text:
CS Master's admission after academic dishonesty
I got a B.S. in Math several years ago. I'm applying for CS MS this fall, but I still need some coursework before admission. I spent the past year at College X as a non-degree student. I did well last fall (all As), but was caught cheating on an elective CS class this spring (googled some answers on one homework assignment). The result is a B- in the class (instead of a B). I realize I'm fortunate for a pretty minimal penalty -- I just got a 0 on the assignment, and a one-semester probation (which doesn't affect me since I was only a non-degree student here and I'm not continuing here anyway). I don't have an excuse for this, and I don't know why I decided to do this. This is the only time I've cheated. For whatever it's worth, it's not indicated on my transcript, only in some confidential file the university has somewhere. My questions are:

How badly does this affect my chances for admission? I was planning on applying to just one top 20 school that I doubt I'd get into anyway, but most of the schools on my list are still ranked in the top 50.
More importantly, is there anything I can do to repair the situation? I don't have years of time before application season to be able to say it happened a long time ago. That said, I'm taking two classes this summer at College Y, and another class in the fall at either College Z or Z'. The advice given in a similar thread here was to do very well in classes from here on out, but would people reading my application even believe the rest of my work is honest after committing academic dishonesty?

If I go to College Z this fall, I could also retake the same class from this spring. It wouldn't do anything to help my GPA at College X, but my GPA there is > 3.6 anyway. I believe I could do well, at least an A-. The class also covers an extra couple chapters, one of which is related to my CS interests. Would it be worth "retaking?" It's basically the same class, so it feels like it might be a waste of time, especially since one B- isn't that bad. If I go to College Z' this fall, I could probably take an advanced class related to the class I took this spring. This advanced (joint undergrad/grad) class seems to cover a lot of material specifically related to my CS interests.
My overall application is pretty strong (3.7 GPA, GRE 170Q, 158V, 4.5A, 2-3 strong LORs, 75%ile Math Subject GRE). Hopefully it helps that three schools I'm considering are Colleges Y, Z, and Z', so maybe having a little bit of coursework done at two of them could help.
Thanks for any advice.

I have to wonder, what school did you go to, where using online sources to help figure out the solution to a programming problem is considered "cheating"?!?  As a professional computer programmer, out in the real world that's generally considered "one of the most valuable tools in your toolkit," and even when I was in college that wasn't frowned upon so long as you used it to help you learn rather than looking up the answer instead of learning.

I don't think the academic dishonesty is relevant at all. Since the (pretty minimal, as you say) consequences are known, really this question is just "I got a B- instead of a B, does it affect my application?".

@MasonWheeler, the OP didn't state the nature of the homework assignment, or whether use of internet resources was specifically disallowed. If the assignment was (for example), "Write an essay on the development of C++ from C" and part of the work was plagiarized, then the discipline was deserved.

@MasonWheeler As a CS professor, in some cases (such as project-based courses), using online sources is encouraged; in a few cases it's forbidden, such as when I'm reusing a classic problem or algorithm.

I understand it's useful to look things up "in real life," but it was against the rules in this case. It was a relatively minor homework assignment. The answers looked up were numerical in nature -- nothing as serious as plagiarizing an essay or code for a project.

Perhaps you should reflect on why you cheated and whether you really want to put in the time and effort required to get an advanced degree or if your transgression was a subconscious suggestion that you would rather be doing something else.

Based on what you stated, it doesn't really sound like this will follow you anywhere. You were caught, they gave you a token punishment, and everyone moved on. It's not as though you have to state your dishonesty on your resume or whatnot. I would recommend treating it as a lesson learned, and unless someone specifically asks you about it, don't bring it up.
To directly answer your questions... no, you really can't do anything to fix it. It's part of your history now. However, it may not affect your application, as they receiving university will probably never find out about it.
Note that all of this is based on the assumption that your dishonesty does not go on your official transcript, based on your having stated that in the question text. If it is on the official transcript—the one that one university will send to another when asked—then your situation is a good deal worse.

I'm not too worried about a B- instead of a B. But I think most applications ask if you've ever faced any academic probation, and while many people reading my application might not see this specific case as a big deal, it still might be easier to admit the guy with similar stats who doesn't have any issues on his record since CS is so competitive these days. I'll have to wait until applications open to see what specifically is asked. That said, it's not documented on my transcript in any way, so if it's not asked, it certainly won't affect my applications.

Well, were you put on academic probation? Your question didn't mention that. It's something you would receive a formal notice from the college administration about, as far as I know. If you didn't get that formal notice, then you were not put on probation, and you should say as much (i.e. check the "no" box) on any applications that ask about it.

The bigger concern in this matter is not what impact this incident has had on your grades, but on letters of recommendation. Who is going to be writing them for you, and how will they see this?
The professor who taught the class in question is presumably a bad pick, both because they caught you cheating, and because they gave you your worst grade in that program.
Other professors in that program, and likely anywhere, will potentially ask to see your transcripts, to get a general sense of your capabilities, and will ask about that outlier grade. You'd better hope they're willing to excuse that indiscretion.

Right, I obviously wouldn't ask the professor of this course for a LOR. My references from my math courses in college have written me letters before and some have asked for my grades, but none has ever questioned me about the occasional B or even a C+. Even if I were asked about it, the 0 on that assignment had less bearing on my grade than the fact that I messed up the midterm. My only concern is if I should ask a professor from that school for a class I got an A in. This incident is supposedly confidential, but people in academia tend to spread information sometimes anyway.


text:
(Psychology) Mismatch with Advisor's Research Interests
A complicated story so I’ll try to keep it short. Basically, I was fairly young applying to PhD programs (in psychology) and got into a program where I thought I’d be a great fit. My advisor’s research interests seemed to match up with mine, but the more I started working in the lab I realized how much they....don’t. I’m realizing that we have really conflicting theoretical orientations, and I’m not in any way shape or form thrilled about the current research being conducted in the lab. I’ve been skirting by on the outer rim of their research interests, but I ultimately know for the sake of my future I should be working with someone who has more expertise in what I specifically want to work in. All that said, I can tell my advisor wants me to pursue my own interests and is trying to support my ideas (but it’s clear they are working outside their expertise). I actually have a great relationship with my current advisor and interpersonally get along fantastically with my lab. I feel lost as to what to do (switch labs and work with someone more related to what I want to do-not sure if that would damage any current relationships with my present lab, continue with someone who is very supportive but not in the area I want to be in, something else....). I would feel more comfortable working outside said advisors expertise; however, they are new faculty and I’m not confident they can support me very well in that domain. Honestly just looking for advice/thoughts.... I’ve subtly brought this up in our individual meetings but haven’t done anything drastic.

Miss Match is a flammable lady ;-)

One statement in your question stands out: "I can tell my advisor wants me to pursue my own interests and is trying to support my ideas". That alone would suggest that, under certain conditions, it might be wise to stay. You have other supporting statements as well.
Some students can carry on their research with only minimal advice from advisors. Others need more continuing support, and even the ideas about what to study. You seem to be more in the former group than the latter, but you need to judge that.
If your advisor were hostile, or even indifferent, to your research goals, it would be better to leave, but in this case, perhaps staying is the best option.
But an advisor can be helpful to you in many ways other than just basic support. S/he can help with process and with keeping you within ethical norms of the field. They can probably also make a fair judgement about when you are done and ready to write up your findings. The general support also implies that they will sign off on the work and write good letters. That alone is enough, provided that you are self driven enough, and with enough ideas, to carry through the research relatively unguided.
You need to judge this, of course, but I would be hesitant to make a quick decision to go elsewhere, either at the same university or at a different one. Imagine what your situation would be if it were completely reversed: a hostile advisor who was very knowledgeable in your specialization.
Think before you jump.
However, there is also an opportunity to get the specific guidance you may want outside your institution. It is harder, but not impossible, to keep close contact. In the long term, you do want external collaborative relationships to support your future career and it isn't unreasonable to begin to develop them now. Your current advisor may even be able to put you in contact with a few people. Conferences are also good for making contacts in some fields.

Anyone where you are with the right interests that you could add to the team? It's not clear how far along you are, but switching is always disruptive. Furthermore, you already have good support and engagement and that should not be undervalued. A supervisor does not only provide technical guidance, but also assistance with helping you think through your research question, structuring your thesis, contacts, planning and managing a research program, and many other aspects of being a researcher.
To me it sounds like you need to have a clear talk with your advisor about your desired approach and ask for assistance about how to achieve that.
Also, can you do some research contrasting your approach and your advisor's - what does each bring to the table? Can they be combined or parts dealt with one way and other parts the other way? People with different views can make fabulous collaborators.

I am in the exact same situation. I unfortunately had to stay with my advisor and am seeking help from other people but it is not easy. If you can, I would recommend switching to someone else. Your future success matters the most.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it acceptable to be listed as an author based only on technical assitance?
I am a PhD student in bioinformatics/computational biology. A year or two ago I helped a fellow student using a software package she needed for creating a certain type of figures for her project. This week I got an email from that student asking if I wish to be listed as an author in a paper she is submitting in which she used these figures.
Other than helping to get her started with this software package and maybe helping her a bit with improving her code otherwise, I made no contribution to that project and in fact had only a very vague idea what she was working on until I saw the manuscript this week. I estimate that at most I dedicated 5-10 hours  to the whole thing.
So my dilemma is if such a minor contribution justifies me being listed as an author.
On the one hand, I have invested very little in this student in terms of time and effort, and was not involved at all in her research process per se.
On the other hand, I did invest a considerable amount of time learning to work with the said software for my own project (totally unrelated to hers) so I think there was some kind of knowledge/skill transfer involved that may have saved her some time.
If it matters, the paper has four authors other then me: the student that I helped, her two supervisors, and another PhD student who to my understanding was much more involved than me in this project.
I'm looking forward to hearing your perspective, O wise ones.

You could ask for an acknowledgement, e.g., something that includes "XX created Figures A, B & C."

When I was in grad school (materials science) eons ago, it was very common for grad students to help/teach other grad students various things. How to make TEM specimens, how to run some mod/sim program, etc. We never paid it back with authorship (unless they actually did work, not just taught us how to do the work). Instead, we paid it forward, teaching other students how to do the stuff that we knew how to do. In your shoes, how you are feeling, I'd just politely say thanks, but it isn't needed.

The criteria for authorship may somehow vary by discipline. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) stipulates four criteria that must be met if someone is to deserve authorship.

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;
  AND
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
Final approval of the version to be published; AND
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the
  work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

The ICMJE guideline further states that contributors fulfilling only less than four of the criteria should not be listed as authors but should be acknowledged.
A COPE discussion document about authorship also raises authorship criteria that are considered in different disciplines.
You may decide whether you qualify to be listed as an author based on the different guidelines available, probably based on the one closest to your discipline.

Why the downvote? May you (the colleague who downvoted) explain the reason?

I would probably add that by the ICMJE standards, what OP describes does not satisfy all four criteria.

By those guidelines the most important part is really the first statement; one could interpret the next three as part of the offer for authorship (that is, if OP was to be an author, they should then have a part in revising and approving the manuscript).

If you expect to continue to be on this student's papers or to have her on yours, go ahead.  After all there are a huge amount of professors tacking onto papers where all they did was write a grant.  It is a good way to boost your count.  And you'll still have first on your papers, doesn't hurt to add others.  That said, if you think/want no further association, I would just say "make it an acknowledgement".
P.s.  Cynical view, but "keeping it real".

As a PhD student, it is always worthwhile increasing your publication list and if the 'real' authors are happy to invite you, then it's certainly acceptable. It then comes down to your personal comfort.
I have been in similar situations where I provided what I consider to be general assistance without any real intellectual input: coding assistance, editing style comments on a draft paper, suggestions on how to visualise results. For me, I think about it from the other perspective. If someone had provided that level of assistance on my project, would I invite them as a co-author or would I be upset if they expected to be a co-author. Sometimes my general assistance leads to invitation as a co-author and I always decline on the basis that I didn't really contribute to the study.
This has consequences, though, my publications list is shorter than others in my discipline. For me, that's less important. But for a PhD student, every paper you can get is valuable. On the other hand, if you decline, you are also in a stronger position to limit the authors on your papers to people who genuinely contributed, which may also be important to you.

Yes
For you your contribution might not look very important and was easy to do for you but for people with non-technical background some help from a bioinformatician/statistician etc is of high value and possibly saves them lots of time and effort. Therefore in their perspective (and objectively) your contribution is significant and it justifies authorship.

The student didn't say "I want to list you as an author", she asked OP whether they wish to be listed, so I don't think it's clear that in the student's perspective the contribution is significant enough to justify authorship.

"some help from XYZ is of high value and saves them time and effort" is not an argument for authorship. A translator who translates a manuscript from French to English would not qualify as an author, even if the actual authors are poor at English and benefit much from the translation.

There is no reason why you shouldn't go for authorship. Free publication, you have nothing to lose, as a student yourself why not?
Anyone can be an author for a paper as long as the first and last authors agree. I'm an author for a paper on something I had absolutely no idea, but I'm still an author!
FYI: Providing technical advice is of course counted as serious contribution.

I do not agree that it is that simple. There are ethical standards to be met but these vary a lot. The German science funding agency has an official statement about "Gute wissenschaftliche Praxis" (something like ethical guidelines for scientific work). Also some university may have their own rules that may apply.

@Dirk Wrong. If the all other authors say nothing, who would know? Do you really think reviewers can work out who do what?

That was not my point.

@Dirk It's your point. As long as the other authors have no objection, nothing would happen. If they have objections, anything can happen. Your guidelines only apply if the other authors have objection. If they don't, anybody can be an author.

@Dirk In this question, the other authors have no objection. So, why do you think they will suddenly check the German science official statement?

@SmallChess "Am I going to get caught" is not the only question one should ask oneself in matters of ethics. Apart from that, your presupposition "Providing technical advice is of course counted as serious contribution" is exactly what OP wants to figure out.

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


text:
Paper recommender system
Does anyone know a tool that gives paper recommendations based on a user defined list of papers?
For example, if I've read papers A, B and C, I would like to find all papers related to A, B and C sorted by relevance. In this list a paper that cites all A, B and C or that is cited by all 3 should rank higher than a paper that is related to just one of them.
EDIT: Some people suggested to use Google Scholar. The problem with Google Scholar is that it gives you papers related to just one article. If I have a base of 5 papers for my bibliography and I want to expand it, then I have to search for papers related to each of them individually and soon the number of options will become huge. I would prefer to have a smarter tool that analyze the links between the 5 papers and recommends articles related to all of them together. This would save a lot of time.

GooSchol does it for 1 paper, or for your papers.  It shouldn't be too hard to write a script that takes the "related papers" for each paper in the list and process them.

Google Scholar doesn't provide an API and it's quite illegal to crawl it with scripts.

"This would save a lot of time". Of course it would. But then what would you do during your literature review? Part of the work you have to do during the PhD, is to learn to scan the literature fast and efficiently. On the other hand, if you use Google scholar and find the top-5 authors and follow them (new articles + citations) then the recommended articles it suggests are quite good.

@Alexandros There is a compromise in every innovation. If planes weren't there, there would be no plane crashes...

Here's a (negative) review of such methods.

I would prefer to have a smarter tool that analyze the links between the 5 papers and recommends articles related to all of them together. This would save a lot of time. — Sounds like an excellent topic for a PhD thesis.  Go for it!

I've already started my PhD on something else :) But I consider doing this as a side project.

Mendeley has recently started to send me paper suggestions based on my saved papers.

I'm not familiar with such a tool. But, if you reading an article on a scientific website such as http://www.sciencedirect.com/, a list of recommended or related papers will appear on the right hand side. Some of these recommended papers are very related, cited or been cited by the article you are reading. Google Scholar will list all papers that have cited a certain that too. I hope this helps.

Maybe this is more appropriate as a comment?

The problem with Google Scholar and others is that they give you papers related to just one article. If I have a base of 5 papers for my bibliography and I want to expand it, then I have to search for papers related to each of them individually and soon the number of options will become huge. I would prefer to have a smarter tool that analyze the links between the 5 papers and recommends articles related to all of them together. This would save a lot of time.

Note, also, that sciencedirect is Elsevier, and recommends only other Elsevier papers.

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


text:
How to tell professor the reason for dropping his/her subject without it sounding rude?
In our university, we are allowed to drop or cancel our classes before a certain deadline within the semester. The reason for dropping is, officially, not required but most professors I know usually asks the student why before agreeing since the professor's consent is required.
I'm planning to drop out since I'm not finding enough time to research and read outside of class hours. Don't get me wrong, it is interesting but I'm currently struggling in my thesis. I want to tell the professor that I'll drop because I don't think I'll be able to focus on his/her subject, especially since it also has a lot of required work outside of class, but how do I do this without insulting the professor or sounding rude? I'm worried he/she might not take it too kindly when the reason given is someone 'don't have enough time for their class.'

Tell them that you need to focus your efforts on fewer things especially your thesis as you find it challenging.
Be polite and don't forget professors have heard it all before, they will understand or should do.

State your case with full honesty. You only do a disservice to yourself to do otherwise.
Faculty who say that dropping their course is an insult to them have their heads in the wrong place. When they are roadblocks, request that your thesis advisor take your petition to the department chair for approval.
This all presumes that you have already gotten pre-approval from your thesis advisor to make this change in your program of study for this semester. In one sense, I should wonder with some experience why your thesis advisor did not warn you in advance not to take the course in the first place because you would have a harder workload this semester. Your insult here may be to have purposely ignored any such advice. Alternatively, you may be in a situations where you feel that you must do these type of things (schedule courses) on your own for whatever reason. I should wonder what new input as caused you to realize that you mis-judged your own abilities. Your insult here may be to have incorrectly pre-judged the work you would need in the course.
Lessons are sometimes best learned the hard way. In the case that you ignored your advisor, apologize and be honest about it. You may need his/her support to get the change done. In the case where you are working on your own, you may need to reflect carefully on what exactly you misjudged. Perhaps you do owe the instructor an apology because you are ducking out of the course that you thought would be easier (instead of dropping out of the course because you are faced with an unanticipated increase in the work load of your thesis). I am not judging either way, just providing a counter point for reflection.
Finally, you have presumably made yourself fully aware of whether/how dropping a course may impact (decrease) any financial support that you have. Alternatively, you are fully prepared to pay for a late registration fee should their be one to register now for a different course in order to re-fill you program of study in place of the dropped course.

While "Faculty who say that dropping their course is an insult to them have their heads in the wrong place." is correct, there is often such faculty with heads in the wrong place who makes your life more difficult when you are honest.

I also agree with what @anewguest said. Regarding my thesis advisor, he/she has a don't care attitude, doesn't even reply to emails and doesn't even give comments during progress reports, hence I try and work on my own, even if it's hard. But, we have separate advisers that approve dropped classes, so I think on this part it's fine, since this advisor didn't have any idea on what the class I took was anyway or the workload it entails when I first asked for advise at the start of the semester. Thanks!

@anewguest Though they exist, and though yes they do make life harder, they are never a reason for one to figure out how to be dishonest.

@I.Am I added an update to reflect the aspect of facing this on your own.

Just tell him you are too busy.  Don't tell him you're not interested.  (Obviously there is some scale of business to interest.  But you don't need to reference this tradeoff.)
"Would love to stay if I had more time but I'm struggling on other priorities.  Need to spend my time on research."
Let him sign the paper, don't open a discussion, and get out.

Noted. If all goes well, then I hope it'd be fast, with not much of scrutiny as to the reasons I'm dropping. Thanks!


text:
Online "database" for mathematical conferences?
I am about to start applying for Ph.D programs (mathematics), and while compiling my CV, comparing it with many examples avaliable across the internet, I noticed that almost everyone attended one or two conferences during his bachelor/master years.
Now, I just didn't do that. I don't know if this could be an issue or anything, anyway, that is not my question.
Since I have at least four months until most programs start, I wanted to look for some conference that could be interesting. At my university there is a hallway where posters of such things are hanged, but I couldn't find anything online (apparently each university publishes its own conferences on its website, and that's it).
I can't believe there isn't an online equivalent of the above mentioned hallway, my question is: is there?

Are you looking for something like this: http://www.ams.org/meetings/calendar/mathcal

Exactly. You may post it as an answer if you want. Anyway I will leave the question open for a while as I'm sure it is not the only one

I'm not involved with mathematics so I've answered with a community wiki in case others with more knowledge want to contribute to it.

Would it be appropriate to change the title of this question to include mathematics? i.e. 'Online "database" for mathematics conferences'

The American Mathematical Society has a calendar of conferences: http://www.ams.org//meetings/calendar/mathcal
As does the Mathematical Association of America: http://www.maa.org/meetings
And the Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics: http://www.siam.org/meetings/

you might also want to check:
http://www.springer.com/computer/lncs?SGWID=0-164-12-73665-0 - LNCS forthcoming proceedings
http://www.ieee.org/conferences_events/index.html
http://www.acm.org/calendar-of-events
http://www.wikicfp.com/cfp/

We have a list of Conference Announcement sites on our blog. Hope this help.
(Caveat - it hasn't been updated in about a year)

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


text:
Are Non-US bachelor's degrees equatable with US bachelor's degrees when applying to law schools in the US?
Most law schools in the US require applicants to have bachelor's degrees (used here and throughout the question to refer to a typically 4 year college degree) - usually on topics related to law such as English, Political Science, or Philosophy. I'm a US citizen who has attended some US college part-time. I'm considering pursuing a bachelor's degree in law in Spain - a 4/5 year program that provides basic legal training for those hoping to become lawyers in Spain (further specialization is typically required before becoming an attorney). If I obtain a bachelor's in law in Spain, will that be equitable with a bachelor's from a US institution for meeting the requirements of law schools in the United States? In two parts:

Will a foreign bachelor's meet the hard requirement?
Will a foreign bachelor's be "looked down upon" or considered "less than" a US degree?

Let me know if the Law Stack Exchange is more appropriate for this question, I wasn't sure.

It's not my field, but I would worry that preparation for Spanish law might not carry over very well to a US law program.

European undergraduate degrees tend to be more specialised than those in the USA (i.e. you will only study law and not law + biology + underwater basket weaving + ...), so I don't think it would be considered to be worth less. Have you looked at the admissions criteria for various law schools in the USA? It could even be worth getting in touch to ask their admissions officers how they deal with Spanish degree-holders (you surely will not be the first).

@Buffy - on the other hand, it could be considered highly if the OP is applying to a law school that has international law as a concentration area. Like many questions here it will depend on the institution...

@Buffy I honestly think that most Bachelor's in the US don't really do much to prepare one for law school in the US. Obviously a degree in English, PoliSci, or Philosophy would help, but a degree in law in a foreign language seems equivalent or better in some ways. The laws and their foundations will clearly be quite different, but having an understanding of some basic concepts and a system by which to compare them to seems quite useful.

@astronat I've contacted multiple law schools, most directed me to LSAC to decide if it would qualify for admissions, and I've contacted LSAC now too. It appears it meets the hard requirement, but the soft question of "will it be looked down upon" still stands.

As a note, I've worked as a professional for years, including in "legal" fields (including drafting and assisting with drafting legislation) - so I feel adequately prepared for law school already. To me, this is about meeting the bachelor's requirement with a bachelor's that will benefit my development while also not breaking the bank - thus a foreign language program in a topic I'm interested in.


text:
Co-citation analysis of my library?
I just realized that the co-citation analysis is a very handy tool, especially at the initial stage of the research. There are many software available that do the co-citation and bibliographic analysis for you. However, most of them require the output file from scientific search engines like Scopus, Web of Science, and so on.
What I would like to do is to run a co-citation analysis on a collection of scientific papers that I have (gathered in a folder), to see how the citation network looks like and find the most important papers. I am currently using Vosviewer but it appears that it does not allow such analysis.
I have exported the .ris file from Mendeley and then read it in Vosviewer but then it only shows the co-authorship and co-occurrence of keywords, which are not interesting for me.
Any suggestion will be appreciated.

This is either a shopping question, if you are looking for a tool, or "not within scope" if you are looking for how to do it. You could write your own tool, of course.

@Buffy Questions about software tools are explicitly allowed.

Is https://www.connectedpapers.com/ or https://scite.ai/ along the lines of what you're looking for?

@0xDBFB7 no because these platforms only allow you to choose a particular paper and see the citation map for it. However, as I mentioned, I am looking for a method to develop the citation network for my library.

You can import your library into Inciteful.xyz* or LitMaps.

* Note: So far, Inciteful.xyz only supports an import of BibTeX files. However, (1) you can easily convert .ris files to BibTeX, and (2) it seems that Inciteful.xyz is still under development and might enable the direct import of .ris files soon (see this Tweet).

Thanks a lot. LitMAps is exactly what I wanted. I created a bib file from my library using Mendeley and supplied it to LitMap, which then made a citation network for me.


text:
Designing a credit-by-examination exam
I have been tasked with writing an exam for a student who wishes to receive credit-by-examination for an upper-level course in my department.1  While the department head suggested just using the final exam as the basis, I don't really think that works as it misses out on a lot of the material that was assessed via other means (e.g. paper writing, presentations, etc) as an integral part of the course.  In contrast to many lower-level courses that cover wide swathes of basic material that is very conducive to comprehensive examinations, this course has both a wide and shallow (assessed via tests) and skinny and deep approach (assessed via papers and presentations).
Given a course that approaches the material in both broad and deep ways, how should an exam that is supposed to represent having done both styles of learning be designed?  Or would it be fine to give a student credit (presuming passing) despite not demonstrating competency in an integral part of the regular course?
I freely admit being completely against this CbE procedure in principle, but since I couldn't get out of it, I want to do this correctly.
Update: Thanks for the answers everyone.  After making the exam, the student never bothered to show up to take it.  Hooray for wasted time.

Are you allowed to include a take-home component to the exam? If so, you could also possibly do an (abbreviated) project to help test some of that material.

If the student is agreeable, and able, an interview-exam, a.k.a. "oral exam", might give you a better sense of the student's competence. For that matter, perhaps critically, an oral exam can be adaptive, depending on how things seem, on what you see needs to be inquire-further-upon.

@RogerFan and paulGarrett both would be great ideas that are, sadly, not options.

In art "examinations" I think students submit a portfolio of their work.  Presumably that is not an option either?

The answer to this question depends on the objectives of the course.  We only know some of those.

I have done this "credit-by-examination" as a student.  This was called "challenging a course".
The precise rules can vary between different schools (colleges/universities).  There is commonly a maximum limit to how much can be challenged (number of credits/courses).  Not all courses can be challenged; this may be up to the department (e.g., perhaps the department chair).
For instance, I was once coerced into challenging a course.  This satisfied the bureaucratic requirements which were being imposed, despite the detail that the requirements were an unwritten update that didn't match the course catalog.  Had I done things the way the department recommended, I would have needed to graduate 15 months later (due to when courses were made available).
I got full credit for the course, despite doing nothing but reading a book and taking an exam (and paying tuition, and filling out a form).  My record simply shows that I took the course and got an A.
In no way do I suggest that I had the exact same experience as if I went through the entire course, including delivering presentations and completing the projects.  Yes, the challenged course was a streamlined experience, and I am basically getting full credit for far less work.
I've received credit for some other courses by having industry certifications (which required I take an exam, which can be taken in exam centers other than colleges...)  My mother has received credit for prior "work experience".
Should this be allowed?  Maybe not.  However, many universities do allow this.  Is it unfair?  Well, an argument could be made that this is fair, because the college student catalog may describe policies including the ability to challenge a course, or get credit via other means.  I think that some students could reduce overall workload by exploring such options, although they are often simply unaware of the options.  The educational institutions often don't go out of their way to promote such non-traditional approaches, because it involves a bit more work by staff, perhaps some more expense, and may produce graduates with a bit less experience.  So they have no particular incentive to promote such familiarity.  Personally, I do try to tell people about such options, because I am not a fan of people failing to benefit from available options just because they were unaware of opportunities that were technically available and even published (at least partially) in their student catalog.

I don't really think that works as it misses out on a lot of the material that was assessed via other means (e.g. paper writing, presentations, etc) as an integral part of the course.

This sounds true.
Don't expect that everybody who gets credit for the course has had identical experiences.  Staff may have some ability to influence the requirements to get credit for a course, or even a degree.  (I recall once when a university lost staff and was unable to teach a required course.  Until the university was able to adjust the requirements, students were routinely told to just file a waiver asking for an exception, and graduating without taking the "required" course.)
The head (or other staff) of the college/university/department staff might be able to impose additional requirements.  Maybe not in this case, if there is an official "credit-by-examination" process.  Even if the staff is able to impose some additional requirements, they still might make decisions (different than what you might make) about what the student should (or shouldn't) be required to do, in order to receive credit.  If the student gets credit for the course, or not, is really a decision that is quite separate from the task of making this exam.

While the department head suggested just using the final exam as the basis

I suggest reviewing the final exam.  Then, see if there is anything major missing (maybe the final exam tends to focus on only later topics, and crucial earlier comments are entirely absent).  However, don't try to use the exam to re-create aspects of the "skinny and deep approach (assessed via papers and presentations)".  Just make the exam so that it fulfills what the exam is expected to do: ask questions about what is normally "assessed via tests" throughout the course.
Trying to make the exam into something unusual may be something that wasn't expected by the person who decided what a student should be required to do to satisfy the course's requirements.  I suggest not trying to subvert the process by crafting an unusual exam.  At least, don't spend a lot of time and effort doing that before finding out whether that would even be desirable by whomever provided you with this task.

Trying to make the exam into something unusual may be something that wasn't expected by the person who decided what a student should be required to do to satisfy the course's requirements. — Not the OP's problem: this "person" should've been more proactive. Live and learn.

@MadJack : Somebody made the rules, deciding "completing an exam will satisfy" specific desirable goals."  The resulting policy may continue to live on, even years after the policy's creator leaves.  I'm not sure what proactivity you'd seek from that person.  Regardless of whomever initially made the policy, I suspect it is someone other than OP who is now in charge of implementing that policy, and authorizing any exceptions.  If an exam is required, OP may help the process best by making a sensible exam, not trying to subvert the designed process by trying to invent unanticipated improvements

From OP's post, all I gather is that OP was suggested to do an exam: it doesn't sound like any strict guidelines were given (and the fact that OP is asking this question seems to indicate that OP has been given some freedom in deciding the best way forward).

All I saw was that the OP was to design an exam.  I didn't see a note about how much freedom/decision-making was granted, so I would guess the exam may be reviewed by other staff (dept head) for approval.  Hence some of my advice about "how should an exam" ... "be designed?"  As for the other question, "would it be fine to give a student credit" ... "despite not" doing "an integral part of the regular course?", I'm hoping that much of my answer's text provided the straightforward answer of "Yes, that's fine".

Yes, I'm +1'ing both this answer and the other one.

There is a lot missing information here that makes it difficult to provide an fully informed response. For example, the subject, whether this is a theoretical or application class, the way it is taught, the number of topics, the scope and sequence etc.
At many universities, credit by examination is only possible if the student wants to prove that they already have mastery of the subject. In other words, unless the student is completely lying, they should already be highly familiar with the content of this subject and the simply want to prove that they already know it.
If the current final exam is comprehensive in nature it should be suitably for credit by exam, regardless of one's philosophical position. The reasoning being is that the student needs to demonstrate mastery of the entire subject and not just a portion of it. If the current final exam is not comprehensive, mixing it with the mid-term should help to develop a comprehensive exam.


text:
I don't know what to say when meeting the supervisor after he has suggested me to leave the research group
I am a PhD student in Germany and my supervisor has suggested me to change the research group because he has told me I cannot write a good quality dissertation within the time framework of three years. He assumes that the maximum possible time for doing the PhD is three years and this time framework cannot be extended.
Now I want to talk with him face to face, but I don't know what to say. Has anyone had a similar experience? Should I fight to keeping this position or I should find another position in another university?
edit 1: I personally prefer to leave the group because I never felt I'm part of the research group even after one semester. I didn't get that feeling even from my supervisor.

It is not clear wheather you want to stay in the team or not. I would also suggest to add your exact intentions regarding the same.

Independently of whether you feel or feel not able to handle the material, this is a red flag. If you stay, be aware that the supervisor is not going to invest time in you, as you stay against his express recommendation. Find another group to work in, or you will most likely have a miserable time, and 3 years of misery, possibly without anything to show for it, is something that one would expect from a prison sentence, not a PhD. Unless you have enormous talent, indomitable self-confidence and an elephant skin. But then, would you have asked us this question?

The three years can always be extended, but possibly not the money. How are you paid? The professor would have to finance you out of his spare budget, which he probably doesn't have or has planned for otherwise.

My professor does not finance my PhD education and I have no external source of finance, I use my own money.

He has never invested time on me. We had meetings only four times during the semester which I presented my weekly progress for 15 or 20 minutes. He would just listen and then tell me what the wrong parts are, without telling the subject I need to study more. I had weekly meeting with his assistant for about 30 minutes and then I would email the result to the supervisor.

Can you disclosure your field?If it is astrophysics/theoretical physics you can publish 2 3 papers in 3 years easily, there is time for this. If it is more mathematical, it should be reachable in 3 4 years. And what about PhD requirements at your department?

You want to talk but don't know what to say? Why do you want to talk in the first place?

"he has told me I cannot write a good quality dissertation within the time framework of three years." You used the tag "international". Are you an international student in Germany? Do you think you lack the native language skills required for the dissertation? Or is it something else? Do you even agree with his assessment? Is he willing to help you get into another program?

Strict time frame of 3 years is just a funny plea. If your boss likes you ou could take whatever time you need to finish a PhD. However, in your case it seems clear that he does not like you. In this case you should go, no matter if it's fair or not. "Fighting" would not make sense.

@Anon with so little time you are getting next to no supervision at all, there is no point in continuing with that group.

You say 'now' you want to speak face-to-face. Were you not speaking face-to-face when he said this to you?!

This adviser is doing you a favor. He is telling you at the very early stage of your PhD that you're not cut for it according to his standards. That sounds harsh and that's why I think the funding argument is merely a diplomatic excuse.
Imagine if he had told you the same thing after 2.5 years, or failed you at the defense (if that still happens).
I have no ways of knowing whether he is right or wrong, but that is irrelevant anyway: he doesn't want you to get a PhD under his supervision, hence you won't get it. Your only viable option is to leave.
For your discussion, ask more details about what you could improve, or what other path he would suggest for you. He is in no way obligated to answer but it might be helpful to you. Based on what he tells you, you might get an idea of what can be next for you: switching group, taking additional education, switching field of research, looking for opportunities outside academia, etc. That is not something we can help with without knowing you and your work.

Here is what a good supervisor should do:

Before hiring you, evaluate your qualifications and abilities in a diligent way.
Once he has hired you, take a certain responsibility for your professional developement, and provide you with his (hopefully prudent) advice, in particular in times of troubles and doubt.
If you fall short of his expectations, tell you in a non-threatening way and look, together with you, for solutions.

As your advisor seems to do none of this, my advice is to run as quick as you can from his research group and look for another position.

That may or may not be good advice but I don't see how it answers the question.

Why not? My answer is: @Anon should find another position in another university, because he/she should not waste time with a bad/hostile supervisor.

About three-quarters of your answer focuses on what advisors should do, not about what the asker should do.

Should I fight to keeping this position or I should find another
  position in another university?

Ask yourself the simple questions.

Fight for what?
Will I fight for this?
Are my chances to achieve what I need enough for the estimated efforts?

You should find a balance between two fundamental edges. Withdrawing from troubles becomes a very bad habit, nobody should feed it. Even so, reasonable step aside is a wise move. Problem in using this dilemma is measuring the price and prize while you haven't such experience and saw only vague probabilities.

Has anyone had a similar experience?

Probably, nobody had the identical situation with the same people for sharing a solution with you. I'd leave one job because it's become unpleasant because some direct hired manager's doings, and I didn't see enough growing potential there. However, It wasn't a hard choice. I'd ripen to move towards harder and well paid projects.
As you write it, such direct recommendation is almost a silent firing, looks like nothing to seek there. But you can still try to obtain some time, recommendations for moving and information about your next workplace.


text:
Realized error in testing of machine learning paper
I submitted a paper in a major machine learning conference recently. The paper submission deadline passed ~2 weeks ago and the appendix submission deadline passed ~1 week ago. I just realized an issue in my testing pipeline that made the benchmark numbers incorrect. I reran the benchmarks and the numbers don't change the results (in the same "category"). What do I do (withdraw or request amendment)? I would not want the paper to get published with incorrect numbers (out of academic integrity), but it realistically should also not change much review wise.

Do you know whether for this conference it is standard that they ask for revisions? In that case you have a chance to correct things without trouble. In many places even if they accept the paper without revisions you'd have a chance to do corrections before final publication. Given that main results are unchanged, it shouldn't be a problem to correct this if at any point you have a chance to make changes, although I can't know whether at this conference you'll get such a chance (more likely than not I'd say, but what do I know... maybe ask somebody with experience with this conference.)

@ChristianHennig - I'm not entirely certain. I can always email the chair. I imagine it would not be wise to just update during the de-anonomization update without a note

It sounds like you are unaware that the paper, if accepted, will not be published in the verbatim form that you submitted to the conference, but there will be a camera ready version, where you are supposed to incorporate reviewer comments, and this will be the final version that will go into conference proceedings.
If these changes do not change the results and conclusions, then you can update the results with the latest ones and submit it as the camera ready version.
If the updated results do change conclusions, then the paper should be withdrawn as in most conferences you cannot update the paper after it has been submitted and the deadline passed.
As an example, for the Neural Processing Systems Conference (NeurIPS), this conference has a rebuttal process where authors can add new results in their rebuttal,in their 2023 FAQ they clearly specify this:

Can the rebuttal include new results? Yes, however your original submission will serve as the basis for the reviewers' (and ACs') acceptance recommendations. The rebuttals should serve only to clarify the reviewers' and ACs' questions during the discussion period.

And for the International Conference in Learning Representations (ICLR), you can update the paper during rebuttal, as long as you are clear to the reviewers of what has changed. This is very clear in the FAQ:

Q. Can we change the title of a paper during the rebuttal?
Yes, you can change the title, abstract, and the paper’s content, including supplementary materials. But make sure any modifications are clearly communicated to the reviewers and the area chair, so that they can efficiently review the modified version of your paper. The set of authors cannot be changed, but the order can be changed.

I was aware, but my impression was that camera ready was for cleaning up (formatting, citations, acknowledgements, etc.) rather than changes to the content (small as they may be) of the paper itself

@mb1 you’re not wrong, that’s precisely what camera-ready versions are suppose to be. This answer asks you to abuse the review process and commit an ethical violation. Will you be caught? Probably not. Is it the right thing to do? Absolutely not.

@Spark Sorry, what? You seem to be unaware of standards in Machine Learning conferences, this is not an ethical violation, people are allowed to add results and changes to the final version, please put evidence to your statements, in particular for Machine Learning conferences.

@mb1 Your impression is actually incorrect for ML conferences.

The ethical thing to do is to withdraw the paper. We are scientists, and our goal is to tell the truth about the world as we see it. If you made a mistake, minor as it may be - own it and fess up. Here’s a few other reasons:

It’s a slippery slope: if you let yourself go this time, you may make greater allowances the next time.
It’s better if you own up than if a reviewer finds out/the numbers don’t make sense. Someone might ask to see your code for reproducibility. What will you tell them?
One discovered error usually implies that other errors exist. Can you say for sure they don’t?
ML is suffering from a serious reproducibility crisis, don’t contribute to it- be a force for good!

I think it makes more sense to just update the paper rather than withdraw it (if allowed). Surely there is a way to contact the chair and let them decide.

Most top ML conferences don’t operate this way. Once you submit there’s no real option for revision (say if it’s NeuIPS ICML ICLR etc)

Surely you still get to re-upload a camera ready version if the paper gets accepted

Yes, but still, the review itself was on wrong results. It’s not the right thing to do.

This advice optimizes for ethics but not career.

@MathematicsStudent1122 If career is more important than ethics, then you don't really have any ethics

@Spark In ICLR you can update the whole paper in rebuttal, what you said is plain wrong: https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2024/AuthorGuide "Q. Can we change the title of a paper during the rebuttal?
Yes, you can change the title, abstract, and the paper’s content, including supplementary materials. But make sure any modifications are clearly communicated to the reviewers and the area chair, so that they can efficiently review the modified version of your paper. The set of authors cannot be changed, but the order can be changed."


text:
What does "Awaiting Reviewers Selection" in scholarone means
I submitted a paper to a journal that used scholarone and the reviewers recommended a major revision. I addressed every single comment of reviewers and made all the suggested changes.
Now, it is in the “Awaiting Reviewers Selection” mode once again. Does anybody explain why the journal editor needs to select new reviewers at this step of the review process?

For a major revision typically the article will be sent through the review process again. Sometimes it is sent to original reviewers, sometimes new reviewers are selected, sometimes a mix. Seems like at least one new reviewer is needed.

It may just be a glitch or they have not yet sent out your new version to the referees. I'd recommend waiting for a day or two while they send it out to the reviewers.


text:
How long does it take to hear back from the faculty hiring committee after an initial screening interview?
I'm currently on the hunt for a job and I applied for several tenure-track psychology faculty positions. I did initial Zoom interviews with a couple of places (15 - 30 minutes long). It's been about a week since the interview, and I am getting nervous.
How long does it normally take to hear back from the hiring committee after an initial screening interview? My advisor said it really varies but I would feel much better if I have at least a rough estimate. Also, do they actually tell you if you are not going to be invited to the on-campus job talk?

It can take a while. Don't expect anything in a week. There may be other candidates. They need to schedule internal discussions. They need to get some buy-in from administration. If it goes on for a month, ask about whether there are updates.
And keep on the hunt for other positions. Don't close out any other options until it is definite.


text:
Editor does not respond after a month of completion of second revision
Our paper underwent a second minor revision after the first major revision. This second revision has been completed by the reviewer 1 month ago, yet the editor has not even seen this report. I know this as the Elsevier tracking status is still "under review" despite the reviewer has sent their report. I am the corresponding author and I sent an email and then my supervisor sent an email but we just got generic responses from the Elsevier Researcher support representative telling us that they have sent a reminder to the editor. yet nothing from the editor. What do we do?

See the generic/canonical answer: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/55665/75368

You have probably done all you can do.

How do you know the second review is complete, if the status is "under review"?

Elsevier lets you track the status of submission. It is under review from the point editor sends the paper to reviewer till they have completed and sent their review. When the editor reads this completed review then only is changes to 'Review complete'.

So if it still says "under review", then the reviewer could still be working on it and not have submitted their review. No?

Elsevier uses Editorial Manager, for which the status remains as 'under review' until enough reviews are submitted for the status to change to 'required reviews complete'.
Since you're seeing 'under review', the indication is that the reviewer(s) have not submitted their report.

When the editor reads this completed review then only is changes to 'Review complete'.

This is not correct. When the editor makes a decision, then the status changes to 'decision in progress'. It does not update when the editor reads reviews, and even if it did, it does not update to 'review complete'.


text:
How does everyone do their lterature reviews?
I have to do a literature review and have never done one before. What are some methods to do this?

Re: #efficiently ... One might want to give thought to the type of lit review. ... Systematic review ... Rapid/scoping review ... Narrative review ... Realist review

First do a search for papers on the topic. A librarian can help with this as can online tools. But the bibliography of each paper you find will point to other papers. It can be a long process.
Read a lot of those papers. Try to summarize them in a few sentences. Index cards are good for this sort of thing, actually.
It used to be harder to find such papers when only hard-copy in libraries was available, but it is now just as hard to read and summarize them. There aren't a lot of effective shortcuts for that if you want to learn anything. Look for insight.
And you have to sort things for relevance.
The point of it is both to learn something in your own work, so that you don't overlook the obvious (or the already done) and to place your own work in context.

Thanks. This is good. What I need help with is doing the actual analysis. I have my papers and books on the topic (56 articles and 14 books). I do understand there is not a good shortcut but I want some way or method to help me do this seamlessly. Do you have any suggestions?


text:
Funding faculty position for a spouse
My wife is looking for a faculty position. It seems its not so easy to get a position in biology though she is doing postdoc at top 5 genetics programs in USA. I am wondering if I can offer a school funding equivalent to her pay for 5 years plus some more for research? I am wondering if good schools will be interested in it? Why I want to do is because at least my wife will cool down and will live a normal life!

Please give more details. Is she looking for a position at a specific university? Has she applied for jobs? What is your situation? etc.

Like, you want to offer them your pocket change?

If I may paraphrase your question, it sounds like you would like to use money to tilt the playing field of a faculty search in your wife’s favor. You would like to know if your plan can work.
Sadly for you, but happily for our society and the health of our academic institutions, this has zero chance of working. Faculty positions at respected universities are offered based on merit - that is exactly why those places are respected in the first place. If your wife has what it takes to get a job offer, she will get it without the need for any subsidies. If she doesn’t, she won’t get it with or without your subsidy offer. At all US universities where people I know and respect work, the only conceivable reactions to your offer would be bafflement at your cluelessness, if not outright derision and anger at your presumption to be able to influence their hiring process by offering money. Conversely, any institution that would seriously entertain your offer (and I suppose there may exist some third-rate, cash-strapped universities that might) is one where I would not advise your wife to take a job.
To be clear, even respectable institutions may put a price tag on their reputations. If you were to offer, say, a donation of 50 million dollars conditioned on your wife being offered a faculty job (you’d better ask for her to get it with tenure in that case), and your wife was reasonably well-qualified, I don’t know for sure but I’m guessing that there are departments that might find such an offer tempting. A university can do a lot of good things with such a large sum of money, probably enough to offset the risk of any reputational harm they might suffer. But five years’ salary and change? That’s a complete non-starter.
Anyway, good luck to your wife in her job search.

So, a partner of a famous professor was never hired by a first-class USA University to solve their two-body problem?

@DmitrySavostyanov The difference between the "two-body" problem and the OP's question is that the hiring of the (possibly second-choice) partner was bought by the academic excellence of the famous researcher, not by their deeper pockets. Assuming the goal of academia is excellence, such a barter may be an appropriate price to pay, but just funding an isolated position for a (possibly sub-par) researcher is not (whereas, again, if a whole high-class institute is funded as side effect, the institution may again consider it a "fair price"). I think this is the point of Dan Romik's response.

@CaptainEmacs Since "academic excellence" is measured by Universities almost exclusively based on funding and student fees the researcher can attract, it's not easy to see the difference sometimes.

@DmitrySavostyanov The actual excellence generator are publications in good venues. Funding is a consequence of the latter. I agree that it is not the most objective of measures, but clearly a criterion that cannot that easily be bought into.

Anyway, hiring someone based on their partner's merit and claiming that this is purely meritocratic seems very hypocritical to me.

@DmitrySavostyanov partners of famous professors are occasionally offered faculty jobs when the partner is him/herself reasonably well-qualified. It’s true that that’s one common situation where departments may compromise a bit on the ideal of individual merit (similarly to the much more unusual kind of compromise I mentioned at the end of my answer). Even then, they do it to maximize the total merit they get from hiring the couple. Also, I don’t think a well-respected university will offer a faculty job to an obviously unqualified partner, even of a famous professor. Anyway, good point, ...

... but it doesn’t invalidate my answer, and I don’t think it justifies your accusing me of hypocrisy. I didn’t mention the couple hiring in my answer because it was unrelated to OP’s question, and I did acknowledge that the ideal can be compromised on in some situations. Hiring based on merit is the norm in any case.

I think you are overcritical to my thought. Unfortunately universities ranked below 50 typically give tenure based on amount of funding faculty has got for their research so indirectly university cares more about money than merit. My spouse is not completely meritless. She has been working with a prof who is leader in his work related with epigenetic and has 100 k citations. She has published articles around 7 articles as first author in journals with impact factor of 15+. Unfortunately she could not try publishing nature or cell due to certain constraints.

@NachiketPatil I’m sure your spouse is very talented and hardworking, and I wish her the best of luck. Nonetheless, I gave you my honest opinion that your salary subsidy plan will not work. As for your assertion that “university cares more about money than merit”: it’s true that grant funding is sometimes used as evidence of merit, but “funding” given by one’s spouse will have no value for that purpose. So I stand by my answer. Of course, it’s just my opinion and you’re free to disagree.

I have to admit that I'm just guessing a bit here but it would seem to be unusual, at least, to offer a grant to fund a specific person. There might be rules prohibiting it.
However, a possible alternative for you might be to create a foundation for research along with your wife and have the foundation seek an association with a research university to carry out the goals of the foundation. Your wife would be a natural participant in that case. The cost would probably be greater, however, as you would need to bear some, at least, of the other costs of the research itself.
Creating a foundation is a legal process and it interfaces with tax law, so you need an attorney to give you advice. But if you have the funds to do what you suggest, it may not be a reach to do more and create something that continues. Depending on the results of the foundation work, it may be that your spouse could, over time, move to a traditional position or stay with the foundation.

Thanks for the response. I think instead of looking for a faculty position I am wondering if universities offer PI positions which are more suitable for this? So that I do not disturb the level playing field as other people are worried about. I personally think that society is never on a level field to start with but at least I think I should not make people angry about what I do. Who I should be taliking at university? Departments or the university foundations?

@NachiketPatil, I have no good advice for that, but at some level you will need to talk to the university itself, I think. But I don't know where it is best to start.


text:
Inquiry about reference of dropout of grad school
I studied briefly for a master's degree in economics at Boise State University, USA. After 4 weeks of first semester, I decided to drop all of my enrolled course because this program is not right for me at all. Consequently, I would like to ask you folks whether I should refer this incident in CV or SOP when I apply for master's degree in another university in the future, 3-4 years from now? For example applying MBA program in UK.

It is possible that Boise State hasn't kept a record of your attendance if it was so short. Request a transcript from them before you make any decisions. If they have no record then you need not mention it in future. But if there is a record then it might depend on what the record says. If there is a grade assigned (incomplete or whatever), then it might be necessary to state it somewhere, though I doubt that the CV is the correct place. If the incident was brief and inconsequential, then your mention of it should also be brief.
If the time period represents a gap in your education/work life it might be more necessary to mention it. However, I doubt that anyone would hold a brief mistake made in the past against you in any way.

there will be 10 months gap (12/2017-10/2018) should I mention it?

Probably you should mention it for such a gap. But maybe not in the CV. If you did something interesting in that period, mention that. In an oral interview, you will probably be asked to account for any gaps.


text:
Should I inform the Review Board that approved presumably illegal data collection?
I've recently reviewed a paper where I think part of the data may have been obtained illegally, albeit in approval of the ethics review board.
Hence, I'm wondering whether there is a point in sending an email and informing the ethics board about potential issues from approving the relevant study. Particularly, I'm wondering whether any good will come from this, or whether I'm mostly gonna be ignored and burn bridges towards places.
Disclaimer: While I personally think that it is fairly obvious the data was in-part obtained illegally, IANAL and as such, may of course be wrong in my conclusion.

You may have committed to keeping the paper and your review confidential. If so, reaching out to the institution's review board may get you in hot water with the journal or its editor. So the first person I would reach out to would be the editor.

Definitely the editor - they can, on behalf of the journal that does not want to publish something that is in violation of ethical and legal standards, ask the probing questions.

Contact the editor with this suspicion.
The journal may have a policy on how to proceed.


text:
How much do you agree with Elon Musk statement that non one is going to read your publications?
I have seen a public video on youtube where Elon Musk gave his opinion about academic publications: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uA_2v0d9Gzs
He stated that most academic publications are pretty much useless and no one ever reads them.
I personally relate to his point of view and understand that he was not generalizing to all research produced, but at the same time he has a valid good point.
Is Musk correct in his assessment?
Do you feel that your research is having/will have some impact in the world?
If according to some metric (to be defined) most of academic papers are useless and that nobody will ever care of your published work, then what is the point of wasting the best time of your life by pursuing an academic career where the chances of getting a permanent position are very slim?

Sorry, but I'm voting to close as opinion-based. Also, to classify a paper's usefulness, don't you have to read it first? So his statement that all papers are useless and no one reads them seems contradictory.

Does this answer your question? How many people read an individual journal article?

"What is your opinion in this regard" -- note that we do not allow answers that are only opinions or survey responses; we require answers to be based on references or specific personal expertise. You may be able to rephrase to "focus on a more fact-based line of questioning" -- for more details, see here.

There is a famous anecdote about a big CEO. He was told that only 10% of marketing and advertisement investment were actually effective. So he told his marketing director to cut the 90%. "Well", said the marketing director, "the problem is, we do not know which 10% to keep."
And so is science. [This was supposed to become an answer, but the question was closed while I was writing. I threw away 3/4 of my response - quite annoying.]

@CaptainEmacs, and annoyed you should be. Reopen?

@Buffy I threw it away, won't rewrite it. It'll be just a comment, thanks for the offer!

Even if no one reads your publications, it does not mean they are "useless". You still can use them in your CV and for grant applications.

Why does the user @Buffy corrects the content of my question and seems that also closed my question but makes a comment for himself/herself and after blocks other people from replying? This is not fair!

I changed the question to make it less "opinion" based. I didn't vote to close it and I have no power to block anyone from anything. In fact, I voted to reopen it. You are free, of course, to roll back my change if you object to it.

@Buffy: The question is still very opinion-based, asking us about how we feel about something. Even half of your answer is about how Elon Musk is trolling. A valid question about this going beyond this question would be something like: “Is it considered a problem of academia that most articles are read only by few people?” But that’s best asked as a brand-new question.

Well, for starters, Musk is just trolling. I think he does that often enough that people should recognize it for what it is. The statement has a bit of truth and if you exaggerate it enough you get to his statement.
A more accurate portrayal is that most academic publications have a very small audience. Not all, but most. The audience is other specialists in that sub field to which the paper applies. The paper might be very significant to half a dozen people worldwide, but of little interest elsewhere.
Some papers, on the other hand, have a lot of influence. And some of the lesser papers are what eventually enable the big ones.
The publication of his ideas on the Calculus by Leibniz were pretty important and have had a huge impact, and not just on math. Einstein's work has also had a big influence.
If you were to create a graph of the importance of papers vs their numbers, I think it would be pretty skewed. But that is irrelevant if it is the small steps, accumulated over time, that make the big steps possible.
So the "useless" is an exaggeration. And the "nobody" is an exaggeration. The result is just a troll. Smile and enjoy the workmanship of Elon the Showman. But don't neglect your research.
And none of Musk's business ventures would be worth anything without the research that led to the technology they use.
That said, at the moment, it is a pretty poor marketplace for academics. A lot of that is political with too little consideration given to the long term importance of education generally. And, of course, to survive in any competitive environment you have to work hard and get results. If you don't love research and the field you work in, then do something else. The rewards aren't financial for most of us.

To add a personal note. My doctoral dissertation (classical real analysis) was incredibly esoteric, though quite nice in its way. I predicted at the time that no one would ever find a practical use for it. I was wrong, though it took ten years or more before someone found an application. My later work in CS had more of an immediate impact.
And, my gateway into academia wasn't easy to pass through. I graduated at a time when no one wanted to hire mathematicians, since there was a glut due to the race to the moon. My trajectory would have been entirely different had I finished three years earlier. But, life is good. I'm not sorry that I stuck it out.


text:
How to suggest merging papers with a more senior author?
Here is my situation: A well-known senior researcher - let's call him Prof. Bigshot - wrote a paper. His paper is based on a good idea, but the implementation of that idea is (in my humble opinion) messy. After much thought, I, a lowly PhD student, cleaned up and extended the implementation and wrote a follow-up paper.
Both of our papers are publicly available on arxiv. I know (via gossip) that Bigshot's paper has been rejected twice already. I have not submitted my paper anywhere yet.
I believe his paper is being rejected because it is a conceptual paper without any meat. And I worry that my paper will also be rejected because it is incremental. However, if we merged our papers, I think it would be a strong paper as it would have both conceptual and technical contributions.
Thus I think it would be mutually beneficial if we merged our papers. (My advisor concurs with this assessment. Merging papers is reasonably common in my field.)
How do I go about suggesting to Prof. Bigshot that we merge our papers? I don't know what the etiquette for this situation is. I worry that he will think I am trying to take credit for his idea. Should I just wait for him to bring it up? or should I actively suggest it?
I have interacted with Prof. Bigshot before and I also sent him a draft of my paper, to which he responded positively. So this is not coming out of the blue for him, but I need to be diplomatic nonetheless. In particular, I want him to feel comfortable saying no without anyone's feelings being hurt.

@user37208 That is a possibility, but, given that I have interacted with Prof. Bigshot before (i.e. I don't need my advisor to introduce us), I feel like this is probably something I should do myself.

Still better if your advisor does it.

"I want him to feel comfortable saying no" - this is usually not a problem for bigshots from my experience

Let met just get some stray observations out of the way: "Professor Bigshot" publishes a paper with flaws that are obvious to a PhD student, who knows just how to fix them and happens to know information about the status of Professor Bigshot's submissions.  This "gossip" seems perhaps a smidge unseemly (although I don't want to claim that I never talk about this sort of thing myself).  In my field, well known senior researchers rarely write papers with an obvious shoddy aspect (they may make some kind of subtle, critical mistake -- everyone does sometimes -- but that's not the same thing).  I find it a bit curious, but it doesn't affect my answer.
Sure, if you and someone else have two unpublished manuscripts that would each benefit from being combined with the other, you should suggest the combination.  I would have given the same suggestion already given in the comment: maybe get your advisor to broach the subject.  The advantage of this is that your advisor is (surely?) much more senior and established than you, so if the request comes from him in the formal sense, it comes with his imprimatur.  Putting myself in the Professor B's place, knowing that your advisor has endorsed the action is at least useful information.  If your advisor is someone I know and respect, then that does put more gravity behind the request.
(By the way, you didn't just wake up one day with a "followup paper" on your hands.  In deciding to write the paper, you knew you would be putting yourself in your current situation.  I hope that when a PhD student decides to write a new paper, he mentions it to his advisor!  What advice did you get while you were writing the paper?)
I don't mean to insist that going through your advisor is a key point.  Given that you have already corresponded with Professor B, it most likely will not be.  Anyway, let me assume that you will do the asking yourself, because that's the more difficult case.

How do I go about suggesting to Prof. Bigshot that we merge our papers?

Assuming you want to do it yourself (to be sure, there is nothing wrong with doing this), you write to Professor Bigshot, send him a copy of your paper, and ask for his feedback on it.  You mention that the possibility of merging them has occurred to you, and you would be interested to hear his take on that.

I don't know what the etiquette for this situation is.

I don't think there is any specific protocol here.  In dealing with academics, especially senior academics, you want to be (i) informative, (ii) respectful and (iii) reasonably concise.  There are many ways to do so.

I worry that he will think I am trying to take credit for his idea.

Suggesting coauthorship is not trying to take credit for someone else's idea.  It is possible that he thinks that the idea is so precious, even with its shoddy implementation, that he doesn't want to share authorship with someone else.  Okay, he can say no, but you haven't done anything wrong.  It would also be possible, by the way, to describe your respective contributions in the paper itself, in this case crediting Professor B with the idea and you with the implementation.  That is not done as much as it should be, but it is sometimes done.  But wait -- in this case you have separate arxiv preprints, so the origin of the contributions is rather publicly known.  I don't see that you have much to worry about.  If you wanted to, you could cite both preprints in the paper: this would be an unobtrusive, easy way to show any interested party the provenance of the paper.

Should I just wait for him to bring it up? or should I actively suggest it?

You should actively call his attention to the possibility of the collaboration.  There is no prize for the meek here.

Thank you for your answer. "Shoddy" is probably not the right word and my follow-up work was not obvious (to me). I have edited the question to clarify.
In terms of how this happened: I didn't set out to write a follow-up paper; I was working on a related problem and saw that the techniques I was using for the related problem could be used to simplify his work. I used some tools from a different area that Prof. Bigshot was possibly not aware of.

It may be true in your field, narrowly construed, that senior researchers do not write papers with an obvious shoddy aspect, but it is not true even in mathematics more generally (e.g., the mess in symplectic geometry about virtual classes).

@Vivek: What I said was that it was rare, which is true as far as my own experience goes.  I don't know the incident that you refer to.  Is there some quick link you can give me for that?

@PeteL.Clark, one side of this endlessly amusing trainwreck can be found at the homepage of Aleksey Zinger.  I am not equipped to comment about which particular mathematicians are writing shoddy papers, but it is clear from the controversy presented there that at least one or the other of the various combatants are.

@Vivek: Thanks for the link.  I am honestly not sure whether or not to regard it as an example against what I said above...but it certainly made interesting reading.


text:
Is it good practice to share pre-print of PhD thesis?
I know it's common practice for researchers to share the pre-prints of their papers on online repositories such as ArXiv , SocArXiv, SSRN, OSF. This practice helps speed up the process of receiving feedback from more people and it helps drawing more attention to the study.
Now, I've just submitted my PhD thesis to university/examiners and the whole process will take a while until I get my PhD defence (viva), eventual corrections etc until the university puts my thesis available online. My question is: is it Ok to share the submitted thesis manuscript as a pre-print online before having the PhD defence?
edit: I've recently been informed that The Center for Open Science (the same group behind SocArXiv and OSF) also has a preprint repository devoted to theses called Thesis Commons.

I think that question can only be answered by your University and your advisor. It is conceivable that they have some rule prohibiting it. I think that is unlikely, but you should learn first. Even if it is not forbidden, your advisor can give you feedback on whether it is advisable in your case.
If you were submitting to a formal publication, on the other hand, their rules might also be important to consider.


text:
Basic paper outside area of expertise: reject or decline?
It sometimes happens that I receive referee requests for theoretical papers which deals with the same phenomena I do in my research, but from a totally different specific theoretical starting point. I am familiar enough with the "competitors'" theoretical framework that I can read the papers, but they more often than not, it seems that the papers I receive are limited to only basic results of the kind I would not publish myself, but rather leave for my memoirs or a lecture note.
I realize that I am of course a bit biased, since I actively dislike that theoretical framework. For that reason I also have a hard time judging if the papers actually make some kind of incremental contribution, which would warrant publication.
For these reasons, I mostly decline reviewing such papers. But recently I have started to doubt whether I am, in this way, a bit too soft. If everyone, who are not active researchers in that very specific theoretical framework, decline to review their papers, we just end up with a lot of sub-par research being published. On the other hand, I don't want to become one of those petty referees, who will only accept papers that does the kind of theory that I find best.
Are there any good solutions to this dilemma?

The time I felt or I was unsure but somehow I've mistakenly accepted to be referee I wrote very clear letter to the editor, saying my opinion could have be considered but recommending one more expert to be contacted.  It is not exactly the same situation but somehow similar. Basically I made clear my contribution to the decision to be put at a second level. I think it is still useful and fair not only to the journal but also to the authors

It sounds like you are too soft. If you sincerely believe a paper should be rejected, then declining to review it is just withholding useful information from a scientific community that is sorely in need of precisely that information.
It is good to question yourself and examine if you have any biases, but at the end of the day, evaluating a scientific work is a subjective matter and on such things we are all biased in one direction or another. The journals are asking for your opinion because they think you are the best person to provide it; why hold back?

This is an interesting point of view, but referee choice is often driven by more prosaic considerations (e.g. a hassled editor might just settle for the first available person) than something as idealistic as a search for the "best" person to conduct the review.

@user_of_math “best” refers to a combination of factors, including, importantly, being available. Or to put it differently, you can replace “best” with “best available” if you find that more accurate.

@user_of_math: In this particular case, the editor apparently found the exact right person -- knowledgeable in the area, and with a perspective that allows them to point out flaws in the paper. Now nabla just needs to say "yes" to reviewing :-)

Thank you for the comment. I know what you mean, it is basically what I outline myself. To the discussion: Reviewing a paper is more than just pointing out flaws - most papers like this don't have any mistakes, but are simply rather boring. That, you could argue, is also a flaw - but a person viewing a paper a bit from the outside is probably not the best to point that out.

It sometimes happens that I receive referee requests for theoretical papers which deals with the same phenomena I do in my research, but from a totally different specific theoretical starting point...they more often than not seem extremely basic to me.

Given that you deal with the same phenomena from a different basis and achieve more advanced results (i.e., not extremely basic), can we conclude that your basis offers some advantage that is being overlooked (by proponents of the other technique)? If so, you could write a position paper that argues in favour of your starting point and against the other starting point. In parallel, you could ask a competitor to write a position paper that argues against your starting point and in favour of their starting point. Perhaps you could then combine your two papers before submitting for publication. Maybe the resulting paper will surprise you both!

Thank you for the suggestion! This is in fact something I have been trying to look into, so far with limited results - but I am learning things, and that can only be a plus.
I realize that I may have formulated the "basic" in a clumsy way. The "competing" formalism can of course to very advanced things - this is just not (seemingly) done in the papers I mention receiving for review. I will edit my question a bit.

The "competing" formalism can of course do very advanced things - this is just not (seemingly) done in the papers I mention receiving for review I wonder why. There must surely be a reason. Perhaps doing such advanced things is time-consuming.


text:
Listing "memberships" on academic CV
I have seen people listing "memberships" on their CV. Do you have certain rules of thumb for what to list? I have some myself, which are basically memberships that have happened automatically, when I have been invited to give talks - like, come give a talk, and please join our "board of associates". I don't do any work in those roles, and listing them feels a bit like CV padding. I am in the beginning of my career (first post doc).
What is the normal practice?

My experience is that people only list memberships in large, well-established professional societies.  Usually they require paying annual dues but don't have other responsibilities.

@NateEldredge I fully agree. Would you have any insight why people do mention memberships in the CV, since it only requires paying?

I think it just indicates a certain level of involvement with the wider academic community.  It also gives some indication of the person's interests and priorities.  For instance, the American Mathematical Society, the Mathematical Association of America, and the National Association of Mathematicians all have rather different focuses and goals, corresponding, extremely roughly, to research, teaching, and equity.  So knowing that someone is a member of one or the other says something about them.  (You can insert your own "People's Front of Judea" jokes.)

The general rule is "if you don't want someone to ask you about it, don't put in on your CV." Including such memberships is still standard practice for many as they signify both your involvement and willingness to continue to participate in your field. So, don't think of these memberships as padding, think of them as opportunities to highlight your accomplishments - unless you really can't find a positive way to discuss these memberships, in which case they should not be included.

" as they signify both your involvement and willingness to continue to participate in your field." Really? Becoming membership of the associations I know simply requires paying.

As @NateEldredge notes in the comments above, it can be valuable to know someone else is a member in something, even if it just means you both pay to be a member of the same association. Perhaps for some associations the level of participation is more implied than explicit.

Many people I know subscribe to a society only to get the member discount at the conferences organized by this society. It all feels like a big scam to me --- the societies inflate artificially their member count by making membership_fee < member_discount.

Many (but not most) people list membership in disciplinary organizations on their CV.  If the membership is open to anyone who pays a fee, I consider listing this completely pointless.  If membership is selective, then it is productive to list it.  If somebody lists membership in a predatory or pseudoscientific organization on their CV, then I would view that as a negative.