text:
Why is a PhD thesis typically 150 pages?
I just don't understand why the overall findings & implications of a PhD cannot be communicated in the style of a research paper?
Succinctness is a virtue in a field characterised by time pressure.
The research output is equal to or less than that of a 3 year postdoc - which is always communicated as a research paper.
Just seems like added embellishment for the sake of embellishment.
What am I missing?

What am I missing? A lot actually. The length of a PhD dissertation varies greatly by field, university, and department. My dissertation had 5 chapter: an Intro, 3 manuscripts chapters, and a conclusion. Also, during my postdoc I produced far more than a single publication. You're making field specific assumptions and generalizing them

The nature of a PhD thesis varies wildly from field to field and also country to country. Please make your question more specific.

Systems Biology in the UK

Out of curiosity, I looked for the largest digital dissertation file I have a copy of (something I could do easily and quickly), and David E. Rowe's dissertation Felix Klein, David Hilbert, and the Göttingen Mathematical Tradition is xxviii + 637 [= 665] pages (26.56 MB). Here's one I missed a few moments ago that is v + 632 pages (29.31 MB).

Quick answer: Because they are single column, double spaced with big font and big margins

I don't know where your 150 page idea comes from since I have never heard this as a guideline. However, in my field, "staple theses" are common, composed of roughly 3 papers stapled together (either already published or publishable drafts), with an added introduction and conclusion that tie the works together and may get a bit deeper into background than is acceptable in a published manuscript.
Therefore, they must be at least the length of three research papers, and aren't typically all that much longer than that. However, theses are also typically formatted in a longer form, more similar to the original word-processed manuscript, whereas journal articles are composed in a dense, newspaper-like format. Figures may have their own pages. In sum, a manuscript that is 10-15 published pages can easily be 30-50 pages in this format.
No embellishment necessary to get to 150 pages.
I'd also add that a post doc in my field who only produced 1 paper in 3 years would probably have their next job in industry; a graduate student with only one paper will have been quite disappointing (it may happen that only one paper is publishable due to being scooped or unexpected failures, but even those outcomes can be part of a thesis). Not necessarily, it's possible that paper could be highly impactful, and might be reasonable in some subfields, but generally that would not be a suitable output for an academic career.

Edit: decided to pull up my own thesis from the archives. 230 pages. Of those, 53 pages are "thesis-only" pages; the other 177 pages are verbatim copies from 2 published papers and a third draft manuscript which was later revised and published, all reformatted to fit the thesis formatting requirements. Of the remaining 53 pages of "fluff," 6 pages are title/contents/acknowledgements/abstract, and about 19 are references for the introduction/conclusion chapters, so about 28 extra pages of generously spaced writing, to be treated as "embellishment" if you wish, or alternatively, to provide enough background and context for the work for someone familiar with the field but not previously familiar with my research area, such as members of my thesis committee besides my advisor.
In summary, even if my thesis had nothing but 3 published/publishable manuscripts, it would already be >150 pages.

I recognise that PhD theses vary in length; however in general theses have a substantially higher word count than a research publication.

Number of papers as a marker of progress is annoying too. It is possible to publish 100 papers without changing the world in any meaningful way.

@AsymptoticTri Yes, they do, and my answer explains why, at least in my area, they would typically have at least 3 times as many words as a research publication, plus a few extra pages of context. I am also in biology.

It is possible to publish 100 papers without changing the world in any meaningful way — If changing the world in a meaningful way were a requirement for a successful PhD thesis, there would be very very very few PhDs, almost all awarded posthumously.

Succinctness may be a virtue, but page limits means that papers are often overly terse. They also commonly leave out important information, helpful steps, and additional but less eye catching results. The presentation and style of a paper is also often geared towards experts in a field, while you have more freedom to be pedagogical and explicit in a dissertation. Factor in a double-spaced one-column format and some front matter, and it's easy to get to 150 pages and beyond.
In fact, one of my papers during the PhD (physics) was five pages long when published, plus references (not counted in page limit). Six pages of supplemental material was deposited along with the paper, for a total of 11 pages. The corresponding chapter in the dissertation is 46 pages long, with some details still relegated to appendices... The main difference in presentation, however, isn't the length or layout - it's that I attempted to make the description more self-contained. A new graduate student may actually get a reasonable idea of the background and calculations from reading this chapter and the introduction. In contrast, there's no way the same grad student could get all details from the paper and be able to reproduce the calculations without following a bunch of references, well unless they already were an expert. And if you do read those papers, the amount of material to go through would quickly exceed 150 pages anyway.
Yes, many dissertations could be made more compact, but why? The dissertation is a rare opportunity where you don't have to compromise style or contents. It's an opportunity to provide an alternate description than already exists in preprints or published papers that can be useful to another audience. It's also a place where you can make deposit certain results, derivations, proofs or procedures that don't fit elsewhere in explicit form for later use by yourself as well as others. So if you want to write a shorter dissertation yourself, that's alright, but avoid judging others for trying to be more pedagogical than the journal paper form allows.

[quote]there's no way the same grad student could get all details from the paper and be able to reproduce the calculations without following a bunch of references, well unless they already were an expert[/quote]                                                                                Thanks Anyon, I found that explanation helpful.

@AsymptoticTri I'm happy it helped.

Your question includes a number of assumptions, which are not universal and may be simply wrong for some areas.

You probably know that John Nash had one of the shortest PhD theses with only 26 pages and 2 references. PhD theses of 300+ pages are also not unusual, particularly in humanities.
I would expect a postdoctoral researcher in Mathematics to participate / contribute to at least 1 paper per year. I know of colleagues in Engineering / Computer Science for whom this expectation seems very low - a postdoctoral researcher in their group would put their name on 3-5 outputs per year.

Number of pages, as well as the number of outputs, is an very poor metric of research effort and performance. Some universities may put an upper boundary on the number of pages to make sure that their supervisors are not overwhelmed with the amount of material they have to read and comment on during the supervision (after all, Universities want their staff to do a lot of work apart of supervising the particular student). I don't think that the lower boundary is very usual.
Having said this, there is definitely an expectation that a PhD theses should contain a detailed introduction and thorough literature review. After all, a PhD student  should study the area and then train themselves to become a professional researcher in this area. In contrast, a postdoctoral researcher is already expected to be trained and their work is only to do novel research. For a PhD student, a lot of emphasis is on studying the methodology, and writing about it takes time and a significant number of pages.
Finally, compare the number of references: a typical journal paper could have 30, while a PhD theses can easily have 300. This clearly shows that the scope of a PhD theses is much wider than the scope of an academic research paper, while a paper may be more focused and deep.

Papers also contain an introduction and literature review. Maybe I am expecting too much of a PhD student; it just seens that writing a 3-year study succinctly would prove the student had studied the area and trained to become a professional researcher.

@AsymptoticTri The content in the intro and lit review of a paper is nowhere near as detailed as those in a thesis should be. That's the whole point: the candidate needs to be able to show that they understand the breadth of the field and how their research topic fits into that, as well as give an introduction to the broad picture so that a non-expert could understand the thesis. Instead, papers show the depth of knowledge in a very narrow area.

Successful PhD student aren't merely "trained to become" professional researchers.  They are professional researchers.

That's what I think too Jeff. So why can't students communicate the PhD work as a paper instead of a thesis?

@JeffE From the moment when they start their program? --- no, not necessarily. When they successfully complete it? --- yes, sure.

@DmitrySavostyanov By the time they become successful.  That's what success means.

@AsymptoticTri Because, as many answers have already stated, their PhD work is usually more than can be effectively communicated in a single paper.  Or perhaps more to the point, because a single paper is usually considered insufficient evidence of being a successful researcher.

@JeffE I agree with you, but in my answer I was talking about the process of PhD program, not the end result.


text:
How can I serve my supervisor?
So I am hoping to study a higher scientific degree; research proposal created by myself.
Since - (i) the research interest will be mostly my own, although it will overlap with those of my supervisor (ii) I have experience of teaching and know how exhausting the responsibility can be - I recognise that this is not necessarily a good deal for my prospective supervisor.
And so for reasons - (i) self-interestedly I want to ensure that my supervisor is incentivised to accept my offer & to maintain a meaningful presence (ii) I can empathise with my supervisor & deem that situation unethical - I am brainstorming ways that I can serve my supervisor.
I would especially like to hear from members with direct experience of supervising graduate students although all advice is appreciated.
So far these are my ideas:
*The institution, department & supervisor inherit IP rights to the discovery
*Supervisor may publish the findings
*Offer to teach small group tutorials, lectures or 1:1 voluntarily
*Offer to complete admin duties for supervisor
*Offer to provide outreach for the department
What would really help you as a supervisor that a grad student can do?
Asymptotic Tri
P.S. I don't really want to give up IP rights

Can you please add some context information in your question: what is your current status and what would be the context of this research: internship, master, PhD? Knowing the country might also help. And why are you looking for such unconventional ways to work with your supervisor? Are they not interested in the topic of your research?

Hello, the context is PhD level study in the UK. The reason I ask is that I am keen to maintain as much academic independence and freedom as possible, I don't want to work on somebody else's question. However, I realise that I may need to compromise in order to add value. If I were a PI with multiple time commitmemts the last thing I would want is to supervise a grad student whose research interests are specific & not very closely aligned with my own.

You know many PhD students complain about a lack of supervision, it's probably a more common problem than lack of independence (although it's true that this can happen as well). As Buffy's answer nicely says, it's the supervisor's job to supervise, it's not a favour they do to you. If possible, I'd suggest you try to talk to the supervisor's current or past PhD students to get an idea of their style of supervision.

This may depend a bit on your field (CS), but in mine, none of that would be necessary. All of my students generally worked on their own doctoral proposals with only my advice on things like methodology and such. I made sure they were on track. They published under their own names and only mentioned me in acknowledgements, which was entirely appropriate. I would think that mathematics is just the same, but don't know about things like lab sciences or the humanities.
Your supervisor/advisor is there to serve you. It is part of her/his responsibilities to see that you do a good job, but not to take over any part of your life or intellectual work. Developing a good personal relationship with an advisor is very valuable, however.
If you have time for it, you might offer to help him with advising beginning graduate students in finding problems and such, provided that you have a lot of ideas. This would give you some valuable experience for an academic career and also could help build that personal relationship with the advisor. It might also lead to future collaborative work.

Thanks for the insight, I just don't see that there is much benefit for the supervisor in managing a PhD student, if the student's thesis is relatively peripheral to the PI's research interest. I can understand the benefit to the PI of supervising grad students if restricted narrowly to the PI's particular research interest. The benefit, in that case, is free labour; I don't want to labour, I want to think.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What should i do if my college refused to issue me a degree after paying off my debt?
I'm an African American. I had all my degrees here in the United States, my Bsc and my two masters degrees. Guess what? I was refused a diploma for my EMBA bcos i couldn't pay a just bal of $1050 on my student account. Of course it was "pay from the pocket option". I paid off the outstanding balance yet i could obtain my diploma because i did not apply for a graduation at the year i completed my program. Therefore, i was told my diploma will be dated current yrs (2 years after) despite i took graduation foto and attended the graduation ceremony. I'm still confuse i can be denied of my diploma even after paying off the balance. I'm in search of a lawyer who can help me with this case. Why will this college refuse to issue me a diploma stating the year i complete the course after paying off? As for the graduation application, i did sunmitted it of which i called their attention to check the email. Unfortunately, the school said they can not retrieve two years back email of a student. Can you imagine?
What should i do if my college refused to issue me a degree after paying off my debt?
 Pls i need your advice on this issue folks. Thnks

If you are talking to a lawyer, take their advice. Nothing here can help you. Your college rules are what they are.

This is not a place for legal advice. Try contacting the ones responsible at the university to make your case, if possible go there in person. Look for student representation, student counsels or something of the kind that might be able to help you.

Are they refusing to grant you a degree, or is it that degree conferral is delayed until the next semester?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is more of a legal question about the particulars of the case. Perhaps this can be migrated to Law.SE?

@jakebeal: Legal advice on specific cases is explicitly off-topic on [law.se].

@Wrzlprmft I see; not sure this belongs anywhere on SE, then.

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


text:
How to merge mendeley contiguous citations in body text?
I am writing a paper by using Mendeley and I want to cite many paper at the end of a sentence such as [1-5]. But when I have inserted the citations contiguosly, it seems like [1],[2],[3],[4],[5]. How do I change the appearance of citations from plural to single square bracket?

With Mendeley Citations Plugin, you should be able to highlight all of the citations that you wish to merge (as long as they appear next to each other) and then select the 'Merge Citations' option from the menu, next to 'Insert or Edit Citation', to bring them into a single citation/square bracket.

Thanks, I think this question and it's simple answer will be very useful for the community.

Update as of 2021. In the current version of Mendeley Citation Plugin, there is no option to select 'Merge Citations'. Here's what works for me on Mac:

Open the plugin in Word
Select citations that you want to merge together (there should be a yellow-ish box around each citation). Make sure they are as close together as possible (you can drag them around by clicking the ... icons on the top left)
Click on the this group of citations (may have to repeatedly click on it - it's a bit of a mystery to me) and a yellow "manual override" will pop up.
Manually enter what you want the text to be then click save change (hint: the default text tells you which citation has been selected)

Screenshot on Mac Word:

I found the citation style you are seeking for. If you go under the "Mendeley Cite" extension in Word -> "citation setting" -> "Change citation style" -> "search for another style", and look for "Journal of Construction Steel Research".
It is the modified IEEE style which auto merges sequential citation numbers.
Hope this helps others in the future.


text:
How do I learn to recognise what is worth publishing
I am a PhD student starting my second year of PhD. I don't expect any major publications to come out of this within the first year or so, but I often find myself wondering if something smaller - a measurement setup, comparison of simulation techniques, etc - is worth publishing or not.
On the one hand, my Promoter says that we as a research group should publish more. I get the feeling he doesn't say this purely from a publish-or-perish perspective - rather, we spend a year or two working on something to get one big publication from the high-ranking journals, but along the way we learn a lot of little things, or come up with new tricks for measurements - all of which could be worth sending to smaller conferences or journals.
Due to the personal self-image struggles I have, I find it very difficult to feel like my work is good or new or worth talking about most of the time. How can I improve my ability to see if something is worth sending in or not? Will this just come with experience?

You could discuss with your advisor, he may find that the idea of smaller papers interesting...

Although it is not direct answer to your question, however, worthwhile to read.

Presenting a major piece of new information in writing for the first time
Extending, qualifying or elaborating on an existing piece of work
Undertaking an original piece of work designed by someone else
Developing a new product or improving an existing one
Reinterpreting an existing theory, maybe in a different context
Demonstrating originality by testing someone else's idea
Carrying out empirical work that has not been done before
Using a different methodological approach to address a problem
Synthesising information in a new or different way
Providing a new interpretation using existing / known information
Repeating research in other contexts, for example, a different country
Applying existing ideas to new areas of study
Taking a particular technique and applying it in a new area
Developing a new research tool or technique
Taking a different approach, for example a cross- disciplinary perspective
Developing a portfolio of work based on research
Adding to knowledge in a way that has not previously been done before
Conducting a study on a previously unresearched area or topic
Producing a critical analysis of something not previously examined

Adapted from Phillips, E.M. & Pugh, D.S. (1994). How to get a PhD. USA: Open University Press.
www.services.unimelb.edu.au/academicskills

So only 5% (1 out of 20) of valuable publications are specifically about the new and innovative stuff. Sounds about right to me, though Edison (https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/12/14/genius-ratio/) has a much tighter figure.

I agree. The new and innovative research is purely based on reinterpretation of existing; unless you are a genius or close to genius supervision, it is nearly impossible to find new without 99% perspiration.

Broadly, ask yourself these two questions:

Is it new?
Is it something that people in your field would want to read?

The first question is very important and sometimes disheartening. If it's not new, it doesn't matter how interesting your result is, how difficult it was to obtain, or how well you present it. You say that you have difficulty feeling like your work is new, but (unlike whether or not your work is "good") this is something that you can and should unambiguously determine by reading the existing literature. Note that "new" doesn't have to mean "earthshaking". It can (and usually does) mean more modest novelty.
The second question helps you distinguish between many possible new things to try to publish. If the paper you're working on already existed, would you and your colleagues want to read it?  You can use the degree to which the answer is "yes" to decide whether or not you should spend your time on one publication as opposed to another.
To answer either question, you need to read a lot of the existing literature, and get to know the academic community you work in. So yes, experience is important. Your advisors are there to help you when you are starting out.

I would qualify the "is it new" statement a little bit. Replication is an important part of science and is finally gaining significant traction. Though the level of traction is highly field dependent.


text:
Getting a Phd abroad: is there any chance?
I am Earth Sciences major with post-graduate studies (Master) in the field of Geophysics/Seismology from Greece. In the last couple of months i am trying to find a PhD opportunity abroad in order to continue my research journey. I think i have built a pretty good CV for my level (and young age) with good grades, numerous poster presentations and 4 peer reviewed publications in well known journals in my field. Is it possible to find a PhD in a prestigious University abroad, based on a good CV with degrees (Bsc, Msc) from Greek University? Any advise or experience is more than welcome.
Thank You!

The only way to get a valid answer is to ask the universities you contemplate attending. Usually the best way is to actually apply. Nothing in what you say sounds like it would be a problem, of course. But the competition at "prestigious" universities is quite intense.

I'll also note that Greece is part of the Bologna Process, so within EU, there should be many opportunities. Elsewhere also, of course.

If you're considering the US as part of "abroad", keep in mind that most US graduate programs operate on a standard admissions calendar, with applications for fall admission typically due the previous December.

Would it be useful to approach via e-mail potential PhD supervisors?

I'd also separate the problems of "getting into a PhD program" and "being funded". In my location you can relatively easily get into a PhD program at a good university, while getting a scholarship can be much, much harder.

@JohnF yes, I think it would be useful to contact potential supervisors directly. You might not get an answer most of the time, but that will certainly increase your chances: a lot of PhD positions are not advertised (or not much), direct contact can put you in the loop for positions you wouldn't know about.

Getting a Phd [outside of Greece]: is there any chance?

TL;DR: Yes

I think i have built a pretty good CV for my level (and young age) with good grades, numerous poster presentations and 4 peer reviewed publications in well known journals in my field.

Many universities will accept PhD students without any publications, so - with 4 peer reviewed publications - you seem like a good candidate.* You don't say how good your grades are, PhD students will typically be amongst the top of their class.
*I cannot answer specifically for  Earth Sciences.

Is it possible to find a PhD in a prestigious University [outside of Greece], based
  on a good CV with degrees (Bsc, Msc) from Greek University?

Yes. You mention, during the last couple of months i am trying to find a PhD opportunity, has your search been unsuccessful? If so, why?

Yes, i applied to two different PhD calls. I received standardized e-mail rejections.

@JohnF two applications is not enough, you should probably target at least a dozen to get a decent chance overall.


text:
Including co-authored work in my thesis
One of the contribution chapters in my PhD thesis (computer science) is a work (paper) that I was actively involved in but the experiments (simulation etc.) was carried out by another co-author. After talking to my supervisor I decided to include this work as one of my contribution chapters but without the results (plots, etc.). Know I want to write a paragraph at the end of the chapter to justify why I did not include any results, clarify my contribution and also refer to the paper where they can find the results in and my name as a co-author.
1- Does this look like a good approach?
2- This is what I am planning to write:
The experimental results have been omitted from this chapter to maintain the originality of this dissertation as the experiments have been carried out by other co-authors. These results can be found in [paper x].

You seem to be concerned that inclusion of experimental results will mean your dissertation isn't original. Yet, you could include such results whilst alleviating your concerns. For instance, you could present experimental results and explain that those results were carried out by your co-author. You could also include a fresh analysis of those results or (with attribution) regurgitate existing analysis. This approach ensures your dissertation is self-contained and surely provides the reader with a better understanding.

Thanks @user2768, I prefer not to include the results as the co-author does not work in our institutions anymore and I have no access to them. I do agree that the term originality does not represent what I meant here. I'm just looking for a better way to clarify my contribution to the work and also justify why the results are not here.

@Thestruggler I don't understand why you'd prefer not to include because the co-author does not work in our institutions anymore and I have no access to them. The co-author not working at your institution doesn't seem pertinent. Not having access might be problematic, but you surely have access to LaTeX source. If not,  surely you can get it. Perhaps what's published will do. Regarding the term originality perhaps your concern is: your dissertation not being entirely your own work. Regarding justify[ing] why the results are not [included], I don't think that looks like a good approach

Many universities have rules about the originality of dissertations. While these are often ignored, I don't see any reason not to use these rules to justify what the author wants to do anyhow. The research is available in a paper, and so it can be left out of the thesis without fears that the reader might think there the author is hiding something.

@PeterShor I hadn't considered that the reader might think the author is hiding something. I'm concerned with self-containment and understanding, both of which I think will benefit from including experimental results (with clear attribution). (University guidelines should of course be followed, if they exist.)

@user2768: no thesis is ever truly self-contained ... they all build on previous work. Ideally, every scientific article should tell a story (although for theses, there are often several stories, one for each chapter). The real question is: do these experimental results add or detract from the story that the thesis is telling. I can imagine each of these alternatives being possible.


text:
Recent competition in mathematics in European Ph.D. positions
I am a student from India and I have been trying to apply for PhD positions in pure mathematics for a few months now. After having many unsuccessful applications and discussing with a lot of my peers, I think the competition is an all time high. Here are some of the statistics for the places where I applied :

87 applicants for 1 position at University of Gothenburg
75 applications for 4 positions at Vienna School of Mathematics
A number of applications for 4 positions at University of York (where I got interviewed but eventually rejected)

and many more....
It feels like the acceptance rate everywhere is less than 5 to 10 %. If this is the situation for these universities, I wonder how is it for places like Bonn, Oxford, Cambridge, ETH Zurich etc.
Is there a particular reason why PhD positions in pure maths have become crazy competitive in past couple of years?
P.S. The situation for US universities is similar as well.

Unfortunately, theoretical research is increasingly less valued, except in obviously hot topics. There is not much you can do, except for keeping improving and open your mind to other but the top schools.

I don't think your numbers are any kind of proof that the competition is at an all-time high.

It's not a sudden thing. Numbers have slowly been going up year after year.
With a quick internet search, I found some statistics from Duke University (USA) showing the number of applicants growing from about 220 per year in 2013 to over 400 per year in 2023. The number admitted is pretty consistent at about 30 each year.
The most likely explanation that I can see, is that there is a similar growth pattern for the number of undergraduate applicants. The COVID-19 pandemic has some effects too such as hiring freezes for faculty and people delaying graduation. However, the steady growth in applicants can be observed before the pandemic too. (You can see about a 50% increase in the number of applicants at Duke from 2013 to 2019.)

I just want to note that just from the increase in the number of applications one cannot conclude whether more people in total are applying relative to the number of spots or whether a roughly stable number of people is just sending out more applications per person than in the past.


text:
Is it necessary to publish a research paper while pursuing MS?
Is it necessary to publish a research paper while pursuing MS Degree in the field of Computer Science. Will not publishing one affect your job prospects?

The first question depends on your university's requirements. I think that it is sometimes required, but not universal.
The second question might also depend on what sort of job you are interested in. Most jobs for MS graduates aren't especially research oriented, so, while it would be a plus, it might not be essential.
But if your future is in academia, it is good to get started on research as soon as you can.
I you have an advisor, consult him/her for advice on what you want to do in your future.

I am actually more focused towards a job and not planning for further studies


text:
Alternative citation index for papers with 600+ citations?
I have a memory of seeing an alternative citation index being defined, being the number of papers with more than 600 citations. In other words, something like the i10 index, but with i=600 instead.
The way I recall it, this was more or less tounge in cheek, but I think it was used by some people in the computer animation community (e.g. Ronald Fedkiw). Now, trying to look it up, I fail to find any references to this index.
Does anyone else recall seeing this, or am I mistaken?

You defined the citation index in your own question. If you feel like using it and you think it makes sense, you can just use it. It certainly is not common.


text:
Trying to find out whether my advisor is ignoring me
So the story is something like this:
Week-1: My advisor meets me. We have a chat. Then he explains me about his time management style. I said okay.
Week-2: No email replies to anything.
Week-3: I make all pdf's ready, presentations ready, keeping in view of time management. The advisor meets me this time is very delighted of the preparations and says to keep it up. He is also pleased with the work I have done.
Week-4: No email replies to anything.
Week-5: I get to know another parallel group had a meeting and I get a reply back that he is busy with some personal things. He also told maybe he can meet tomorrow.
I am getting a feeling that my advisor is trying to ignore me and I don't have guts to go ask them directly. Is my advisor really ignoring me? I am confused. And thanks in advance for answering the question.

Maybe just busy. You probably aren't his only responsibility.

Had a lecturer that was tough and unapproachable in our first year... but by halfway through the second year he was different as if you got that far you showed some promise so worthy of his effort. A tough stance, but with a large intake in the first year and a large dropout rate understandable. The final year - his door was open at all times whether you needs 5 minutes or an hour - lectures took priority though.

From my experience, you need to think about incentives not intentions when it come to people in academia. Your advisor incentive is to do their work first. One can say, that it should be their good intention to help, but that is rare. In conclusion, dont rely on advisor too much. Listen to him/her, but otherwise the responsibility is up to you. I know this may sound harsh, but dont worry, academia is not that complicated and after few trial/errors, you will be good  to progress on your own.

I doubt that he's ignoring you, he's just busy. My best advice is not to take it personally because you never know what's going on in someone's life...


text:
Finding a PhD scholarship with a Second Class Lower Honors
Hi I and a Student from Sri Lanka and I do have 2 Bachelors degrees one with a Class (2nd Class Honors) and another General degree. However I do wish to enroll to a PhD program, possibly in Australia. Is it possible to do so. I have studied mainly in the stream of Cyber Security.
I tried with applying for a few Universities and some hadn't replied as well. However one of my colleagues had received a scholarship for PhD with the same results.
Can anyone explain the feasibility of the things that I have mentioned about?

What does 2nd Class Honors mean? Googling suggests it is a UK term and there's an upper 2nd Class Honors and a lower 2nd Class Honors. One answer (https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/134656/22768) to the question  assumes you have low second class, but I don't see evidence in the question that that's the case.

@user2768, it's mentioned in the title, but not in the body of the question. One of the OP's comments also mentions this, and what looks like a GPA score.

@Emma Missed that! I don't know why users don't make questions easy to read...

I think this question is too narrow, but if it could be generalised, it can be a very useful one. "How to get a PhD position with low undergrad scores?"

Do you have research experience? I don't know about Australia, but in Sweden, with most professors, a good MSc thesis will be far more important than grades. Coming from Sri Lanka your university will be mostly unknown, so that does plays against you.

Yes I do have one, which got published in a conference. However rather than that I didn't have anything tbh :-/

Unfortunately with your record. you have zero chance of getting an international student scholarship from Australia (formerly called "IPRS" and now "Australian Government Research Training Program International Fee Offset Scholarship").  Best to be realistic about this from the get go.
Equally, I cannot think of any academic who would be likley to provide a scholarship based on your record (low second class) and no evidence of research potential.  If you have a friend who did so, I think there must have been extraordinary circumstances (e.g. research publications) or else it was a very low tier university.
The only possibility you have is to get funding from Sri Lanka and then try to find a supervisor in Australia who will accept you.  This funding needs to have two parts - (1) money to pay the substantial fees that Australia charges overseas students and (2) money to support you living in Australia which is not cheap even living the student life.
The reality is that you are competing with people who have evidence of research capacity.  This comes usually through published papers.  If you have not done any research that is publishable in the past the options are to work in the literature and produce a review paper on a topic of broad interest.  This is a path that I have seen used successfully in the past.  Alternatively do you volunteer in a research lab, do you have experience in research procedures that you have developed through spending time in a research lab?
Without some evidence of a capacity for research, it's hard to be at all positive about your chances of achieving your goal.
Sorry to blunt!
Best wishes

At many universities a 2-2 is below even the entry requirement, let alone a scholarship.

Thank you for your answer. I do have a final year research publication but not in a journal though. However thanks for being realistic

You probably have two options for Australia at least. One is more likely than the other:
Apply for an RTP (Research Training Program) formerly known as an APA (Australian Postgraduate Award) which is funded by the Australian federal govt. However, I have only included this as an option for the sake of completeness. These are highly competitive and based on research potential. At this stage of your academic career, assuming you have no publications, this will more than likely boil down to your GPA. I guess you have to be in it to win it though. This requires residency or citizenship.
The other, more likely approach, is to find a potential supervisor with similar research interests who has funding either directly from the university through a named scholarship, or is in receipt of funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC). You can find the names of these researchers directly on the ARC website. Visa requirements here are just that you have the right to pursue tertiary education. It has probably changed since I did it. But, for what it’s worth my visa was subclass 457.

I'm guessing the questioner is an international student.  If I'm not wrong, both of your suggestions require a student to hold permanent residency or citizenship.

Well actually, yes the RTP requires residency. The others do not and only require a postgrad visa. This is how I got my PhD. I’ll update.

Yes I am an international student :)

The Second class Honors is actually a Second class Lowe div Honors. 3.15/4.00


text:
Naming of subchapters which deal with same topic in different case
Is there any naming convention or strategy for subchapters, if they are about the same phenomenon but observed within a different case?
Let's say my structure looks as follows:
4.1 Usage of Software-as-a-Service
4.1.1 Usage of Software-as-a-Service at Company A
4.1.2 Usage of Software-as-a-Service at Company B

How should one select the titles for a thesis?

How should one select the titles for a thesis?

It is rather repetitive to use structures such as
 4.1 Usage of Software-as-a-Service
 4.1.1 Usage of Software-as-a-Service at Company A
 4.1.2 Usage of Software-as-a-Service at Company B

I suggest something less repetitive, e.g.,
 4.1 Software-as-a-Service
 4.1.1 Case study: Company A
 4.1.2 Case study: Company B


text:
Allowed help in thesis
If you write a thesis, is it legal to ask somebody if things you did are correct in the thesis? When it's my own work and this person says, everything correct, there shouldn't be any problem, right? When does plagiarism start?

What kind of "thesis"? Original research, or a learning exercise? Are you working with an advisor?

This isn't a "legal" issue anywhere that I can name. It has ethical, but not legal, implications.

From a publication point of view:
In general, this is nothing else than peer review and totally fine.
As long as the other person only tells you "all good", or "this here doesn't look good, maybe rewrite it so that X is more clear", that is no problem at all. If the other person writes the whole new version for you, that is obviously not good. Either way, this wouldn't be plagiarism in this case. Plagiarism means copying from a different paper/book/source without properly mentioning it. What this would be is someone else writing (part of) your publication without getting mentioned. That is at least as bad as plagiarism, but it is something else.
Depending on the level of help you got, consider mentioning the other person in the acknowledgements.
From a university point of view:
A thesis isn't completely the same as a paper, so here, other rules might apply. At some universities, you have to sign that you didn't use any sources or help apart from the ones clearly mentioned and cited. Thus, rules might be stricter here. While I would not worry about, say, a math major getting feedback on their English grammar by someone who has no idea about math, as soon as the one reviewing your work is from the same field and/or also gives feedback regarding content, this is something that should be cleared with your advisor first.

My answer will complement that of user Dirk, but partly counter it. Yes, you need to follow the stated rules of your university. But ....
In most larger universities, students get a lot of help on their theses, not just from their advisor, and not just on their writing style. In both of the graduate (R1) institutions at which I studied I was part of a (mathematics) research group in which ideas were freely shared. The groups held weekly seminars for discussion and sharing. We would make suggestions to one another and get advice from the faculty members of the group. No one ever suggested that I wasn't sole author of my dissertation or the paper that resulted from it. My advisor was acknowledged, of course.
So, I doubt that the sort of "help" you got would be considered wrong, though the formal rules apply. You didn't ask for, or get, corrections to your work if your statements are accurate.
I think such research seminars are a marvelous thing. The insights that led to my dissertation were mine, though I suspect that my advisor had them in parallel also. The "help" from the seminar didn't lessen the quality or value of the research experience. In fact, it is how real researchers in the real world actually work. It would be foolish to lock yourself up in an office until you produce a paper with no outside consultation. Research activity would stop.
And plagiarism is only using someone else's work without attribution. I don't see it as having any bearing here. And, as I said in a comment, neither is it a legal issue.
Note, for the record, that my Erdős Number is 2. We value collaboration in mathematics and related fields.

Certainly where we are it would be seen as very poor practice for your supervisor not to have read and commented on your thesis, and in certain circumstances might be considered negligence on the part of the supervisor.


text:
Can a person taking their undergraduate degree in humanities, apply for a masters in scientific fields?
can humanities students apply for masters in the sciences or must they take a second undergraduate degree in the sciences if they choose to study in a different field?

Are you still in your bachelor's? What country?

@Azor Ahai Yes, In the US

You can apply to any course you wish. Getting accepted is a different question.

This is quite possible in the US, but less so elsewhere, as the undergraduate program is quite different here than in, say, UK or Germany.

Check the stated requirements of the program you're interested in. There's no easy answer.
Example: if you're interested in a Masters in Biology @ Harvard Extension School, then you're in luck because their website says:

Eligibility: Before enrolling in any degree-applicable courses, you need to possess a four-year, US regionally accredited bachelor's degree or its foreign equivalent. You cannot already have or be in the process of earning a master's degree in biology or related field.

So you should be in the clear. However if you want to do Aeronautics and Astronautics @ MIT, then:

You must have a strong background in mathematics and physics, and, with rare exception, familiarity with an engineering discipline. In some cases, unfulfilled entrance requirements may be satisfied during your first year of graduate study. If you're radically changing fields, advanced study before applying is recommended. You should also address your reasons for changing you field when you are writing your Statement of Objectives, a very important part of our graduate application.

It's up to you to assess if you have a strong background in mathematics & physics from your humanities degree, and if so, to convince the admissions people.

Since the OP is currently in their bachelor's, I would recommend - if they don't want to change majors entirely - to squeeze in as many relevant science courses as they can. No master's will take anyone who took 0 relevant calsses.


text:
Contacting professors for PhD supervision past the formal application deadline of the university in USA
I am interested to do PhD under the supervision of a renowned professor based in the USA. But, I have missed the formal PhD application deadline for the university.
Is it possible to do PhD in the USA by directly contacting the Professor requesting supervision and also mentioning motivation of the PhD, past research experience and academic performance in this email (things asked in a formal application)?

In the US this would certainly be unusual and at many universities, impossible. Admission to doctoral programs is done by a committee and there are cost implications for admitting a student. Space is needed, if nothing else. An individual professor, most places, has little control over that.
You can ask, of course, and there is no issue with exploring options with the professor.
But in the US there is more than research involved in a doctorate. There are, at least, qualifying exams. And most students require advanced coursework in order to pass the exams. This normally occurs before the serious dissertation research begins, or at the earliest stages of exploration. Many students don't choose an advisor until they pass comps, since failure means you will be asked to leave.
But, another option, provided that you are good enough is to state your case and show that you are a worthy "independent researcher" who wants to work with the professor now on some ideas and that you will be applying later to the degree program. Some professors might find that interesting, others not. It might depend on where they are in their own career and how generally busy they are with their normal duties.
And, I'm going to guess that you aren't alone in this wish and that your query might just get lost in the mass of others. Think of a "renowned professor" as a kind of magnet for such interest.


text:
What do I do with extra ECTS points?
I did an exchange semester and a few other extra curricular activities and ended up with a few extra credit points.
Can I do anything with them or are they basically useless?

This depends on the rules of your country/university. Basically, the uses are the following:

When your director of studies allows, they count for mandatory or optional courses in your studies.
They can be used to proved that you studied enough - e.g. to be allowed to stay a student or for financial benefits for which you have to be a student to receive them. Or also to justify the finanical help you received for your exchange semester.
They can be used to prove that you studied much - you might be eligible for stipendia if you took a lot of courses (most likely, you need good grades for them too).

Other than that, you might have learned something. Whether or not this was worth the effort can only you decide.


text:
How can a Poli Sci undergrad with a CS minor improve their chances for a CS masters program?
I'm a PS undergrad with a minor in CS that's 22 credit hours and covers most, if not all, masters pre-reqs that I've seen. The only issue I forsee is that I will only be taking one semester of calculus.
I'm only a sophomore, but I have a 3.78 GPA and I believe I will maintain it at minimum above a 3.5.
I go to a school with an incredibly strong engineering program (where CS is housed), and although I've realized I want to pursue research in CS and/or work as a programmer, it's incredibly difficult to switch into engineering at my school if you did not start in it.
So, with a major in PS and a 22 hour minor in CS covering most essential topics, what can I do to stand out from other non-CS applicants?

In my experience, those who come from non-CS undegraduates to CS grad studies are often missing some key things, and having those things will definitely help you succeed:

Know graphs back and forth. Make sure you're comfortable with the main terminology (edge, path, degree, connected-component, bfs, dfs, cycle, etc.) and the main operations on them. They are literally everywhere in CS. Other discrete math will help (especially sets and relations), but graphs really are key.
Make sure you're comfortable with induction. A discrete math class might help with this, but even if you don't know number theory or combinatorics or relations, induction pops up everywhere in CS, and knowing it will help.
Make sure you've taken a Systems class. Concurrency, threading, interrupts, caching, memory management, etc. These are hard concepts to wrap your head around, and they can pop up in many places. Knowing these could save you weeks of debugging slow or incorrect parallel code, and in this day and age you're probably going to have to do something in parallel.
Make sure you know basic software engineering. I've seen plenty of people who can write correct code, but it is terrible to read. Learn about functions, classes, modules, etc. Learn to document your code. Learn to separate your code into functions and modules, so that you can share it and maintain it.
Knowing a bunch of languages isn't the most important thing, but I'd make sure you know the basics of at least two languages from different programming paradigms. For me, the main paradigms are Typed Imperative (C, C++, Java, Go, C#), Untyped Imperative (Python, Ruby, JavaScript, PHP), Typed Functional (Haskell, ML, Elm, F#), Untyped Functional (LISP, Scheme, Racket, Clojure, Elixr), and Logic (Prolog, Datalog, Mercury, miniKanren). Basically, you want to avoid going into grad studies thinking there's only one way to program. Once you've got two significantly different languages, picking up more shouldn't be that hard.

More "practically oriented" classes are tempting, because they seem, well, practical. They have fun hands-on projects with flashy results. But knowing the fundamentals will make it possible for you to teach yourself things in graduate studies, and once you're into grad studies, you will be teaching yourself new things every single day.

In the US this should not be a problem, provided that your studies will continue here. The undergraduate program is always very general and you have taken enough courses to be able to make a serious claim that you can be successful. Taking a bit more math might be helpful, but discrete math or statistics might be as big a help as more calculus. Maybe even better.
And, I hope that  your CS courses go beyond just programming. I assume that it does since the school has a designated minor.
I think you will be in pretty good shape. Just build up a reputation for success and hard work. Make contact with a few professors/mentors so that you get good letters of recommendation by people who can predict your future success.
Switching fields of interest after a BS/BA is very common in the US, so is more likely to be accepted and properly evaluated.

That's why I really appreiciate American mode of higher education that accommodates students from diverse backgrounds. But some EU countries(especially Germany) are quite strict with major&courses matching, which is a staple gripe for me


text:
Five handling editors changed in a span of 1 month. What could be the reason?
The submission system shows the name of editor assigned and the name has changed 5 times till now. Its been a month since submission. what could be the reason and does it say anything. Its a mathematics journal.

Most likely it means all the editors invited have declined to handle it. For example, the person most appropriate declined for whatever reason (too busy, sick, etc), and all the others don't feel confident enough to handle it.
In any case there's nothing to do except wait.

Probably they are too busy because of the pandemic, in particular.


text:
Are these responses from top journals just boiler plate? or anything atleast miniscule to salvage from them?

thanks for submitting your paper to XXXXX Journal. It is an explicit
and interesting analysis of a natural problem. However, in my
opinion, it does not reach the level of XXXXX Journal. I therefore
have decided not to pursue the evaluation process in order not to
delay the publication of your paper elsewhere.
Please don’t take it too bad, XXXXX Journal receive a lot of very very
strong submissions in every aspect of mathematics and we publish only
700 pages per year, so we have to make some hard choices.
Best regards, XXXXX (Editor-in-chief)

Dear Professor XXXXX,
The XXXXX Journal of XXXXX recently received a very large number of
submissions.  We are also attempting to reduce our publication
backlog. Consequently, the editors are unable to consider every
manuscript for further review.  So we regret to inform you that we
will not be able to publish your manuscript.
We hope that you will submit your paper to a more specialized journal
where your work may be more fully appreciated.
Sincerely,
The Editors XXXXX Journal of XXXXX

Are both of these are just boiler plate or anything to salvage from them. I must say both are really top journals in mathematics.

This is a duplicate of another question you asked. The answer is the same.

@DanRomik almost same. But here they are explicitly suggesting to look for a less choosy journal?

@user102868 it’s very easy to take an existing question and make a microscopic change to it and then say it isn’t a duplicate. I understand that you feel the situation is different, and in a way it is, but as I said the answer is the same, and as a general rule I don’t think it improves the quality of this site to have people posting every referee report they get and asking for explanations of what it means, when the answer, to a high degree of accuracy, is always the same: it means what it says, nothing more or less.

By the way, whether it’s boilerplate or not is irrelevant. Even if it’s boilerplate, it represents the exact content of what the editor wanted to communicate to you. So again, asking other people to read the tea leaves and guess what additional meaning lies hidden in the text is a futile exercise.

DanRomik agree. I am not trying to justify my question. I was completely unaware  of my old question.

I just wanted to know how experienced people percieve this. I am not trying to decrypt anything. I take their remarks honestly.

I think you should treat them as honest statements. They may be boilerplate, of course, since journals often get more submissions than are possible to publish on any reasonable time scale. They therefor have such "boilerplate" ready to ease the editor's work.
The first implies something lacking in the paper itself wrt the standards of that journal, though the paper may have merit otherwise. The second doesn't necessarily imply the same.
But, an exceptional paper, by their standards, would probably be put into the process.
As they suggest, move on with the paper and try for a different venue. Alternatively, improve it dramatically and try again.

The second doesn't necessarily imply the same. - Still I would interpret them as saying the same thing.  To me the only difference is that the 2nd is more professional, both in tone and in grammar.  (That said, I completely agree with your answer.)

I am taking them honestly. I just wanted to know if my interpretation was right.

They are just varying species of boilerplate, absolutely. Either automated or not. Almost nothing can be gleaned from them, coming from "high status" journals. In particular, thinking in terms of rewriting and resubmitting to the same journal is probably misguided and a waste of your time and effort.


text:
Can I add a link to my ORCID Id in the statement of purpose?
Is it a good practice to add a link to the orcid ID in the statement of purpose for a PhD admission application?
Also can I add a link to my published paper? Can I include an abstract as well.

ORCID is just an identifier used to tell if two people are the same person or not.  In your application there is only one applicant, so there is no purpose for an ORCID.

Your ORCID would be better off placed on your CV, either next to or below your name. You can certainly cite your published paper in your statement of purpose, if it is relevant to the work you want to pursue in your PhD. You should also list your publications on your CV. It might be worth looking at the websites of a few professors in your field, to find examples of how they structure and format their CVs.


text:
Being in "reviewer invited" state for a long time before changing to "under review" : Is this a bad sign
My paper was in "Reviewer invited" state for close to 7 months and recently changed to the status "Under Review". Why did it took 7 months for a reviewer/reviewers to accept to review, or find one who accepted? Is this generally a bad sign? and how much time it may on the "under review" state? Is it recommended to wait further for the review process to complete? Its an inter disciplinary math journal, to which both engineers and mathematicians contribute.

It's a bad sign in the sense that the editor handling your paper is not very active, but not a sign that your paper is going to be rejected.
The difference between "reviewer invited" and "under review" is simply that in the second case, at least one invited reviewer has agreed to review it. So your manuscript is one step closer to a final decision. The bad sign stems from the fact that it really shouldn't take seven months to find a reviewer. It is possible that there are benign reasons for this, e.g. perhaps the editor handling your paper retired and left the editorial board, but the most likely reason is simply procrastination.
It's not possible to tell how long it'll take for the reviewer to finish the review, unfortunately. Whether to wait it out or to withdraw and submit elsewhere is up to you. If you choose to submit elsewhere, know that you'll be starting from zero (and it might take them seven months to find a reviewer too ...). If you choose to do so anyway, tell this journal quickly so they can save everyone's time.

The status “reviewer invited” implies that your manuscript has cleared the initial screening and your paper will be sent for peer review. Finding reviewers usually takes some time as reviewers are busy researchers themselves.
Also, potential reviewers may decline the invitation, in which case the editor will have to begin looking for more reviewers. The reasons for declining may simply be too much workload or others, not simply disliking the paper.
Once the requisite number of reviewers has been assigned, the status will change to “under review.” You can wait for some more time to see if the status changes. I'm not too sure, but the number of reviewers probably varied, so you may simply have needed a lot of reviewers.
The time frame for review is around 3 weeks or so based on what i've seen based on some looking around. Then you might have a decision made, which might be a short round of reviews.
It may simply have been a month timelag in updating the listing, and simply difficulty in finding people in quantity (and probably expertise imo) to review the paper. I doubt it is an inherently bad sign, but do write to the editor, after all 7 months is a long wait. Best of luck with getting it published.
I would also check here and here.


text:
Graduate Internship - Collaborating with other divisions
I managed to get a 4 month internship (during my PhD) in one of the major US national labs. I'm really enthusiast of this experience and I would like to get the most out of it, both in terms of knowledge and formation as well as in networking with colleague. In fact, I believe this is fundamental to eventually continue my experience at the lab with a postdoc.
My question is very simple. Do you think it would be clever to network with other divisions besides mine? There is a group, with which I'm already in contact by mail, and who study the same things I'm doing in my PhD.
My idea is to proposed them a sort of "pro bono" collaboration (since I'm already paid by my division), helping them in my free time as an extra activity.
I have two question in particular:
1- do you think that it would be appreciated? Or will I sound as an annoying climber?
2- do you think it could upset my first division? (provided that I'll give them full priority, doing parallel activities ONLY in my free time)
Thank you all in advance for your advice!

1- do you think that it would be appreciated? Or will I sound as an annoying climber?

No, I personally would not think that. Instead, I would appreciate your initiative and passion.

2- do you think it could upset my first division? (provided that I'll give them full priority, doing parallel activities ONLY in my free time)

Here it comes the important point. It is ok to collaborate with other groups but you should ask your supervisor first. Even if we are talking about your free time it could still sound very shady to work with other people without saying anything. When you ask this to your primary division, you can say what you said to us "I would like to collaborate with lab X in this way to improve my CV, for networking [...] HOWEVER, I will give full priority to your tasks [...]"


text:
Do I have to write GRE to apply to physics PhD programs in the US?
I'm doing my Masters in GRAPPA at University of Amsterdam now and I want to apply to multiple places for PhD after I'm done.
However, the applications in US confuse me. Some say they want GRE scores, some don't and some say it's optional even. And since I'll be applying to some places in Europe as well, I don't want to write GRE and Subject GRE if it isn't that mandatory.
I'm sorry if this might be a duplicate question but any link/explanation would be helpful.

You mention duplicate question, so which other questions have you read / considered already?

@SolarMike I haven't read anything here particularly but I almost assumed that this is probably a frequent question. I found other similar websites discussing this but none of them were very helpful.

A quick search on here gives : https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/33023/72855  and that's only one of many which might, or might not, help you...

My experience has been that GRE scores are typically needed to get into Grad School. That is, when going from either a Bachelors to Masters or directly from Bachelors to PhD. However if you already have a Master's, then I would think that the result of that Masters program would be much more relevant, and hence I doubt that many places would really require the GRE. However, every place is different and there definitely could be schools that still require it

@bremen_matt Yeah, that's the problem. There's no fixed rule so I think it's just better to have everything. That seems better than my application not being considered at all.

Doing the GREs is going to be a hassle. It is something you should prepare for for a few weeks ahead. Then you will have to find a place to take the test, and pay a lot of money. If I were you, I would contact the schools that you want to apply to and explain your situation.

@bremen_matt Yeah, it's definitely going to be a hassle. There are no test centers in the Netherlands which means the nearest test center is either in Germany or France.
Another problem is that I've lost touch with some areas of Physics since I'm doing a very specialized course now. So writing the Subject GRE will also not be as easy.
But I think that's what I'll finally do, contact the schools and explain the situation and see what that leads to.

Every university in the US has its own policies. There is no national educational system in the US.
If you want to apply to a place for which it is mandatory then it is mandatory. Otherwise not. However, for those places for which it is optional it might be a way to bolster your application, so consider that, at least.
Every graduate school is looking at your application materials for evidence of success. If you can show that and also meet the rules then you have a chance to be admitted. But the rules aren't normally optional.

Yeah, I suppose that makes sense. It's probably a better idea to have all possible things on my application and maximize the chances of acceptance. Thanks!


text:
Transitioning from a PhD to Postdoc. Is it acceptable to stay with the PhD advisor for 6 months to a year after graduating?
My PhD advisor has offered me a postdoc position in her group with specific projects and duties post graduation. However, she has time and again advised me to do a postdoc from somewhere else as according to her, doing postdoc from PhD university is not seen in a positive sense in academia.
I on the other hand want to stay for 6 to 12 months in the same group as I have lot of additional projects to complete which would be impossible to attend to in a new environment. Also, my PhD research was in a modeling technique which was far away from my advisors expertise. And, I want to learn the new modeling technique and work in a project for which my advisor is known for. So, that way I can get the direct expertise of my advisor.
Also, I love the city I am currently in. I am not ready to leave it for someplace else.
What do you think I should do?
(Here, I have made an assumption that I will surely be getting a good postdoc position somewhere soon).

It is not completely unusual to have a short 'post-doc' with your advisor as you look for a 'real' post-doc somewhere else. When hiring post-docs that never bothered me.

I did it up to 12 month. Then moved to a post doc and realized my prolonged stay was already considered a post doc, and before finishing the new post doc, run for a permanent position and got it.  So why not

Which academic field and country?

I would suggest working pretty hard to take her advice. She probably has a better perspective than you. Use a local position only as a backup.

In mathematics and in Northern Europe I have seen more than a few people do this. A grace period after graduation is not rare. But it is expected that you spend time elsewhere, preferably abroad, either employed or on long and frequent visits, or that you are very good. (Even if you are very good, there are probably other very good people seeking employment, so travelling is still a good idea.)
More importantly, going elsewhere gives you perspective:

New ways of teaching.
New fields and problems to solve and methods for solving them.
New contacts and collaborators.
If going abroad, usually a new language and a more-or-less new culture, depending on how far you go.

In most life situations, it is easier to travel now then later, even if you intend to come back. So if your situation allows, consider seeking for positions elsewhere. Current co-operators of your current research group would be especially useful, since that would probably allow you to contribute to the ongoing projects in some way, too.
Also, unless you specifically aim for it, you will never not have unfinished projects going on, though this is probably field- and personality-specific.

I have been told that it is important to show you aren't ONLY able to do good science/publish with your advisor. When applying for a faculty job, if you've only ever published with your advisor, some may question if you are capable of publishing when not under their wing. If you have had additional collaborations during your PhD (ideally outside your advisors lab group) then it shouldn't hurt at all! If not, as long as you plan to do that with another postdoc after this short one, then I don't think it would hinder your future job prospects.

There is no hard and fast rule or good answer to this. Generally speaking, changes early on in your career prepare you for similar changes later on, when making adjustments can in some ways be harder. There is also the general perception of "so-and-so's little helper" that you need to shake off.
Still, opportunities to get good papers out and good grant applications in are not to be dismissed lightly.
So just follow your heart on this and ignore what everyone else (including myself) says, as it is you in the end who has to live your life.


text:
Doing a master's degree after PhD. Is it advisable?
I have a Master's degree in Materials science and am soon to finish my PhD in computational materials science. I am fairly well versed in programming (python, MATLAB, FORTRAN), linear algebra, calculus.  While pursuing my PhD, I got exposed to machine learning and got fascinated by the possibilities of utilizing it properly in my field of study. I have done courses on Coursera (Andrew Ng course), Bayesian statistics, another ML course in Udemy and have gained a good insight into the process. But, I have not yet solved any big problem or developed the knowledge or confidence required to properly implement ML into my work.
I was thinking if I could pursue a master's degree after completing my PhD as that would give me proper structured know how and would provide me with tools to actually be able to include it in my field of study.
I realize that, I  should have taken some actual courses while staying in university. But, I did not get the time to go for these. Now that I am about to complete my degree, I was thinking whether a master's degree a possibility for me or not? Also, my aim is to be in academia, so will this help me?
Also, if there's another alternative way to achieve my goals, I will delighted to know about them.

I wonder why you think a MS degree rather than just self study will help you achieve your goals. I think you could do it, but why. Maybe find some way to collaborate on a project you like instead.

I think a postdoc would better suit your purposes. The benefit is just not there to pursue a masters degree. Further, unless you are trying to go into a field that requires that specific degree as a prerequisite for entry, you can easily teach yourself from open source material.
The benefits of a postdoc are that it allows you to make a transition in your academic career while getting paid better than a graduate student. You also do not have the pressure of course work or degree requirements.
I used my postdoc to strengthen my programming skills, begin work in machine learning, and to expose myself to bayesian statistics. This sounds pretty similar to where you are at.

I agree with all of this, and I'd also like to add that even though some programs do not award a terminal Master's degree after the 2nd year of the PhD program, the accomplishment is still implied, and pursuing a Master's in the same field would be unusual and, in rare cases, interpreted as an effort to avoid competing on the job market. I have never heard of anyone doing this and it certainly might raise a few eyebrows.


text:
Master thesis: emails to a dissertation supervisor
i have finished all my classes and now I should start my master thesis.
But first of all, I need to write an email to prof. and ask him about the available topic for the master thesis.
How to write this email?
does anyone have experience with that?

This is better handled in person, rather than by email. You will get a more useful answer and be able to explore options. I would only use email if there were no face-to-face options available. Bring a printed CV to any such meeting in case the professor wants more information on your background. Mention in the CV any projects you have done. And make sure you know at least a bit about the professor's research interests before you meet.
But if you need an email structure it so that you give some information, but don't make it difficult to read or necessary to read everything. First ask, then say something about yourself and your background and interests. Try to keep it short and it will be more likely to be read. Anything very long (like a CV) can be an attachment, but probably isn't necessary for an initial contact. I assume that the professor will, if interested, ask for a face to face meeting in most cases. Again, make sure you have an understanding of the research interests of the professor and that they match your own.


text:
My PhD thesis does not include a Literature Review chapter
I am due to submit my PhD in a week and I am starting to panic over not having a dedicated chapter with a literature review. My topic covers different fields of study so I have added some literature review within the content of every chapter when that field is explored. Now I am worried because my thesis does not follow the standard structure.
Do you think it will help to make this clear in the Introduction?

2 years later: How did it turn out?

This is a question for your advisor. What will s/he accept in your dissertation? If it is a acceptable to the advisor (and any committee) then there is no issue at all.
It seems pretty clear from what you write that you have, in fact, reviewed the literature, rather than just ignoring it. How you present your findings is, in a sense, just a matter of writing style. If it works, it works.
But your advisor may have veto power here, so make sure they are happy.


text:
How to cite an Amazon page product?
We are supposed to cite product's pages on Amazon (to cite the price).
Which informations are we supposed to put in the bibliography?

Do it like you would any other web reference with both a link and a date on which the link was accessed by you. This guards against changes that can always occur in any web resource. You can take the title from the page title.
The date is essential.

For the author, is it Amazon?

Probably, but for some things maybe something from the page, such as a book's author. Hard to say in general. You could omit author in favor of a descriptive.


text:
How can I most respectfully leave my current PhD position for a new one?
My professor is a bully and the university will not challenge his behaviour despite numerous complaints from both staff and students. I am 9 months into the first year of my PhD. I love my work and all of my other colleagues but the professor's behaviour is unbearable and affecting my mental health. I have made the decision to apply for positions elsewhere.
How can I do so without appearing as a troublemaker? I am terrified that other lab groups will read my application and just see me as weak, lazy, or disruptive for leaving my current position. How can I mention the experience of my current position on my CV, and explain politely in cover letters etc. the circumstances without sounding like a brat?
Thanks in advance,
A very stressed PhD student

Have a read : https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/115362/72855

Are you contemplating changing universities, or just supervisors? Moving to a new institution, or just a new lab within your current one?

@Buffy I will most likely move to a new university as the university have said they will not provide me with a new supervisor.

the university have said they will not provide me with a new supervisor — That doesn't mean you can't identify a new supervisor yourself.  (Does it? I find the whole idea of departments assigning supervisors rather toxic.)

If you are moving to a new university, I think you can ignore most of your fears. You need to get accepted, of course, and may require letters of recommendation to do so, but I don't think you need to be very explicit about disagreements with your supervisor or your assessment of his flaws. It is enough, for most purposes, to simply indicate that you had an incompatible position and are seeking a better one. Keep any disagreements out of your written materials for application. If you are asked, don't emphasize the disagreements or the treatment. The old advisor probably isn't going to change and you are interested in finding a better situation rather than correcting the old one.
Write your materials, initially, as if you were starting fresh. Then add just enough to show that you are in an unhappy situation and want a better one. Don't try to hide it, but emphasize the positive.
I suspect that, except in a few narrow fields, what people think of you at the old place won't matter much if at all. The old professor may be known and can have some impact (hence being cautious), but other people in the lab are pretty invisible from the viewpoint of another institution.
On your CV, mention your current position, of course but without comment. In your SOP stress that you find your current situation "unsatisfying" and "not sufficiently productive".
While it may be unsatisfying not to complain about bad behavior, doing so from a position of little power can hurt only you.

Note: this is only a suggestion, take it only if you think it applies well to your situation.
As a subtle way to address the issue with your advisor without offending anyone, you could present it as a divergence of views with them about work methods or objectives. For example you could maybe say that you would like to work in close collaboration with a supervisor, but the previous one was too busy to spend time with you.
This idea involves a bit of "facts massaging" to present a professionally acceptable explanation and avoid potentially negative perception.


text:
Should I explain my "NP" grade in my statement of purpose?
Here's my situation. I am struggling with it for weeks. I am a math major applying to Ph.D. programs (pure math). I have a 3.94 major GPA, but in my sophomore year, I got an NP (no pass) in a math course of differential geometry. This is because I didn't make the final for personal reasons. I retook the course (in my junior year, because there is only one such course a year) and got an A, and actually I got full marks in all quizzes and exams.
Here is the thing. Do I need to explain in my "NP" grade in my statement of purpose? Since I am applying to good Ph.D. programs, my statement of purpose is like a research statement, and it shows my math background, research experience, and dedication - all good things. I feel it is very weird to write anything about my "NP" in such a statement. I also feel like professors don't like such things showing up in a statement of purpose.
If I don't write any explanation, I believe that professors will know the "NP" cannot reflect my academic ability. After all, I retook it and nearly all my math courses are "A". However, I am worried that they make some guesses about the "NP" like academic dishonesty (definitely not true), or I don't have the ability to handle the crisis (which is true). Besides, I think (only my guess) professors will be curious about it, so maybe they are expecting an explanation?
All in all, should I explain my "NP" grade in my statement of purpose?

Is this question related to a particular country?

Does this answer your question? How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students?

This sort of thing is always a strategic decision. While some readers will appreciate the clarification, for others it may serve to highlight something that would otherwise not have attracted attention. I suggest seeking advice from professors at your current institution, who can comment on how your overall application looks.
If you do decide to address it, some options include:

Ask one of your letter-writers if they can deal with it in their letter;
Add a standalone note at the end of your Statement of Purpose. Don't work it into the prose of your SoP, just put something at the end such as

N.B. The 'NP' grade shown on my transcript for ... arose because I was unable to attend the final exam for personal reasons. I retook this course in .... and received an 'A'.

Include a cover note with the transcript.

Good luck!


text:
Does auditing a class and taking it later for credit look bad on my transcript?
I am currently a freshman and I'm thinking of taking 3 upper division math courses next semester: Linear Algebra, Abstract Algebra 2, and Topology. However, I think that 3 math courses for credit would overwhelm me. I still would like to learn all 3 of them.
I was considering auditing Topology instead. I do plan to take the course again in my sophomore or Junior year for credit. Will this hurt my graduation school admissions?

I don't think it will make any difference when you get to grad school application time. A further thought: if you've already had abstract algebra 1 you probably won't find linear algebra very difficult. It's a place where students often first struggle with definitions and proofs and you've done that. Talk to your advisor.

I thought auditing was just sitting in on a class that you aren't taking?  It's not on your transcript.  So how the heck can anyone tell, that you audited before taking something?
Source: I audited classes and took classes for credit.  Audits not on my records.  Go check yours to be sure.
P.s.  I personally don't see the point.  If you are going to take a course (audit or paid), you should do best effort in it and take it once, unless you fail. If you know you're not doing it right, than don't audit.  If you do it right, than no need to take it for credit--you mastered it, previously when auditing.  So move on to the next battle.

Actually, auditing is often (usually?) an official designation that leaves a record. Universities aren't normally happy to have people just dropping in without knowing who they are. There are security and liability concerns. This isn't 1950 anymore. Official auditors show up on the professor's class roster.

The class list =/= transcript.  And the latter is what matters, here.

Yes, but audits do show up on transcripts many places.

Well, then cite those, specifically. That's relevant.  See also what I already wrote.  "I audited classes and took classes for credit. Audits not on my records. Go check yours to be sure."  (Duh.)

What is officially defined as "auditing" at your university?  At mine, you could just sit in the classes and pay attention, and that was seen as auditing.  If you actually wanted access to class resources, depending on the class and instructor, you could do so as well.
But auditing doesn't appear on your transcript, so I wouldn't worry about it.

It is impossible to say with certainty, but I doubt it. When I was a math student (half a century ago) there was a rumor going around that at some elite college(s), no student would dare to take an advanced course without first auditing it. It wasn't so much that the students were grade-happy, but that those courses were very challenging.
In fact, I think that auditing a course before taking it shows a certain amount of seriousness, provided that you do well overall.
Some universities will only show a course once on a transcript, so it is possible that the audit won't even appear.
There is actually a pedagogical effect that seeing something (a first look) before you delve deeply into it is a good thing for learning. If you are questioned about this you can bring up the "Spiral Pedagogical Pattern".

If there is a formal audit process for your university, then the course shows up on you transcript with AU where the grade should be.
This is my personal opinion, but I feel like it shows initiative and planning ahead to audit a more complex course that you plan to take another year.
I'm actually also trying to audit Topology my first semester of sophomore year! The course that made me look up this question was Intro to Real Analysis.

Sometimes an "audit" is just an informal agreement between the professor and a student to sit in the classroom during lectures and take notes and ask questions but not take quizzes or exams nor do any homework or projects or get any marks or feedback. I certainly audited several classes during my undergrad in the mid to late 90s this way. I also stopped showing up to those lectures as soon as it became too time consuming or the prep work was too much to keep up with.
Some universities may allow for a paid audit where less tuition is charged and everything is normal but no credit is given in the end. The upside for the student being that there's no pressure to pass and no ultimate grade assigned in the end on the transcript just an "audit" mark or nothing. I don't think I've ever seen one of these transcripts, but I don't review very many undergrad transcripts, ever.
I just found the official audit form for my undergrad university, and it didn't even allow for a transcript record and required full tuition for the course, so YMMV. So in the end, no, I agree with others, unless your university is weird or you go off the books and audit the course without telling your university registrar or paying (and don't get caught!!), your grad school application won't be affected. If you can, it's probably best to do the honest thing and pay for an official audit, but you have to choose your own ethics and settle that with the professor who is teaching. They will notice if there's an extra, unaccounted for student in the lectures!