text:
Are students allowed to read recommendation letters written for them?
As a relatively new assistant professor,
I'm beginning to write recommendation letters for a few students.
Recently, a student asked me to write a recommendation letter for him.
The web link which was sent to me contains text which reads:

Please note that, under the provision of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance of Hong Kong, information contained in your reference report will be shown to the applicant upon request.

This was extremely surprising to me,
because it was my impression that in the US,
all recommendation letters are private
(i.e., the student is not able to read them).
Even though I am employed in Hong Kong, not in the US,
I had expected that this practice would be the same in my current country.
Questions:

Am I correct in my understanding that typically students are not allowed to read their recommendation letters?
If it is the case that the student would be able to read the letter,
should that affect what I write in the letter?

Could you indicate what is your "current country"? I am asking because etiquette around LoRs varies considerably by place - if you look around here in related questions, you'll find that in the U.S., it seems to be common for students to have the right to see their letters, and just as common for them to voluntarily waive that right. At the same time, in some other places where LoRs are maybe not that common, the mere idea that a student would not see what's written in the LoR appears as an alien concept, and LoRs are generally handed directly to the student to be passed on to the recipient.

For U.S. universities, the student gets to decide whether the recommendation will be confidential.  Things may be very different in your own country.  (I decline to write letters when the student does not waive the right of access on grounds that a) the student doesn't trust me and b) the institution to which he is applying will possibly give my letter less weight.)

@O.R.Mapper I added my current country in the question.

Why do you expect that the practice about LoRs in Hong Kong to be the same of that in the US? Related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/a/71440/20058

Fun fact: as part of my application for a Japanese government scholarship, I had to submit a LoR to my local Japanese embassy. Later, the embassy returned my complete aplication file, including the LoR, for me to forward to the universities I wished to attend, so I saw the LoR. The referer was definitely not aware of this beforehand (neither was I), and I haven't told him since (here's hoping he does not frequent Academia.SE).

As noted in the comments, law and custom about letters of recommendation differ by country.  In the United States, the student does have access to letters of recommendation unless the student waives that right.  There will generally be a notice such as the one you describe, letting you know whether the letter is available to the student.
The second part of your question, "should that affect what I write in the letter?" is the more important part because you already know the letter could be available to the student.
It should not affect what you write.  The institution to which the student has applied is depending on you for an honest evaluation of the student's abilities.  The student presumably believes your evaluation will be a good one, or you would not have been asked to write a recommendation.  If that turns out not to be the case, the student may be disappointed; the potential for disappointment should not influence your recommendation.
Although potential access by the student should not affect what you write, it might affect whether you write.  As I wrote in a comment, I decline to write letters when the student does not waive the right of access on grounds that a) the student doesn't trust me and b) the institution to which he is applying will possibly give my letter less weight.
Finally,  If you would write a negative recommendation, you have an ethical obligation to decline to write a recommendation and to tell the student, at least in general terms, why not.
Encourage your students to talk with you before giving your name as a referee.  That will help you avoid problems like this one.  Here is what I tell my own students about such letters: https://professorbrown.net/recommendations/

Students can waive their right to read the letters, but that does not make the letters confidential.  The institution to which the student applied is not required - unless I am mistaken - to keep them confidential.  If the student sues you for libel, then surely the letter will be revealed in discovery.  Always assume that the referee will read the letter.

@emory: Your hypothetical libel suit has a chicken-or-egg problem.  The letter is needed to decide whether it is libelous.  The student who has waived right to access does not have access-by-request to the recommendation letters.  Beyond that, one should not write libelous recommendations.

@BobBrown I think the point is that even if the student waived their right, the letter is still an educational record and could be subpoenaed someday or ordered released by a court in the event of a (libel or other) lawsuit, and that's something that the author of the letter may not wish to see happen regardless if the letter is libelous or not. It's true that it is highly unlikely to happen, but stranger things have happened.

@DanRomik, and moreover, unless I am misreading something somewhere, waiving one's right to access the letter only means that no one is legally obligated to show the letter to the student—in no way (that I can find) does it inhibit the letter recipient's right to show the letter to the student themselves, if they so choose.

@Wildcard yes of course, that is correct, though I don't quite see how that reinforces (or weakens) my earlier point.

Actually, it appears what I wrote is just a longer statement of what @emory already included in an earlier comment.

I can understand your reasoning for declining to write a letter for a student who does not waive the right of access in the US context (I also think the letters should be between letter writers and whomever reads the application). However, the standard way of submitting LoRs for my PhD application (France) was for the student to upload/submit them together with other documents after collecting it directly from the referees. Trying to ask the funding body going through applications to accept a LoR directly was out of the norm and not easy. Would you still decline to write a LoR in such a case?

@penelope  No, I'd follow local custom.  In the U.S., the current standard practice is for the referee to upload the letters to a service that collates application material, and the business about waivers is codified in law.  I am old enough to remember when, in the U.S., referees delivered letters to applicants in a sealed envelope with the referee's signature across the seal.

Legally, in the USA, students are entitled to access their educational records.  (I assume that there are similar regulations in some other countries.)  This poses an obvious problem with letters of recommendation, the contents of which may ideally be unknown to their subjects; this makes it possible for the recommender to give completely honest evaluations and discourages students from "shopping" for the most positive references.
The solution is that students normally waive their right to view the recommendation letter.  Most colleges now have online recommendation systems for references to use, and there is always a prominent notice that the student has waived access to the letter.  I have never had to write a letter when this waiver was not in place.  I know a couple colleagues, however, who have gotten recommendation requests that did not include the waiver; their solution was to write a polite e-mail to the student, reminding the student to waive access.  (That the faculty involved would not be willing to write the letter without the waiver may or may not have been made explicit.)

I realise that this is besides the point, but I never understood why people (in general) are so keen on the student waiving their right. Either you write a nice letter or you refuse to recommend the student... In either case there is little harm in letting the student see the letter... The point about being completely honest is especially ridicules, even if you write a sub optimal letter (for the student) you should do so  in way she would understand and in way that that does not induce a mental breakdown... If you can't do this then don't write a letter, ever...

Well said, Repmat.

Is a letter of recommendation actually considered part of their "educational records", legally speaking?

@Repmat One reason for insisting on a waiver is that strong useful letters often offer direct comparisons to other current and former students. But it's really none of student A's business what I think of student B.

@JeffE no of course student A shouldn't learn about your recommendation for student B. But student A should be able to read everything about herself...

@Repmat But without a waiver, Student A has access to the entire letter, including the comparison with student B, which means I can't include the comparison in student A's letter.

@JeffE Per your above case of an LoR written for Student A, one needs to ask does Student B know they are being "compared" (evaluated) in a written document ? If not then you may be violating Student B's rights even if Student A did waive their right to see the LoR.

@Repmat Some academics may have a contractual duty to deal with LoR's -- for example, in our University personal tutors and course leaders can't refuse the request.

I always thought useful LoR's would also be useful to the student, to actually be aware of their own strengths and weaknesses in a way that they can improve.

@JeffE We have discussed this before, but notice that comparing two students is useful in a limited number of cases. Moreover, some people can find this practice questionable and unethical: if you discuss about me in an official document, I want to be informed.

@Repmat Could you post this as an answer? In my opinion, this is a useful perspective for recommendation letter writers to have.

Do you usually let the other student know @JeffE thatf you mention them?

@user111388 No, I don't.  Nor do I inform other comparable researchers that I mention in recommendation letters for hiring, promotion, and tenure, for which such comparisons are almost always explicitly requested.  My professional opinions of other people are obviously sensitive—which is why letters are always held in confidence, and why such comparisons must be written carefully—but they are not educational or employment records.  I do not have the right to disclose your confidential records, but you do not have the right to prevent me from talking about you at all.

The state of affairs with regards to letters of recommendation in the US represents the very uncomfortable tension that exists between the principle that students should have access to their educational records (a noble idea, to be sure) on the one hand, and the premise (based on an understanding of human psychology) that letter writers become considerably more likely to provide an honest evaluation when they are assured that their letter will be kept confidential from the student, on the other hand.
For this reason, the game of asking students to waive their legal rights has developed, as described in other answers. Ultimately it seems that human nature and human psychology cannot be defeated by a law, however noble and well-intentioned. Thus students end up not seeing their letters in almost all cases, and somehow the world keeps turning.
As for whether what you write should be affected by the lack of confidentiality, that is up to you. It is easy for others to say, as Bob Brown does in his answer, that it shouldn't. Personally I feel that it is a bit inappropriate for any of us to make a recommendation on this point, since we are not you, don't have or know about your personality, and will not be the ones who will be paying the psychological price of our advice. The one practical piece of advice that I agree with (and that I feel is the course of action I would likely take in this situation) is to email the student, explain that as a matter of personal policy you only write letters for students who agree to waive their right, and ask if he/she can kindly click the appropriate checkbox.

Not only that the students get to see the recommendation letters, but in at least two countries in EU, you get to discuss with the professor about what to include, so that s/he includes positive things that match the expectancy of the other end.
It is actually just now that I realized that in other parts of the world, the recommendation letters go straight between institutions and do not pass by the students.

(Caveat: In my cultural background, hiding references is not customary.)

Am I correct in my understanding that typically students are not allowed to read their recommendation letters?

If you gave a copy of the letter to them, for sure they're allowed to read it. So just do that.

If it is the case that the student would be able to read the letter, should that affect what I write in the letter?

No, it should not in my opinion. If it's a negative recommendation, just decline to write it; and if it's positive, you should still be fair and honest. It should be up to the person you're writing the recommendation to decide whether she/he wants to use what you wrote based on how they feel it reflects upon them.

Under the new General Data Protection Regulations any indevidual in the EU has the right to all personal information held by any private organisation that pertains to them. Most people seem to be interpreting this as including references. Thus while in the UK, at least, it is not customary for students to get access to their references, they could in theory request to see them. Our uni says this about references in its information about data protection:

"References are the personal data of both the referee and the subject
  of the reference. Therefore they could be released to either party as
  a result of a Subject Access Request. References should be factually
  accurate and fair."

I know that many private firms now refuse to give references beyond "yes this person worked for us" because they could be sued if the subject found that anything they wrote prevented them from getting a job.

I consulted one university in British who have similar data privacy laws, and the reply I got from their admission office indicates that if I indicate explicitly in the letter or upon providing it, the letter won't be shared with the student without consulting me first (but it's theoretically possible that the university may decide to share the letter anyways with my disagreement, if they see proper to do so).  That is, you will have to explicitly indicate that you at least must be asked before releasing the letter to students, in theory.
Whenever you're not sure, you can simply write an email to the program's admission office and ask for an official answer/promise.
Personally, I am someone who either writes a nice letter or refuses to recommend, but I always insist that students I recommend must waive their rights to access my evaluations.
 The arguments that some comments above on how students can benefit from reading the reference letter are unconvincing.  If someone, as the letter writer, feels comfortable sharing advises with the student, he/she can just tell the student face-to-face or directly over emails.  Recommendation letter is certainly not the only chance that students can learn about their strengths and weaknesses, and if it is one, it's usually far from the best way to communicate (not only because the letter is not written to the student as its target reader, but also the writer and a student reader may have different interpretations, because the professor have his/her own comparison groups so the evaluations may not match the student's expectation, but this could be better understood by the recruiters especially when the professor has been writing letters to this recruiting program in several years already).  The form of a confidential letter not only ensures the recruiters that this letter faithfully expresses the opinions of the letter writer, reducing their concerns of impacting the interpersonal relationship to the minimum level, but moreover, (the letter) may contain confidential information (even it's just summary) regarding the performance of other students which cannot shared with the subject of the letter.  I usually tell my students roughly what I wrote in the letter, but I never let them see the letter per-se.
The recommendation process needs to be built on some mutual consensus from the professor and the student.  If you don't like the term of waiving the access, don't ``sign the contract'' by requesting my recommendation -- I am by no means the only possible person for students to ask.


text:
Does it make sense to list Ph.D.-level coursework in industry-focused CV?
I recently defended my Ph.D. dissertation (Information Systems) and now it's time to apply for some positions. While I would love to stay in academia, my current highest priority is to find a good job in IT and/or management consulting. Since I've designed my coursework with partial industry (consulting) focus in mind, most of the courses that I've taken during my Ph.D. program are very relevant to potential work in a consulting environment. I've read this related question, but it has only academic focus, hence my question.
Currently I'm working on converting my former resume into two CV variants: one, focused on industry/consulting (updated and improved resume), and another, focused on academia (CV per se). My strategy is to include (mention) the relevant (practically, full) Ph.D.-level coursework into the industry/consulting CV variant and exclude that information from the academic one. What do you think of this strategy? Also, I'm interested whether it is beneficial to include my master's level coursework into the industry-focused CV. Any other advice and suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

Related question: CV for leaving academia after PhD.

@scaaahu: Thank you for the link. Somehow I missed that question and it seems like a useful one (will review). However, answers there don't cover the main point of my question: arguments for or against inclusion of Ph.D.-level coursework into a CV.

To answer your question title: Does it make sense to list Ph.D.-level coursework in industry-focused CV? Yes, if the coursework is relevant to the company business.

@scaaahu: Thank you, again - I suspected that this is the case. I just wanted to know, if there are any situations, where one wouldn't want to include such information.

I assume that people here agree with me that it doesn't make sense to include coursework information into academic CV. Is this assumption correct?

That depends. Generally speaking, you don't want the CV you send to an industry company too long, as opposed to CV sent to academic institutions. So, it's up to you. As long as the info on the CV are useful, include them. But, don't make it too much.

My first job after my PhD was as a consultant. I suggest being selective with respect to what, and how much of your coursework to include.
Your degree speaks for your potential, and there is little use adding too much detail that is implied by it (in particular if you graduated from a reputable school). You want your CV to be one page only, so don't clutter it.
Begin with a brief executive summary, which generically could read like "Information system PhD with strong skills in (insert - say, system programming/data analysis/...) and communication (from X years as a teaching assistant)." Find something jazzy that you think fits you.
You can add relevant course work experience in a "skills" section, as appropriate, and further add anything valuable under "awards and honors" (if nothing else fits, don't shy away from mentioning performing well/near top/top of class in course work). It's also ok to maybe highlight some particularly relevant coursework (with grades). It would definitely help if your thesis work (which you should summarize) could be linked to the typical consulting job (bringing structure where little was before). At the bottom of the page, add three academic references if any of your faculty might be known in industry.
Two more points: I don't remember what the person's job name and description was, but in my case, I found someone at my school who proof-read my CV with lots of feedback (my initial version sucked badly). Secondly, you tend to read to de-emphasize your academic background in industry (eg, "list it after professional experience"), but this is simply not true for at least 2-5 years, depending, as your PhD will stay your greatest achievement for a while.
Take it with a grain of salt as I've been out of this for a while. Best of luck!

Excellent advice (+1; acceptance is TBD, based on overall feedback). Much appreciated. And thank you for the wishes! I will need some luck, for sure :-)

As someone who has reviewed job applications and interviewed candidates in industry, I would be interested in the dissertation topic, and in courses that are particularly relevant to the job.

I agree with @Patricia on a thesis summary. My old formulation didn't make that clear enough, so I edited it in specifically.

@PatriciaShanahan: I appreciate your comment. I'm certainly leaving dissertation topic intact and will consider keeping relevant coursework in the industry-focused CV. I'm not sure about the names of my dissertation committee members, though. As I understand, only relevant publications should be kept, but I have none so far (dissertation per se and citable research software will be in corresponding sections; papers in preparation don't count IMHO and will be listed in the academic CV).

There is more than one type of industry, and you should adapt your presentation accordingly.  One major flag is whether they ask for a CV or a resume, and you may want to explicitly clarify which.
Industrial jobs with a strong R&D component (such as at the company where I work) will often want a CV.  For those jobs, keep the full academic CV, but also add in a "Skills" section near the top where you can talk about what else you learned that's not reflected well by the publications, etc. on the rest of your CV.  Don't bother listing individual course names---the reader probably won't be able to meaningfully evaluate them---but your goal here is to demonstrate the breadth and flexibility that is likely to be necessary in the broader scientific community.
Other jobs are more "normal industry" and just want to know about your job-relevant skills, and will want a resume.  Don't give them a CV, give them a 1-page resume, summarizing your skills, goals, etc.  They too will likely not care about the individual classes, but rather what you can claim as skills as a result of having taken them.

Excellent advice (+1). Much appreciated.

The structure of a CV might differ from a country to another, but the real goal of a CV is always the same: to get you a job interview (and not to describe yourself).
As a result, for an industry CV, everything that is in favor of you getting the job interview can be helpful in your application and coursework definitively should be included. Whether you want to add them in the "Education" or "Skills" section is up to you but keep in mind that you must stay concise (e.g., just give a list of intelligible coursework titles). If some of them are particularly relevant to the job, you can add further details but the cover letter might be a more appropriate place for that.
Finally, about adding or omitting the coursework in an academic CV, just ask yourself the same question: Will it help me to get an interview? So you might want to consider if the skills (technical, management, etc...) developed in the coursework are pertinent for doing or conducting the research and teaching aspects of an academic position.

Excellent advice (+1). Much appreciated.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to transition from theoretical mathematics to theoretical computer science
Background: I started my undergraduate career in computer science and transitioned to mathematics leaving computer science as a minor. I have just recently completed my Bachelors in Mathematics with a research project in Galois theory, algebraic geometry, and additive number theory. For the next academic year, I am pursuing a Masters in Mathematics which I will complete in a year through a 5-year (BS/MS) program.
Although I did not complete more than a minor in computer science, I have been interested in having it play a vital role in my career goals in academia.
My goal after finishing my masters is to transition into a Ph.D. program in mathematics, but I have not yet decided what I want to focus my research on.
I would like to learn about what Theoretical Computer Science is for academia and what background someone needs to become a theoretical computer scientist.
Questions:
Do most theoretical computer science professors have their Ph.D. in mathematics?
How much formal background does one need from computer science itself? Can this be achieved outside of a school setting?
What fields of mathematics play an important role in theoretical cs?

The answer to your question in "no": Most of people who call themselves Theoretical Computer Scientists have PhD in (T)CS.
And yes, you need to have a CS background because the word says it itself: Theoretical Computer Science which is the study of what a computer can(not) do and with what resources.
Math is a vital part and on different fields of TCS different fields areas of math play important role (number theory, linear algebra, combinatorics. probability theory are by far the most used ones). Generally speaking, the maths used are rarely "obscure" or too abstract/pure.
As on the question of if this can be achieved outside formal education the answer is "depends" on the motivation, circumstances etc. It is really hard to answer that.

Most theoretical computer scientists have PhDs in computer science. But there several math programs that also employ theoretical computer scientists and/or have a close relationship with the CS department at their university. These math PhD programs produce theoretical computer scientists.
The MIT math department is one such program --- plenty of computer scientists graduate with PhDs in math from MIT, although they are advised by people who would normally be considered (theoretical) computer scientists. Other programs include:
The ACO program at CMU: http://aco.math.cmu.edu/
The ACO program at Georgia Tech: http://www.aco.gatech.edu/
The AMCS program at Penn: https://www.amcs.upenn.edu/
I'm sure there are other such that I am missing.
These programs "leave your options open" in case you want to study some aspect of pure or applied math separate from TCS, but with the option to study TCS. Of course, if you are sure about what you want to do, a strong math background is usually good preparation for a PhD in (T)CS as well, even if you don't have an undergraduate CS major. (e.g. many of my own PhD students at Penn were math majors in college rather than CS majors)

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


text:
Publication dilemma
X gave some nanoparticles to Y lab 2 years ago. I worked on biological characterization of these particles in Y lab as a postdoc (second postdoc) and wrote a manuscript at the end of my 2 year contract. X lab had said when I joined Y lab that their work on the nanoparticles was almost ready for publication (so approximately 3 years) but till now they have not published the work.
Three years later, they haven't published the synthesis work. Now it is about a year since I left Y lab and there has been lack of communication across teams. Y lab people do not want to annoy X lab but do not have any plan in place of what is to be done. Y lab doesn't keep me in the loop and only when I ask they respond with a lame excuse for delay. If I question the excuse they ignore me till I send them a few follow-ups only with a new excuse.
Is there are any workaround the situation of the materials provided if I were to publish? And also if there is no technical reason, Y lab cannot keep blocking my paper from being put on the preprint server at least. So if at all they wash their hands off the paper (I don't think they will back off easily), how can I go about the issue of the materials provided that we used in our study if X lab refuses to be coauthors?

Read a similar story to this on this site a while back...

Read this you may find it interesting : https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/105056/72855

Thanks solarMike. The link is interesting. The plan is such. Since I only have one sided information from Y and do not know what exactly X had to say. I intend to email all coauthors with a deadline to respond soon. They can decide if they want to be a part of this paper or if not decide not to be. There is just one figure which could come from X which I will remove and try to submit atleast to a preprint server. If Y complains then i will try to tell them I dont want to make it dirty but if they insist I am going to the ethics committee as its unethical to stall my career

Talk to the ethics committee or someone who knows and good luck.

I managed to speak to a previous colleague from the same lab and he had the same issues as well. So Y lab seems to have a pattern of poorly managed collaborations.

Keep your data close and good luck...

sometimes all you can do is step away when there are big ego's in the room that refuse to talk science or accept questions as part of learning.

It sounds like you have issues with lab X as well as with lab Y. This is (of course) possible, but are you sure that it is not you who is too impatient, you who thinks that publishing a paper is easier than it actually is, or you who could facilitate the "communication across teams" to resolve the situation? Your question stating that "Y lab people do not want to annoy X lab" may imply that more patience is advised. Talk to your supervisor.

I have complained about that issue to ethics committee, unfortunately, they did not give me convincing answer, so I am trying to follow up this issue from my university side as a former PhD student. I suggest you first contact the ethics committee. Also, if you are in Europe, you can contact ALLEA (All European Academics) they are not responsible to solve these issues but when I contacted them, there are really nice people to guide you and they will tell you, who you can contact about these types of issue.

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


text:
I have only one name shown in my ID card. How do I write my name (surname) in research paper or article?
My name is SALMAN. No Middle and Last name. How do I write my name in research paper or article?

At first, I did not believe this. Then I found the Wiki page Mononymous person.

@scaaahu One day looking at the students enrolled in a course of mine, I saw a name like XXX Abcd. XXX, really? When I met the student in the classroom  I asked him: "Is your name really XXX?" No, he said, I don't have a name, I'm just Abcd, but the university enrollment system doesn't accept an empty name field. And so the secretary just put XXX.

@MassimoOrtolano Your comment makes my day. The reason I wrote the comment is because someone raised a Low Quality post flag on this question.  I gave it a "Looks OK". I feel  I should explain my action.

Related question (where the answers show that some variety in author names is not completely unheard of): Is it OK to write first initial of some authors on a paper and full first name of others?

My first suggestion would be to write it as "SALMAN". Have you tried it?

In your home culture, is there some form that would be used to distinguish you if there were two Salman's at the same school or workplace?

A tangent, but: W3C advice on handling names in software, and a blogpost with interesting remarks and wonderful comments.

Relevant article: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/

Regardless of what is on your ID card, you can decide what name you want to use on your published papers.  Do you want to just use Salman or SALMAN, or is there something else you would prefer?

Call yourself "Salman Mononymous" so that whoever reads your name will immediately understand that you are actually just "salman"...

We had a person with only one name at work, Sajama, and in the system she was Sajama Sajama because a first and last name were needed. This solution was suggested below.

May I ask what culture you come from (or more specifically, what the naming convention is in your culture, and how common it is in your culture for people to only have one name?

People really should know about mononyms.  Here is an academic example:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govindjee

Another academic example: http://www.csail.mit.edu/user/849

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Abdullah (a politician in Afghanistan) doubled his name because foreign news editors expect two names.

You have two choices.
Either just use your given name, e.g., as in Matthew B. Dwyer, John Hatcliff, Robby, Venkatesh Prasad Ranganath: Exploiting Object Escape and Locking Information in Partial-Order Reductions for Concurrent Object-Oriented Programs. That has two advantages – it's formally and culturally correct – and two disadvantages – you will have to explain it to many people, and finding you in any search engine is awfully difficult.
Alternatively, invent some "first" name or initial, so for instance, you might publish as "S. Salman". That's formally incorrect, but probably more convenient in most situations.
Whatever you do, do it consistently. That's the most important recommendation.

Some more suggestions: S.A.L.Man, Sal Mann.

Or even go with Salman Salman in places that require two names. That way people will get it right no matter which one they choose.

Using a single name in such a context might alternatively be regarded as an advantage, since it's more unusual, so someone reading the paper, or meeting Salman at a conference, might be more likely to remember him and his work.

Use the chosen form prominently on your web sites. Someone reading one of your papers may try to learn more about your research by searching for you by the name on the paper.

In addition to this advice, I would strongly urge SALMAN to correctly set up an online presence on as many channels as possible: set up profiles on ORCID, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, any relevant Stack Exchange sites, Github, Bitbucket, and any relevant others, and make sure that they are all appropriately linked, discoverable, and contain accurate listings of their research output. This then helps offset the difficulties in finding mononymous authors through standard search channels.

+1 for ORCID @E.P. I've wrote recently this answer - Salman, please have a  look regarding ORCID there: http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/81506/

Not everybody in the world fits into the western idea of first name, maybe middle name/names, last name.
Regardless of what your ID card says, you can publish your papers under whatever name you want. Some people use pseudonyms. Much more common is that many women continue to publish under their maiden name when they marry and change their surname.
There's no reason you can't publish papers as Salman.

"(...) you can publish your papers under whatever name you want" - a very important point not mentioned in other answers!

@JakubKonieczny I am actually unsure if that is true. For example a normal name in one language might mean something inappropriate in another. Setting aside reasons for which that person might want to publish under such a name, even if it is legal, the editor might not want to go with it.

@dtldarek I have no idea how happy a journal editor would be if I tried to publish a paper under a deliberately offensive pseudonym. But, come on, that's not what we're talking about, here.

@DavidRicherby I only wanted to point out that some care should be taken to check if the pseudonym or name transliteration that we would like to use won't cause any headaches later. For example if you want to create a new name for a product with hopefully international reach, then you should check potential name candidates to avoid embarrassment.

@dtldarek Of course, you are right that one should be careful when choosing the name, and there are many practical considerations (many of which are discussed in more detain on this SE) which go into this. All I wanted to emphasise is that you can choose the name, there are no hard rules saying what name you can and cannot use.

A slightly unrelated side note: While not as common, some men do change their name as well when marrying (e.g. in Germany). So this point does not only apply to women.

> you can publish your papers under whatever name you want. – yes! To give an example, Dr. Perelman, who proved the Poincaré conjecture, is officially called "Grigori Yakovlevich Perelman", the typical naming on the paper would be "Grigori Y. Perelman" or "Grigori Perelman". His proofs carry the name "Grisha Perelman". This is a shorthand of his first name, probably because he is comfortable being called this way. So, yes, you can use whatever name you want.

@OlegLobachev Actually, I'm not sure that's really what I meant. Middle names in, say, English speaking countries, and patronymics in Russia are treated almost as disambiguators and are very often omitted or initialized; familiar forms of a name are considered as just being different ways of saying the same thing. In quite a strong sense, all the examples you give are just different presentations of the same name. For example, if I said "You can use whatever postal address you want", you wouldn't say "Yes, I could say I live at 123 Main Street or 123 Main St.!"

Well, while "Grisha" can be univocally tracked back to "Grigory", this is not a widely accepted way of referencing self in a written manner in Russian. (In contrast to, say, referring to Mr. Clinton as "Bill", which is fully Ok in US.) One case of using such a shortened name is mentioning a child in credits of a film. In most cases, definitely including research publications, you are expected to write down your full first name. But – and that's your point in my opinion – you are not obliged to.

@OlegLobachev Sure but when you read "Grisha", you still think "Oh, it's Grigory and he's being unusually informal".

Some mononymous professors:
Arvind
Johnson Professor of Computer Science and Engineering
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Publications
Google Scholar
Kinshuk
Dean of the College of Information
University of North Texas
Publications
Google Scholar
SunWolf
Professor of Communication
College of Arts and Sciences
Santa Clara University
Publications
As you can see, you are not alone. All these professors seem to be using their (single) name in publications. (No doubt there are others too, who have a single name, but use variant forms in publications.)
(Edit: These examples, along with examples of professors who have the same first and last names, are collected on the Improbable Research blog.)

It's curious to note that while on Dr. Kinshuk's Google Scholar profile the attribution is correctly noted, the corresponding Google Scholar page for Arvind has his name missing from most papers, incorrectly noted for a few, and it does this monstruosity.

Also, were you previously aware of these, or did you just now go looking for them? If the latter, it would be good to note how you find them, so Salman can look further in that direction.

@E.P. I was previously aware of these (having some interest in names), but I probably came across them via mini-AIR, maybe this :-) Come to think of it, some of the others on that list may be relevant too (if the OP chooses "Salman Salman"). And yes, looks like Google Scholar's automated systems don't always deal correctly with these attributions, as will probably many other programs. :-(

Ah, that would be it - of course, a perfectly natural subject for Ann. Imp. Res. And yes, Salman may well find many of those examples useful - please consider adding the link to your answer.

Does SunWolf really has a capital W in the middle of their name? That's horrible. I'm now imagining they spend most of their days on the phone, talking to publishers etc, trying to remove the space.

@ShreevatsaR, Google Scholar isn't the only automated software that has trouble with single names. For that reasons, putting in "Salman Salman" is probably best for dealing with the software and surroduning issues.

Add Min-Oo, although these days he goes by Maung Min-Oo.  Maung is kind of like "Mr." in Burmese, though more specific.

I read a lot of papers by Arvind back in the 70s.  Really it was my first introduction to the idea that first name middle name last name wasn't universal.

A colleague of mine with a unique name uses his father's name as his "first" name (usually just the initial) for his publications.
In various systems, it is common practice  to use the father's or mother's name for further disambiguation (e.g., Indian visa application form ask for that information).
The above choice transposes this practice into the first-name surname system and if I understood my colleague correctly is commonly used.
This is somewhat close to Uwe's second suggestion, except that you do not literally invent it, but rather follow a systematic way to assign it.
This might have the advantage that it is easier to explain the situation, than with an arbitrarily self-selected name.
A drawback that colleague mentioned is that sometimes he will be addressed by his "first" name, so his father's name.

One advantage of inventing an initial only is that people will not address you by a wrong name.

Yes. I believe I said this more or less  in my answer. But an initial only, even more so an invented one, might raise more questions, and possibly create issues when filling out forms etc. It might come down to an individual preference what one prefers/does mind less explaining or with which explanation one is more comfortable. Plus, as I said, it's not a random idea of mine, but for some transposes something they are used to doing in a different form, and anyway it is something that some, I think quite many in fact, people in that situation do.

This is actually how surnames appeared historically in the first place in many cultures.

@vsz indeed, Partonymic and Matronymic naming are wide spread, and also were common in some "Western" countries, even well into the 20th century.  Indeed, it seems in Iceland such a system is still in place. That's why I think if the question arises the explanation "I use my father's/mother's name for this (as this is common in my culture)" is one that will work better with many  than "I just invented that name-field datum"

An old lecturer of mine had this problem; he had stopped using his surname in his younger days, and all official paperwork referred to him by only one name. However he found, when it came to publishing papers, that many journals assumed his single name must be a middle name of another author on the paper. His solution was to use his name twice.
It also allowed him to make a joke along the lines of “so good they named me twice”.

You could use your father's name + "son" as your last name (or "daughter", "dottir", etc, with an S between, perhaps).
If, for example, your father were also named SALMAN, you could be SALMAN
SALMANSON. Sounds great!
That in your case it is a literal description rather than a hereditary name or one assigned to you at birth is not a problem.

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


text:
If I publish my Master's Thesis in a journal can I still write a book my topic about later?
I've recently completed my Master's Thesis (and I'm a little proud of it). I'm interested in publishing my findings in a journal, but I'd also like to expand on my ideas and write a book for a wider audience. Is this an acceptable thing to do? I don't want to shoot myself in the foot.
For context, I haven't initiated the process of publishing the book version or of being published in a journal, yet. I simply would like to figure out what to do before I make any major decisons.

Do you intend to self publish or work with a publisher? And you may need to yield your copyright to a journal if you publish the thesis.

I've considered self-publishing, but I'm also open to going through a publisher. If I yield the copyright that means I'd have to cite myself, right?

If it is published at all, then you need to cite it.

You might be interested: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/119710/chances-of-being-accepted-for-a-book-author-as-a-graduate-student

Publishing a book that incorporates and expands on previously published work in a journal is common in academia. You will have to cite the previous publication properly.
If you want to directly quote the previous publication or include it as chapter you may need permission to reproduce.

Much appreciated. That really helps!

If you publish your thesis as a book, yourself or with a publisher, and it is the first time that it appears as a publication, then you can copy freely without citation. This assumes that the university doesn't somehow "publish" your work. The university will probably give you advice on how to proceed.
But, once it appears, then the correct way to work is to cite the older work as needed and to quote your old work properly. The best way to think of it, once it has already appeared, is to treat it just as you would the work of any other author. If you give up copyright to a journal, then you also are limited by the length of any quotes so as to avoid copyright infringement.
Self plagiarism and copyright are separate issues and you should explore both. The first is about words (specific expression) but the latter is about the ideas, even if paraphrased. So, you need to cite even your own published ideas.
However, with respect to the topic itself, you are free to publish other things, in particular, extensions of the older work. It is the words that need to be quoted and the ideas that need to be cited.
I'll also warn you that a self published book is probably a mistake unless you are already well established. Very few people will be able to find it and it is unlikely to be cited. Working with a publisher is a better bet, but they have their own ideas about what they want to publish.
For most young academics and those hoping to become academics, publishing in journals is the best path since you get some editing/reviewing help (also with books), but the publication itself has some visibility.

Very thorough. I cannot thank you enough!


text:
"Required Reviews Completed"
"Required Reviews Completed" Is that normal that this status lasts more than one month after Major Revision?
Thank you for your contribution

Pretty much anything can happen with reviews and editors. The editor may still have questions. If they are an academic, they might be busy. Lots of things. You can ask for an update, of course.

"Required review completed" means that the reviewers who were assigned to review your paper have all submitted their reviews. The next step is that the editor who is handling your paper should take a decision based on these reviews such as "accept", "reject", "minor/major revision", or invite more reviewers.
It is a bit unusual that it takes 1 month after the reviews are completed. From my experience (as author of more than 200 papers and as editor-in-chief of some journal) it is usually more like a few days or a week but it can vary depending on the journal. There can be various reasons why there is a long delay such as the handling editor being very busy.
What you should do is to send an e-mail to the editor to let him/her know that your paper is waiting with that status for over a month. Write a polite e-mail and ask gently to check what is going on with your paper. I did that recently for a paper that was in that situation for 3 months... The editor told me that he was busy and since he was only a guest-editor he did not handle the job quickly, but after my e-mail, he processed it quickly. Don't send more than 1 e-mail because editors are usually very busy.


text:
Is sci-hub also used in places having institutional access?
Has there a study been done regarding the issue? Because I've seen a lot of people directly pasting the doi at scihub without even checking if our institution library wifi has access to the particular journal (even when they are right in the lib).

Who's downloading pirated papers?
EVERYONE

SciHub avoids having to battle with ReadCube's "interactive" PDFs.

I imagine some people might try Scihub first because it avoids the need to grapple with the various paywall and access management systems that legitimate users have to deal with. As is often the case, the pirated version works better.

I use it when the journal's website is down.

Yes. it is used by everyone.

The only study that I'm aware of is the magazine article that Orion linked to in the comments. Anecdotally, however, my experience matches yours -- even in places with institutional access, some people prefer sci-hub as it's quicker and easier. No need for a lab-specific login or password, no need to check if the journal is actually one that your institution subscribes to; just paste in the DOI and go. In fact, there are even web browser extensions that automatically append the sci-hub URL to the page you're visiting, so with a few keypresses you can be automatically forwarded to sci-hub's cache of that page.

Yes, as this 2016 case study from Utrecht University points out.
It found that 75% of Utrecht Sci-hub downloads would've been available through existing subscriptions or open-access alternatives.
This is a very interesting discovery, and thankfully today there are more PDF discovery tools available.

Welcome to Academia SE and thank you for your answer. While it is generally fine to recommend your own product as long as your disclose your affiliation, it also needs to be relevant to answer the question. Here the question was solely about the existence of the phenomenon, not how to avoid it. I have therefore reduced your question to what answers the question.

Thank you, @Wrzlprmft, I apprecite it.


text:
How do graduate research methods differ from those learned in undergraduate research?
Are the research methods learned in the undergraduate equivalent to the method in graduate school?  That is, do the grad students learn another method of research, a more advanced version of how undergrads research or is it at the grad level the quality is just higher?

You probably need to be a bit more specific about the field and what you mean by "research method". For me, undergraduate research methods involved going to the library and looking at math books on the shelves, whereas graduate research methods involved going to the library and looking at math books on the shelves (but paying more attention to the bibliographies in the books) and looking up journal volumes to photocopy papers from. This being before the internet, of course.

I'm not too clear on what might constitute undergraduate-vs.-graduate research methods.

Thank you for you comment.  I mean once you have the materials in hand is your methodology the same?  How would the same paper be graded at the grad level and undergrad level?  Is it the same paper just more detailed at the grad level?

@Nat what I mean is that is the quality of the papers like an undergrad paper on steroids?  Or is there new and more advanced techniques taught by the staff that goes beyond the undergrad level.

The biggest difference between undergraduate studies and graduate research is that graduate research very specialized; in many fields, the terms used by graduate (PhD) researchers will not be familiar to most undergraduates.
As to whether the methods are different or fundamentally the same, this is a matter of philosophy. Certainly, the methods in graduate school build on those you learn during your undergraduate, and it is necessary to be an expert on the undergraduate methods before becoming a good PhD student. Depending on the field, that may be basically enough to be competent for graduate research, or, you may have to learn entirely new ways of thinking. For example, in mathematics, graduate research requires thinking at a higher level than the detailed writing of rigorous proofs in undergraduate courses.

I enjoyed your answer.  Is it just the intensity that differs with the same research method?  By research I mean using references in papers like undergrads do.  Can an undergrad duplicate the same method as the PHD student or is there some information that has to be taught by an instructor?

@Logikal Most undergraduates cannot do graduate research without careful instruction and supervision by a supervisor. It does of course depend on the field. The hardest thing about graduate research (as opposed to undergraduate researching in writing a paper) is that you have to be good at searching the literature for related work, and knowing the area of your research very well.

By research I mean using references in papers like undergrads do. -- This sounds like a literature review; PhD students are expected to develop new knowledge. @Logikal


text:
Is it possible to do a Master's and PhD at the same time?
I am currently in my master's and about to start my research. Is it possible that I can do my research with any institute in Europe or do my Ph.D. at the same time but from different universities?

Possible, but unlikely. You would need to find the institution yourself, though.

What is the motivation behind attempting this?

In most European countries you can be considered for a PhD position only if you have already a master in a related field.
I also think that doing a master and a PhD at the same time will be too much work for one person.

"too much work for one person" - I'll add: if done properly.

That's usually the case, but I've seen people doing a PhD in Europe without a master's (in a PhD program that normally requires a master's degree). Usually this is not a good idea though; best case scenario, it's too much pressure on the PhD candidate, and the PhD is likely botched.

The other way around is a little more common. People in PhD program do a master in different field within the same university to improve job prospect in industry.

My understanding is that this is an American thing. Haven't heard or seen anyone with a European PhD doing that, and as far as I know, the structure of a typical PhD in Europe makes it very difficult to do that (if not impossible). My experience and data is limited though.

This may depend on the institutions but the expectation is that you are committed on a full time basis to your degree, and the work load is usually commensurate with this expectation.
Finding a thesis director or an academic advisor that will let you spend considerable chunks of time on a different degree is probably not so easy either.  It’s not like you can be at two places at once, so how do you propose to explain to your PhD advisor that you need to leave to work on your MSc or MA project?

I tried to so this exact same thing. I got accepted onto a PhD program whilst I was still finishing my research masters at the same university. I thought I would be able to finish my analysis and write up for my masters whilst beginning my PhD.
I found out over time that this wasn't going to be physically possible, due to the workload. I risked disrupting all the important things you need to do when starting a PhD by working all hours trying to finish the masters, and it became way too much in the end. Fortunately, there was no requirement to have a masters for my PhD program, and I dropped the masters within 4 months.
So my general advice would be aware that it is going to be extremely difficult work-wise. I have  no idea about your country/field/personality, but I would say that in my field, the fact that I dropped my masters is probably going to make zero bearings in my future career, and so in hindsight was a good choice. Good luck!


text:
How can I convey my knowledge about a field without publications in a PhD application?
I'm a CS undergrad interested in Machine Learning. During the past year, I've delved deep into a theoretical book in Machine Learning and wrote many programs to demonstrate / visualize concepts and algorithms. I hope, when I apply to a PhD program, the advisor can know about this, because it displays my dedication and passion about this field. However, I don't know how.
Any broad or specific advice will help.

Additional notes: I'm not in a desperate situation in which I have to depend on showing off the books I've read to get into a PhD -- I have relevant research experiences and recommendations.  I am currently a sophomore.

Unfortunately, saying you have read a book is not going to be sufficient.  You need a formal and recognized degree.  Even with publications, it may not be sufficient because the work could have been done by co-authors.

Put the code you wrote on github along with relevant notes, screenshots etc. Add link on your CV. Problem solved.

@Buffy I'm a sophomore in Carleton MN.

@Buffy: I almost did, but then bailed for some reason. However, in looking at it again 45 minutes later, I suppose it does have provide very specific and actionable advice.

@DaveLRenfro, just do it. I just looked at the Carleton math curriculum. It seems to be an excellent place for the OP to be studying. An independent study might even lead to a publication somewhere if nothing more than a student journal. (feel free to add that idea)

@Buffy: I almost took a 1-year visiting position there (for 2001-2002), but wound up choosing another place because the other visiting position was (at the time; budget problems 4 years later changed this) indefinitely renewable and they needed someone to teach graduate real analysis and measure theory due to a "problem" with a recent tenure-track hire (someone who decided in April not to come).

@DaveLRenfro. Hmmm. Did we just increase applications to CC by 10%? Disclaimer: I have no connection but once knew faculty there.

Given that you're a sophomore at a fairly selective liberal arts college [*], you still have plenty of time. Indeed, in two years time the work you're doing now might seem rather simplistic and quaint to you, due to your likely much greater "maturity" in relevant subject-matter knowledge by then.

[*] You mentioned this in a comment. You should probably include this information in your question, but perhaps omit the name of the college.

I recommend considering doing a more advanced independent study course with an appropriate faculty member, impress the faculty member, and ask this faculty member be one of those who will write a letter of recommendation for you when you apply to graduate programs. And also do what @Dan Romik suggests.

I think the OP here is much more focused for a 2nd year student than most. Certainly more than I was at the time and I was pretty successful later. Work hard, get noticed by faculty.

During the past year, I've delved deep into a theoretical book in Machine Learning and wrote many programs to demonstrate / visualize concepts and algorithms. I hope, when I apply to a PhD program, the advisor can know about this, because it displays me dedication and passion about this field. However, I don't know how.

This is exactly the point of a CV and cover letter!
CV
The first thing you can do is make a section of your CV on "Projects", with a brief (one-sentence) description of the programs you have written and a link to github.

Don't include trivial stuff: "implemented linear regression in MatLab" is going to hurt your application instead of help it. Less is more in this case; focus on the more interesting projects.
Do make it sound as impressive as possible; if your program was used for a research project, say that. If your project required extensive development, e.g. in terms of lines of code, feel free to include the lines of code.
I would not include reading / self-study as an item here -- delving in the theoretical book on ML is not that important on its own, as you will already say that you are interested in theoretical ML as a research topic.

Cover Letter
With a cover letter, you want to be even more selective than on the CV about what you mention. You would state your history of working on projects in theoretical machine learning and then back that up by only mentioning the most impressive thing, as an example. Of course if you acquire more research experience later, that would come first.
A note on timeline and priorities
However, it is a little early to worry about the specifics of what is on your CV and cover letter. You still have a long time before your graduate application, so what is more important right now is actually to acquire more research experience and to develop strong relationships with research mentors so you can get good rec letters. For example, summer research would be very helpful at this stage. So you could use the above advice about your CV and cover letter to put together a strong application to a summer research program.


text:
What are possible next steps after the completion of a less-than-stellar PhD?
I recently graduated with a Ph.D. in a STEM field from a reputed university in the US. I took more time than what it normally takes to finish the Ph.D.(over 6 years), partly due to some personal, familial issues I was coping with. For the same reason, my GPA during my doctoral studies remained around 3.4. Neither I had any internships during the Ph.D. Recently, I sent my first paper to a journal and I am expecting to work on a few more in the coming months. Clearly, my academic credentials are far from being stellar.
Before starting my Ph.D., I was hoping for continuing with a postdoctoral job after Ph.D. studies, followed by a career in academia in my native place.
I see the following options right now:

Ask my advisor for a position to work on some more papers
Apply for postdoctoral positions elsewhere (hindrance: lack of published papers)
Apply for industry jobs (hindrance: GPA is not good enough)

Here I am asking you all to offer me a reality check on whether options (2) and (3) are really realistic in a case similar to mine. I will also appreciate your valuable guidance on how I should build my credentials hereafter (I know, I am already late) that will help me get into good academic positions.

Why do you say GPA of 3.4 "is not good enough" for industry?

This is based on my interaction with others in my circle. Thanks for responding.

Considering the pandemic, nobody will be able to predict the outcome of your job search.  Don't take people's advice, just apply for things and see what happens.

I made some edits to make the question more generally applicable. I hope I didn't disturb the original intent.

You are putting up your own roadblocks. Your GPA isn't material if you have a doctorate. The quality of your dissertation might be. The recommendations from your advisor and others might be.
But you should at least apply to a few external places, perhaps both for post docs and for regular positions. If you go to industry it might be hard to return to academia if that is your goal.
But, in the US, at least there are a lot of institutions whose faculty doesn't focus primarily on research. If you can teach and inspire undergraduates then you can probably find a position if you try hard enough.
The conditions and requirements in your "own place" can't be judged here. And much depends on the economy at the time. And now, the pandemic also.
But don't give up before you start.

Thanks. That is encouraging.

Just a thought: It will be a bit of a struggle for me to explain to the probable recruiter the amount of time taken to finish the Ph.D. and fewer published papers.

I don't think the time is overly long. Especially if you mean past the BS degree. Mine was seven years, with some setbacks. The bind on my early career was just the economy at the time. Otherwise I'd have been fine.

Thanks. That helped a lot.

"But, in the US, at least there are a lot of institutions whose faculty doesn't focus primarily on research. If you can teach and inspire undergraduates then you can probably find a position if you try hard enough."  Today, if you lack publications, your chances are very, very poor.  This is a mostly wrong stereotype about low-ranked universities.

@AnonymousPhysicist, I was considering Liberal Arts Colleges, many of which are quite good.

I include low-ranked liberal arts college with low-ranked universities.  You still need publications to get a job.  Your viewpoint is at least a decade out of date, and I've pointed that out before.  Check CVs of recent hires.

I'm assuming adjunct teaching and short-term contracts do not count as a "position."

As Buffy points out, the premise of the question

Clearly, my academic credentials are far from being stellar.

is a bit questionable in your case, as in terms of academic credentials research quality and recommendation letters are likely the most important things, and time to completion and GPA do not really matter.
However, taken at face value, the answer to "what can I do in this situation" is probably that it depends. While you may not have the credentials for a very competitive postdoc, a starting academic position, or a competitive industry research position, you don't describe a situation with truly awful credentials, either (and completion of a PhD in the first place usually indicates an important baseline of expertise). Whether you can continue in each of the directions (1), (2), and (3) depends on some individual factors:

Ask my advisor for a position to work on some more papers

This seems like an ideal option if you have a good relationship with your advisor and are excited about continuing this research, as well as continuing in academia, but (in your advisor's estimation), your CV is not strong enough to get postdocs in your area. The plan would be to just spend some extra time to get a couple more papers so that you can get a good postdoc. (Incidentally, I'm not sure what the position would formally be, but I guess it would probably be a postdoc.)

Apply for postdoctoral positions elsewhere

It is possible this is a good option if the small publication that you have is promising enough, and if your advisor can strongly recommend you without qualifications. You would probably have to ask your advisor unambiguously if they can recommend you enough to get good positions. This is also a better option than (1) (even for a weaker postdoc) if your PhD research is not generally successful or not exciting to you anymore, and you want to switch directions to build a better resume.

Apply for industry jobs

What industries are looking for varies by field, and it also depends on if you are looking for research industry or non-research industry. In general for non-research industry, companies are less concerned about sheer number of papers and more about abstract qualities such as work ethic, ability to learn, and knowledge of the basic fundamentals of the field (rather than knowledge of esoteric research topics), so this is a strong option for many people. Note however that if your intention is to go into academia, taking this route (again assuming non-research industry) will not open any new doors, and might close some existing ones.

Thank you for the detailed reply. Really appreciate it.


text:
How to find free data sets from the internet for independent research?
I am conducting an independent research on a tourism-related topic. However, data sets on the internet require premium registration.
I was wondering: what are the best websites that offer data sets for free? Can experienced researchers give any good leads?

Consider Open Data StackExchange

This feels a bit backwards, actually. Are you seeking data before you formulate hypotheses?

@Buffy I don't think that is necessarily backwards. What would be backwards would be examining the data before formulating a hypothesis, not obtaining the data. The problem with formulating the hypothesis before finding the data is that there may be no good data testing that particular hypothesis.

The question A database of open databases? over on OpenData.SE seems like a useful resource.

First - looking for already published research projects that contain and/or utilize datasets similar to what your project requires might be a good start.
There are some researchers and research groups that wouldn't have any issues sharing their dataset with you if you provide them with a good enough reason as to why you need it and what you're going to use it for.
That being said, because of privacy and data protection laws; it greatly depends on how they acquired the data in the first place and whether or not there is personally identifiable information within the dataset. If you don't do this right, you can get into quite a lot of trouble.
There are also a number of sites that supply anything from large national and international gov datasets to the more modest limited access sites.
Most U.S. government agencies provide open access to a large portion of their data.
The FBI's web services
Data.gov
The CDC
The US Census Bureau
... the list goes on.
Kaggle is often talked about
BuzzFeed, surprisingly, provides a vast array of open information
data.world
... to name a few.
You may also wish to contact universities and college departments. The often work with massive datasets and are quite liberal when it comes to sharing.
Good luck :)

General Search Engines for Datasets

Google Dataset Search, or
DataCite Search.

(Governmental) Open Data Portals
Many governments around the world have created "open data portals" which allow free access to machine-readable datasets generated by the public sector (e.g. by national statistical institutes). Check out, for instance

the European Data Portal,
Open Data Portal Watch, or
Open Data Inception.

Data Repositories
For non-public datasets, you can always search for open "data repositories" such as Harvard Dataverse. You can find directories at:

Re3Data (Registry of Research Data Repositories),
FAIRSharing, and
Nature's Recommended Data Repositories.


text:
Choosing and training (admitted) PhD students for research
What do you expect from a PhD student before being an advisor for him? I mean do you expect from him to fully understand your papers and to be able to contribute your research from the first day or first month? Or, do you ask him to join your research group meetings and ask him to do some minor tasks in the group (collecting data, maybe some coding) while still learning about your research and other relevant topics he needs to understand the papers.
For example, assume that you are working on manifold learning and your PhD student has some experience on machine learning and has a very superficial knowledge about topology and manifold learning. Do you tell him to go and not to come back till getting some advanced math classes. Or do you rather tell him: "You did well on the general machine learning class which I taught why not come and join my group and lets have a look what we can do"?

Do you tell him to go and not to come back till getting some advanced math classes. Or do you tell him: "you did well on the general machine learning class which I taught why not come and join my group and lets have a look what we can do"?

If by "advisor" you mean "research mentor/collaborator", definitely the latter!  In my experience, strong students can jump in and learn as they go.  Even the most inexperienced student can ask useful "stupid" questions, precisely because their backgrounds aren't yet firm.  Moreover, struggling with research (either reading or thinking or coding) while taking their first topology class tends to drive the relevant topology deeper into their heads.  I don't expect most new PhD students to contribute real research results in my area (computational topology) in their first year, but I've been pleasantly surprised more than once.
On the other hand, if by "advisor" you mean "provider of research funding", my expectations are a bit higher.  Before I hire anyone as a research assistant, I need concrete evidence of research output (not just potential), preferably in the general area of the grant.
On the gripping hand, if by "advisor" you mean "guy who signs paperwork", things are different again.  Regardless of their background, I'll agree to be a student's official advisor only after we've worked together for at least a semester and they've worked with at least one other professor for at least a semester and we both agree that we're a good match.


text:
Importance of Mathematical Maturity for CS Grad School Admissions
I want to improve my competitiveness for grad school admissions. My intended area of study is AI/Machine Learning and possibly other math and statistics heavy fields of Computer Science.
My undergrad math grades were terrible, mostly C's and a few B's. Although my mathematical maturity improved tremendously after years passed, as you will guess I have no proof for this. So I decided to take a math class to show my skills to adcoms.
Now I have to choose exactly one from the two options available:

an undergrad MATH level mathematical analysis class following through walter rudin's PMA book or
a graduate EE level Random Processes class about stochastic processes following through Ross.

So from an admissions comittee member perspective, which class do you value more for judging a students mathematical maturity?

I'd go with the graduate-level class.  But just taking one class is not likely to make much difference.
What you really need is for your recommendation letters to specifically address this point.  Nobody will believe your claim that your grades do not accurately reflect your true level of mathematical maturity (although you can certainly demonstrate your mathematical maturity in your research statement).  But people will generally believe your references if they make the same claim, especially if they back up their claim with specific and credible evidence of your mathematical maturity, and more generally of your potential for research excellence.
This will only happen if you develop a closer collaborate relationship with your professors.  Don't just sit in the back of the random-processes class and get an A.  Talk with the instructor; ask cogent questions; ask about research opportunities, or at least directions for further study.  Impress them.  Give them proof.


text:
Will 2 years of non relevant work ex affect ms in cs prospects?
I have completed Bachelor's in Computer Science ( from India) with an 8.7 CGPA. During my engineering I've done a couple of relevant internships and published a couple of papers. After graduating, I've done a two years non-relevant job in a reputed bank.
Will this non-relevant work experience hurt my chances of getting admit in a good university for MS in CS? (in USA)

Look at the entry criteria for those universities that you are interested in. As Buffy said, it is different for each institutions

Every university is different, but two years shouldn't be a big problem as long as you haven't lost the knowledge you once had. But in the US, even that is less of a problem as the MS usually involves a lot of course work.
Most admissions systems are looking for evidence of success that you can demonstrate. If your record is good and you can get good letters of recommendation you will have a chance. And, the internships and papers are a plus, of course.
But note that, depending on where you apply, you may find tremendous competition for limited slots. Don't make your search for a university too narrow.


text:
Can you be a part-time (research) assistant professor in the USA?
(I am new to the USA academic system, so please apologize if this is very naive.)
In the USA, is it possible to have a full-time job (e.g., industry scientist) and also pursue a part-time Assistant Professor position in academia, with a research/group-leading focus? Have you seen that happen before? Would that be equivalent to Adjunct Professor?

You cannot lead a group while working full time. Do not do a disservice to the people you hire by pretending to lead them.

I think it would be helpful to share what field you are talking about and what you think a research assistant professor is (because adjunct professors are totally different animals that is why I am not sure what you want to achieve).

Honestly, I'm a little offended you think you can lead a research group on your weekends and evenings like we're a t-ball team.

@AzorAhai-him- I get your point, but your language sounds a little dramatic, to say the least.

@Greg: the field is computational neuroscience. People in the field are used to remote jobs and different work practices (although I kind of get the points/concerns of other folks about the need of a full-time commitment to academia).

@Elabore I am still not clear how you define "part-time research assistant profs" (do you tenure track? at a university with teaching? with supervised students?) In my experience computational STILL fields still need a full-time commitment (though maybe more flexible than experimental fields) if someone has a lab/projects/reports/teaching/communities etc. and a side-job is generally an added part-time commitment after one establishes themselves at academia. Also, you should consider what is the incentive of the university: why give a lab and position to someone who is only part-time?

@Greg: Thanks for the thoughtful answer, I agree in that computational research needs commitment. What I had in mind was something like a 20 hour/week research schedule, non-tenure-track, probably with no teaching. It may still sound like a weird practice in the US, but I have seen it in other places... I just wanted to hear other people's thoughts about how (un)realistic this would be in the US. :-)

@Elabore I guess the question is what is in it for the university. If you do not teach, do not bring grands or train students, I think you just use up resources from their point of view. If you train students and bring in grands, most probably you need at least 20 hours/week just for the grands and the students if not more. Most assistant/assoc professors I know doing research almost as a hobby or side hustle: administration and other commitments are already a full time job. Maybe what you are looking for is an (unpaid) visiting professor position?

Thanks @Greg, yours is probably the most comprehensive answer.

I won't be so encouraging as the answer of emory. I don't think it would be impossible, but I think it would be very very rare.
An Assistant Professor is on the tenure track. There are certain expectations that almost always go beyond research, since even R1 universities have a complex mission that includes teaching. Moreover, it is other faculty members (a committee) that is normally responsible for recommending (or not) tenure at the end of the probationary period. I think that a part time person would have a lot of trouble with such a committee unless their research were far beyond the expected level.
On the other hand, I know of some highly respected industry researchers who serve as adjuncts. They don't hold tenure, and serve "at will", but mostly they do it because they want to teach (not research) at the university. They don't mind the fact that the pay is abysmal.
Another issue with such a plan is that for someone hired as an industry researcher probably has some restrictions on what they can publish outside the company. These may be mild, requiring some sign off, or severe. Some industry research requires a high level of confidentiality and the company may not want any possible "slop over" into the public sphere.
A university is almost always looking for full-time long-term employees in the tenure system and would take a lot of convincing to change their minds. One reason is that such a person doesn't really depend on the university and so could leave at any time. This would be a big problem for any students advised by the person.
In some cases, for superstars from industry (or the public sector), a person might be granted tenure via a non-standard path. But they probably wouldn't be considered Assistant professors. Someone near the end of their stellar career in industry might have a foot in both camps. But I think it more likely that they would move full time to the university, and retain some part time links to industry.
It would surprise me if the US had as many as ten such available positions. And I don't know how an early career person could even convince a university to consider it.

Yes, anything and everything is possible (but some things are extremely rare and for practical purposes impossible).
I remember a former professor of mine.  He was a highly successful alumnus.  He was the CEO of a big regional corporation.  He was a member of the board of visitors.  He was a big university donor.
He was also an adjunct professor.  I thought he was a very good one.
He worked as much or as little as he liked.  He focused on the things he liked.  He had this freedom because he was self-funding.
Can you get a position like that without self-funding? I doubt it.  But if you can self-fund, there is nothing you can't do.
The test to see if you are ready for this opportunity is:  Your university has screwed up payroll and your salary was not deposited today.  Do you

Brace for the impact on your personal finances.
Not notice it
Transfer money to your team members' personal bank accounts so there is no impact on their finances.

If you did not answer #3 then you probably do not have enough money.

Everything is possible, but not everything that is possible is common or achievable to everyone.

Adjuncts don't lead teams. They barely even have time for research, if they try to make a living from adjuncting. They do the teaching grunt work the education system has outsourced to its periphery.

@WolfgangBangerth you are right that my answer was irresponsibly optimistic.  It is possible, but not for me and the vast majority people.  And the rare people for which it is possible probably have better things to do with their time and money.

@henning if you are trying to make a living from being a professor this track is not for you.  But if you can pay other people's salaries, you can lead a team.


text:
Is there such a thing as a "1.5 PhD degree"?
A famous person in my hometown claimed that she was awarded a "1.5 Ph.D. degree" by her thesis committee in a famous law school in London in the early 1980s (which was noted on her diploma, according to her memoir) -- is there really such a thing in academia?

What exactly did she claim a "1.5 PhD degree" is? It's certainly not something I've (British, although a not born until a few years after this is claimed to have happend) ever heard of.

Without proof of seeing the diploma who can say.

According to the memoir, her committee member thought that her thesis was so good (a law student with a strong background on international trade) that they decided to award her a "1.5 PhD degree." Nevertheless, on the three different versions of her Ph.D. diplomas that she showed to the public (one should be real; the other two are replacements because she lost her certificate twice for unknown reasons), there was no such note about the "1.5 Ph.D. degree." Just wondering if anyone ever heard of such a thing.

Just this in Google books, for which the reviews say it's fake: https://books.google.com/books?id=IRwIvwEACAAJ&sitesec=reviews

I assume we're talking about the Taiwan president's claim. Some discussion is provided here.

Yes, that's what I was asking about. Common senses didn't seem to apply to Taiwan president's PhD diploma controversy, such as the 1.5 PhD degree.

Just silly. Obvs. Often, what seems incorrect is incorrect. For various reasons...

No. It is difficult to prove a negative, but the idea of a "1.5 PhD" seems far-fetched on its face. Negative search results on the internet coupled with the lack of answers here over the past six months further indicate that the answer is no.
Where did this crazy idea get started? Apparently, from some claims made by the President of Taiwan. As stated in this report by a faculty member at the University of North Carolina:

[President Tsai Ing-Wen] also claimed that the committee decided not just to award her a PhD in law in 1984, but also to add the remark “she has extraordinarily strong academic background in international trade” to her PhD diploma. She went on to say that the thesis committee lionized her work as “worthy of 1.5 PhD degrees.”

There was some controversy in 2019 about whether Dr. Tsai had earned a PhD at all (in fact, the linked report concludes in the negative). However, the London School of Economics confirmed that she was "correctly awarded a PhD in Law in 1984." The LSE did not mention anything about an "extra half PhD," nor is there any proof that the faculty added any remarks to her diploma (indeed, adding remarks to a diploma is not a typical practice).
I suspect that what happened is that her advisor made the remarks when introducing her at the defense, and she simply paraphrased and/or embellished those comments. Indeed, some commenters suggest that the introductions at public defenses tend to have "gushing praise," to the point where suggesting she deserves "merely" an extra half-PhD could be considered rather faint praise. I suspect this varies culturally; no one made such remarks at my defense or at others I attended (maybe we are just slackers...).

In my experience, introductions given by advisors to their students at public defenses can be quite gushing. If anything, saying a student "did the equivalent work of 1.5 PhDs!" in that context would be damning with faint praise; you'd expect them to at least have accomplished the value of 2 PhDs... (Not that it necessarily applies here, just noting that saying something like that isn't too out of the ordinary)

@BryanKrause I agree. To my experience, "1.5 PhDs" seems much closer to barely scraping through than to an exceptional student.

No, generally speaking - not a thing.
However, in many ex-Soviet countries a post-PhD degree called Doctor of Sciences exist. This is not to be confused with German "Dr. ..." system which is equivalent to PhD. So in Russia, for PhD the requirement would be having just 2 publications (3 for social sciences) while for Doctor of Sciences it is 10 (15). There you have it, "PhD 2.0". On top of that, there are precedents of PhD dissertations being so good a Doctor of Sciences degree was awarded for them instead even though other formal requirements were not met. So there is some far-fetched existing base for that (well, probably not particularly that very) claim, after all.

In Germany there is also such a "beyond" PhD degree.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctorate#Higher_doctorate_and_post-doctoral_degrees

@Buffy yep, I just wanted to point out how naming gets confusing when doctorate elsewhere and doctorate in ex-USSR mean two different things. In the latter case, a PhD equivalent does not even have "doctor" in its name...


text:
Waiting for an interview outcome ( Research Associate Position)
I did an interview for a research associate position 10 days ago and I still don't know anything. They told me they would let me know "soon" but they also had a problem with one of the project organizers because he said he was leaving the university the day before the interview and they were trying to reorganize the position.
Even so, the interview went well and I had a good impression, they asked me a lot about my current job (which is the same position) and about how much time I needed to leave the other university and join them. However, I still don't know anything.
As on other occasions they called me quickly when five days after the interview I wrote to the HR manager and he responded by saying that there was a delay in the process but that we would be in touch very soon. Another five days have passed and I still don't know anything, I think that if they had chosen me I would already know it despite the problems they are having with the project.
What should I do? If someone has gone through something similar, could you tell me if you were notified soon or that you are delayed so it means you have not been chosen.

Ten days in academic time is but an instant. If they are in a bit of turmoil over another person leaving then it may take a bit. If you have a reason to need to know (accepting a different position, say) then ask. Otherwise a bit more patience.

You ask what you should do. Well, since you don't have a job (yet) you should keep your options open by waiting and applying for other relevant positions as you learn of them. As Buffy noted, if you have another offer with a deadline, then you can ask again and let them know your constraints.
What you shouldn't do, however, is to read too much into those two weeks of waiting time. It's still a relatively short period, and all kinds of things could be going on behind the scenes. It could be that they are waiting for another preferred candidate to get back to them, having money problems, had to deal with a family emergency, or got busy with something completely different. Or they might just be waiting for a department head or dean to sign off on your offer. But things are much too variable to know which one it is unless they outright tell you, which they currently seem unwilling to do. (Since it's HR you're talking to, that's not much of a surprise.)
Let me give you an example. For what became my first postdoc position, I had good signals already before applying. The interview also went great. Still, the time from it to offer took several months. In that case there was a policy requiring them to interview at least two people per position, which took time to schedule, especially since the would-be interviewers (co-PIs on a sizable grant) had non-overlapping travel times. Then there was also the matter of getting some signature(s) from higher up, which took some time too. It's not exactly fun waiting to hear back, not hearing anything new, while the PhD defense date grows ever closer, but sometimes that's just how it goes.

In a sane hiring process, the hiring PI would give you an informal heads-up that they plan to offer you the job, while pointing out any formal hurdles on the way (like getting the necessary signatures etc.). A PI who doesn't do that makes life for you unnecessarily difficult and, therefore, would raise some doubt.