text:
Do Postdocs have any seniority ranking or progress?
I am seeing many people doing postdocs for years, or even nearly a decade, well into their late thirties. Do they usually have progressive salary and responsibility, as one could expect in a job?  Is your fifth or sixth year as a postdoc essentially the same as your first month after PhD., but with some extra publications?
For clarification, this is what I mean by progress.
In your later years, do you get to build and lead a small team of junior researchers who you hire from your grant, whom you can give some instruction, or you divide the tasks of a more ambitious project and you take some supervisory role in addition to your own hands-on research? I do not expect it to be completely managerial because I know postdocs love the actual research…but at least some mark of seniority and experience?

It depends on the institution and supervisor.  Salary progression seems pretty common.

Also depends on the field and country.

Of all the kinds of academic positions, the postdoc is probably the most variable.  The common ground across (almost) all postdoctoral positions is: you should have a doctoral degree when you start the position, and the position should not be permanent or tenure-track.  That's really about it.  (Added: I agree with @StrongBad that most postdoctoral positions have an expectation of "advanced training" of one kind or another.)
It is rare for a single postdoc position to last more than 4-5 years.  In my understanding, the ones that do are soft-money positions and thus are more explicitly doing specified projects for the PI / grantholder.  I am not aware of any kind of formal seniority across multiple postdocs: generally the reason that someone does a second postdoc is because they want a permanent academic job and haven't gotten one yet.  They may also want additional specific training / the chance to work with other researchers, but this really is "additional" rather than on top of.
In terms of salary: in my experience [mathematics, US], postdoc salaries are rather flat across the period of employment.  (I previously had more detailed information, but I am less confident that it is representative even among math postdocs in the US.)  In my department we have one kind of postdoc that pays about $10K per year more than another postdoc is funded by an NSF grant, and the salaries for the latter postdoc are set by the NSF, so will be the same unless / until we get a new grant (or an updated version of the same).
When it comes to skilled labor, wherever you work for a year or more, you gain knowledge, experience and seniority in some informal sense.  One might say that a postdoc is a process of laundering a student into a faculty member, so late-career postdocs resemble faculty members more than early career postdocs.  Most postdocs in mathematics find their way from a combination of completing / continuing their thesis work and starting new projects with their new supervisor to developing a distinctive and independent research program.  Although the particulars differ across fields, I think that something like this is the goal of most postdocs: if a postdoc only does their supervisor / PI's work then it will be difficult for them to portray themselves as a valuable faculty hire.
For math postdocs, the only formal seniority comes from teaching obligations: namely most math postdocs start out teaching freshman / sophomore level courses.  If they are competent at their teaching and interested in teaching other courses (not all postdocs are), many postdocs move on to teach a junior/senior level course for majors in their second year and some postdocs teach a graduate course in their last year.  (In my fifth semester as a postdoc I was able to teach a topics course in the arithmetic of Shimura varieties.  I have since taught about a dozen graduate courses, but none as advanced as that.)

In your later years, do you get to build a small team of junior researchers who you hire from your grant whom you can give some instruction,,

Some postdocs are not associated to a grant in any way; they are rather temporary faculty funded by their department.  Some postdocs work under their PI's grant, in which case the answer to the question is up to the PI (and the grant proposal).  Some postdocs receive grant funding of their own, in which
case some kind of money for junior personnel may well be included.  Also some postdocs work with graduate students, in a variety of different ways.  My current postdoc is for instance a member of the dissertation committee of one of my students.

or you divide the tasks of a more ambitious project and you take some supervisory role in addition to your own hands-on research?

That could happen.  Some large research groups employ postdocs in a kind of managerial role.

I do not expect it to be completely administrative or managerial because I know postdocs love the actual research…but at least some mark of seniority and experience?

Keep in mind that any seniority you acquire as a postdoc is ephemeral.  Spending too much time doing administrative / managerial work as a postdoc sounds very risky if you are aiming for a permanent faculty position.  Some departments somewhere must be hiring some faculty largely for their administrative skills...but I confess I have never seen it with my own eyes.

@Chris: It means the first thing, if by "work" you mean anything that contributes to the department / university rather than the postdoc's own research program.   Such a postdoc would be free to (i) get an outside, even non-academic [though it seems unlikely] job over the summer, (ii) apply for summer research funds (e.g. NSF provides some), or (iii) try to teach a course over the summer if they really want a "12 month salary".  For postdocs interested in a tenure track job at a research university, the last is a pretty bad idea, IMO.

In addition to a doctoral degree and temporary, the NIH and NSF, at the least, also require "mentored advance training" in post doc positions (see my answer.

I'm happy - for mathematicians - to hear that $45,000 is not considered competitive anymore (implying that more is now usual)! In my wife's fairly trendy field (neuroscience) that's a standard Postdoc salary when provided through PI grants (pretty much always during the first, or first two years), and if you want more, you need to go out and get your own grant (which still would probably be capped by the $55,000 you mention).

I do not believe math postdocs can be usefully compared to postdocs in any other field. Accordingly, although this response is excellent (as usual), I do not think it answers the original question.

@Pete why is that a really bad idea?

@Tom: I agree that math postdocs have some distinctive features.  On the one hand, a math postdoc is a kind of postdoc, and I think a positive proportion of the users of this site are interested in math postdocs.  On the other hand, I included some information about postdocs other than in mathematics.  So I think this answers the original question...partially.  It would be good to see other answers as well.

@Azor-Ahai: Well, I said "pretty bad".  The reason is that a postdoc is a training / audition for something else, namely a permanent academic job.  The amount of additional salary you get by teaching a summer course is probably not going to offset the loss of research time.  This assumes, by the way, that you are teaching during the academic year (as is the case for most math postdocs); if you aren't, then teaching over the summer sounds like a good idea.

@StrongBad: Yes, I agree, at least in theory.  However: tenure track faculty can also have faculty mentors.  For me, the amount of mentorship I got as a postdoc was about the same as the amount I got in the first two years of my tenure track job (small, but positive, as much as I wanted, and very useful nevertheless).  I did not do any joint work in any sense with my postdoctoral supervisor..  (Except that he generously paid me to read through a book he had just written.  I did this the summer before I started, and I got paid extra for it.) Tom Church's comment seems applicable here!

By the way: non-STEM fields also have postdocs.  See e.g. http://academicjobs.wikia.com/wiki/Humanities_and_Social_Sciences_Postdocs_2015-16.  My guess is that in many of these fields, postdocs are close to the kind of "visiting assistant professor" position that they often are in mathematics.

@gnome: By "not competitive," I meant that the majority of math departments we consider to be our peers or aspirational peers [a lovely term I learned from a dean on a job interview many years ago] offer more.  I didn't mean to imply that (i) no else pays this little or (ii) we can't fill the positions.  But it is not an attractive feature of the offer, if you take my meaning.

About salaries: our department (a peer to Pete's I'd say), pays almost 10k more to postdocs, and feel that's not as competitive as we'd like.  Also, I received a pay increase as a postdoc at MIT, and since our salaries are public record can confirm that postdocs in our department have received (small) increases over the course of their time at UVA.

@Ben: Based on your comments I took out some of the information which was specific and detailed to my institution.  I don't want to speak for all of math postdocs in the US if it's not representative...and I don't want to call too much negative attention to my own department!  (Also, your institution may be more like an "aspirational peer."  Finally, it must be said that the cost of living in Athens, GA is notably low compared to everywhere else I have ever lived...)

For math postdocs, the only formal seniority comes from teaching obligations - I don't think there's much correlation between "seniority" and what kinds of classes postdocs teach at my department.  They teach what we need them to.  This could be 1000 or 4000 level classes their first year.  (Though they do get a chance to express preferences after their first year.)  I don't know which scenario is more common.

In order to answer this, we first need to define what a post doc is. I have talked about how the NIH defines a post doc in this answer. Both the NIH and NSF define a post doc as

An
  individual
  who
  has
  received
  a doctoral
  degree
  (or
  equivalent)
  and
  is engaged
  in
  a
  temporary
  and
  definedperiod
  of
  mentored
  advanced
  training
  to
  enhance
  the
  professional
  skills
  and
  research
  independence
  needed
  to pursue
  his
  or
  her
  chosen
  career
  path.

In terms of salary progression, the NIH has a scale: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-16-047.html. It starts at $43,692 for a new post doc and progresses to $57,504 after 7 years of experience.
Within the NIH framework post docs are either funded through a grant to a PI (e.g., R01) or an NRSA postdoctoral fellowship (e.g., F32). The post doctoral fellowships do not provide funding for hiring staff. After finishing their training, many post docs choose to stay in the lab of their mentor as a research scientist on soft money. They can then apply for research grants and hire and supervise staff.

This varies quite a bit from country to country, field to field and even group to group.
In the US and Canada, I've never seen a lab where the postdocs are officially ranked (e.g., Sarah is a senior postdoc and has some sort of authority over Nick the Newbie and Jamie the junior postdoc). However, it's not uncommon for an informal hierarchy to arise, where a senior postdoc does his own research and works closely with newer staff interested in a very similar topic.
This is partly a matter of seniority and experience (a postdoc has a PhD + a few years of experience, versus a brand new masters' student). It is also influenced by how research happens: new projects often involve a lot of work that is difficult to parallelize, but once they are up and running, there is often a surfeit of directions one could take: existing data could be analyzed in many new ways; it might also suggest obvious follow-up experiments using the existing setup. Having new students/postdocs work on this can be a great way to get new staff up to speed (or could even be a complete project for undergrad/masters' students), while helping the postdoc get publications out.
The postdoc probably would not independently hire new staff, but they might get some say in choosing between potential lab members.

As others have said, it varies. In Australia, I have seen:

Postdocs on insecure soft money go from one postdoc position to another for years on end, with only cost of living salary increases and no change in title or responsibility;
Postdocs on more secure soft money gradually working their way up the academic ranks, with job titles changing from "research associate" to "research fellow" to "senior research fellow", or from "postdoctoral fellow" to "research projects officer", and becoming more and more involved in writing grant applications and managing stakeholder relations as they go;
Postdocs who are told in advance that they have three years in which they will be given advanced research training and financial support, but with no chance of extension;
Postdocs moving from one institution to another either at the same level or with an increase in pay and job title.

I've never personally seen a postdoc given official management responsibilities, but it is common for even first-year postdocs to unofficially be managing postgraduate students and technical staff.

At a UK institution, pay is often set to a single pay spine system where pay goes up annually (this can be automatic or based on merit).
In terms of supervisory roles, a PI may ask for help supervising student or postgraduate projects. But this is usually informal.
It would be unusual for a postdoc to be PI on grants big enough to hire from, and the postdoc would be able to get a lectureship with ease off such a grant.

" get a lectureship with ease off such a grant."---what does that mean? If he brings the big grant, then the school will promote him to a faculty?

One of the main roles of lecturing staff is to bring in grant money. If one can bring in large grants(i.e. one big enough to hire other staff with), it would be trivial to make a case for promotion/move to another institution into a lectureship. The same is true for lecturers, if they can bring in a very large grant as PI (>£1 million, say), the school will likely promote them to professor.

So the grants are tied to the person? If he moves to a different institution, the grants he got (on behalf of the school) will leave with him?


text:
What does a university's acceptance rate indicate?
If the acceptance rate of a university is 90%, does that mean it accepts 90 out of every 100 students that apply?
Does a university's acceptance rate indicate its quality?  Most top universities have low acceptance rates, however some good universities have high acceptance rates.

If the acceptance rate of a university is 90%, does that mean it accepts 90 students from 100 that applied?

Yes.

Does the acceptance rate of universities indicate the quality of them?

No, not particularly.  For example, it's possible to get a good education at an institution with open admissions.  It's true that low acceptance rates are correlated with quality, for at least two reasons.  A university that is perceived as being of high quality will often receive more applications than it has space available for students, and being able to choose high-achieving students will help create an academically stimulating atmosphere and enable the university to offer more demanding courses.  However, this correlation is far from perfect.  Acceptance rates are essentially a popularity contest: you are measuring a combination of how many students apply and how many accept an offer of admission.  Like most popularity contests, they only tell you so much.
It's also worth noting that these statistics can be intentionally skewed by universities.  Because college rankings in the U.S. often involve acceptance rates, some schools have adapted by deliberately advertising to try to attract applications from students they have no interest in admitting (increasing the total number of applications decreases the acceptance rate).  This makes the acceptance rate even less meaningful than it used to be.
Added in response to Kimball's question about references:
I don't know of a definitive reference.  It's widely believed to be happening, but it's difficult to prove since who would admit it?  (Instead of saying "we're soliciting mediocre applications just to be able to reject them," any competent admissions director would say "we're casting a wide net to make sure talented students don't get overlooked.")  Certainly schools that are concerned about their rankings are trying hard to get more applications; see, for example, this story about Northeastern, which suggests but doesn't explicitly say that Northeastern is more concerned about the number of additional applications than their quality (the closest it comes is "The more applications NU could drum up, the more students they could turn away, thus making the school appear more selective").  See also this NYT story, which discusses attracting more applications as a form of ranking manipulation (but attributes this information to unnamed admissions directors and doesn't mention any concrete examples).  For comparison, seeking more applications is not so extreme: Clemson has been accused of far more dramatic forms of ranking manipulation.

some schools have adapted by deliberately advertising to try to attract applications from students they have no interest in admitting - Do you have any reference for this out of curiosity?

An addition for your last paragraph: This goes both ways; in some countries, public university funding is partly based on acceptance numbers, in which case the statement "the more accepted students, the more money" is valid. In such places, universities are motivated to intentionally accept as many students as possible (just to try and kick as many of them out within the first two semesters by making the first few exams the most difficult throughout a whole major - with failure rates of 70 to 80% being normal).

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How do junior faculty in the U.S. normally address senior faculty in emails?
In the United States, what is the common way junior faculty address senior faculty in the same department or different department?

Hi First or Last name
Hi Dr ___
Dear Dr __
Dear Doctor ___
Dear Prof. ___
Dear Professor ___
No greetings, start the topic directly.

Varies from place to place, surely.  Around here you would not say Dear Lastname.  But you might say Dear Firstname.

Another option is to use neither 'Hi' nor 'Dear', but start with a name.

In my experience in the United States, most professors invite even their graduate students to call them by their given (first) name.  Junior faculty would be no less invited to familiar address.  Whether you say "Hi, Name" or just dive into communication is often a matter of personal style and communication medium---for example, emailing from one's phone often has much terser communication, and this is generally understood and not taken amiss.
Just because you are addressing somebody by their given name, however, doesn't mean you are actually an intimate or a peer.  Many senior faculty in the United States will still expect deference by junior faculty; they will just expect it to be shown by the tone and actions of interaction, rather than merely the formality of address.

Just don't do this outside the USA without understanding that different cultures may approach this very differently.

No kidding! I wrote an collegial email in response to a concern that a senior professor in the UK  brought up in an email to me (at the time I was an assistant professor in the US), and began it with "Dear First Name," and he got seriously huffy with me!!!

@Alexis - That seems really odd to me as even when I was a student at Lancaster everyone was addressed on first name terms right up the chain.

At some institutions, the University of Chicago, for example, that is actually a rule. The are more formal options, like calling everyone Mr/s. But many times the idea is to treat everyone as equal scholars.

An advice and manners column I once read suggested you start (as in, you have no real history with this person, and you've had little communication before this point) written communications off formally—the Professor title is superior to, and trumps, the doctor title, for the record— and then from there address them in accordance to how they sign their responses.  If you write to "Professor Jerrys" and he signs his response "Ben", then he has given you implicit permission to address him as Ben, and it would be appropriate for you to do so in the future.  The nature of how they write their message will also give you indicators: if they're saying "howdy" to you then they're not looking to be on formal terms with you, and things like that.
When in doubt: ask them directly.  Everyone's familiar with this problem and has gone through it themselves.
In my experience, in the US once you have your doctorate you can be on a first-name basis with your university's faculty by default: at that point you are officially their colleague.  For some professors this extends down to their doctoral students, others to all graduate students, and to yet others it applies to everyone.  The state you're in can even affect the level of formality a typical faculty member expects from any given person, due to slight cultural differences between states.
Note that this will change wildly from culture to culture.  In France, for example, it's a flat hierarchy with essentially no titular addresses.  Students invariably address their (male) professors as "Monsieur", and a famous professor could be teaching problem sessions to a lecture run by an unproven fresh hire.  Which is not to say there's no social hierarchy at all (the famous guy will most certainly be treated more nicely than the new guy and given more deference), it's just that an institutionalized hierarchy is nearly non-existent.  Japan, on the other hand, is very formal (in some ways the language is really two languages: one formal, the other informal) and a first-name basis is generally reserved only for very close acquaintances, like family members and lovers (even friends may still address each other in a formal way).

On that note, I just remembered a story a colleague once told me about the time he spent in Britain.  There, he said, the extremely important and powerful guys that had a dozen titles (doctorate, professor, head of multiple societies, etc., for example) were always addressed as "Mr.".  So if you were at a university, you'd know that those called "Dr." and "Professor" were pretty normal and weren't going to be the top dogs, but as soon as you were introduced to a "Mr." you knew you were in the presence of a very powerful and amazing man that you needed to show great respect to.

If I'm asking the Chair what she's bringing to the department potluck, it's "Dear Jane" but if I'm asking for additional research funds or trying to get out of committee duty, it's "Dear Prof. Doe" or "Dear Chair Doe" depending on how much I'm trying to suck up.
The more interesting question is how you address the provost or deans.

Does seniority play a role, or do you address faculty more junior than you by title for work related things?

At my university, we tend to eschew titles as a whole. Graf students call faculty by their first name so it'd be unusual if junior faculty acted differently.

You should ask the question about how to address a Provost and Dean.

You would have to clarify what types of addressing you're talking about: conversational (casual and official), written (casual and official) or both. This is, because I believe that there are significant differences in addressing, based on this factor. There are most likely other potential factors, including geographical and cultural academic traditions, particular academic institution's or department's collegial or other atmosphere, professional personal relationships and more.
UPDATE (per OP's clarification):
For the written casual addressing, I would use the same type of addressing you're using (or would use) with that person in a conversation. On the other hand, for the written formal type of addressing, I would consider a "Dear Dr. -Last Name-" or "Dear Professor -Last Name-" to be the safest option. However, keep in mind that some professors insist on addressing them by first name, so, in that case, "Dear -First Name-" is appropriate.

written - email

@ThomasLee: Please see my update above.

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


text:
How to cope with a situation, when I withdrew from a job search, but now I regret it?
I applied for a position. Before the interview, I was encouraged by the selection committee that I was a very good candidate. But I was not sure. I thought it is far more above my capabilities, I was not sure what to do with my family (it was not a permanent position), etc. After the interview, I just withdrew even before I knew the results.
Now, after a couple of weeks, I think I made a mistake. Should I try to correct it? To ask them if the position is still available? It is in different country, so I have only email contacts.
Or should I just leave it as it is? I have the feeling, that if I will leave as it is, they will think I am arrogant because I rejected them. What would be the best solution?

of course, send the email

After how much time? Overnight? A couple days? A couple of weeks?

Is this a position you now want? Or are you simply worried about the committee's perception of you? It is not clear from the question. What is the goal?

Your chances are low, but nothing can you lose. You won't lose face, these things are much more common as you would think. In your case I would try.

I would let them know that you now believe that you made a mistake in turning them down and that you did so only for external (family) reasons. Thank them for their interest in you and tell them that the other issues have resolved themselves and you are in a position now to accept an offer. Thanking them is the most important part, just to keep lines of communication open.  For future reference, a position that doesn't seem permanent might develop in to one if you develop a good relationship. It might be nothing more than an inability to commit to a long term position now.

Two weeks sounds like a lot of time and it is likely the position was already offered to another candidate. If it was, you lose nothing by sending an email. If it was not, they probably do not have an appointable candidate and in this case they can be actually quite happy to offer the position to you. However, consider providing a brief explanation of why you have withdrawn and why you are now asking to reconsider you for the post. The appointing committee needs some reassurance that you will take the post if you are offered it.

Yes - if a committee makes encouraging comments, they really want you. If you turn them down, that's fine (in general) as long as you haven't toyed with them. However, coming back to them without a good argument why may come down as dithering - and that's something that committees do not like to see. There needs to be some perspective of what caused the change in your thinking and why this exhibition of indecisiveness is a one-off.

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


text:
Who reads teaching evaluations?
At the end of each semester, usually a month before final exams, my school (in the US) distributes teaching evaluations. What people will read these? Do people only see these after the final grades are posted?

Depends on the university. At my university we see the anonymous feedback ~one month after the end of the course.

This is too broad to be answerable. At my university, all evaluations are anonymous and are publicly available at the university webpages, so everybody reads them: future students deciding which courses to take, the department head, your jealous colleagues if you are good, your good colleagues pointing out that even your teaching is bad if you are bad. But it depends, in some schools, there might be an evaluation committee, in some the papers are collected and never read, ...

In my experience, faculty don't get to see these survey results until after grades have been submitted.  Typically, any handwritten comments are typed into the survey summary so that there would be no chance of recognizing a student's handwriting.  All of this is intended to protect students from faculty who might take revenege for negative evaluations.

And among those who read them, how many actually care? Anyway, in some universities (e.g. where I work) teachers can read teaching evaluations before the exams.

@MassimoOrtolano: To go even a step further, I know universities that place the evaluations in the middle of the semester and require professors to present the evaluation results in class to discuss options for improving the class with the students. Like that, students may still benefit from some improvements at least during the last few weeks of the semester - and in case of any problems with the exam preparation in the class, there is still a little time to for the professor to react to that before the exams.

My experience (only one place, could vary)... The anonymous results go to the instructor (after grades have been submitted).  They may (if they choose) voluntarily submit the numerical summaries to the relevant committee when they apply for tenure or promotion.  Although this is technically voluntary, it may be assumed by higher administrators that failure to submit evaluations means you are a bad teacher, and that may be a negative factor in your tenure or promotion case.

While this may vary significantly from institution to institution, my understanding is that, in the US at least, evaluations are at least read by:

The instructor, who needs to get feedback on their teaching efficacy
Others in the department who are evaluating the instructor, e.g., as part of tenure and promotion review, as part of peer mentoring, as part of a departments' own ongoing self-management.

They may also end up being read by other administrators (internal or external, e.g., certification authorities) who are monitoring a department's teaching quality, and may be distributed to students to help them decide which classes to take.  In these latter cases, it is likely that a summary will be distributed rather than the raw evaluations.
Timing with respect to finals and grading varies.  In all cases, however, institutions tend to take pains to preserve student privacy so that unless somebody leaves a clearly identifying mark in the comments it should be unable to affect their grades either way.

That tallies with my experience as an adjunct professor in the US.  For me, the best feedback is in the "open ended" responses: What can the professor do better? What does the professor do well? There are generally one or two gems from each class in those sections that help me figure out how to do better for the next class.

One subtlety at my university (which I didn't know until I'd been here for a decade) is that the individual teaching evaluation forms are available only to the instructor.  Department heads, promotion committees, awards committees, and the like only have access to the average scores for the first two questions (quality of instructor / quality of course).  In particular, only the instructor sees the students' narrative comments.

@peter-k I've had the same experience too. I eagerly wait the "comments" section of our teacher evaluations as they are typically very useful. BTW, one more data point: in our institution, these comments can only be seen by the instructor (but the averages scores are completely public).

In the university I attended, evaluations were in two parts. A number ranking (1-5) on some university wide (and sometimes department wide) questions were available to the department. A second set of open-answer questions were available to the professor only.
Other universities have different policies, including as open as making all the evaluations available (in an anonymized fashion) on the university website. Often a department secretary (or possibly assistant to the Chair of the department) is tasked with handling these evaluations. They (or your advisor) should be able to answer how your university handles them.
It is nearly universal (in the US at least) that the evaluations are not given to the professor until after final grades are turned in. This avoids the appearance of retaliation for a bad review (or reward for a good one).


text:
Which license should be chosen in arXiv for a paper to be published in IEEE TPDS?
I would like to know what license needs to be chosen in arXiv for a paper that is to be sent to an IEEE journal, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS).
Arxiv licenses:

non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article.
Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0).
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (CC BY-SA 4.0).
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).
Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication (CC0 1.0).

I read numerous pages like A, B, and C, but I didn't find my answer.

Arxiv has a minimal license option. If any of them work, that's the one.

I am no lawyer and I have not read the complete legalese, but as far as I see, the first option (non-exclusive and irrevocable license to distribute the article) is the only possible valid one, as it is the most restrictive.
All the Creative Commons licenses would allow others to distribute a copy of your paper (with attribution and some possible restrictions, such as the non-commercial clause). However the IEEE policy allows only the following:

Author’s personal website
Author’s employer’s website
arXiv.org
Funder’s repository

[...] The posted article must be removed from any other third-party servers.

So using a CC license would result in a conflict, as you cannot both allow others to distribute copies while at the same time guaranteeing to the IEEE that there will be no copies on other servers.
This does not guarantee that the first option is the right one, however since the IEEE explicitly allows arXiv.org and we have excluded all the others, they will probably not complain...

Is the first option the most restrictive or the least restrictive?

I would call it the most restrictive, as the author gives away the least amount rights to others.

This might be relevant after the OP has signed away their rights.

Prevent IEEE access restrictions - Don't use option 1
The IEEE's ability to legally restrict access is based on having exclusive rights, which they take from you by strong-arming you into signing those away.
The solution is using the standard trick: to actually grant the relevant rights beforehand to someone else - without losing them yourself - so that when you sign the IEEE copyright form, there will be someone else to give you the rights back afterwards. That's why you should choose one of the last three options, never the first one.
Recommendation: CC-BY-SA
Personally, I would tend not to restrict commercial use from the get-go. It's tempting, but when you think about it - the social damage from having to go through you for economic use of your findings is probably higher than the benefit of sticking it to the large corporations or what-not.
As for public domain - I'd be against it, since attribution is important not just to you but also for academic/scientific work. So, wanna use my paper? Citation please.
Non-SA licenses: I would be worried about derivative work being non-free.
To be honest, though, this isn't a strong recommendation and all three are fine by me I guess.

Coming very late and just having the same problem,
https://conferences.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/get-published/post-your-paper/#preprint says

Upon acceptance of the paper by IEEE, the author must replace the
posted preprint paper with either (1) the full citation to the IEEE
work with the DOI, or (2) the accepted version of the paper with the
DOI and an appropriate copyright notice (as described in the “Accepted
paper” section below).  No other changes may be made to the accepted
paper.

It seems to me that IEEE does not (anymore?) restrict the freedom to choose any of the five licensing options for the preprint. However, if one chooses to upload the IEEE accepted version to arXiv, an "appropriate copyright notice" must be added (apparently the one agreed with IEEE). I understand that if you upload the accepted version then you'd have to choose option 1 (the most restrictive one) to remain consistent.
(I'm also not a lawyer, but hope that helps.)

For the rest, I agree with the other answers.

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


text:
Is it the denomination of the PhD course very important?
I received an unconditional offer for a PhD from two different universities. The first from a famous Department of English. The second from an average Department of Comparative Literature. (I have an MA in Comparative Literature and have studied Russian and English).
My research proposal - for which I received an offer in both departments – has, however, a multi-national and theoretical approach. I was wondering: if I accept the offer at the Department of English, will I still be able, after graduation, to apply for a post-doc position in Comparative Literature? Clearly, I wish to publish papers in Comparative Literature and write my PhD dissertation with a comparative approach.
P.S.: I don't know if this information is necessary, but I am an Italian student and got both my BA and MA in Italy.

No, the name of your degree is not important in most cases. You will be judged based on the quality and area of your work and research and your publication record. If you publish with a comparative approach and want to do a post-doc in a comparative department, you won't be impeded simply because your degree says you have a PhD in English.
It is more important that you have an advisor (and perhaps other mentors as well) around you that can assist you in the approach you wish to take. If no one in this Department of English has any expertise in a comparative approach (I think it would be highly unlikely that no one would, but perhaps no one you were interested in working with), that's a bigger issue than the name of the degree, and something you should actually consider.


text:
Letting another author know I'm using one of their results
Let's say I write a paper and use a result from someone that is rarely cited. Would it be polite/acceptable/unacceptable to email them and let them know of my application of their result before publishing my paper?
This would be primarily self-serving on my part, as I'd want to know if they see any other applications of their work to mine.  But I don't want to come across as someone who's trying to leach ideas off of them. I'm open to collaboration.
What would be your reaction if you received an email saying something to the effect of:

Hey, I used result X from your paper from 10 years ago to show Y.  Do you think other applications of your related work could apply to mine?  Here are some of my questions, etc...

Is the researcher still active in that area? Do they have any more recent work that you should be citing? I presume not (for both), which probably means that they've moved on to other things and perhaps aren't well-placed to answer your questions. That said, send the mail anyway!

Citing another is in no way "leaching". It is the natural course of scholarship. It took a long time for my dissertation to be extended, but I was very happy when it occurred. I was, in a small way, an inspiration for another. That is what we do in academia.
Send the email. Moreover, wait and hope for a similar email to come to you in the future. Too seldom do we get to actually thank the people on whose work we build.
And if the person is still working in that field, asking for collaboration is completely proper. In my own example, I'd left the field and had nothing to contribute going forward, but it was still a nice feeling that someone, somewhere, still cared.

+1 Just yesterday I had an email from someone who'd read a paper of mine (and settled some conjectures, one yes one no). Made my day,

I have scientific publications.  I'm always happy to hear someone is reading my work and am willing to discuss it further.
That said, I, in no way, expect to be contacted before hand (just properly cited).
With this, I would be unlikely to offer much insight into how my work may apply to yours.  Researchers are busy, rattling off an email takes time and it simply isn't worth the energy unless there is the potential for collaboration.
In short, sure flick off an email but don't feel obligated to.  Then don't worry about getting a reply, it may never come.

As per the other answers, yes, send the email, but I suggest that you don't jump in with a list of questions.
You could, if you are not sure, ask if they are still active / interested in the field then, if they come back positively, that might lead to collaboration...

It seems like a waste of time to email somebody to basically say, "Can I ask you a question?" Just ask the question and they'll decline to answer it if they don't want to.

@DavidRicherby the way the op put it, was “here are some of my questions”... so if there are 10 or so it is a bit imposing imho... but showing interest could be better...

Yeah, OK. I agree that more than a couple of questions would be too much for a first email.

Write the author - but not the way you've suggested!
It sounds like you've written him:

Hello Prof XYZ. I'm citing your work so now you owe me. Please do some free work for me! Figure out what I'm working on, see whether any of your work applies, and summarize your findings for me so I could publish more.

No no no no no, don't send that kind of a message.
I suggest that:

You greet them
You mention how them work on ABC has been inspirational for you, or how it attracted you to study ABC further etc.
Tell them that you've been able to show whatever you've shown, and that X from their paper was key to achieving Y / helped lay the foundations for Z / gave you the idea to establish Y.
If you want to ask him whether they explored a specific research direction X' following their work on X, ask.
Don't ask them to do something for you. That might be relevant once you've established a rapport - and probably not even then. You can ask them for a suggestion regarding something to read; or for documents they have access to and you don't.

Seeking input for further research is in general a good idea. It could be beneficial for the other group, too.
If in doubt, wait with your email after your paper is accepted or even published.


text:
Postdoc with a professor retiring soon
I am starting a new postdoc position with a professor who's retiring soon (<5 yrs, judging from the grad intake).
I am interested in pursuing an academic job and it worries me that I would not be able to count on him during my career, for support after he retires.
Am I overly worried and exaggerating the benefit of having a senior scientist interested in your work in the early stage of your academic career?
Right now, I am thinking of doing as much work as I can and using his connections to do a second postdoc with younger and active PI.
Any advice would be appreciated!

Thank you everyone for helpful input! I think I was just surprised by the retirement news on the first week of my work which led to unnecessary amount of worries as always.. I will definitely communicate with him to make sure that we are on the same page about my postdoc career! Again thank you for your kind advice

You are overthinking it and maybe trying to plan too far in advance. Your current prof, after retirement, will most likely still be able to help you. He will still have his contacts and may still give you some, if less, feedback on your ideas.
You are right to maximize what you have now. But as time passes you will have the opportunity to fine-tune your future. You will know more in a year or so. You can explore with your current prof what he intends after retirement. It may be retirement in name only, perhaps. You can also get connected to his network as you work along, so that his direct presence is less important.
Far worse if someone leaves suddenly for any reason. That can leave you stranded. This situation seems well controlled with a lot of planning time.

Before worrying too much, I think you should simply ask the professor about his plans for the future. Is he actually thinking about retiring, or is this a temporary wind-down? Also keep in mind that some people want to retire from teaching and administrative duties, but stay active in research or writing for a lot longer, while others will simply vanish the day of retirement. (The latter is rare, of course, but still happens.) The point is, if you form a good relationship with this professor, and they aren't the vanishing type, you might very well have their support beyond retirement.

This begs the question if the professor is willing to share that information openly with a new postdoc at the very beginning of their professional relationship.

@Ghanima Sure, and the professor certainly has a right to not share this information (but in that case I suspect OP could learn something from the way their question isn't answered). Still, unless there are strong cultural or personal reasons not to ask, well, I think it's worth bringing it up and see what happens.

I am starting a new postdoc position with a professor

No you're not. Not really. You're being hired as a fixed-term (post-doctoral) researcher. It so happens that you'll be associated to this Professor's research group.
Now, ok, I'm describing this in the other extreme. But the point is that a post-doc is an independent researcher, first and foremost.

who's retiring soon (<5 yrs, judging from the grad intake).

So you don't even know for sure?
Is his output as a researcher and relevance to your fields of interest still significant? Then it's not even clear he's retiring. Or he may "retire" to become an active Emeritus. Otherwise, ok.

I am interested in pursuing academic job and it worries me that I would not be able to count on him during my career for support after he retires.

You're implying you're not worried about his support for the duration of your appointment as a post-doc researcher. If that's the case - then you're in good shape. A lot of people don't have even that.

Am I overly worried and exaggerating the benefit of having a senior scientist interested in your work in the early stage of your academic career?

You're not exaggerating the maximum possible effect of such support, but you are exaggerating its mean effect conditioning on its being extended, and its mean extent. So IMHO, this should not be a major consideration. The main questions could be:

Do you have interesting alternatives? Do Pros and Cons. If not, then be happy you're not busing tables.
Will you be working on what you want to work?
Are there other researchers around with which you can have some "cross-polination" or even proper collaboration?
Do they pay reasonably? (If not, you might still want to go there and help organize a researcher's union; this is not related to your question but I just cannot exaggerate the importance of unionization among junior academics)
How is the environment, housing conditions, spouse support if relevant, child care arrangements, etc. etc.

Right now, I am thinking of doing as much work as I can and using his connections to do a second postdoc with younger and active PI.

Start by "doing as much work as you can". If a second post-doc presents itself and is an opportunity for some variety, consider it - at that point.

"But the point is that a post-doc is an independent researcher, first and foremost."  No, some are but many are not.

@AnonymousPhysicist: Independent in the sense that you no longer need the guidance of a senior academic staff member to conduct research. Also, you will be expected to show initiative and independence if you want to advance - at least in all cases I'm aware of.

Most posdocs have supervisors.  They may or may not need them.  Your comment that "a post-doc is an independent researcher, first and foremost" is mostly wrong.

@AnonymousPhysicist: "Most postdocs have supervisors" <- 1. Can you provide a reference to some stats about that? 2. What's your definition of a "supervisor"?

I don't do reference requests on Stack Exchange.  Many universities have regulations on their websites requiring postdocs be supervised.  At my university everyone has supervisor(s) without regard to their rank.  2.  I define "Supervisor" to be the person who is required by the university to supervise (e.g. monitor their performance, and possibly tell them what to do) the postdoc.

@AnonymousPhysicist: 1. So let me rephrase. What are you basing your claim on? 2. Monitoring is one thing, being able t tell you what to do is a second thing, and being an approving authority for your research agenda and methods is a third thing.

Some advantages of working with someone late in their career: They will be well-networked and knowledgeable in your field, so a good source of advice and expertise. As @Anyon states, many retired researchers continue to publish and attend conferences, so ongoing collaboration is possible. A good person of this type to work with would have many well-placed former students/postdocs/junior colleagues that he or she still works with, and be receiving recognition (awards etc) for their career contributions to your field. You would want to avoid someone who has maintained feuds with their peers since they will be prominent in your field too.
Some advantages of working with someone early in their career: They are looking to build up funding or reputation too, so there will be opportunities to collaborate on future projects. A good person of this type to work with would be getting early-career recognition (asked to chair sessions at conferences, for example) and have a good funding track record. You would also want to make sure they have a personality for collaboration. Some people can get a good start based on their own talent but are not able to mentor junior colleagues well.
Best of all is to get a mix of both, as you suggested.

talk with the professor about your concerns. Ask him especially how he sees his retirement. Many professors get a an office as emeritus, and effectively continues working.
do not be overly concerned about the professor in the first place. Your role is different from when you where a phd student. Reach out and establish new contacts.
Working with a professor that will become inactive (not the same as emeritus) means you have a unique position to take over expertise as he exits, if you are up to that task.
As professor go emeritus, they often pull down on hours. If he will have half finished collaborations, research consortium's and funding applications you may get a piece of that cake as well.

I think it will be fine, ESPECIALLY as a post doc.  May even be better because his group will shrink and you get more time with him.  Also post docs pull their own weight regardless.  Plus older profs get more grandfatherly and supportive.


text:
update a paper after the deadline
I have finished my paper for a computer science conference, and I submitted it, but after the deadline a discover the missing of a figure, what if I updated my paper on the Easychair conference organization platform?

deadlines make stress, updated

If the conference uses the Easychair system for organizing the reviewing process for conferences, then you can check if you can still upload an updated version. This often works, as many conference organizers choose to manually disable the submission of updated versions after the deadline has passed. So if Easychair allows you to still upload an updated version, you can use this functionality. This is because in this case, the assignment of papers to reviewers hasn't been triggered, so nobody should have had a close look at your paper already.
When you cannot upload updated version anymore, the best course of action is to send a new version to the PC chair, asking her/him to update the paper on Easychair manually. Accompany the new version with a list of changes and an apology. If this change list really short and lists easy to recognize problems with the paper (such as a missing figure), the PC chair is likely to forward your updated paper to all reviewers, so that they can do the review on the updated version. They may choose not to, though, because your updated version is late. But if a reviewer hasn't even started looking into your paper (and printing it), they will normally not mind.

Correct answer, but without explicit permission, the option of updating the paper in EasyChair after the deadline (if available) should only be used until 1-2 hours after the deadline. Later, some reviewers might have already downloaded the earlier version and use that for assessing the paper.

@lighthousekeeper I'm wondering....doesn't Easychair automatically disable paper uploads when the PC chairs trigger the final paper assignment?

From what I know, it can be set up to be automatically disabled at a specific point in time (e.g., at the deadline). Otherwise it is disabled manually.


text:
Is it (ab)normal to propose a course to another university as a PhD candidate
I'm an external PhD candidate at a university in Germany, meaning that I have neither a post at the university nor funding. I know this isn't ideal, but my question is this:
My research is related to language education, and for my field work I'd like to compare students from a certain Asian country (mine) with German students. I have done the field work in Asia, and now I need to teach a class in at least two German universities to observe the students' attitude first-hand.
Would it be very outlandish to write an email to a department chair at a neighbouring university in order to propose a class in relation to my PhD project? I've checked their program, and the title of my proposed course isn't there. As this is for the sake of my project, I could do it voluntarily, although I'd be very glad if I'm paid. Should I state that as well (at least the first part)?
I have no idea whether an unsolicited application like this is common in academia (particularly in Germany). In any case I don't want to sound desperate or forcing someone's hand. Thank you in advance for your insight.
P.S. My supervisor is taking a sabbatical leave, so he's not around at the university, and I cannot easily ask questions like this.

I worry, actually, that your research will be tainted if you (a) teach the course and (b) record "attitudes". It might be best to observe the teaching of other instructors. I don't need a reply, but hope you have considered this issue.

It is even ridiculous, sorry. Another story would be to propose and eventually arrange a project in which you basically observed existing courses or implement a kind of "laboratory" with the students of your future supervisor or so.

Yes, I think it is quite abnormal to suggest that a department takes up a course in their program for the purpose of research field work of a PhD student from another university. To me it seems unlikely that they are going to agree to that.
My field is not education research, but I have a hard time imagining that teaching yourself and evaluating something that goes on in a lecture on a higher level goes very well together.
Some points that you may want to consider to increase your chances of getting to do reliable field work:

Maybe it is sufficient to sit in one or two sessions of an appropriate on-going course just as an observer? Find a suitable course, explain your plans to the instructor, and I think you'll have much higher chances of getting this done than getting to teach a course yourself.
If your field work absolutely requires that you are the teacher, then I would propose that you look for a suitable course that already exists, and ask the instructor of that if you'd be allowed to teach one or two sessions in that course. Of course you have to show your qualification to do that, and it may be helpful if your supervisor could actually make or support that request (assuming that he/she is knowledgable in the field you're looking to teach in).

Even if your advisor is currently on leave, I'd like to suggest asking her/him handling the issue.
While for a Master's level course, you could propose teaching a course to a different department, it is unlikely to work. Normally you need a PhD to be an examiner for a course, and since you don't have a PhD....that will be quite tricky. There may be exceptions for experienced influential external people not holding a PhD (e.g., high-ranking engineers from industry), but that will require some support from a professor within the department.
If there is really no way for you to get your advisor involved in asking (which is likely to drive up the success rate of your endeavor dramatically), you will need to find a professor at the department to teach at who is close enough in terms of research to serve the role of examiner for the course, and do an informal inquiry with that person to check if they are interested.

If - quite apart from your own research needs - you are eminently qualified to teach the module, it would not be outlandish.
However, modules are part of a complex intramural infrastructure and financial ecology. Even a tenured professor cannot just propose modules that he or she would like to teach. (This is why we kept module titles quite generic, so we could extensively repurpose our modules without officially changing title and code number.)
So, unless your proposal fits a clear and present and pre-existing need at that other uni, you are very likely to get thanks but no thanks.

"Even a tenured professor cannot just propose modules that he or she would like to teach." - For elective courses at the Master's level, this is pretty much how it works in several universities in Germany.


text:
I drunkenly told a professor something fundamentally wrong about a friend's thesis work. Should I clarify and/or apologize?
TL;DR: I told a professor something fundamental about a friends' work that is absolutely wrong, and I should have known, but I was drunk. Will it help the situation if I clarify and apologize via e-mail?
Yesterday evening I attended a festivity at my old university. I got drunk and talked to a professor who is working in a field related to my studies.
In particular, I told him that a friend and coworker of mine did his master thesis on a topic that is related to a project the professor is working on. However, I got it mixed up and this is not true. He appeared surprised and said he was going to look into that.
Now I regret getting drunk and I am wondering whether I should email him to clarify (and apologize). Either he did know that I was in the wrong, and did not correct me out of politeness, or he will actually ask around and several people will know that I gave the professor wrong information. The latter option would be very embarrassing to me, since I actually attended my friends' thesis defense and I know what it was about.

If I was the professor, I would appreciate the correction, but it would feel awkward if the student felt very sorry and embarrassed about it. I would appreciate a short e-mail with the purpose of "correction", so that I don't have to look into it (and confusion is avoided for the case that I actually do.)

You should apologise if you a) were inappropriately drunk, or b) said anything inappropriate. And to just clear this up, you are probably too late, if that prof knows how to run a search engine.

DOn't apologize or make a big deal about it. Don't tell them you were drunk. Say you mixed up two different friends, that happens all the time.

You got the answers below. I just point out that likely the prof was either drunk or aware of you being drunk. Not a drama.

How well do you know the professor?  If you got drunk together I imagine you know him at least a bit on a personal level, is that true?

While alcohol may have played a factor in your confusion, I don't think it's relevant in the apology. Just say that you were mistaken, no reason to mention the alcohol.

The professor having been surprised could actually be a good thing. You can use this as hook for your e-mail, in the way of “Oh yes, you were right. I checked again and the fields are indeed not as related as I thought.”

@Issel that is a lie, and doesn't even make sense, the professor doesn't care which friend, he cares that there is someone out there doing similar work.

I don't see why Germany should be any different from other places, but generally it is a good idea to apologize for stupid things said drunkenly. And since this may have a bearing on the reputation of a third party you probably have an obligation to make sure the record is correct.
Sooner is better than later in such things, so the professor doesn't spend effort on a lost cause.

Well, the teatotaller faction generally is very small in Germany, so there is a good chance that prof was sloshed himself. ;) And while most Germans know that the prohibition has been repealed, we´re not sure how Americans feel about the issue of being drunk in public. I.e. we´ve got the feeling they feel a bit different about it than we do.

I would add that if possible I would give the apology in person rather then per email. If that is hard to do, maybe a phone call is better then an email.

Maybe I have a different threshold, but I would hardly call what the OP described a "stupid thing said drunkenly". It is an honest mistake that can perfectly happen while sober. Correcting the mistake is good (I would not go so far as to call it an "obligation" either, as this happened during an informal gathering), but the words "stupid" and "drunk" do not need to be in the email, as the first one is false and the second one is irrelevant.

This shouldn't be a big deal. If I were in your position I would simply email the professor and apologise, say you had made a mistake. But keep it professional, don't make a big deal about it, and you don't need to draw attention to the fact you were drunk... especially since not everyone's drunkenness presents as making up random things about people, and it might lower the professor's opinion of you. Just say something along the lines of, "Hi, it was nice to have a chat the other night. I know I spoke to you about x, but I realise I was mistaken."

Right, it seems like the mistake could have been easily made while sober, too, so no need to make the drunkenness central to the apology.

There is no need to apologise for being drunk, as this is really not relevant; such a mixup could happen in any state of mind. There is also no need to apologise profusely for giving him false information; it is just a small mixup that is of little consequence to anyone. To keep the consequences at a minimum, it would grace you to spare your professor the wasted time of looking up (or even going through) an irrelevant thesis, by sending him an email along the following lines:

Dear X,
A few days ago I suggested that my coworker's masters thesis might be of interest to you, as its topic is related to your field. Today I realised I got his thesis mixed up ; his is not at all related to your work.
  Sorry for the confusion.
Regards,

You could start off the email with some niceties depending on how familiar you are.

If there is another one, he should be prepared for the followup "oh, what was the thesis that did relate".  If there isn't another one, he should not say that there was.  OP said "mixed up" but not "mixed up with another one".  I'm just saying, careful with the wording to make sure the problem isn't made worse.

@msouth Agreed. Upon rereading the question, it seems that I read something that was not written. If there isn't another one, the phrase "...with another one" should be omitted indeed.

Just want to take a second here to thank you for taking the time to respond and update your answer--it is nice to have one's effort (even if small) be acknowledged and reciprocated.  It makes the site work better if we can just submit improvements to a question rather than having to submit our own to address a problem with an existing question.  Welcome to the site, I hope you keep contributing and enjoy your time here.


text:
How to revoke my old paper from a fake journal (waset.org)?
It was like more than 6 years ago, I was an undergrad senior in a south asian university, we did not have much internet connectivity back then.
I wanted to publish something on a journal/conference to get a feedback on my undergrad thesis (I was curious to know about the quality of my work) and submitted a paper to one of the journals listed on that notorious waset.org.
I was young and novice, above all, I had no idea that people could do such a scam with intellectual issues like "research papers", anyway.
but the thing is that when I search my name on a web search engine (google, duck-duck-go etc.), that biggest mistake of my life still comes up on the first page, I am now near the end of my PhD and looking for an academic/research job. So, I wanted to communicate with them so that I can request them to revoke my paper.
However, their site does not provide any specific contact address/person to whom I can discuss with.
I have no wish to resubmit that to any other place, after 7 years now I can understand that my undergrad thesis work was too "trivial" to be "published".
Is there anyone who is in the similar situation? and is there any way to retract the paper from waset.org ?
any pointer will be greatly appreciated.
Apology: I am feeling very uneasy to share the link of my paper, but their website is provided.

Personally (and I don't know how other people would feel), I would be wary of holding a publication in a scam journal against you without further investigation. For all I know, they published it without your knowledge.

If you consider that the biggest mistake of your life, you're doing pretty well for yourself so far... :P

@Davidmh I hope people will realize that, because as far as I remember I did not sign any consent form with waset, it was long ago.

@henning I don't think this is a duplicate of a question about conferences.

I think there is something you can do to help yourself in this situation.
You could contact Google and ask if they would remove this particular search hit from their cache. As a result your paper will not come up when people search your name in Google. Of course your paper will still exist in their server but I think that a major part of the potential damage can be avoided since I would believe that people do not intentionally go the predator publishers website to search anyones articles.
Here are the instructions to contact Google: https://support.google.com/websearch/troubleshooter/3111061?hl=en

Reading their removal policies, I'm not sure if an embarassing publication is the kind of thing they would remove. But I guess it's worth a try.

@mhwombat I think it definitely worth of try. If celebrities get their pictures removed, I guess this should be valid also. Especially in the context of "predator publisher"

Moreover this is about removing one particular hit from the Google cache, not a two dozens of hits

@ramgorur, if you ask Google to remove this search hit, please let us know whether or not they do so.

@mhwombat According to Google's policy, it's unlikely that it will be removed because it 1. doesn't violate any laws (unless the fake journal is breaking the law by publishing?), and 2. doesn't expose any personal information other than that which would normally be exposed if you published anywhere else. Furthermore, most other search engines (Yahoo, Bing, etc) will have indexed it as well. In fact, Google will probably re-index it because waset.org still exists and has the journal available via link.

good idea, I will try this way and will update if anything good happens.

If it's not their IP to publish, and the author has withdrawn reproduction rights, then they are indeed breaking the law, and stuff like DMCA takedowns will work. I used one once to take down my own work from geocities when someone guessed and changed my Yahoo password.

Of course you can try to contact the conference 'organizers', but I am afraid that a scam conference, like waset (which is an anagram for waste), will not revoke your paper.
I would suggest that you leave the paper out from any list that you can control (your website, your university's website, your cv, your google scholar profile, etc).
Try to focus on your genuine papers. As that list grows, the trivial one will become less and less visible.

yes, that's why waset people do not keep any contact point, in the meantime I will try to take the google approach.

@ramgorur, they were forced to provide a contact point when they registered the domain -- https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/88367/22768

You can look-up domain name owners. World Academy of Science Engineering and Technolo [sic] is listed as the owner of waset.org, their registered business address is given as 6, Dubai, 28817, AE, which probably doesn't help much, they also registered phone number +971.559099620 and email address waset.org@gmail.com, which might be more useful.

Google ranks results based on an algorithm that calculates the page rank of a page, which is (over simplified) a combination of links to that page and the ranks of the pages linking to it. I can't think that this fake journal would have a very high rank.
Social websites usually have a sky high page rank, so you can try and bury this result in search by creating a public profile on as many social media websites as you can (linkedin, google plus, facebook, twitter, pinterest, instagram, youtube (upload a cat video please), geni, blogger, google scholar, wordpress, to name just a few), and those should quickly outrank this one.
You can create public profiles on forums in your area of research (or any sizeable forum for that matter), as these also tend to have high page rank. I also see some of reviews on zomato when I google my own name, so that could be worth a try.
Last but not least, you can register your name as a domain name, and host a website there with your CV. Typically domains that exactly match a search term tend to rank well for that term.
The key is to use your name, or the name that appears in your paper that you would like to bury.

We all make mistakes, but learning from them is where the value lies.
Add this under notable life experiences on your CV. This way you have the opportunity to explain the situation, and show that you have grown since then. It also shows that you are not trying to hide things, that you can own up to your mistakes, that you have courage, and that you can poke fun at yourself.
The softer skills in life could indicate how well you would fit into an existing team, and that also counts towards your appointability, not just your academic achievements.

I am also in a similar situation. I am a PhD student. I submitted a paper to one of WASET conferences which they had used a name of a genuine top level conference. After I submitted my paper, they accepted within 3 days without any reviews and that made me suspicious. I decided to withdraw my paper after 2 weeks. However, I was surprised to learn from my friend 2 months later that they went ahead and published my paper yet I had withdrawn and did not attend nor pay for the conference. I have written to them almost 20 times to remove my paper but they declined. In short, never submit a paper to WASET, it's a scam for making money through registration fee from unsuspecting researchers.

This is interesting but not an answer so far. Perhaps you can emphasize the conclusion that there is not really anything OP can do.


text:
Supervisor who accepted me for a research internship now says he doesn't know who I am
I've been accepted in a research internship. However, after I sent an email to my supervisor asking about some details, he told me that he has no idea about who I am, and that maybe I've been exchanging with someone else. But the confirmation letter was signed by him.
I'm so confused, I'm afraid if I send more emails it would look like I'm forcing things. I'm really confused because I refused many offers to work in this lab. Any suggestions please?

Is it possible that there are two individuals with the same name?

No it’s not possible, I already discussed with the professor, I think he just forgot ... which is a bit weird

When you say "I've already discussed with the professor" what exactly does that mean? Did you email, meet on Zoom, speak on the phone?

No just by email, he put me in contact with another professor with whom I had the interview

Are you sure that the professor who signed the letter is to be your supervisor, and did not simply sign it in some administrative capacity? Particularly since you say some other professor interviewed you for the position. If it is a structured internship program, the professor who signed could be the program coordinator, for instance.

@GoodDeeds he’s my supervisor and it’s even mentioned in the letter of acceptance

@pjc50 That's exactly what the very first comment asks about here. :)

Did you pay anything for this "internship"? It could be a possible scam.

I know of a professor who one day came and said he had a new PhD student he didn't know about, because he forgot to have accepted him. But bottom line, he had a new student, he signed and accepted him, so that already done. Likely the professor will work with you, but if you got acceptance and he forgot, its his problem, not yours :)

Professors are people, too. Probably just slipped his mind. Nothing wrong with reminding him, telling him you have the letter of acceptance. It pains me to admit it, but I could see myself doing something like this, so it's not so surprising.

This is a great story. An update would be nice ;)

@AyoubAjarra Where was the interview with the "other professor" conducted?  In person?  Remotely?  Did you actually set foot in the institution you think you're going to attend?  Do you know for certain that the person who interviewed you is actually a professor at that university?  Did you pay anyone any money?

Sorry guys for the late response, I am going through some hard times lately because of what happened, I’m shocked and disappointed, this is my last year internship that I take too seriously, unfortunately this is not ethical coming from one of the best labs in the world, I don’t know what to do now ...

I didn’t pay anything ... but from what I’ve heard, they recruited another intern for the same position, the other intern is paid and they’re preparing his visa and work authorization, unlike me... I’ve been ghosted for a long time ... I was hoping this is just a joke, I rejected many paid good offers to start this internship that isn’t even paid ... Anyway, I don’t know anymore what words would best express my situation ... I’m just disappointed and lost hope.

@AyoubAjarra It's been two days - did you not follow up with the professor since then, like the top answer suggests?  Don't wait - do that now!

@J... I did, I’m trying not to give details about the lab or the professor ... I tried the best I can, the professor gives me short answers or doesn’t answer me at all.

The RH sent me the internship agreement with a stipend salary, then later, told me it was a mistake and that the internship is non funded.... These are certainly the worst conditions that an intern can work on, now I just regret all the good offers that I withdrew because I’ve been dreaming to work with this brilliant professor... he’s one of the best researchers in the world and I am very grateful for the opportunity he gave me ... but after all, it seems like it wasn’t what I really imagined ...

You need to get one of your local faculty involved to help you on this ASAP. Whoever the faculty member you have the best relationship is, show them the information and ask if they will email the other faculty to try to work out a fair solution given the situation.

So in the meantime, what has happened?

Don't read too much in to this. There are a variety of possible explanations, including a miscommunication between the PI and the person with whom you had the interview. It is also possible that the PI is very busy and a bit distracted and someone who delegates a lot of such things to others, such as the person you interviewed with.
I would suggest just reminding both of the state of affairs as you see them and ask again (both people) for the details you need. Hopefully everyone will get "on the same page" soon.

this seems like just a guess that has no basis on the question asked and really should be a comment.

@blankip: what kind of answer would you expect to "my future supervisor does not recognize me"? Something like "there is a rule 23-49 in the official Yale handbook that states a supervisor will forget students in 42% of cases"? All the answers will obviously go from "he is busy, to ""he delegated and someone fucked up", to "he may have a brain damage". Anything will be speculation for such a question.

Send him an email with a copy of the acceptance letter. Don't phrase the email as "you were wrong", but rather express that you are confused, that maybe there is a misunderstanding.
If the prof is a reasonable person things will improve from there. Otherwise, you could contact the admissions office that sent you the letter, explaning the situation. That said, if you get to this second stage, it is not clear if it is to your advantage to work with this person.

Why should one express being confused when one is not confused?

Out of politeness and pragmatism. There is little to gain from telling idiots that they are idiots. If you tell someone "you are wrong", in particular when the person is supposed to be some kind of authoritative figure, it goes bad more often than not. It shouldn't, but it does.

Yes, I agree with you that one should not say that someone is wrong. One should just state facts, like: "I have this signed paper from you, which should confirm that I am not exchanging". The shorter the better, to my opinion.

@yarchik: I wouldn't say "I have this signed paper from you", because it comes across as accusing, and at this stage you're not 100% certain that you have the right person (as others have mentioned, it's not that uncommon for there to be two people with the same name, or at least similar enough names that their email addresses are easily confused). If it's the wrong person and you're polite, they're much more likely to send a helpful response ("Ah, you need Dr Xyz, whose email address is x.xyz@example.edu, I'm Dr Xyzz xyzz@example.edu. People always get us mixed up").

+1 for stressing a non-confrontational, non-accusing tone.

@yarchik: 1. OP literally says they're confused.... 2. You could phrase it as "Perhaps I have gotten confused, but" or "I hope I am not confusing you with someone else, but the acceptance letter seems to indicate that XYZ". etc.

You do not indicate whether you have exchanged emails or calls in person with this supervisor. (At the very least, my email program will remember who I've interacted with even if I don't, and I confess that this has at times been my first checkpoint.) However, I suspect that your dealings thus far have been with a different person and that you and the supervisor have simply been assigned to one another. However, s/he did sign the letter. It is quite possible that they may not remember this as their PA gives them a pile of letters to sign everyday (but then it would be unprofessional for them to plead complete ignorance, if they have a PA with whom they can check what happened!). There could also be a bog standard mix-up.
In any case, be forewarned that this mess is a sign of things to come. You will be supervised by an overworked junior staff member or postdoc, your supervisor will rarely if ever see you and most likely still not have the slightest clue who you are when the internship is done, unless you deliver them a high-impact manuscript they can put their name to.


text:
What are the consequences of using Sci-Hub?
A student of mine has told me about Sci-Hub, where people can download copyrighted scholarly articles for free.
I have cautioned him that it is illegal, but he challenged me asking me what would be the consequences for him if he only downloads files uploaded by others.
So my question is, what are the potential consequences of using Sci-Hub?

Theoretically, the answer depends on many factors, including your jurisdiction, your internet provider rules, and your University Honour code.  Practically, the consequences are likely to be nil.

The answer depends on the laws of the country. Here's an answer for Germany: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86414/is-it-legal-to-use-sci-hub-cc-in-germany

what are the consequences - am I assuming correctly that you are interested mainly in the legal consequences?

I'm also interested in the consequences, both at personal and community levels, of not using Sci-Hub.

Right now the main consequence is being unable to get papers. It has been broken of the time!..

Which country were you asking about?

I am mainly interested in European countries and USA

Using Sci Hub is like borrowing books from a library without checking them out: 1) It is stealing, 2) it's the same DB or very close to Athens, Jstor, etc. that you already have 3) Sci Hub is way easier to use 4) it's arguably less ethically wrong than outright stealing (from a book store or without a university license respectively). On the subject of theft, how 'bout them publishers? But I digress...

Scihub also often has quality pdfs, sometimes more easily readable by iphone pdf readers than university libraries.

It's of questionable legality, but it's not going to lead to prosecution. For me personally using sci-hub has led to new research results in fields outside of my specialization that will (very likely) appear in leading peer reviewed journals. One problem I'm not sure about is whether it's wise to say in the acknowledgements: "I thank Alexandra Elbakyan for setting up Sci-Hub without which the research results reported in this paper would have been impossible", in an Elsevier paper.
Using sci-hub therefore has at least the consequence of your personal scientific enlightenment, and possibly even of many other people who benefit from research you have been able to as a result of using sci-hub.

Wise or not, it's increasingly common to thank Alexandra Elbakyan in published acknowledgements, even (apparently) on an Elsevier journal. You can just use a generic phrase like "for her support", or "for help with the literature review" or "for her indirect assistance" as someone did.

There would likely be no consequences for a student to use sci-hub. In fact, for a student to not use it is foolish, considering that much valuable research that could be used for school assignments is hidden behind paywalls that no student can be reasonably asked to pay.
I could see the argument being made against using sci-hub for a professional research paper, in which the user actually stands to receive some form of profit from their work. But a student can only gain knowledge and assignment completion, with no monetary profit from using this site.
The legality of the site itself is dubious, but there are not likely legal consequences for simply using the site, especially if there is no monetary gain for the user.
Morally, there is much to be said about academic monopolization. Too many publications and companies control knowledge, inflating prices to take advantage of already poor students with few other options. This was a legal question, not a moral one, so I will say no more about it, but I would not take action against the student if I were you.

There being no monetary gain for the user doesn't make it legal to use something acquired illegally - see https://law.stackexchange.com/a/33647/15133

The consequences are overwhelmingly positive!

Gaining access to research papers one would probably not otherwise have access to.

Undermining the control major publishers (Elsevier etc.) have over access to scientific findings.

Contributing to a social norm of free access to scientific information.

There is effectively no possibility of your friend being sanctioned for downloading articles from Sci-Hub. I do not know of world states in which researchers have been penalized or sued in court for doing so - although, caveat: I have not followed the question of such legal action closely.

Sorry, your #2 is a deal breaker. While the system isn't perfect, it does get scientific findings both properly viewed and disseminated.

@Buffy: #2 is not necessary for scientific findings to be disseminated. Not sure what "properly viewed" means.

Hmmm. properly "reviewed". Garbage can also be disseminated, and is. If you don't believe the publishing system is valid, don't use it. But copyright has a valid purpose.

@Buffy: Why do we need Elsevier for journals with proper reviews? Academics do the reviews anyway, they/we would just do it in freely-accessible-content journals instead.

But that isn't Sci-Hub. I hold copyright on much of my own work. Sci-Hub can make it less valuable to me, the creator. Nevermind Elsevier. You are attacking copyright, not Elsevier.

@Buffy: You focused on #2. If you want to argue about copying restriction mechanisms, we can do that. I don't understand what you mean by your paper being "less valuable" because people can read it. Do you mean you want to be able to make money by charging people for reading it?

Using Sci Hub can also be like reading books in a library without borrowing them: 1) Is it operating as the library intended? No and yes. 2) I agree that it's arguably less ethically wrong than outright stealing. After reading copious articles on a subject, I can then decide which articles I want to cite/include/research further. Impossible to gain such knowledge and familiarity with the subject if I had to purchase each paper.
As a teenager I would go to a Barnes and Noble and read another chapter of the same book every day till I finished it. Then on to new book. Was it stealing? I didn't really care because I couldn't afford to buy school lunch much less books. I see this much the same way.

Why "no and yes"? Libraries I know have tables and chairs where people sit and read.

And is "Barnes and Noble" a library? It sounds more like a bookstore.

Maybe you meant to write "bookstore" rather than "library"? I know it is a false friend in some languages. The comparison works better with bookstores anyway, since they are for-profit and selling books is their main source of profit.

Not a good comparison - if the bookstore wanted to prevent you from reading the book, they can seal it up. The same doesn't apply to SciHub, which is illegally accessing papers/books that the publishers explicitly do not want them to access.

Barnes and Noble is, indeed, a US bookstore chain. The commenter was not confusing bookstore with library. He was describing two scenarios, I believe.

@user111388 So what? I don't think that a core aspect of a library is that it has chairs and tables—the important thing is that it allows you to read literature for free, usually within a wide selection of topics. I have my own chair and table when I read articles on SciHub.

Sci-Hub is not a repository of user-uploaded material. See e.g. this explanation - it uses institutional usernames and passwords to obtain the material. When you request a paper, if it's not already in the repository, Sci-Hub uses someone else's institutional access to get the paper. How Sci-Hub got those usernames and passwords is unknown. It's possible they were donated by Sci-Hub supporters, or they might have phished for them (remember also that it is almost certainly against your institutional policies to give out your username and password).
In other words you are correct and your student is wrong: Sci-Hub is illegal.
As for consequences, as in the linked article, if you are doing analysis of the papers themselves, then you're stuck because you can't publish data which you obtained illegally. Beyond that there's likely to be no consequences. There are simply too many people using the service. On a personal level it comes to one's moral values and how much one is willing to do something that's illegal, which I won't comment on.
In the long term if everyone decided to use the service then the publishing world will change massively, although it's complex enough that it's hard to forecast what actually will happen. Also, remember that the modus operandi of Sci-Hub isn't unique to academic publishing. Sci-Hub is a threat to all publishers of non-free electronic content, since it will probably work on Wall Street Journal articles and whatnot.

If everyone used Sci-hub "institutions ... won't subscribe, after which Sci-Hub won't have access to the papers either". Many publishers would then turn into open access, and other novel paywall-less, noncommercial publishing model(s) would appear as well.

@Orion OA would need to gain wider acceptance too (c.f. Jeffrey Beall saying gold OA is fundamentally not workable). It's hard to forecast. Let's just say the publishing world will change massively and leave it at that. I'll edit the "predictions" out of the answer.

Note that Sci-hub is illegal may mean two different things: (1) they are infringing the law by letting people download copyrighted material, or (2) I am infringing the law if I download copyrighted material from them. While (1) seems clear, (2) is much more debatable in my view.

Per https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86414/is-it-legal-to-use-sci-hub-in-germany/112475#112475, (2) is not much more debatable, although it varies by country.

Using Sci-Hub is not universally illegal. In some states in the world it is, in some it's of questionable legality, in others it's perfectly legal. In some states it is not criminally prohibited but is cause for civil legal action (e.g. in the US), so it is kind of illegal but not in the police-and-jails sense. Anyway, your sweeping statement that using Sci-Hub is illegal is untrue.

@einpoklum The best part of that question is "A judge in NY found that viewing child porn on internet not criminal possession bc no possession" -- aka. streaming is not illegal, but downloading is, and this question asked about downloading.

Where is Sci-Hub illegal? No region tag was added to the question! Could we be victims of yet another case of Euro/Amero-centrism here?

@David pretty much anywhere with copyright law would suffice to default to "SciHub is illegal". Doesn't mean it is illegal, but it would be enough to take it as illegal until proven otherwise.

"you can't publish data which you obtained illegally" - Not  true, when you cite a paper, or use the attached data for re-analysis no-one will ask for you to prove you obtained the paper or the data legally.

@Ivana if you publish a paper and you use self-generated data, you'll need to describe how you acquired it, or your results won't be reproducible.

I'm a bit disturbed that this answer was downvoted as it introduces a lot of interesting important elements to this conversation.


text:
University knowledge of student and/or staff viewing free online journal article databases
Is there evidence that Universities network administrators are aware of, or actively tracking student and/or staff usage of free online journal article databases such as Sci-Hub or LibGen?
My question is not meant to address any legal issues. I am merely asking about knowledge of student and staff usage by network administrators and by extension the University.
Unless faculty and students are using Tor a VPN or some other sort of anonymity network, University network administrators can easily track what web pages are being accessed over the University network.
University network administrators commonly track access to social media, gambling, pornography, plagiarism related sites and more. Are Universities also tracking faculty and staff usage of sites like Sci-Hub and LibGen?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_Genesis

"University network administrators commonly track access to social media, gambling, pornography, plagiarism related sites and more." - [citation needed], or at least some context. Given that "the university network" may well serve as the internet connection provided to dorms, tracking students' use of social media and pornography sounds like both a severe restriction of legitimate private internet use and a violation of the students' privacy.

@O.R.Mapper: You are very correct.  My own university has a separate residential network, possibly for that reason, although more likely "because security."

As an alternative, you can install TOR on your computer. In this way, the access will be encrypted to the network provider.

There easily could be, so don't do marginally legal things on your university's network. Mine doesn't appear to do more than shut down bot nets and torrent hosting, but it's not hard to track the rest. It's mostly only in the university's interest to stop crimes and copyright infringement committed on its network so that it doesn't have to deal with law enforcement and/or lawsuits (i.e. paperwork and cooperation). I don't think Sci-Hub and LibGen have risen to that level quite yet. You might get away with it for awhile, but if enough people start accessing scientific content that way, then the paperwork will start to flow in, and the accesses will start getting shut down.

I guess I'm lucky to be in some university where there is not self-censorship and it's up to the users of the networks to deal with the law (and the days getting a PDF from sci-hub will land someone in jail are hopefully quite far away, otherwise jails would soon become research labs).

It's not obvious who would be sending "paperwork" to the university if its students are reading papers via scihub. The only people that know are the university and scihub, and I don't see scihub complaining to the university. (The copyright owner has no way of knowing that students from University X got a copy of their work for personal use via scihub.)

@ff524 and Franck, my opinions of these activities and the realities of what can happen are different things. It wouldn't be hard for some government to take over Sci-Hub without much of anyone knowing in order to gather information on downloaders for future criminal cases. It might also be possible for Sci-Hub to be required to reveal such information in its ongoing civil case in New York, USA. Frank, usually the network provider has to get involved for the copyright holder to figure out who to sue (aka paperwork). No self-censorship required. The copyright holder can then sue the end user.

@BillBarth True, I was just pointing out that some network providers prefer to do the paperwork than banning websites/p2p/etc. No worries, I don't mix up personal opinions and knowledge.

@FranckDernoncourt, I agree, but this was a question about tracking not banning, though my answer mostly applies to both.

Thank you for the answers.  It sounds like widespread University network tracking of this is not yet common (or at least not common knowledge in the academic community) yet but that could change in the future if usage continues to increase.

@MagnusGustafson, it would only take a few moments of configuration changes to begin tracking such activities at the border of almost any university's network. Be very careful with what you have learned.

@BillBarth I have no reason to worry because I do not use those databases. The purpose of my question was only to identify what is occurring right now. Based on the size of this industry, I suspect we will hear a lot more about this in the years to come. The topic of paywalls are already being hotly debated in fields outside of academia: http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/09/is-an-academic-publishing-giant-trying-to-paywall-wikipedia/

Enhancing on @BillBarth's answer: while universities do not typically monitor access to services on their websites, they are quite capable of doing so when the need or desire arises.
The handling of Aaron Swartz's JSTOR mass-downloading by MIT may be instructive here: MIT information services was apparently fairly unexcited about the incident for quite a while, treating it as relatively routine network misbehavior.  Eventually, however, it changed positions and began carefully monitoring him and cooperating with the prosecution that would eventually lead to arrest, massive charges, and Aaron Swartz's suicide.

Are Universities also tracking faculty and staff usage of sites like Sci-Hub and LibGen? Yes, they are.
Source

Jim O’Donnell, university librarian at the Arizona State University Library, said that news of the investigation of Elbakyan had not changed his views on Sci-Hub.
“We are very aware of Sci-Hub. They make assertions about their business practices that cannot be verified -- they’re very untransparent,” he said. But the ASU Library does not tell academics and students to specifically avoid Sci-Hub, nor has it blocked the site. “Our advice to users is that they should abide by the law and follow our university policies,” he said.
The investigation into Elbakyan has “created more smoke, metaphorically speaking. But all we’re doing is a little more coughing,” said O’Donnell. He added, “We observe, we watch, we wait.”

@Libor did you look at the other question on IS.SE? You're certainly not the only one who thinks it's bullshit.