text:
How to best exploit a (very) diverse research background in a Research Statement
I am considering coming back to academia for a faculty position after a successful stint as an entrepreneur. I think I'm a strong candidate for many of the job posts I want, having a good body of research behind me, and proven tech transfer and teaching experience.
As it is common for academic job posts, I'm being asked to write a Research Statement. This is a first for me, as I got most of my previous research jobs using my professional network, which I cannot tap at the moment because I want to stay within a specific geographic region.
What worries me is that I'm kind of a jack of all trades having a very diverse research background, from Digital Signal Processing to Compilers to Machine Learning to Healthcare. This is because I guided my career more from a standpoint of where and with whom I wanted to work rather than what I was going to be doing.
My question is then: How do I make the best of a diverse research background in a Research Statement? Perhaps do I:

Try to put all my research under a wider umbrella to present it as a unified direction?
Just plain admit that my research interest has been varied?
Selectively mention only the research more relevant to the position?
Something else...

I understand this question lends itself to many good answers, being borderline subjective. However, the academic community of SO has been incredibly supportive in the past, so I will take my chances. I will appreciate all answers by voting up all I consider beneficial, selecting as answer the one I like the most. Thank you all. _/\_

You don't tell us what level of job you're applying for.  Presumably, you're looking for a faculty slot, and not a postdoc.  Is that correct?

Yes. That is correct. I will update my answer. Thanks @ScottSeidman

Coming from industry back to academia, the main research-related concern of the hiring committee will be whether or not you have remained engaged enough with research that you can amass a strong enough research record for tenure. So, I think you should not omit any publications.
It is perfectly fine for a research statement to have multiple sections. Mine starts with a high-level overview of the field, to help non-expert readers (experts can skip that section). This also shows them that I am good at explaining things, and hence would probably be a good teacher.
You can then have one section for each branch of your research, "from Digital Signal Processing to Compilers to Machine Learning to Healthcare." Mine has sections about abstract homotopy theory, applied statistics, data science, research with undergraduates, and scholarship of teaching and learning.
It is good to include lots of ideas you have for future work, as well as summarizing the research you've already done.
Depending on the job, they might expect you to win grant funding. If so, you could write about which aspects of your research you intend to get grant funding to continue.
It is also important to convey the impression that there is some theme connecting all these bits of research together. For those of us with broad interests, that can be tricky, but do try. They want to know that you have a Research Program, that will continue to produce good research for years to come. But, if you devote some of your research time to interdisciplinary research, that's ok to mention, too. For example, my research statement emphasizes the pure math stuff because that's my strongest suit, and then discusses the other stuff I do as side projects, things related to my teaching, and things related to service. I try to give the impression that, even if I only did the pure math stuff, it would already be a sufficient research program, and the rest is bonus. I also point out that I have broad interests and happy to collaborate with a wide variety of people, on a wide variety of topics.

There is no single best strategy because there's no guessing what's in the mind of the search committee.
You should read the job posting carefully and spin your cover letter and CV to fit that job. We're not talking about lying about your experience, but about emphasizing areas that would make you a better candidate.
The problem is that many times the job ad will not give any clues about what they are looking for in terms of narrow vs. broad experience. The same ad could mean that they are looking for someone with a very narrow specialty that the department currently lacks, or that they are looking for a generalist who can support a wide range of undergrads and/or teach a wide range of subjects. And sometimes you get search committees who are looking for a generalist but will settle for a narrow specialist, or vice-versa.
My best advice is to read the job ad carefully and make use of any clues to tailor your CV appropriately. Having a broad range of experiences is in fact something that search committees often look for, and is your strength. If in doubt about what the committee is looking for, I would play to that strength.
Then keep applying to as many jobs as you can.


text:
Should I anglicise foreign names of people/places/organizations in my research?
What does academic community think of anglicising foreign names in their research? For example, saying Istanbul rather than İstanbul (with capital "İ"), or, author's name, Tasan, instead of Taşan.

Anglicize (or anglicise) is the traditional word.

@CharlesMorisset maybe not duplicate but related? The OP seems more concerned about correct spelling of names, rather than translating the word from the original language to English.

Related: Special (non-english) character in name. What to do as author? Internationalize or not?

In the case where you're referring to someone with academic publications of their own I presume that it's pretty important to reference those publications exactly. So if you're then going to use an Anglicization of their name in your text, you must at least make clear on first mention that the "Tasan" you're talking about is the same "Taşan" you cite?

What are you referring to precisely?  "Anglicizing" doesn't just mean leaving off diacritics.  It means using English versions of names, e.g. writing Eugene Wigner instead of Wigner Jenő or Paul Erdős instead of Erdős Pál.  The people from my examples chose to use the anglicized versions themselves.  Forcing it on someone who didn't choose it would be pretty rude though IMO.  (@BillBarth)

The answer very much depend on the naming standard and usage  of the given academic field (and it is often different than standard English spelling). E.g the rules for history may be very different than for geography, and one should follow the one that applies.

@Greg Can you elaborate with specific examples? Thanks.

Eg naming standards of historical researchers or linguists can be different. For example a book specialized on Japanese history may use a stricter Hepburn notation than a business book or newspaper (which generally use a looser transcription more readable by general audience).  Also, a specialist work more likely to distinguish local or historical names (Edo, Constantinople etc) for a place or place than a work for wider audience( Tokyo, Istanbul) .

For anything that's not written in the Latin alphabet, use the standard transliteration from the relevant alphabet (e.g., "Vladimir Putin", not "Владимир Путин"). For people's names written in the Latin alphabet, keep the accents if possible. For place names, if there is a standard Anglicization, use that (e.g., "Cologne" rather than "Köln", "Istanbul" rather than "İstanbul"); otherwise, keep the accents (e.g., "Lübeck" and "Şanlıurfa").

One difficulty with this approach, for  Turkic languages in particular, is that use the dotless-i can confuse search engines, leading to blank returns when users of non-Turkic keyboard layouts substitute this character for a dotted-i. For this reason, I have often seen names with this letter 'Anglicized' pragmatically.

Also consider that Irish "Doire" or "Derry" translates into English "Derry/Londonderry", and that "Gdańsk" might transliterate into "Gdańsk" or "Gdansk" or "Danzig" if you're talking about the present day, but almost always "Danzig" if you're talking about its Prussian/German/independent history. In both cases the "standard Anglicization" is somewhat disputed and I'm sure there are plenty of other examples.

This is pretty much correct, although I would add that you should also look out for common Anglicizations of names, especially if the person is particularly famous. You wouldn't, for example, refer to Cristoforo Colombo but Christopher Columbus. (And, yes, it is usually historic people who have this problem.)

@trlkly: I assume that's partly because of the custom of the time: the fella himself would presumably have used a translated version of his name in each of Latin, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese. I don't know that he ever spoke English, ofc. Whereas these days when Cristiano Ronaldo dos Santos Aveiro travels to and finds employment in England he doesn't call himself "Chris Ronald".

"[K]eep the accents" should not be followed by examples that do not include accents.

@SteveJessop Somewhat OT but apropos of your comment, I've heard more than one inhabitant of that place mischievously refer to it as "Slash City" ;-)

Şanlıurfa contains a character that isn't present in the English alphabet, so that character should be transliterated (like ß --> ss).

@arne.b "Lübeck" contains an umlaut and "Şanlıurfa" contains a cedilla. Are you making some sort of oblique comment about my use of the word "accent"? If so, how about being more constructive?

"standard transliteration" -- is that a thing? Afaik, these standards differ from country to country and change over time. Check out the many transcriptions of Пафну́тий Чебышёв!

@Raphael Yes, it is a thing, though it's not always uniquely defined so perhaps it was a little misleading of me to use the definite article. For example, it's always "Putin", not "Pootin"; Chebyshev has a million and one transliterations which include "Chebysheff" but not "Chebycheff"

Sorry, I just tried to point out a minor mistake unrelated to the gist of the answer. (A more constructive way to do that would have been an edit, of course, but you rejected that.) I did not mean to imply that you intentionally used the word accent for something it does not mean.

@arne.b As I recall, your suggested made some other change, which changed the sense of what I'd written. Instead of complaining, just make your point clearly. I understand that you think I've said something that isn't quite accurate: please explain what it is and I'll happily fix the problem.

EDITED to clarify the type of spelling changes I'm referring to, and to address other types of spelling changes.
As someone with an 'é' in my name, I'd say that it depends on whether or not there's a good reason to leave off the diacritical marks.
I'm aware that you may not know how to type special characters, or your keyboard may make it difficult to do so. So if you send me an email, I wouldn't be offended if you leave off the diacritical marks, spelling 'é' as 'e', for example.
I'm aware that computer file systems and programming languages sometimes don't deal elegantly with non-ASCII characters. So if you name a module in a computer program after me, I wouldn't be offended if you leave off the diacritical marks.
But if you publish something (e.g. an academic paper), there's no good reason not to spell my name correctly. (You can cut and paste, can't you?) I would be annoyed if you didn't take the trouble to do so. Not only have you been lazy, but you've made it more difficult for others to know the correct spelling of my name.
EDIT:
As for names that aren't written in the Latin alphabet, I agree with David Richerby that it makes sense to transliterate them. Unless the name is extremely well-known, the first time I use the name I would probably add the original name in parenthesis. That way, the reader can search for additional information under both names.
Of course, if Владимир Путин chooses to go by Vladimir Putin, I would respect that. I wouldn't insist on writing Владимир Путин.

Sometimes the Anglicized version of a name is much more familiar to the target audience. To use David Richerby's example, many English speakers know "Vladimir Putin" but would not recognize "Владимир Путин". This isn't an issue with European languages that use essentially the same alphabet as English, but with an entirely different alphabet, the question arises: do you include the original along with the Anglicization? (Or instead of it? I think that makes less sense though.) P.S. IGTF mini-reunion, yay :-)

@DavidZ Have both?

@DavidZ: in the case of Putin it's pretty straightforward: when he's working in the latin alphabet he transliterates his own name (or anyway consents to it being done), so others can safely use that alone. I suppose you might choose to include Cyrillic for precision in cases where the name is transliterated different ways by different people (Hertzen/Gertzen/Ге́рцен, although that's a Russianized German word to begin with). I'd venture the same goes for pretty much everyone whose name is in an entirely different alphabet, that in English you can use only a transliteration. Except Prince ;-)

I don't disagree with the pragmatics of this answer, nor the specific example of the accented e. But I do think it's a bit narrow with only referring to the Latin alphabet. Combine your pragmatics with David Richerby's answer, and I think we have the ultimate answer.

@trikly actually, it only refers to the Latin alphabet. The name on my birth certificate is written in Cyrillic, and I don't expect anybody to use the Cyrillic original when writing in a language using the Latin alphabet. In fact, I suspect that, if your text has two Cyrillic names and use them un-transliterated, many Latin-writers will not be able to distinguish them without extraordinary mental effort. So, this really only applies to Latin names with a few special characters in them.

@DavidZ You're confusing Anglicization with Romanization. Anglicization is, e.g., refering to Cristoforo Colombo/Cristóbal Colón as "Christopher Columbus". You're perfectly capable of reading the Italian and Spanish but (as a native English speaker), you're used to a different version of the name. Romanization is converting something to the Latin alphabet. Native English speakers will have difficulty dealing with Владимир Путин (Putin) or 孔夫子 (Confucius) in writing because they have no idea how to vocalize it: it's just a bunch of squiggles unless you know the relevant writing system.

@DavidRicherby true, I was mixing those up, though now that you mention it I think the argument applies to Anglicized names as well.

As with so many questions in life it depends. In Irish there's one major accent, known as a síneadh fada (pronounced sheena fa-da, meaning length accent, usually abbreviated to fada). It occurs over vowels only i.e. á, é, í, ó, ú are the long equivalents of the vowels a, e, i, o, u and it dramatically changes the sound (and as I'll illustrate below, the meaning).
The canonical example that I use here is the word "sean" pronounced in the Munster dialect as "shan"; this means old. Put a fada over the a and it becomes the name Seán (Irish for John, pronounced Shawn); put it over the e and and it becomes a verb meaning to disavow or repudiate, pronounced shane. So with ostensibly the same word, the accents create three different words which you can construct a sentence from:
Séan sean Seán [Disavow old John]
This is one example why you might want to spell words as they are originally.
Another reason, and this is purely opinion, is that it feels somewhat arrogant to me to insist that your pronunciation and spelling is so much better than the people who live there.
In summing up I'd exhort you to focus on the impact of your message rather than the intent; IOW tailor it for your audience.

Great example. Another fun one is the difference between féar marbh sa gairdín (not an uncommon occurence) and fear marbh sa gairdín (much more unusual).

Heh, don't forget your séimhiú; in both cases that should read "sa ghairdín" Remember that "in" anything triggers this where it's possible viz. sa chrann "in the tree"; san fhómhar "in the autumn" ;-)

Gah, I originally had a séimhiú in both places, then, doubting my memory, googled it and found "sa gairdín". But now that I re-google, I don't know where I found that. I am ashamed, and I hereby hand back my A in Leaving Cert Irish.

For those wondering: @ArtiePrendergast-Smith's two sentences translate as: dead grass in the garden and dead man in the garden

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Must bibliography entries match the original title's German orthography?
I am writing a book, and in its bibliography I would like to include a paper whose title has the German word "Über" printed as "Ueber". As far as I know, this is an equivalent way of writing the word, but the former way is the normal way. It is definitely spelled as "Ueber" in the (nineteenth-century) journal in which it appeared - the body text uses umlauts so I assume there was some typographic obstacle with the title font.
I can see three options for me:

Ueber
Ueber [sic]
Über

I have a soft preference for (3), because I think it looks nicer. I do not like (2) because it carries the implication that Ueber is an error, which it isn't. But (1) is the original form. I could just about imagine somebody failing to find the paper because I wrote (3) instead of (1), but it seems unlikely - search services like Google "know" about the equivalence, and readers will have the volume/page/date information regardless.
The publisher has asked me to follow Chicago Manual of Style guidelines if in doubt. Unfortunately, I cannot find a definitive ruling there.
Am I bound to use the precise conventions of the original publication, or should I adapt to a more normal modern style?

I would always prefer the original title of the paper (only ignoring all-caps or similar), even if it contains spelling mistakes, as this is the most likely search term, somebody is going to use (and not all search tools do autocorrections). This in particular applies to titles in spelling conventions that readers might not be familiar with. A German paper from that time might use the spelling Oscillator instead of the modern Oszillator or Maasssystem instead of Maßsystem¹ – would you also change these?
As a sidenote:
Uppercase umlauts (such as Ü) only came up in German in the nineteenth century and were only fully established as a consequence of the spelling reform/establishment of 1901. Thus, it’s very unlikely that Ueber was used due to typographical restrictions and one could argue that it is the more correct spelling here. Also note that nowadays, substituting Ü with Ue is only allowed as a makeshift solution and the two are not regarded as equivalent.

¹ Taken straight from Max Planck – Ueber irreversible Strahlungsvorgänge.

One might want to add a "modern" version and/or a translation (into the main language of the article) of the title as BibTeX note.

Do you have any reference that Ü and Ue are not equivalent, as I have never heard that before. I tried to google it, but couldn't find anything relevant. Wikipedia (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umlaut?oldformat=true#Darstellung_von_Umlauten) mentions it in a way that I would interpret as they are in fact the same.

@dirkk: The substitution Ü→Ue is not even mentioned as a fallback solution in the current official German spelling rules. Thus writing Ueber instead of Über is as clearly a spelling mistake as it can be. I do not see something supporting your claim in the linked Wikipedia article as well. On the contrary, it states: “Die Darstellung eines Umlauts mit nachfolgendem ‚e‘ […] ist inzwischen bis auf wenige Ausnahmen aber nur noch üblich, wenn der verwendete Zeichensatz keine entsprechenden Buchstaben zur Verfügung stellt […].”

@Roland: If a word is used in the title of a publication, it’s very likely to be used in the body as well (though I know a long review paper about complex networks that uses this word in the title but never bothers to explain what a complex network is), so I would use whatever spelling is used there. That being said, the ß→SS conversion is a really nasty, unparalleled special case for which every solution has big drawbacks (all hail the capital eszett).

You should follow the spelling of the printed publication. The purpose of the references is for others to be able to trace your sources. Obviously most search engines would possibly suggest other spellings by similarity but this is no excuse for changing the spelling in your reference list so go with your option 1.
A similar effect is caused by people doing things the other way, changing umlaut spelling to a spelling without umlauts because they are not familiar with the spelling or do not have the letter on their keyboard. This can cause slight confusion in searching for the literature down the line. It is however, in most cases not a severe problem.

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


text:
Correct practice for representing units in figure and text?
What is best practice (if any exist) for representing units of a quantity in figures and text for publications.
I have seen use of both () and [] for representing units, eg. in a plot if y axis represents velocity then v(m/s) and v[m/s].
I would like to know what correct: parentheses OR square bracket Or something else?

What's correct: however you choose to do it (though in terms of dimensional analysis I use [L], for example).

@SeanRoberson: Square brackets are the expected notation for dimensional analysis.

The publication likely has a style guide. Failing that, just flip through a few published papers until you find an example, then use that

This is correct, and a more general statement is that typesetting conventions will vary by field and even by sub-discipline. Find good exemplar papers or ask your adviser.

style guide does not have any mention of that. I scrolled through few publications and found that both parentheses and square brackets are used. Thanks.

@pkj If papers in the journal use different conventions, then don't worry about it. Just make sure that the meaning of what you are writing is clear.

With respect to units, brackets are frequently used in two distinct ways:

They are placed around a variable to signify the units of that
variable, such as in [v] = m/s.  See this answer in the physics stack exchange for an excellent description of the conventions.

They are placed around the units to separate them from a preceding mathematical expression and, in the context of figures, to make labels like log(v [m/s]) more readable.

Parentheses may be used in place of brackets for (2), but not (1).  Whether they are or aren't is—as others have said—a matter of style and depends on the journal and field.

This seems a rather trivial question, where the answer is "it depends on your field".
However, the importance of the representation of objects cannot be understated. Your field may be full of errors, it is good practice to correct them and propose best practices.
For the best practice, you have to refer to the following literature:

The Unified Code for Units of Measure
ANSI INCITS 50, not active and replacing ANSI X3.50-1986
the european standard ENV 12435, superseeding ISO 2955

For example, the first publication describes that, based on the other publications

Square brackets enclose suffixes of unit symbols that change the
meaning of a unit stem. [...]
For example 1 m H2O is written as “ m[H2O]” in The Unified Code for
Units of Measure because the suffix H 2O changes the meaning of the
unit atom for meter (length) to a unit of pressure.

Interesting reading. Unfortunately I do not have the time to fully answer your question. Feel free to read through the material and self-answer yourself.

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


text:
Is there any risk in applying for a different graduate program, while already doing a PhD?
I'm doing a Ph.D. (in Europe) in field X, but my interests have shifted towards a different subject (say Y) over time. I've tried to shift my research to be on interdisciplinary topics crossing the two areas, but it's far from satisfactory for me and still my advisor constantly pushes me towards research projects I'm not really interested in.
Initially, I thought I'll finish the Ph.D. in X, develop some transferrable skills, and then do my postdoc in my area of interest, but my advisor is limiting me to opportunities (collaborators, conferences, projects, etc.) within my old field of interest and I just can't imagine an academic career in X for myself. I want to stay in academia, but join a Y department, which would be impossible without a proper training in Y or substantial research experience and networking with the researchers in that field.
So, I'm now considering applying to grad programs in Y, but I actually have no idea about my chances. I have some interdisciplinary research experience and minor collaborations with researchers in Y (plus self study of course), which is what I'm relying on for my application. I'm also getting recommendation letters from my collaborators working in Y, who are aware of my situation. But, since I don't know whether I'll actually get in or not, I don't want to burn bridges or make my advisor angry or disappointed. After all, my only chance for pursuing my interest if I don't get into the grad programs I like, is to finish my current Ph.D. succesfully and find interdisciplinary research positions (which comes at the risk of being a "research associate" or some sort of "life-long postdoc" and never getting a tenure). My alternative is to finish my Ph.D. in X and then go and do a masters or possibly a second Ph.D. in Y (which is suboptimal, but still allows me to follow my interests), and I don't want to burn bridges for doing that either.
This means I'm applying to grad programs in Y, without telling my current advisor about it. I'm worried the department I'll apply to might (possibly unintentionally and just in a coffee chat at a conference) might reveal this to my advisor or other members of our group, especially because in a few of the departments I'm targeting, there are people who actually collaborate (or have collaborated) with our group. I was wondering whether this is something I should worry about. Are there professors on the the admission committee (for master's programs in Europe)? Am I overthinking this or is there a real chance that this could happen? Would a reviewer ever email my advisor and tell them "this student of yours is telling us they don't want to finish their PhD and want to move to our department and do a master's in Y and then do a PhD in Y!"?!
++ Please note that areas X and Y are traditionally considered completely unrelated, but there are modern interdisciplinary research combining practices of the two. That being said, it's still almost impossible to get hired at a Y department without a formal training in Y (especially if you have a Ph.D. in X, the general attitude in Y communities is that you don't really understand Y).
++++ By grad programs, I mean master's programs (in Europe).

Probably this is just a personality issue.

@Buffy Could you please elaborate? what part of it is the issue? The decision to switch field, my worry, my approach, or something else?

In most cases it would be foolish to hide it from your advisor. But I don't know them or their personality. Some people would react very badly and others would be very supportive, with every possibility in between. For a vindictive person, you need to be extra cautious. But those folks are fairly rare.
One issue you should consider is whether you are leaving others with problems to clean up after you go. If there is none of that, then people are more willing to be supportive since it is easier. But you may have control over when you go and the state in which you leave any joint research.
The reason it is foolish is not just that the person might try to torpedo your career (possible - unlikely), but that they may have options for you that you haven't considered. Those options might involve X or Y or a melding. But they've been around longer than you and may have a much better idea about what is possible.
But this is a sit down face to face sort of conversation. I wouldn't express it in terms of like and dislike, however, but that your recent studies are pushing you toward one thing rather than the other and you want to continue those explorations.
Perhaps, knowing the situation, the advisor can make room for it to happen. If not, you can, perhaps, leave with good mutual feelings.

I had thought about that, but he issue is that my advisor is really bad at communication (and I'm not much better than him). He hides his feelings and often comments, even though he certainly has some, and shows it in his action later (e.g. his support for you). He's a highly respected experienced scientist, and every one of his students I've talked to has had communication issues with him. So, I don't have a way to tell how he actually feels about the situation - only speculations.
He's also very busy, easily bored at sentences lasting >5 secs, and all conversations with him last <10 mins.

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


text:
Spousal-hire arrangements at a postdoc level
In contract to available information for faculty positions, I would be interested to learn how to go for a spousal-hire arrangement at a postdoc level. In my view, there are three factors that might play a role (similarity of work, obviousness of the relationship, funding).
My specific question:
How would you approach as a rather obvious couple (based on overlap in the CV) an application to the same lab (due to the same sub-specialization)?

Two independet applications or single application?
Mentioning the partner or not?
Or applications seperated over time? I.e. one application and then asking for a spousal-hire arrangement during the actual hiring process?

I would disagree that "overlap in the CV" == "a rather obvious couple".

I don't have an answer to the question, but I am pleased to hear that somewhere in the world (US, presumably?) there is still some hope to get some spousal arrangements at postdoc level. Personally, I have not seen it been done in the UK  for temporary or permanent staff below the professorial rank.

I do not think that any of these are realistic strategies.  Sorry.
If you are in a field where there are many jobs, you may be able so separately obtain positions which are in the same city.
Spousal hire arrangements are used to recruit highly prestigious candidates to permanent faculty positions.  It would be unusual to have the resources to use that hiring strategy for a temporary postdoc position.

Would self acquired funding/fellowship for one or both change your assessment? Or would you consider the situation still as socially unacceptable?

@Henle If you both applied for a fellowship, such as a Marie Curie, and you both received it, that would not be considered a spousal hire.  Fellowships usually have rules, and the rules will not consider who your spouse is.  However, some fellowships do provide additional funds if you have family.  But the family members do not get a job.  That is also not a spousal hire.

@AnonymousPhysicist What about “I was given a grant of $X million, with the authority to hire staff, so I decided to hire my wife”?

@nick012000 That's a totally different situation, on which I have no comment.

@nick012000 related to your comment, but about hiring a past-romantic partner. I'm sure I've seen another Q&A about hiring a relative but couldn't quickly find it.


text:
Is it okay to provide a list of manuscripts that are in preparation?
I am preparing my CV for a Ph.D. application. Can I include a list of papers that are currently in preparation?

Yes, but make sure to keep things in balance. 1 published paper and 10 in preparation would be bad.

it's fine, just put in braces (in progress)

Yes, this is fine. Having a section on "Work in Progress" is usually (always?) a good option as it shows you are active.
Work in progress can include things nearing completion (in prep) but also things at an earlier stage.


text:
Emailing a professor to know more about their research
I am a prospective grad student and have been looking into potential labs that overlap with my area of interest. There is this one professor whose work sort of interests me and overlaps with my background. But, since I am straight out of undergrad, it is a bit difficult for me to understand everything in their publications and the research direction in their lab.
I am from a STEM background, and I was wondering if it is a good idea to email them enquiring about their research work and wanting to know more about the kind of work they are doing/interested in. They are a distinguished professor in their field, so I am a bit apprehensive.

Most professors would appreciate the inquiry if you have interest in their field. If you don't hear back in about a week, don't be afraid to politely follow up. Most professors get 50-100 emails a day so a response time of at least a few days is normal.

It's fine. But you should not ask what they are doing. You are able to get this by their research portfolio, recent papers. Just check that, if you like the topic, you can ask about the opportunities to get a position within a team, and PhD advising.

Okay, thanks a lot for this.

You cannot lose anyting by sending an enquiry.
Researchers are generally flattered when somebody, irrespective of career stage or scientific background, shows an interest in their work.
Given your interest in the professors work, I suggest you write a succinct(!) email in which you briefly outline how your interests overlap with theirs. Keep it fairly general but drop one or two comments about specific aspects of their research that demonstrate that this is not a mass cold-email sent to many different labs at once. Also be clear about what you are looking for (you are not really clear in your question - you used the graduate-school tag in your question, so I assume you are looking for a PhD position).
While this will give you a good chance to raise the professor's interest in you, their response will depend on other factors too. To name just a few:

their capacity to take on new PhD students,
their ability to offer you any funding,
university regulations on how the recruitment process of PhD students works.

I do plan to do a PhD eventually, but for now, I am vying for a Master's....for which it's generally advised against emailing faculties, but if given the chance, I would like to work remotely too.

I would argue that it’s NOT generally advised against emailing faculty about Master’s projects, but this may be country or institution dependent.

Understood, it's mainly in the US institutions, and I am technically a prospective international student.

Professors are humans: they are flattened when someone shows interest in their work.
Additionally, they know that being professors they have a strong magnet for some subsection of the humanity: they know that young humans (<35 y.o.) write them with the general goal of working with them, middle age humans (>35 y.o., <65 y.o.) are either cranks, lawyers or sales representatives, older humans (>65 y.o) are either profesisonal cranks or passionate amateurs (amateur == positive trait).
Do your homework, show interest in the topic, be open and not eccessively formal (depending on your and on the professor cultural area this may vary) and do not be afraid of showing you do not fully manage the fine details behind their work ... keep in mind that ideally you would like to work and learn with them.
If you knew everything they need they would have been looking for you in first place.

"Flatten" as in "knocked down?"

@MoisheKohan as I am too idiot to write proper english flattered ... you may think of a Freudian slip and my consideration of the average VIP (very important Professor that instillate in student this formal respect based often on ... nothing) ;) !


text:
Etiquette concerning Lab Findings / Results
I'm an undergraduate and was fortunate to be selected for a 12 week summer placement in a professors lab at my university.
I worked way over and above the funded hours and made some very interesting and exciting findings.
I have been asked to present a talk to the university body in a few months. I agreed with the lab professor during my placement that this was a good opportunity.
Recently I pulled together my presentation and a summary. I copied the professor on it, who replied very angrily saying I had let him down; I wasn't following lab etiquette and I had no right to publish my findings without his agreement as he was funding it and it was part of larger research work etc. The findings hadn't been published, I just wrote the summary and presentation and only he has seen it.
I've never done lab work before and just prepared the presentation in advance before the term starts to be as organised as possible. I'm worried I've ruined my future lab prospects - I wasn't trying to breach any confidences and was just keen and excited to do the work.
What is your advise on how to further handle this, as well as future lab findings/discoveries and hierarchy discussing anything, lab work etc.
I am not sure how to repair the relationship as I was shocked about it and am now quite nervous following his reaction.

Not really an answer, but you certainly shouldn’t feel bad about this - academia is full of norms and etiquette that there’s mo way of undergrads knowing. I once got an earful from a collaborator at a conference when I asked them about unpublished results at a conference - it’s an unfortunate part of the learning process.

But can you clarify - it seems like you confirmed with the professor that it was a good idea and then they said you were breaking etiquette - is it the same person?

Can you please give some more details.  Who was it that asked you to present a talk to the university body?

How did you "publish" something? Is the professor just wrong to assume that you did or did you submit it somewhere?

Assuming you simply emailed the presentation to the professor before using it:  A reasonable professor would not be angry.  They might give you advice on how to better prepare the presentation.
Ask the professor for input on how to fix the presentation.  If the professor is still angry after you followed their advice, that is their problem.
I think it's likely that you have misunderstood the situation.

I don't think OP sent it to just his professor or within the group. It says he "copied" his professor. I think the OP sent it to the undergrad symposium organizers.

@user71659 The question is unclear.

Yes, it is the role/right of the principal researcher to allow publication of results.
Maybe he though that you are going to present this somewhere, and you just sent it to him for feedback. Just clarify that with him that this was just an internal thing and you don't plan submitting, and thank him for clarifying the situation.

Actually, it's the role/right of all the participants in a research study to allow publication of results. Even a junior researcher can stop a publication going ahead if they have contributed to the research and don't agree with publishing it for any reason. Mind you, blocking a publication like that out of spite probably won't put you in anybody's good graces, but if is every researcher's role/right to allow whether the results of their research will get published.

@penelope: Even if the principal researcher was not involved in the (co)author sense, he can still stop it, if funds they were responsible for were used - this has nothing to do with the scientific responsibility about which you are talking. I.e. it if the principals responsibility to determine how the results to publish are split in a way that it suits the people in the project and the project. If e.g. student published something it may affect another publication being prepared (since you declare that you did not publish previously). Not saying that this is good, but that is as it is.

It seems like the professor may have been blindsided by this presentation/report.
The professor's response was strange - so perhaps they were responding to what they believe you have done rather than what you actually did. The response you describe makes it sound as if they assume you have already disseminated the findings (rather than simply giving them first-look at a draft for an upcoming presentation).
Was the professor aware of this upcoming presentation/report? Was it a requirement of the summer placement, or some new opportunity offered to you by the university?  If it had been mentioned earlier, it is still quite possible that they forgot, or that they were expecting some heads up to have a discussion on which details should be shared rather than getting some sort of "I'm done. Here's what I'm saying!" dropped on their lap.
Etiquette dictates that the lab you work in (that funds the very work you are doing) decides when/where/how to publish the results.  Nobody wants to get "scooped"... especially not by the very labmates they are supposed to be able to trust.  It seems like your professor fears you had just "scooped" the results from your summer placement in such a way that may jeopardize their current publication plans for this body of work.
Ultimately it seems like there was a miscommunication issue somewhere.  The fix is to figure out where signals got crossed and uncross them.  Presumably the professor should be relieved when it becomes clear that (1) you sent them an internal draft rather than just cc'ing them on an external publication submission, (2) there is plenty of time left to make changes to the presentation if they prefer to save certain results for other venues.

Are there politics at play?
Was there anything of a controversial nature in your findings? Anything that would cause a big industry to lose money, or anything like that? Is it possible your professor has ties to interests that would frown on the publication of the findings in question?
If you believe this to be the case, disseminate the information very publicly through other channels. Don't play that game, at all.
It's sad that such conflicts of interest sometimes stand in the way of scientific advancement and the larger interests of humankind, but that's the politics of humans. And as such, the possibility should be at least considered.
In any case, don't be intimidated. Stand your ground and get people to back you up. Be vocal about it.


text:
Need help to choose a master degree
I'm Russian citizen. I graduated in the field of Computer Science (cybersecurity branch) from a Russian university. The specialist degree is a 5-year study.
I want to make a change and take a master in Computer Science in Europe or take a master in Software Engineering in my local university. In this question it was already said that Russian degrees would be recognized. But it was also said that nowadays taking master in Russia may lead to (silent) support of the ongoing war.
Why I'm in a hurry? - Putin has signed a decree on higher education reform in Russia. Which means I have limited time to get Bologna Process master in Russia and little opportunities to get a European master.
I want further to immigrate as I don't support the war. So I need to make a right decision on this.
What is the best thing to do?
First option
Go to local university for a local master and in the meantime trying to apply to European master degree. In this case I want to win some time as applying tends to be very contentious action. Would it be OK to say in motivation letter that I am already studying a master in Russia and want to switch it to European one?
I'm doubting that studying master in Russia would be appropriate in passing admission to European university:

Government might not give me a student visa with the reason that I may be fleeing from the Russian army.
University admission department might think "he's already enrolled in a master's course why would we let him study in here?".
As @sevensevens has said: "Do you support the invasion of Ukraine? By attending a Russian university many people and admissions departments will assume your answer is "Yes I do". You may not get a chance to explain your real sentiments. If you are a Russian citizen, people and admission departments may still assume you support the war by participating in Russian academia even though most polls show Russian academics are generally against the war." If @sevensevens is right, I think this might reduce my chances to be enrolled to get European master when I am already studying in local university.

Second option
Don't get the local master and prepare only for the European master. In this case I'm afraid of not getting European master(for the variety of complex reasons) and loosing the last opportunity to get Bologna Process for the master in Russia.
Which option is the best?
Is the first option bad and I should not do it?

There are several goals at play here: desire to immigrate, desire to get a master's degree, desire to express (actively or passively) lack of support for the war, be certain to be accepted to the program, and, hopefully, desire to learn something. I would say it would be crucial in this situation to assign priorities, as some of them are in direct conflict with each other.

@AntonMenshov, I'm trying to exclude some options... Maybe I don't need european master because I could not get anyway

I agree with Anton, this really comes down to your priorities. If you want "a European degree or nothing", then option #2 is best; if you just want to maximize your chances of getting a degree, then option #1 is best. Personally, I am very skeptical of the suggestion that starting grad school in Russia implies tacit support of the war...but it's true that if you're already on track to get a master's degree, it may be harder to get admitted to a different master's program.

Both in terms of admission and getting a visa, your chances may be higher at an Israeli university. In terms of quality and prestige, a degree from the Technion or the Weizmann Institute will be at least as good as that from a top European university.


text:
Faculty member whose research is the same as their PhD thesis
In mathematics, suppose we have a PhD who worked on a very spefic topic X during their PhD thesis. When they become a postdoc, they'll likely work on the same thing or related subjects. However, let's say after they have become a faculty member since quite some while ago, let's say more than a decade after finishing their PhD, and they have still been publishing papers on X only.
My question is: will this be looked down upon? Will this cause trouble in future promotion?

Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.

@Community No, the questions are clear and it is easy to tell what OP is asking.

It depends.  One of the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics winners (I forget which one) told me a few years ago that he started working on the expansion of the universe at the start of his PhD.  He had not worked on anything else since.  That strategy will not be good for most academics.

@Oliver882 https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/369272/resolving-community-user-and-share-feedback-issues-in-review-queues

There is too little information to judge. If they have been productive and their publication record shows progress in that narrow field and provides insight to others then no. But if it is a dead-end niche (hard to judge), then perhaps (but not a definite yes).
And, if they have been at it for a decade or more then they are probably a tenured associate professor (US system), so it doesn't matter a lot to them.
Moreover, if they were in at the beginning of a substantive development in the field, then it would be entirely natural to keep following those threads.
Note that if they keep publishing papers in X, then the reviewers are continuously judging that their work is fine, assuming reputable journals.
Promotion, say to Full Professor is hard to judge, since it is done by peers who form their own judgements. The individual needs to make their own case as is true for everyone. Not publishing would likely prejudice the case.
If you want to work in that area, then they are probably just the right person to work with as they likely have a lot of insight that they can pass along.
But everyone gets to judge whether they look up or down on others and it is often for the wrong reasons.
When I was a doctoral student I had a friend who was an (early career) associate professor in that math department. He predicted he would never make Full, since the standards were so high. Happily, he was wrong and retired as a Full Professor.

Ultimately it depends on the merits of that research.  There is nothing inherently wrong with pursuing the same line of research as in your PhD, so long as that leads to fruitful research discoveries later on.  Doing so could just be a sign that you picked a great PhD topic.


text:
How can I add an animation or video to a peer review report without using "unprofessional" sites like imgur or youtube?
I am writing a peer review and there is an animation I want to share along with it. I can't embed it in the PDF, so what other options do I have besides websites like imgur or youtube that lack professionality? I often like to refer to and post content on these sites, e.g. when doing peer review, but it feels a little unprofessional due to the ads and other recommendations.

I think I'm a bit confused. Do you also incorporate references to Discord, Facebook or Twitter in reviews? The issue with those isn't the platform, it's the quality and verifiability of any factual element in the content itself.

Vimeo seems to have a slightly more professional appearance than youtube.

@user176372 like, I'm writing a peer review for an article, and there's an animation that I want to share with them. But I can't embed it in a PDF, so I need to put it somewhere. YouTube just feels funny because when they watch It. They'll see Mr. Beast suggestions and a lot of other unprofessional stuff..

@TomSolberg: Why can't you just submit the animation as a separate file together with your review?

@TomSolberg Oh, I see. To verify: You would like to include video or image content that you made yourself in your review? Jochen should just turn his comment into an answer, then. Worst case scenario, contact the editor with whom you're corresponding to figure it out. Though also I would remark that the vast majority of possible animations and video content are unprofessional to include in this setting in math and science. I can't judge your particular field, however.

I would think the suggestion by @JochenGlueck is the best option, as it ensures there is no ex parte communication between reviewer and authors. If that's not possible, maybe you could use a data repository site. There are several that can be used in a way that preserves anonymity, and have support for in-browser viewing of images and videos.

@JochenGlueck that would be fine, except for e.g. file size limits and annoying things like "Windows can't open this media file".

Providing this infrastructure is the responsibility of the journal, not the reviewer. I'd talk to the editor who requested your review to decide on the best course of action.

There's really nothing unprofessional about putting it on youtube... Just make sure it's unlisted

You might also be interested in IPFS

@TobiasKienzler Magnet URIs are more widely supported than IPFS, with the same upsides and similar downsides.

You should indicate if you want a free site, which will probably have advertisements, or how much you are willing to pay. The precise video format may also be relevant, or at least what kind of resolution and length it is. Also do you want a site you can stream or embed it from or is it OK just to have it as a download, in which case any file sharing site would do.

I recommend Figshare which supports sharing scientific data in various formats (images, videos, structured data, code, etc). You have the option to share with or without creating a DOI. However, beware that in the context of blind peer-review this might allow authors to identify you.
Zenodo is also a good option, but in this case associating a DOI is not optional.
Alternatively, you could just send the video to the editor to share with the authors.

It is the responsibility of the journal to provide you with the means to effectively do your job as a reviewer. So, if you need to share an animation file, you can ask the journal for advice on how to do that.
At the same time, consider the possibility that the fact that the journal does not offer a convenient way to share animation files suggests that they do not think sharing such files is appropriate or necessary in the context of a peer review. In other words, unless they have indicated otherwise, they expect a written review, so that’s what you should probably aim to provide them with.

Also it may be worth considering that the animation file's metadata could potentially leak information about the reviewer's identity - especially if it is a self-generated file.

I'm an EiC for a journal, have been for years. youtube and imgur domains are fine. Keep the words professional - nobody cares much about the website.


text:
How easy is it to transition from STEM to the social sciences?
I am almost done with my bachelor's degree in a STEM field (Computer Science).
I wanted to ask if it is possible to transition into the social sciences, after I am done with my bachelor's?  I'm interested in Political Science, and especially International Relations.
If yes, how easy is it?
Will I need to enroll for another bachelor's degree or will it be feasible to directly apply for a Master's?
Background: I have done introductory courses in Economics, Sociology and Environmental Politics. And I am doing my bachelor's thesis for a research experience but it is in CS.

In what country?

@AlexanderWoo globally, or whichever country it is easiest in...

Related: (How) Can I switch from field X to field Y after getting my PhD?

One option would be to find a master that is "half-way" between computer science and social science. For example, there are a number of master programs focusing on applying data science on social science problems, like this one https://www.uni-konstanz.de/en/study/before-you-study/study-programmes/masters-degree/social-and-economic-data-science-msc/ .

Also this one is interesting if the OP wants to explore complexity science. https://www.uu.nl/en/research/complex-systems-studies/education/masters-profile

Questions of the "can I get into?" type usually come down to what a university will let you do. And that usually comes down to a letter of recommendation from a prof or two.
My prof got into a PhD program in physics at Cambridge. This was because he had a letter of recommendation from Einstein. He had no undergrad degree.
There was a co-student of mine when in my PhD in particle physics. He had a degree in linguistics. But he took a bunch of math and physics classes because he was interested. And he got a good recommendation. So he was doing just fine in his PhD in particle physics. It was a little intimidating when he would be reading three different languages before lunch.
These days, the contact info and course catalog should be on the net for many schools. Scope out what universities there are that might be interesting to you. Find the departments that have programs you might like to take. Send them some emails asking what their requirements are and if your case specifically would qualify.
You may be able to contact the support staff. Be very nice to them. They can help you a lot. The secretary of the department chair will likely know every detail of what you need.
Try to be specific in your email. Say what you are in now, when you expect to finish, and the degree you are interested in. Ask specifically if you meet the requirements.
Possibly you will come very near to meeting the requirements. Consider whether you would be willing to do a couple classes at the new university before you start your degree. Maybe a year with a smaller class load but some kind of employment would work. Maybe some sort of TA job at the university can be arranged. Then start the real degree, maybe only one semester late.

For entry into a Masters program, the usual expectation is that the student already has an undergraduate-level understanding of the field, either from having already done an undergraduate degree in that field or from related study or demonstrated self-learning.  From your description, you have done some introductory courses, but it does not sound like you have a full undergraduate education in your desired field.  Even with a sprinkling of electives in introductory social science topics, your existing undergraduate degree in computer science would not have much cross-over with social science.  Unless you have undertaken substantial self-learning in the latter field it is unlikely that you would have the background for direct entry to a Masters program, and it would be unusual for a university to admit you directly.
The usual process in cases like this is that a student will undertake a bachelor's degree in the field of interest before progression to a Masters program, or possibly a lower-level graduate program.  In some cases the university might offer an accelerated bachelors program (e.g., cutting down certain course requirements) based on the fact that the student has already done an undergraduate degree in another field, or even something like a Graduate Diploma program to act as a bridging program at graduate level.  This would depend on the policies and programs in the particular university, and you should talk directly to the Graduate Coordinator in the relevant Department of interest to you to get more information.  (You might also be interested in this related question by another student seeking entry to a PhD program in another field from their present area of study.)
As to whether it is "easy" to transition from STEM into social science, well, it is no harder (and possibly a bit easier) than going into a social science degree directly from school.  Plenty of 18 year-olds manage to go directly into undergraduate social science degrees and succeed, with no previous university background.  I see no reason that an older university graduate with an existing STEM degree would have any more trouble entering the field than a bunch of people in their late teens.


text:
Individual doctorate in Germany – registering from abroad
I'm in the process of starting an individual doctorate in Germany and my supervisor is OK with me living (and conducting research; soc. sci.) abroad for the duration of it.
I understand there can be considerable variation from one university to another, but with the exception of needing to show up in person to submit files (diploma, contract, etc.), would anyone know of specific (state-level?) requirements that would necessitate a residency in Germany or German health insurance if I'm not sticking around?
(I'm an EU citizen, and have no funding/am not employed by the university in question.)

Education in Germany is a state (Länder) issue, so you would have to at least specify the German state to get a complete answer.


text:
What to do with repeated rejections for PhD position
Background:
I have been applying for a PhD in the last three years to more than 150 positions, very much specific to my skills and background. I only applied when I found positions' requirements matching my skills and experience.
I got the same response for all those positions. I almost gave up and went offline. After few months, I noticed a couple of emails from a professor, who liked my profile very much and was very interested in contacting me. I responded and got interviewed. However, he didn't find me suitable for position and advertised again for the very same position.
After a couple of months I applied to another project/position of the same Research Centre, thinking I may have chance in this group, but as usual they rejected but they said I came second.
After a couple of months, they said they are advertising again and I should apply since I was in top three. However, as usual, they got better candidate this time as well.

In a nutshell, I have been rejected for more than 150 positions and only one group who found me very suitable candidate rejected three times. While I cannot describe how I am feeling I also don't know whether to take it as positive that they interviewed me three times or that even they didn't find me suitable for something which I was very much capable of.
My question Is if it's all normal, or should I give up on looking for PhD positions.
With every day I am not getting any younger and my chances are decreasing. It has been around 3.5 years since I have done my master's. With every rejection, I have been trying to rectify errors and mistakes and improvements but all in vain so far.
Thanks in advance.

Have you talked to one of them or to a friendly academic who you do not want to apply to? Perhaps they can identify problems in your application? Do you go to conferences?

What's your gpa and university ranking? This is almost surely the problem

Fifty positions a year is crazy high for where I'm from. I can't imagine they're all "very much specific to [your] skills and background." Where are you applying to? Is that a typical number?

OP, can you clarify which of the following is the case? Do you have a PhD and you are applying to positions that require one, or you do not have a PhD and you are applying to get into a PhD program of study?

could you please add some personal info: your country of citizenship, your undergrad country, and the country where you apply for PhD. Also it might be useful if you mention your field

You definitely need to consider alternative careers. Everyone should. One thing about life, if you try your best to achieve your dream and fail, it's much easier to move on without regrets than if you took only the safe and easier path.

@ASimpleAlgorithm i am not convinced that OP really have tried their best. 0/150 is really unsual

Sceptic, have you applied to any US programs? Or programs run closer to the US system where you apply to the department and later (usually) find an advisor?

@shoover "I have been applying for PhD" -- the asker wishes to study for a PhD.

You say you have been rejected a lot, but give no indication whatever of why that is. It isn't random, I suspect. I can suggest two possible scenarios and from them you can, perhaps, devise a strategy.
The first situation is that you are just applying to places that are so off the scale that no one is actually likely to be admitted. The top institutions normally have tremendous competition for slots and some of them have very few slots available. Dartmouth, in CS, for example is a great institution, but its doctoral program is very small. If they get hundreds of applications for any available position, then the likelihood of any particular person gaining admission is pretty miniscule. So perhaps you are just aiming too high. Since you have come close a few times, perhaps not impossibly high, but there are probably other options.
The second is that you are deficient in some way and need to improve either your technical or personal skills or both. That isn't criticism, since I don't know anything about you, but perceived issues are probably apparent to people once you get into the application process. Arrogant people don't find easy acceptance, to name just one personal "flaw" that some folks exhibit. At the other end of the scale, people who project extreme introversion often come off as less able than they are.
As for the technical side, you can work on that without formally being in a program. You can study and write in your field, for example. If you have the time and can expend the effort to do it effectively, you will improve the skills that others may feel you lack.
But, it is important, I think, that you also find a way to learn at least a bit about why you haven't made the cut. Perhaps someone you have corresponded with in the past can point you in the direction you need to go. Feedback can be valuable, not just about your final position in the ranking, but why you weren't higher. Find a way to ask.

I am an international US-based PhD student, so have bias in experience and what I've heard.
Still, 150 applications and rejections seems pretty high to me to suspect that there might be some systematic error. I think that's a good news for you!
Unfortunately, you don't get a lot of feedback when PhD program rejects you (nor do we usually explain ourselves when reject PhD program :)
There are few ways to make sure that your applications are not lacking something fundamental:

Ask your home undergrad institution to review your application and package and your target program. Your college is interested in your employment and success, that is one of their key metrics. Go talk to the Employment office or whatever your school provides. You can always start with the Undergraduate Adviser.
Ask other experiences people inside the graduate programs. Find a professor that knows your field (doesn't have to be exactly in your field) to review your package and plan. They might not be experts in paperwork that is involved in admission but will surely advise you. Send nice email asking precise question and admitting that you might not understand something.
Find a graduate student or a post-doc who went through the process, especially inside program you want to apply to. Social media here is your friend, you can address them directly or by posting something with hashtag like #academia or #PhDchat (on Twitter). Chances are you'll find a nice student to review your application (I have helped at least once to review cover letter and it is very rewarding)

@artificial_moonlet my impression that academic twitter is pretty friendly, and usually people will follow up with "here is my email, let's move it there or schedule a video call"

Some big things that would generally affect your PhD applications are briefed below. These will definitely impact your application if you are applying to a US university, however, I still think that these can be applicable across different countries.

Your GPA (or grades/percentage). It doesn't have to be extremely high, but should be above the institution's threshold.
MS research (I am assuming you have an MS). What you did in your masters might also have an impact on your PhD acceptance. For instance, if you have an undergrad in English, but are looking to pursue higher education in molecular biology, you will have hard time. This is not an exaggeration because I know someone who just did that, but it was hard for that person to get admitted. This might not apply to you though.
Your statement of purpose (SOP). Some also call it statement of intent. This is very important. It is an opportunity for you to stitch your past, present, and future together in your own words. How well you do at it, might actually have an impact on how your interviewer perceive you for a PhD.
Communication skills. This generally applies to international students where language can be a barrier. Even though language can be improved, this might be another factor that initially can make recruiter think twice before hiring someone. If you can't understand what other person is saying then it is going to be a problem. Another thing, during interview, your confidence also shows somewhat how likely are you to succeed in PhD. The way you present yourself in the interview will be the proxy for your hiring faculty to test your presentation skills.
Minimum supervision. Even though a PhD is still an education program where you learn things, most supervisors expect you to be somewhat independent during your PhD. If you show them, verbally or otherwise, that you will be requiring a constant supervision, then that is discouraging for the hiring faculty. On the flip side, if you can show you can not only work under minimum supervision, but can also supervise other undergrads or your peers, then that makes your application stronger.
Finally, the letters of recommendation (LOR). To some, this might seem somewhat trivial. Some might think, if they have wonderful GPA, bunch of publication, and good lab experience, so nobody can stop them. But if referees wrote a bad LOR, then it is unlikely that your potential supervisor will hire you. My MS supervisor told me once that he interviewed 3-4 students for a position he hired me for, and one of other applicant's LOR from his supervisor said something like "he is good in lab, is punctual, and is goal oriented, but is arrogant and does not work well with others". So this is a red flag. Even if you are a good researcher, your future supervisor doesn't want to be your social coach. Science can be taught, but social behavior is a life-learning endeavor.

Good luck!

One question I had to your letters of recommendation portion - isn’t it routine to have an individual decline to write a letter of recommendation if they can not write a good one? I don’t see why anyone would agree to write a letter and then just throw in there that the student is arrogant.

I don’t see why anyone would agree to write a letter and then just throw in there that the student is arrogant. Because it is their responsibility, to be honest in the letters as per academic policy. Now I am not saying that it happens or it does not on a regular basis but things do happen. Some professors ask their students to draft a letter then they edit and sign it. But some write themselves and it is confidential and you have no control.

I believe some universities in the US allow you to see your recommendation letters unless you waive your right. However, I’ve always been under the impression that individuals will refuse to write a letter if they can not write a positive one. I was under the impression that that was the normal policy for such things.

Maybe there is. But unless it is a written guideline, then it is subjective.


text:
What is the purpose of peer evaluation of teaching?
At my UK university all new teaching staff, as part of the requirements to fulfil the requirements for a Post Graduate Certificate in Higher Education (PGCHE), have their teaching observed by a member of their department, a member of another department, and a member of the Education Department (who run the PGCHE course). I don't understand the advantages of being observed by the three different people. What should I strive to get out of each observation?

It is a UK university. Most UK universities are moving towards requiring all teaching staff to have a PGCHE, in the most extreme case a Master's in Education and in the lightest touch, about half the credits towards a Masters.

I think "differential analysis" comparing the performance of the students for several teachers should hint better the quality of their work than simply observing (with the disruption caused by observation). The purpose to me seems to be to pretend that quality is taken seriously and there is some QA guaranteed by peer review, because nothing is better than peer review. However, everything feels like pretending to me lately.

For a recent promotion, I read some of the literature on evaluation of teaching. Some of the folks I read (and I'll get the links, if I can find them) consider peer evaluation of teaching to be among the worst methods for assessing quality teaching.

@ChrisLeary Yes, please do post those links.

@earthling The article I found most illuminating about student course evaluations generally, and peer evaluations specifically was an article published by Emory University, http://www.emory.edu/EMORY_REPORT/erarchive/1999/February/erfebruary.15/2_15_99lilienfeld.html. I hope this helps (you and any other interested parties).

I believe the goal of having three people in such different positions is to give you different perspectives.
Someone from your department may well see things very similar to you. After all, you likely have the same boss, attend the same training courses, etc. So, this teacher is there to help you see if you are following the game plan that they think you should be following.
The person from the other department still has the perspective of delivering "content" courses as opposed to teaching teachers how to teach. They should understand things quite similar to you but in a different way because they likely have a different boss (though somewhere up the chain I suspect the bosses merge) and they might receive different ongoing training. So this teacher is to see if your department is on the right path. There is less loyalty between this monitor and you because you might not even know each other but at the very least, you do not work together every day.
The education specialist should understand the theories of teaching better than any of the three, and perhaps better than you. After all, this is their area of expertise. Part of the reason they are there might be to continue their research but the main reason is to see if you have been taught properly. Perhaps even to assess you as we assess each of our students.
I know MANY teachers do not like being observed. I never felt that way. Actually, I always want to hear how I can do better. Honestly, I would prefer to be observed (with meaningful feedback) more regularly - perhaps even once or twice per month.
Remember, just like you are there to help your students genuinely improve, so these observers are there to help you genuinely improve.


text:
Should I give up on pursuing a PhD in Europe if I performed poorly in my master?
I'm currently a master student in an Erasmus Mundus program. Unfortunately for me, I have been doing badly. My overall grade on the first 3 semesters is a C. So far only my master thesis remains but I don't think even an A will make me go from a C to a B. Is it worth trying to apply for PhD positions or should I just give up and go to the industry.
Edit: more than three years after posting this, I am now writing my doctoral thesis.

Why do you want to pursue a PhD? It's a serious question because, if you're doing badly in your Masters, that indicates you aren't suited to a PhD. Why do you want to do it anyway? Was there some mitigating factor that made you do badly at your Masters, but the factor is gone so you should do well in your PhD?

Find a trusted faculty member at your institution and pay them a visit to talk over your hopes and your options.

The level between my undergrad university and my first master university was very high. There were many things I didn't know and the courses where very hard because of that. So the first semester was a catastrophe. As a consecuence I started to get extremely anxious during exams and I started to do many stupid mistakes like writing negative sign instead of positives or forgetting to write some terms of a formula which ultimately costed me a lot. Whenever I had to do exams via oral presentation, my kind just went blank. My confidence is nearly non-existent.

I want to do PhD because I want to do research. To work in a particular topic and develop it. That's what appeals to me but it seems like my masters performance may bring my dream down.

@JoséLinares You realise that this is exactly what a PhD and research in general is often like? You're thrown into a hard, high level top you effectively know nothing about and you get an even less structured approach than in classes. Instead you are expected to achieve something on your own, even though you will sometime only produce failures for months at a time. To top this you will be expected to give a confident oral presentation about your work at some points in time even though you might not yet understand what you are doing. If this causes you to seize up, doing a PhD is a bad idea.

It's not that I want to discourage you, from trying if you really want, it is just a warning to keep in mind reality. Research can be a lot of fun, but sometimes it just can be quite an anxiety-producing slog for months at a time. I think everyone in academia has seen some PhD-student who wasn't ready and couldn't cope with this and who ultimately quit after having the worst time of their life for a few years.

Congratulations on your progress.


text:
My internship is going to sponsor my bachelor's thesis (which will require more hours in the office). Should I ask for more money?
I have worked for the past year as an intern in a company that is partly based in my university. I have been receiving a scholarship for my work.
We agreed on how much time I was going to spend at the company and how much money I would receive. My scholarship amount was determined by the time I agreed to work monthly, at least that was how it was explained to me.
During the interview for this position, we agreed that I would do my bachelor project here, which basically means I will do the research they need and then write my bachelor thesis about it. This is a win-win for everyone, because instead of working ON TOP of school, I would work for the company AND work on my degree at the same time. The company benefits from this because it allows me to spend more hours weekly working.
My work on the bachelor thesis is about to start, which means I will be able to spend about twice the amount of time in the office than before. My boss and coworkers expect me to be more often in the office.
I would like to get double the scholarship, but I heard from someone who was in the same position as me in the past that his scholarship did not increase and he was told that he would have to do the work for his bachelor project anyway, so even though he spent more time working, he received the same scholarship.
This is basically free work for the company. I don't like working for free. Is this normal? I will try negotiating, but what should I do if the boss doesn't change his view? One thing I was considering was that if they don't increase my scholarship, I would spend the same time in the office as before and do the rest of the work at home/elsewhere, which is more convenient for me.
Everything is already agreed, I can't change my bachelor project (do a different one, for a different company) without delaying my degree by at least half a year, so basically the company now holds my academic progress hostage, which from what I have heard is the situation of some PhD students.

Bottom line up front: I agree with Buffy. If you were my intern and sent me some version of the above question as an e-mail, I would probably not react well. Detailed reasoning below....

I don't like working for free.

As I understand it, you are perfectly willing to do a bunch of "free" work in exchange for a bachelor's thesis, and you're willing to do a some paid work at the agreed-upon rate. I'm not sure why combining these two separate projects into one big project changes anything. The work required and outputs earned are the same.

This is basically free work for the company.

I seriously doubt it. As one data point, I can usually do things at least 100x faster than my interns (literally). In fact, with the time I spend explaining things, answering questions, and providing mentorship, I would probably save time by doing the intern's project myself. One of the only reasons we bother with having interns is because we hope to recruit them after graduation. This may or may not be true in your case, but it's probably why the company does not see this as exploitative.

During the interview for this position, we have agreed that I would do my bachelor project here....Everything is already agreed

If you had agreed to do the paid work and then the situation changed, that would be one thing. But you already agreed to do this; nothing has changed. In this case, trying to renegotiate a contract would be inappropriate. That said, it's true that your negotiation was a year ago, this gives you a little leeway.

which basically means, I will do the research they need and then write my bachelor thesis about it...the company benefits from this because it allows me to spend more hours weekly working.

It sounds like a big chunk of the "extra" hours (maybe not all of them) is writing up your results for your university's thesis. Certainly it is not reasonable to expect the company to pay you to write this thesis.

One thing I was considering...I would spend the same time in the office as before and do the rest of the work at home/elsewhere, which is more convenient for me.

I'm not clear on whether you negotiated hours when you started. If you've already agreed to a particular schedule, you should keep it. Perhaps at the end, you'll be able to ask for some work-at-home days when you are focusing on the university thesis document. If you did already negotiate hours and now your boss is trying to increase your hour count, then it might be reasonable to (gently) push back at the change in terms.

You are right about me spending some time writing my university's thesis, which only benefits me, didn't think about this one, this justifies it a little bit.

I hadn't immediately realized that you had negotiated terms a year ago and that the project was only starting now.  This doesn't really change my answer, but I did make some minor edits to soften a few things.

I don't think you have a lot of leverage here other than by disadvantaging yourself.
First, scholarship money is not always abundant and people like to spread it around to help more people, rather than to concentrate it.
And, you are getting something for your work, beyond the money. You are getting a degree. It isn't that they get your work for free. You made an agreement, I think, if I have a accurate reading here. Live up to it.
I think your statement that the company is holding you hostage is misplaced. In fact, they are helping enabling your future. Even just providing a project that you can develop into a thesis should be worth something to you.
I suspect that starting over with a different situation would be worse for you in every way: time, money, and more.

During the interview, we have agreed that I would be spending X time in the office and get Y money and also that later I would be able to spend more than X time in the office when I would be doing my bachelor project there. We have not agreed on how much money would I be getting then, this negotiation is about to happen.

I don't think you have much leverage, given most people have no internship at all.  I suspect you are also overvaluing your work.  My advice is buckle down and just do a good job.
Note:  I'm usually one of the "power to the people" types who advises negotiating salary and the like.  Now, when you are on the full time job market, fine.  But here?  Company is probably already looking at you as a little bit of a luxury.
P.s.  If you really wanted to seriously negotiate, you would need to have some alternate offer or the like.  You don't.  Ergo, no leverage.
P.s.s.  You might ask, I guess. Perhaps they will pay you some hourly rate and they are a big company and don't think about it.  But I wouldn't drive it too hard, unless you really have an alternate option. (A walkaway option.)

I think that the other answers are already adequate, but would like to add one point: Think of working for the agreed upon amount of money as an investment. You are investing into your future in the form of a possible place to work after graduation. Or, if you choose not to work there, into letters of recommendation from your current supervisors about your work ethic and abilities. Having been in the workforce for twenty years now, and having largely followed this kind of philosophy, I have found that these kinds of investments into relationships (with companies, with people, with projects) tend to pay off in many different ways and to a degree often vastly larger than the original investment in time and money: Job offers, more money, more responsibilities in projects, etc.
On the other hand, if you are recalcitrant about a few extra dollars or a few hours of work time, you might find yourself in a position where the company doesn't want to hire you after graduation, and your supervisor doesn't want to write you letters of recommendations once you leave either. Are you really that much better off in that case, having possibly earned a few extra bucks?
(I recognize that only people can invest who can afford to. If you actually need the money to survive and only have the choice between asking for more money or taking on a second job -- which is also time not spent on your project --, then the situation is different. This would be something I would talk to your supervisor about: They will understand your choices. But if you can live off the money you already get from the project, it may be worth making this kind of sacrifice for a year.)


text:
How to let a journal know that its submission process is very painful?
I have recently decided to no longer publish, or at least publish less, with a well respected journal in my field. How do I let the journal know in a meaningful way that the submission process is very painful?
The required Microsoft Word and LaTeX templates are extremely dated and do not match my (or anyones) workflow. The review time (6 months), number of reviewer (3-4), number of rounds of review (3-4), and delay from in press to available online (8 months) are all too much. The lack of communication is extreme. The online system tells you if the manuscript is on your desk or the journals desk and nothing more. Editors do not respond to queries other than to tell you it is being reviewed.

You may get the best response by using informal channels.  If you know the managing editor of the journal (my field is small enough that I often do), you might send an informal email, or even just express your concern in person.  As Ben Norris mentioned, the key is that you communicate in a calm, rational, and deliberative way.

Maybe you can approach the editor in an informal way at a conference.

Aside from writing a letter to their editor, I don't think there's much you can do, particularly if the journal is well-respected. There are plenty of fish in the sea, so to speak. Unless you're the leading researcher in the journal's field, your ideological protest, while commendable, won't make the slightest difference to them.

Having given this answer, I would be most interested in hearing whether journals are open to feedback from the authors regarding the various processes (submission, review, communication, etc.).

I agree that one complaint isn't likely to accomplish much on its own, but a steady stream of complaints from different people might get noticed.

@Anon - True, and good luck getting that critical mass.

@eykanal: it's not like the point would be to raise critical mass for some ethical principal or for common good. Authors hate to have their time wasted, and it is in the self-interest of any editorial board to get information on how much and in which way their peer-review process annoys authors.

The best method to send the message that you disagree with one or more of its policies or practices to a journal is to stop publishing in it (regardless of prestige) and to convince as many of your like-minded colleagues to stop publishing in it as you can. Publicizing your intent in a calm, rational, and deliberative way, does not hurt, either. See the ongoing Elsevier Boycott, which has already gained the attention of Elsevier and earned some concessions from the publisher.

I think one should to talk to them first (which we did, with Elsevier).  If they don't want to change, then you could go this route.

I am answering my own question with an option that hasn't been given yet. If the journal is linked to a society (which it is in this case) with an annual (biannual, etc.) conference, then there may be a special conference session on the journal which the managing editors attend. For the journal in question, the concerns have been raised at the annual meeting for the past few years and there is a growing community of dissatisfied people who are taking stances like mine.


text:
Who to ask whether my math logic research results are novel?
I wrote some texts related to mathematical logic:
http://www.mathematics21.org/formulas.html
How to check if my ideas are novel? Where and who to ask?
The problem is that I am not even nearly a professional logician.

This question is probably more suitable for math.stackexchange

@user_of_math: The question is how. Your comment is an answer.

The reality is unless you’re in academia and have an advisor, or are close to relevant people in the field who you can to for for advice or ask favors of, no one has any motivation to investigate some unknown person’s work in a field he doesn’t “live” in. Think about it from the reviewer’s perspective: what does he get out of doing the work? That said, I suppose one approach would to try to find a relevant journal that’s not too competitive and submit your work there. But I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Side note about the content: You seem to have a different definition of "basis" than every other mathematician alive. Your document demonstrates that you know a lot of math words, but you should not repurpose them in a new context without a lot of explanation of why that makes sense.

you should not repurpose them in a new context without a lot of explanation of why that makes sense --- Also, there are no references directing the reader to similar work and to background material, which is especially needed since the exposition is not very complete. For example, in the statement "A basis[1] is a pair of a set E and some set X (set of indices or indexes) of functions on E", the reader is left in the dark concerning the co-domain of those functions defined on E. Also, "function from E_1 to E_2 an operator from" --- is there a reason to use "operator" instead of "function"?

The best way of finding out if your ideas are novel is to do a literature search.
A good place to start would be arxiv.org, which is a well-known pre-print repository (i.e. place where papers get uploaded before they are published) that has plenty of mathematical papers.
See what research has been done in the same area as you and you will get an idea of whether or not your research is novel, as well as the standard your work needs to reach if you intend to publish it in the future.

+1: People often post on Math SE asking if something is novel, protesting that they don't understand the literature well enough to tell if their work is novel. That's a dead giveaway that the work isn't.

There is no way except to put in the study necessary to have the knowledge of a professional logician.  (This can easily take several years.)
Here is the fundamental problem.  It is very possible that your ideas would look novel to a layperson, even a layperson who has read the relevant literature, but any professional logician would know that your ideas are really some old (possibly a century old) idea recast into new language by a standard well known trick that has already been used many times in the past.