text:
Inquiring about the possibility of a job
I am a fairly new Assistant Professor at a liberal arts university. I know from Facebook that a professor at my undergrad just retired and I specialize in some of the same classes this person taught. I would love to work at my undergrad.
Is it appropriate to email my former advisor and ask to be notified if/when they choose to fill that position? How should that email be phrased?
[I'm fairly certain that there hasn't been a search begun already for this position, so it may be even be a few years before one begins.]

Depending on the particular university and the particular department, the notion of "fill that position" may be meaningless. When a faculty member retires, there is often no guarantee that the same department will be allowed to hire someone, and, even when it is allowed, there's no guarantee that the department will hire someone in the same area of specialization.

Is it appropriate to email my former advisor and ask to be notified if/when they choose to fill that position?

It’s generally appropriate to ask about job opportunities and to express potential interest. However, I wouldn’t rely on the former adviser to remember to notify you of something several years later (for me it’s hard enough to remember what someone asked me to do last week), and asking for such an open-ended future commitment to notify you might come across as a bit insensitive. It might be better to phrase the request as a question about whether they anticipate that there would be openings soon, and if so, what would be a way that you could learn about them.
As a general rule, people will show more good will towards you and willingness to help you if you show yourself willing to do things yourself (like keep track of job postings at a place you’re insterested in) instead of asking them to do those things for you.

How should that email be phrased?

Since it sounds like it’s been some time since you’ve had contact with your undergraduate advisor, I suggest starting by saying hi, reminding them of who you are (there’s a good chance they’ll need their memories jogged, even if that may sound unlikely to you) and updating them about what you’ve been up to. They will probably be glad to hear you are now beginning a career in academia.
After that background, you can get to the point and simply say you’re writing to inquire about job opportunities that might open up in the immediate or near future. It’s okay to mention the professor retiring, but I should caution you that the way you’ve phrased your question suggests an implicit premise that departments always fill positions of professors who retire with new faculty who have similar expertise or are qualified to teach similar classes as the retiring professor. In my area (math) that is usually false. So keep that in mind when you mention how your own expertise overlaps that of the other professor.
Good luck!

Yes, asking is always allowed. The worst that can happen is that they say they have other strong candidates and that they're not looking for any further applications -- though it sounds like they're not at that stage.
From the perspective of a hiring committee, you always want to spread the news that a job is available as widely as possible, because then you will get better applicants. So there is really nothing wrong with sending an informal email as these kinds of emails are useful to the hiring department.

Personally, if it hasn't been too long, I'd go in person and catch up with people while making my interest known. That won't work everywhere, of course.


text:
Personal Statement(s) for two similar masters courses
I'm applying to two courses viz - Mathematical Physics MSc and Theoretical Physics MSc at the University of Edinburgh. I'm currently a final year bachelors student. From what I can gather post a decent amount of research, the two courses differ in the allocation of compulsory math courses. I've attached a description from the course website.
I'd like to know how similar the personal statement can be. Obviously I have included program specific components in the two separate statements, and I have also added different motivations behind applying to both courses. But fundamentally they are similar courses, and the parts of the SOP that involve my background or my interests towards physics/math physics will remain the same. I'm honestly worried that if the same admissions team receives both statements, they may not read whichever statement they read second, because of a similar narrative (introduction atleast, for the lack of better explanation).
Do I have to give an entirely different personal statement now?

You want the two statements to be unified, so that a person reading both isn't confused. And especially, doesn't think you are playing to the audience rather than being honest. As you suggest, the programs may share faculty, and hence admissions committee members.
But especially, don't say things in one that are inconsistent with things in the other.

Yeah I am mentioning similar research interests, but elaborating on a different 'why' for instance. But again, not too different. I'm just worried one of them may be dismissed halfway through.

It is possible, of course, but you can't prevent that. They will get the idea, I think, in any case, as long as everything is consistent.

As others have said, write a strong essay that contains some specialization to the program and identify who you want to work with and why. If the beginning of this essay overlaps with another that should be fine, just don't contradict yourself.
How your application is evaluated might depend on how separate the two programs are.

One way this might get broken up is that mathematical physics gets a stack of mathematical physics applications and theoretical physics gets a stack of theoretical physics applications. Of the hundred(s) who apply, each side of the program selects their top candidates. The two programs then meet to fight about how spots are allocated. (Maybe everyone acknowledges that mathematical physics happened to receive generally weaker candidates in a particular year, so more spots are allocated to theoretical physics, &c.)
Every application is dumped in a giant pool at the beginning.

In the first case, if only one of your applications makes it to the top, you're fine. If two of your applications make it to the top it seems unlikely to me that the program rejects you. In fact, it's good evidence in your favour: twice as many people have independently found you to be a desirable candidate.
In the second case, I'm not sure what happens.
Contacting a program coordinator to get more information is probably a good way of figuring this out.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Preprints conflicts between Research Gate and Journal
I uploaded a preprint paper to Research Gate. Then I realized that it is not allowed for the Journal I submitted my paper. I removed the paper from RG, but it was around two days available. Will I have any problem with the publisher in case the paper is finally accepted?

This question is severely subject-dependent. In mathematics, no sane journal would ever try to disallow preprints. In computer science, I think a minority of them does, or maybe none by now. Chemistry is another story... and don't get me started on the humanities.

While I think it unlikely that you will have a problem, that is up to the journal - assuming they even notice it.
Of course, if they use automated systems to scrape preprint information they might know. But you will also, likely, be asked if the paper is available elsewhere. Phrased like that you can honestly say no, but if the phrasing is different (has it ever been available...) then you will need to explain to them what happened.

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


text:
Recent publication and special issues
I'm looking to know how to get notifications when there is a recent publication (in IEEE Transaction Journal and MDPI Energies). Moreover, If there are any special issues (Smart grid or something related to it) I want to be aware of these. Can someone guide how to get notified with these two journals?
P.s: (Although I have accounts in these)
Thank you in advance.

Journals usually have a RSS feed available that tracks the current ToC. As for Special issues, you would have to subscribe (or just create an account) to a publisher. This way, I regularly receive updates via email on special issues from parent publishing houses of journals where I published / reviewed (think Elsevier, Springer, IEEE xplore, etc).

That's a very good point, however, the issue is that then there is no filter it means you can receive on each and every topic related to you or not. As I said, I already have that account. Thank you anyways

To a degree that is true (and Flyto said as much in his answer), however, in my experience, you don't get that much spam and it is easy to quickly sift through in order to identify whether there is something interesting. The "problem" with the special issues is that they are often an amalgam of different topics and actively encourage people from other disciplines to participate. In other words, a physics special issue might not be considered spam by a computer scientist, because his work might be related. That is part of the reason why the special issue invitations are broadcasted.

To the best of my knowledge there is no way to get MDPI to notify you of upcoming special issues without knowing about everything else they publish.
If you're looking to submit to those special issues, I recommend looking for subject-specific communities (e.g. mailing lists or similar) that people might advertise calls for papers to.
If you're simply looking to read them, I suggest setting up some good Google Scholar alerts around the subjects; if you get these right then as well as giving you interesting articles from all over the place, they will tend to show up multiple articles from the same special issues.


text:
Explaining contribution of book and journal
I'm writing a scientific paper and I want to add the contribution of a book in my paper. Generally, we use to write like that way ''authors in this work present [1].....'' but this is the case when we are writing about any other scientific paper. But for the first time I'm using the reference of book, could you kindly elaborate how do I add the book reference that makes my work relevant.
Thanks in advance...

is there something this book that makes its contribution different from a paper? Scientific book is typically a collection of related papers.

@Bald Bear So you mean I should use the same way as I'm using for scientific paper???

Your form works perfectly well for books. I would go one step further and say that this form works for all kinds of writing (although the specific word "present" may be more suitable for some works than for others - but I guess you are not using the exact same sentence all the time anyway).
The only thing that may be specific for books is that it may be helpful to be a bit more exact about where in the book the argument that you relate to appears. In some disciplines (e.g., the humanities), you would be required to list chapter and page numbers (depending on style either in the text or the reference). I have seen a lot of STEM papers omit this, but I think even if the style guide of your journal / conference does not require you to list at least a chapter, it is a useful service to the reader to do so.
Further note that this advise only applies to monographs. For "chapter books", where each chapter is a little paper of their own written by different authors, it is customary to cite the specific chapter that your argument appears in. Your style guide most likely has requirements how to do this (cp. the @incollection bibtex entry type).

Thank you for the explanation.

X, Y and Z present ABC [1].

is appropriate regardless of whether [1] is a technical report, published manuscript, thesis, chapter, book, ...

Thank you user2768


text:
How to tell whether invitation to special issue of a journal is worth being accepted?
I have been invited to participate to a special issue of Entropy for some work that I have done in statistical physics.
I received from other journals many such invitations which looked like spam,  and I wonder whether I should take this one more seriously, or consider it somehow a good one.
What are the criteria to tell whether the special issue is 'prestigious' enough, besides Impact Factor and names of guest editors?

Did the guest editor reach out to you specifically? Or did this feel like a spam email generated through data collected by a web crawler?

I don't know anything about the journal or its sponsor (mdpi.com) but you could probably learn if they are reputable or not (predatory). But in general, if you can trust the guest editors, and they have good professional standing, then you can probably trust the journal.

Have you ever cited a paper in Entropy?  Have you ever even read a paper in Entropy?  Do you recognize and trust the guest editors?

mdpi is good publisher, maybe also not so known for publications on fundamental science problems, rather technical and applied sciences and especially real-world applications. I also got several invitations from varying guest editors I know from conferences being leaders in their field. It looks like they have a strong growth strategy with many special issues. But when you can publish your results in a top-tier journal, I would always prefer over an special issue. But I quite often stumble over mdpi publications on google scholar looking for technical in-depth review articles.

@JWH2006 it looks like an automated email, but then I wrote back to ask for some additional information and they relied politely, copying the editor

@JeffE No, no and no.

@James Then you've just answered your own question: No, no, and no.

First things first, Entropy is an MDPI journal. MDPI is a rather controversial publisher - see the "Controversies section of its Wikipedia page - and while I make no judgment on whether it's a predatory publisher, it's preferable to know the facts so you can make an educated decision on whether to publish with them.
If you conclude that it's worth publishing with them, then factors to consider are:

Do you have anything relevant to contribute to the special issue?
Do you know who the editors are? Are they authorities in your field?
How good is the journal? Have you read/cited papers published in it? If not, you can still look at the papers in its current issues and draw your own conclusions about its quality.
Which databases are the journal indexed in? This is usually a concern, but since you mention "impact factor", that means the journal is indexed by the Science Citation Index, and that's the index to be concerned about. If the journal is indexed there every other index doesn't really matter.
How much is the article processing charge, and can you afford to pay it? MDPI is an open access publisher, so you can only publish OA with them, which usually means there's an APC. It's possible they're offering you free OA (this is especially likely if you're an invited submission, similar to how invited conference speakers often have the conference attendance fee waived). Otherwise they might simply be letting you know that you might be interested in this special issue, in which case you'll probably need to pay the APC.

But in the end the final decision is up to you. If you submit, acceptance is not guaranteed, although I'll venture that your chances are relatively good. If yours is an invited submission, then you might get to list that prominently on your CV; even if not, it's still +1 to your publication count. But preparing a submission will take time, and if you have nothing really worth publishing available, that might not be time well spent. It's up to you.

Research libraries tend to have help pages that explain evaluating the credibility of journals. I'll link to the Emory Health Sciences Library page, since it has some credible steps that I'll paraphrase briefly:

In what databases is the journal listed? (is it in the big databases for your field?)
What is the publication history? (has it been around a long time? is it on a regular release schedule?)
What is its review process? (peer reviewed? refereed? how long does review seem to take?)
What is the journal's Impact Factor? (a measure of citation frequency)

Evaluating a journal with these questions require some expertise in your field, so you should do the work of answering those questions, and consult a research librarian or mentor if you have questions. In general, I'd see if I can find it in the main databases I use for research, if it keeps to a regular schedule (biyearly, quarterly, monthly), if you can find any clues to how long their review process takes, and so on.
You can also use tools in some databases to look up an article from the journal and see where it was cited. For instance, if you find an article in that journal, you can search for it on Google Scholar and see the number of times it has been cited with the search result. You can then see where the articles citing the journal are published -  do you know those journals? Are they reputable?

I find the first criterion ambiguous: it all comes down to the definition of "big database," which is not specified here, and thus ambiguous and potentially arbitrary .

Major database - for example, is the journal in one of the first three you would use to do research in your field? Yes, it is literally arbitrary - you are evaluating it based on your own standards. You set your standards.


text:
Can I reuse my problem statement?
I am doing Master's of Research, and I am required to enrol in a number of compulsory coursework subjects for research candidates. In these subjects, I have submitted a number of assignments using Turnitin, which requires me to include the problem statement of my research.
Given that the problem statement hasn't changed every time I submit my assignments, am I supposed to write completely different problem statements every time I submit my assignments?

Typically, Turnitin is set to find similarities that are 3-4 words long at a minimum. So, is there a way to make minor edits so that your statement is slightly different each time? You can also ask your professor if it's okay to reuse your problem statements. Then, even if Turnitin flags it, your professor will know that they are still your words and ideas, since you discussed it ahead of time.

Making minor edits to my problem statement for no reason other than to avoid self-plagiarising seems unreasonable to me. I suppose all I can do is ask my lecturers beforehand.

Though it may seem unreasonable, if you are interested in pursuing academia as a career, learning how to rewrite your work over and over is a good skill...Journals use anti-plagiarism software, too, so if you write many papers on the same topic, you will have to learn how to do this anyway. For instance, one of my studies resulted in six papers, so I had to rewrite mundane parts of the first paper (e.g. methods) five times so that they wouldn't get flagged.

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


text:
Using first person pronouns in a statement of purpose
I am writing a statement of purpose for Ph.D. applications in the US and Europe. In doing so, I have come across the idea that I should not use first-person pronouns in formal writing. Does this apply to statements of purpose? How do I describe my academic/research/other experiences in the statement then?

It's perfectly normal to use first person pronouns in your statement of purpose. I've never heard of anyone deliberately avoiding them, and frankly I'd imagine it would be pretty bizarre to read!
The statement of purpose is not exactly "formal writing", like an academic paper would be. It's not informal either, it should be written fluently and professionally, but this type of personal essay is perhaps is closer to formal speech (or maybe a formal email) than it is to academic writing.
I suspect your source was talking about using a passive voice and not an active voice (e.g. "X was increased" vs "I increased X). That was standard practice in academic papers and scientific reports in the 20th century. It's sometimes seen as old fashioned now, as the active voice is gradually becoming more common, but both styles have their advocates in academic publications.
In any case, that debate certainly doesn't apply to a personal essay. Use first person pronouns normally in your SOP.

Ah, the dreaded the applicant has great interest in further pursuing X. I would 10/10 read it, but preferably as satire, not an ordinary SOP...

This is more general advice than you ask for, but yes, use the first person as the answer of Gumbercules suggests.
However, you may have the wrong idea about SoP in general. It isn't a document praising yourself for past accomplishments or a recapitulation of your CV. It is a forward looking document giving your plans for the future, both in studies and beyond. It isn't at all about what you have done, but, instead, what you plan to do and how you want to go about it.
So, don't describe your "experiences" there. That is for the CV. And, don't use the SoP to try to explain any past failings.
If you have a subfield in mind or even a research direction you are interested in, put it in the SoP. If you are pointing toward a career in academia, say that. You don't need a formal research plan or topic for most such things though some specificity is helpful, especially if you hold a masters already.
The CV details the past. The SoP looks entirely forward.

I understand. I just have a section contextualizing some past research experience (which is mentioned on the CV) and how that has helped me figure out what I want to do and what I learned from it (which is not on the CV). I'm only including that because at least some of the universities I'm applying to ask for this to be mentioned in their 'About the SoP' on the application webpage.


text:
Forum to get SOPs/Draft Emails/CV reviewed
Is there a forum (comprising of grad students, maybe even postdocs or PIs) which would help me review drafts of my SOP or the cold emails I wish to send to prospective PIs or my academic CV?
I am applying for a PhD program in physics, if that's useful.

I did not mean for somebody to provide theses services for free. I just wanted to know whom to approach, if something like this exists. Most of the people at my university are not aware, and in my country PhD admissions work very differently.

I know I am late, but checkout r/gradadmissions?

I think part of the goals in the PhD application process is to know what you want to learn, and how you want to contribute to that position. If you do not know that, then it is not a good fit for you. If you feel you need to learn the skill to draft such documents, then you can find plenty of websites on the internet where you can learn how to structure and write them. In many cases, your undergraduate/Master's professors and lecturers might be able to help you if you request them reasonably before time. Some PhD advertisements would also mention the page limits and the margin/font size for such documents.


text:
What factors do I consider before deciding to ask my summer research guide for a recommendation for grad school?
I've currently finished two years of undergraduate study in physics. I'm at the end of a close to two month summer research program in math, at one of the best universities in my country. While I'd applied for a mathematical physics type project, the problem I was assigned has to do more with math and my job is to make a program in order to understand (the outcome of) this problem. My background in mathematics is not good, since the way it works where I study is that there is an extremely small math component in a physics degree and some extremely important concepts in math were excluded from this math component. While I have been studying independently, my course is generally lacking in rigour and depth in coursework so there always ends up being a lot of independent study that I need to do.
I wish to apply for a Master's program in Physics once I complete my undergrad (I'm doing a three year degree) and I'm considering applying to places in the UK and/or Europe. My background in math and my never having had formal education in CS certainly put me at a disadvantage during this internship. However, I am unable to decide if I should be asking this professor for a letter of recommendation in case my applications require one from a summer research guide or someone in such a position.

This is the only such research internship that I will be doing before applications begin (which happen in 2 months) so I do not have the option of asking anyone else for this specific position.
I'm also not sure how having only one summer research experience, and that too not in physics, plays out while I apply for a Master's in physics.
I'm also quite disillusioned at this point regarding just going forward with physics itself because it seems like I already have heaps and heaps of catching up to do and I'm feeling extremely overwhelmed and unsure of whether this is something that I'm good enough to do. I've always wanted to do physics and I enjoy learning and I understand that this is simply one summer, but I am quite anxious at this point.

I'm unsure of what to do, specifically regarding the recommendation. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Have you asked the professor for an honest assessment of your success in the program?

I intend to do that near the end of this internship.

I think you ought to do it now.  If that conversation goes well, you can ask the professor for letters at the same time.

I am unable to decide if I should be asking this professor for a letter of recommendation

Of course you should be asking!
Specifically, you should be asking whether this professor is willing to write you a strong letter of recommendation. The word “strong” (or a similar synonym) is crucial here. You want to make it clear that a weak letter may do more harm than good, and you’d much rather receive honest negative feedback now, face to face, while you still have some time to improve, than to risk spoiling your application.
Stop trying to read the professor’s mind.  Stop trying to imagine all the impostor-syndrome-inspired weaknesses that the professor could write about. Every applicant has weaknesses.  Just ask.

unsure of whether this is something that I'm good enough to do

Do not listen to the Impostor Syndrome. There is no such thing as being good enough; what matters is what you do.
And what you are doing is pursuing an internship that addresses the gaps you perceive in your own background. You see a gap in formal CS preparation (even though that preparation is rare among programmers, and even rarer among physics students), but you are addressing it by learning to program anyway. You see gaps in your mathematical background, but you are pursuing a mathematics internship that requires you to do a lot of independent study.  You are deliberately working outside your comfort zone to strengthen your background—of course you feel overwhelmed!
In short, you’re acting exactly like a researcher.
I agree with Buffy. From out here, it looks like you’ll be fine. Keep up the good work!

I'm a bit confused by your confusion. On the one hand you say you have some deficiencies in maths, but on the other that the internship is, somehow, filling in for those deficiencies. It seems like a good thing.
Next, you say you don't have formal CS training, but are doing programming in the internship. That too, sounds like a good thing. I'll also point out that a lot of programmers don't have formal CS training - especially those programmers doing it as an adjunct to some other field.
As to feeling behind, you also seem to have the attitude that will drive you forward toward success. Yet another good thing.
Finally, as to the title question. Normally you get to choose who will write letters for you. You want to choose those people who will say the best things about you - works hard, overcomes obstacles, lots of curiosity, etc. If your summer guide is one of those people, then get a letter. But as user Nate Eldridge suggests in a comment, you can explore first how you are viewed - and additionally ask for suggestions on a path going forward.
As an outsider, looking in, I think you will be fine. Work hard and also relax a bit.

Thank you for your reply. I was looking to ask the professor towards the end of the internship anyway. But the reason I'm nervous about it is that given our interactions so far, I think he may not be viewing me very well. I guess I will just have to ask him and then make a decision.

You can also ask for guidance so that his opinion improves if it is actually poor.


text:
Grad School application that's submitted early with a decent LOR vs Application that's submitted rather late but with a better LOR
I am a final year bachelor's student in physics and I am applying to masters programs in physics, in the UK.
The places I am applying to have a rolling admissions process and I wanted to submit my applications by mid Feb latest, but still haven't done so.
At this point, one of the professors I had asked for an LOR (a few months ago), says he is still not ready with his letter. Owing to time constraints I requested another professor who is now ready with his letter. Any letter in the application portals needs to be uploaded as a PDF so I will have access to it, before I hit submit. I have reason to believe that the first professor might write a better letter, since he has mentioned (to me and generally) how he normally approaches an LOR and he seems quite specific about where I'm applying to and the like. However, it seems like he may take atleast another week to complete his letter.
I wish to apply for a few external scholarships which have a late March deadline, but I can only apply for them if I have an acceptance from some university.
The letter that I currently have, seems rather basic and the same professor has given another student from my class an LOR for almost identical applications.
Do I wait, and hope that the first professor gives me an answer (and a letter hopefully) or do I submit the application now as it is?

Apply now or wait until next year...

Did you explain to the first professor that you need the letter to be able to submit the application? Did you give him a concrete deadline when you wanted it by? If he doesn't know when you need it, it's not likely to find its way to the top of his todo list.


text:
How to indicate deleted text in manuscript when using highlighted text as opposed to tracked changes
I have the chance to submit a revised manuscript to a journal, and they have specifically asked to highlight the changes using highlighted text, as opposed to tracked changes. I am using Microsoft word.
I have always used tracked changes, so I am not sure of the normal procedure when using highlighted text to mark changes, specifically when deleting text. If there is a sentence to be deleted, how do you indicate this using highlighted text, as there is no text remaining. Should I just delete and then reference the line at which this happened in the response to editors and reviewers? Or should I highlight the 'space' where the line used to be?
Many thanks

Use strikethrough in Word (or LaTeX).

Ah ok, so the text doesn't actually get removed from the manuscript, that's great thanks. Is it common practice to highlight the strikethrough text, or only highlight the new text?

@AP30 Strictly speaking, a strikethrough is a highlight. That said, it is unclear what the journal require, so highlighting [the backrgound], as per other changes, might be useful.


text:
Can you use brand names in a research survey
I a currently designing a research survey and would like to use company brand names such as 'Apple' for participants to rate their preferred organisational attributes against. Is this ethical?

Yes, you can use brand names and trademarks as long as you mark them as such.
You should also, probably include a disclaimer that you have no ties to any of the companies you are researching.
But be aware that some companies are paranoid about their public image, so make sure that anything you say is supported by facts, not your opinions.
The brand names are public, by intention. You can use them. Notice that the popular press mentions brand names and trademarks constantly.


text:
A way of getting tenure for a non-creative person
Suppose there is Al and Bob.

Al is a frustrated graduate student who is lacking in the creative department and can not establish any new results in his field. He has some trivialities in the thesis and will most likely get his degree but it is unlikely he will ever land a tenure-track position. Al really wants, however, to get tenure in a research university but that is impossible without papers in great journals. Al is competent enough to read papers in his field and he can give a reasonably good presentation based on a paper he has read. Al could rewrite a given paper in his own writing style should he need it.
Bob is a smart person with tenure who does not have much difficulty producing new results. Bob's university does not provide significant financial incentives for him to publish more and better papers. Bob would like to make a few bucks.

How can Al and Bob make their lives more enjoyable? Al pays a certain sum (say, 100,000 USD) to Bob for Bob to write some good papers for Al and then Al with his impressive research portfolio gets tenure (the contract can be spread over time as necessary). Bob got his money, Al got his tenure (and eventually he will get some money too because salary).
Q: is there a common name for this kind of transaction? Are there any websites or organizations facilitating such transactions?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

Q: is there a common name for this kind of transaction?

Fraud.

do you mean fraud in the legal sense? You can say that Bob generously shared his ideas with Al. As long as Al writes the text of the paper himself, I do not think this is fraud in the legal sense of the term. In some fields, established academics will sometimes suggest really good ideas to younger people and not get a coauthorship. Would you consider that to be fraud too?

@ajac: it seems that "Al with his impressive research portfolio gets tenure" implies that he is knowingly lying about his skillset in order to obtain a financial gain and a position. It sounds like a fraud to me. Also, the question assumes that "Bob (...) write[s] some good papers for Al", not just provide some mentoring.

I've seen comments "From Review" on answers elsewhere saying "This does not provide an answer to the question." When it definitely does provide an answer, I upvote the answer to counter the comment. I would have done that in the present case, but by the time I read the comment I had already upvoted the answer because it's exactly the answer I would have given.

@AndreasBlass A one-word answer is likely to get flagged as "low quality", even though in this case it says everything there is to be said IMO - and the number of upvotes suggests other people think the same.

This is not how it works.
Before someone is given tenure, there are often several years of working as a "tenure-track" in which one has to repeatedly demonstrate the research capacity. It is close to impossible to hide the fact that Al is not the person writing the papers.
Furthermore, if the papers Bob is writing for Al are sufficiently good and influential to attain tenure, why would Bob just give them to Al? Bob can keep the papers and get promoted or awards, which are potentially worth, over the years, more than 100000 USD.
Hiring committees do not judge applicants merely on the basis of their research portfolio. There is usually a presentation to the department, in which Al would probably perform poorly if he was not the person who did the research and wrote the papers. There is a teaching philosophy statement, research statement, ability to teach and supervise students, etc. People are hired based on their international standing in a research field. Just having papers with Al's name on them are not sufficient. Al needs to have networks of collaborators, people who can write recommendation letters for Al, reputation gained during presentations at conferences, etc. It is close to impossible to fake it.
Even if Al can make a somewhat believable illusion that he is a real researcher, applying for tenured (more likely tenure-track) jobs is a gamble. Some jobs have more than 100 applicants. Paying 100000 USD for something that has a 1% chance of getting is a stupid gamble.

+1 for spelling out what (I would have thought) everyone knows, and also much of what I was thinking of when I first read the question and made a few brief observations (among many more that I could have given, but I didn't feel like it was worth the effort). On the off-chance that anyone actually thinks something like this could happen, your answer helps to provide a wake-up call to reality.

I think under certain circumstances Bob might be better off with 100K rather than keeping the papers (e.g. he already has advanced as far in the career as the universtity allows; getting awards you can rarely guarantee). I also disagree with the characterization of 1% chance; for the good applicants it is higher than 1% (significantly higher) and for the bad applicants it is lower than 1%. So I would not say that if Al really succeeds in creating the impression, he has only 1% chance.


text:
How to stand out in math graduate school admissions
In less than a year from now I'll be applying to pure math PhD programs. I'm going to have a competitive application. I'm attending a well regarded school and will no doubt get good reccomendations; I took a whole slew of math undergrad courses receiving all A's; I took (and am taking) a handful of graduate courses receiving a mix of A's and B's; TA'd some undergrad courses; I have two solid REUs; participated in Budapest semesters in mathematics, etc
But these are all things that every top (20 or so) graduate school is going to expect from all it's applicants. I don't have any research independent of my REUs, I've never done notably well on the Putnam, and so on. My main concern is that I'm not going to stand out in any way to a graduate school admissions committee.
Looking at application threads, this seems quite worrisome. There are consistently applicants in a similar position as I who get almost universal rejection from good graduate programs. I love mathematics and so that I can pursue a fruitful research career someday, I want to attend a serious graduate program.
What can I do in under a year to improve my graduate application? How can I stand out?

But these are all things that every top (20 or so) graduate school is going to expect from all it's applicants. This is just false.  Top 5 schools okay, top 20 no.

Your score on the Putnam is irrelevant. Having original research outside of any REU is not crucial either. Are you writing a senior thesis? The recommendation letters are the key. Why don't you seek advice from faculty at your school instead of strangers on the internet? They'd know better than us where students from your school have gone for graduate school and what the background of those past students was.

@Kcd I'm away from my school at BSM now, so I figured this was a good alternative. I plan on writing a thesis that will synthesize a couple of recent papers in a very active field which is of great interest to me, but I so far have no original contributions which would be seen as nontrivial in the eyes of anyone who has any experience in the field.

Relax. You don't need original contributions in math as an undergrad to get into top PhD programs. It's more important to learn a lot of nontrivial math and have letters from good people. Write to faculty at your home institution with your concerns.

Showing that you understand that mathematics is not a "school subject", and that you think about it on your own, of your own volition, are willing to take risks, are curious, ... as opposed to success at simple compliance and obedience ... matter a great deal to some admissions committee people.

@paulgarrett It's critical to emphasize the importance of showing people that you think about math on your own. I thought about math on my own, but I did it... on my own. Looking back, I should have been more "in people's faces" about the kinds of things I was reading.

Consider the viewpoint of the admissions committee. How would they know who to pick? One way is to trust others opinions -- this is why they seek recommendation letters from those who know your abilities.
If you still want to "stand out", and aren't satisfied with your performance in the standard ways (grades, exams, REU programs), consider what makes you different. You should seek advice from those who know you better than us for ideas here.
In addition, if you're afraid of not getting in anywhere -- apply to a spectrum of schools, and simply pick the top one(s) you are accepted to. Having backups is a good way to be safe.

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


text:
PhD student lost fellowship 1 week before school starts, what should I do?
I am a rising 2nd year PhD student in a US public school.
I was promised 4 years of funding by my department. Last year, I received a fellowship which covered tuition and stipend. I believe most people get 2 years of funding, so I was expecting it to be renewed. Over the summer, I kept asking about the status of my renewal application and only until yesterday (1 week before next school year) did they inform me my renewal was rejected. The secretary who communicates with me still has not told me why.
The next school year starts in <1 week, and all my classes will be dropped tomorrow if my tuition is not paid. To make matters worse, I am an international student, and if in ~3 weeks my tuition still isn't paid, then my visa will be invalidated and I fear I may be deported.
I will talk to my advisor tomorrow, but much advice is appreciated. In particular, I wish to know whether there is any standard procedure for this kind of situation and whether I should pay my own tuition first in case of any visa problem.

I presume you were promised 4 years of funding in your admission letter. That letter constitutes a contract. If the university refuses to honor the contract, seek lawyer's help.

@BorisBukh Obviously I am not in a position to know, but I would be surprised if the wording of the initial admission letter was unconditional. I can't imagine a graduate program committing themselves for 4 years to a student who might not pan out, especially if the anticipated funding was contingent on external grants. When I went to grad school, I remember being told that students can "normally" expect 4 years of funding, but nothing that would have made it certain.

@JohnColeman I agree that it depends on the wording; however, even an unfavorable wording might turn out to be unenforceable. Because of how much is at stake for the student is why I suggested to seek help of a professional.

@BorisBukh I agree that seeking a lawyer's help is unlikely to hurt, if it comes to that. Short of that, there might be a graduate student ombudsperson who could help.

@JohnColeman Mine was, at least for the first 12 months

I would not panic too much about having your classes dropped.  Once your funding is sorted out, they can be added again.  Even if they should somehow fill up in the meantime, since the registration issue was not your fault, your professors can and should let you take the class anyway (maximum class sizes can be overridden).

I don't know at which university you are studying, but a number of universities are experiencing severe financial difficulties recently. It may be that your university simply does not have the funds to renew your fellowship.

Please update after having talked to your advisor.

I wish to know whether there is any standard procedure for this kind of situation

You already have the right answer.  Talk to your advisor.
PhD students should never pay tuition.

Actually, if you don't have any funding, they you may well need to pay tuition. Some places only forgive part of the tuition even for TAs. So, while I agree with" should never pay tuition", it doesn't always work that way.

Indeed, that's an incredibly STEM answer, @Anonymous Physicist, and you'd probably do well to find out a bit more about the funding situations of other disciplines before you make statements like that. While, indeed, the operative word there is "should", in many other disciplines the ideal simply is not the reality.

@GrotesqueSI I'm well aware that some PhD students get no support and must pay tuition.  And I know that's more common in the humanities.  And I strongly stand by what I said; don't pay tuition, even if it means not being a PhD student.

Unless you are telling the OP to not pay the tuition and drop out instead, it's not a helpful part of the answer.

@Anonymous Physicist Such an absolute statement ignores the complication and nuance of both PhD funding and motivation for doing a PhD. I mean, are you saying that if a student gets partial funding they should not do a PhD? If they have to fund one year but will have the rest funded they shouldn't do a PhD? That there's no circumstance where they should do a PhD part time while working part time? etc etc. I had only partial funding for mine, as it was funding meant for a local student and I was international, and I did it anyway, and am doing pretty great, frankly. Correct choice.

@GrotesqueSI Yes, I stand by what I said.  You have survivorship bias.  In fact, encouraging someone to complete a PhD without full funding is unethical, unless they are super rich.

@Anonymous Physicist Aha, so one exception now. Are there others? Without spending time understanding a student's context, motivation, and situation, how can you possibly speak to what they should or shouldn't do regarding how they spend their time and money? I'd argue it is unethical to do otherwise, and certainly makes for poor mentoring. Though I note, I didn't say anything about "encouraging" unfunded PhDs. I took issue with your "never" as untrue and unrealistic.

@Anonymous Physicist Note, PhDs likely cost significantly less where I am (Scotland) than where you are, assuming you are in the States. Undergraduate education is free here and PhDs are about 5300 USD/year full time and 2700 USD/year part time. Full time PhDs only last 3 years as students don't take any coursework.

Even if tuition is cheaper, you still need to shelter, feed, clothe, and entertain yourself.  It's much much easier to get funded as a PhD student than to get any academic job at any higher level.  So unless you're in a position to plop down a couple hundred thousand dollars purely for the fun of it, don't do an unfunded PhD.

I was promised 4 years of funding by my department. Last year, I received a fellowship...my renewal was rejected.

There are different types of funding -- teaching assistant, research assistant, and fellowship. If your fellowship application was rejected, then you should be awarded a TA or RA.
That said, you could still have problems. In particular, if you didn't apply for a TA or RA because you expected your fellowship to be renewed. Or if your funding was lost due to your actions (e.g., academic misconduct, poor performance, etc.).

I will talk to my advisor tomorrow

Yes, absolutely this, talk to your advisor. Consider also talking to the graduate director or even international students' office -- and don't wait around for a response to e-mail, be proactive.

I wish to know whether...I should pay my own tuition first in case of any visa problem.

If you pay your tuition with your own money, I would not expect to ever get that money back. On the other hand, if your visa expires, the university's ability to help you will be very limited.

"If you pay your tuition with your own money, I would not expect to ever get that money back." I don't agree with this. I have known departments that are untimely with getting appointments arranged, in which it wasn't uncommon for the paperwork to come after the deadline for tuition payment. However if an appointment includes remission of tuition as a benefit, it should be incompatible with the university's payroll procedures not to refund tuition already paid. This is from an American perspective, in case that's relevant.

If the university promised funding and the student held up their end, then I agree the university should return any money fronted. That is, however, two ifs and a should -- so, I would never advise a student to front money they can't afford on the assumption that they'll get it back. At least not without doing a ton of due diligence, which does not appear to have (yet) been done here.

Sure, the original phrasing seemed more to imply that there's no chance of getting a refund, as opposed to "make sure you know you'll get the money back before you forward potentially thousands of dollars [or local equivalent] from your bank account", which is pretty hard advice to argue with.

Talking to the advisor is always a good idea, but they are not likely to be the person who can actually solve this or give you an answer, though they may direct you to the person who can.  But to save time, I would also talk to the faculty member in charge of the graduate program ("graduate vice chair" or some similar title), who is most likely the person who actually will decide what kind of funding you will get instead.  And don't wait around for a response to an email - go talk to them in person.

It may also be a good idea to talk to the university's international student office, who can give specific advice about visa issues.  I wouldn't expect either the advisor or the graduate vice chair to be able to address that.

Well, this really sucks. I’m sorry to hear this happened.

I was promised 4 years of funding by my department

In writing? Do you have an official letter from the university saying this or is it something more like “yeah most students get by you’ll be fine”
If you have any formal agreement/offer from your university for full funding then it’s not your problem how they fulfill it. If your stipend depends on teaching duties or something then you may need to do this now. To be honest, unless someone really screwed up it’s unlikely that your scholarship would lapse when the department committed to keeping you, so I suspect the promise you were given is less official than you might think.
If you are indeed a good “rising” student then your department/advisor will make significant efforts to keep you. If not, this may be their way of letting you go.


text:
Removing articles from ResearchGate
Over a decade ago, when I was about 11, I fancied myself as budding social scientist and wrote a few "papers" of extremely dubious quality  which I uploaded to SSRN. I kept up the interest in academics, in physics, and recently became aware of their continued existence. I deleted them from SSRN, but it seems ResearchGate had already created pages automatically for them. I can remove the papers from my newly created profile but I can't find a way to delete the pages from accessibility via Google. I have quite a distinctive name, so there's no deniability there. What should I do?

I am not familiar with SSRN, but it seems that when you publish content there you give SSRN a license to display the paper, but this is not a transferable license like a Creative Commons one. If that's the case, and if you did not publish the paper on a journal or elsewhere, then you are the copyright holder and Researchgate does not have a license that allows them to publish it. Then they are infringing your copyright, and the correct legal step to take is filing a DMCA takedown request using this PDF form.
IANAL.

Thank you! It worked!


text:
Email to two academics of differing familiarity
I am sending an email to two people: Prof FirstName1 LastName1 and Dr FirstName2 LastName2. The former has a PhD and is officially a professor (with tenure, if that matters) with whom I am not intimately familiar. He prefers to go by Prof or Dr LastName (I have no problem with it). The latter I have worked with for a few months now and strongly prefers not to be called Dr (much less Professor, as he isn't one; he does research and lectures but the institute at which he works does not grant that title). Instead, I call him FirstName2 as he has instructed me to do. The two are of a similar age and experience (as far as I know).
My question is, when emailing them, should I say "Dear Prof LastName1 and FirstName2," or a more formal (but possibly upsetting) "Dear Prof LastName1 and Dr LastName2," or something else altogether? Furthermore, what would be the most polite thing to call each of them in a meeting where both are present? I would like to respect both of their preferences, but not respecting FirstName2's title seems like it could be taken the wrong way (i.e. insulting).
I ended up going with "Dear all," even though there are only two people in the email but I am wondering what the most polite way would have been (for future reference).

I'm not sure there is anything wrong with it. My concern with it is that it might be seen as disrespectful to FirstName, if not by him then maybe by Prof LastName. It just seems weird to me, in the same way as a previous poster thought "Hello Dr. X, Mr. Y" would be "weird."

If you're this worried about slighting FirstName2, you should probably just ask them if their preferences extend also to email or general situations involving others.

@ndpl Probably more like "Should I still call you 'Firstname' when X is present?". I guess it's a little unusual to do so when X is of higher status, but it's quite reasonable to establish such rules for the opposite case. E.g. if you're on first name basis with a professor, they might still prefer you using the title when students are present.

Just consider yourself lucky that you are not writing in a language with T-V distinction: it's even more awkward, because there is a difference in basically every sentence, not just the salutation.

I'd call them by "Prof A and Dr. B" or perhaps "Dr. A and Dr. B", in the extreme "Prof. A and Mr. B". In the letter itself, address the more senior, i.e., formally. Dr. B won't object; while Dr. A might be put off by informality.


text:
How to deal with guilt turning down non-tenure track faculty offer at current institution?
I recognize my questions have some overlap with this one and this one. I feel those are largely talking about different things, though.
I am in a situation where I have been offered a non-tenure track faculty position at my current university. This is also the institution in which I did my PhD, but the tenured faculty I would be working for is not the person I did my PhD with; I have been working with them since finishing my PhD though. So I feel a great deal of appreciation for the institution and the faculty member I'd be working with.
However, there are a few issues with the position, and I am considering a competing offer in industry that seems to better fit my personal goals. I (and some mentors without a dog in the race) feel  that I would grow more in my area of research in the industry job. The non-tenure track position has been very hard for the faculty to fill, and they tend to lose whoever they hire to industry anyway because industry offers far better compensation. If I accept the industry job and turn down the faculty job, I will still be working with the faculty for a few months. I am not worried about the faculty seeking retribution, or that I will be burning a bridge, especially because I have been open about other offers and my goals from the beginning. Despite that, I still feel a sense of guilt considering the industry offer, and I think that might be clouding my judgement in the decision of which offer to accept.
So the question is as stated in the title, but I can be more specific. I recognize this may not be a question that can be answered with concrete steps, but what I am looking for is how to decline the faculty job in a way that will be palatable and not seen as greedily choosing industry over what I'm offered here.

So it is only about your feeling of guilt?

Talk to some good friends about this dilemma. They will bring you on the right path.

@user111388 It is, basically. I'm posting this ideally to get insight from others in this position or those who have been the faculty in this situation. I have discussed with friends and mentors, I just wanted to get broader perspectives.

What's wrong with "Thanks for the offer, but I've decided to accept a different position."?  There's absolutely no need to apologize.

If they really wanted you (or anyone) enough, they would make the position more desirable (tenure, pay, etc.).  They do it for other positions.
Don't you worry yourself a bit.  Be pleasant on the outside, sure.  But realize this is a business situation.  You have competing offers.  Take the one that does more in terms of pay/etc.
Also, often to advance in life, you need to move around some.  That's nice that you have a cozy situation there and people that value you.  But move on and do it elsewhere.  It's not unusual for companies or organizations to pay more for someone external than someone internal.
In particular, it is completely normal for someone in your situation to move on (recent grad).  If anything hanging out at your school is more the oddity.  So nobody will care that you moved on. Will wish you the best.

Indeed, if they really, really wanted you, they'd make it tenure-track or tenured, and the pay could be better.

Feeling of professional guilt is justified when you made a promise and broke it. Here you haven't done anything of sorts.
When asked about reasons why you decline an offer, use your own language:

Thank you for considering me. I have another offer that seems to better fit my personal goals. I and some of my mentors feel that I would grow more in my area of research in another position.

The fact that job is not filled is 100% responsibility of the administration. They don't know what they are doing or lack resources to fill the job.
Use the "default" approach here. Imagine that non-tenure job is offered 1000 miles to the east of your current location, and industry job is located 1000 miles to the west. Pick the one that suits you better.

Why guilt? You have a right to work to maximize your future as you see it. I don't see any basis for guilt. I hope it isn't a feeling of "letting them down". The position is hard for them to fill because it isn't sufficiently attractive to candidates. That is their problem, not yours.
Think about where you want to be in, say, five years. And 20 years. Then think about a path to get there.
There are some non-tenure track positions that offer enough security and enough benefits for the right person. But not all do. For example, Professor of the Practice positions at Duke, CMU, and Stanford (& probably others), while not, technically tenured, offer a career path for teaching faculty. But other non-tenure teach positions offer no security and no real job satisfaction.
No Guilt.
If you need a way to decline "gracefully", it is enough to say that the job doesn't align with your current goals.


text:
Choosing an unfamiliar PhD topic?
Is it okay to apply to a PhD without knowing precisely what you want to achieve? I heard advisors have projects, so would it be okay to state that you are interested in one of those projects without necessarily being an expert in it?
If so, how much knowledge do you need anyway? and in the statement of purpose letter, how do you state your interest in a specific project efficaciously giving that you are not fully aware of it?
Now you may ask, why would someone be interested in working on a project if he is not fully aware of it, right? But the thing is, some research topics are claimed to be HOT, at least that's the word on the web, some claim that certain topics have great potential in the foreseeable future. So, who does not want to work on something desirable with a future!

Thank you all for your kind and genuine advice. Truly respect tactful professionals. I love this platform, especially when I come across great people just like you all! I take my hat off

What you describe is often the common case for a PhD. But, in a letter and also in real you should have some related interdisciplinary or methodological background. Starting as a complete novice a PhD is very risky. An expert you have to become during your PhD, no one is one at the beginning, this would be a pointless odyssey. But a background is necessary, otherwise everybody could start a PhD without educational requirements like a bachelor in natural sciences/engineering  when looking for a STEM PhD.

I think it is extremely important to differentiate between:

Option A: a desire to work on something [that is claimed to be] desirable in the future;
Option B: choosing to do a Ph.D. in the topic [that is claimed to be] desirable in the future.

There are many ways to proceed with option A, and doing a Ph.D. certainly should not be the one if one does not possess some background.
Therefore, the simple advice would be to gain that experience, confirm your desires, increase your knowledge about the subject, and only then (and only maybe) proceed to option B.
Most of the time, the lack of any background and hand-on familiarity with the potential Ph.D. topic signifies that one is not ready to pursue a Ph.D. in it. There is nothing wrong with trying to get that experience and then apply the next year.

Thanks Anton! On a different matter, I noticed your personal website, it is very sweet looking - my compliments! I am wondering  though how did make it? Also, roughly speaking, how much would it cost to keep it up running?

@Ronnie, I use Faculty theme for WordPress which is relatively cheap. + you have to find the hosting that allows WordPress, the price could vary a lot.

I would advise against choosing a completely unfamiliar topic for your Ph.D. While the topic might be hot and help you with the job search after graduation, it would also put much more pressure on you. First, the required learning curve would delay your progress and possible publications. Second, you have to work double to get what comes naturally to others. I've seen many Ph.D. students in my department that have a limited grasp on basic concepts and sometimes even reinvent the wheel. Finally, you must really like your Ph.D. topic and eventually live with it until your graduation (and sometimes even through your whole academic and/or professional life). Choosing a topic with which you're unfamiliar could be risky as you might not like it after getting to know it completely.


text:
Handling several acceptance letters from different schools
If an institution tells you, look here is an admission offer, and you should let’s know if you accept it or reject it by the day after tomorrow. Meanwhile, you are still waiting for a word from other places that you applied to.
So, what is the most diplomatic and tactful way to communicate “Hey, I can not  accept/reject the current offer right now. That's because i am waiting to hear back from other schools, and I need time to decide upon that”? At the same time, I do not want to sound like careless about the offer.

Please read the help before posting questions.

It would be polite to let them know that you "won't be ready to make a decision before some date". Asking them to hold the offer open for a bit and requesting a reply.
If they really insist, then you have to make a decision about acceptance, but they might not, unless they have an overabundance of candidates. But, going past their due date implies risk that the acceptance will be withdrawn. So, be prepared to make a decision on short notice.
Letting the date pass without notifying them is probably your worst option, however.

Could you give any insight how to find the date one gives?

Not a lot, I guess. Use what information you have about future decisions by others. But shorter, rather than longer, is more likely to be accepted.


text:
What is/are the most important thing(s) you wish that you have known/done before considering to apply to a PhD
I wonder what your thoughts are on the above subject

1) To know how bad/abusive/ morally evil/sexist supervisors/academics can be (and academia in general).
2) To know other (ex-)students from the target institution and talk to them. This really helps!
3) To know how unimportant good schools/doing much work is compared to things like family, friends, health etc. Indeed, I've often wished to have done less work during the PHD and to have spend more time with friends and hobbies.
I hope this helps, maybe more later!!!!

As an academic advising students, I agree with the above points.  I would also add that how 'unimportant good schools' is as compared to a good supervisor.  You can be at a top school but crap supervisor, and as a result, you will not likely to graduate, which amounts to nothing.  Also, I have students who joined a top colleague based on his/her research prowess, but little do they know he/she is a slave driver that demands results that only the top 0.01% of students are able to achieve.  So many of his/her students suffer mentally -- so point 2) is really important.


text:
Variance in academic fecundity during and after graduate school
Some people used to be prolific when they were working on their PhDs, but years after graduation, they hardly published a single paper. Why?
Also, some faculty members published great papers while working on their PhDs that received dozens of citations, but few years later and after they started leading their own research, most of their published work barely got any citation. How come?

What kind of answer are you expecting here? Your question clearly shows that people are different. You'd have to look at each case individually.

@Wolfgang Bangerth: it is quite the contrary! I am conspicuously asking about the  difference in performance of the same people before and after they obtained their PhDs, but I am presenting two different scenarios for clarity.

I do not think this question is too broad or opinion-based. Question itself is quite specific. The answers may vary a lot, depending on their context. I am voting to keep this open.

Here's a similar (but more narrowly scoped) question: Why do some individuals who are productive PhD students at leading Western institutions, then publish infrequently as faculty in their home country?. From a more personal perspective there's also After successfully publishing papers during my Post-Doc, why am I now having trouble publishing as a tenure track academic?.

I still think that the question can not be answered. I've given three more answers in comments below @Buffy's answer below.

@Scientist. Thanks! that's the spirit of scientists. Constructivism prevails despite stochastic disturbances.

@Anyon. Thanks for sharing! Though the first one is a very narrow case - limited to those engaged in academia abroad, and the second one is a personal case.

Thank you all. I was guessing that during PhD, some people are lucky to be part of a productive and collaborative habitat. But upon leaving the nest, they end up where they are. Still. I wanted to know other possible reasons, as I might be wrong

I'm sure there are more reasons, but here are two positive reasons.
Some people get a job that stresses teaching more than research and so they put their focus there. It can be a rewarding life, actually. Lots of teaching and a bit of research. Maybe less stress. Of course this is an unlikely scenario at an R1 university.
Some people, after gaining tenure and leading a fairly large group of graduate students in a lab or research group, are willing to let the students gain the glory and don't add themselves as co-author, even though it might be appropriate. This isn't a good path before tenure, but can be afterwards. So they are doing research but, by feeding ideas to them, the students gain the credit for it.

Yet others have benefited from good mentoring as grad students, but can't seem to hit their stride once they're faculty.

Yet others get married and have children, some with special needs, and do not have the time to do more than the minimum their school requires.

Yet others struggle with mental health issues, or loved ones with mental health issues.

There are so many reasons why people are or choose to be not among the most productive even though they may have been at an earlier stage in their lives. There's really no general reason -- people's lives move in so many different directions once they grow out of their 20s.

@Wolfgang, I guess you nailed it on the first comment.

@WolfgangBangerth, One reason is that too many people never develop, or give up, a circle of collaborators when they finish their degree. Such a circle is one of the most valuable things you can take away from grad school. If you don't have one, then work to build it.

@Buffy. Thanks! once again, you have my back with your genuine answer.


text:
Some people publish great ideas in grad school, others are not
While reading certain papers, I come across great ones, presenting truly new findings, and not re-inventing the wheel or doing minor changes to other works. I seriously find it hard to believe that students who have not been in the field for so long to come up with such great ideas.
How come some people in grad school come up with groundbreaking ideas worthy to be published in top tier journals?

How do you know how long they're studying the field? PhD can take up to 5 or more years which is a long time

Some people are star athletes in school, others are not - why? Some people are great saxophonists in school, others are not - why?

I do not see the contradiction. If there is a strong team (advisor, other PhD students, ...), then good ideas are often developed together.
Many good PhD students might have research experience even before starting their PhDs. It is not uncommon for my colleagues to have a few publications when they start here.

I think a more interesting question is, of those who "have great ideas in graduate school", how come some don't continue to have great ideas. This would certainly be a small portion of those who had great ideas in graduate school, but nonetheless my question pertains to those people. (Not intended as a serious question here, by the way, only what I think avoids the obvious issue pointed out by @Jon Custer.)

@Dave L Renfro. I have another question about prolificity of some graduates during school only that I am posting very soon to gain some the thoughts out there. Appreciate your comment!

Some people ask questions that get upvoted, some people do not. That's just how life is.

If somebody knew the answer to this question, there would be no need for academics anymore because all the great ideas would have been found already.

Some of it is being in the right place at the right time. A field has advanced to a certain state that some key insight is "ripe" for exploration.
Some of it is luck. Things just "come together" for the student.
Some of it is great advising, and some of it is being at a university in which there is a lot of intellectual discussion going on.
But research, and the great results, isn't something that can be scheduled and necessarily builds up incrementally. It takes insight, Eureka, that most trained researchers are capable of, given the right environment.
Finally some of it is just that the great work is recognized after the fact as others find it useful.
Note that my perspective is mathematics and computer science.
My daughter's dissertation was a "great work" in philosophy because she had the chutzpah to take on and refute a certain conventional wisdom held by the "great men" of the time. Risky, that.
But the riskiest path of all is to try to solve some classic unsolved dilemma that has been worked over by a generation or two of researchers. Getting a "win" there is partly magic, as the existing papers don't seem to get very close to a solution. New researchers are normally advised to avoid putting too much work into such problems until they have an established position in which failure to finish isn't devastating.

I could not ask for a better answer. I appreciate the first 3 points you made. I also thought the same by the way. Meanwhile, I find the fourth point you made quite interesting. Specifically the part about trained researchers being capable of having the "Eureka" thing. How do they get trained though to have these these insights?


text:
Not meeting the min. GRE requirement
If I do not meet the min. GRE score requirement, shall I apply to the school anyway?

No. It's a waste of your money, and a waste of their time. Your application will simply be filtered out.
There are cases where schools make exceptions. But they need to know that they should make an exception and why -- so if you think that you have a particularly good reason why you do not meet their minimal threshold, write an email to the graduate adviser of the chair of the graduate committee and tell them about it.


text:
How can I address several deans in a letter?
I am part of the student council at my college and I would like to email a letter to all of the deans.
How can I start the letter without writing "Dear Deans?"

I never use "Dear" when formally addressing anyone. When addressing professors or more generally people higher up the food chain, I address them with an honorific if applicable followed by their last name. So in this case, I'd say "Deans ABC, DEF, etc."

As we can see below, this probably depends on local custom and culture, so you should say where you are.  I'd do whatever would be considered appropriate for a formal business letter in your culture.  I don't think it's likely to be specific to academia.

What's wrong with "Dear Deans"?

One solution would be: instead of sending a single email addressed to all of them, send each one a separate message, addressed to them personally and with an appropriate salutation.  This is also more likely to get their attention than something that appears to be a mass-mailed form letter.  If it's important that they know the same letter is being sent to the other deans, say so in the text.

I'll prefer this option then.

It might not be pleasing to most people of higher ranks to address with "Dear" at the start of a contact, especially if it is from a student. I suppose a better option would be to include this.

Respected Dignitaries

This should be the most pleasing way to address rank officials such as deans, professors, and chief guests.

This is likely to vary by culture.  In contrast to this, in a US business or academic environment, "Dear" is perfectly acceptable for all formal letters, regardless of the "rank" of the sender or recipient, and "Respected Dignitaries" would sound hilariously pompous, or even mocking.

If that's so, Dear Dignitaries, may be a better fit for that culture.

I think "Dignitaries" itself is way over the top for US.  It suggests princes, ambassadors, heads of state with fancy clothes, and sounds odd applied to a mere academic dean.

It seems like it is a bit overused from where I came from. So its seems appropriate. (PS: Today's heads of states do not wear fancy clothes.)

I know they don't - that is my point!

Nonetheless, in literature, dignitaries do refer to important persons as well. The word has not archaic meaning as of now, hence it is applicable under the sense stated in the question.


text:
Why patents are not cited in papers as that of journal papers?
I couldn't find papers that cite patents. Is it OK to cite patents? If yes, what are the reasons for scarce patent citations?

There are certainly papers citing patents, mostly in engineering fields. So, yes it is certainly OK to cite a patent.
Now patents have an entirely different purpose than scientific articles. They usually contain detailed descriptions of methods and devices and (sometimes wild) speculations about practical applications of these. Useful to protect potential commercial use, but not really to scientists wanting to build on existing knowledge.
More specifically, what they typically don't contain are original experimental data, or other means of scientifically evaluating the described methods or devices.
Very often, if the development of the patented method or device has led to scientific discoveries, these have been published separately as articles (or conference proceedings for the fields where that applies). Those will be much more scientifically informative, and hence more likely to be cited in academic articles.

"or other means of scientifically evaluating the described methods or devices" - the scientifically can probably be dropped. It is just not the purpose of a patent to prove that the presented technology works.

@Cape Code Thanks for the answer. Now I use "Google Patent" search to find out patents. Any other source to refer patents. I am interested in chemical physics, condensed matter physics, materials science related patents.

@phenomenon Google scholar is a pretty comprehensive database. But your institution's library certainly can help with searching patents.


text:
Using Industry experience to recover from bad undergrad record
I graduated 2 years ago from a (frankly shitty) US state school with a 2.9 GPA and a Bachelor's of Arts in Computer science and no research experience.
I am well aware that this is a very poor undergraduate record. My mental health has has improved markedly since I left undergraduate and I have continued educating myself (self study/undergraduate courses).
I have the opportunity to move to a group within my company that does machine learning and statistics. Provided I take this position, will this experience be a positive mark on an application to a Master's program in a related field (comp. sci, statistics)? If so, how can I maximize the utility of this work experience in terms of admission?
More generally, what can I do to prevent myself from being permanently locked out of acceptance into graduate studies?

Does the new group include at least one academically impressive leader?

@PatriciaShanahan I believe that at least one member has a PhD

@jakebeal I'm only considering a Master's degree at this point, specifically because of an answer in your linked question: "The best way to offset a low GPA ... is to consider enrolling in a terminal Master's degree and getting a good GPA in difficult classes."

@BryanGlazer Ah, good... we really need to make a similar community wiki for questions about Masters admissions.

Getting experience on a work project using statistics & machine learning is a great first step towards remedying a poor undergrad GPA.
Your next steps should be:

mastering your work project (reading books, picking your colleague's brain),
finding CS programs & faculty that specialize in machine learning,
reading their popular/latest articles (list your questions),
discussing these articles and questions with coworkers,
attending the weekly colloquium/seminar of a CS department, and
talking to the speaker and other interested faculty afterwards.

Once you're comfortable enough to talk faculty about their research, make friends and say, "I am considering applying to grad school, is there a place for me in your group? Would you consider putting a good word for me with the admissions committee?"

Thank you Nick. Should I be searching for some way to get published? Is that viewed as a necessity?

Publishing is nice, but not necessary. However, if you are excited about a professor's research, it is very likely that he can start you out on a publishable project. This is perhaps the best way to gain admittance to grad school.

I'd add to your list taking some courses at a local university and getting good grades to establish that you've become a better student then you were before.


text:
How to ask editor for a formal acceptance letter?
How can I ask editor to send me a formal acceptance letter of my paper to use it in my university?

Why would you need such a letter? If your paper has been accepted, the notification would work; if your paper hasn't been accepted, the editor can't possibly send you a formal acceptance letter.

You send an email to the editor asking for a formal acceptance letter of your paper. Be sure to identify which paper it is about.
If desired, add a second paragraph to your email, which explains why you need such a letter. Do not hide anything necessary in the paragraph.
Be polite and to the point.


text:
How to stay motivated and optimistic about an academic or industrial career with an extended PhD?
I am pursuing my PhD in Canada in Mechanical engineering and will graduate this November. This brings my PhD time to a total of 5 years 3 months. I already had a master's degree. I have not yet started looking for postdoc positions but I have heard from one of my lab's alumni that they were asked about their extended PhD duration during postdoc and industry position interviews.
I had coursework in first semester, but after that, all my time was invested in my research. So, I don't have the reasoning that my US counterparts have for their PhD extending over 5 years. I was unfocused for a better part of a semester during my 3rd year, so that might have caused this delay.
On top of that, I am submitting my research to journals now, so I don't have any proof of productivity for the past 4 years.
I have two questions:
1) does an extended PhD duration really frowned upon in academia and industry (for a research scientist position), if so, any suggestions to counteract a question on that?
2) A vague question: How can I stay motivated and optimistic about completing my thesis and working towards an academic or a research scientist career in the future?

I'll say something only about your first concern.
You can't change the past. You are where you are. However, I wouldn't be overly concerned with anecdotal remarks about what is expected or not. You have a history and if asked about it, just recount it honestly. Don't apologize for taking a few extra months or even years.
The funny thing about (real) research is that you can't do it on a schedule. The insights and the background work take time to mature. It isn't like manufacturing a complex artifact like an automobile that can be optimized to the second. Research problems worth the effort are hard and the solutions come when they come. Sometimes spending more hours on them helps. Sometimes taking a break, especially a mental break, helps.
But anyone who says "I will do this significant piece of work and be done in three years" is deluding themselves. I expect other people with research experience to recognize and respect that. If they don't, I expect that they haven't really worked on anything difficult lately and carried it to completion.
You do what you can do with the constraints that you have. Hopefully you learn something valuable and are able to write it up and get your degree. But the path is both winding and difficult.
When I went to grad school it was still possible to get a math PhD in four years out of undergraduate. I took seven. My career wasn't what I expected, due to economic factors beyond my control, but I had a rewarding career in academia. Nowadays seven is closer to the norm, unfortunately.

I finished my MS in three years where normal time is two years, but that did not stop me from getting into a PhD and finish in 5 years.  I have numerous examples of people taking up to 8 years finishing up their PhDs.  Everybody has different reasons, some took time off, some had a family emergency/planning (had babies), some had failed experiments, some went on internships, or some just goofed around.  However, all those people had good job offers of their choice when they graduated.  Therefore, do not worry much about if you have taken a little over five years to finish.  You will be fine.
About publications, usually students do not publish while they are doing their MS or PhD, unless you are very enthusiastic or your department has a policy to publish before you graduate.  Many students publish their MS or PhD work in the next couple of years after graduation.  If a potential employer ask you about the publications, you can always say that you are working on them, although this answer is more acceptable in industry than in academia.
About staying motivated, just think about the bigger picture.  I know it is hard.  I was supposed to finish my MS thesis in 6 months but took 12.  It wasn't because I was super busy with anything else, but because I was too distracted going out with friends, watching TV or doing some other non-academic stuff.  But I learned a lesson from that and finished my PhD dissertation in time.  You can do all the stuff other than writing your thesis/dissertation and have that stress in the back of your head about finishing for one year, or you can finish in 6 months and then do all that stuff without any stress.  Good luck!


text:
Applying to a school with a new PhD program
I am interested in studying biostatistics, and was looking at several schools to apply to. I live in the DC area and would ideally like to stay in this area. Georgetown and the University of Maryland have new PhD programs in biostatistics. I believe they have both had masters programs in biostatistics for several years now, but their PhD programs are new.
My question is this: Is it risky to apply to a PhD program that is new?
More specifically, does that hinder future employment because the university doesn't have as many connections with other places? Does the fact that these universities already had a masters program mitigate that?

You're thinking of the biostatistics PhD program as growing out of the biostatistics masters, but that's probably not accurate. It's more likely that the biostatistics PhD program is branching off of a statistics PhD program (and faculty that have been doing biostatistics for a long time) and is just a version of the stats PhD that is more tailored to applications in biology; probably universities of that scope have trained many many biostatisticians in the past, but their degrees say "PhD in Statistics."

Note that the UMD PhD stats website https://sph.umd.edu/department/epib/phd-biostatistics-bioinformatics explains that the new program is a joint venture between statisticians in the Dept of Mathematics and several departments and divisions within their school of public health.

@BryanKrause That's an interesting point. Do you think the school would have less connections to research centers and people in the field though? I ask because from what I understand the network/connections your thesis advisor has are crucial after you finish your phd

No, or at least, the name of different PhD programs is not going to be a reliable indication. I think you are misunderstanding the relationship between a graduate program and academic faculty. PhD programs relate to graduate students. Faculty relate to academic departments and their own research. There is absolutely no reason a top biostatistician needs to be involved with a PhD program called "biostatistics" or in an academic department called "biostatistics."

Similarly there is no reason to expect an academic with a PhD in "mathematics" who publishes in mathematical statistics to be less of a statistician or less involved in the statistics community than an academic with a PhD in "statistics" that publishes in mathematical statistics. Probably the difference between them is they took different but overlapping courses in their early years of graduate school, or attended different institutions who grouped the fields differently, which matters hardly at all and is certainly not how you would evaluate their contributions to their field.

Georgetown and the University of Maryland have new PhD programs in
  biostatistics

Even though the program is new, both of these are very reputable universities. It is the same faculty, same resources, and probably same philosophy. Therefore, no risk there in terms of program age.

More specifically, does that hinder future employment because the
  university doesn't have as many connections with other places? Does
  the fact that these universities already had a masters program
  mitigate that?

I don't think it matters. What matters for future employment is what you learned, new skills and experience gained, leadership development, goal oriented personality, and ability to work in teams.

Don't the people and institutions your advisor has connections matter a great deal?

@graphtheory123 they can but not as much as what you have to offer.  Your advisor can probably introduce you to other faculty or company, but if you don't have what they are looking for, then there is no point.  That being said, your advisor's connection can come in handy for the collaborations.  That is one big benefit of having a supervisor who has connections.  Sometime you can find a project that you want to work on but your supervisor directly do not have expertise in that, but one of your supervisor's collaborator does.  In that case you can always find a way to work on the project.

@graphtheory123  People, definitely; institutions, less so—especially if you include yourself as "people". The biostatisticians at Georgetown and Maryland are well-established; otherwise, they wouldn't have been able to start a PhD program!


text:
Why are operations research departments usually separate from mathematics departments?
The title says it all. When I look online, they are usually separate departments

One could ask the same about Computer Science / Statistics / Machine Learning / Data Science departments. If your mathematical work interests non-mathematicians, then you cannot be in the Mathematics department.

Or Computer Science, Computer Engineering, and Electrical Engineering. Why, to find materials science folks do I need to consider physics, chemistry, materials science, chemical engineering, ceramic engineering, metallurgy, polymer science, mechanical engineering, and nuclear engineering degrees?

Choose from : history, habit, snobbery, tribalism ...
There is no logical reason for one choice of departmental structure over another. Just look at how often universities change their departmental structures.
If you bring some groups of people together in a named department then you are excluding other people whose work does in fact have a lot in common with the first group. Departmental structures are always compromises.
Most academics see the benefit of interdisciplinary work, but universities, on the whole, like the apparent orderliness of clear departmental structures.
As to the specifics of operational research: its history was in dealing with urgent practical problems in wartime. Its practitioners were applying mathematics, but were not pure mathematicians. Neither were they what many universities described as applied mathematicians, although in the natural meaning of the words they were, of course, applied mathematicians.
When I took a master's degree in OR in the 1970s, I was in the faculty of engineering. A very few years later, I would have been in the business school of the same university (with the same teachers).

So, really it is just about control on an admin basis...


text:
Applying to US Phd Programs while doing a UK Master's
I recently received a conditional offer from UCL in MSc Advanced Neuroimaging. I'll be completing this program through distance learning (meaning that I won't have to physically be present in the UK).
I was thinking about applying to PhD programs in the US this fall with the hopes of starting in the fall of 2020. However, while I was looking at the course requirements for the MSc program, I noticed that my thesis would require a final presentation in September 2020 and results will be notified in October 2020.
Will this overlap (starting a PhD program in September 2020 while finishing my master's thesis) cause a problem? Will I have to wait to apply in the fall of 2020? I would really like to apply this cycle so that I won't have to waster another year.

In this situation you can often have your UK dissertation supervisor write a note on letterhead separate from whatever recommendation they are writing for you that explains the timeline of your degree programme, notes what your current marks are, and gives a bit of speculation as to what your degree outcome will be (usually, "they are almost certainly going to pass"). I've done that for students before.

Are you willing to spend a month doing the equivalent of working two full time jobs simultaneously?

I'll speculate that most places wouldn't find it to be much of a problem, but it is up to the accepting institution, certainly.
However, you will need to get accepted based on your current record without the MSc and will need to present sufficient evidence of success in the doctoral program. Since most US doctoral programs in the US don't require completion of a master's first it wouldn't seem to be an impediment to be doing both. But you will need to be sure that the required work on either of them doesn't impede the necessary work on the other. It would be sad to fail at either because of overload.


text:
Publishing on arXiv before submitting to an IEEE journal
Since the review process for IEEE journals can take upto an year, I want to publish my paper on arXiv to make it available to the research community. I read that in order to have the paper on both arXiv and IEEE, I should submit to arXiv first and then to IEEE. But once the article is submitted to arXiv, it takes time to be announced and publicly available. So, should I submit to IEEE only after the article is announced on arXiv or can I submit to IEEE as soon as I've submitted to arXiv?

See: https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/policy-posting-your-journal-article/

Thanks! I had read that. My concern was not clarified there.

"I should submit to arXiv first and then to IEEE" -- is that field specific? Can you provide a source for this?

If the IEEE page didn't answer your question, what do you need to know in addition?

@GoodDeeds, I had read this somewhere on the web. I couldn't find it now. It said something along the lines of "Posting on arXiv before submitting to IEEE would give distributing rights to arXiv first and hence IEEE cannot forbid it. If I submit to IEEE first, then I can submit to arXiv only after the paper is accepted/rejected".

@Buffy, please read my above comment. That information caused me concern. On the IEEE page, there is no description of the chronology I should follow. It says "IEEE allows authors to post on arXiv", but there may be some hidden clause saying "IEEE allows authors to post on arXiv, only if the paper is posted on arXiv first". I don't know if there is such a thing, I'm just worried and want to make sure I don't muck it up!


text:
Should arXiv paper be linked when submitting to a IEEE journal
IEEE allows submitting papers which have already been published in preprint servers like arXiv. But when submitting, should I link the arXiv paper to the submission?
If I don't do that, would IEEE flag this as plagiarism?
If I have to do that, where to do that? I couldn't find any place to link it when submitting a paper.

Do the submission and the ArXiv preprint have the same authors?   If so, it is not plagiarism, since ArXiv is not a journal.

ArXiv cannot be used in a way that creates self-plagiarism.

Yes, authors, title, everything is the same. Thanks!

Are you writing a cover letter?

No. Not writing a cover letter.


text:
Is it illegal or unethical to use plotting and graphics styles that mimic those from newspapers and websites?
I am a researcher and publish my findings in academic journals, websites/blogs, and social media. The results often involve plots and other graphics, and I try to make them as attractive as possible.
Publications such as NYT, FT, The Economist, ... have characteristic (and pretty imo) styles for plots that many people like and try to mimic. One particular example is fivethirtyeight, with their style being even integrated as a style in matplotlib.
I wonder what is the stance about this topic in the data science community and academia. Is it okay to get inspired by someone's design of graphics and follow it?
I am not sure whether a plotting style can be protected and patented (and can you get sued for re-using it), but if not: is it unethical to mimic plot styles from others?
Another thing that may complicate things further is that when one publishes in academic journals, often the copyright of the content is transferred to the publisher.

It's fine to base your graphical style on that of other publications that you think are doing a good job.  There are no ethical issues with this, provided you are not actually reusing images—or parts of images—from other sources.  (For example, you cannot copy parts directly from other figures without either proper attribution or permission; what precisely you need depends on the context and the use you are going to make of the images.  You might also run into issues if you directly copied The Economist's proprietary house font, which was specifically designed for that publication.)