text:
How to prepare for first year university after college diploma?
This will be my first year attending university after obtaining an advanced diploma from a local college. I will be going into first year Computer Science in September and graduated this year with a diploma for Computer Systems Technology.
I am concerned about the first year courses however. First year Computer Science requires Chemistry 1, Algebra 1, Calculus 1, Discrete Mathematics 1 as well as the comp sci courses. It's been 3 years since I've had to do any higher level math and chemistry and I'm not sure how I'll adapt to the different learning style and intensity of university.
How can I prepare myself for these courses and university over the summer?

Have you asked the lecturers who will be teaching those courses?

That's a strange schedule for grad school.  It looks more like an undergraduate schedule.  It's too many classes.  And there is no reason to be taking chemistry.  Also, Algebra?  This makes no sense.  Could you post a link to the specific program of studies, please?

I think the specific question is about an undergraduate program, but the issue, how best to use time before the start of a program if underprepared in some subjects, also applies to graduates.

It would be a good idea to Contact the professors of the courses.  Usually they are already assigned to the course before it is offered and something you can look up prior to the course starting.  They could give you a list of recommended reading/sites to visit or they may simply say you have nothing to worry about.
I too have switched between community colleges, public and private universities and I do understand your worry.  While the experience is subject to change based on the individual, I found there to be little I needed to do to change my study habits and achieve the desired grades between all 3 experiences.
Remember it is school where you LEARN.  You aren't expected to go in already being a calculus expert or a mad scientist.  These are the freshman/sophomore level courses where it is generally assumed little prior knowledge outside of the pre-req basics.  Of course some classes also go hard early to weed out students as well and force drop out.
The only other suggestion outside of contacting the school/teacher for materials
 is seeing if you have the text book for the classes listed already.  From my days in college, usually the online forum for the class had a home page that listed off basic syllabus info such as teacher name and course materials needed.
 If not you can always contact the school/call the uni book store to find out what the names of the books are for those specific classes.  You will generally be able to find text books on Amazon and will be significantly cheaper than the uni book store anyways.  Thumb through the chapters on your own leisure.  That way you can go through the book and write notes down on things that seem to be a struggle topic and do your own focused preparation.  Or you may go through all the books and see that you really were worrying for nothing!

Personal experience, I love it! Thank you for then answer, I already feel less stressed.

Just remember to take a deep breath.  I had a friend who was vietnamese in my Computer science classes who always stressed out about every little thing and he never understood how I was so calm about everything.  To me, staying calm helped me to stay focused.  When you panic, things start going bad :)  Best thing you can do really to prepare is understand that classes are going to be significantly larger, (depending on the college and degree) and you may not always get the teacher's attention.  It is generally suggested to find a friend or 2 in class to create a study group/help group.

oh and I specify his nationality only because of his mannerisms and the way he talked and stressed out always gave me a good laugh (not at him or being racist kind of way).  Just reflecting back and thinking about him talking to me in his broken english couldn't help but smile at the memory.


text:
Who should I specify as my affiliation if re-writing an undergraduate paper?
Years ago, I, as well as a team of other engineering students, conducted some pretty solid research for an undergrad project. We didn't end up commercializing it or anything, but I believe it would be a great fit for an upcoming conference.
I am no longer affiliated with the university where the research was originally conducted. The original paper was horrible, and needs to be re-written (I've been published before and am familiar with writing styles and the process of submitting a paper, despite not having an adviser).
Can (or should/must) I use the university as my (and my team's) affiliation? What does this actually mean? Does the university have to know I'm publishing a paper with their name on it? If so, who typically signs off on this?
I've tried to find an answer online and have come across this answer, but I'm not sure if it applies since I am not currently enrolled as a student, and because the paper is being re-written.

Just to check: the original paper was never published?

Correct. It was just an undergraduate capstone project. It was submitted to the course, but not published.

Your affiliation is listed so that you can be identified/contacted. Thus, your affiliation should be listed as your current employer.
Given that your university provided resources to conduct the research, you should list them in the acknowledgements section.
You should probably invite whoever supervised your project to co-author the paper. You should also invite your fellow team members to co-author the paper too.

Great idea. I will reach out to the supervisor. Maybe he can help out with the paper. And I'm sure he's got access to all kinds of other resources. Yes, the other team members will definitely be on the paper if I can help it, but due to some complex circumstances (more appropriate for a whole other question), one of them has dropped out of contact.

I think you'll need permission from everyone involved to publish the paper. (That's probably been answered on here somewhere.) It might be worth getting an initial agreement from everyone in advance. You'll want to ask again once the paper is prepared.

Your current employer may not look kindly upon you listing them under your affiliation. As it may be misinterpreted as saying they endorse the work (or that it was arrived out on their behalf).
I think I have scene it suggested elsewhere on this sight that you are safest  just to give no affiliation.

@LyndonWhite, JSideris must abide by any contractual obligations put in place by his current employer.

While  one only is required  to follow contractual obligations, but if for example I was an engineer working for a company the produces mining drills, and  I wrote a  paper was called "On the Significant Dangers of Mining Drills, Compares to other Technologies"
and assuming my contract allowed me to do this kind of thing in my free time (without say giving the company ownership),
then it is entirely possible that I have neither violated my contract, nor even broken any formal company rules.
But when my boss finds the paper, and sees my affiliation listed as "Big Drill Co"  ...

@LyndonWhite, that seems like a corner case. Legally, Big Drill Co has no come back. Of course, the world doesn't operate on law alone...

@LyndonWhite, in the scenario you mention, your boss is going to be angry even if you don't list your affiliation...

@user2768: "Legally"? In many jurisdictions, including most of the US, an employer can fire an employee for any reason or for no reason, at any time, unless there is a specific contract specifying otherwise (which might be rare).  So in such a case, just annoying Big Drill could cost your job.

@NateEldredge, I believe LyndonWhite raised the issue in the context of contracts, hence, my use of "legal" should be considered in the context of contracts. As I have stated, "your boss is going to be angry" and may act accordingly (including firing you, if permitted by law).

Is your then-adviser also a co-author on the paper? If so, and if they are still affiliated with the university, it may be enough that their affiliation is listed.
If your undergrad research was funded, that funding information should appear on the paper. This usually means that funding was provided through your adviser's grant(s).
If neither is true, i.e. you got no co-authors that are still affiliated with the university and no grants to report, you can still state somewhere in the paper (e.g. in the acknowledgements section) something along the line of "during the original research, author was affiliated with university X", if you feel inclined.
In general, your and every co-author's affiliation should be the current one and you are obliged to state your funding sources, if you have any.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of the obligation to list funding sources (even though this is in the paper). The original adviser did not co-author the paper or provide us with funding, however the research was minimally funded by the university (aka the tuition we paid to take the course).

You can write something like "this work was partly conducted at University XYZ" in the acknowledgement section.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can a bad last semester prevent me from getting into grad school?
I submitted my graduate application form  for a university in January, even saying I would graduate 'with honours'. I'm not sure how I was suppose to know what I would graduate with, but what I wrote down before almost feels like a complete lie at this point.
Now I am in my final semester of my undergraduate degree and it is burning me hard. My program pretty much cornered me into the 2nd most sadistic set of courses I have taken. I have an average of 3-4 (3-5 page) assignments due every week, and the content itself is the type of stuff you need to allow yourself to digest (if I had the time). My grades are all over the place, anywhere from 30%-80%. The TAs marking them are cruel, with an all or nothing marking scheme.
I realize this may be a post to vent some frustration I feel, but I am genuinely worried about my future at this point. These are the very courses of subjects I wish to go into, and an outside observer might look at my marks and feel my work ethic and intelligence was simply inadequate. My other semesters have been ~80% and I don't exactly have any research experience to back my case.

It is unlikely, but possible. Most decisions will be made by the time final grades are posted. A fair number of people crash in their final semester, actually.

Admissions decisions will be made based on your application materials and any sort of interview process that a given program uses; this will all likely happen before the semester is over so you won't have any grades finalized before then.
If you're accepted, you will get an offer that states reasons the offer can potentially be withdrawn. It's likely there to be some sort of clause that indicates the offer is conditional on completion of your current degree, and it may be written more broadly to something like "satisfactory academic progress". So yes, if your bad semester prevents you from graduating, it likely will prevent your admission. There's a chance possibility that a poor semester that doesn't prevent graduation could also affect your admission, but that will be entirely up to the program and nothing can be guaranteed. Given the ongoing pandemic I'd guess programs would be more forgiving of a recent slide. However, you'll want to make sure that you are able to be successful in the program, and if you are in courses now that will be relevant to your future you'll need to be sure you're staying on top of the material, no matter what your assessments look like. You also may see this as an opportunity to polish your time management skills, as these will be important in graduate school as well as in your current courses.

Yes, finishing the degree is essential. Most offers would be withdrawn for a non-graduate. It is hard to imagine an exception.

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


text:
How to answer a reviewer asking for the methodology code of the paper?
Recently I have submitted my paper to IEEE Access Journal which has a binary peer review process, and I got rejected. Still, they allow me to answer the reviewers' concerns and resubmit again.
One of the reviewers asked: "For the consideration of reproducibility, the code of the proposed method is suggested to be provided.
I want to know how I should respond to that concern politely as the author? I plan to provide all datasets and some part of the program, which is related to an example that I described in my paper. This simple example shows how my algorithm works and will help reproducibility (It shows the final result of applying the proposed method by considering one of the algorithms that I have used in my paper on a smaller dataset).
I want to know how to answer the reviewer politely and convincingly while explaining that I am providing some part of my programs, not all of it.
Thanks.

Do you have some reason for withholding part of it?

@Buffy I have shown the methodology's performance with 4 different algorithms and provide the results in several tables in the analysis part. I believe the code for that example will show the algorithm's performance, and if I want to provide the program for all comparison parts, I should trim lots of stuff, and it is time-consuming. Secondly, he suggests that the code of the proposed method be provided. So I believe this part will provide the code for the methodology, and it is enough for reproducibility.

Well, you can explain that to editors, but, since your paper was rejected and you need to re-write it, you may need to do more than you think. There are some battles you won't win. But, you haven't answered my question other than to say "time consuming".

@Buffy So what is your suggestion? Do you mean I should provide the code for each comparison table and curve with all the datasets? I am working in this direction and add some other parts to it for the next paper. Do you think it is a good idea to provide all the things I have in my hand?

No, my suggestion is to have a solid reason if you don't provide it. A reason that editors will accept.

That is my question actually! I'm looking for a similar situation or suggestions from others to help me with writing this response to the reviewer!

I would go ahead and release my code and results, even if it looks messy and needs work.

From your OP, the only reason you have given for not releasing it is "I don't want to". That is not going to satisfy anybody. But people here can't invent reasons and put them into your mouth. If the reviewer is concerned about reproducibility, that might imply he/she doesn't actually believe your results are correct. It wouldn't be the first (or last) time that software gave good-looking (but wrong) results because of a bug! We used to call the most insidious bugs the "20% errors". 2% errors usually don't matter. 200% errors are usually obvious. But 20% ... "here be dragons".

Let me try to capture the thoughts in the comments and add a bit, though I can't be specific, not knowing your work.
The reviewer has asked for your code. It might be appropriate or not to release it, depending on too many things to list here. But if you don't want to release it since future work depends on it and you prefer to keep it private for now, it might be an acceptable reason to an editor, or not. I can't predict that. If knowing it is essential to evaluating the correctness of your work, then the editor has a right to object.
But, the original was rejected and, if you want to resubmit to that journal, then you need to do a fairly extensive rewrite in any case. Evaluate for yourself how essential it is for you to not (yet) reveal things and if it isn't essential, try, within page limits etc, to comply with the request. It might make the paper better and it might send it off into inessential areas resulting in cruft. But the decision is yours to make how to write up your work. And the editor's job is to judge its acceptance for the journal.
But the bottom line is that you don't need to reply to every concern or accede to every demand. The work is your own. But your readers, including the reviewers and editors will make judgments about it as to whether you make the case for any conclusions you hope to draw. Make sure that the proper connections are made.

I have a guess that you are worried about getting scooped on future work if you reveal too much. That may be a valid concern. If so, releasing a more complete version of the current paper close in time to the follow up might be a solution, so that there is less opportunity for others to jump on your methodology and break in line ahead of you.

You cannot answer “convincingly”, because your assumption that it is okay not to provide the code is incorrect, and the reviewer is correct to ask for it. And the fact that it’s time-consuming to prepare the code for release is neither here nor there: it’s also time-consuming to write a good paper and polish it over and over to make it into something people can read and understand; but that’s what good researchers do, because they understand it’s important and that this is the way to do good science.
For a related discussion, see here.

I very much agree with your linked answer, that researchers should release their code by default (with rare exceptions), and that the main counterarguments boil down to laziness at best.  But what you write here is a little misleading — there are many fields in which, according to current norms, it’s perfectly normal and acceptable to not release code.  I greatly hope those norms will change soon, but for now, they are what they are, and it’s a bit misleading to pretend otherwise.

@PLL thanks, I’m not pretending anything, it’s just my opinion and others are free to disagree. However since OP’s paper got rejected it seems that the referee shares my view and is similarly unlikely to find OP’s arguments for not sharing their code convincing.

Fair enough, and I greatly agree with your opinion and agree it sounds like the referee shares this position.  It was just that (to me) the first sentence of your answer reads like it’s presenting an accepted consensus, rather than a (common but far from universal) opinion.

There are no models for this. I think you have answered your own question here:

answer the reviewer politely and convincingly while explaining that I
am providing some part of my programs, not all of it.

You suggest several reasons why not all the code is called for. Some is extraneous. Some is working but not fit for public consumption (all too often true). Some you may want to keep private for future use. Those reasons might satisfy the editor.
What you do provide might be in a web accessible repository - not necessarily written up as part of the paper. It's becoming more common for journals (and editors and reviewers) to require at least that much public exposure of data and code.

I would point out that the reviewer did not specifically ask for all the code to be made public.  It certainly is reasonable to release some code and not other code, for all manner of reasons.

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


text:
How to measure outcomes of general education and higher education?
How do you measure the outcomes of general education (up to 12th grade) and higher education (college and above) in a given country? what are some indicators you would suggest I use?
If we were to look in education in a specific country in a certain period, how would we benchmark those outcomes? What indicators are used for this purpose?

Sorry, but your question is too broad.

The very short answer is "badly."  The long answer is very long.  These might be some starting points for your research.  https://nsse.indiana.edu/nsse/about-nsse/index.html https://research.acer.edu.au/ausse/ https://www.qilt.edu.au/qilt-surveys/student-experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardized_test https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/student-information-and-data/national-student-survey-nss/

I’m voting to close this question because i's much too general.

It also seems to be about a specific research topic.

As a starting point, you may take a look at the PISA study. It is conducted by the OECD in ca. 80 countries around the world. It uses various indicators to assess (1) reading performance, (2) mathematics performance, and (3) science performance on a country-level (disaggregated by gender and age group).
Here is an example visualizing the 2018 mean reading performance of girls and boys, with the x-axis designating various countries (source):

For more detailed information on the PISA study and its methodology, I would suggest you to browse through OECD's library, or to directly go to the PISA website.
As regards higher education institutes, the indicators will differ significantly - usually, they deal with research outputs in scientific journals, the number of citations accrued by those publications, the share of national and international collaboration with other researchers around the world, the amount of grants and funding obtained by the institute's faculty, or the teaching-staff-to-student-ratio. One illustrative example is the THE World University Ranking. (But note that the reliability and credibility of these rankings may be subject to biases and methodical flaws.)


text:
Awkward situation with editor several month after submission: advice
I am observing from some distance the following situation.
Two young mathematicians -- call them A and B -- submitted a paper to a quite strong journal and indicated a much senior colleague C as a possible handling editor. The corresponding author of the paper is A. Several month later C writes to B alone and hints that (s)he might decline the handling because of a conflict of interests. After some astonished requirements from B, C states plainly that the reason is the pending review for the same journal (s)he is awaiting from B. Since, in C's opinion, B is working too slowly on the review, (s)he, C, can't conceive how (s)he will be hurrying the reviewers of B's (and A's!) paper. In C's opinion, this constitutes the conflict of interests.
I have several questions about this situation.

(Definition) Is the trivial fact that C got annoyed by B not corresponding to C's expectations (B gets of course no money for reviewing) sufficient to constitute a conflict of interests?
(Strategy) What are A&B's options concerning their paper? It is pretty clear that B will now finish the review of this not-particularly-nice-to-review (unnecessary long, very heavy, very  technical, not that exciting results) paper for C as the first priority. But will this save their own submission to this journal? C most probably has good memory; (s)he can decline the publication anyway. Would it be better to withdraw the paper right away?
(Ethics) Some details in C's behavior are suspicious. Why didn't (s)he claim the conflict of interests immediately when (s)he got the paper of A&B on the table? At that point, B has been already reviewing the paper for C. Why is C writing only to B? To me, it looks like C is blackmailing B: now C gets from B what (the review) and when (quickly) (s)he wants and frees themselves from all work concerning A&B's paper. This way, C is "punishing" B (and btw A who has nothing to do with this review) for not standing to C's expectations by prohibiting the publication of their really nice result in a really good journal. Am I too paranoid here? Should  A&B write to editor-in-chief?

Why did B accept to review a paper if B did not plan to do so?

Ask C whether he/she can transfer the paper to a different editor.

@BryanKrause: how did you come to your conclusion about B's plans?

@tchao Because one of the plans you suggest is that B actually finish the review for C plus a list of reasons this task is no fun: "unnecessary long, very heavy, very technical, not that exciting results"; the implication is that otherwise they would not, or would not prioritize it. It seems rude to me to agree to review a paper, find it is "technical"(isn't every paper?) or too long (if it's too long, mention this in the review), and then put it off. Why shouldn't reviewers do the same to A and B's paper?

@BryanKrause: unfortunately, I can't understand your idea about the implication. Your first sentence does not even make sense to me grammatically: "would not" -- do what?. (The problem might be very well with me, not with your writing.) And why do you believe that B put the paper off?

@tchao Would not complete the review in a timely fashion. I believe B would put the paper off because you give a long list of all the reasons reviewing this paper is an unwanted chore.

No, agreeing to peer review a paper for an editor would never cause the editor to have a conflict of interest.  A conflict of interest would only occur if the author somehow incentivized the editor to make a decision on a paper.  B providing (or failing to provide) a peer review is not an incentive to an editor, and it is unrelated to the decision on the paper written by A and B.

If C declines to handle the paper, some other editor will handle it.  This likely has no effect on you.  Probably it is best to do nothing for now.  I suggest that you not request C as handling editor in the future since they seem unprofessional.

If C were to directly violate the journal's policies, you might complain to the editor in chief, but it does not appear that has happened.  Don't complain now.

If C said "I will not handle your paper because you did not complete your peer review" then no, you are not being paranoid.  If C said "You should not complain that your paper has not been handled because you did not complete your peer review" then you are being paranoid.

If the editor says that they feel like they have a conflict of interest, then they do have a conflict of interest. Maybe they shouldn't feel conflicted, but you can't say "would never cause the editor to have a conflict of interest".

I agree with @WolfgangBangerth . It's just just whether there is a conflict of interest but could there be the appearance of a conflict of interest? Let's say the reviews for A&B's paper come in as a reject and a weak approval and decides to reject it. A&B could complain that the editor had a conflict of interest bc of the delay of the other review.

@WolfgangBangerth If you define conflict of interest based on emotions instead of facts, then your definition is totally arbitrary.  We have had quite a few posts here with absurd feelings of conflict of interest.

@AnonymousPhysicist That's how this goes. If someone feels conflicted, then that's a conflict. (There are of course also objective criteria: If I'm asked to review a paper by my wife, then that's also a conflict.)


text:
How to find a *to-be-published* paper
An article I'm reading references another article as:

[6] J. Wess and B. Zumino, CERN preprint TH 1857 (1974), Nucl. Phys. B, to be published

It is explained in the article I'm reading that "all unexplained notation in the present paper can be found in ref. [6]", so it is quite an important reference. The problem is that I can't find it anywhere. Neither in Nuclear Physics B, nor on the CERN document server. The elsevier page of the article I'm reading is also no help.
How am I supposed to find this article? Is it possible that it was never published after all?

Did you search "Supergauge invariant extension of quantum electrodynamics" in Google Scholar? It is Ref.TH.1857-CERN

You find it by using a real search engine. In Web of Science, searching on the two authors and a generous year range yielded 4 possible hits between 1972 and 1976. Or, you go ask your local research librarian and let them introduce you to the tools available locally.

@JonCuster That would make a good answer!

I found the following from a Google search: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(74)90355-1. If that's not it, then browse through the archive of Nuclear Physics B for 1974, from 61(1) to 83(3), perhaps going a little further (maybe it didn't appear in 1974). Maybe there's a faster way, e.g., an author index for Nuclear Physics B.
Using a more directed Google search, namely,
https://www.google.com/search?q=1974%20Wess%20Zumino%20site:https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/
I found: https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(74)90578-4. My search uses three key pieces of information: publication year (1974) and author names (Wess and Zumino). Moreover, I limit my search to https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/, by prepending that url with site:. (In the above URL, each %20 represents a space. You can
enter the following into Google Search: 1974 Wess Zumino site:https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/, adapting for your needs.)

Thank you for looking, but that's reference [1] from the same article. I was also hoping for a more general strategy for finding elusive references.

@Simon It's difficult to answer your question with so little information, perhaps mention [1]. (As it stands, it's probably a shopping question.) I was also hoping for a more general strategy for finding elusive references: That's perhaps a different question. My edited answer gives a slow approach.

My second edit gives a faster approach, which gives another potential hit.

One option is to contact the first author (or try the other authors). It may be the the paper was never published, or if it was it ended up in a different journal or published in a different year (which can make tracking down harder).
The difficulty here is that the paper was from ~1974 so it may be tricky to track down the current contact information for the person (they may not be in academia anymore or even alive). Depending how well known that person was in your field you may want to check with other people in your department if they know how to reach them. If that fails then you can try talking to your University library, they usually have people whose job is to help find difficult to find papers.

And 1974 was way before arXiv existed.


text:
Should I add E-books and Blog Posts to my CV?
I am still planning to get into a Master's program sometime in the fall next year.  Should I add my E-books and Blog Posts to my CV?
I keep my blog posts formal and educational.  The following is a link to my blog: http://cybersecwise.com/wordpress/. I do already know people reviewing my CV will not actually read my blog.
I have also written two E-books.  One is called "NoSQL Injection for Elasticsearch", which was referenced in a Russian Defcon (Hacker Convention).  Since it was referenced in a defcon, does that count as Peer Reviewed?  The other E-book is called "Introduction to Web Hacking: Cross-site Scripting".
These things are all computer security related, but I am actually going to go for a Master's in Computer Science.

I would include them in a section titled "community engagement" or something of that flavor. Note that something being cited is not equivalent to peer-review, do not classify the work as peer-reviewed.

@ErikM Seems like a good answer to me, maybe make it an answer?

Someday everyone will stop using the stupid E- prefix.  E-mail is just mail.  E-commerce is just commerce.  E-books are just books.

I would include them in a section titled "community engagement" or something of that flavor.
Note that something being cited is not equivalent to peer-review, do not classify the work as peer-reviewed.

Do you think a title of "Extracurricular Activities" would be appropriate?

I think extracurricular activities is only a term that should be used if you are still in school, to differentiate the activities from school activities.


text:
Can you submit a paper to a journal that contains a paper already accepted?
I have just got a short paper (about 3,500 words) accepted by a top journal and it is currently being copy-edited. Meanwhile I have completed a paper (about 12,000 words) with deeper research that contains the short paper as a whole. The new paper reorganizes and expands on the short paper in a way that improves on the accuracy, although it takes much of the short paper contents verbatim. Then it adds an entirely new section. Is it inappropriate to submit this to a journal?

I am no sure what "reorganizes and expands..in a way that improves the accuracy" means in this case. However, nothing from an accepted paper should be used verbatim in a new paper. You must rewrite all these sections and cite the short paper.

It is quite common, to publish a short letter-like paper to a high-impact journal first and then follow it up with a more detailed longer paper expanding on the first one.
However, containing the first paper as a subset is (self-)plagiarism, not original, and not acceptable. You must write the second paper independently, though some similarity of the text is okay, in particular if you state explicitly which passage has already been presented in that earlier paper and are only included for completeness.

Thank you very much for your replies. By "write the second paper independently" do you mean not to use the same expressions verbatim but rephrase all of them? About citing, I cannot cite the shorter paper in the submission because that would reveal my identity as the author and break the anonymity requirement.

Are you sure regarding the anonymity requirement? Whose requirement is that? Not citing the short paper is unacceptable, as it would pretend the new submission is entirely original, i.e. this is plagiarism. You should clarify with whoever you think forbids quoting that paper how to proceed.

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


text:
Web Crawl Dataset - Legal & Practical feedback
I'm working on a web site classification method. Papers in field (Text Classification / Web Page Classification) are usually using:

a) Ancient, but well known & widely adopted, datasets like WebKB 7-sectors
b) Their own datasets, collected from domains found at a public categorized web directory

What puzzles me:

after review of recent research, I found that for b) cases, authors are not that happy to make dataset (corpus) publicly available.

They clearly state where they harvested web domains and do provide parameters of the crawl - but, I assume it would make scientific sense to publish exact corpus - so, future comparisons have more solid ground. Yet, I rarely find dataset link in a paper (interestingly enough: in few cases, I recall: authors published the corpus but never mentioned it in the article - I found it accidentally while searching GitHub / Google for PDF of the original source)
Now, I'm worried if there are legal concerns here - that I might not be aware of. I would appreciate very much thoughts & feedback from your practice / experience:

Should we allow our self to interpret copyright notice (~100% of pages in the sample) "all rights reserved" less rigidly, for our case, case of a scientific research?

But how to sleep well if I published gigabytes of web pages, having such copyright notice, on a Data Set repository with Creative Commons or GPLv3 licence? I mean, it is hard to play dumb if ever called out for such "disagreement" between the repository content and the licence.

Is it about me, or you agree - that it sounds really insane if we should ask for written permission to each of 1400 legal entities (in my current sample), running business web site - being researched?
how you guys handle this dilemma?
or would you stick only with ancient/mainstream datasets?

My particular research has focus more toward "web site" than "web page / text" classification aspect. Hence, I have strong motive to crawl an additional dataset (from domains harvested from https://dmoztools.net/), beside using the mainstream ones (since these rarely provide web-site context, and mostly contain web pages / single documents). If I take that methodological path, I have to make it available -- but: are there hidden problems in such path?
Thanks for all thoughts in advance & this is not an easy one :)

You're asking several questions. Would you be able to break your question down into smaller questions?

Sorry (for confuse style), the dilemma is about two conflicting "interests" (if you will) - as Buffy broken down: two issues: copyright vs reproducibility - it could be presented better, but essentially: it is problem with several variables :)

By breaking down into smaller questions I think @RichardErickson meant making smaller, separate posts.

Copyrights - I have no issue on that. Making the dataset open source - again, no issue there.  --- but copyright vs open souring dataset -- that's the dilemma. (everything else, about particular research, datasets used etc. is just for illustration -- again, sorry for the style, I'll do better next time)

There seem to me to be two issues here: copyright and reproducibility of research. You pose them as being in conflict, but I don't think that is the case.
First, in most jurisdictions, publishing someone's copyright work is a violation. "Just for research purposes" probably won't save you in these times, though once it might have done so.
However, the reproducibility issue isn't quite as you pose it here. Suppose I publish an algorithm (I'm assuming it is an algorithm, actually - deterministic). Suppose I also publish the data set on which it is run. If someone else runs my algorithm on my data set does anyone expect that it won't produce the same result. Even a randomized "algorithm" should produce the same results within statistical limits when run on the same data set.
But that isn't really the meaning of reproducible. I make an hypothesis about what should occur in a situation. I test it. Others should be able to test it under similar constraints. But I doubt that my hypothesis was "X happens in Y dataset with Z methodology". More likely Y here is treated as a category of datasets, not a specific one.
So, if you publish the mechanism by which you gather the dataset, rather than the dataset itself (along with Z), then others can test your work and the results will be more meaningful than if you publish the dataset itself. Thus you avoid the copyright problem altogether.
One reason that authors don't want to publish some datasets is to avoid stepping in quagmires such as copyright. Others involve human subject privacy, etc. But, that shouldn't matter if the hypothesis isn't overly tied to a specific dataset, but to a category of similarly gathered datasets.

But, we (primarily) publish data sets to run "your" algorithm on "my" dataset (too). I mean, that's the most widely followed logic in papers proposing enhancement or completely novel method.
I agree on the main point: mechanism, not dataset. My concern is time offset: list of domains + crawl parameters/method, would produce very different set of documents after 1+ year. However, I agree with your rationale - and it seems general practice in the field.

On the whole "what is reproducibility" issue, there is an excellent paper by Benureau et al. with a lot of examples of what can go wrong: https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.08205. In their terms, reproducible means "someone else can take your code and data, and obtain the same results." I also think that this is a very useful property, because it allows me to directly compare two algorithms and make sure that you actually obtained the results you claim on your own dataset. Plus, if I find errors in your code, I can get new results on the original dataset. So, it's not a fringe concern, I think


text:
Changing research disciplines during Graduate school
I am about to start a masters on track to phd program at a graduate school in the US. I study archaeology and intend to focus my masters on a geoarchaeological research project. My archaeological background is focused primarily on geochemical studies of lithic assemblages and as such i have developed a foundation in geology and chemistry (although haven't had any formal training) alongside my archaeological knowledge.
However, my interest in earth sciences, particular planetary science, has recently grown and i am wondering if it is possible to swap disciplines furthur down my grad school career. At the moment i want to see through my archaeological training but want to know if it is possible to skew my research towards planetary science/geology for my phd if the interests still persist.

It's certainly possible, at least in the universities I'm acquainted with, to apply to a Ph.D. program in a field different from your masters degree. But to be accepted into such a program, you'll have to convince an admissions committee (or the professor with whom you want to work) that you have the necessary background. You mentioned that you have relevant background but not formal training, so this may present a problem. If you can take some relevant courses while you're in the masters program, or if you can get recommendation letters attesting to your background knowledge, that would help. If that's not possible, then you may need to take some classes after you get your masters degree and before you apply to Ph.D. programs.


text:
What percentage of the code should be yours in a final year computer science project?
I have a final year project in Artificial intelligence and I need to make a facial recognition project. I'm confused how to start this project and how plagiarism works in terms of coding? No one would make a project from scratch but the thing is my coding ability in python is very limited and the code that I have seen for facial recognition using the K nearest algorithm is like 70 lines. If I change that code with my variable names and create functions and add that code into those functions would that be a problem ? what do I do ?  I would obviously cite where I got this code from and say that my code is inspired from this. But if i just change the variables and make a few functions and add their code clearly I have done very little work in terms of coding aspect.

This is a question for your instructor. Rules vary.

Let me emphasize that if you were to get a "permissive" answer here and follow it, your instructor might be very unhappy with you. Ask them for guidance.

I did and he wasnt clear in terms of yes i can get someone else's code and build off it but then how much would i need to contribute to it to make it mine

I vote to reopen. Although some individual factors may come into play (e.g., the OP may have specific constraints), this seems rather general. And seemingly goes beyond AI: Essentially the OP is asking how to use external material. (Perhaps the OP can clarify any specific requirements enforced upon them, possibly explaining they have none.)

If I change that code with my variable names and create functions and add that code into those functions would that be a problem ?

That seems like blatant plagiarism: Taking code and changing variable names surely only serves plagiarism. Creating new functions from existing code surely only serves plagiarism too.

what do I do ?

Use as much external code as you like. That code should appear as-is, with any ownership, copyright, and licensing information intacted, where ownership information is missing, perhaps add it, at the very least, document the fact that code isn't yours.
Write your own code that uses external code. That's your contribution.
Occasionally, you may use an external code snippet within your code. Mark such code with comments, e.g., /** BEGIN: Code from xyz **/ and /** END **/.
Ultimately, your goal should be to achieve your objective with minimal code.

"Use as much external code as you like." That is dangerous advice unless you are the instructor.

@Buffy Not doing so is reinventing the wheel, but, of course, some instructors may be testing for a student's ability to build a wheel. I've never heard such a constraint for a final year project though. The OP can clarify. (NB: For fairness, I presume rules are governed at department level, rather than instructor level.)

When I saw your question, I was rather concerned. No-one should be asking how little they need to do in order to pass their final year project!
However, having read the content of your question it sounds as if you are not actually trying to get away with doing minimal work, just feeling stuck and trying to find a way to improve your project.
You already know that you need to cite your code - any attempt to pass off code written by others as your own would be an act of plagiarism, and as such would be subject to the penalties employed at your college. It's therefore very important that it's VERY clear which elements of the code are your own work, which you have adapted from another source, and which are entirely replicated from another source, and that those sources are clearly and appropriately referenced. You can find guides about how to reference code online, but it’s likely your local library or learning resource center would also provide guides about this.
Depending on the purpose of your code in relation to your whole project, your project may also benefit from a justification as to why you have utilized code from other (cited) sources rather than write your own. The approach you take to do this may be different where you are including external packages/modules rather than including code directly.
If I was supervising your final year project the first thing I would recommend doing is to look again at the scope of your task. If your project simply requires the reproduction of code already written by others just to see if you can get it to work, then its scope is very limited. Maybe you need to expand the scope and/or aim of your project to ensure you are developing something specific to a clear project aim.
I’d therefore suggest you note some ideas about how your project could be expanded then use that as a starter for discussion in your next supervisor meeting. This would show you are proactive in developing your project scope (and not asking them to tell you what to do, which wouldn’t be appropriate in the final year) and hopefully also enable you to improve your project into being something you can be proud to include in your portfolio of work once it’s complete :)

I would recommend to look at the actual (discrete) mathematics and write your corresponding code from scratch.
You say it's only 80 SLOC, so why not implement it yourself? If you make use of established libraries, well, this is fine IMHO usually. Ask your advisor, if you are supposed to not use libraries/frameworks before.


text:
How do bad grades affect my chances of getting a Master's degree in biomedical engineering?
I want to get into a master's program in biomedical engineering. The university I attend does not offer a biomedical engineering undergraduate degree, so I decided to major in chemical engineering since it seemed like a really good option at the time. However, I've been making low grades the moment I started my chemical engineering classes. I have 5 C's now and I've already had to withdraw and retake a class. I'm told that such grades are common in this program at my university (which was something I should have realized at the time). I was able to take Pass for all these classes due to the pandemic. I'm now well into my junior year for this degree and my grades get worse and worse every single semester no matter how hard I try to get them back up. As much as I hate to admit it, I've lost passion in my work due to all the stress and am just trying to survive my classes. I feel pressured to stay with this major because its the only major on campus that has research opportunities close to biomedical engineering and switching my major would mean taking summer classes which would prevent me from doing research. I already have some research experience but no publication which I was hoping to get this semester before I ruined it with my grades. Should I just stick this out and do research over the summer and just move on to my masters? Should I change majors to salvage my GPA (because I feel like my classes are going to get much worse)? How do I fix the mess I've gotten myself into? Before my academic performance dropped, I was hoping to apply for biomedical engineering at Vanderbilt University. Is that even possible at this point?


text:
Mentioning graduates names in the SOP?
I found many questions that ask about mentioning professors names in the SOP. However, this doesn't address my question. Is it a good idea to mention the name of a program's graduate in the SOP? I am an international student, and I contact one of the graduates who is from my country. The program has a few graduates from my country (he is the only one I am aware of and I found about him online, and he clearly was doing pretty good "high gpa"- studied both masters and phd there). I just said he thinks the program is great in both education and job opportunities. The program is a top program, and it is obvious that it has a great education and good job opportunities. However, i mentioned this to clarify that I am really interested and I tried to get more info and contact people to make sure it is a fit before applying. (Not mass applying)

I think it would be ok, if done in passing; less than a sentence, perhaps. I think it would be much better, however, if one of your letters of recommendation mentioned the earlier (successful) student instead. I once benefitted from just that situation.
But, a word of caution. Make sure that your SoP is forward looking on your own plans and goals and how you intend to meet them. Don't get side tracked from the fact that this is, perhaps, your most important application document. Having someone else say certain things gives you a few more words to make the most important points.


text:
How long it takes for a Mendeley Data repository review?
I've just "published" some Datasets as the Mendeley Data repositories. After pressing the "Publish" button I was surprised with message that my dataset(s) are "in the moderation" process that I wasn't well aware of in advance (my bad).
Now, I'm puzzled how long it takes usually for Mendeley Data staff to approve a dataset/repository for being published on-line? Does someone has any experience with the service?
I planned to submit an article (linking to these dataset) today, but it seems I'll have to wait for the dataset moderation first.

Mendeley Data moderated and accepted all 6 datasets, in between 2 and 3* days since submission.

I can't say when exactly it was as I received no email confirmation and I've checked last time the status of datasets 2 days after submission. Also, looking on the Mendeley Data UI, I can't find any clue about when it was approved.

However, 3 days is very good in my opinion :)
Hope this info will help someone else :).
Live long and prosper!

We hope to moderate datasets within 1-2 working days. We check that the dataset contains data files and not articles or spam.
If you have any questions, contact our team directly at data@mendeley.com
Best Regards,
Kate
Engagement Manager
Mendeley Data

Good, the quality of data sets is crucial for the service. Really, 3 days are more then good enough, in my view. Keep good work!


text:
Is it possible to switch from condensed matter theory PhD to high energy theory in postdoc work?
Suppose that my PhD work is on CMT, very field theoretic in techniques. Then, is it possible to work on hep-ph and hep-th areas in postdoc? Is it a lot harder than the opposite way or other people who have PhD in high energy theory? Do you know any examples of success?

If you find a PI who takes you on, you can pretty much do whatever you want as a postdoc. That's the whole idea. Some paths are easier and some are harder, but what counts in the end is what you are interested in.

Also, what are your motivations in making the change? Do you plan to be a high-energy theorist in the future? Or work on both topics? Or stay in CMT but just want to develop some other skills during postdoc?

Hans Bethe is arguable an example (a high-profile one at that) but I've struggled to think of more recent ones.

Hi. Sorry for the off-topic question, but I'm also planning to join a PhD in condmat, but I'm trying to find a position which involves field theoretic techniques. I haven't found many professors from visiting University websites. Can you suggest or recommend any people since you'd have been active in the field for quite some time?


text:
Student accused of Plagarism
A former student of mine asked for advise. This student has been accused of cheating on an assignment.  By their account, approximately 8% of their project is nearly identical to a partial solution posted by a student who took the same course in the past.  My former student claims that they never consulted GitHub, rather they just built the project using the description in the handout.
The former student also claims that the remainder of the project, much more complicated, bears no resemblance to the GitHub posting, per the accusing professor.
The matter is further complicated in that the student has been unable to see the GitHub posting as it was removed prior to the student being accused of plagiarism. I was contacted because I have talked about academic dishonesty in my classes, and given examples to students. The student asks how to proceed.
From my end, I suggested that the student email the professor, and ask for the specifics so that they can be examined.  The professor indicated that the case can go to the academic review board, and points out that it will be likely upheld there. I reminded the student that apparently 90+% of the project appears to be original, and the student denies using anyone else's code. The student wondered if they should admit, as the professor is suggesting.
My advise was to only admit to what you have done.  Ask for the code allegedly used in the project, and in writing justify how the submitted project was developed, explaining the commonality with the GitHub code, if possible.  And before that can be done, the professor should supply the alleged copied code which is relied upon for the assertion of academic dishonesty.
Is there anything else which I should consider or suggest?

How was "8%" determined?  Using an automated tool like MOSS?  How similar were the codes of other students in the class?  In my experience, a MOSS similarity score of 8% with hits randomly scattered throughout a project would probably be completely innocent.  However, if the similarity score was 80% for a module that was 10% of the whole project, it would be a very strong indication of a problem with that module.  The details matter a lot.  Any process that is reasonably fair to the student should allow the student to see the evidence and offer an explanation for apparent copying.

8% was assumed as the professor stated that 80% of part 1, which was worth 10% of the total project, was allegedly copied.  There was no discussion about any tool used to determine that.

If there's evidence that 80% of part 1 of the project was copied, then the student will have a very hard time denying that they cheated on that part of the assignment.  Depending on local norms, the punishment for cheating on part of an assignment might be anything from a warning to expulsion from the university. The best strategy for the student is probably to beg for leniency rather than trying to deny cheating.

Rather than arguing it with the prof, who seems disinclined to do so, let it go to the review board and argue it there. The student doesn't actually need to do the analysis them self before they have a review scheduled, but then, you can both insist that you have full information in which to defend yourself. Serve as the student's advocate if you are so inclined.
If the student uses well designed code as they were taught to do, there may be, in essence, only one way to properly express the solution if it is small and well defined. That won't be true for a large program, of course.
But also insist that the student should get the benefit of any doubt as the overall impact on the system is small, but that on the student is large.
I agree with the advice you have so far given in this, by the way.


text:
Authors in proceeding are dominated by one university
Recently I want to submit my manuscript to a conference. The accepted papers in this conference will be published in IEEE Xplore, so I thought this conference is reputable. But after I checked the last two years published proceeding (2021 is their 10th), more than 60% of the accepted papers authors are from one university (which is the host of the conference)
As I'm new in academia (as junior lecturer), I'm not sure is this normal and acceptable (the 60%), or is it a sign that the conference not reputable?

Is this maybe a really niche research area with few people working on it outside a group at that university?

I assume that if IEEE is a sponsor, then it is pretty reputable.

There are plenty of small regional conferences out there, so it may well be reputable albeit dominated by the host institution. 10 years seems a reasonable track record.

@Peter No, the conference is about IT and have a wide coverage of topics, the total number of papers accepted reached 100 papers

It might be the easiest way for the organizers to motivate some more people to attend by giving discounts etc. to local researchers. And wouldn't you apply for a decent local conference? I would with 100% certainty, nothing wrong with that. The probability to go for a specific conference somewhere else is definitely lower.

Conference reputation is essentially the experiences of the people who have attended the conference.  You have established that only a narrow group of people have attended.  So you know that the conference has an exceptionally narrow reputation.
I would not attend such a conference.
Proceedings for conferences during the COVID-19 pandemic should be disregarded as atypical.


text:
Claiming authorship for substantial work on a single-author-only paper
I recently worked on a research project for a client of my organization who was chosen for a highly prestigious lecture in my field (delivered annually). As part of convention, the lecturer is also afforded the opportunity to publish, ahead of the lecture, a single-author-only invited paper in a high-profile journal. From what I understand, no other authors are "allowed" to appear, but having been the sole person responsible for producing literally all tables, models, and visualizations in the manuscript,  I still feel strange about this.
I wrote all code used to wrangle and analyze the data and am listed in the acknowledgments for "data and statistical support". Would it be acceptable (conventional, ethical, etc.) for me to list this publication alongside the others (for which I am listed as author) on my CV?
If so, what's the appropriate format? Can it be Only-Author, [Publication Title] or Only-Author et al., [Publication Title]?
This kind of scenario does happen somewhat frequently at my organization, so just thought I'd try to get some insight to avoid raising any eyebrows for grad program applications/future employers. Thanks in advance!

What do you mean with having "allowed" in quotation marks? Maybe there is some convention, but conventions can be broken if the situation justifies it.

Unfortunately, the journal site doesn't publish these guidelines, and I wasn't even aware that there would be a publication to begin with until I stumbled upon it while doing a lit search for something else lol. Good point though; will keep in mind for the future

"This kind of scenario does happen somewhat frequently at my organization"  Sounds like it's time to find a new organization.

If there is no guideline, then there is no point why you cannot be second author of the paper. You might want to ask questions, until you are presented with some clear evidence why you cannot be an author of this paper.

This situation seems extremely weird to me. The requirement that a paper be single-author only seems odd - it's hard to imagine why that would be there. But whatever the reason, if someone publishes a single-author paper then it has to be solely their work. If the content was primarily - or even partially - your work then your name has to be on the paper. If it's not then something is very wrong. Submitting it without your name is a clear case of misconduct by the person who's listed as the author. If the paper doesn't cite a previous publication of yours it could be grounds for withdrawal.

What I don't understand is that apparently there are single authors of paper created by at least one more author. This is the wrong side of the story.

Depending on how routine the data analysis and visualisations are authorship is not necessarily guaranteed. They need to be major intellectual contributions. For example, in some fields if someone could reproduce the analysis or visualisations using well known methods taught in university classes, without modification, it wouldn't count for authorship.

@WetlabStudent the corollary to that is that 'tables' and 'visualisations' is clearly material that will quite literally be embedded in the manuscript. We are not talking about visualisations that helped Author1 come up with their own material to insert. So in that sense, OP is a 'co-author', and the manner in which the tables, models, and visualisations have been formulated express their own work and opinions. Had OP been 'commissioned'to create those following very strict specifications, that is a different matter. Obviously there is a gray area in between.

@TasosPapastylianou Why do you assume it is not the case that OP was "commissioned to create those following very strict specifications"? OP says all they did was write "all code". It sounds like they work for a company that provides visualization services, so an author can send a data file in a random format and ask for scatter plots by principle components, or 3D visualizations, or whatever they want. Then an employee will write the code to "wrangle and analyze the data", including making it look nice. Now an employee sees a prestigious paper full of their figures and wants co-authorship?

It's a little hard to follow.  Is this a good way to summarize your question?  "I have done a lot of work on a paper and feel I should be listed as a co-author.  The other author agrees, but due to a technicality would like to omit me from the list of authors so that the paper can be published in a certain high-profile journal for a certain conference.  Is there a way I can tell people I'm an 'uncredited co-author' of the paper?"

@TasosPapastylianou Yes, the assumption is that the author paid the OP, otherwise it is unethical unless the terms of the arrangement (lack of co-authorship and pay) was specified in advance. Usually for such tasks, an academic would either do it themself or pay a research assistant or company to do it. While exploiting students for free does happen, and it is unethical (without explicit agreement as to what the student is getting out of the relationship), this does not appear to be what happened here.

Yes, the assumption is that the author paid the OP — Huh?  Whether or not money changed hands has nothing whatsoever to do with deserving authorship.

@JeffE In principle yes. There are cases where "major intellectual contribution" is clear, and authorship should be granted, or not, based on this. However, many people will disagree as to what is a major intellectual contribution. In some fields, it is very common to pay a company to prepare tables, visualisations, or perform standard routine analyses. It is understood that payment is compensation for the work. However, if there is no payment, there is an ethical issue, e.g. did the author take advantage of someone who assumed they'd be an author as compensation?

The other answers/comments provide accurate information from the perspective of academia, where authorship (including co-authorship) is an important metric for achievement and prestige, and where a lot of attention is therefore given to its fair allocation.
I'll add a perspective from someone who has jumped around between academia, industry, and the grey area in between. In many instances in industry and general-public-focused publications in particular, it is only the prestigious seniors who get "credit in the byline". Or sometimes the publication channel limits the number of authors that can be listed and the contributors are expected to sort it out. When I was starting in my field, I was multiple times the grunt who did a lot of the work for such papers but wasn't listed as author, and in recent years have sometimes become the prestigious senior.
It is good form*, where someone has done a significant part of the work but isn't listed as official co-author, for them to be credited in the text or at least a footnote, e.g. "the author acknowledges the significant contributions of John Q. Hardworker, Jr. to this paper". But whether this happens depends largely on how much priority the prestigious senior puts on it, and often editors will resist. In particular, if the editors feel they have scored a coup by getting Amy Y. Famous to write a paper on "Future trends in intradisciplinary factology", they may not want to dilute the prestige by an overly fulsome acknowledgement that implies it was effectively ghostwritten.
As others have said, you can't claim authorship for a paper where you are not a listed author in the "Publications" section of an academic CV. But you can -- and should -- mention it under "Additional research experience" or somesuch. For the purposes of job hunting -- when you are still fairly junior -- or grad school applications, it should be still be treated as very positive evidence of your ability to do and write about research. As you become more senior, for a while it will hang around your CV as a shoe-horned unloved stepchild as you build up more conventional publications. (Many of us have them, the "it-felt-like-a-great-accomplishment-at-the-time-but-I-didn't-quite-realize-it's-not-peer-reviewed" type of publication) You will eventually axe it from your CV once it's long enough for it not to matter.
I'd like to hope the "prestigious journal" in question isn't an academic journal, since if they are, they really ought to know better. So probably even you had been listed, it wouldn't have counted as peer-reviewed.
*I recognize from the perspective of academia, it is much more than "good form", it is an obligation. I'm deliberately using this weaker statement here to emphasize that the culture outside or on the boundaries of academia can be different.

Would it be acceptable (conventional, ethical, etc.) for me to list this publication alongside the others (for which I am listed as author) on my CV?

No.  If you are not on the author list in the publication, never imply that you are on the author list in your CV.  It's dishonest, even if you deserved to be on the author list.

Assuming that you really cannot be an author of this paper (about which I have doubts, see my comments), you cannot list it as a publication in your CV.
An alternative, ethical way of taking credit for your efforts would be as follows: You can have a separate section in your CV called "Additional research experiences". There you could mention this project and the tasks that you performed in it.
This would be worth more than nothing, but also less than a publication.

What does "producing the models" mean to you?
Did you choose something from a drop-down menu and massage the code a bit?
Or did you formulate a mathematical model entirely from scratch based on this person's verbal description of the relevant assumptions?
I grant it will be somewhere in between, but I am just sketching the end points of a continuum of possibilities. On the one end, you should just quit yer bitching, but on the other, yes, I agree you have been had, and if this is a structural/systematic problem in your organisation, you could try and bring this to the attention of its leadership.


text:
When to look for a new PhD position?
TL; DR: Should I re-apply for another PhD program? What could I do instead?
Since April, I am a PhD student in mathematics after having finished my master's studies last year. Although I spent most of my attention on doing abstract algebra doing my masters, I felt like shifting towards applied topics and found myself a PhD position in topological data analysis.
However, after having started to work, my enthusiasm has dimmed significantly in the last few months. It seems to me that I am dissatisfied with the following particular aspects:

The working group is extremely small. We do not have a research seminar or any lectures that are relevant or of interest for me. There is little exchange between the few people in our group, since everybody does something unrelated to the others' work.
I am somehow disappointed by subject: I have the impression that all the papers out there gather some more or less obvious statements, or sell things as new that are known to other fields since long time. I am uncertain whether I should expect any significant theory to be developed in the future.
My supervisor does not seem to have a particular idea where he wants to lead the research of his group. When I talk to him on what to work on, he usually comes up with some half-baked ideas that barely make some occupation for a day or so. When discussing a possible problem to work on, he quickly makes the conversation get lost in unimportant details, such that eventually I have no plan what to occupy myself with.
At the moment, I am working on some specific problem neither I nor my supervisor have the expertise for. To me, our approach seems rather non-mathematical. It is not what we have agreed upon when I applied what I would be working on; however, it seems that he has no ideas where to employ my knowledge.

These points make me wonder whether I should quit and apply for a new PhD position, or try to somehow cope with what it is like now. In the last months, I have worked on an article on some ideas from my master's thesis. With the temporal distance, these topics do not seem so frightening anymore, and by now, I can manage to identify with what I worked on at the time; hence, I would try to return to abstract algebra if I quit.
Questions: However, I now that I am an uncertain and insecure person, and in particular the third point makes me wonder if I am  qualified for pursuing a PhD:

Can I expect my supervisor to provide me with problems to start working on, especially if I am new to the field?
Should I consider myself unqualified for a PhD if I am not able to identify relevant questions and work on these completely on my own?
Should I expect things to improve when I relocate?
Is newly applying for other PhD positions the right strategy to deal with the above problems?

While this problem is very personal I can offer a bit of guidance rather than an answer to your problem. You have a number of things coming together to bring you to this state. However, it isn't a unique state and others have resolved it in various ways.
I suspect that your advisor is a bit inexperienced at this and is genuinely unable to give you the guidance you need. That isn't uncommon. Some doctoral students in math come up with their own problems and some advisors provide problems to students. I don't know which is more common, actually. I was once refused by a potential advisor who told me he didn't think he had the experience to guide me properly. But he got me connected to a (scary scary) senior professor and it worked out fine. That professor was full of problems he was more than happy to share.
Switching sub-fields isn't that uncommon either. Many students come to doctoral studies relatively "unformed", even with a master's degree behind them. But, working in a field that you like is a big help. For me it was an issue of insight. I had deep insight into classical real analysis and some aspects of topology. But actual insight into algebra was always hard for me. In analysis I knew what I could expect to be true before starting a study. I never had that sense in algebra.
No, you aren't a failure. Whether you stay or go, do it for a reason related to what you really want to do.
You may find a new situation to be similar or not, but you have some control over that. A more experienced advisor in a field you love, could be explored before you make any decisions. You can search for an alternative without making a prior commitment to actually change.


text:
Full scholarship and student advisor relationship
If a phd student is completely funded by an outside institution and don't cost the school or the university anything, what impact would that have on the student relationship with his advisor? Especially on things like interest on the student progress.

Generally agree with @jakebeal's answer, with a couple additional points: 1. I recommend you to edit your question to make it more specific. What aspects of the relationship are of most concern to you. Support and patronage of dissertation work? Attitude toward autonomy (ability to chart your own course through the degree by undertaking independent research)? Being less (or more) constrained by time (depending on duration or strings attached to financial support from the outside institution)?

The main effect of external support on a student/advisor relationship is that there is less external pressure for production of short-term results.  Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing depends strongly on the individual student and advisor.

With less pressure on the student, there is more freedom to develop a unique research agenda but also more opportunity to get "lost" in the possibilities and waste time.
With less pressure on the advisor, there are fewer boss/employee dynamics in the relationship and generally less strain, but also more opportunity for the advisor to be distracted by other short-term concerns.

A secondary effect is that the student may have less opportunities to be apprenticed in grant-writing, since their support is already assured.
In sum: with a good advisor and a student with a mature outlook, the freedom of external support is a blessing.  If either of those two ingredients is lacking, it can be a problem to lack the forcing functions of external support.

This makes sense if the alternative is support from the advisor's grant.  But what about the case, common in some fields, where the alternative would be support from the university?  In such cases I don't see why there would be pressure for short-term results.

@NateEldredge I don't have anything much to say about that case, because I have virtually no experience with it.

You have missed a strong factor. The funding from external institution  / grants is not eternal. Therefore the student will have to finish before the expiry date of the funding or continue the rest of his PHD probably unfunded.

@Alexandros, or help the advisor win a follow-on grant.

@Alexandros Bill's point is what I said about "opportunities to be apprenticed in grant-writing" since in the US, at least, there are few grants that are precisely aligned to a Ph.D.  I recognize that in Europe it more often goes in the other direction, as you say.

First off, having a PhD paid for by an outside institution is a big advantage for any PhD student.  This generally makes it much easier to gain admittance to a PhD program as you are essentially free labor.  Be sure your advisor can take advantage of this in a way that benefits you.
I've seen this situation most often when a company foots the bill for an employee.   If this is the case, be sure your advisor's work lines up well with what the company is doing.  You're generally expected to work for the company after graduation, so keep this in mind.
If you are lucky enough to get a full scholarship for the entirety of your PhD, skip to the next paragraph.  If not, keep reading.  Most PhD student "pay" for their education via GRA/GTA positions at the university, and by bringing in outside research grant money.  Many of these grants are called scholarships, and will only last 1 year.
If you are entirely funded from the outside, reach out to people you know who went to the school, and find a prof who has worked with people who are "self-funded".  Some profs are very happy to work within constraints that may be set by your scholarship, while other would prefer you be funded under their projects.

I am tempted to say that if the student is good, then the professor will push him/her to do more, and vice versa.
A professor's success depends a lot on the group's PhD students. Once a hiring decision is made, the professor doesn't really get reminded of who's footing the bill every day. Therefore the level of supervision would stay uniform across the board.
It is very much a semiotic relation, not a parasitic one.

Although each case is unique, my general sense is that advisors tend to care the most about (invest more time/effort into) students who are "their" students, in the sense that they are brought into the program to work with (be funded by) them, to conduct research within their general research field/agenda, and to adhere to their recommendations, including the approximate study plan and time to degree.
With this in mind, the more you can emulate this dynamic (align yourself with advisor in ways that minimize differences caused by independent support), the less awkward the relationship will be.


text:
Normal career path for lecturer in Computer Science
I'm 27 and looking for advice on the career path for lecturing in Computer Science. At the moment I have just started a job at a blue chip company in Software Engineering. However my prime goal is to become a lecturer.
My education background is a little sidewards in terms of fundamental knowledge in Computing (details in algorithms, memory, programming) as I have a BA in Graphic Design and a conversion Masters in Computing (which skimmed the subject).
I would be interested in pursuing a Phd in Computer Science focusing on HCI/ software engineering. However my concern is whether or not I have the confidence in the fundamental knowledge as I only achieved a Pass on my Masters.
So my question is, would taking a postgraduate diploma in Advance Computer Science benefit before fully undertaking a Phd?
Both courses would be undertaken part-time whilst working.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

What country? This sounds UKish.

Bill Barth's question is particularly important because (as far as I know) the meaning of "lecturer" is entirely different in the UK and the US.

Hi, yes sorry I'm in the UK!

I think that would depend on where and what you teach.  I've been a "computer science" prof for years because at the beginning of my career while working for a "dot com" I was asked to substitute for a class at a very famous design school and the instructor never came back.  Then I went to the department chair with a bunch of suggestions for things I thought they could improve in the program and they made me an assistant professor.  Then they put me in charge of the technical faculty.  Then they let me expand "coding" classes out into things like physical computing and HCI.  And because of this experience (teaching, curricular development, faculty leadership, not to mention panels and publications) I've been hired at other places, and go back and forth between industry and teaching.
It does sound like you're in the UK but I know a lot (most) schools in the US will hire people with very strong industry experience even if they don't have a Ph. D.  So while having a Ph. D. might be a clearer path to some extent, teaching gigs are competitive no matter what you do.  Working in the industry might not necessarily work against you!

This might be a bit harder to swing nowadays, with the field not being quite so new now.  Glad it worked out for you and your students, though!

Well, I don't know about that.  I think any program training someone in a job-related skill is going to grant a certain nod to people with actual experience over someone with only "pure" academic experience.  It's a selling point to the students for one thing, "Our professors are industry experts...."

A PhD can very much be tailored to your skills: there are lots of areas of research in computer science and your interdisciplinary background will likely help find you a niche.
Of greater concern is what sort of academic career you want. At some universities a "lecturer" is 50/50 teaching and research, at others it is mostly teaching. If you want to work at a research-led university, a PhD is crucial and you may be able to just teach the topics you research.
At a teaching-led university, your industry experience will be of benefit (as modules tend to be more practical, less theoretical), but with greater teaching load you may end up lecturing something you're less confident in. This is fine: you'll learn the subject well enough, and really the skill is in constructing a suitable environment to facilitate students learning the subject, rather than reciting everything you know. But if this is the route you want to follow, you might save yourself some stress later by becoming a bit more confident in the fundamentals now.

I'm not familiar with "postgraduate diploma in Advance Computer Science."  If you were in the US, I would say, don't spend a lot of money at this point, just take a few courses as a non-degree-seeking student.  You need to get deeply into the key undergraduate computer science courses, because you said you only skimmed computer science.
Getting admitted to a PhD program isn't the only hurdle.  We also want to make sure you have the requisite grounding in the fundamentals so as to have a good start in your PhD program.
When you're doing your applications for a PhD program, you can present whatever degrees you have, and also the individual non-matriculated courses you took after graduating, with transcripts for everything you studied.  They will be able to put the puzzle pieces together to get a full picture of you as an applicant.
(I'm assuming you have your own strong reasons for wanting to teach, so I'm just taking that as a given.)


text:
How do I refer to my own work in an anonymous abstract?
I am currently working on an abstract for conference submission. The contents of the proposed presentation build heavily on part of my master's thesis.
Since the abstract has to be written anonymously, however, I am struggling to find a good way to refer to the work I did in my thesis.
Some thoughts on a few options I had so far:

Although my thesis hasn't been properly published, simply pretending it doesn't exist feels weird and academically questionable.
I'm worried that, by citing it using my last name while making no connection to me as the author of the abstract, I would make it seem as if I did significantly less work myself, minimize the apparent impact of the presentation, and thereby drastically reduce the chances of getting accepted.
Referring to the previous work I did using "in my master's thesis..." seems like the best option so far, but citing work without providing author and title feels odd too.

Is there any established way of going about this?
In case that makes any difference, I am working in the field of linguistics.

Is your thesis "not properly published" because it isn't done, or because it's not peer-reviewed?

@AzorAhai-him-, there are other alternatives than just those two.

It is not finished yet and probably won't be before the abstract submission deadline. But it will most likely be done by the time the conference is held (October), and then be available only at my uni's library.

@schoekling Conference abstracts aren't that important in linguistics. I would just cite things as you did in your thesis. If it's a small conference, perhaps you could ask organizers to add it back in if/when you've been accepted.

Related: How can I cite my dissertation in a paper that will be double-blind reviewed?

@AzorAhai-him- I'm not exactly sure I can follow. How to "just cite things as you did in your thesis" when I obviously don't cite the thesis within itself?

I'm saying there's no real need to cite your thesis because you can presumably use the references therein in order to situate your abstract in the field.

@Anyon Thank you, that helped. Blinding the source seems to be more acceptable than I thought.

@AzorAhai-him- So go with my first option and only talk about the thesis in the presentation in case I get accepted?

@schoekling Yeah, although if it was me I would ask for the citation to be added if my thesis was available in case someone wanted to find it

Actually a reference that cannot be and never will be accessed equals no references.

I agree with Anyon. Blinded for review seems the way to go.

Don't lose track of the purpose of an anonymous abstract. It is there to provide double blind reviewing so that reviewers aren't influenced by the reputation of the author. They aren't intended for final publication and an edited version is what will appear if anything does.
You could cite your own work as by "this author" listing it as unpublished or to appear or thesis, etc. That is sufficient for review. If the abstract is eventually published, it will be in a form in which you correct those references.

Makes sense, thank you. Would you recommend including the title when citing under this author (unpublished)?

Sure. It is probably necessary.

You certainly shouldn't be removing relevant sources just for the purposes of blinding; you can just use standard techniques for blinding instead.  When I write an academic paper I just write it without any blinding and then at the end I make a "blinded copy" where I cover any references to my personal details or my own papers with [BLINDED], and also remove my own papers from the bibliography.  That gets the point across perfectly well without detracting from the substance of the material.  I have never had any complaints with this method.  Here is how you could do this in an abstract:

Do toads control the human race with their psychic mind-powers?  Adding to the experimental literature
Author: [BLINDED], Institution: [BLINDED], Email: [BLINDED]
Abstract: The present paper considers the theory that toads have extra sensory perception (ESP) and mind-control powers, first set out in McMahon (1901).  Later papers claimed that toads control the human-race with their mind powers, and were the cause of both world wars (see e.g., McMahon 1922, McMahon 1938, McMahon 1950).  Empirical evidence relating to this theory was examined in Tolio and Ribbert (1972), Tolio, Ribbert and Smith (1979), and Smith and Zhang (1988).  More recently, experiments comparing the hypothsised psychic powers of toads against a control group of young human children were performed in [BLINDED], and further experimental comparisons between toads and grasshoppers were conducted in [BLINDED].  In this paper we extend the experiments in these latter papers to compare toads, snakes, dogs, and horses.  We find further evidence that toads control the human race with their mind-powers.  We hypothesise that our toad masters have allowed us to publish this paper for various nefarious purposes.


text:
How to number figures inside footnotes
I cannot think of an instance where I saw a figure inside a footnote in any published work, but in my specific case it seems appropriate to put one there.
However, since this is a rather uncommon thing to do, I am not sure how to label the figure's caption.
As @Alan Munn also pointed out in a comment to this answer, it seems odd to include it in the normal figure numbering, since - at least in the field of linguistics - numbering for examples etc. is separated from the main text.
As shown in the screenshot below, the figures in the main text are counted within chapters (Figure chapter.figure:), and examples in footnotes are numbered with the common lowercase roman numerals.
I will only add one or two lines to this note and its contents are a typical case for footnote examples, which is why I do not want to include it in the main text. Really the only odd thing is the additional figure showing the pitch of said example.

Are there any typographic/academic/editorial standards for this?

I am not sure how to label [a figure that appears in a footnote]

Presumably the figure is relevant only to the footnote, otherwise it wouldn't appear in the footnote: Include the figure without numbering and without a caption, explain the figure in the footnote.


text:
Is this a predatory conference?
https://www.pagesconferences.com/physics/
I was invited despite never communicating with anyone in the committee, the email was not marked as spam though.

"Exploring the Innovations and Modern Break Through in the field of Physics." Can't tell if it's predatory or not, but it doesn't seem to put much effort into proofreading.

I don't think I've ever seen a serious conference advertised where the venue is just "Brussels". What are you supposed to do, wander aimlessly around the city hoping to bump into other people that look like lost physicists?

I wonder if email was not marked as spam is a valid indicator. They want your money; this takes some effort.

This conference has many hallmarks of predatory conferences.

Based on their webpage, the company is reportedly "running" at least 4 conferences on the same day in the same city with vastly different topics.
Each reported attendee's biography is plagiarized from a top Google search result. To confirm, copy and paste the biography into Google.
The abstract submission process does not detail any form of peer review.
The image of the conference attendees is the same on each conference webpage.
The domain of the conference organizer is registered to a proxy organization intended to obfuscate the true owner.
Other sources on the internet have questioned conferences held by this organization.


text:
Can I resubmit an unpresented conference paper to the same conference?
I submitted a paper to a major conference last year, it was accepted, but I had to withdraw from the conference before it could be presented. There is no proceedings for this conference. I am wondering the etiquette surrounding resubmitting the article to the exact same conference this year. Since the first submission, it has not been presented or published anywhere else.
Thanks in advance.

Considering the COVID-19 pandemic, most people would consider withdrawing from an in-person conference to be a smart and ethical move.  In this situation, it should be fine to resubmit.  If the conference is peer reviewed, you should draw the conference's attention to the resubmission so they do not waste time re-reviewing a paper.
Do not make a habit of withdrawing papers.

Plus 1. OP: while informing the conference convey the idea that "you will be very glad to finally present as for before it wasn't really possible".


text:
How to remove the "Text Overlap" comment from arxiv
Recently I have submitted an article in arxiv. But unfortunately, an indication of text overlap has been added in the comment section. It is to be noted that, the overlapped paper is also my other paper. Now I would like to remove that comment ("Text overlap"). Can I remove this comment by replacing this paper with a revised and corrected copy?

"Text overlap" is officially not a bad thing, so I suggest you do not try to remove the notice.  The appeal process is given here: https://arxiv.org/help/overlap

@AnonymousPhysicist I guess this depends on whether it overlaps with your own or someone else's paper.

Yes, updating the paper will remove the comment. (From the new version - it will still be there with the old version.)
Note that https://arxiv.org/help/overlap (linked by AnonymousPhysicist) also lists ways to avoid having such a comment added, by proactively pointing out the related work.


text:
Hiring a professor to review doctoral thesis
Where can I find a professor to review my doctoral thesis? My current professor has a turnaround of 5 to 6 weeks before getting back to me with suggested revisions. I was hoping to hire someone to give me quicker feedback and reduce the time my professor needs to review my doc.

Where are you making your thesis (what country), what domain (computer science is not the same as astrophysics) is your thesis about?

While I can understand the impulse, I'd worry that your advisor might be unhappy with your hiring outside assistance. Further, even in supposedly objective subjects (hahaha...) the approval/recommendations of an outside person are by far not guaranteed to meet approval with your advisor.

You are looking for a scientific editing service, not a professor.  There are several.

... a further comment: in my world, the back-and-forth of revision/edit/critique etc. is a big part of the educational/professionalization experience. To hire someone else to simulate your own professionalization is bad on many levels...

Do you know the old saying that you can have something done 1) cheap, 2) fast, and 3) good - but you can only pick two of three? That applies here.
There are not many professors available for hire for something like this. If you can even find one, I would suspect that they are not very good. Good researchers are generally busy people, who would not want to commit to proof-reading some strangers' thesis. Unless, of course, you are willing to pay a large amount of money. I am not at professor level myself, but I am qualified to read a thesis and provide comments. If you wrote and asked me, I would probably say no, because of the obvious ethical problems. But if I entertain the thought for a moment, I would ask my standard rate for external consultations which, depending on who is asking, is 2-300 €/hour. If you are willing to pay something like this, then it is a matter of sending someone you know to be good an email and asking. Expect many people to say no before someone accepts.

@Roland 5 to 6 weeks is the distant future. I'm unconvinced whether next week justifies a price hike. Tomorrow, in two days, sure.

@user2768 Asking a special rate for quick work can be justified  because you have to do something stressful (work quickly). In that case 5 to 6 weeks is probably distant future. The more important justification for a special rate for work like this is that a tight deadline puts a limit on the timing of the different tasks I must do and may preclude me from doing other things. Depending on how busy you are 5 to 6 weeks is often frighteningly close. If I have to give up on other task you'd better pay me extra.

@MaartenBuis Months are regularly given for peer-review. Is every reviewer so busy that they must plan ahead to squeeze in the review just before the deadline (or during the-month-or-so after)? Or, as I suspect, do many just do things just before the deadline? Sure, some can't get something done this week. At least, not without an incentive. Many will though.

Depends entirely on the nature of the time constraints. If I were to do something like this - which I stress again for the OP I would reject on principle - I would not want to read the full thing in one go, but rather ask for a chapter at a time, two weeks to read and provide feedback, then the next etc.
But sure, feedback on a full thesis with deadline less than a month would be difficult. I would not even entertain the thought - I don't have that much free time.

@nabla I suppose it depends on whether one accepts consultancy work and how much time can be devoted to it.

@user2768 - in my opinion there is a stronger ethical argument against this than most other consultant work.

@nabla I discuss morality in my answer. What are the obvious ethical problems you hint at?

@user2768 That a thesis is supposed to be written entirely by the student themselves. Incorporating paid back-door feed back, which would in all likelihood not be credited in the thesis, is borderline cheating.

@nabla I prefer to assume everyone here is honest

@user2768 Then clearly you don't do much consulting work...

@nabla I don't follow: I assume questions are asked in good faith. I assume the OP isn't cheating.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Where can I find a professor to review my doctoral thesis?

In your bibliography: You need a reviewer working in your field, so surely you must cite their work.

I was hoping to hire someone

A professor may feel they cannot morally accept payment from a PhD student  subsisting on a stipend. Some may be swayed by independently wealthy PhD students with the means to pay their consultancy rate. (Offering an hourly rate from the outset might entice such professors; you're merely offering a business transaction.) Others may reject on the principle that wealthy students shouldn't be able to buy an advantage. Both professors may cast judgement. It's unusual to hire a professor to review your thesis.
A professor you've collaborated with may be willing to (partially) read your thesis for free. But, you cannot demand a prompt turnaround and you should expect some delay.
Your peers may be willing to review for free too, especially if you offer to return the favour. Seek those you cite, work alongside (in your department), or those you've met (at conferences or elsewhere).
Finally, you might look for professional reviewing services that are widely advertised.

@Roland Many aren't: You have some decent editors out there. Many research manuscripts would benefit from their services!


text:
'Awaiting recommendation' on Scholar One before any review process
I submitted a manuscript to ScholarOne about 10 weeks ago. I'm aware of the typical workflow of a journal. There are two bullet points that have remained unchanged for about 8 weeks now - one saying 'awaiting reviewer scores' and the other saying 'awaiting recommendation'. From reading other posts, these don't seem to usually be said together - does it usually just say one or other? What does this mean?

The status that authors see is fully customizable, and depends on the actual workflow employed by the journal. What you are seeing generally indicates that there is at least 1 review task pending, and also a recommendation task pending. This is possible! For instance, let's say the journal assigned 3 reviewers, but only requires 2 to move on to the recommendation task. Since they are both now "pending", you could see both status's at the same time. Without specific information on the journal you are working with, I can't give you exact details on your situation. There are other possible scenario's.
Note: I am an employee of ScholarOne, but my posts and answers are strictly my own.