text:
When should researchers who take part in the composition and editing of a manuscript be co-authors
I sometimes work as a ghostwriter/editor for other researchers alongside my own research, and it occurred to me that there isn't a clear framework for crediting this work. I have sometimes appeared in the acknowledgements for writing the first draft or completely rewriting the manuscript, or been a co-author on manuscripts I only commented on or did a tiny bit of data analysis for.
On the one hand, if the editor is employed to edit the language of the manuscript only, I don't think that they should be co-authors. But should they appear in the acknowledgements? Does this depend on whether they were paid specifically for the project or are a departmental editor?
On the other hand, if the editor contributes scientifically to the manuscript, perhaps they should be co-authors. However, does this depend on whether the manuscript is basic research or (for instance) an opinion paper? In this case, how do they differ from a reviewer who comments on the substantive aspects of the paper?

Related: Does significant editing of a paper with the possibility of minor contributions to its scientific content warrant co-authorship?.

This depends on the field of course, but in general it is pretty unlikely unless the "editor" has contributed to the content of the work, rather than just the wording, layout, etc.
This has been debated within the Patterns Writing Community within Computer Science. Part of the process of getting a paper accepted goes beyond editing and review. A Shepherd is assigned to each paper and the shepherd works with the authors over three or four iterations/versions of the paper to get it ready for a patterns conference. These conferences are also rather different from what most think of as conferences as they are also designed to improve the paper for publication using Writers Workshops.
Some authors seem to get so much help from their shepherds that they have asked to have the shepherd included as an author. I believe that it has happened in a few cases, but is not a general rule. The shepherd goes far beyond what an editor would do, suggesting content, for example. But even there, it hasn't become a general practice. I'm currently shepherding one paper for an upcoming conference and have made a lot of suggestions, but wouldn't expect to be a co-author, for example. I would, personally, object if a shepherd asked or demanded to be made a co-author, but that is because of the nature of the culture of the patterns community.
So, if, as you say, the editor contributes content (fact, opinion, whatever), or makes the "author" rethink things generally, then it may be appropriate. But they should be acknowledged in any case.


text:
Method of self-assessment of academic potential
I am a soon-to-be-CS-grad at a small teaching university I'm sure you haven't heard of.  I have had several internships, most of which were more development than research (teaching programming at local high schools, developing web services at local companies, etc), and would like to "try on" research before I commit myself to a post-grad program.
Is there a way to accurately assess my ability to perform in a research environment?  I do well in classes, but I am realizing that has little bearing on research ability.  I feel that I am  fairly smart, and know I put in more hours than my undergrad peers, but again, that means basically nothing.
How can I tell if I would be a productive researcher, or if I'm just suffering a minor case of DK-itis?  Is committing to it and spending years of my life the only way to discover my own hackery?

Not an answer, but I have never seen a single person who didn't greatly exaggerate they're own self assessment at that point in their lives, including myself. No matter what you decide to do, ratchet that down at least two steps to keep it accurate.

The best way to assess your ability to do research is to do research.  It's kind of like figuring out what Tiggers like to eat---there's just no substitute for trying.
Research generally requires intelligence, hard work, and creativity, but whether you have enough of them and whether those talents combine in a way that fits well with research and whether you actually enjoy deploying them in that manner is something you simply will not be able to know until you get involved in some.
One good way to do this would be by enrolling in a Master's program with a research component.  This is only a couple of years commitment, and can give you ample opportunities to try out research in your field of interest.  If you end up deciding that research is a good path for you, it will help you build credentials to get into a good Ph.D. program.  If you ended up deciding otherwise, you'll still have a nice higher degree that may get you a higher paycheck in industry.

I haven't heard of a master's program that includes research, seems like a good option.  I'll definitely look into this.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How should I cite something that I saw in a famous internet forum (not Stack Exchange)?
Let me tell you the story. I am a researcher in Mathematics and I have been the past months developing an idea that seems simple but potentially fruitful. The idea is so simple and straightforward from the current literature (at least for me) that I was even concerned that something like that was already (and) better studied. However, I was checking during some weeks and I am sure that nobody developed that idea so I began to write a paper that is now a long paper and it is in its 3rd week of preparation. I did already a lot of work.
I was in that situation when some days ago I entered in a very famous forum for math discussions  (not in Stack Exchange) and saw an image (not even a TeX document, it was a mere drawing) just an image and a post of someone describing something very similar to what I am currently studying. It is not exactly the same, though, but you can consider that my construction is some kind of particularization (the object is introduced in the post is so general that without particularize you can say very few things and I also use this in connection with other branch of mathematics in a way that seems original and novel and it is of course not mentioned in that post).
The problem came when I was checking more on the person publishing that idea (as I said just one post with a text of a few paragraphs, less than half a page) and this person seems like a bit of a crackpot in the sense that the only thing that seems to do is to stake territory out by publishing some unpolished and partial ideas in his/her blog (always really short underdeveloped ideas, never -not just one- long citable papers with actual developments and content). It is reasonable to think that if you begin to write ideas randomly at this rate at some point you will touch something interesting by mere casualty, and this is what happened, though the touch is just tangential.
Do not get me wrong: I want to cite this person as I consider that there is some value in the fact that he/she saw this and introduced it although very rudimentarily and not rigorously; the problem that I face is that I am not sure how could affect to my reputation or the acceptance of my paper to cite a crackpot-like person who could (although it is clearly not true) use this against me maybe saying that I stole his/her idea. I want to be morally okay and recognize to this person his/her novelty in that generalization, but I got there independently and actually working though the idea also and I would not like that this person could make a nasty statement about my integrity when I am really trying to be fully integral and actually recognize his/her part (tangential as I did not get ideas from the post because I reached my idea independently and hard-worked on it) in the novelty of the general case. How would you manage such a situation?
I am also thinking that citing such a source could not be well-seen by a potential journal and could lead to automatic rejection of legitimate work. I am thinking in some names of crackpots that got cited in legitimate work and then some undesirable things happened (I cannot write particular examples here because it could damage some -already damaged- reputations, but we can all think in some of the kings of viXra or GM in arXiv to fit into this non-hypothetical situation).

In the strictest sense, a citation is exactly that: A citation, not an endorsement. As a consequence, I would find it unlikely that someone would consider your paper any less just because you cite something or someone.
But then you also always have the opportunity to qualify citations. For example, you can say something like the following, which is a pretty strong endorsement of the work you are citing:

In [13], Bayer and Schmidt have previously considered this exact problem and produced an excellent algorithm to solve it. That said, while we know from their work that the algorithm has optimal complexity on average, there are also known cases where it runs for far longer than in the optimal case. This paper addresses this flaw.

Compare this with the following citation:

In preparing this work, we have spent a substantial amount of time on trying to find literature that considers the problem we address here. Very little can be found, with the possible exception of the blog post [42] that presents some ideas -- but few details and no worked out solutions -- of what we do here.

Such a statement makes it clear that you think it is related, but it's not an endorsement because you also make clear that whatever is presented there is not a full solution of the problem. This seems unobjectionable to me: Nobody can be mad at you for citing prior work this way, as you make it clear that whoever goes to that blog post will not find prior art, just ideas.

Just cite them.
You write, I consider that there is some value in the fact that he/she saw this and introduced it although very rudimentarily and not rigorously, so mention that. You also write, I am not sure how could affect to my reputation or the acceptance of my paper to cite a crackpot-like person. Why would citing a crackpot-like person matter? You say they introduced the idea, that's what you're citing. Not citing, as you go on to write, would result in allegations that I stole his/her idea.
You could perhaps place your citation in the following context: Independently of this work, the underlying idea appears to have been first recognised by X. This work goes beyond that presentation to ABC.

From some collegues I know (myself probably included), if something sketchy is cited, this makes a negative impression (probably subconsiously). I don't have a better solution as you, but I see why "citing a crackpot-like person" could matter.

@user111388 That's a problem for your colleagues. Academia demands prior work be cited. Somewhat related: Citing prior work by Nazis.

I know that prior work must be cited and that there is no better solution. I wanted to remark that "citing a crackpot-like person" is, unfortunately, a problem and not as easy as "why would citing a crackpot-like person matter", unfortunately.

I think using the right context is key in this. I'd even go so far and formulate something like: "While preparing this manuscript, the author has been made aware that a similar approach has been independently proposed in online discussions before [citation], but no attempt has been made to carry this idea out to completion." Or even explain why this idea alone is insufficient. The main point of course is to immediately convey that your paper is completely independent, i.e. as you explain in your story, you would have come up with the same paper even if there never had been a crackpot.

Obviously, as you say yourself, you have to cite it. And I see your problem - your paper will be reviwed and read by humans, who may have their biases. One of them could be "OP cites a paper from this nationwide-known crackpot, so the paper cannot be serious". I've unfortunately encountered biases among academics in many ways (eg that people from certain nations do not produce valueable research) and I don't think anybody is completely free from them (which may sometimes good - otherwise people would have to read many useless crackpot papers which proved major theorems).
In your case, I have only two advices:
(1) Write your paper as professional as possibly be. Sometimes people are sloppy with proofs and this is widely accepted (although I read yesterday on Stack Exchange the opinion "one small typo should imply paper rejected" ) - here you should not be sloppy with proofs, layout, grammar etc. The people who read this should get the impression that it is really professional and that you are not a crackpot. Ask your collegues for their opinion. Prove in your paper that ehat the crackpot says really makes sense.
(1b) If at all possible, cite many "serious" papers. Of course, not irrelevant ones. But if you have thw choice between "putting some more results to the paper and thereby citing serious papers" or "keeping those results for a follow-up paper", choose the first option. I repeat: You should not cite papers just to cite them, but because you need them. And of course, you should not make the paper far too long just to cite and include results...I think you get my idea.
(2) Talk to other people. My impression is that "unexpected" things like "I found gold in some crackpot's work" are often better told orally than in paper. If you go to conferences and give a talk, mention the funny story that you found this result in some unexpected place. If you have dinner with collegues, tell them this funny story. Maybe this will make them look together at the result with you (if it is interesting for them), maybe they will also cite it if they need it. Anyway, when the community sees the paper, chances are good that people already know about this results and will not be surprised and possibly even checked the crackpot paper because they found this story so interesting.

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


text:
How to modify a final draft to reflect that a conjecture in its preprint was refuted?
I am currently in the process of trying to publish a mathematics paper. A draft of this paper had been posted on arxiv, which contained an interesting conjecture.
In the intervening time, this conjecture has been refuted by another group of authors. I am not sure how I should edit my paper to reflect this.
One option that is out of the question is to simply delete the conjecture from the paper. The problem with this is that the latter paper has cited this conjecture as its motivation. If I removed the conjecture, I would be pulling the legs out from the subsequent paper.
What I am leaning toward is to state something along the lines of "In an earlier draft, we had made the following conjecture:" and then include some discussion and citations about how the conjecture has subsequently been refuted.
Note that most of my paper is unaffected by this refutation, and in fact I still believe that the conjecture could hold for the special case I need
Is there a better way of handling this situation?

AFAIK, arxiv stores every version as separate paper. So your original work is more or less cast in stone and cited already, you can only follow-up

If you can prove or at least make a convincing case for the conjecture in the special case you need, I'd do the following:

Describe the conjecture in the special case
Prove or make the convincing case in the special case
Write "in a previous draft, we expected this conjecture to hold generally. However, it has subsequently been shown ..."

If you can't or don't want to argue for the conjecture in your special case, then your formulation works as well.

When you believe, that your special case still holds, you can keep the conjecture and mention that you believe it holds for your special case and that it does not hold in the general case with a citation of the other paper.

We conjecture X for all cases in which Y holds. Note that X does not hold in the general case, as shown by Name [42].

So the other paper even improves on the revision of your paper and you can acknowledge this by adding this information and the citation. It would be way more complicated when the conjecture would be totally wrong. But when it is correct for a special case, both papers are useful.

One option that is out of the question is to simply delete the conjecture from the paper. The problem with this is that the latter paper has cited this conjecture as its motivation. If I removed the conjecture, I would be pulling the legs out from the subsequent paper.

This isn't pulling the legs out, since the subsequent paper cites a published arxiv draft. Indeed, Tyszka published 152 drafts (of one work) over almost six years and any version can be cited.

What I am leaning toward is to state something along the lines of "In an earlier draft, we had made the following conjecture:" and then include some discussion and citations about how the conjecture has subsequently been refuted.

That's certainly a nice touch.

I still believe that the conjecture could hold for the special case I need

Prove this result, at least partially.

“Prove this result.”  Presumably the OP has already thought seriously about this and can’t yet see how, otherwise they would have included it as a theorem not a conjecture.

@PLL The OP believes the conjecture holds for a special case, even though the conjecture has been disproved in the general case. So, I presume the OP has a significant basis for their belief. At the very least, they can surely prove part of the special case, thereby reducing the leap of faith required to accept it.

I believe it COULD hold for the special case (i.e. it is still a relevant, interesting, and open, conjecture). I have no evidence that it DOES hold.

@DavidHarris Without any evidence, I personally wouldn't call it a conjecture. But, the definition of conjecture is rather vague, so your usage is correct. I tried searching for a mathematician's definition: I couldn't find one. (I did stumble upon Guido's book  of conjectures, which is quite nice.)

@user2768: I’d say mathematicians typically use conjecture for a statement we have some heuristic evidence of — e.g. various particular cases we know hold, or perhaps some numerical evidence — but no proof, and usually not even anything we’d call a partial proof, at the point where we first present it as a conjecture (since if we had a partial proof, we’d usually then isolate what was missing to complete it and present that statement as the conjecture instead).

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


text:
Semi-administrative position in academic/research setting after finishing Ph.D. and postdoc(s)
I would like to know what are the scopes for semi-administrative positions like research coordinator, scientific coordinator, program manager or something similar that are available for someone with PhD and postdoctoral experience. I have definitely seen LinkedIn profiles where they completed a postdoc in certain universities in France, it was 4th or 5th year after their PhD in STEM field (his are was astronomy and data analysis), and then got a senior project manager (not even Junior manager) in Ireland.
I have some questions regarding this type of positions:

What is the nature of the job outside their research?
What prerequisites are needed to get these jobs apart from PhD+postdoc? Is it just university research in PhD+postdoc? Or something more?

Maybe there was no answer to this question, yet, because there is no clear answer. The nature of such positions vary, but in most cases, administrative maanging of larger projects and coordination of reasearchers or research groups is involved. In fact, many principal investigators are looking for someone, who just manages the project in a way that they don't have to dig into details or do much paperwork etc.
You'll learn a lot about orgnization, lateral leadership, politics, funding, administration; you'll work with motivated PhD students; but you won't do too much research by yourself and you will have to deal with the ugly parts of the job.
After a few years, you will be able to decide whether a full professorship is something for you or not.
To get such a job, you'll have to show solid scientific performance, and it is very helpful if you wrote or assisted in writing research grand applications or led smaller teams.

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


text:
Why do the rankings from U.S. News & World Report list some schools twice?
The 2014 rankings of US statistics doctoral programs compiled by the U.S. News & World Report lists a few of the schools twice. I assume that the rankings are probably for different types of statistics programs (Harvard for example has both a statistics department but also a very good School of Public Health, which I'm sure has a biostatistics program), but the methodology section does not address this problem and I am doing research which requires analysis of this list.
Question:  Why are some schools listed twice in the rankings?
I cannot request this information from U.S. News & World Report directly because they only release this information to university officials.

If you click on a school's name, you can see the rankings of its various departments, including both Statistics and Biostatistics if applicable (example). This is pretty inconvenient, as it requires going through the schools one-by-one, but I'm not sure there's a better way to get that information.
There is also a post on gradcafe separating the rankings, though I'm not sure if it includes the entire list.


text:
Why do people say that elite schools are inflating grades?
Ivy League students had 4.0 GPA in average at high school, but their average college GPA is 3.45. A student from a random school had 3.3 from their high school, and then 3.3 exiting GPA from the random university.
Simple math tells us that which school is grade deflating. But why people always say that Ivies are grade inflating?

Yes, there are some schools whose students had an average GPA of 3.8-ish from high school, but then 3.0-ish while exiting. But those extremely grade-deflating schools are extremely rare. I can only come up two names out of my head.

One data point does not a point make.

A 3.5 from Harvard means something very different from a 3.5 from the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople.

@XanderHenderson Personal data point: I graduated high school with a 4.2 and was in the bottom half of my incoming college class.

The first and last sentences of this post are directly contradictory to each other it seems. Which one do you believe?

Voting to close as unclear.  Dodo, it's not enough to say, "People say that such-and-so" -- you should give at least one quotation and link as illustration.

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what the question is. “Grade inflation” doesn’t mean that you get a higher grade going to an elite university than a local public school, or that you got a higher grade in college then you did in high school. That won’t be true for the vast majority of students. Grade inflation means that students at the University of Overly Large Balloons today are getting higher marks for equivalent work to students at the University of Overly Large Baloons in 2000.
See the chart at the top of this page.
————————————————————
I also wanted to address this line:

Yes, there are some schools whose students had an average GPA of 3.8-ish from High school, but then 3.0-ish while exiting. But those grade-deflating schools are extremely rare. I can only come up two names out of my head.

This is not close to true. Virtually every elite university in the US is an example of such a school. Out of every Ivy League school, the University of Chicago, MIT, and I’m sure many more (stopping because I’m bored, but feel free to google “Median GPA UNIVERSITY” for more data points) we see there are TWO universities out of 10 with median high school GPAs below 4.0. In both cases it was 3.9. The vast majority of students at those schools are not graduating with grades similar to what they had in high school.
This isn’t a phenomenon restricted to elite private schools either. 94% of UVA students got a 3.75+, the median at UCLA is 4.39, and the median at Georgia Tech is 4.03.
Even at schools where the median isn’t so high, many students have a very high high school GPA. For example, 25% of UIUC students had a 3.89 or higher.

It’s not the same students now as in the past.  People often compare to grades in the 60s and 70s, but admission to these schools were way way less competitive then.  People getting a “gentrleman’s C” then just wouldn’t get in now.  The number of students going to college has gone up and up, and more top students apply country-wide than in the past.

@NoahSnyder Yes, I know there are mitigating factors in these analyses. I don't feel like that has a huge amount of baring on the question though. The question is "why do people say X," not "is X true."

@NoahSnyder: Highly skeptical; citation needed. Unclear if "less competitive" means higher acceptance rates, which may not mean anything if large numbers of unskilled applicants show up later. Everyone I know in academia seems painfully aware that entry standards are being lowered in competition for fewer students, post-recession. Example: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/27/business/dealbook/study-cites-lower-standards-in-law-school-admissions.html

And major institutions (CUNY, CSU) have dropped even 8th-grade algebra skills as a requirement for degrees in the last year, because the vast majority of students can't succeed at it even after multiple remediation attempts. To my knowledge, that was never the case in the past.

Question was about Ivy League, not CUNY.

@NoahSnyder: Good job avoiding the major point and the required citation.


text:
Salary for math professors at 4-year liberal arts colleges?
I am working on the latter half of my PhD in mathematics at a mid-ranked university, and I am beginning to think about what kind of career I would like to have after I graduate. I am leaning towards a tenure track job at a more teaching oriented liberal arts college. I am more into the teaching aspect of the job rather than the research aspect of the job. I prefer living the quiet life in a smaller size town, and having fewer students that I can interact with rather than larger classes where I don't get much interaction with students.
However, salary is important to me and when I search online "liberal arts college assistant professor salary" I get conflicting, and some downright scary search results.
Examples:

Salary genius says:

The average yearly salary for Liberal Arts College Professor is $36,550. If you are just beginning to work a new job as a Liberal Arts College Professor, you could expect a starting pay rate of $30,100 annually.

Salary.com says:

How much does a Asst. Professor - Liberal Arts make? The median annual Asst. Professor - Liberal Arts salary is $56,978, as of January 30, 2018, with a range usually between $44,890-$69,846, however this can vary widely depending on a variety of factors.

Wikipedia says:

Assistant Professor:
  $45,927 (Lowest Median By Field)
$81,005  (Highest Median By Field)
$58,662 (Overall Median)

I am okay with Salary.com's numbers and Wikipedia's. I know that these numbers go up as you get promoted to associate professor and full professor, and I think that somewhere in the neighborhood of $50,000+ is a pretty decent starting 9 month salary. But Salary Genius' cited numbers, to me, are an absolute joke for the qualifications required for the job and the amount of time we have put into getting those qualifications.
Question: I am hoping for some responses about what kind of salary I will likely be getting if I get a tenure track job at a smaller liberal arts college in, say, a rural town. What are the actual numbers?
Hopefully I can hear from someone who actually has experience working at these type of institutions.

https://data.chronicle.com/

In many cases, the salary of faculty at public institutions is a matter of public record and you can look up the information on the internet.  Most "liberal arts colleges" are private institutions, but there are lots of public institutions that are similar in size and similar in offering only undergraduate degrees.

Is this for jobs in the US?

For terminology, I think that most colleges in the US are liberal arts schools.  But as used above, is it meant as a contrast to research institutions?  This is, is this question about the salary for a math teacher who doesn't have grad students and whatnot?

For what it's worth, the Salary genius values would be about correct for the mid 1990s in the U.S., but definitely not now.

Reading my comment again 9 hours later, it occurs to me that what I said would be correct IF "Liberal Arts College Professor" means "Liberal Arts College Assistant Professor". But probably not for "Professor" unspecified, unless the sample that the average is calculated for consists largely of Assistant Professors.

The AMS does a salary survey with lots of information about math faculty pay by type of school and rank.  New hires at schools that only offer bachelors degrees almost all make between 40K-80K with the most common band being 50K-60K.

The survey is very useful but it doesn't dive into the data to give details about how salaries vary.  There is a lot of variation between salaries at public and private institutions (salaries are often higher at private institutions) and by region.  Salaries can be higher in areas with high cost of living, but you might well find that a lower salary in a low cost of living area would be preferable.

Thanks Noah, this is helpful. Unfortunately, as Brian Borchers pointed out it doesn't have a good breakdown by region, but it does give me a sense of how much assistant professors are making.

I am a professor of mathematics at a small liberal arts college (SLAC) in Ohio, got my PhD at a SLAC in Connecticut (2700 undergrads, 18 math PhD students), and went to undergrad at a SLAC in Maine. The numbers cited in the OP are lower than the reality at SLACs. Probably they are being brought down by visiting professors (who make slightly less than tenure track professors) and adjuncts (who are paid by the course, a whole lot less than tenure track professors).
Salary is affected by a lot of things, including cost of living, the university's endowment, the university's fame/prestige/rank, and potentially your department (e.g., at some places, a professor of computer science makes more than a professor of literature). When I was hired as a math professor, my salary was higher than all the numbers in the OP except the "highest median by field." By my last year as an assistant professor (when I went for tenure) I was higher than that number too. While SLACs start you at a lower salary than a research institution, your salary grows faster (at least, at a competitive SLAC with a strong endowment). Because salary data from Ohio State University is public, and it's the same city so same cost of living, I checked to compare my salary with folks from there. I see some hired around the same year as I was, and they started off maybe 30% higher (but, always after several years of postdocs, whereas I went straight from PhD into tenure track job), but I overtook them after about 8 years, due to the difference in annual pay raises.
Much more important than the salary, however, is actually wanting the job. As a PhD mathematician, you can make a LOT more than professors at either a SLAC or an R1, if salary is the main concern. The OP is right to focus on the essential things, like wanting to be at a highly relational place, interacting with undergraduates, small classes, more focus on teaching than research, etc. If that's the main concern, then the only essential question about salary is: is this salary enough to live on comfortably in this community? Of course, "comfort" is relative. Most professors at a SLAC have a large enough salary to eventually buy a house, put away money for retirement (TIAA-Cref is awesome), support a family with kids, and retire at 65 years old if they want to.
Lastly, it's worth looking carefully at the other benefits. For example, many SLACs offer a tuition waiver for children of professors, or reduced tuition at other SLACs around the country. Many put money into your retirement every year (in my case, in addition to my salary, the university puts in 10% of the value of my salary into a retirement account; no matching needed). Many offer parental leave. If salary is a big concern, you can always do consulting during the summer months to get more money in the bank. Don't let concerns about the salary prevent you from applying!


text:
What graduation gown should a PhD-holder wear when later receiving a Master's in another field?
I already have a PhD, but now I'm graduating with a Master's in another field from another university.
Question:  What academic robes do I wear?
I know it is normal to wear the regalia from the highest award but that seems strange in this case.

@NajibIdrissi Folks don't dress up where you're from?  Here in the US, it's traditional for everyone to pretend to be a wizard.  We get long robes, fancy hats - the works!

@Nat Also in my country no one dresses up (luckily). Yes, most students dress more elegantly with respect to an ordinary day, but that's all, and jeans and t-shirt are fine too.

It varies from university to university. In Cambridge, for example, you wear the academic dress of the highest Cambridge degree you hold, if you do already hold one, but if you are not already a Cambridge graduate you wear the garb appropriate to the degree that is about to be conferred on you. So, in a case such as yours, suppose you hold a PhD from London and are about to take a Cambridge master's degree, you would wear the Cambridge gown and hood.

Thank you. That is what I thought. I will ask the second university for their protocols, however.

You should probably contact your graduate school to ask them.  Ceremonial matters like this have some tradition behind them, so it'd seem to depend on what traditions your school cares about.
And if they don't care, then I suppose that you'd get to decide!  Then it's really a matter of personal preference.


text:
What are the best avenues for employment for a new Doctor of Management Information Systems Technology?
I will have my degree soon. I am waiting for QRF approval and preparing for my Oral Defense. Suddenly I feel a bit unsure about how I will make this degree pay for itself. I am not sure that my Doctorate will get me an advancement with my current employer and I want to have a path for applying what I have learned. I do like the research aspect of the title but I want to do more.
What are the best avenues for employment for a new Doctor of Management Information Systems Technology, for example, teaching or doing research for a university?

Since this is tagged [tag:postdocs], are you specifically looking for a postdoc in your field?  Or are you more broadly asking for career pathways?

I am asking for career pathways.

At SE.Academia, job-hunting isn't typically considered on-topic unless you're specifically asking about hunting for academic jobs, e.g. as a post-doc, instructor, researcher, or professor.  If you edit this question to that more restricted set of career pathways, it might be on-topic (dunno about the "shopping question" constraint).  But if you're more interested in private-sector jobs, this might be on-topic at SE.Workplace.

Thank you, now I get how this works. I will edit the question as I am interested in the academic side as well. For example, I would not mind teaching.


text:
Teaching visual tools for visually impaired students?
I am teaching a module related to data visualization. Thus, of course, most of the tools are visual tools, that is, tools for visualizing summaries of the data.
I have visually impaired students, which makes it really difficult to teach them these tools, as it involves two- and three-dimensional plots and graphs.
Creating an audio substitute for these is very complicated, but of course it is essential to make the teaching material available.
What are the main rules for making this kind of material accessible?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78668/teaching-a-blind-student-matlab-programming/78669#78669

@BrianTompsett-汤莱恩 Thanks, very interesting points.

This may be of interest: http://iris.grapheel.com/

In what environment are you working? Do you have a disabilities office that could support you in this?

@AzorAhai--hehim All teaching is online due to the pandemic. There is a disabilities department, but they are overwhelmed and not really attending particular issues.

@astronat Interesting, I wonder how fast can you get a reply.

@datavis The reason I ask is because you could unfortunately end up putting in a lot of time and doing a bad job (and then all that time would be wasted). When do classes start for you?

@AzorAhai--hehim Very good points. They start in September, so there is time to plan ahead. It is going to be a challenging semester ...

I doubt there is a good answer to this question.

There are physical devices that permit the blind to feel three dimensional graphs. Do a search for something like "haptic graphing device for visually impaired" to see some of the possibilities. They aren't cheap, of course. One of the most interesting, I think, is one designed at Stanford University.
A simpler Braille printer might be adapted to make 2-D graphs, but may not work for 3-D.
Three Dimensional printers are a possibility provided that you have enough preparation time for creation of the models. They tend to be rather slow.
There are also haptic feedback gloves that might be adapted.

Thanks, those are useful suggestions.


text:
A university's odd rule that inevitably affects students' final grades
My university had a quite strange rule that set an upper limit 78 on the average grades for each course. To be more specific, even if you're the number one student in your school, your GPA will still be lower than many other applicants who are applying for grad schools.
My question is "Should I address this problem in my Statement of Purpose?"
P.S. the official transcript does mention this rule, but I'm afraid that admission offices will overlook these tiny tiny texts.

Which discipline did you do your undergraduate studies in? It might just be me, but a 78% course/class average seems fairly reasonable, and I definitely wouldn't consider it unusually low (but my experience is with studying engineering in Canada). Does this rule make any requirements about the standard deviation or distribution of grades? If the class average is 78%, wouldn't at least a couple of the best students have a final grade >90%? This grading distribution really doesn't seem that atypical to me.

@RobertBahensky I studied Interaction Design. The particular rule was jettisoned roughly in my 3rd semester in college; since then, I started getting grades higher than 85. Unfortunately, my transcript wouldn't rank any student because of suicide problems in my country. Thus, the only way to evaluate students is probably through GPA, and it means that my first 3 semesters will drag me down a bit as I would never get an A in U.S. grading system (I suppose).

Have other students from your university gone on to grad schools in the US? If so, there are certainly some institutions that understand the grading system and know how to take it into account.

I am assuming this is US. I want to suggest an alternative. Kindly ask your references to add the situation in their recommendations. I don't think Bill Nace's suggestion is exactly the right one, simple because of this answer. From questions regarding SOPs and from some personal experience I understand that at least some admission bodies in US universities do:

only glance over SoPs
Eliminate a significant (sometimes even more than half) of the applicants based on numbers (gpa, gre etc.) without even looking at anything in the application.

Now, nothing you can do right now that can help you in the second part except for scoring really high on your standardized tests. Even that won't be that useful as anonymous physicist points out in the comments. I heard people joking about getting someone to read your application as being the hardest part of an application (in US). You will need to somehow manage that. Probably good portion of your applications will end before a pair of eyes can lay on it. When, if, you get over that stage, 1 applies. They will read your recommendations more carefully than your SoP almost always.
Also, I would strongly suggest looking into graduate programs in other countries. I had much better experiences with European ones. They were always free and much easier to apply (in my case). Instead of dumping another 100 hours to a menial test, I reckon you can find and apply to 20-30 suitable master's programs in Europe.

"Now, nothing you can do right now that can help you in the second part except for scoring really high on your standardized tests."  This research claims that is a myth.  https://twitter.com/nickyoungper/status/1286049764535144449

@AnonymousPhysicist very good point. I was not trying to suggest this was a good course of action. I actually was trying to imply only possible course of action is not a very fruitful one.

Yes, mention it, but don't make a big deal out of it.  A single sentence like

"With regards to my transcript, please note that the lower averages in
my first three semesters were due to the University's 78% rule, that is fully
described elsewhere on the transcript."

Any more than that will look like you are whining or trying to make excuses.
But, this statement can be very helpful to those who have to read your application package.
Source: I've read many application packages.

If your class rank is good (first?) but your GPA is low, simply highlight your class rank in your application.  If your university does not disclose your class rank, then this won't work.
Admissions committees know that grading standards vary between institutions.  Just give the committee context for your achievements.  Compare your performance to the average.

this also only applies if you are ranking good. I personally don't believe the rankings are a good measure. They can be wildly misleading (in my personal experience). If you have any departmental awards they may help too.

Could you get a letter from your university that such a rule existed? I believe they should definitely give you that. You can attach this letter with your applications.
And if it is possible for your teachers to evaluate your grades without that rule and write another letter for you independently, then it would be fantastic. I doubt though, that this is possible. You could always try.
And the other suggestions that you could ask your referees to write it in their letters will work too.
Do not worry too much about it. Grades is just one aspect which the admission committee considers. There are many other parameters which are considered.
By the way, the earlier rule was silly. I wonder who came up with it. I once had same problem in high school. I got angry and complained to the school principal. I was able to get it overturned as I lost the first rank in my class due to such a rule.
Best of luck!


text:
Would it be rude to put my professor's name in for a reference when they haven't responded yet?
I asked this professor for a recommendation letter last admissions season, and got a yes immediately and was very good about sending in letters.
This year it's much much harder to get a hold of them, and haven't responded to my recommendation letter email that I sent yesterday (I only sent it late this time because I figured they'd say yes) and my first deadlines are tomorrow. Would it be rude to just put the name in anyway, assuming they don't reply tomorrow? They've done it before so I figure it wouldn't be a bother for them to just re-send letters, but I'm worried it would be rude. But my future is at stake here.
Update: It ended up working out; thanks for your help.

You should never trust that someone will definitely answer your email within a day, even though it is common courtesy or if you know the professor well, especially when your request is important. Also, it is unrealistic to expect the professor to craft/modify a recommendation letter in just one day. This is a major miscalculation on your part. However, some programs are not strict sticklers for deadlines, so if you are lucky...

Why can't you use the letter he had written previously? Is the programme/job you are applying for too important?

@ahorn because Datsura having a copy of the letter to use would violate the understanding and trust that a reference letter is the referee's own words and has been kept confidential. The professor can re-use the letter, sure – but Datsura should never even see it.

You should absolutely NEVER list somebody as a recommendation without permission. Its asking for trouble.  Your deadline issue is YOUR issue, not your recommenders.  If time is critical, you should have mentioned that in your earlier email.  You should consider a followup email, letting him know that time is critical, or even stop by is office or call.

+1. On deadlines – only the OP's problem because the timeframe is very short (~few days). If a deadline is more than about a week away, and the professor agrees to write the letter, then it's the professor's responsibility to get it done in time (perhaps with a reminder or two from the student).

@Moriarty  I'm betting the student is talking about the deadline to complete the application,  and the deadline to submit the letter is later --  but absolutely, if ou commit to something with career ramifications for someone else, that's a deadline never to be missed.

The most scathing reaction I ever gave to a reference check phone call was "I'm terribly sorry, but Jim did not ask my permission to use him as a reference."  I did not elaborate and the caller ended the call quickly.
There are two reasons why the professor is not being as good about providing a reference as last year:
(1) They meant to, but haven't gotten around to it.
(2) Their opinion of you has changed and they have been putting off the unpleasant task of declining the request.
Do not use someone for a reference without their permission.

I think the way this will be perceived comes down to the individual professor.
I've had a student put me down as a reference without asking, and a potential employer call me to ask about him. I didn't find it particularly rude, just a bit surprising. I was also not as well prepared as I could have been, which might have been beneficial in the conversation with the recruiter. It was also lucky that I was available to talk when I received the call. To be honest I was actually happy that the student trusted me enough to put me down as a reference. I'm not a professor, though -- maybe it makes a difference.


text:
How to write a good essay for phD application?
I have completed my Bachelors of Engineering and I now want to purse my PhD in Computer Science. I have written essays for my Masters application before and I am familiar with the context of those essays. How different are they from PhD application essays? And how should I proceed with writing my PhD application essay?

I suggest browsing the [tag:statement-of-purpose] tag.

First, I would recommend reading some of the requirements from schools you intend on applying to. Most schools have very similar requirements, but it may be worth looking at the schools that you are most interested in attending before you get started (page requirements, etc. can deviate from school to school).
Since you are applying to PhD programs you will want to be addressing the questions of "What makes you an individual well suited to research in computer science?" and "Why should institution X accept you?"-- this will involve talking about your past achievements, what made you want to pursue a PhD in computer science, what type of research you want to do, etc.
As far as definitive strategy goes, there are numerous routes you can go (I will leave a couple of links at the end of this post). One that I would recommend is to write the majority of the statement such that it can be sent to any institution (i.e., is not institution specific). Set it up (as far as continuity goes) so that your last paragraph is why you want to attend institution X. This way you will only need to re-write the last paragraph for each application you send out.
Here are some helpful links I found:
Sample Statement for MIT
A post on SoP w/ Example
An article with some examples
Hope that helps!


text:
What are the differences between these levels of study?
I'm Brazilian and am currently trying to apply to this scholarship in New Zealand. However, when asked which "level of study" I will apply for, I see the following list:

PhD
Masters course
Masters thesis
Post-Graduate Diploma
Post-Graduate Certificate

I only understand what a PhD is. To me, both masters sound like the same thing (in Brazil we have a masters course that you conclude when you present the thesis), and I haven't the faintest idea of what is the difference between a post-graduate diploma and a certificate.
So what's the difference between these four categories and are they known as such throughout every English speaking country or are they specific terms used only in NZ?
(also I'm not sure which tags to use here, so correct me if necessary)

In the specific context you're asking about these refer to qualifications at different levels of the New Zealand Qualifications Framework, which are documented in detail (PDF). The short answer, though, is to pick the name of the qualification that matches what you're planning to enrol in. The institution will list it with one of those terms specifically; if you don't know what you're going to enrol in yet, the first thing to do is figure that out.

The two "Postgraduate X" qualifications are the least widespread terms and do have some New Zealand-specific subtleties in terms of how they're offered. A Postgraduate Certificate requires 60 credits at level 8, and represents half a year of full-time tertiary study at an advanced level. A Postgraduate Diploma is 120 credits of same, representing a full year. These are defined on pages 17 & 18. Note that these are different (at a higher level) than the similarly-named "Graduate Certificate/Diploma" qualifications.
Both Certificates and Diplomas can be separate qualifications that you enrol in deliberately, commonly at polytechnics and non-degree-granting institutions. They're also often exit points for people who leave part-way through a longer qualification. These will require an undergraduate degree as prerequisite.

A Master's Degree by coursework (which ought to be what the form says, but "Masters course" is a plausible error) is:

at least 120 to
  240 credits and is achieved through coursework consisting of courses, project work
  and research in varying combinations. It may build on undergraduate study in the
  same academic field, or it may build on the more generic graduate attributes of
  an undergraduate degree in other fields, or in some cases on relevant professional
  experience

There is no thesis in a coursework Master's. 240 credits is two years of full-time study.
A Master's degree not further specified (in context here, with "by coursework" as a separate category) is either:

a 90- to 120-point thesis following a postgraduate diploma or Honours degree (one year); or
a 240-point qualification involving both coursework and a thesis, essentially the postgraduate diploma immediately followed by the thesis (two years, commonly officially "MSc part 1" and "MSc part 2").

All forms of Master's degree are defined on page 18.

A PhD is a 360-credit thesis, representing three years of full-time research (pages 20-21). It will generally require a Master's or Honours degree as prerequisite.
All of these are different qualifications that will be offered specifically by universities. You should pick the one that matches what you're planning to enrol in, which will be named directly as one of these categories.

Did you mean "masters thesis" when you talked about the two options of either 90- to 120-points thesis or the 240-point qualification?

Yes. I'm not sure what other kind of thesis they could be. They are theses in Master's degrees.

I think I don't understand your question. In both of the thesis cases, the thesis is what makes it a Master's degree; the distinction is whether the relevant coursework has already been completed as part of another qualification or not.

Oh, I see now. I'm sorry, I was confused.

A Phd is a three or four year degree awarded following research and a thesis.
A Masters course is a taught postgraduate degree usually of one or two years duration.
A Masters thesis is a research degree of one or two years duration awarded following research and a thesis.
A Post-Graduate Diploma is usually two-thirds of a taught masters and is awarded to someone who did the examination component but did not complete a dissertation.
A Post-graduate Certificate is usually one-third of a taught masters and is awarded to someone who left after completing half of the course credits.

These terms would be used in areas based on the British University system, but all have analogues in the Bologna Process.

They are asking how long you want to stay and what type of degree you plan to pursue.
You probably have a lot of thinking to do about these questions before you apply: it looks like there is a lot of information and resources on that website to help you, and if you are unclear on anything I would suggest contacting them for more information.
My assumption, though it isn't immediately clear, is that there would be a separate application process for the institution you will actually be visiting, though I could be wrong and maybe there is just a very streamlined process.
These are all fairly standard terms, the last two are the only ones that seem atypical to me, but it is clear they are completed after a bachelors but are less than a masters.
A PhD is a doctoral degree, doutorado. My assumption, though it might be wrong, is that "masters course" means you are coming just to take a course, "masters thesis" means you plan to do your research for your masters in NZ.
(edit: I'll keep this answer here for now, but Brian Thompsett's answer has a much better clarification of the specific meanings of each)


text:
Does a teaching assistant position improve your PhD application?
I am currently working on a Master's degree in mathematics and was recently offered a teaching assistant position for a graduate-level course that covers material I am really comfortable with.
My problem is that finding time to study is really limited and I am only considering this job if it would really help my future applications for a Ph.D. in mathematics, and would be a good point to have on my CV. Along with my courses, I am also working on my thesis and I don't want the quality of my work to be affected.
What are your experiences from the committee/applicant perspective? Do people usually have some teaching experience before going into a Ph.D.?
I understand that this might be a field-oriented question but all points of view are welcome.
Edit: This is about European applications for math Ph.D. programs.

Is this about US applications or elsewhere?

I edited my post. It's about EU applications. Thanks for bringing this up.

I don't think there can be a general answer to this. Ways to admit PhD students can be quite heterogeneous, also within the EU. Particularly there are situations in which it is mainly up to the supervisor to decide (as long as the candidate fulfills certain minimum requirements), and other situations in which a commission decides this, and this can happen according to fixed list of criteria, a points system with points assigned to different aspects of the application before applications have been seen, but also more freely according to the opinions of the people who decide.
Furthermore there are certain paid positions that are meant to enable the holder to do a PhD (and also come with the opportunity to do a PhD in the same place) but involve other duties such as teaching, and experience in teaching may be explicitly desirable for such positions.
I suspect that more often than not this kind of experience will not help or not help much (probably it still is an advantage if two candidates look otherwise equally strong), but there are exceptions, and they may not be super-rare. It for sure won't hurt your CV, but your concern may be valid that it may be bad to lose valuable time to work on your project and maybe even give a try publishing it.
Personally I do think that it'd be a valuable experience though (and it would help to some extent if I could personally decide to admit PhD students).


text:
Difference between MAst, MSc, how far I can go with an MPhil
For context, I'm currently an I.T. bachelor's student who has an interest in mathematics and is planning for higher education in math. After doing some research online, I realised that a PhD isn't something you can tick off a checklist for your education and that I could do a master's before deciding whether or not I should go for a PhD.

What's the difference between MAst and MSc?
I noticed some universities don't offer an MSc and that Oxford/Cambridge offers an MAst degree, how do the two compare? There is also MPhil I came across which is leans towards the research side.

If I chose MPhil but didn't go for a PhD, how far can I go with the degree?
This of course means in the field of mathematics and not going back to a corporate IT job.

Or alternatively should I just keep math as a hobby and continue with a career in IT?

I assume this is about UK education. Correct?

I doubt that IT gives a good start for a graduate degree in math, actually.

@Buffy Yes, the question was related to UK education, I am aware of the difference and am learning math by myself with reference to the syllabus taught in a BSc degree over here in India

This question could use more focus: "In my situation, what should I do?" is not something that this site can answer. But "What are the differences between these types of masters degree" is.
On a personal note, remember to think about what your goals are beyond any degree. Why do you want to do it? Don't go into it just because it's another bit of education.

I could do a master's before deciding whether or not I should go for a PhD.

If PhD is not a certainty for you, and you're at the fence of academia and industry, the MAst (M.A.S., MAS, Master of Advanced Studies) might be just right for you.  Many institutions are projecting MAst as an offering focused on the needs of professionals rather than academics! For instance, UC San Diego 'advertise' it as a professional (terminal) degree!
Typically, MAst, is conceived/geared towards a post-graduate professional degree. It's not uncommon to go through series of a set of coordinated coursework carefully orchestrated in such a way to culminate to projects or papers rather than research treatise.
In Spain, there's the notion that MAst is offered as the "Diploma de Estudios Avanzados". Whether the DEA scale through as higher qualification that MPhil or MS is left to be seen in coming years.
If you're looking at the UK, apart from Cambridge, for mathematics, you also have Warwick.


text:
What is the correct way to refer to Ferdinand de Saussure: “Saussure” or “de Saussure”?
Are there established grammatical conventions or stylistic norms in academic writing regarding the use of particles in names, such as "de," "von," "di," etc.?

This question is similar to: How should 'van'-names be ordered in a bibliography?. If you believe it’s different, please [edit] the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem.

In his Wikipedia article, he is referred to as Saussure unless his full name is given. I'd guess that is sufficiently canonical for use.
If you look at how some of his works are listed, you will find that he is named as Saussure, Ferdinand de. For example: https://archive.org/details/memoiresurlesyst00saus.
This doesn't seem to be a case of the older usage of "de" meaning a place of origin, as he was born in Geneva.
And, as you suggest such things are often included with the "last" name. I'm no linguist, but each case may be distinct.
Contrast this with Vincent de Paul where de does correspond to a "place", in this case a nearby stream.
There is a genus of plants called Saussurea, but Saussure doesn't seem to be associated with that. His father was an entomologist.

And just to back up Wikipedia with an authoritative published source: Saussure is referred to as ‘Saussure’, and listed under S, in Frawley’s International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (Oxford University Press, paywalled), and just about any other text in linguistics you care to check.

For famous people there is usually a common way by which they are known in English, but this varies by person.
Van Gogh is known as Van Gogh in English. On the other hand, Beethoven was Ludwig van Beethoven, but we don't call him van Beethoven. Similarly Saussure is best known as Saussure.
EDITED TO ADD: The APA page listed by Peter Jansson is not bad. It implies that it is only German and Portuguese where we omit van etc. Saussure is a good counterexample to this (he was born in Geneva, Switzerland and his name was French):

Ludwig van Beethoven is usually referred to in English as Beethoven and so would be credited as Beethoven, L. van, in the reference list entry and as Beethoven in the text. If you are writing in English, include the particle as part of the surname unless you know that the name is one of the famous German or Portuguese exceptions like Beethoven.

Is the informal rule you suggest valid for academic writing, which is what the OP asks about?

I certainly think so. Why would it not be? A style guide might say something different of course.

@Jagerber48 It's fine to use non-stilted language in academic writing.

@Jagerber48: One should follow whatever name is generally standard in existing academic writing in the field one’s writing in.  Sometimes this differs from the name most widely used by the public, or differs between academic fields (e.g. Chinggis/Genghis Khan) — but on this particular issue of including a de, van, etc, I don’t know any cases where popular and academic use differ.  And, in particular, Saussure is always Saussure.

Goethe isn't called von Goethe, but just Goethe.

I had to go look it up, but TIL that it's Ludwig van Beethoven and not Ludwig von Beethoven...

It is definitely a French custom to omit de when referring to people by their last name, especially when it's a title, e.g. Alexis de Tocqueville is Tocqueville, Armand Jean du Plessis de Richelieu is Richelieu.

The surname is 'de Saussure' and thus it should be listed as such. There are several sources detailing the use of  'de', 'von', 'van' etc. See for example the American Psychological Association. See also this post on Academia for more discussion.
One way to look at this is that the 'de' and its equivalent formulations are not part of the first name and so it should be part of the surname. In the end the reference style used by any specific journal may dictate otherwise but if you use a reference manager and add data properly and then use the reference style required, the reference should be reproduced properly.

Note that the academia post you link indicates that for van, at least, the usage isn't consistent, differing by country, at least. Why are you so definite. Lots of things aren't part of either the given or surname.

Historians don't always use the preamble to surnames. It's not standardized.

Saussure is pretty much never called ‘de Saussure’; listing him as such in bibliographies would be as unexpected as listing Beethoven under van (example courtesy of toby544’s answer) or, conversely, listing Leonardo da Vinci under V.

and than there are cultures where the surname appears first and the given name last and there are cultures where people don't have surnames... Names are just not as standardized as we like to think.

@MaartenBuis: Obligatory Falsehoods programmers believe about names

@JanusBahsJacquet Incidentally, listing Leonardo da Vinci under D would also be unexpected. Art historians working in English call him Leonardo, so it is L.

@toby544 Esteemed writer Dan Brown calls him "Da Vinci"

@AzorAhai-him- Very well put. Yes, renowned novelist Dan Brown does do that.

@toby544 While I’m sure that’s true of art historians, I’m less confident it holds for academia as a whole. Would engineers referring to him as a historical source and polyhistor call him Leonardo, for instance? I’m fairly sure I’ve seen him referred to in academic writing as Da Vinci, outside the writings of prominent penman Dan Brown (though I’m not sure it was in English).


text:
PhD Suggestion in 3 rd year without any progress
I am a Mathematics PhD student currently in 3 rd year. I have a funding of 5 years. But being in 3 rd year also I haven't started working on a problem yet. Whenever I ask my supervisor he always says there is still a lot of time or sometimes ask about 6 th year or something. I had very little interaction with my supervisor as he is very busy and we only meet mostly twice in a month for maximum 1 hour or less. I can see now all my peers have some preprint whereas I haven't started anything yet. Sometimes I get demotivated and cry for the whole day knowing that is not a solution. Do anyone have any suggestion regarding how to progress? I am now trying to find some small problems but that also is taking a lot of time.

How experienced is your supervisor? Has he had a lot of students? Is he an active in publishing papers?

Also, what country is this? Not having a problem in the 3rd year in the US wouldn't be very unusual.

It's in US. And my supervisor is moderately active. I mean he had students earlier.

Have you passed all required qualifying exams?

And he has some teaching academic commitments which I am not sure about also family commitments may be. He is moderately active but it seems he expects the student will do everything as he can invest a very little amount of time.

Yes I passed it in 1 st year itself. So I am working under him for a year and 2 months.

Did you try to come up with problems on your own, based on the papers that you have read? Did you talk to other students or pistdocs working in this area?

I do try to come up with problems on my own. Infact I want to ask something else also. It somehow happened that I was attending some seminar on some other area which I had some exposure in my undergraduate and I able to come up with some minor progress in one of the paper the speaker was talking about. But I couldn't tell it to my supervisor as I am sure he will get angry and think that I am focusing on other things.

About other students and postdocs working in this area I think my supervisor doesn't want that I discuss things with anyone. I tried to ask him indirectly and he said you don't need to discuss with others

". I can see now all my peers have some preprint ". If you are into queue theory, do not look too much into the abyss or you will fall down ;) https://www.tensator.com/math-queue-theory-the-benefits-of-serpentine-lines-and-heading-left/

While you are waiting to find THE problem, you should be tackling lots of other problems. In your main field and adjacent. Just get in there and pull on lots of threads. Finding good problems is its own skill. Anyone can solve them. :)

I will try to find some problem. But I don't know whether I could solve it in 2 years.

My experience is that it is possible to do a dissertation in a year once you have a suitable problem. Everyone's experience is different, of course.  But suitable problems in math are hard to come up with. Especially for novice researchers, but even for experienced people.
My experience, also, is that you might spend a lot of time on problems that aren't suitable or even feasible. It is a three bears problem. I had one problem that was "too easy" and I could generate a theorem just about daily. It wasn't sufficiently deep for a dissertation. The next problem was "too hard" and I couldn't crack it at all after a month of trying. The third problem was just right and led to a fairly significant thesis.
It isn't "time" that your advisor needs to give you, at this stage. It is ideas for things to try. If you aren't getting that, then he isn't doing his job properly. Coming up with the insight to know what might be true is a very difficult thing to do in math. It comes with experience that you don't yet have, I suspect. The same is true of many (most?) doctoral students in math. I know I didn't at that time.
If he is giving you papers to read in your (and his) field then he is on the right path. Look for holes. Look for extensions. Look for parallel development possibilities. He should be passing you unfinished and unfocused ideas that are, to him, "worth looking in to". If that is happening then you are probably ok, as long as you follow up. But if he is without ideas to share then it is very difficult, maybe impossible. Maybe you can even ask other professors in the field for ideas.
Some places have seminars for professors and doctoral students in some subfield. They meet regularly and toss ideas around. Some, not all, of those ideas are worth a good look.

One idea for examining existing papers. Take a paper that you understand and that has some significance. Compare the results (and methods) in that paper with the results and methods of those papers that it cites. What is the nature/essence of the extension in the new paper. There was something "missing" from the earlier papers. What is it, exactly. What insight did the author gain from the older papers that led to the problem solved in the new one.

Thanks. Yes he is giving me papers to read but he is not giving any ideas or what to do after that.  Sometimes if I can't figure out some details in the paper then also it remains unresolved as he expects you to finish it. Sometime I try to ask him whether it can extended like this way but he is mostly like think about these later first focus on understanding this paper.

But now as I spent 3 years already I am also bit restless now. I want to find some problem now as I don't now how long it will take to solve it.

Your situation sucks, I know.  My PhD supervisor was a big shot that just didn't talk to me.  In fact, he derailed me more than helped, all in all.  Here are some points you should consider.

Talk to the guy.  I mean, really sit down and confront him.  Tell him the situation is untenable and that you are really lost.  I never did this with my supervisor, and I wish I had done it.  At the very least he has to know what is going on.

Find other people to work with.  It can be tricky to approach other professors because of politics, but postdocs should be easier to approach.

I had an area (like number theory, functional analysis, etc.) but not a specific topic/subject.  It seems you have one, so at least you are more focused than I was.  You may end up just having to come up with your problem yourself, like I did, and do all the work.  As someone else said, once this happens, it goes really fast.  My PhD only progressed once I realized my supervisor didn't care and wouldn't help, and decided to stop talking to him altogether and just do everything myself.

The world has changed a lot in the past 10 years.  Now I'm a professor and I would be reprimanded if I treated a student like I was treated.  You are in the US, so it should be easier for you to change supervisors; consider doing it, as soon as possible.  Give it a deadline.  Find out who you can talk to about what is going on.  What is not okay is for you to be crying alone because of the situation.

Think, really think whether you want to have a PhD in math.  Is it really worth it?  I didn't even consider quitting at the time, but I should have.  It is actually nothing special.  If it makes you miserable, you can quit.  There is nothing wrong with it, no shame.  Heck, you may end up better off!

How my story ended: at some point, I was desperate since I was not doing anything (like you).  I chose a problem left over from my master's and figured out some stuff for it.  It was decent, but nothing groundbreaking.  I was fun to work on it and write it down.  I showed it to my supervisor, and he basically told me to not bother him with trivial stuff like that anymore.
Then I spiraled into depression.  I disappeared for 2 weeks (great decision) and just stopped thinking about math.  I decided to stop talking to my supervisor.  Next thing I know, during a seminar from one of the postdocs, I had an idea of applying some method that was discussed to an old problem I knew, and it worked.  In a matter of 2 months I had collaborated with this postdoc and had all the main results of my thesis.  It was really fast.  But, I can't help but feel I was also very lucky.

Thanks for sharing your story. I want to make a few points here. I am now in 3 rd year and I am an international student, I thought of changing the supervisor but it is not possible it seems. I told him that I am lost he said you have enough time which I didn't have.

Then the next point is postdoc that I tried. My supervisor said he wants something new in the thesis and not with others I have to do it on my own. Lastly yes I can maximum sustain for a year more it seems if I am unable to find problems I have to quit. Being an international student it's tough to do as I am supporting my family also but I don't know if I don't find anything things would be miserable.

And yes my supervisor also told me to not bother him with trivial stuffs. Infact if I have any doubts in the paper I am reading he says you have to figure it out. Sometimes I feel it's tough staying like this I ask in math forums or other people sometimes. But if i don't figure out then I don't know what to do.

@Mayank, can you tell us your subject?  Anyway, you can also quit quietly. Stop working on your phd and take your time to look for a job or something else. Prepare your way out and when you're done, quit.

Subject is dynamical systems ergodic theory.

Very sorry for asking it here. But do you know some people in the realted areas who could be of some help. I know that's not a suitable question but I am clueless now. I will try for a few months but then may be I don't know what are the options.

I don't know anyone.  But my suggestion is that you bring this issue to some appropriate person in your department.  With your supervisor blocking you, you don't have many options.

Yes I don't have. I am trying on my own. But feeling frustrated everyday. I will try more for some months then I will decide.

Just for some context, my PhD dissertation result was mostly discovered and written in about 6-8 months towards the end (the memories are now a little fuzzy). I don't know how typical that is though. The problem naturally grew out of a class assignment. I came up with the specific question myself though simply because I wanted to know the answer. I wouldn't call it a great result, but it was sufficient.
I find coming up with questions easy and natural, but it's determining which can be suitable for reasonable progress that is difficult. I tend to work on things that are too hard for me, and I advise being very wary of falling into that trap. That's where input from an advisor would hopefully serve as guidance.
My gut reaction is that having 2 years of funding left without even an idea of a project is cutting it close. Do you have an area or general subfield to work in?
I'd have an honest and direct conversation with your advisor about this. You may need more careful guidance on how to find a suitable problem where progress can be made.
With the right project you do have plenty of time left. But having a doable project is a key and uncertain part.
If you are doing well and making progress during the 5th year, making a case to stay for another year may be possible. In my experience, getting a teaching assignment for a year is fairly easy unless they think you have no chance of finishing. But that will vary according to time and place. Don't quote me on that as you'll want insight from those with current experience in US math grad programs. Ask your advisor explicitly and directly about what it generally takes to get an additional year.

I would say that your experience seems extremely atypical, to the point that I believe your supervisor was guilty of dereliction of duty at the very least, and neglect at the very worst. I was given my PhD problem about 2 months before I officially started (I did my masters under the same supervisor), and worked on it for almost 3 years. I was told to focus on that problem until it was done.

@anonymousx let me clarify that I was working on the problem much longer but only figured it out and wrote it up in the 6 month timeframe.

I haven't started the problem yet. Even I don't know when I will get a problem. Whenever I ask him he seems to ask me to read papers only. I don't know . Should I try to find small problems on my own? But I don't know whether my supervisor will allow that also in PhD thesis. But I feel hopeless as I didn't start any problem.

@Mayank try being very direct and explicit with your advisor. Bring papers you've read and ask directly of there are possible extensions to anything in those papers to explore. Have you not seen any results in those papers which state some requirement? Can you try to find a situation where the result applies but the requirement isn't satisfied?

Ok I try to be direct. Ok yes I can try this.


text:
Do mathematics/computer science graduate schools care about major-specific GPA?
I'm a sophomore studying computer science and mathematics at a well-known university in the US who is interested in doing a PhD in computer science related to graph algorithms, theoretical deep learning, or something else in these areas of interest.
I'm currently taking a graduate level measure theory course and a senior level (i.e. 4000-level) mathematical statistics course. I'm concerned that I may get a B in one of these two courses, but likely not both. Assuming that my GPA is otherwise a 4.0/4.0, will this seriously affect my chances of getting into strong graduate schools for computer science?

Yes, they care. Or at least those on admissions committees in the US are very likely to care. But one or two grades below A shouldn't be a problem. It isn't a numbers game, but an overall evaluation of your likelihood of success in grad study and beyond. But GPA in major is more important that overall GPA in the US educational system, assuming that you want to continue in that field.
If you are taking measure theory in the second year, I suspect that you are good enough in grades. Make sure you have enough contact with professors to get good letters of recommendation. That is very important.
Also note that competition at the best schools is intense. Cast a broad net when you get to the point of making application.

When I was on my department's graduate admission committee, we paid a lot of attention to grades in our field (mathematics) and nearby fields (physics, computer science ...). That involved looking at the courses the applicant had taken and the grades, not some mechanical average like the GPA. We would certainly view a B in measure theory (for a sophomore!) more favorably than an A in a typical sophomore course (calculus 3, introduction to proofs, ...).


text:
PhD university ranking when going for post doc/ jobs
I have completed my bachelors and masters in engineering from a top UK uni and I am currently working towards my PhD at a low ranked uni (50th in the UK) mainly because it was one of the very few project in my field and with partial funding for non-EU students. My question is how negatively will the ranking of my new university affect me when applying for research jobs / post docs in the future?


text:
Is it a good idea to submit to a single-blind journal when I have no affiliation?
I am looking to publish a paper in computational biology. However, I have no affiliation (I have been affiliated with some institutions in the past, but am not currently affiliated with anyone now). I am also looking for a journal that will publish with no charge as I am low on funds.
I understand I should be able to publish a paper when my work is evaluated solely for its quality. However I have been unable to find any non-predatory and at least semi-legitimate computational biology journals that use double-blind review and are free to publish in.
I will submit my manuscript to bioRxiv, but would really like to publish in a journal. I am unsure how to proceed - should I try and submit to a single-blind journal and mark my affiliation as "independent scholar" or try some other way to publish to a double-blind computational biology journal?

It can't be denied that there is some sociological element in the peer review process, so the list of authors, their qualifications (some journals require this), the institution- all these shouldn't matter, but sadly they sometimes do. This is not to discourage you, but rather so you accept the finite probability that this could work against you.
Double-blind review is also not immune to this, because the editor will have your details, and he/she could also develop a negative opinion. So my suggestion would be to not look for too many double-blind journals, and submit to the wide range of single blind, free publishing journals one by one. Remember, this element is based on probability, so if you are willing to try several journals, you are automatically improving your chances (not to mention, potentially getting helpful reviews).
Another possibility is to work on the paper with someone you have been affiliated with in the past, and submit it as a joint publication. If that works out, some of your misgivings will be taken care of.
In any case, please don't hold back and not submit, getting a chance to publish is a universal right, even if you're not presently at an institution.

This answer is essentially the same as that of @CoderInNetwork, which I didn't see until I submitted. :)

The review process can be political, but I think you are overestimating the risk of people rejecting your work out of hand because of your (lack of) affiliation. Bioinformatics actually has a couple of famous independent researchers, like Robert C. Edgar, who developed MUSCLE. I think your odds of getting work published as an unaffiliated single author are actually much better in computational biology than in most of the life sciences.
As far as price goes, reputable OA journals often waive publication fees on a need-based, case by case basis. You request a waiver at submission and will get an answer within a week or two. Here's a link to info about fee waiver requests for PLoS and BMC. Out of OA journals, I would consider PLoS Computational Biology and the BMC journals (BMC Bioinformatics, Genomics, etc. as appropriate for the topic), and maybe Nucleic Acids Research if your work fits their call for research.
You could also submit to Bioinformatics and not pay for the immediate OA option (the default is to embargo the paper for several months), though having your work be easily accessible could help it be more widely disseminated, especially as an unaffiliated scholar who is presumably not routinely presenting about the work. Also you would need to be more careful about self-archiving since in that case the bioRxiv policy is different.

Why would the lack of affiliation have any effect? I mean, ok, it would mean more scrutiny of claimed laboratory research, since if you're not affiliated, how do you have lab access. But beyond that?

I think OP is concerned that the lack of affiliation will make reviewers quicker to assume the author is a crank. It's not a totally irrational fear: some scientists are obsessed with status or are very proprietary about their subfield, and some of those get asked to review papers. But in practice these attitudes aren't that prevalent, one nasty review doesn't typically sink a paper at the journals I listed (especially if the editor can see the reviewer's being unreasonable), the risk would be ~= for a junior PI at a small institution, and this field has high-profile independent scientists.

Addendum: by "obsessed with status" above I really mean "equate status with competence" or "use status as a short-cut to evaluate competence."

If he writes a paper claiming to have found the cure for cancer, then maybe, but if it's a paper on, say, cell membrane dynamics, it's not the type of thing cranks are interested in publishing.

You'd think, but I've reviewed papers on topics at that level of granularity that I'd nevertheless describe as crankery: grandiose unsupported claims, idiosyncratic and opaque writing style, obvious lack of familiarity with well-established previous work, etc.

Yeah, sure, just submit.  You don't have to be at an institution to submit something.  Is uncommon but not vanishingly rare.  If you are worried about your work being stolen or your contribution downplayed than watch out.  But realize this can happen if you are at an institution also.

Thank you! So a reviewer wouldn't just look at my paper, see I am an "indepedent scholar" and reject it?

@user90757: No, they won't. No way. Unless your discipline is totally nuts and everybody is taking exotic drugs.


text:
Are paper revision services worthwhile?
After completing a paper my supervisor at the time wanted to use a paper review service to review my paper for grammar, English etc..
I am a native English speaker and the service is based in a non-English-speaking country, but I don't know the nationality of the person who reviewed the paper. After receiving back the corrected paper, it seems like they have reduced its size by more than 50% by taking out words phrases that they thought to be redundant and rewording sentences to be easier to understand by anyone.
I feel like these services aren't worth the money but that might just be due to the sour feeling of having someone change the majority of a paper you've spent a fair amount of time on by someone that might know little about the subject.
What kind of experiences have people had with these services?  Do you think think they are worth using?

A related answer of mine. Shortly: you should work together with a local review service.

Working with the proofreader might be good, but in this case it was not possible since this was not an in house service. In my case I am a native English speaker and even though I am sure I make grammar and other mistakes I dont feel that 60% of my paper was a mistake. It feels more like the reviewer would change large amounts of the paper just putting it into a style they prefer or think is right even if there isnt that much wrong with the current english.

I have tried some of those "English testing sites" and weirdly all of them say I will benefit from their course! As a native english speaker yeah right... Having checked with some of my colleagues who teach english, they also get results that tell them they need to do the course, which leads us to believe that (possibly) many of those sites are marketing tools and don't have any real analysis behind them...

I have found that engineers who speak two languages can do a much better job of translating a technical document as they understand the theory and concepts behind the paper... I had this argument with a person who claimed "I can translate anything - I am bi-lingual" well, a paper dealing with stress, strain and Mohr's circle soon dealt with that... Didn't know the technical jargon, etc etc

@SolarMike In other words, those engineers speak three languages...

@origimbo isn't there evidence that those who have further education doctors, lawyers, scientists, engineers have access to a larger vocabulary, so no not three languages but more words in both...

@SolarMike I read the comment as meaning that "engineering" was the third language.

@TobiasKildetoft there is that :) some comments from my colleagues ascwell...

I fail to see how a non-technical person can cut more than 50% of a paper in such a way that it still makes sense. Someone with no intimate knowledge of the content simply does not have the tools to judge whether something is redundant or not

After comparing the two papers, do you feel that the resulting paper is of the same technical caliber as the source paper?

not the same but ive changed and added in what was missing. It might have been made clearer for non technical people by making sentences shorter etc but it did mess around a bit with the technical interpretation by people that would understand it.

[paper review service] reduced [paper] size by more than 50% by taking out words phrases that they thought to be redundant and rewording sentences to be easier to understand by anyone.

A fifty percent reduction in paper length is an excellent improvement of your paper, because your readers have less to read. (Assuming what "they thought to be redundant" really was.) There's no need for any "sour feeling," appreciate the improvement and learn how to make similar reductions. (Note that reductions are far easier for someone else to make than the original author.)

I agree with you, I used the same service, they even told me to significantly cut introduction, but advisor wouldnt allow bcs refrees didnt ask for it

A large reduction in paper length can have an additional benefit for journals or proceedings with strict page limits - the authors can include more results or discussions they could not fit in the first version.

Was the removed text actually redundant or was it important to understanding the paper? did the rewording actually get the correct point across in an easier to understand way or did it change the meaning unacceptablly?
Without a good answer to those questions it's impossible to say if the service was useful or not.


text:
Grad schools emailing to request that I apply?
I'm an undergraduate major in International Studies applying for grad school programs in Development, Securities, and Global Governance.  I have international experience working in West Africa for World Bank and USAID sponsored NGO research initiatives.
I've recently submitted all of my intended applications for graduate school programs and fellowships.  In the last week, I've received three emails requesting that I apply to graduate school programs which I had not intended to apply for - Cornell, Denver, and Penn.
Does this mean that the programs are particularly interested in me or is this a normal spam-type email to people that have applied to other programs with similar major focus?

Could you perhaps reply thanking them for the invitation and asking where they got your name? I think it's fair to say that most people don't receive emails soliciting them to apply to Ivy league graduate programs.

They all mentioned either the Payne or Pickering Fellowships that I've applied for.

Universities are not above collecting and re-selling data.  There are a number of ways you could have gotten on a mailing list which was purchased by the 3 schools you mention.  In math, we have a Putnam competition and most good math majors participate.  Grad schools will buy the list of top 500 or second 250 or whatever finishers and then spam them with invitations to apply.  In your field, you may have done something that got your name on a list of likely candidates, or perhaps it's just that one or more of the schools you applied to stuck your name on a list and sold it to other schools.
(Yes, companies sell data to their competitors.  I always get a chuckle when DISH TV sends me a solicitation using the misspelling of my name that Time-Warner Cable has.)
The strict answer to your question is "both."  They are particularly interested in you, but it's because your name appeared in a list of potentially good candidates.  (This is my guess,  but perhaps your work in West Africa got noticed and they really are targeting you in particular.  But this doesn't seem likely, because how would they know you are now in the market for a grad school...?)

one or more of the schools you applied to stuck your name on a list and sold it to other schools Seems quite surprising to me. Why would a department want to redirect its best applicants to another institution? I know it's quite common practice for departments to share details of strong but unsuccessful applicants. Sharing this information before they've had a chance to recruit them first seems like a poor strategy.

@MJeffryes  I agree, but there's my Time-Warner example.  Time-Warner is a for-profit business and it seems silly that they'd sell my name to their chief competitor.  Universities are notorious for being really bad at business, so while I think this is foolish, it doesn't surprise me.  Often the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, I suppose.

@MJeffryes Also, the school knows that you're going to apply to other schools anyway (I mean, if you're any good, you should be), so they might as well make some money in the process.

Also, it does show on my LinkedIn profile that I am a graduating senior interested in graduate school, along with my work history.  My profile has been viewed 4 or 5 times in hidden mode in the last month or so. One of my professors said that might be recruiters.

I've served on admissions committees for one Ph.D. program and two terminal masters. A general solicitation from a department or program means you're on a mailing list. (They're sold by professional organizations, journal publishers, conference organizers, ETS, etc.) Occasionally a faculty member will contact an undergrad who has published or presented in the field, or as recommended by a trusted colleague at the undergrad's institution. If so, the reason would be made clear -- e.g. "Prof Jane Doe mentioned your fine work in...", "I saw your presentation at AIS in Toronto".


text:
I got a provisional acceptance and submitted my clerical revisions almost two months ago. Email the editor?
I got a revise and resubmit after a 4-month review in a decent Psychology journal, submitted a revision and, after another 4-month review, got a provisional acceptance with minor and clerical comments to be addressed, and was asked to submit my response within two weeks. I did response within two weeks, which is almost two months ago at this point.
Questions:

Should I email the editor through the submission website?
If so, what would be an appropriate way to frame the email? I had in mind something like:

Dear ____,
I am emailing to check on the status of my provisionally accepted manuscript (ID=xxx). Please let me know if there is any further information you need and thank you for your continued attention.
Best, ____

The question hangs on the meaning of "provisional acceptance." If the reviewers suggested that no further review was required, then the editor should be able to make a decision fairly quickly once the changes have been made and submitted, so two months is probably too long for the subsequent review. However, there is the possibility that the editor sent the paper out for an additional round of reviews, in which case the delay is much more "explainable," but still bordering on too long.
In any case, a polite email to the editor asking about the status of the paper wouldn't be remiss. What you've written is fine.

What you suggest is fine.  As a referee, I recently sat on a paper for too long.  I had a pretty bad accident, and couldn't type (or concentrate, thanks to the oxycodone) for a couple months.  I had informed the editor that I was going to be slow, but he didn't inform the author.  Later, I got an e-mail from the editor asking for an estimated time.  This e-mail was prompted by the author who had inquired.  I don't think anyone was annoyed.
Probably the referee is supposed to check that you've corrected the minor typos and he means to get to it just any day now.  Your e-mail to the editor will probably generate an e-mail to the referee which will get your paper moved to the top of the pile.  And no one will be annoyed.
Edit:  I'm in mathematics, so perhaps the culture in your field is different.


text:
How to phrase follow-up email to professor to find out whether funding has come through regarding potential graduate school project?
I am attempting to find a researcher to work with for graduate school. Fortunately I found one with very similar interests to mine. I have been in contact with him since August, where I spoke with him over the phone. He said, unfortunately, he does not have a project that I could work on (that is in my interest) at the moment, but he is waiting to hear back from a funding comittee. He told me to email him to check in again in October. I did and we exchanged a few emails, where he said that he had still not heard back and for me to check in again mid-November. I am about to email him again.
My question is: how should I phrase what I say in the email so as to not sound "greedy"?
(i.e., I do not want to say something that sounds like "hey did you find out about the research project yet?"). I know I have emailed him about this before, but I feel like my email came off as that the first time. Plus, I do not want to copy and paste what I sent him last time.

Don't overthink it, he did ask you to email him. Keep your email short (one or two lines). Wait until mid-end November and reply to the previous email with something like "Hi Dr. Lastname, I'm still interested in the ___ project and just wanted to follow up with your previous email from October to see if you have any update about the research project and funding. Regards, aspire94"