text:
Synonym for the job title of assistant professor
I often go to meetings and professional events outside academia.
I am meeting new people all the time, and most of them are not acquainted with academic ranks and job titles. It happens often that when they realize that my job title is 'assistant professor' they slightly dismiss me and suddenly give an impression that they see me inferior.
Some even ask me who my professor is. So I don't think I am misinterpreting the situations.
Outside academia 'assistant' has often a connotation of a lower and dependent ranking, which may explain it.
I am not obsessed with titles, and I am happy with my job and position, but I have a feeling that in these situations it may close doors as I am getting dismissed before I can show anything.
As I am getting convinced that this happens only because of the job title, I started to think who can I introduce myself with another generic job title that sounds better and does more justice (that I am more senior than I appear: a project leader, supervising people, and do not assist someone).
Is there a synonym that I can use instead? The requirement is that a title isn't fake. I don't want to claim a title that does not belong to me. I just want to find a better way to introduce myself to those who are outside academia.
I was thinking about using titles such as senior scientist, research director, lecturer, but these are actual job titles. Principal investigator, while truthful, may not be understood.
Maybe I should also state that I am male, so it is not about gender. I can imagine that if I were female it would be even worse.

It could help to know what country this relates to.

As Dan says, the 'correct' answer to this question depends on which country you are in. 'Professor' means different things in different countries.

It is a lower ranking than Professor. But you're probably right that some will (reasonably) interpret it as "Assistant to the Professor".

I think you should just introduce yourself as

I work as a professor at the University of X.

omitting the assistant rank that can cause misunderstandings.
The following conversation line feels also very safe:

– Where do you work?
– I do research and teach at the University of X.

which might be a better fit since it explains your job in a short sentence. However, nothing wrong with the first line that does not require a question to feel natural.
The actual rank (assistant/associate/full) might matter in a formal (mostly, written and official) context and rarely means a lot outside of the academic system. And that seems to be exactly the situation you happen to encounter issues.
Related questions:

How an assistant professor is called in North America?
Can I call an assistant professor Professor?

Cultural and linguistic differences can play a role, so it might not be as appropriate in certain countries; though, I doubt that would matter at all in a circle that is not familiar with academic ranks at all. Moreover, it is likely that there is no confusion because the rank in the other language is very different.
You might also dig in the direction of "Head of XXX lab" (in case it applies) or "research group supervisor", but I don't think there is a good reason. An assistant professor is a professor and no elaboration is needed in a laid-back unofficial atmosphere.

Good answer, upvoted, but “I do research and teach at the University of X” can come across as “I am being deliberately vague about my job title at University of X”. Which will actually be true in OP’s case, but probably defeats the purpose of what he’s trying to achieve.

In the UK it would be misleading to describe yourself as a professor unless your job title was "Professor" - a relatively senior rank in the hierarchy that you do not hold.

Same for Australia. It would be extremely misleading to call yourself a Professor if you were not one. Even an Associate Professor is a high rank.

To add to @DanRomik's comment, that phrase might equally well apply to grad students and postdocs, and possibly by people who aren't even employees of University X.

@JeremyC Yes, but in the UK the OP wouldn't be an Assistant Professor.  They would be a post-doc researcher, or a Lecturer, or a Reader.

I take it back.  Apparently (see Especially Lime's answer) some UK universities do use "Assistant Professor".

This is best. Anyone who doesn't know that an "assistant" professor isn't an assistant doesn't care about the differences between being an "assistant professor" and a "professor." || Same way a Senior Research Engineer might just introduce themselves as an "engineer" or "research engineer" in a social setting.

@MartinBonnersupportsMonica Even so, the OP might be from the US, but talking to someone from a different country. In fact, it would pay to be particularly careful in this case. Being a full professor in some countries is an extremely serious matter, and in some places is even protected by law.

Try this: (Example)
"I am currently a faculty member at the University of Texas, English Department (2013 - Present)" - since assistant professor vs. associate professor are simply ranking progress of a Ph.d on faculty simply state the basic.

Yes, this is the best advice. It is what I do when it is not quite clear if my audience understands academia or not. If they understand academia and want to know mor, it is easy for them to ask a follow-up question.

In the US, if you say something like "math professor", no one will assume that you are referring to the actual rank. I think this is the most natural way of saying what you do for a living in an informal context. "Faculty member" is also OK if you don't want to get into what your field is.

In the UK, there are currently two competing sets of ranks. Some universities use the traditional British structure of Lecturer - Senior Lecturer - Reader - Professor, whereas others use the more international one of Assistant Professor - Associate Professor - Professor. Job advertisements will often indicate how the ranks used in that university correspond to the other set, and this is normally Assistant Professor = Lecturer, Associate Professor = Senior Lecturer / Reader (some places have two classes of Associate Professor to distinguish this) and, unsurprisingly, Professor = Professor.
So I would use "university lecturer"; it may not be your job title, but you do (I presume) actually deliver lectures, people will probably understand it better than "assistant professor", and it is a title some other institutions would use for your current rank. In the UK at least (and I think in Europe more generally, although I don't have direct experience of that), it would be clearly wrong to use "professor", which without modification would be interpreted as a full professor. (Someone with the title of Associate or Assistant Professor would still be referred to as "Dr X" in the UK, not "Prof. X".)

In some places "lecturer" is used as the job title for non-tenured, non-tenure track teaching positions (i.e. significantly lower in the hierarchy than a typical assistant professor). As such, describing oneself as such could have the opposite effect.

@mmeent In the UK, that would be a "teaching fellow". Perhaps the only conclusion we can come to is that any option would be misleading in some places, and the answer is dependent on country (which OP hasn't specified).

I work at a university that is moving from the "old" system to the "new" - apparently it has been made clear to those that have changed job title that if your job title is "associate professor" that doesn't entitle you to refer to yourself as e.g. Prof. Marsupial.  I opted to stay as an SL (and would be Dr Marsupial if I didn't prefer to be called by my first name).  I really don't understand why someone would prefer to be an "associate professor" rather than an SL.

Some universities might also consider Reader to be equivalent to many US Professors, and UK Professor to be more like "Distinguished Professor" or "Professor with a chair" or something.
And some mix the two systems, going Lecturer-> Senior Lecturer -> Associate Professor ;-)

What about something along the lines of "Junior-ranked professor"? - this conveys both that (a) you are a professor for practical purposes (i.e., you do research and teaching), and (b) that you don't have a high seniority. This does leave out the fact that you do not have tenure, but industry people often do not care about this.
Coincidentally, in Germany, "Juniorprofessor" is an official designation for a position quite similar to an assistant professorship elsewhere, except that by default, it does not have a tenure track, so after at most 6 years, such professors have to find a new job.

ok, so this answer is late, but no-one seems to have suggested

tenure-track professor

this sounds better to me than assistant professor and if someone asks you can explain that you are on a career path towards tenure / full professor
if you have tenure then

tenured professor

might be an option

If you want to stay vague, I would go with

I am an academic / in academia

but I think it is more useful to be subject-specific

I am a mathematician / chemist / historian at the University of X.

That way people understand that you are a researcher and a teacher, and what your area of expertise is.

When talking to people that are not deeply into academia, I call myself "researcher [at the University (of Somewhere)]" to start with. Currently, I am postdoctoral researcher, some day I might be assistant/associate professor - I guess I will keep it that way.
It's a word everyone should be familiar with (unlike postdoc or assistant professor), and it makes sure that people don't think I am a teacher (which I might do as well, but it's not the main part of my job), and they have some idea what I might be doing (likely not, but it wouldn't be better when I tell them I am professor).

Unless you're bothered about the teaching aspect, How about "scientist"?

I like anton-menshov's response. In talking with non-academics, you can also quickly convey the reality of your position by calling yourself a "beginning professor" at University X. Then they know you are in fact a professor, and they know where you are among the different types of professors.

My suggestion based on what I would do: Just present yourself with your name and surname. Then, if other people ask about your job, you can explain that you are an Assistant Professor. If people consider your preparation only considering your Title, then you are sure that these people are not good at their work, so it's not good to have a collaboration with them for future projects.
There are Professors that are less prepared than students and researchers.

You said: “Maybe I should also state that I am male, so it is not about gender. I can imagine that if I were female it would be even worse”.  There is not any proof and evidence that for females it’s worse for the recognition of the academic titles. In fact, I would say it’s the opposite.


text:
Math REU low GPA
I have a GPA ~3.2 because I did poorly on my courses during my freshman year. I am currently a junior. I did terribly during my freshman year because I was experiencing culture shock and I was burned out. At that point I was thinking of being CS major and I took a class that was more advanced than my skill set; that was a big mistake, and it not only affected my grade in that course but in other the courses I was taking as well, including calc 2 (I got C).
The thing is I knew calculus well enough – I self studied it when I was in sophomore highschool and I also took it my senior year high-school, and I got all As in my high-school math. But due to lack of time and being burnt out I didn't practice enough for the final. I also had spent most of the semester trying to manage my CS class.
The following semester I had very low confidence in myself, and so I also did poorly on multivariate calculus (got C+), but my gpa was slightly higher than the first. Again I didn't practice enough for the final although I knew the material from self studying.
After avoiding math for a semester, I decided to take linear algebra, abstract algebra, real analysis, vector calculus, and combinatorics, over two semesters. I got A/A- in all of them. I hope that since these are advanced classes than calculus that they demonstrate that math acumen is not terribly low.
Currently, I am thinking of applying to Math REUs and I am having doubts whether the programs that I apply to will consider me a viable candidate due to my grades in my freshman year also considering my calculus grades. What do guys think I should do?

I would also review this thread, since REUs and grad school applications have a lot in common.

When were the C's? If there were early on in your undergraduate career, then it's less of a thing to worry about and it'll help that you had an upward trend afterwards.  I got into an REU at a very top school in my field this past summer after a terrible junior year (2.8 GPA both semesters).  At the REU, one of the guys on my project team noted they had one or two sub-2.5 semesters.  Everyone understands that the transition from high school to college can be a rough one sometimes so there's more leeway than you think here (this also applies when applying to grad schools from that I've read).
The more important thing than your GPA at this point is getting strong letters of recommendations, as well as writing a great statement of purpose to really show that you are interested in the fields that your potential REUs will explore.  Being a 4.0 student in this regard will matter a lot less than actually being passionate about the field you will explore in the potential REU program.  You mentioned that you are a junior, so hopefully since you've been in your major a while, you will have an idea of what those potential fields of interest are.
Also, do note that REUs are competitive no matter who you are, so just apply to as many as you physically can that are of interest to you.  I applied to ~15-17, and was accepted to 3 (and one other summer research program abroad, I was in the process of applying to one or two more when I got an offer letter from one of my top choices that I ended up going to).  Especially if you're considering grad school and you want to REU's, I'd say give it your best shot and apply to all the REU's you can ... you'll have a 0% chance of getting in if you don't apply.
Hope this helped and best of luck with your applications!

The C's are from my freshman year. I have had a strong upward trend ever since. I just finished a semester (that went extremely well) with a heavy load of math classes.

One thing that bothers me is that I am not sure what kind of math I am interested in. I only started being a math major in Sophomore year. Would not having a specific interest matter significantly?

If you have done very well in math classes recently, including classes that had the ones where you got the C/C+ as prerequisites, that's very much in your favor.  As for the second comment, note most REUs are in a specific field so you want to show that you are a fit for their program/field.  Try to identify potential field(s) of interest, which could help identify which REUs are of particular interest/fit.

Hmm, I have an inclination to number theory. But I took a very advanced algebraic number theory course this semester and I'm afraid I might get B+. I truly enjoyed the course, and I did pretty well until the final. We had a take home final and two of the questions were extremely difficult. I wouldn't mind writing about this in my statement of purpose but I am afraid getting a B+ in an advanced course is not going to reflect well on my application. Should I choose a topic based on one of my other math courses then?

If you truly think number theory is what you may want to research in the future, then go for it.  Grades don't define success in a field, remember this.  But I wouldn't count out considering other potential fields of interest either.  I didn't major in (theoretical) math so as far as the topics themselves, I can't really hint.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Bad GRE scores, but otherwise decent application to PhD program. Still worth it?
I just finished my MA in Global Affairs, and I am applying to several International Relations PhD programs, one of which is very competitive.
I have a 3.9 GPA, 1 1/2 years of experience in research including an internship at a very respected research center, and very strong LORs. My writing sample was recently accepted to a conference, and I have received great feedback on it otherwise.
However, my GRE scores suck. I took them before I applied to my MA program, and despite studying like crazy for close to 3 months, I bombed. My combined score, converted to the older system is 1020, and I somehow got a 3.5 on the analytical writing section. This last part really shocked me, since writing is one of my strongest skills, and any professor I've had can attest to that. I wanted to retake the test before applying, but my last semester was very hectic and I could not carve out the time to study. Admittedly, I have had very little guidance on the application process, so I told myself that the rest of my application would make up for it. Recently I have begun to worry that this assumption was wrong.
Since I have made it this far in the application process, I am still going to apply. However, I want to have realistic expectations. Am I doomed, or do GRE scores not necessarily make or break a holistic review?

Good question. Have considering applying abroad where you might benefit from not needing to report the GRE? If you can go abroad, then you should strongly consider applying to universities where you would not only benefit from being able to show your strongest suit (i.e., all of your grades and achievements rather than GRE) but also facing less competition, cost, and higher probabilities of funding. Let me know if this is an option and, if so, I can add more.

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


text:
Arxiv updated references not tracked by Google scholar
I uploaded a preprint to arxiv and then uploaded a second version after 2 weeks with additional references. It seems that it has been more than a month but Google Scholar is unable to track the updated references and change the citation count. Has anybody experienced something similar and has solutions to address the problem ?

Have you asked Google Scholar?

Seems like you need to wait a bit longer, especially if Google Scholar doesn't include the second version. (You can search for it to find out.)

Duplicate, but no answer there: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79859/references-of-an-updated-version-arxiv-paper-not-added-in-google-scholar?rq=1

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


text:
How exactly do you expand your knowledge about your research field as a PhD student?
My research field is functional analysis, and currently, I am acquiring new knowledge simply "by chance". This means, I need something specific to know, so I educate myself on it, and continue my work. Although this might work, I don't find that it's the ideal way to do it.
The problem I encounter is that if my advisor and I stumble across a problem to solve, I am simply unprepared from a knowledge point of view speaking. I understand the problem, but I do not know how to solve it - or at least how to tackle it, what kind of ideas are worth investigating. So I always end up relying on my basic knowledge from my Bachelor's and Master's studies, instead of more professional and fine tuned knowledge. Eventually, my advisor comes up with a solution and once I understand it I can investigate it further.
In other words, I simply lack the necessary knowledge to not only find potential solutions to our mathematical problems, but also to realize when something needs to be mathematically corrected or fine tuned. This is also something which goes completely off my radar.
Now the problem is that there is just such an overwhelming amount of books on functional analysis and operator theory, that I don't know how and where to start. Should I create some schedule and simply work through those textbooks? How can I do it efficiently?
One might suggest to go visit seminars, but the problem is that there is exactly one seminar a week in the city I study where actually topics about strictly only functional analysis or operator theory are being presented. So I don't know whether there are online seminars which I might potentially check out?

This question is similar to: How to improve self-learning as a PhD student?. If you believe it’s different, please [edit] the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem.

Welcome to the site. There are existing questions on self-learning. I encourage you to take the site's tour and browse through other questions.

@RichardErickson It's not the same question. My problem is that I do have the resources, but I don't know how to start. The only resources I have are textbooks, and I have them available. Seminars, as I said, there is only one seminar a week, and there are no extra courses I could take at my university in my topic. So I can only rely on textbooks. But there are so many, that I simply don't know where and how to start, and how I should effectively go through them. It's not a problem of "how to gather the material to study", but rather "I have the material to study, but how should I start?"

I am a tenured math professor, and every couple months I find out there is something very basic in one of the areas I work in that I didn't know that I feel like I should've known.  You'll never learn everything relevant to what you're working on.  If you're clever enough, you figure it out from scratch for yourself, look around now that you know what you're looking for, and find out (or have pointed out by a reviewer) that it's something that's been done.  Just give up on knowing everything and solve the problems you can with what you know.

If you knew how to solve the problem from general knowledge, chances are that someone else also could solve the problem from general knowledge, and it'd be solved already.  Most problems you come across, or even work on, you won't solve.  That's how math research works.

@S-F Perhaps How to stop hopping the learning chain and actually begin somewhere? is more relevant.

From the question I find it difficult to get a clear picture your current state of knowledge and the state of knowledge that you would like to have - after all, nobody knows all of functional analysis and operator theory. Questions: (1) How far are you into your PhD (in terms of months or years)? (2) How much have you learnt in your Bachelor's and Master's programme about functional analysis and operator theory (how many course and which courses)? (3) Can you give a concrete example of a piece of knowledge that you did not have at a point when your advisor used it to solve a problem?

(I'm aware that my questions are rather specific for this site - but I'm trying to understand whether your issue is really a lack of knowledge or unrealisitic assumptions on how much one can know at a certain point.)

@JochenGlueck (1) 2nd (2) Actually not that much, because my university specializes more in applied mathematics. I only had one functional analysis course (which covered the most basic things) and one operator theory course (which covered the fundamentals of operators). The rest I've learned by writing my Master's thesis about functional analysis and now being a PhD student (and also attending seminars), so I keep learning new stuff everyday. Mostly my knowledge in this area is self-learned.

@JochenGlueck (3) We needed something from O. Bekkens' PhD thesis but instead of asking UCLA for a copy we recreated it on our own. This was only possible because my advisor simply has been reading lots of papers for the past decades, and he knew one Japanese paper from the 1970s which eventually helped us recreate what we needed. I would've never found it, let alone came up with that solution.

‘I don't find that it's the ideal way to do it.’ Learning at the research level is like that. How would you prefer things to be?

Typically, one works with an advisor who can point you to resources. If your advisor can't do that then it can be very difficult. If you can meet frequently and ask questions, perhaps you can get pointed toward useful resources, but only if they work to keep current.
Seminars will help, but only if you interact with people and make it active rather than passive attendance. Conferences are a good place to make contacts and start discussions that can continue afterward. You might be able to ask a senior member for a suggestion of a paper that you promise to present in the future. Now you have an active task.
Note that textbooks are unlikely to get you to the research edge in almost every field. Very unlikely. That isn't their purpose and things change rapidly in active fields.
Recent papers are probably essential for you. A good research librarian can help, as can the internet. Recent books may be better than older ones, provided they contain modern methods. Preprint servers might contain a lot of what you need, but not everything there will be sufficiently vetted, so you need to judge.
The typical process with recent papers is that if/when you find them hard to follow, go to papers they cite first and try to understand them. This was the common process in pre-internet days. Lots of hours in the library with lots of journals to consult. If you are somewhat isolated this might be the only way. A research librarian can probably get access to most things. Such librarians often have (international) circles of contact with other librarians.
Some traditional methods in established fields may be enough, but not in new or rapidly evolving fields.

My advisor gave me some essential literature, but I just don't really know what I'm supposed to do with it - study it like a student, or treat it like some sort of encyclopedia so I can always look up important stuff there? Seminars, conferences: There aren't many (in my area) for functional analysis, almost none. The same goes for research papers in my particular topic and problem I'm working on. The latest is 27 years old, and the textbooks and other papers we're working with are from the 1970s usually.

Yes, study it like a student. You need to understand it to gain insight. And, you are unlikely to find things very specific to your problem. If you did, then your problem has probably been solved by others. Insight. How do things work? Why do the work? When don't they work?

Why are you working on problems that have been untouched for 30 years?  (Sometimes there is a good reason, but usually there are good reasons no one has worked on these things for a while!)

@AlexanderWoo Because my Professor and the author who wrote last about these problems 30 years ago are good friends, so that's how we got the idea to work on it again.

First of all, are you sure that a lack of knowledge is the issue? When you try to analyse how your supervisor solved it in the end, is about them knowing stuff at the beginning of the process that you don't? Or is it more about tenacity, in that they kept trying to actually solve the problem while you were scared off by not knowing how? Figuring out a new proof usually involves feeling very, very lost, and in my experience novice researchers often struggle comitting to really try.
When it comes to actual knowledge, I think it is useful to distinguish the fundamentals of your own field and other stuff that might be useful. The fundamentals of your field are something you really want actively present in your mind. If you are missing stuff here, a detailed reading of a textbook or following some online course plus doing exercises might help. Check in with your supervisor to figure out if you are missing something here.
For more peripheral stuff, it suffices to recall enough of it to identify that it might help in a particular setting, and to be able to quickly look it up and ascertain if it does. It is impossible to learn everything in the "might be useful" category, and here I think we just collect stuff over the decades. The strategy here is be curious and patient.

"is about them knowing stuff at the beginning of the process that you don't?" Exactly. He knows so much more stuff than me, and when he proposes a solution I first have to educate myself on the new stuff introduced by him in the solution. I do have the fundamental knowledge of my field. It's just that the knowledge my advisor uses for coming up with new solutions is just very, very specific.

Why is your advisor working on your problems?  2) Why are you working on problems that seem to be solvable only by finding the right piece of knowledge in a vast body of knowledge that you can't have learned?  3) I'm still skeptical that the problem is a lack of knowledge - it's quite common especially for grad students to spend lots of time rediscovering things before finding them in the literature.  4) Is the new stuff introduced by him actually in the literature, or is it something that he just came up with, and maybe you should start learning to just come up with also?

We're working on those problems together, we're both listed as authors. I am just talking about some points in our problems which need very specialized knowledge. 2) Isn't that the usual way when you're a PhD student? 4) Not in the literature. The literature itself covers the basics, which I do know and understand. The knowledge I'm referring to are in papers which at first glance might seem totally unrelated to our problem but it turns out that they are the answer to our problems. So it's very, very specific knowledge you only get after decades of reading lots of papers

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think a math PhD student should have their own problems.  2) No - PhD students should be steered towards problems that are good for PhD students, which means requiring more in the way of time trying stuff and less in the way of extensive knowledge of what's been done.  4) "Literature" includes published papers.


text:
Writing style: why is "in the context of" bad?
I am using a style checker http://www.cs.umd.edu/~nspring/software/style-check-readme.html and it scolds me for using "in the context of".

In the context of CUDA, this is also called managed memory.

Why is this wrong? What would be a better phrase?

Do the words "the context of" add any meaning to the sentence? I would also avoid using "this" to refer back to something unnamed in the current sentence.

@BryanKrause Yes, because it is called something else in different contexts

So? If it's called managed memory in CUDA, you can just say "In CUDA, (thing you are describing) is called managed memory." "In CUDA" means "In the context of CUDA". The extra words are superfluous.

The spell checker rule is in the ruleset verbose-phrases (which might give you a hint of why) and has an explanation: in the context of % phrase "in" avoid, if possible.

In CUDA, this is also called managed memory.


text:
Application to a PhD program abroad
I am in the second year of my Master's program in International Trade in a developing country and planning to apply for a PhD abroad next year. However, I’m unsure where to start. I don’t fully understand how the application process works, how to search for and contact a supervisor, or whether reaching out to one is necessary before applying. If so, I’d like to know how to find and approach potential supervisors effectively. If you’ve been in a similar situation, I’d greatly appreciate any advice or insights from your experience.

For some, but not yet enough, countries, see: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/176908/75368

This is too general for an answer here. Things vary by country and in some countries, vary by university. Look at web sites for a few universities in places you would like to study.

@MisterMiyagi, the canonical question we both linked to is incomplete, covering only a few countries and missing many. The OP has not stated where they want to study. Until we know more, this can't be considered a duplicate.

@Buffy So far this is a generic request like the other. They are free to [edit] the question to clarify how it differs. If they just add a country tag, any answers respecting that should ideally also go to the canonical.


text:
Why do some journals request that headings are not included in figures?
For some journals the guidelines for authors recommend that headings be removed from figures. However, by removing headings the figures are more difficult to be interpreted as they require reference to the caption or the text. Is this simply related to historical pre-digital printing practices ?

One reason might be that the journal would prefer not to have a different font in graphics than in the text. Also, text within graphics is not searchable, not selectable, and cannot be read aloud by screenreaders for sight-impaired readers. (All these are just reasons I could think of; I have no idea what reasons a journal would give, so this is not an answer, merely speculation.)

Are you sure the guidelines say to remove the headings completely? I only know guidelines saying the headings should be regular text (anchored to the figures, of course).

What do you mean "headings"? Captions? Like "Figure 1: blah."

@AzorAhai-him- I assume because OP also speaks of captions, the heading is the heading on top of a graph (which e.g. says "hours spent per basket as a function of water temperature"), which IMO is perfectly fine to put in the caption instead.

@Sursula I would call those "titles" (just trying to clarify). I suppose I was confused by Mr. Miyagi's comment, because I've never tried to make "titles" "regular text."

The information that would go in a figure title is information that should be in the caption anyway, so including a title is redundant. Not using titles also makes it easier to have a relatively consistent "look" across different papers in the journal, and reduces the problem of having inconsistent font sizes when the figure is resized for layout reasons. Including titles either makes the figures take up more space or makes them more cluttered. For print journals, space matters. And some people just prefer the aesthetics of figures without titles.

It seems to me that the consistency and font sizing issues would also apply to plot legends but I've never seen instructions asking to remove those.

@anyon Leaving titles off doesn't eliminate that problem, but it reduces it. The issue of redundancy is probably a bigger factor anyway.


text:
I am applying to a Philosophy Master degree which I have little experience on, what should I do with my CV and cover letter?
I did Economics for my Undergrad but I switched to Philosophy for my Taught master degree. I absolutely love Philosophy but I only have a Merit for it, so I didn't think I would be competent enough for a PhD so I have been working in banking for about 1.5 yr instead.
But now I want to apply to another Taught Master degree which focuses on Logic, with the goal of applying to a PhD eventually, since I feel that I need a Master to boost up my knowledge/exposure in Philosophy and Logic before jumping to PhD.
The problem is I have very little I can talk about in my cover letter and CV...
When I look at the others' CV I see a long list of awards, publications...etc. In contrast, I have hardly any exposure to Philosophy from my Undergrad except a course in ethics, and one in intro to logic.
From my Master I have 5 paper assignments + 1 dissertation with no in-depth research to talk about (since my dissertation really just explained two opposing theories in my own words without much original input from my own, I simply did not have enough ideas about Philosophy back then to develop my own ideas).
I have indeed been self-studying logic/discrete maths on my own while I have a 9-6, sometimes 9-7 job. This is perhaps my biggest pros since I think it does take determination, but it seems cheeky to elaborate on it and also difficult to develop as a point. I also haven't been making a good progress on it since I can only do about 1 hr of studying every night...
All in all I don't think my CV would last more than 1 page, so I am desperate for any idea to expand on it. Could anyone please help? Thank you so much!

The English here seems off on several points. Can you state in the most succinct form what your question is?

Sorry, my point is, in view of my background above, I am not sure how can I complement the serious weakness I have to create a persuasive CV and cover letter to my application.

Possible duplicate of How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students?

A taught master's degree are given in programs where the majority of the 'work' that you do is coursework rather than research.
In those cases, the assumption is that you are seeking more background in the field -- which implies that you don't have enough background in the field. I think that you'll find that if you get in, most of your cohort will have similar ... how shall we say it... diverse backgrounds.
I would write your statement just as you did, that you don't have much background but that you are seeking a PhD in the field and see the taught master's as a stepping stone towards that.

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


text:
Am I deceiving my former advisor?
I did a successfull research project for my studies. My team created a software prototype and a promising evaluation therefore. It has potential for further research and eventually for an industry product.
The idea of the overall prototype is mine, but one core component originally comes from my advisor at that time. However, I reprogrammed it in another programming language and did several improvements on it, but the core algorithm is unchanged.
I eventually have the chance to do more about it, e.g. deliver it as a product to a company or get research fundings or a PhD grant. Therefore, I want to replace all code lines (~150) that I copied from my former advisor with own ones and leave him uninformed about what I am doing. Why?

As I said, the idea for the overall prototype was mine.
During the work with our advisor, I and my colleagues found him to be a difficult person. He has a tense and controlling attitude, which I think is distrustfull.
At the end of our project our team wanted to make our code Open Source. He refused.
He wanted to be informed about everything that I would do about the prototype. Especially, he wanted to have a veto about if regarding further scientific publications can be submitted.

So, things will get complicated if I inform him about my procedure or use his unchanged code.
Do you think this would be correct from an ethical and juristical perspective? What is your personal opinion about my thoughts and behaviour?
Furthermore, do you think my behaviour could have negative consequences for my potential academic career, since my former advisor works at a different chair on the same university? Is it possible, that my former advisor's boss will be notably pissed off by me?
Thanks in advance!

How much was his contribution? Is his algorithm something known in CS, or something he developed ad hoc? How involved was him in directing and supervising the project, besides providing such component?

I do not understand many things. It was not "your team" it was your advisor's team and your advisor's project. You and other undergraduate students implemented a project and maybe were paid for that. Of course you have rights towards the project but so does the one who proposed it, supervised it (even micromanaged it as you suggest) and assembled the team to implement it.

@Davidmh: He implemented the algorithm based on freely accessible descriptions from research.

@Alexandros: I assembled the team and the idea came from me. I went to him to get it accredited as a study project (so no payment). His advice was concerned with scientific feedback for prototype evaluation and proper definition and adaptation of goals/milestones.

" His advice was concerned with evaluation, proper definition of goals/milestones and scientific feedback". This is still a valid contribution. Also, the "study project" was somehow approved by someone and probably has his signature on that.

That's correct. It is him and his boss who approved and accredited our efforts.

So, technically that makes it "his project" and not yours. In a nutshell, he implemented an already published algorithm (even wrote the code for it, which is unusual for a professor), evaluated results, set goals and provided scientific feedback and you (as an undergraduate student) like to cut him out of this project? Not going to work.

He himself is a PhD student, I am an undergraduate. The project is completed, since we have our grades and he is not working on it anymore. He even does not have a copy of the code. Under these circumstances I would not say, that I want to cut him out. He simply is not interested.

Interestingly, I have recently asked a question that seems to be from the other side of this.  Maybe it is of some help for you to see the overall picture. http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/57193/how-to-show-a-student-the-work-done-in-the-lab-is-the-labs-or-is-it

Interesting! But my case is even a bit more sensitive, since the project idea came from me.

@oroberos then maybe you should include his supervisor in the conversation (and I say include, not go behind his back to his boss unless the situation is already very ugly).

I might suggest that the person you are deceiving is yourself - you seem to believe that a student project is so valuable that you wish to cut others out thinking that you will prosper in the end. But, lets suppose it could be a huge success - is it more likely that having your professor (a known quantity who has published in an area critical to the product) will help or hinder your further success, be it in industry or in a PhD program? The most likely outcome is that you burn your bridges with the professor and the rest of your project team.

I am surely no expert, but I can say for sure that the professor is publishing in a completely different field than the one of our prototype (complicated, but true story).
BTW: The problem is my advisor, since he is a control freak -- you can read this in my inital question for reference if you want (?). All other involved people are informed about my activities except him and the professor of course.

There's something wrong with your title.  Could you edit it?  Right now it reads like "Who's buried in Grant's tomb?"  You describe wanting to commercialize some code without telling someone, and then ask if you're deceiving him?  I wonder if perhaps "deceive" is not quite the word you're looking for.

I am not from an English speaking country. I'd be grateful for better title suggestions.

First of all you should inquire with your institution regarding intellectual property. Usually, there are some strict regulations in place. In my institution, for example, whatever is produced by the university's funding or using the university's equipment is at least to some point eligible to be the intellectual property of the university. Honestly, I've never heard of anyone who got into trouble with these regulations, but they're there, and should a feud arise, the institution will have the legal upper hand.
As you see, even if your code contained nothing of someone else's code (or other contributions - source code is not the only thing that makes a project), you could still expect some difficulties.
Further, is the algorithm published, i.e. could I find a paper describing it and reimplement it to make a similar component as your adviser? If so, that puts you in a bit better position to use it without his consent, but I still wouldn't.
However, you still can't sell this product for your own benefit, without getting the consent and including all the parties that made a significant contribution. (Well, you could, of course, but that would be highly unethical and probably illegal) I do not see any obstacles in continuing research on your project, if you find a suitable department and new adviser whose interests happen to coincide with it. You could even find a way to improve you adviser's algorithm.
Finally, I would strongly advise against antagonizing you adviser (whether you are right or not). Remember, that you will need recommendation letters for your PhD studies. You should always try to maintain good relations with ex-collaborators (including your adviser), it's a lot easier to advance you career, if there are people who worked with you and have nice things to say about it, especially at the beginning of your career.
My advice is not to go behind anyone's back in your group. Your ideas are your own and nobody can prevent you from working on them in the future, so you have nothing to lose there. But, you shouldn't rely on those border cases, e.g. "if I took that and modified it slightly, would they still be able to sue me?. Talk to people, if you can't work things out, it is not the end of the world, you'll have to work on it more and come up with your own methods. As a byproduct you also get additional research material which is never a bad thing for a PhD candidate.

You stated some very good points for me. Actually I don't have a problem to make things clear with my colleagues, but with my advisor it is a different thing out of the mentioned reasons. But still you are right, it is a bad idea to go behind his back, not to speak about the University.
I think I will talk to him and if he feels difficult with this topic -- which probably will be the case -- I will rewrite the whole prototype on my own.

Look, as a general rule in life, if you have to ask someone else whether your behavior is ethical, then you already know the answer: you're at best skirting the boundaries of good citizenship in the group you're in, and you're likely beyond it.
Whether the behavior is legal is of course a different question. But, as humans, we rely on the good will of others a lot. You imperil the relationships you have with other at your own risk if you already suspect that your behavior may "piss off" others.

"Look, as a general rule in life..." In general I agree.  But for a substantial minority of "Is it ethical..." questions we get on this site, my first reaction is "Sure, what could possibly be wrong with that?" and then other people chime in to explain what they feel is very wrong with that.  Ethical questions can be tricky.

@PeteL.Clark -- I don't disagree. But I think from the original question, you could see that the OP knew that it was an ethically fraught situation and simply wanted someone to re-affirm his decision. I just wanted to point out that if you know that there is a dilemma, you should also know that you're likely taking the wrong course.


text:
The best wording to politely nudge the editor?
Any tips on polite yet resolute phrasing for an e-mail to the managing editor of a journal when your article is under review for far too long and it would be nice to give the process a nudge?
Thanks in advance; specific advice for math journals appreciated.

Can you quantify far too long? Also, what field?

Unlikely for anything to be really effective in making it go faster. It is what it is, though it may vary by field and by journal. Reviewers set their own schedules.

@Buffy: Agree. With what you say in mind, I still would appreciate knowing which phrasing would you recommend for the e-mail to be clear and least irritating for the editor.

@SolarMike Thanks, it is close. Still, any specific tips on the appropriate wording for the e-mail (polite yet clearly compelling to check on the manuscript and take action rather than giving a boilerplate answer saying nothing but "the review process is ongoing") would be welcome as I seem to have difficulties with wording things in such an e-mail in a polite & non-confrontational manner while still getting the point across.

Use the answer given to your question. succinct and sufficient.

I have occasionally asked whether I have missed the decision email. I'm very patient though, I'm talking about waiting times substantially longer than 6 months here. From the Editor's side I can say that nudging occasionally does help, because sometimes Editors, Associate Editors, and Reviewers miss that something is still to be done, and when nudged they will try to do something about it. On the other hand too impatient authors are annoying.

First, always be polite to the editor. Often academic editors are volunteers. Even if they are not, being polite is always more helpful than being not polite.
Second, journals often have trouble getting enough reviewers. I have emailed journals and asked if they need more reviewer suggestions. This nudges the journal to think about your submission. And, can sometime help them address the delay in review.

Fair enough, although I have been told as Associate Editor by an Editor once that reviewers recommended by the authors should be avoided as a matter of principle because they are very often biased. And I can see where this Editor is coming from. In this case advice 2 would be counterproductive.

I see that perspective. I've also used that line when the AE was having trouble finding reviewers and appreciated the extra names. I've seen (from Editors I know) where AE's often chose of the suggested reviewer and a second reviewer from their choice.


text:
Can researcher re-publish their own published research somewhere else?
Let's say I (first author) have published my research in a paywalled, non-open access journal. Can I publish a simplified version of the article, using some of the same figures as in the paywalled article onto elsewhere? Like a blog? Do I need to go through some licensing process as if I were not the author myself?

What does the agreement you signed with the publisher of the paywalled non-open access journal say?

Most modern agreements will let you publish the entire article on your blog, perhaps with some conditions.  But it varies.

To avoid trouble of that kind, send a version of the article to a preprint server before publication in a journal.

While copyright law varies, I suspect that you can't do that unless you have specific permission from the copyright holder. That is probably whoever published your work initially.
Publishers usually detail what license they grant back to authors, so you can look to that for guidance. To do more requires explicit permission.
But it also requires care in writing so that you don't wind up self-plagiarizing. You need to cite and not over-quote yourself, pretty much as if the original was that of another author. There may be some leeway in the latter.
You also need to deal with co-authors if you aren't sole author. First author gives no additional rights for such things.
The new publisher also needs to be aware that there are copyright restrictions on (some parts of) the work and that you can't grant them full and unrestricted rights to the work.
For purposes of a blog that you publish yourself, you an write "about" your work, citing as necessary. This is probably already covered in your license. Monetizing the work might be an issue, and if what you put on the blog lessens the value of the published work to the copyright holder you may also run into issues.


text:
If the lecture room is usually full, is it appropriate for a TA to compete with the seat of students?
There is one topic in the course that I am TAing that I felt interested to re-learn (since I forgot most things about it). I also had some questions I want to ask about the topic (that could be beneficial to students). As in the question, knowing that the room is frequently overflowing, is it not appropriate to "steal" the seat of students to sit in the lecture?

This seems to me to be two completely separate topics...1) taking a seat as a TA in a room where all the seats are filled (I assume you mean literally? as in, students would have to stand), and 2) asking questions when you are the TA rather than a student.

@Bryan this is just to say that If I occupy the seat, I won't just "sit" there, I also plan to do something potentially beneficial to the class as well. The primary question is still regarding taking a seat from students as a TA.

Do you mean literally taking a seat so someone has to stand? or taking a seat as in someone has to sit further to the back?

I will not be able to know in advance if the lecture room will be actually full. Perhaps, I have the option to observe the situation a bit, if it is indeed full-seated, then I could sit on the stair or sth, tho not ideal.

More information, in the last lecture even some students appeared to sit on the stair/stand. It was not even just full, it was overflowing. But I dont know if it is just because it is still add/drop period.

@ychung If the lecture room is exceeding room capacity, that is a fire code violation and building regulation concern. You should 1) report this repeating incident and 2) request a larger lecture room (or request the lecturer do it).

Ask the professor
The professor should be the one to make this decision, weighing the potential positive and negative impacts on the students.
As a TA, you should in any case ask the professor before planning to attend lectures, whether the course is full or not, and you should particularly ask whether it is okay for you to ask questions.  In some classes, the professor might think having a TA present would be distracting, and may or may not share your view that your questions would be "beneficial to the students".
If you do end up asking questions, it would be good to check in with the professor periodically to see if they are still finding it helpful.
If the professor asks you not to attend the class, then it is your responsibility to find some other way to get up to speed on the material (i.e. reading on your own).  If you do not think that will be possible, then you should ask to be assigned to a different course.

Thank you for the answer. I agree the best is to ask the professor directly. Over the years, I have observed that it is pretty common in my university where the TA sit in the course and even raise question (for the courses I have taken so far).

If I was in the situation with a room this full, I'd probably find a stool or chair and sit to the side or behind the professor rather than taking a "normal" seat. I'm sorry you are in a position with such limited seating for the class size.
I think it's completely normal and desirable for TAs to attend lectures regularly, but I'd also agree with @NateEldridge in that you should probably run your questioning by your professor in some way. There are a lot of questions a TA might have that aren't really relevant to the course, and you run the risk of undermining or appearing to undermine the professor in front of their students, which, even if it is in some way deserved, is unlikely to work out positively for anyone involved.

is it not appropriate to "steal" the seat of students to sit in the lecture?

No, it is not appropriate.  In most cases it is appropriate and potentially slightly helpful for a TA to be present in a class when they are not teaching it.  But the TA should allow the students to take priority.  The class is for them.


text:
Can I take online courses to make up for poor past community college performance when applying to a four year college?
I am wondering if there is a place where I can take online mathematics courses that do not require a transcript for admission. I did ok in high school and not so great at community college, but I found a great math tutor, and I'm willing to put in a lot more effort to get a degree. Before meeting this tutor, I was conditionally accepted to a four-year institution for mechanical engineering and was kicked out after the first semester. My plan is to meet with this tutor for about 20 hours a week until I feel comfortable with material up to calculus, then take a graded online course in calculus, so I have evidence of my understanding of calculus and my ability to excel in classes at a four-year university. I would repeat this process for multivariable calculus, differential equations, linear algebra, applied statistics, numerical analysis, abstract algebra, and real analysis.
I looked at Coursera, and they have calculus, differential equations, linear algebra, numerical analysis, and complex analysis. Do you think that taking these courses is the best chance that I have to re-enter my four-year institution for mathematics instead of engineering? I am concerned because the grade is based on just four quizzes, which means that it might not be recognized by undergraduate schools. If not, what would my best next step towards this goal?
Things are tough I need good grades to enroll at a university to show that I am qualified despite my previous bad performance, but I need to enroll in a university to take advanced classes to get those good grades.

My advice would be to go to the website of the university you are thinking about enrolling in, find out who the course coordinator is, and email them about your situation.  Explain that you are willing to put in the effort to get your knowledge up to an acceptable level.  You may find that they can offer you a bridging course, or suggest having sessions with a personal tutor like you are planning.
I found myself as tutoring a mature-age student who was very much in a situation similar to what you described.  The course coordinator emailed the maths academics to see if anyone was interested in some private one-on-one tutoring, and I took up the offer.  Ultimately, the student opted to drop out due to the feeling of being overwhelmed with the content (and they were struggling greatly to understand basic high-school level concepts), but the fact is the university attempted give the student every possible chance of getting in. There is nothing to lose by trying.


text:
Finding area of research and people that offer PhD's in this area
I'm currently in the first year of my MSc in an European university and as time goes on I'm thinking of what to do afterwards. One of the options is continuing on to a PhD and so I find myself from time to time browsing arXiv or some other journals in my field of interest, hoping to see a professor/group at a university doing something that interests me. While doing this I came to the realization, that in almost all cases, I have absolutely no idea what the papers are about. This isn't really surprising to me (I checked with my peers and they feel the same way), but it leaves me wondering how exactly I'm supposed to find out what topics in my field could interest me.
To hopefully explain the problem a bit better I'll take myself as an example, but I'm pretty sure this applies to a lot of other disciplines as well: I'm studying physics, most of my subjects focusing on theoretical aspects of physics. There are obviously several sub-fields in theoretical physics, but all of them are really broad and today's research seems really far away from what is thought in university classes. Most of the classes are only introductions to theories that have been refined for the last 50 years or more, leaving a huge gap between what I may be working on in a couple of years and what I know of today. So how exactly am I supposed to asses how interesting, challenging, etc. a direction in a particular sub-field is, when I almost know nothing of what is relevant in that field today? And, maybe even more importantly, even if I exactly knew what I wanted to do, how do I exactly single out the people who work in that area?
Some remarks about things that I've tried so far and the situation at my university:

There are almost no research opportunities at my university for students in the BSc and even in the MSc category (at least in my field of study).
The contact between the students and faculty is almost non-existent. I maybe have spoken to like three professors in the past 4 years for about 5 minutes (not counting the exams). I speak to PhD's a lot more regularly, but to no-one who has more experience in the academic world. I asked them more or less the same question, but the answers range from "you just kinda slip into a PhD program" to "I already knew in year one of my studies that I wanted to do XYZ, so I can't realate."
I talked to the "Students-Help-Office" of my university, which is basically a senior researcher from my university. His comment on the question was that he doesn't think that planning that far ahead is useful... Is this true, is one to two years of planning ahead to much in this context?
I've also seen this question here, but the top answer reads kind of like it's searching for the "best" place to do your PhD and less for the "best-fit". I'm not so much concerned about going to one of the best places in the world as much as I'd like to find a topic and adviser that actually fit me (obviously the other way around as well).

Are you doing anything now that does interest you? Or are you just thrashing about? If the latter, is that comfortable for you?

@Buffy Yeah, I enjoy most of my classes. I like TA'ing and I like spending time in the library doing exercises and reading up on the things from the lectures. So in general I'd say I enjoy what I'm doing now. I'm sorry, but I don't know what you mean by 'thrashing'.. Google suggests something that doesn't really make sense..

I mean, just going with whatever is put in front of you without discernment or particular focus. Taking what is giving, rather than going after something in particular. Note that I have a reason for exploring this. I'm not being insulting.

@Buffy We are given a lot of choice when it comes to classes that we have to take. I did choose all of mine focusing on basically two aspects of physics (theoretical particle physics and computational physics), so I thinks its fair to say that I have a general idea in what direction I would want to go, at the very least there are certainly things that I know I don't want to do.

Perhaps it matters less than you think. Some people are absolutely driven to work in a very specialized domain. Others, at the other end of the scale, are just attracted to academia. I was somewhere in between. I knew I wanted to be an educator and I knew I wanted to work in mathematics, but, beyond that, I wasn't especially committed to any one thing.
The more I studied the more I reduced the options, but still had several open to me at the point I chose an advisor. I let him guide me to some interesting problems that led to my degree and eventual career in academia. It was fine. There was no need to choose within a very narrow range at the start.
This was in the US, however, where things are a little less compressed. In UK and EU a bit more is expected, but I think (hope) that there is still room to work with an advisor to find a problem (or two) that are interesting enough to start and will become more interesting with time. Perhaps your interests and goals are a bit like mine. "I don't want to do this. I want to do something like this other thing." That may be enough.
But the key is to find an advisor with whom you are mutually compatible and from whom you can take a bit of direction at the start. The rest can follow. It takes a lot of commitment, but that commitment can develop over time.
In fact, people who are too "narrow" at the very start, may have trouble later when it turns out not to be what was expected. Find an advisor who has enough time and ability to advise you well.

If you read random papers on arXiv without having research experience or knowing how to choose, your chance to find something that awakens your interest is very little. Normally, this problem is solved by doing some research during your Master's program. You say that there are very few research opportunities for students at your university, so become active and try to get one of those few. Depending on your study program, there might also be the possibility to do a research internship for credit at a company or research center.
Even if you do not manage to find one, there should (hopefully) be a Master's Thesis at the end of the program. That should include enough research.
At Master's level, you will do research under a supervisor that will point you to literature and guide you on how to find more. You will get a feeling of whether you actually like research, and whether you want to spend 3-5 years doing it as a doctoral candidate. You should also hopefully get a feeling of which topics you like to work on.
I am actually quite surprised at the comments from your professors: I have never heard anything along the lines of "you just kinda slip into a PhD program", and this does not look like the kind of advice a senior academic should be giving to a student. They are probably right when they say that planning two years ahead is too early, especially if you have no experience with research.

Thank you for your answer. There is a master thesis at the end, planned to take up about a semester or two, full-time. I wasn't really thrilled by the response to 'slipping into a PhD' either.. It just doesn't seem to be really useful.


text:
Who owns intellectual property from research funded by an external company at a university?
If a company or any external organization collaborates with a University to fund research - perhaps even open a lab - who owns the intellectual property (IP) of anything that results from that research? Is it the company, the university, or both?
Do cases like these affect IP ownership:

the university buys equipment/pays its professors and student researchers with money granted by the company
the company uses equipment and funds available at the university to conduct research?

In which country? If nothing specific has been agreed upon, the default owner is probably either the employer or the employees, depending on the country.

This can't be answered in general - it will depend on whatever the contract was, which must be written and accepted before any research begins.

There is a good reason for having a good contract. without specific contract it would be a very messy legal problem.

The division of intellectual property rights will be explicitly specified in every research contract negotiated by competent personnel, no matter who the funder is.  In my experience, I have seen that the typical arrangements fall into five rough categories along a spectrum of control:

The researcher's organization retains all IP rights.
The researcher's organization retains all IP rights, but automatically grants a non-exclusive license to the funding organization.
The researcher's organization retains all IP rights, but the funding organization has an option to exclusively license all IP rights.
The researcher's organization transfers all IP rights to the funding organization, but retains an automatic license to the IP.
The researcher's organization transfers all IP rights to the funding organization.

Research contracts also often divide a project into different areas that mix and match these rights.  For example, the researcher's organization might have non-exclusive licensing (#2) for all basic research work, but transfer all rights for a planned prototype (#5) to the funding organization.
Corporately funded research contracts tend to fall anywhere along the spectrum from #2 to #5, depending on the nature of the research and the motivation for the contract.  More basic research tends to be viewed as "pre-competitive," and companies funding such research will generally be large and with a long view and happy to grant liberal rights, since they are more concerned with reshaping their strategic landscape (e.g., extending Moore's Law) and trust their ability to build internally off of basic research breakthroughs. More applied research and research funded by smaller companies tends to be more immediately relevant to competitive advantage: it tends to have much more tightly restricted IP rights and at its most applied shades into consulting.

This answer is the correct one. The office of sponsored projects (or whatever it is called at any given university) negotiates every single sponsored project's contract, and the contract includes language that specifically addresses IP rights. Sometimes this is simple, such as with the US federal government, and sometimes it's not, such as with industry sponsors. The important point to know is that even if you, the researcher, has never seen the actual language of the contract, it will still exist on someone's hard drive.

It should be negotiated and specified in a written contract.  Each contract could be different.

And if somehow there's not a contract that specifies (which can only be described as a massive oversight, if so), what happens in most jurisdictions is that the inventor of the IP retains ownership unless there's an employer-employee relationship involved, in which case the employer is generally entitled to the rights to any IP that the employee creates "in the course of employment".

@aroth Do oyu mean US by  "most jurisdictions". I am really not sure it holds internationally (though most places do not forget to sign a contract when exchange large sums of money).

@Greg - I mean the US and most "Western" nations.  For instance, here's a discussion of the concept as applied in Australia.  Though as with all things legal, YMMV and it's always best to consult with a local lawyer if you have anything more than theoretical concerns.

@aroth This seems to be yet another difference between common law and civil law. For example, in many (most?) European countries, copyright is seen primarily as author's right. Without specific agreements or regulations to the contrary, copyright belongs to the employee, not the employer.

@Greg I'd go out say that in every jurisdiction in absence of a specific contract term the IP will belong either to the employee or their employer, but never to a third party / external company that contributed funds indirectly, as asked by the original question.


text:
Questions about Sociology Writing Sample
I'm applying for a Ph.D. program in Sociology for Fall 2019. My background is in Computer Science, but I've attempted to build a competent resume by taking courses in my intended field and having relatively good grades in my non-major courses (philosophy, research methods, writing, etc.).
My query is related to writing samples. NYU requires a writing sample that, at maximum, should be 30 pages. While I have some great papers I wrote while at college, I'm wondering what it means to have a writing sample in your Ph.D application.
Do you write a sample from scratch, or do you simply make some changes to a paper you wrote in college? Are these samples supposed to be reviewed by a professor? If I write one from scratch, what's the recommended amount of time I should spend on it? I'm not looking to submit any applications before October, but not later than that, so I have about 4 months to write one and edit it.
Any advice would be useful. Thank you so much!

I would not suggest starting from scratch. I am assuming you do not yet have publications, (but if you do, you should definitely submit the paper that has already been published in an academic journal). If not, don't worry. The schools you are applying to are aware that you have not done any graduate level work before and they are probably not expecting you to deliver a published or publishable article, but rather your understanding and ability to convey your ideas clearly in writing. If the papers you wrote previously are relatively well written, you can refine/improve one of them and have an outside reader (not necessarily a professor, but it would surely be useful) to read it and give you feedback.
While you are refining your paper, you might want to look at published articles in Sociology and try to use them as a model to demonstrate your familiarity with the general disciplinary conventions.


text:
Have you used such grading policy in your teaching?
I have seen a grading policy for a course with two midterms. Under this policy, if a student scores better in the second midterm than in the first one, the first test will be "forgiven" and the weight shifts to the second one. For example, if midterm 1 and are 15% each and a student got 60 for midterm 1 and 80 for midterm 2, then the weigh of the two exams become 0% and 30%. I can see the good side of the policy is to encourage students making progress. But I worry that this will cause students complain about unfairness, particularly those who can't take advantage of this policy.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

I have not used this grading system. But the idea is not uncommon. In some sense it's a twist on dropping a grade of some type (e.g., which is built into a management system like Blackboard by default).

I've seen a similar system for homework assignments – i.e., only the best five out of six homework assignments are counted. I would lean towards weighting the grades towards the better exam (i.e. 12.5% and 17.5%) rather than completely discounting the worse one.

This system,  or variations of it, is common in my experience. For example some professors have a rule that the students grade in the course will never be lower than their final exam grade, although not all those professors announce that policy at the beginning of the semester.

The version we use in my calculus class says that we drop the lowest score out of homeworks and midterms. There are 4 midterms, worth 15% each, and the homeworks are worth a total of 15%. The rest is decided by the final. When calculating the final grade, we drop the lowest score out of the midterms and homeworks, and calculate the grade as if each is worth 75/4 % instead.
Some students (the ones who read the syllabus) that have good scores on the first three tests and the homeworks elect to not take the fourth test. Other (less wise) students put all their faith in tests and don't do any homeworks. Most students still do all the homeworks and take all tests.
We think of it as a way to allow the students to have one bad day, without destroying their grade in the course.

Some degree of "forgiveness" is not only humane, but consistent with the purported goal of kids' learning things by the time the course is over, not necessarily on the schedule (a pure artifact) of the syllabus.
One skewing is that presumably the course "builds", so that later exams presume competency in earlier... so a good early score is not at all a substitute for a good later score.
Keeping the latter in mind: in all my teaching, a good later score trumps a bad earlier one, period. Sure, it's not a good thing that people messed up earlier, but if the real goal/issue is acquisition of certain ideas, why do we care what schedule they're on?
At the same time, yes, most assuredly, a too-generous-sounding description of grading system will "confuse" many people, certainly undergrads, and often beginning grad students who've spent the previous four years (not to mention high school) figuring out how to avoid being pwned by The System... as opposed to believing (which is not at all true...) that the system has benign interest in them.
That is, even if not discussed too fully with students... who will often seriously/fatally misunderstand ... think of the genuine goals, namely, imparting some knowledge by the end of the term. That is, adherence to schedule of acquisition is really not essential, though it'd be handy.
All of this changes, of course, if by mischance the true purpose of the class is "filter/weeder", in which case one might contemplate issues unrelated to the course content, or even course structure. That is, if the filter might be to reward "steadiness" (not a bad thing at all!), then don't give a break to people who aren't "steady".
(Sure, there's hubris aplenty in figuring out or caring to speculate what the true purpose of most math courses might be...)

Here's one fair variation:
If a student scores greater than a 90 on Mid1 they can elect to take Mid2 or not and if taken can only make grade go up. Regardless, both will be greatest grade * 2.
If a student bombs the first (60). They must take the second. Grades become greatest of the two * 2.
I think that's fair without getting too mathematical.


text:
Should I ask a recommendation letter from a supervisor with whom I had sometimes difficult time working with?
I will be applying for PhD positions in the UK. I have three years of previous research experience, and I worked with four professors who could write me recommendation letters.
I will be applying to many schools, so I would like to ask a recommendation letter from all of the professors.
My other primary advisor came from a different culture, and it was occasionally very difficult to work with him. He was sometimes very upset, and so was I, but things never escalated into anything horrible. He moved away about 1.5 years ago; we departed in good spirit. I have been contact with him after that. It is difficult to guess how he sees things at the moment. I appreciate him in many ways but I don't know if he knows that. I think he is a good person.
Should I ask a recommendation letter from him? Most schools ask for 2-3 recommendation letters, so I would not send it to every place I apply to.
(Academically, my performance is very good. I have received big prizes, have a good publication record, etc.)


text:
How brief I should be when contacting a professor for a PhD position for the first time?
I happened to find a PhD project that would align with my past experience really well. I would like to contact the professor responsible for the project. How brief should I be in my first email?
In addition to introducing myself and referring to the position, I would like to ask at least two questions about the project, and mention that I have been working on a similar project.
Is that enough? How would I finish the email then in a proper way? Just something like

If you are not too busy, I hope you could discuss the matter further. Attached is my CV.

or something entirely else?
I have a very good publication record, have received big prizes, lot of experience, etc. in my pocket but I guess I should not repeat that in the email, since it is in the CV?

Professors receive a number of such emails. You must get the professor's interest in the opening few lines.
"I am a prize-winning A+ student in the department of X at the university of Y. My most recent work - my honours study of
Z - is very relevant to the advertised PhD position. I am very keen to talk to you about this opportunity, by email, phone or Skype, whenever would be convenient with you".
And then by all means ask your questions, that is good, it shows engagement. You could also expand on why your previous work and/or skills will be valuable to the professor.
You could get another professor to proof read your email to see if it hits the right note.

I completely agree with this advice.


text:
Answering an email regarding recommendation letters
I asked a professor for a recommendation letter last Thursday to apply to a certain grad school program (and others), and she agreed to do it. However, I received an e-mail yesterday from her that said that the deadline is too soon (I completely understand that I was irresponsible), and that she may not complete it in time. What would be a good/diplomatic way to respond? I do not want to give the impression that I'm forcing her to write the recommendation letter for me.

How soon is the deadline? Tomorrow? Do you have time to find a new recommendation? Would you have had time if she had said no last thursday?

Friday, although that doesn't change things much. I think I would've had time to find another referee by then, but now it's not feasible.

Oy.  [In the future, give people at least a month for this sort of thing] Here's what you can do.  (1) Be very polite and thank her a lot.  (2) Say that you would like her to write a letter and submit it when she gets the chance [perhaps late as needed].  (3) Email the grad department and say you're applying but one of your letters will be late.
Hopefully that works out at some level.  A few things could go wrong with this plan of course, but it's worth a shot.  In any event, be sure to thank the letter writer profusely before and after the fact.  Cards are nice.

That sounds like great advice, I'll try it. Thank you very much!

@distlamer - And also do approach someone else, just in case.  Perhaps this particular professor was planning on taking three weeks off right after turning in grades for the semester.


text:
Where to submit an article first?
What is your strategy when submitting an article?
I am asking because I wonder if it hurts to try submitting to a top journal even if the paper is clearly not good enough. Worse come worse I get a desk rejection and a couple of comments from the editor. If I am lucky, I get some reviewers' comments.
I guess something else that matters is time. If a journal takes months to get back, an additional submission might results in a huge loss of time, which postpone the publication process.
But I still don't get why I should start from a lower ranked journal, without even trying an overshoot.
Field is Econ if it helps. But I am more interested in a general argument.

For me, there are some factors at play:

If this paper is something that a student needs to graduate, I prefer playing it safe. Journal rank is less important than a prospect to exhaust one's paid scholarship period.
I start with a presumption that we write for a particular audience, and my primary goal is to reach this audience. Thus, I'd prefer to publish in a journal that (I believe) will be read by the relevant people.
Thus, for example, a widely scoped top "Journal A" that publishes a lot of diverse papers yearly and too vast for me to read would be less preferable to me than a focused and less prestigious "Journal B" that I personally check regularly.

Summing up, I think if the paper at hand can make headlines in the mainstream press, a "star journal" can help. Otherwise, a publication at any decent venue is supposed to become a part of common knowledge. So if we aim for an impact (and we probably should), the goal is to improve the likelihood of being read and cited, which I think isn't always directly related to journal rank. As a shorthand, I tend to prefer journals that publish papers I personally consider most similar to the work I do.

Ultimately you need to make a judgement call, but the best judgement will be one that tries to find the most appropriate journal, not the best and (certainly) not a predatory one.
But that means that you have done some investigation beyond just determining ranking. What do they publish? Is my paper compatible with what they are likely to publish? How big a contribution am I making? Do I extend the work of X who publishes here? There are lots of things you can look at.
But yes, publishing takes time, though it also, hopefully, gives you feedback provided it goes through review and isn't immediately rejected by the editor.
Do your homework. Try to find a "best match", though that is elusive.


text:
Increase coautorships
I am a PhD student in Economics and I am looking to increase my paper production to be a more competitive candidate on the job market in a couple of years.
So far I have been working on solo projects and one project coauthored with a cohort-mate. However, my understanding is that the best way to increase paper production is to increase coauthorship.
So my question is: how can I find coauthors outside of my department? Is there a physical/digital location that is more prone to coauthor finding? Should I reach out to authors working in my field? Any suggestion is very welcome!

Do you have an advisor that can connect you to others in your sub-field?

Do you have something to offer, e.g. some specialized method that is useful for others? And do you know who these other people might be?

@Snijderfrey, that important point is the basis of an answer. Perhaps you should expand it.

@Buffy I do have an advisor but not sure about the opportunities to connect outside my department. So far I haven't received any suggestion.

This will be harder during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the prior strategy was to submit papers to conferences, go and present them, and then go to see other talks and meet people who share your interests. Now that so many conferences are virtual or hybrid, you’re going to have to get creative, but so is everyone else. Something on SE, FB, TikTok, or the like might be best. Host a weekly article discussion or something similar.  Advertise the heck out of it and let a thousand flowers bloom (hopefully).

There might be an online-only journal club for grad students in your subject area that you could search for.


text:
Ph.D. application timing
I am going to graduate in mid-October from my M.Sc. in Economics and I am starting to think seriously to apply for a Ph.D. However, since I am still completing the writing of my thesis, I have not yet started to get informed in any way about the available programs and I did not fill any requirement in terms of GRE, language certifications and so on. Therefore, my idea would be to do some research work and to send my applications in fall 2018 (thus actually starting Ph.D. in September 2019).
Do you think this is meaningful? In my mind, trying to write a better thesis and get some other experience in research could be useful for the purpose of the application. But I am also worried that I am kind of losing one year with respect to my cohort of graduates, thus this could be seen as a symptom of uncertainty.
How an evaluation committee would consider this timing choice?

Naming the country involved would help.  It sounds pretty weird to me.  You're going to wait 2 years between finishing your masters and starting your Ph.D.?

@BenWebster It sounds like the OP needs to concentrate on finishing the MSc now and there won't be enough time to do the GREs, TOEFL, whatever, in time for Fall 2018 admissions.

What is the benefit of finishing in October? Is it possible to finish in December and give yourself time to work on GRE/applications?

@BenWebster I am studying in Italy and I am willing to apply to Ph.D. programs both in the US and in Europe.

@Dawn That's would be ok but I also need to find a research idea and a third referee (for US application). I feel it is a bit too much in a three-month span

It depends what you do instead of school.  But I would not worry about falling behind your cohorts.
A lifetime is a very long time, enough time to do and get good a lot of things.
 My rule of thumb is that it takes about 4 or 5 years to good at something new, meet an important new life goal, get bored, want something new, then start over.  And you get to keep doing these rinse and repeat cycles as many times as you like.  Figure you have a working life of about 45 to 50 years, meaning you get to have at least 9 or 10 important phases in your career.  That's a lot.
If you think of it in that context, I can't really imagine anything much less important than worrying that taking a year off in between your MS and PhD to go do something else might place you behind your cohorts.  After a few years, no one really has meaningful class of cohorts anyway because everyone follows a different path.
Your actual life outcomes will depend more on what you do instead with that year off.  Could you go find an interesting job with your freshly-minted master's or find something else you'd like to do?

I don't think this really answers the question (how admissions committees view gap years).

I think I did answer it:  It depends what you do instead with that year off.

I have not yet started to get informed in any way about the available programs and I did not fill any requirement in terms of GRE, language certifications and so on.

I think you should allow yourself plenty of time in order to decide which schools you want to apply to & how to prepare your application. If that means applying a year later and not rushing through your thesis and the applications all at the same time, so be it.

But I am also worried that I am kind of losing one year with respect to my cohort of graduates, thus this could be seen as a symptom of uncertainty.

Uncertainty is fine. Many people need time to figure out whether the PhD path is right for them or not, and if you spend an extra year to determine the best way to proceed, that can be seen as a sign of maturity instead (if you present it this way).

How an evaluation committee would consider this timing choice?

As mentioned by others, as long as you don't waste this gap year and can say, "I worked at place X doing Y while preparing my application", it shouldn't be an issue.

This person does not have uncertainty! In this case, there is not benefit to portraying anything but certainty in letters and statement.

How a "gap year" is viewed by an admissions committee depends entirely on how you use it.
A gap year spent fiddling around doing nothing will, of course, be viewed negatively. However, if the year is spent doing active (documentable!) research, or on other professional or personal activities of merit (a traveling fellowship, or volunteer service, for instance), little or no opprobrium will arise.
Your suggestion does not seem too egregious--but you could always check with schools to which you'd like to apply to be sure.

I think this is mostly correct. In particular, I have the impression that in Economics, you want to show that a gap year is used in some academic, research-oriented pursuit. Your letters and personal statement need to communicate that you have had an ongoing commitment to entering a research career that was only delayed because of timing (not because of waffling).

I think this is quite a common query among master's students who are nearing the end of their dissertation/thesis writing. The temptation is to get the ball rolling asap so that the PhD application process proper can start and little time will be lost.
The main thing here is to realise that a] there is no rush and b] you will not be falling behind anyone. Do not do too many things at once. Concentrating on your thesis and finishing your master's should be your sole and overriding priority. You should complete it to the very best of your ability and not worry about PhD topic research until you have hit that 'submit' button and your thesis is winging its way to your department.
PhD topic research is a little tricky. It can take a long time to come up with a title. Concentrating on a PhD topic/research whilst completing your thesis will only risk the quality of your work. The sensible thing to do is to finish your piece, be measured, then take a year which you can split by researching your PhD and applying, then reading up on your area. Get on some mailings lists. Maybe think about going to some conferences, or better still, some paper ideas if you are so fortunate. It will not be time wasted it you do things this way, but you may compromise your thesis quality by rushing PhD applications now.


text:
Including an image/sprite/screenshot of Sonic in a dissertation?
I want to include an image of Sonic the Hedgehog in my dissertation; it is not part of the academic content in any way and is just a bit of fun.
I have a few questions:

Can I include a literal sprite from a Sonic game with a citation?
Can I include a screenshot of a sprite from a Sonic game (which would end up looking like option 1., except that it will be obtained differently)?
Can I draw my own rendition of Sonic or can I trace a sprite and then include it without a citation?

Thanks!

Have you wrapped up your dissertation already? If so, have you asked the copyright holder?

@Aruralreader I haven't, but I'm not sure how productive asking Sega will be. I'd rather first understand what would constitute acceptable/fair use in this context.

This seems to be a legal question without any special connection to Academia. You can probably ask on Law.SE if you keep it generic.

Very interesting question, but it might be better on [Law.SE]. Though, issues like this are generally fuzzy, so be prepared for an answer like "It's probably legal/not legal, but the only way to tell for sure is if this goes to trial, so you're probably better off not doing it." Let us know if you want us to migrate this post over there.

@cag51 Can't hurt trying---let's migrate it to Law. Thanks!


text:
Maths tenure track salaries in China
I am non-Chinese and have been offered a tenure track job in mathematics in China. The offered annual salary is around 400k RMB.
The offered salary is higher than salaries I see discussed online. However, I have been told that these high salaries are a recent development of the last three years, and all the accounts I find online are older than this.
I've been told by the university that on top of this there are several grants which award research funding as well as increase one's salary. They are competitive, though some appear to have good chances of success, for example with one major provincial grant having a reported 50% success rate. Except for one national grant, no information about these grants exists online because the central government forbids disseminating information about these grants online, according to the university. If I were to be successful in most grant applications, then that would bring the annual salary to 800k which seems too good to be true.
Questions:

There are online reports of postdocs and tenure track researchers getting paid less than the promised amount, see e.g. Persistent issues with salary pay as a postdoc in China: What can I do? Is this still an issue as of the last three years?

What are usual salaries to expect in tenure track jobs in Mathematics in China?

Can this information about grants that is nowhere written down be trusted?

Is this job part of a talent program?  You may want to look into the issues with talent recruitment programs and ensure you know what you are getting into.  For US-based researchers, there is a huge amount of compliance regarding these programs.  Some US-based researchers claimed they didn't know they joined one of these programs, and they ended up in severe legal trouble.

@yourfriendlyresearchadmin I've been told that the job is not part of a talent program but the additional grants I mentioned are. I am not US-based and not a US national. Anyway I didn't think about compliance and I will look into this, thanks for raising it.


text:
Main authorship of research paper
I wanted to publish a research paper under my own name for some educational reasons. Now I was introduced to one of these research conferences cum publications called as CVPR for computer vision domain. This suggestion was made by my Head of Department.
My HOD wants me to do the entire work from finding appropriate topic to writing the full paper in proper format. The reasons being

Me being vastly interested in this field and lack of candidates who are willing to take up this task.
My HOD does not have any knowledge about computer vision domain.

The issue is my HOD is avoiding sharing me the complete paper publication process beforehand and insisting me to submit the complete paper on official email. My concern is that he will publish it as him being the main author and me being the co-author. I am stuck between completing the paper, taking appropriate credits for the work and also not crossing college department in the process as I need their help for future purposes.
Is there any solution to this and does a faculty member need to be the part of paper publication process?

I don't think I understood your problem. Do you not have access to the whole paper? What is the paper publication process you are talking about? Is it the submission of the paper? CVPR deadlines are usually in the middle of the year. So, as far as I know, there won't be any submission process happening for now.

Why don't you trust him?

Maybe you can explain what you mean by "official email" as the obvious interpretation is that you use your work email address when you submit.  This is standard and I don't see the risk.

Information on how to submit papers to CVPR is on the website, the submission system is OpenReview, its public information, not a secret, did you try to find this information? Also the next submission cycle is next year, in around 10 months from now.

I am also confused.


text:
What does it means figures are in contents?
I am going to submit the paper to a journal. They required that the figures and tables are in contents. That means I will write text and add the figure after text, Is it right?
Thanks

Could you please give a direct quote of what they journal asked for? I am having trouble understanding exactly what is asked in this question. Did they mean the content of the paper, or the table of contents?

My journal is http://www.journals.elsevier.com/digital-signal-processing/

@user3051460 can you edit a link to the author instructions and quote exactly what they are saying. I did not see much about where figures go.

I think they want the figures and the body content all to be together, I am assuming that you are seperating them.