worried sick."  You might be experiencing anxiety.  Please go and visit the mental health professionals at your university's counseling center.  It's normal to experience difficulties while working on your master's thesis.

My advice in the short term is to separate your current research topic from your broader research interests. You can maintain a large set of research interests, and even take the initiative in reading papers on these topics, or exploring the area, even when your current research topic (optimization in lists) is not satisfying to you. Then, you can look out for opportunities to broaden your experience in your real research interests (machine learning) in the future.
For industry jobs, it may surprise you that employers would be happy if you are knowledgeable about your interests in machine learning, even if you haven't directly worked on them. In general, industries are not so pedantic about the specific topic you are working on, they just want to know what industry skills you have, and what kind of projects you are interested in working for at their company.
In the long term, if you don't feel that you can attain any expertise in the situation through working independently, however, then it may be worth looking into ways you can change your career and work with a different advisor or on a different topic. Have a serious talk with your advisor that you are unhappy with your current research topic, and discuss possible solutions.

An emplyer won’t necessarily be concerned with the topic of the thesis but how you functioned and completed it.
Most employers look for capability and capacity...


text:
How long should I wait for Prospero registration?
I am currently in process of conducting two systematic review and meta-analysis. I have filled in the registration of my reviews in Prospero, yet I have not received any response from the Prospero. I filled in the registration nearly one year ago (first review) and six months ago (second review). Should I reach the Prospero office to follow-up my Prospero record? Or should I wait further?
Thanks in advance

Yes, you should contact them if you have not heard from them after even one month. Prospero contact details are here: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#contactuspage


text:
Should I address my professors by first name in emails if my peers are doing so already?
I'm starting a grad school and I'm used to start my emails to all my professors with "Dear Professor Smith", even though they respond with their first name at the end of their emails ("Best, John").
I noticed that the guys I'm starting the studies with are using "Hi John" in their emails. I don't think they know professors better than I do.
I don't want to be too familiar, but neither be the only who keeps this distance. Should I switch to "Hi John"?

Where are you located in the world?

Has this been answered before? https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84410/is-it-ok-to-call-a-professor-by-his-first-name-when-he-she-signs-emails-by-only

@user2705196: The linked question is only for Northern America. The OP here does not disclose his/her country.

@Kimball: The linked question is only for Northern America. The OP here does not disclose her/his country.

@BryanKrause, if the OP does not mention the location but speaks of "grad school" and uses "John" as an example, we all know where the OP is from ;)

At least in my field and in the US, the culture is that graduate students are supposed to be 'colleagues-in-training'. As such, it is natural for students to be on casual address terms with professors: they are supposed to be working towards being equals.
Of course there is still a gap in power and experience, but casual address is one way to start narrowing that. If others are using casual means of address, it's probably appropriate for you to do so as well.

In the US-influenced culture of international Academica, closing an email with the first name can most of the time be interpreted as implicit invitation to interact, at least in further email communication, on a first-name basis.
So yes, most likely you can address your professors by first name in emails. Not because your peers are doing so, but because your professors are inviting you to. For other communication, I would just ask: "Is it OK if I call you Jane, or do you prefer Dr. Doe"?

While this might generally true, I'm not sure signing off with one's first name is an "implicit invitation" as a rule.  As a professor in the US, I used to just sign almost all my emails with "Cheers, [first name]" partly out of habit and also I'm not going to call myself "Dr. [last name]".  Now I often use my initials when I don't want to imply such an invitation, but my point is I'm not sure all professors put much thought into their signature.

@Kimball thanks for the nuance. I agree that one should still apply judgement. Perhaps invitation is too strong a word, but I think it's a strong indication, to be entered into the calculation together with other cues. I sign with initials to convey the same message you do, by the way.

Since this question is not tagged “US”, I'd add two data points from other countries that I know from experience:

In Germany, the default is that professors and students, as well as other adults who interact in a professional relationship (except in performing arts), call each other by last name (not with academic title but generic “Sehr geehrte Frau Schmidt”, “Lieber Herr Müller” etc.). Oftentimes people switch to using first names, but this is an explicit decision and generally reciprocal – either both call each other by last name or both by first name (they are “per Du”). Many professors prefer the more informal first-name basis even for master students, and if the professor calls you by first name then it is probably safe to assume they're fine with you replying in the same way. If the professor is relatively young, then this would be probably the most common scenario; if they are substantially older then they would more likely explicitly ask whether the student is ok with first-name, or else stay with last-name (not completely uncommon even among colleagues).
I believe this situation is similar in many other European countries.
In Norway, and presumably the other Scandinavian countries too, virtually everybody calls everybody by first name. Even undergraduate students wouldn't think twice to address their professor “Hei Kjersti”.

I can confirm that your description of Norway is accurate in Sweden too (first-name normal for everybody within university settings, including students, faculty, and non-academic staff).

Signing an email with their first name doesn't immediately grant permission to address them in that way. Specially in academia. Ask them how they want to be addressed.
Let me add an anecdote. I used to work with a professor whose personality often resulted in people talking to them by their first name. However, I always referred to them as "Professor", both in person and via email. They never told me to do otherwise and I was completely fine with this.
A couple of years passed and one day I decided to ask if they'd be OK if I referred to them by their first name. This resulted in a whole conversation where they expressed how upsetting it is for people to take this for granted (especially undergrads). The conversation ended with them saying that of course it was fine and thanking me for asking.
FWIW this was in North America with an United-Statesian professor.

Different places have different standards, even within the same country. The US tends to be fairly informal, but I was the only grad student who generally called the professors by their first names. But I was a bit older than most and the faculty was young, so there was little social separation. On the other hand, I pretty much required my own doctoral students to use my first name, though some of them found it hard, as they came from more formal societies.
My preference, personally, would be to stay fairly formal for a bit until you at least meet them face to face and take our cues from that meeting. You can't really go wrong by being a bit more formal than you need to be.
But, in the US, at least, and with your description, you are probably safe enough.

Simple rule of the thumb is: address anyone the way he wants to be addressed. Some prefer prof...others prefer Mr/Mrs/Miss. Find out from them how their correspondence should be addressed.

So what do you recommend exactly? Asking them? In sone cultures, it could be weird to ask someone "How should I adress you" when there is a default (conservative) way.

@user111388 - "Excuse me professor, I notice that some students address you by your first name. I'm wondering if I should do the same. What do you prefer?"

@chaslyfromUk: This would be very unprofessional in my country as it sounds like you would consider it to call them by first name. If the prof wants to be called by first name, they (as they are the power person) has to speak about this

In Nordic countries and in mathematics, the norm is to not use honorary titles in general. Hence, I would be starting my emails with "Hei/Hej [first name]", in general. Foreigners coming from hierarchical cultures might not be used to this, so if writing in English, I would typically write "Dear [title]," and thereafter copy what they do.

Of course it depends highly of where you are located. There are some countries and universities in which there is a strict social hierarchy and professors prefer to be addressed by their title (some conservatives regions in Asia come tome mind), and there are others where the boundary professor-student is rather blur (where I live professors would feel awkward if being addressed as Dr., given they speak casually with students, share drinks with them while lecturing and so on).
I would consider three points:

How do they want to be addressed? Just ask them
Address them as most students do. It won't stand out.
It doesn't matter. Most of them don't think much about it anyway.

When I was a grad student in Canada (in engineering) back in the 70s/80s, students always addressed professors as either Dr. Foo or Prof. Bar, never by just their first or last names.  I can't even imagine someone doing otherwise.
I was in a professional Masters program 5 years ago in the US (in software engineering).  I was older than perhaps two of my profs.  I believe my entire class (which ranged in age from perhaps 30 to me) addressed all of our professors using doctor or professor honorifics.  Now, one of them was Prof. FirstName LongName-AnotherLongOne, I called her Prof. AnotherLongOne.

We do, all (North-Western Europe), at least at the level of PhD. Every PhD student (98% of the cases that I know at least do) addresses the professors with the first name. In fact, in international scientific collaborations that I know (e.g. CERN), it is common that everyone (be it Nobel Laurent or undergrad student) addresses each other with the first name.


text:
No reply after declining a PhD offer
Couple of weeks ago, several professors from one of the universities I received an offer from wrote me asking if they could help me with anything (to decide on a place I choose). As pleasant as it was, I wrote (what I think was) a very nice email declining that PhD offer to each one of them. It's been quite a while now, but none of them have replied, while from other places I've received wishes of good luck. Have I burned some bridges there?

Definitely overthinking this one a bit.

Why do you think a reply was necessary. They offered, you said no, that is the end of it.

@JonCuster it's just a bit odd to me, one day I receive 3 emails from the same uni, and then none of them replies.

Probably no burned bridges. Like everyone else (especially now) they are busy and just focused on the essential things they need to do to keep everything else together. In normal times you might have gotten a few more replies, but not from everyone. They just say to themselves "oh well" and move on to the next crisis.
I suspect that even those who haven't replied hope you succeed. When one does, we all do.

It's difficult to guess how do you have a reasonable explanation for almost all kinds of questions... :D Thank you.. Salutes..

@PraphullaKoushik, thanks for your confidence. It is just that I'm old and was an educator since the late pleistocene and I tried to learn along the way. I've seen a lot and have been in good situations and bad. I even once had a student with your family name. That was a good situation, of course.

:) That is nice to know :) Thanks again.


text:
When an article for a long time is under review ,how can we send a letter to editor for status manuscript
we have submitted our article to a journal  but for a long time status is under review .
what can we mention in our eamil to editor for condition the article?

Just write saying that your article has been under review for a long time and ask for a status update. Don't overthink it. Editors see this kind of email all the time, enough so that they probably don't pay attention to the exact wording.
Only thing is be sure to include the information necessary to identify the paper - e.g. the article ID number.