text:
Is it appropriate (as an undergraduate) to email an academic with a question on their publication?
I am currently studying a published article as part of an undergraduate research project I am doing. I am having difficulty understanding specific parts as the article is quite dense and makes some leaps in logic that I am having trouble following. The article is of a mathematical/computer science nature and suppresses many details.

I would like to email the article's author to ask a question or two, and I am wondering, is this appropriate? If I were a post-doc or something I would not hesitate. My concern is that as an undergraduate, perhaps my questions will be silly and/or a waste of time for the author. Or worse yet, I am concerned that it is inappropriate for an undergraduate to email at all. Can anyone offer some comments on this?
Some relevant info:
- I have studied the problem and am unable to answer the questions thus far.
- My supervisor does not know the answer either and would have to study the paper (my job) to determine the answer.  As noted, this is nearly identical to a question asked by a Masters student, but I feel it justifies its own responses. My concern here is that I may be asking questions that would be obvious to a Master's student.

While you are an undergraduate student and the author of the marked duplicate is a masters student, I believe the answers there directly apply to your situation as well.

The difference between an advanced undergraduate student and a new masters student is, I'm afraid, vanishingly small :) (It is not at all unusual for my undergraduate research students to be "better" than some of my masters students.) Also, if your supervisor does not know the answer to your questions, they are not likely to be "silly and/or a waste of time".

@ff524 OK, thanks for the info! Do you agree with mikeazo, to leave out that I am an undergraduate in my correspondence? Also, should I be letting my supervisor know of my intention to email the author before doing so?

I think it's nice etiquette to just introduce yourself professionally when contacting someone, e.g. "Hello, I am 1west and I am an undergraduate research assistant working with Professor 2east at the University of North South." etc. And of course since you're name-dropping your advisor's name, you should let them know. (As it says in the answers to this question).

It is definitely appropriate. Further, I wouldn't even tell the author that you are an undergraduate. Just tell them you read their paper as part of a research project and had a few questions. Should be as simple as that.


text:
Register to 2 conferences at almost the same time with the same talk abstract/paper
I don't know how to do to prevent being blacklisted from journals. I wanted to give a talk at an international conference (and not to publish this work as a conference paper). I did not know that it is unethical to apply the same talk abstract for two conferences at the same time (I did submit the corresponding paper for publication to just one journal).
The conference A wanted the participant to register via emailing to a professor who handles this conference. It is the form with details and abstract I would like to give. I sent this form by email as mentioned, and did not receive any acknowledgement or response from him for around 10 days. At almost the same time, I made a contact to the conference B to ask questions about registration. My advisor told me that it is uncommon to pay the fee before a review so I asked them about this.
Then, 10 days later, I made the follow-up contacts to both the conferences. Only, conference B answered me (within a day) and they told me to send abstract and some details to them to review before paying the fee if suitable. Then, I prepared and sent the documents (based on the same paper) to conference B and they accepted my talk. I did not know until recently that we shouldn't apply 2 conferences altogether. I did not receive any response from conference A so is this still a bad practice? How can I do now to prevent being blacklisted? I am so nervous.

‘I am so nervous.’ Start by stopping that.

Are you trying to publish your work as a conference paper in both? It's a bit hard to figure out what you think the issue is. If not, I don't see any harm at all. Plenty of people do back to back conferences.

No, I just want to give an oral presentation at one conference, and publish the paper in the journal. However, I sent to both of them the abstract of the talk without rejection from the conference A.

I read from this https://www.quora.com/Can-we-submit-research-paper-in-multiple-conferences-and-when-it-gets-accepted-in-one-we-later-withdraw-from-others @CameronWilliams that may be issues even though I don't publish in the conference.

If the conferences don't require publication in a conference proceedings, I don't see what the problem is.

Thank you, I am a little less nervous from your answer.

You haven’t written anything about a response from A, nor about paying any fees. Why do you think you actually are registered there? Do conferences in your field usually allow to cancel a registration? Most critically, why do you think "we shouldn't apply 2 conferences altogether" in the first place?

I don't receive any response from A until now, and I didn't pay any fee but just sent the abstract for consideration.
I don't know I am considered registered yet.
I don't know too.
Because I read from Quora's Barry answer and comments in the link above. @MisterMiyagi

Well, did you actually submit the same paper to both conferences, as the Quora Q&A discusses? Your question here doesn’t say you, only that you registered yourself to both, with the details of where you submitted the same work/abstract/paper missing. Please be aware that you can still [edit] your question, as it should contain all relevant details (so that people don’t have to pick them out of volatile comments).

@MisterMiyagi Thank you for reminding me. I edited the question. Please answer me about the question in this case.

The edit arguably makes this more confusing. A talk abstract and a conference paper are very different things. You're likely to get conflicting answers as a result. Pretty much every conference wants an abstract for the talk so that the organizers know what you're presenting about (to see if it's even relevant) and so attendees can see if your talk is worthwhile to them. There is no harm in applying to give a talk (without publication) to multiple conferences. A conference paper is for publication and you should not submit more than once as this is unethical for many reasons. Which is it here?

Thank you for your comment I got confused with the Quora comments. @CameronWilliams It is an abstract for the talk here.

@CameronWilliams While that may be true in your area, that is not true in all fields (OP hasn't named a field).

There are archival and non-archival conferences. (Extended) abstracts in the former count as publications, while presenting at a non-archival conferences is not immediately associated with a publication.
Submitting an (extended) abstract to an archival conference explicitly or implicitly includes promising that the material is not published or under review at any journal or other archival conference.
No such thing is applicable for submissions to non-archival conferences. One probably shouldn't talk about the same stuff too often, but there are no hard rules for this.
So in the situation described by the OP there only is a problem if both conferences are archival. Note that the status of conferences is highly correlated with the field. For example, CS conferences tend to by archival and math conferences tend to be not.

There is not such distinction in my field (I don't think we have archival conferences), and some conferences make you say "this work hasn't been presented on" and some don't. So you have to read the submission page for every conference you submit to.

Yes, my field is in math.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to deal with depression due to changing PhD advisor?
Previously I was working with professor A. During that time I feel lost: progress moved much slower than I expected and it's quite difficult to learn new skills required in the lab, which cannot intrigue my interest and push me to read paper at all. Also, lab environment makes me feel uncomfortable sometimes and there's a lack of funding in the lab currently. So I thought I may still need to tolerate these for one year until I formally start my project.
Based on these, I left the group and chose to work with another professor B with enough funding. And I can also start my project immediately. However, different accidents occurred that I forgot to take them into account before I made the decision. One of the most serious consequences is that I screwed up friendship with others. I regret my decision a lot now. This causes me in serious depression.
Was I too hasty and short-sighted then? Only considering to start my project as soon as possible while ignoring almost everything else. I didn't talk to my advisor in depth about these and members in the group.
I can't stop myself thinking on these everyday recently and can't focus on work. I'm always thinking if I persist on staying there for more time, it may be better. I don't know how to solve my issue. I think one of the biggest problem of me is that I did not evaluate myself carefully and correctly. A large part of decision was based on my illusion rather than facts.
Recently I searched online about changing advisor, and I found most of the reason people change is because their advisors are terrible. But this is not the case for me. Both advisors are nice and I'm interested in the research topic. The previous advisor has more communication with students. I'm even thinking go back to the previous advisor, but this may not be a good choice.
I don't know what I can do. Can anyone help?

Many people with depression think that changing their situation will improve the depression. Often it does not. In my (secondhand) experience, the best solution is to avoid making any more big changes until you have sought professional help and treated your depression.

Good wishes for your future. I hope you have at least one close friend you can chat with about these things. Our poor efforts here are likely to be pretty clumsy. We are not trained for such things and we know only the tiny bit about you from your post.

I have significant 1st hand experience in this area; in the case of real clinical depression it's a complicated thing but it doesn't just happen suddenly because of wrong decisions or circumstances. More likely if it's really depression - it simply makes everything seem awful, wrong, etc. while the worst of the episode lasts. I agree with Dawn - don't consider making further big decisions quickly. Try to seek some professional help if you have access, and a close friend may be helpful, you'll have to judge.

After my first, what got me through subsequent episodes was reminding myself that "This feeling is temporary. This will pass." It always did, and the same situation no longer felt awful, wrong, etc.

Thanks everyone. I will not make any big changes recently. I made an appointment with the mental health. I forgot to say that I screwed up my friendship with others because of my choice. That's also one thing caused my depression.

hard question here: how can a change of your PhD affect friendship? if they were friends, they stay friends even when you are away (in anoher city/country/department) ... yes, it will be more difficult to meet them, but not impossible, if they were friends, they will be there ... if they were just PhD companions ... good that you find out they were so selfish to cut you out when you changed path. All the best, the world is full of people, do not stick to the "bad" one.

That's because I complained about what I did, but other people misunderstood my meaning. They thought I was complaining on them.

First, feeling bad for a bit because you think you made a wrong decision (darn, I bought the Ferrari, when I shoulda, coulda, got the Lambo) isn't the same thing as Clinical Depression. For the former, you just work out a solution that fits, perhaps at some cost.
For the latter, however, professional medical help is probably warranted.
In either case, however, it is probably worth seeking at least short term advice from a professional to get a diagnosis and some suggestions for improvement even for the "simple" case.
For the simple case (Ferrari/Lambo) I can offer a few suggestions.
Sit down, perhaps with your significant other if appropriate. Make a list of your goals. Make a list of your options. For each option list how the contribute or not to your goals. For each, try to come up with alternative actions that help meet the goals better.
Don't assume that you have to get it perfectly right. Remember that you will have future decision points and opportunities to make directional changes in your career. Don't rule out big changes if they are feasible and support your goals. Don't assume you are stuck.
See who around you, both personal and professional can help you achieve your goals. Perhaps from another professor can help. Talk to those who have mentored you, perhaps.

Thanks for the suggestion. I think the thing caused my depression is the break down of friendship with others. This would not happen if I didn't make the change.

I think your depression will fade if you take action on the problems. If I understand you correctly, you have two problems: which advisor you should work with, and what happened with your friends. For the first problem you can talk to the advisors directly (one or the other or both), or to some other trusted confidant, like another professor. As Buffy said, knowing what your goals are is a good starting point. Discuss your goals with the advisors or a another professor.
For the second problem, talk directly with your friends. Tell them you sense tension between you and you want to understand their point of view and explain why you did what you did.
My sense is that your depression is caused by perseverating on negative thoughts (Who is displeased with me? What are they thinking? What will the consequences be?) inside your head instead of taking action to solve the problems. I believe that both of your problems are solvable by thinking them through logically and talking with the people involved.
You didn't do what you did out of ill will. Many or most people make wrong decisions even when they do think carefully. Perhaps they miss some key fact or they lack some important insight that they only realize later. This is human. When that happens, you need to forgive yourself quickly and immediately move to problem-solving mode. List the possible solutions and start working on them. If it turns out that you offended someone, apologize and tell them you want to restore the relationship. The faster you take action, the faster these problems will be behind you. Don't allow your perseverating brain to trap you in inaction.
Some strategies that can help your depression: (1) You're stuck in a loop of repeating negative thoughts. Visualize yourself stepping out of the loop. (2) Don't believe everything your anxious and depressed mind is telling you.  Shift to the part of your mind that knows that almost all problems are solvable! Say to yourself, "These are only feelings. They're not reality. I can take action to change my reality."
The problems you've described are solvable. I believe they will be behind you within the next two weeks.

But third underlying problem, before any of the switching is: “feel lost” and “can’t read any papers at all”.

Thanks Eggy. The advisor problem is fine, I can talk to them and I just began to do it. But talking to friends is really much more difficult, and this is the thing affects me most now. As you mentioned, I guess I unintentionally offended them although I don't have that meaning at all. They try to avoid me and even hate me. So I guess they refuse to talk to me and listen to me. What's worse is that they will spread these to more people and new grads coming in the department and let more people misunderstand me. I also don't have a chance to talk to them during these months. It's really hard.

And yes I'm stuck in a loop of repeating negative thoughts. In recent weeks, whenever I try to start to work, I will think of others' negative thoughts on me and then I will be full of guilty, regret. Also I will worry more people will know details about me that I don't want other people know. I even think that go back to the previous advisor may solve these, but this is unknown and may make things even worse. It's hard to shift my mind to the positive part, but I will try my best.

“feel lost” and “can’t read any papers at all” aren't problems anymore. This was a problem because I had the wrong thought and didn't correct myself before.

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


text:
PhD supervisor choice: well-known old professor working on traditional project or young prof working on hot direction?
The thing I'm most concerned about is that whether PhDs who working on traditional project will find a good way out after graduation compared to those working on hot direction.
Also, for the traditional project, I'm familiar with most basic techniques used since I used them in my undergrad, so I can directly start to do the project. While for the hot direction project, I need to spend some time learning new techniques from scratch.
Both supervisors are nice, are willing to guide PhD students in detail and care about students.

The answer to your question depends on too many unstated and unknown variables - your risk tolerance and ambition, the personalities of the advisors, ...

Thanks for the comment. I will add more specific description to eliminate more variables.

This is a personal choice and depends on your tolerance for risk. My standard advice to students in similar situations follows.
Working with an established researcher in an established subfield is probably going to result in success. And after graduation, people will know how to respond to you and what you do. Collaborators might be easier to find.
The other is risky, and you should understand all of the dimensions of risk. First, working in a "hot" area leaves you open to getting scooped by parallel research elsewhere. If you do get scooped local rules will determine whether you can actually use that research to get a degree or if you have to keep going, potentially getting scooped again. I know of a case in which two students working independently solved an important problem simultaneously. It took a year and an investigation to determine that both could finish and that there was no misconduct. I think both have done well since.
The second risk, assuming that the other potential advisor is untenured is that they may suddenly discover that their own progress is more important than yours and that they have to focus on their own publications, leaving you to founder. There are some other questions here that mention that sort of risk. Depending on how self directed you are this might not matter, but for some people it matters a lot. Some, a few, I think, actually prefer a hands-off advisor. But many require more support. It isn't an impossible situation, necessarily, but it is a risk.
And today's "hot" topic may be quite cool (in the bad sense) in a few years. There is no guarantee about the job market you will face in 3-7 years. Right now it is very tough.
You might also want to consider whether there is a difference in funding between the two areas, both short and long term.
Taking risky research ventures is much easier if you can do so from a secure position. Many people change their research focus several times over a long career. Your dissertation doesn't lock you in to a narrow slot.

Assuming funding is not an issue with either lab, you may want to ask each lab’s alumni or current members for objective information. I received my PhD in Molecular Biophysics ten years ago from a research university in Texas. As an applicant we got chances to meet several lab’s students. One guy literally told me do not join that lab because the boss is irresponsible when it comes to mentoring or driving students forward.
For me, it was important to make sure students defend and  graduate in a timely manner. That shows the lab Principal Investigator (PI) is serious and committed to helping you grow. I have seen students doing their PhD thesis in Nobel laureate’s research lab or Howard Hughes lab but PI really don’t care if you are stalled in your progress.
Also consider transferable skills that you will have when you graduate and look for a job. Will your education paint yourself to a corner, or does it give you more leverage to succeed?
Remember, getting out with a PhD is just a beginning. Your next gig will surely require more learning and explorations. I did not answer your question about if you should pursue “hot” topic, but as I see it, I think what I said here should be important for your consideration too.

I don't work in condensed matter, so some of my experience may not apply to you. But in some fields, it is common to work on two projects at the same time. A safe project to guarantee timely graduation. Then a hot, high risk project to have some fun, or find interesting career, etc.
I am working on two projects. The high risk, hot project will not be completed in time, but I learn a fair bit from the experience. I really glad my advisor insist I also work on the safe project, so I can still graduate with publications.
So if you are interesting in the hot topic, ask if you can have a backup safe project.

Thanks, that's a quite useful advise, I will ask my advisor whether I can also work on two projects later.


text:
Can I mention in my CV a legislative bill that I wrote, but which is also not yet approved or deliberated upon by congress?
I'm applying for a doctoral scholarship, and the scholarships office told me to mention in my CV all my academic and professional research publications/authored works.
Now, I once worked with a government agency where I wrote a bill that aimed to strengthen that agency. The plan was to submit the bill to congress in 2020 for sponsorship and approval. Due to the pandemic and other administrative challenges, however, this agency has not yet done so.
Can I still include this bill in my list of authored works? Thanks!

Certainly for something like public policy, experience with government is good. If the bill was never submitted (does not appear in the official record), I would specifically mention it with that work experience entry.

If the work is published then you can treat it like any other. But for most purposes the form of the CV is up to you. You can include a special section with an appropriate label for such things. But you should probably also include the state of the "bill".
It is normal to have a section called "Work in Progress" for unfinished research, though this isn't exactly the same as that. But you can use a similar solution.


text:
When and how to leave a faculty position for a new department/university or industry
Summary: I am a successful tenure-track assistant professor, but want to move to another department/institute or industry

I’m an assistant professor about halfway through my tenure clock at one of the top universities in my field.  I am good at my job: my group publishes, my students are doing great, I’ve raised millions, and have delivered above and beyond in terms of department service and teaching.  My tenure case would probably sail through.
However, I deeply dislike where I am.  The administration is totally dysfunctional, my department is consumed by feuds and grievances, academic standards are almost nonexistent, immoral behavior among the faculty is widely tolerated, etc.  Plus, my spouse and I don't particularly like where we are living.
I like being a professor, but don’t see a future in this department.  The only question is what to do.
I understand the norm is to wait until ~tenure, then try and move universities.  This has an element of risk: while I'm reasonably well-regarded, I'm not a "superstar," so can't just write my ticket anywhere, and it's not guaranteed some other equally strong department would want me.   Also, I don’t know if I could stand another 2-3 years here.
I could go work in industry immediately and get paid 3-4x more than I make right now, and live in a more desirable area.  But, this would be a one-way ticket out.  Also, if I wait until tenure to try and get an industry job, I’m worried I’ll  be seen as a 39-year-old washed-up assistant professor.
I wonder if any academics who experienced my situation, or a similar situation, could comment on what they chose to do and how it worked out.  Or, any advice in general would be most welcome.
(throwaway account for obvious reasons)

"I could go work in industry immediately and get paid 3-4x more than I make right now, and live in a more desirable area. But, this would be a one-way ticket out" Please downplay your expectations, otherwise it makes financial and ethical sense to take the industry position immediately, then in 4-5 years you open your own research centre or at least you fund research positions out of your pocket (because, roughly speaking, you earned the same you would earn in your academic life so the additional money are free money, in comparison).
Plus: depending on the field, you may re-enter academia .

I'd guess that if you can raise millions for research that you would be a pretty hot item in the academic marketplace.

@EarlGrey That's highly dependent on field; if you're a pen-and-paper mathematician, sure, but having enough money to fund your salary for a couple years does not mean "have a research budget for a couple years" that includes equipment, bench space, students, etc...

"I wonder if any academics..." this is a wrong place to start these discussions. Please find a practical problem that you face, and ask accordingly. For example "I have 3 PhD students and want to leave my current department - how can I off-board them?'

What exactly are your concerns with just applying to faculty positions at places where you want to work?

Dear @usul, in my field (or perhaps generally) it is highly unusual for people to apply to faculty positions pre-tenure without restarting the tenure clock.  One may of course apply for an associate professor position after receiving tenure, but this involves an opportunity cost and also has no guarantee of success--there are usually over 150 applicants for each faculty position.  And if it doesn't work out, then I will be in the same place I am now, but older and less competitive to industry.

@BryanKrause Anyone inside the academia knows that one of the burning issue is having more work to do than funding available. Laboratory, equipment, bench space are always created out of thin air, but PhDs and PostDoc in 90% of the cases have to magically finish their previous work while looking for a new job and being unemployed (being affiliated as guest in their last institution, to put it nicely). If 1% of the holy&pure researcher "I really would like to stay in academia but the industry is paying me 5x more" would create a fund to help solve this situation, the issue would be long gone...

@EarlGrey That seems to have very little to do with OP's question, and I don't think it's fair to imply that OP should take a job they want less in order to donate to a fund to let someone else do academic research.

@BryanKrause I never implied that, however I am questioning the deep push to be an academic (yes, I can question the deep push not to be an academic, but we are on SE:academia). Is it the byproduct or is it self-realization or something else? Clarified that, and the answer can only be personal, OP will naturally follows the answer to OP's question.
However, asking "any academics who experienced my situation" implies a lot about the (false) consideration of academics as a semi-homogeneous group in pursuit of "the good", unlike the immoral (OP's words) dept colleagues ...

I think Steve Jobs got it right in his Stanford commencement address when he advised that to do great work, you must do what you love and that if you haven't found it, you must keep looking. To his advice, I'd add my observation that the most important factors in all our outcomes in our lives tend to be all the other people in our lives.  Only the most foresighted are able to choose their parents.  But sometimes we do get to choose and it's important to choose wisely.
It sounds like you do love being an academic but you don't like where you're living or the people you work with.  I would try to find new people somewhere you'd like better.  Forget about your clock.  A lifetime is a long time.  Two or three years invested someplace you don't like is a sunk cost.  And it's nothing out of a career of 45 or so.  But why spend one more minute of it with people you don't like if you could spend it with people you do?
So, check out the alternatives.  Maybe there's a dream school dying to hire you. Or maybe you look around and come to the dismal conclusion that there genuinely are no decent academic alternatives but discover Google is ready to make an offer you can't refuse, showering you with cash and a dream job in industry.  Or maybe you decide that compared to the alternatives, where you are now isn't that bad after all.

"two or three years is nothing out of a career of 45"
OP already dedicated 2-3 years to that department, if you add 2-3 years it is more than 10% of OP's professional life dedicated to that department, and let's not even take into account that OP is contributing to the success of that department and of its practices ...

@EarlGrey I was referring to the sunk cost problem, that people tend to focus on what they've invested and want to avoid losses, in this case, giving up the 2-3 years already invested and possibly having to start over on a new clock.

I, too, worked for a lot of jerks and even certifiably crazy people. But it isn't all like that, and I finally found a very satisfying career by changing universities, though it took quite a while. And then, it took off..

Note that the clock might be shortened at a new place. It is worth exploring.

Thanks Nicole.  This answer has helped to frame things in a  constructive way.

@NicoleHamilton Yup, now I realized you meant  2-3 years in the sense of "redoing" 2-3 years, not in the sense of "harden up and wait 2-3 years more at the current place". My apologizes for misunderstanding what you were saying.

Something implicit in this answer is worth emphasising: it's much easier to weigh up the pros and cons of concrete choices, rather than abstract ones. Get an offer or two on the table and then see how you feel - you can always turn them down.

Treat finding a position you love like a research project. Do homework and be organized.  For example, Think about what you like about being a professor. Is it mentoring students, research, teaching, academic service? Look for positions that meet those needs and possibly create your own new position.
I do not know your field, but consider a government research lab or center. On a regular basis, my center hires academics. The pay is likely better and possibly 1.5 to 2 times better than you currently position and work life balance is also better. I know people who work at DOE National labs or have gone back to academic from DOE labs.
Likewise, consider other positions that meet your needs. You have a job, in fact, a prestigious job, which helps you look for another position. For example, look for industry R&D, NGO, or government position. See what might meet your needs and then make connections with people at those locations. Lastly, I encourage you to read resources Nick Corcodilos who has a free newsletter about looking for and creating positions for yourself.

I could go work in industry immediately and get paid 3-4x more

Let's assume that's true.
You should leave at the end of the current teaching period, but after you have a new job.
Do not sacrifice your income and personal life for an institution you do not believe in.
Do not assume that high paying industry job will always be there when you want it.  A recession can happen at any time.

I disagree on the recession aspect. Recessions hit even harder academics, especially if not permanent.

@EarlGrey Rising unemployment leads to more students enrolling, which leads to more jobs for contingent academics.

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

File this one under general advice and observations:
There are several assumptions in your outlook, the two main ones relate to salary expectations in industry, and administrations in academia:
A 3X to 4X jump in salary sounds really high, and finding that kind of a salary increase is probably quite difficult, depending on your field. In the US, you're more likely to get an extra 50K to 100K / year, unless you find a role at Google or some other (bio)tech giant.
Your other main assumption is that the administration at an other academic institution will not be totally dysfunctional, that there won't be feuds and grievances, etc. When the budgets are small, people fight over the crumbs. Are administrations and department politics all that different between universities?
Your "work-lifestyle" will be very different as well: summers are regular working months, your manager will keep closer tabs on you, and your projects will likely have many short term milestones. It's a different kind of pressure than academia. If it's an R&D role with emphasis on Development, you'll have less freedom to pick what you want to work on, and how to work on it, and you might miss that.
Being half-way through tenure at a top university in your field is outstanding, so there are good reasons to grind it out a few more years, depending on the toll on your mental health and relationship. You could also try to improve the culture at your current institution.
Find out where the top 50 universities in your field are, intersect that with where you want to live, visit, and look at the price of housing there and other quality of life factors that are important to you. Then combine an industry search with a search for a position in academia in that area. There are no guarantees that such a move will improve all factors, but you probably won't regret it. Make sure to talk to current assistant professors about the environment in their university.
If you end up happy at a new institution, restarting the tenure clock is an acceptable price to pay. You'd regret restarting the clock in an equally unpleasant environment.

"there are good reasons to grind it out a few more years, depending on the toll on your mental health and relationship. "
Great how it is taken for granted the toll on mental health and relationship.

Plus, my spouse and I don't particularly like where we are living.

So your spouse is staying with you in a place none of the two like, because of your career, while you are clearly not satisfied with it and the prospects are not good, apart from waiting 5 years and winning the professorship lottery (somewhere else, I hope for you).
All this because you feel you deserve to be a professor, your skills are what will bring forward progress and science.
In short: run!
You are just showing how selfish is the academia, you have only one life, technology and progress will move forward, with or without you, however the more you stay in that department the more you will become bitter and a-empathic like your dept colleagues ... and there is a good chance your spouse will became like you and like them, by osmosis.
Or, in turn, you will get fed up with all the immoral standards and you will immolate yourself. Most likely for nothing.
Run run run!

I think this answer is not useful. The OP did say "I like being a professor".

@WolfgangBangerth my answer is a bit harsh, however I have the strong feeling that:
a) OP likes his current profession so much that OP is not willing to put in discussion or challenge immoral behavior among the faculty, while contributing to the faculty "glory";
b) OP is ready to wait to be a permanent professor to start changing things in the department (old man assesment: it will never happen);
c) OP believes the academic are so entitled that once you get out, you can never go back (beacuse of OP's beleifs or because of colleagues imprinting).
OP must run, to another dept or out of acad!

People are sometimes too eager to drop the "Don't walk, run!" speech. :/

@PedroSEDOBETTER if you have no family, then usually you can walk away and take the time to mend your (mental) injuries and recovery from the daily micro-aggressions.
In the academia and with a family, it's either you running, or your family running. Too many people realize it too late.

You seem to be rather biased. For what reason, I cannot know, perhaps you have had a bad experience in academia, or are close to someone who has, or are projecting a bit. Since the OP is looking to make a major life changing decision, I think one should err on the side of caution when suggesting possible outcomes, which this answer does not do. You are jumping to conclusions about their life and forecasting dramatic outcomes based on little information, which is not helpful at all.

@PedroSEDOBETTER OP's words "However, I deeply dislike where I am. "
No human person says something like that lightly, no human person can bear this burden for long time without consequences, for themselves or for the ones around them.
I am not biased: I know data
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00661-w
or
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41578-021-00367-z
On the other hand, if someone says lightly "I deeply dislike where I am. " well, it is a dangerous sign of absolute narcisism.

@PedroSEDOBETTER if you are happy about academia, have a look at what real persons are saying, this is a good starting point:
https://twitter.com/oopsohno/status/1509463156703309827 , connect it with the nature communications I cited earlier,
then feel free to consider my point of view "biased".

I think the other answers are great advice.  I'll just add one thing that I didn't notice in them:
To start your search, talk to some senior academic (or more than one) whose advice you respect.  This might be your thesis advisor, or someone you've worked with, or contacted at a conference, or someone in your current department.  Express your concerns as you did in this question, and ask if they know of any other department they think you'd like better who might hire you.  They'll know something about what's going on in other similar departments, and they'll be able to spread the word that you're looking if you want them to.
In my experience, academic hiring at your level is very calendar-driven.  It's probably too late to be considered for jobs that are open this year, so you've probably got until near the end of the year to decide what to do.


text:
Correct identification of scientific journal?
I'm new to academic writing. From what I read on other posts, would the "133" be the volume number? And the 46-54 be the page in the journal?
J Surg Res. 2006 Jun 1;133(1):46-54. Epub 2006 Apr 21.
From: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16631200

Journal of Surgical Research
Volume 133, Issue 1, June 2006, Pages 46–54

You are right. 133 is the volume number and (1) is the issue number of the journal, while 46-54 indicates the page numbers. Since you are new to academic writing, a little bit of information on referencing and citation styles would probably help.
There are several style guides such as the APA, MLA, Harvard, and CMS style guides. Of these, students and researchers in the sciences and the social sciences generally follow the APA style guide. The APA style uses in-text citations as well as a separate reference list at the end. Typically, when referencing journal articles, the format used is as follows:
Author, A.A.. (Publication Year). Article title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.

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


text:
Traveling before graduate school
I want to take a gap year and travel after getting my undergraduate degree in Physics. Is it possible to apply for a research grant that would cover my expenses that year? Can someone travel a lot as long as they meet the expectations of a research grant?

What's the purpose of the travel? What's the field you are going to study in graduate school?

Are you planning to do research during your gap year? If so, it wouldn't be a gap year anymore, would it? If not, why would a research grant cover your expenses?

The purpose is non-academic but since I won't be constantly on the move, I'm sure I will have time to do any research I would be able to do from an office. I want to study Physics in graduate school as well, and my interests are theoretical/computational, so a laptop is enough to do the kind of work I'm imagining.

Why ruin a nice holiday with work? Save up a bit and then travel properly, without any pressure to do anything. Return and start your PhD refreshed and ready to go.


text:
Arxiv Empty Bibliographic data
I have uploaded a paper to arxiv. It has several citations / references.
However, when I look at the Bibliographic data, it is shown as empty..
Any hints of what could be wrong?

Where are you looking at the "biliographic data"?  That's not an arxiv.org page image.  Moreover, it is unclear whether you are looking for it to show citations to or from your manuscript.

In addition, how long has the paper been up (public) on the arXiv? Separate databases (like the NASA ADS) will generally take a day or more to update their listings.

@Buzz Yes, this is an screenshot from Arxiv. Recent papers have Semantic Scholar enabled.

@Anyon The paper has been there for a couple of weeks

I eventually found some preprints that happened to show this bibliographic data section, e.g. 1805.02262. Clicking the What is Bibex? link, I note that the current version of the arXiv Bibliographic Explorer is 0.1, from September this year. In addition, they refer to this functionality as a project. Hence, I think you're looking at a somewhat experimental feature, still in development. Most likely then, this feature simply hasn't been able to extract the data it needs, for whatever reason. You could use the "report data issues" link to send them a feedback email to help the development forward.


text:
Prerequisite requirments
I want to start research in the field of Computational Cosmology. It includes the galaxy formation and reionization era. I know it involves extensive computing techniques including parallel and high performance computation but do I need to study General Relativity (detailed course) or I can work without it (or having its basic concepts)?
For the physics part, I have to study Astrophysical Hydrodynamics and galactic compact objects and their X ray sources etc.
Do I need complex differential geometry of General Relativity for this?
P.S: I have a physics background and right now in course-work phase at graduate level in Computational Science degree.

The list of required courses will most likely be available from your university (and vary by university).

There is no one in my university (even in my country) who is working in this field. People over here are saying that I have to take Differential Geometery courses for it whereas I don`t see such requirements in international institutions.
I am going to start with a foreign supervisor, who is currently unavailable. That is why asking someone who is working in this field.

You should ask your (future) supervisor nevertheless, because the way other people would teach it and the requirements they expect of their students might be very different, even if they are in the same field. Especially if it is a fairly new, open field right now.

I don't know if it's 100% necessary for computational cosmology but I would highly recommend studying General Relativity if you can, especially if the course includes some cosmology as well (fairly common for undergraduate and graduate courses in GR).
Fluency in differential geometry is (I think) an essential skill for a cosmologist, computational or otherwise. Studying GR and cosmology will also greatly help your understanding of the bigger picture, for example, the FLRW background, the Friedmann and continuity equations etc.
Plus GR is a really beautiful theory! I would recommend that any physicist study it if they have the chance.

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


text:
Response time of a research supervisor
I had an informal interview with a foreign professor on Skype and things went well. We talked on Friday and he said he will discuss my case during the meeting for recruitment of students. He showed interest and we exchanged emails for the possibilities of scholarships. Mean while he even sent me a book and lecture related to work but he did not replied my email on Monday. I thought he must be busy due to his meeting and its Thursday and still have not heard from him. Tomorrow it will be a week of my interview. Its just 2 or 3 days but should I be worried or wait, until he gets back?

Sara, I would wait another working day (Friday), and on upcoming Monday morning, I would send the following email, so the he/she could respond the beginning of the next week:
Dear Prof.X

I would appreciate if you could let me know about the outcome of the interview?

Kind Regards,
Sara

My interview went well and he seemed to be happy. The only thing worries me he said he will take my case to a meeting on Tuesday. May be he is busy. I have already sent him a similar email. Last week he was responding me within 10 to 15 mins and this week nothing.

@Sarazahoor Academics have busy schedules, and of course it is your life priority to get the position, but the academics have other priorities as well. Being patient is key here.


text:
Print Phd thesis in A4 or A5?
I would like to ask those in Academia who supervise PhD students and get to read their Phd theses. When checking on previous theses submitted to the library, I found some printed not in the more common A4, but A5 format, half the size of A4.
I was wondering whether is is more comfortable for supervisors to read a thesis of roughly 200 pages (just counting the main matter) in A4 or A5 format? My thesis would contain some "normal-sized" tables and figures.

The inclusion of the image seems unnecessary and makes the question much harder to read than necessary. If one is not familiar with standard A4 paper, then seeing the numbers will probably not matter, and it is simple enough to describe A5 as half an A4 page.

Thank you Tobias, I edited the question accordingly.

It might depend on the university, but as far as I know, normally you submit one version to your phd committee and only then after they are done with you, you have to submit a truly final version to the library (which most likely no one will ever read, so small print in A5 might just be a cost saving measure).

In the Netherlands, the most common size for a PhD thesis is close to B5: 170x240 mm.

Firstly, just checking the library is not enough — there might be restrictions on the format and only the relevant office can tell you what those restrictions are (if any).
Secondly, if you find out that you do have a choice (between A4 and A5 paper, for example), the natural thing to do would be to ask would be your supervisor in what format they would like to read your thesis.
(After submitting several printed copies of the thesis for review, you may get some of them back after your thesis defence, which you can submit to the library.)

is it [easier] to read a thesis of roughly 200 pages...in A4 or A5 format?

A4 seems advantageous to A5 if the font size is the same, because more fits on the page.
A4 remains advantageous to A5 with a smaller font size to fit the same information on a single page, if the reader finds smaller fonts harder to read.
A5 is advantageous to A4 if reading on-the-move, because A5 is more compact (and might even fit in the reader's pocket).
Ultimately, more information about the reader needed to definitively answer your question. If you're interested in your examiners' preferences, then you could ask them (just make sure they each have an identical copy!).

I assume that if two versions are available, they would need the same pagination, meaning that the font sizes wouldn't be the same.

@Buffy Yes, I agree that different font sizes are likely, but that information isn't provided

True enough. And given that advisors may be the proverbial aged-aged-man (i.e. me), reducing font size is problematic.

Again, I agree (smaller fonts harder to read ~ reducing font size is problematic for the proverbial aged-aged-man)


text:
Best practice when summarizing (not reviewing) research literature
I recently started my PhD program and have already accumulated a vast amount of papers on my to-read-list. I never had troubles reading and remembering content of academic papers, but this pile is giving me headaches. So much so, that the comment and note functions of my reference management software (Zotero) does not seem to be sufficient to keep track of all the information.
Previous attempts to structure key findings in all this literature have resulted in fragmented lists that just add on to my confusion. I also tried mind mapping applications but feel like there must be some kind of best practice on how researchers structure and extract information on a larger scale (~150 papers).
EDIT: My goal is to quickly gain an extensive overview of my current field of research and its neighboring constructs, including unanswered or potential research questions, hypotheses that were previously investigated. What tools are commonly used beyond reference management software?
I'm aware that this questions has no objective true answer, but find it nonetheless important. Thank you!

It depends on what you are summarizing for.

ofc, sorry. attempted to clarify in EDIT

Still vague objective but will respond with an answer.

Stop reading papers. At least without setting clearer goals first.
My hunch is that you are mainly dissatisfied with your progress, because your goal is too fuzzy and too broad. As you say, you want to

gain an extensive overview of my current field of research and its neighboring constructs, including unanswered or potential research questions, hypotheses.

Depending on what exactly you mean by "extensive overview" and on how broadly you define the "field of research", this may be a truly herculean task, which many PhD students don't even accomplish at the end of their studies.
The goal is also fuzzy, because it's unclear what you want to do with this overview. Are you looking for: a general topic to work on, a specific research puzzle, research that's been done on a specific puzzle, or a small piece of information to fill a gap in your own research etc.? Thus, my first advice is to define for yourself this objective.
My second advice is to start writing your thesis before you continue to summarize other research publications. You may think that you are not yet ready to start writing. But you are. Just write down a few things that you know about the topic that interests you, then write down the unknowns. Next time you dive into the literature, look for these unknowns. Now you have a much clearer heuristic for the things that you are looking for than you currently have. Write down what you learned about the knowns and unknowns. Repeat. Once your unknowns are the field's unknowns, you're ready to define your research puzzle.*
During this process, you will leave a lot of information at the wayside. That's because you are starting to narrow down your research problem, then you will focus on a set of applicable theory and methods, and finally on the nitty-gritty details of your own research design. Don't be afraid of missing out. What you lose you will gain twice in focus. (You can also follow those distractions later, for a future project.)
*Also make sure to discuss your progress with and ask your supervisor for some guidance once in a while.

I faced the same problem when starting my own research.
I think you should avoid mind-mapping applications.
Mind-mapping is fine but for this stage in your research I suggest you use a blackboard or white board or large sheet of paper and attempt to physically draw a map of the high level ideas in the papers. You may need to try dozens of different structures.
The problem with applications is that there is a high overhead in learning how to use them and that obstructs your ability to think about the concepts in the papers.

I would let your specific publication needs (from your work) and researches drive the literature research.  Don't try to get a big overview of all research.  Once you have done a Ph.D., you will be the world's expert in your thesis and have reasonable expertise in a growing circle around it.  But don't expect to have encyclopedic knowledge of a whole subspecialty.  Even older faculty have their "spikes" based on their actual research careers.
Don't take so many notes and don't use a note taking system.  Instead use a filing cabinet and paper copies of publications.  Sort them into some category scheme (does not need to be MECE).  If you take notes on a particular paper, just do it in pen on the paper or on looseleaf that you attach.  At the end of the day, don't try to have some perfect retrieval and synthesis system.  Instead read for what you need at the time and then file the paper in your file cabinet.  Come back to it when needed.
[Note that second readings of papers often give different insights.  You are a different person (more sophisticated, better able to extract things) a couple years later into your Ph.D.  Also, you may be looking for different things later.  Don't expect or try for perfect comprehension the first time.]
Occasionally get the references to the refence (all or many of the citations for a journal aticle).  Don't do it all the time and draw the line at some point of moving backwards.  The point is to just get some feel for types of papers (datapoint versus review, technique versus results, etc.)
Become familiar with some encyclopedic references.  For instance in solid state chemistry the following are very valuable:  Wells Structural Inorganic, West Solid State Chemistry, Greenwood and Earnshaw Chemistry of the Elements, Phase Diagram for Ceramacists.  Consider to buy some or get your PI to do so.  Or at least find out wher held in library (ask for them to be pit on reserve).  Note, you won't read them exhaustively.  But you'll likely do more than just targeted searches.  Occasionally wander down into the Mandelbrot.
While SE likes some generality and you will get responses from different fields, it is helpful if you can give a little specifics also.  That way you may get both general and specific advice.  I can't tell if you are doing history or psych or business or physics.  Experimenter or theorist.  Little bit of info/perspective on your situation also helpful (2nd year student in 4 year Ph.D. or the like). Do this in a light fashion so you don't get accused of a too personal question.  And so more general responses are welcome and helpful to future readers.  But still...give some more info so better targeted advice possible.

+1 for the first paragraph, which could be summarized as: Write first, then read. I'm less sure about the advice to use a fixed category scheme for filing papers. Using running numbers and a reference manager/catalog with tags is more flexible.


text:
Ethical standards in asking a professor for reviewing a finished manuscript and publishing it together
I have been independently working on a substantial idea. The results of my work have been compiled into a complete manuscript.
However, I think I need to have an expert in the field reviewing it to check for potential flaws prior to publication. Then I want to include him in co-authorship. The expert I look for is a professor in another country and we have had no prior contact.
Is it inappropriate to send him a request via email and explain the aforementioned story?
PS: I am a Master's graduate with previous publications. Any elaborate advice or template on how to approach is much appreciated.

There's nothing inappropriate about sending an email with a request. The difficult part might be getting a response.
I would frame the request not as a quid pro quo, but as an offer for collaboration. We are all afraid of getting suckered into a 'collaboration' where we do all the work and the other person/team shares the credit. You are offering the opposite of that, and assuming you are not a crank (you are not 'disproving' evolution, are you?), it could be an attractive proposition to the other side. Just keep your email short and to the point, and don't be disappointed if the other part does not agree that your idea is that substantial.

As you point out, it is not appropriate for you to do all the work and have someone else share the credit. But it sure seems like that's what you're recommending. Unless the other person comes back with a major overhaul of the work, I don't see this is as an authorship-level contribution.

You are correct in spotting the contradiction. I assume that the paper will need serious input to make it publishable. Otherwise, as @Buffy points out, the offer would be an exchange of reputation for authorship. Sadly common, but unethical.

Actually, I'd suggest that you not do that and that you just submit your work to an appropriate journal.
There are two negatives in your plan. The first is that reviewing a finished work isn't grounds for co-authorship. Had you contacted the professor much earlier, when the ideas were being formed, then it would be an actual collaboration. And if the paper is without merit, a reviewer or editor will tell you as much.
The other downside, given all you say, is that the professor might interpret your request as trying to trade off of their reputation.
Also, though not in the same league as the above, sending a paper to someone you don't know in a first/blind email is fairly unlikely to get any response.
If your paper is your own work as as good as you can make it, then have some confidence and send it off to a journal.

I agree.  Offering an authorship for something along these lines creates the appearance that one is trying to capitalize on a prof's credibility for one's own ends.

I don't believe it's at all inappropriate to ask for their feedback. I literally do this all the time (in causal inference, my field, it never hurts to reach out to subject matter experts). In my first paper (currently RR'd at Stata Journal), I thanked A LOT of people in the footnotes, because A LOT of econometricians took time to read my work and give very very good feedback on it... but I didn't include them as coauthors to that paper because that paper is mine, and mine alone.
With this said, if they want to be a coauthor cool, that's great. But, I do believe it is wrong to ask them for co-authorship, unless and until you're prepared to work on it as a proper collaboration (that is, a true collaboration, not simply feedback). In this business, authorship is warranted with contribution. If you did all the hard work, if you were up til and past midnight running code to solve problems and make sure things worked properly, if you've revised the manuscript 100 times from beginning to end, taking every pain to ensure that it's written as logically and as succinctly as possible, if you were the one who called all the shots and had eureka moments at 2am about the way to solve the newest problem you'd been facing, then you are the one who deserves authorship, and while other people may give comments (that we are very most grateful for!!), they should decidedly not be included as co-authors, unless they are prepared to make it their paper as much as it is theirs, and vice versa.
Authorship is conferred with contribution, not simply strength or knowledge.

Thank you for the response. If I am the only one who has worked hard on it, why can't I give some credit to someone else who has not?
I don't really work in the academic business, and it is not important to me that I am giving it away.

When I say "this business", I just mean in this industry of academia-- the fact that you're here on this website tells me that you are in this business, even if it isn't for life. My point is, giving some credit is not the same thing as giving authorship. No professional journal would accept someone being listed as an author who didn't adhere to most of the guidelines I've informally described above. It's called "gift authorship". Google says gift authorship is one of the most common forms of unethical behaviors in academia.

It would not simply look bad on you, it would also tarnish their reputation. I'm a Ph.D student. Someone else doesn't just get to get my Ph.D along with me (literally, in the sense that we both get the same PhD) because life and academia are based, in part, on owning your own actions. Again, I'm not saying you don't reach out and ask for feedback, that's all well and good, but you can't just fork over authorship.

Can you ask some professor of your university to give some feedback? Go to their office hour, bring your printed manuscript and explain what you explained to us.
Con: They might be less expert in the topic of your work.
Pro: They know the standards of your fields and how to write a scientific paper. Further, they might help you directing to the next step, like starting a real collaboration with someone, improving parts of the paper, or submitting directly to a journal.
Pro: They might me more inclined to help a master student of their own faculty compared to the other professor who would be helping an anonymous student from another country.
Pro: You get direct feedback, you don't have to wait for weeks without knowing whether you will get an answer at all.


text:
Explicit request for collaboration/support in publications
If I am publishing a conference paper and/or journal article which is about an ongoing, larger project, is it acceptable or even heard of to not only announce expected future work but also to explicitly request collaboration/support regarding said future work? — since the quality of my work (and the work of many others) is directly influenced by the amount and quality of the data available to work with, I would like to polish a framework which I use to collect data for a particular phenomenon of interest into one which is even more easily set-up and executed than it is now. Of course, this could also be then used for other people to easily collect the same sort of data... and so it would be nice if other parties interested in the work did so and we ended up pooling our data together.
I haven't seen this sort of implicit "I only have so much time to run experiments so it'd be totally awesome if you guys did it too", so I'm not sure if it's just not done that commonly or if it's not "a thing" at all.

I think it would be totally fine to request collaborations, and my colleagues and I actually did it in a paper. We wrote in the conclusions the following announcement:
The authors welcome collaborations from QHARS manufacturers to analyse further cases of practical interest.
Did it work? Yes, but we are in a small field and this probably makes it easier to collaborate.


text:
Capitalization conventions for departments, schools, etc
(Disclaimer: I'm unsure if this is more appropriate here or on English SE instead; Please do migrate this if deemed more appropriate elsewhere)
Are there any general guidelines on when/how to capitalize departmental names which are "pseudo-proper" names, e.g. the department of applied stochastic basket-weaving science in the school of textile engineering at Dartmouth College? — at least in terms of "grammar" (term used loosely here), the the in the example above seems enough: In this usage, it's understood there's only one department of applied stochastic basket-weaving science in the school of textile engineering at Dartmouth College, and there's only one school of textile engineering at Dartmouth College. However, in isolation, such names are often seen in "title-ish" case:

Department of Applied Stochastic Basket-Weaving Science

Likewise:

School of Textile Engineering

However, would this style of case still be applicable when using these terms in running text?

At the Department of Applied Stochastic Basket-Weaving Science (ASBWS) in the School of Textile Engineering at Dartmouth, methods have been developed for using the fibers from old baskets sitting on your grandmother's windowsill to create weapons for the battlefield of tomorrow.

This looks like A Lot of Unnecessary Capital Letters to me, but perhaps my judgement isn't correct.

Better on English.SE in my opinion.  Indeed, it was already asked and answered there: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/74016/should-i-capitalize-chemical-engineering-department/74018#74018


text:
Reference letter without permission
I'm a PhD student and one of my research assistants (undergraduate student) applied for a non-research volunteer position on campus. He asked (via email) for me to be one of his references on the day of the application deadline. I didn't see the email until the day after. In my reply email, I apologized for not catching the email in time, said it would have been better if they gave me more than a few hours warning, and that hopefully he was able to find another letter writer in time.
He replied and said that he had put my name down as a reference anyway because of the deadline. I'm not sure if this was due to them misunderstanding how references work (first job?), or cultural differences (international student?), or procrastination with the application and simply assumed I would be OK with it. In his followup emails he seems to be aware that this was an inappropriate thing to do, but had no choice due to the deadline.
The problem is that even if he had asked me earlier I would have declined to be a reference anyway, primarily because I don't know the student well enough to write a positive letter (he had only been working in the lab for a couple of months at that point).
Today, I received the request for my reference letter, asking me to rate the student on various qualities and some open ended questions. I have enough time to write the letter, but I'm not sure of the correct course of action.
On the one hand I wouldn't have written an overly positive letter in the first place and putting me down as a reference without my permission worsens my impression of the student. But on the other hand I feel that as a supervisor (of his lab work anyway) I should suck it up and help them get the job regardless of how I feel about this situation, as he has been a fairly good student (kind and friendly) in the lab for the little time that I've known him. Additionally, I'll still be supervising the student in the lab regardless of whether he gets the job, and writing a bad letter may sour the relationship and create unwanted tension in the lab.
I'm not sure how to handle this situation. Should the employer be made aware of what happened? Can/should I decline to write the letter? Would there be any negative repercussions for me if I decline to write the letter after being put down as a reference?
I see that there is already a question on here about declining to write a reference (Should I decline to fill out a recommendation form after saying that I will do it?), but in this case I never agreed to write the letter in the first place and this was all done without my permission (or awareness, until after the fact).

This is quite unwelcome, but the student may not be aware that he needs the permission (which is quite unpleasant, but it does happen, esp. with international students). If the student has some redeeming qualities, you may write those down. If not, you can state that you supervised them over that period on that project.

Do you have any reason to think he may have learned about the opportunity that day and decided to just go for it? If it's a once-a-year thing, maybe he was hoping the chance of getting the job was worth the social faux pas?

Are you confusing recommendation forms and recommendation letters here? I just want to note that the forms take very little time 10 minutes...

A reference is not a recommendation, the etiquette is more relaxed and often you are forced to provide references for everything you claim on a resume, like prior landlords on a rent application.  Note that the employer is contacting you directly instead of the student asking you for a personal letter. Professionally speaking you can still speak to their work during that time honestly, even if it is not enough for an academic letter of recommendation. While it is a good idea to give references a heads up, this is not as big of a faux pas as asking for a recommendation letter on short notice.

You are a graduate student who has been placed into a position of authority, managing the work of an undergraduate. This is a chance for you to help this student grow, both by explaining how they should ask and provide more notice, and by providing honest feedback.

@crasic I've never heard of needing references for renting a place. This sounds like a US thing... I've never been asked for one.

" I don't know the student well enough [..] (he had only been working in the lab for a couple of months at that point)": how long do you expect to know them? Most students get reference letter from profs. whom they barely interacted with.

As the student’s supervisor, it is your duty not to “help him get the job” but rather to act in a supervisory role, and that includes giving your honest opinion about the student to anyone he requests you to. When I get requests from students I hardly know to write them letters, I tell them honestly there isn’t much I can say other than what class they took with me and what grade they got, and that a letter from me would not be worth very much, but I always say I am willing to write the letter if they insist that I do.
My suggestion is that you simply answer the reference request from the employer as honestly as you can. If there isn’t much you can say, say so, but include whatever details you can speak about that may be of interest to an employer. If you really think you can’t say anything of value, say so. That would probably hurt the student’s chances, but that’s not your problem.
Finally, I wouldn’t mention to the employer the story about the student putting your name down without your approval. It may be annoying, but I would attribute it to the student’s inexperience and just let it go, although perhaps I would privately mention to the student that such behavior is counterproductive and also somewhat rude.

I would go further and claim that you should expect to serve as a reference for anyone you have supervised ,  while it is a good idea to make sure your references are expecting to be contacted,  if a job application asks you to list past employers with professional references for follow up, this is not something that generally requires "pre approval", you implicitly approved when you accepted them as your supervisee/employee. I think the main disconnect is the relative importance placed on academic recommendations vs the more procedural purpose of professional references .

But, if you feel you cannot give a good reference it is a kind thing to inform the candidate so they can make arrangements for other references if possible   , but in this case the applicant did not give enough time to do this so an honest answer should be sufficient .

@crasic: In my experience it's unusual for a PhD student to give a reference; usually the PI of the group would be called on for that. Or, at an absolute push, a postdoc. PhD students, as students, do not have the standing to be a good reference. Perhaps this differs by region/subject?

@JackAidley since the question indicates that there was an explicit supervisory role,   it seems   appropriate to serve as a  professional reference  even if they are a graduate student .  While a PI is more appropriate for a recommendation, and certainly for academia ,  if they did not  supervise any  work of the student, it may actually be a less appropriate professional reference and unable to answer typical background  questions  during a reference check. In this case it appears that OP is in the best position to speak to their work experience due to the limited time there.

Use this as a teachable moment.
As you made clear, the student either was entirely unaware of or completely disregarded the etiquette around requesting references. Not everyone is born knowing these things, nor do they necessarily understand their importance. Now is a super good time to teach him how to approach this process in the future; this isn't a mistake he can continue to make.
Once you've had that conversation, I'd explain what kind of reference you're comfortable giving, which is the discussion you could have had if he gave you proper notice. Then, give him two options:

You'll write the letter as stated, and he'll agree to learn from the experience and not pull a stunt like this in the future. Be clear you will not penalize him in his letter for the lack of notice.
You'll respond to the request saying that there was a misunderstanding, and the student would like a recommendation from such-and-such instead. Whether that's acceptable to the people evaluating his application or hurts the student's chances is his problem.

If he thinks he'll have a better shot with someone else, he can take it, or he can go ahead with your letter now that he knows what will be in it, which he would have known if he asked you properly in the first place. This ensures he is not blindsided by the letter you intend to write, and allows him to make an informed decision.
All that said, I think there's an important context here. He's an undergraduate student who has worked in your lab for a couple months, applying for a volunteer position on campus. Even though you don't know the student that well, he very well may not have sufficient relationships with others on campus who could write a better letter. And since you've supervised his work in the lab, he may have concluded that you're best suited for the task as compared to, say, professors he doesn't particularly know.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't give anything more than your honest opinion, but the bar is only so high with undergraduate recommendation letters, and simply being a positive contributor as a research assistant over a period of months is, itself, not an insignificantly positive thing for you to attest to. It's worth considering whether you, perhaps in collaboration with others in your lab who have worked more closely with him, are honestly able to be sufficiently (while not overly) positive in your letter.
If you don't have much experience writing letters of recommendation, you might also discuss this with your supervisor, who likely has more experience with the kinds of knowledge of a student necessary to write varying types of letters.

I think the best advice is to be honest. You don't need to praise the student unless he deserves it for any given attribute. On the other hand you don't need to make it negative just because of the history.
I suspect that your letter will, if honest, say some positive and some negative things, or just that you don't have the experience with him to comment more than a bit.
You can describe what he has done in the lab in a non-judgmental way, of course. The potential employer wants an honest assessment. Do your best to provide one. It can be neutral and descriptive.
Be sure that whatever you say you would be willing to share with the candidate. They might learn of it from the employer even if you don't share it yourself.
Since you are a student yourself, you can say that, and say that you have little experience with letters of recommendation. This will help the employer make a proper decision.
Your unhappiness with the behavior of the student should be largely kept between you, unless he also has a history of taking advantage of people and situations.

The same advice should apply to any recommendation, even one more politely arranged. But in that situation, you would have the opportunity to warn the candidate that you might have little positive to say.

My take is that you should write the recommendation letter, but highlight that you really haven't known them very long.  This will let you give a cursory recommendation, since you haven't had any real issues other than this event.  Plus, by focusing on this aspect, your letter won't have as much weight as someone else who has known the student for longer.

This is a rather late response, but I think the reaction here is a bit overboard. It's an undergraduate student and things are often done at the last minute. Even the most organised person in the world might see an advert for a job just before the deadline and want to put a submission in. Sometimes adverts request up to three references, which can be quite a challenge for a normal student (or even an academic staff member) to conjure up at short notice. They're left in a position where they either avoid submitting the application altogether or they take a chance that the people they've asked will be happy to provide one.
If they didn't ask your permission at all then that's clearly bad etiquette. What they did here is ask your permission at a late stage on the assumption it would be ok. That isn't unusual - it's happened to me on numerous occasions and I didn't have a problem with it because I understood the circumstances.
You're under no obligation to provide a good reference, but I really don't understand why so many people in this thread view this as some kind of appalling lack of manners. It's pretty normal in my experience of undergrads and as much as you might think you don't know them very well, if they asked you for a reference it's because they don't have any better candidates. Someone you've supervised for two months is a pretty natural candidate for a reference in my opinion, particularly if they had to provide multiple references. Undergrads typically don't have long lists of academics who know them well.

If I'm getting it right, up to this point, your name in the form has not implied that you give a recommendation or a positive review on him.
So what is wrong with that? Why would he need a permission from you? Isn't it part of your "job" as a PhD student to rate students? He is an undergraduate, what kind of references and connections can he have at this point, other than researchers he has cooperated with?
I've done lots of chores for my supervisor without being asked first (paper reviews, presentations, lectures, rate exam papers etc) and I'm guessing the same applies for you. I simply did not deny (even if I would like to) because he was my supervisor and "that's how academia works."
Let him know that his move was not very appropriate (because "academia status"), fill in the ratings honestly and that's all.

What follows is my opinion. This is not at all specific to academia, because this is far from an academic issue.
I would mark it as unwise to give people as references that you haven't discussed this with, but as far as I know, it is not "not done" as your question seems to imply.
I also don't see any mention of you having to do anything. A request made by the hiring party to fill out the form you are free to decline for whatever reason you see fit. Your failure to respond reflects badly on the person who gave you as reference, and that's completely his fault.
If you feel this needs to be communicated to the employer, go ahead. Everyone will have valuable lessons learnt. But if you don't want to take the time, equally fine.
I never would give someone as a reference if I didn't trust them to be honest and at least slightly positive about me. But as the person in question was not so careful, he should live with the consequences of his rash actions.


text:
Can my advisor's advisor be a reviewer for a paper written by me along with my advisor
Can my advisor's advisor (he is a very well known person in the field) be a reviewer for a paper written by me along with my advisor (I mean the authors are me and my advisor). The work is extending/generalizing a work of my advisor's advisor. I mean whether conflict of interest will allow this. Thanks in advance. Any help/suggestions will be useful.

Conflicts of interest have to be determined individually for each author of each work product (paper, proposal, book, etc.). If a person has a conflict for any author, she should not act as a reviewer.
In the case you cite, your advisor’s advisor cannot act as a reviewer for your advisor, and thus cannot serve as a reviewer. If your advisor is not a coauthor, then your advisor’s advisor could act as a reviewer, but I would likely err on the side of caution and not nominate him as a reviewer.

Have a look at the submission instructions, you may also link them here. It depends on the conference/journal/publisher/... how they define a conflict of interest. Most likely, this will not work out and is a typical case of CoI if they have collaborated very little time ago.

Thanks. Yes, they frequently collaborate. Also, suppose if I write single author paper in the future can he be reviewer ?

It depends. This should be OK in many cases, however, have a look at the submission instructions.

@RIchardWilliams From what I see, usually recent co-authors and advisor/student are considered in conflict. On the other hand, you and your advisor's advisor are not automatically in conflict.