text:
Have I offended my professor by applying to summer research at other universities?
Yesterday I applied to a bunch of internships and sent my professor a request for a recommendation letter. He denied me the request, and sent my request email, along with his reply, to everyone in the lab. He wrote that he didn't understand why I would apply for a research internship in (our research area) when I am already a research intern at his lab, and that he assumes that I was only here for a reference letter and I have no intention of contributing to the lab.
This was shocking to me for several reasons. He had previously wrote, 2 months ago, that he was happy to write me a recommendation letter. In addition, I had already applied to a research internship in (our research area) at a national lab and he provided me a recommendation for that. On top of this, I have been working with a grad student with in-person lab work 4 days a week. I always show up on time to the group meetings but I usually don't have much to share since the grad student I work with share our results.
I also thought that it was obvious I would apply to research internships in our research area, and that it was common for undergrads to work on summer research elsewhere. I don't understand why I would apply to internships in other research areas that are not related to our lab. On top of all this, these REUs are funded and I applied because I can get paid over the summer. My position at the lab is a volunteer position.
Was this an offensive request? I'm not sure why he felt so strongly about this since he has always been very nice.
Edit: Thank you for all your suggestions. I emailed him explaining my decision and he sent the group an email saying that he values my contribution and supports my application.

Did you commit to work for him during the summer?

@CaptainEmacs No, we never discussed work over the summer, and I thought he was ok with this since I told him I was applying to summer internships and he already provided me a rec letter for a summer research internship 2 months ago.

Either this was a misunderstanding or something is awkward between the two.  It's very common for people to apply to summer REU's at other universities and by extension, get the recommendations from professors at their current institution to do so.

The only thing I can imagine is that it was "obvious" to him that you would do the summer internship at his lab. You would have to reconstruct whether there was something that may have been misconstrued that way.

All being said, that prof is out of order to make his frustration known to the whole group. That is not mature behaviour, even if you had reneged on a promise; most certainly not in an ambiguous situation. Try to get a different group, that person has limited control over their own motives.

The only situation I can think of where it'd be unreasonable for an undergrad to work elsewhere during the summer, is if they're in the middle of an unfinished project, or/and they don't have much time left in the lab and need to finish a paper. I think it'd make sense to work with someone and get a paper published, instead of working at two labs with no papers. That being said, that's totally up to the student, and the professor shouldn't react like this anyways.

This is unrelated to the question, but I got the impression that you find it natural to work in the same area as your lab over the summer, and I thought I'll mention this: As an undergrad (or even sometimes as a grad student), it wouldn't hurt to diversify your experience (at least as long as that doesn't mean leaving things unfinished and fruitless; but even if it does, that might be ok if the anticipated fruit is not something you like or need). I should say though, I'm only a grad student, so it's best to run any advice/suggestion from me with someone more reliable (e.g. a professor).

Sharing the letter with your entire lab is bordering on a grey zone of illegality, depending on what country you're in and what your privacy laws are like.  You are well within your rights to take offence to that action.  What country is this?

@J... This is in USA

@commandercorn Then your advisor did something possibly even illegal.  IANAL, but you may even have a case.  Not to suggest you go that route, but if you're looking for some context to evaluate your professor's behaviour it's pretty clear they seriously crossed a line.

Sounds like a bad situation. Perhaps you unknowing applied to a lab which has an unfriendly competition with your professor and he is concerned that your going there might give information to his competitors. But even if so, his reaction is shockingly rude.

@commandercorn are you a master's or doctoral student?

@commandercorn ah, okay, my new answer (see below) is a bit different but you may find some communication tips useful.

The legal case here is questionable, but the case for severe mismanagement is not.  You should be talking to your university HR department or upper management.  Emailing this to your group is NOT OK.  Especially after you professor already told you that they would write a letter of recommendation.  Public shaming is already extremely bad management. but doing so for something already verbally approved is IMHO inexcusable.

Tell him that you do intend to participate as previously agreed, but that funding for the summer was an important consideration. If he is at all reasonable, then that should be enough. If he is offended, then he isn't being reasonable.
If he offers you summer funding, then consider that, of course, but he should have little controlling say over a volunteer.
Perhaps he values your work so much that he thinks losing you for the summer would be a blow. Alternatively, he is just a jerk. If he hasn't got a reasonable response, you should find a way to be done with him. What he did is unprofessional, probably unethical.

Not probably. Definitely unethical.

Definitely unethical, borderline illegal, and certainly grounds for filing a serious complaint against the professor with the University - possibly even something they could be dismissed for.

@J... From my experience, the legal case here is weak.  University policy is a better place to seek redress.

@RBarryYoung Agreed.  I raised it primarily to demonstrate context - that the professor was going so out of line that the behaviour borders on illegality.  I would not advocate pursuing a legal case, but it does add gravity to OP's grievance should they seek arbitration within the university.

The legal stuff is a red-herring. Forwarding "I would like a reference letter for X" to a lab group fails all four of the tests in @J...'s link: a) the email wasn't shown to the public at large, b) the facts are presumably not that private (e.g., medical records) c) revealing that someone's looking for a job isn't offensive and d) the prof's policy, however repugnant it may be, is of concern to the lab. It's still mind-bendingly rude, but legal blustering isn't going to help.

@J... IANAL however I was a professional manager for over 30 years (now retired) and AFAIK this does not border on illegality because legal/illegal in such cases has to do with 1) the content of the information revealed and 2) the audience. The information revealed was short-term professional plans and the audience was the OPs professional work-group, practically speaking that cannot be an illegal category. What was unethical here (and extreme mismanagement IMHO) was the context and usage: public-shaming and reference-denial for perceived disloyalty in personal career planning

@Matt I don't think this is the place to debate the legality.  Neither of us are lawyers and I'm certain the view you've presented is very open to debate.  As I said, the intention was to provide context.  The word "bordeline" already suggests that the case is weak.  The purpose is to point out how close to the "illegal" border the act was.  Most places will fire you for all kinds of not-illegal but borderline acts of poor judgment.

My contention is that a) forwarding an email to the group is not the actual problem, legally or ethically and b) making a legal argument is likely to be counterproductive. Suppose the prof's email had said "I'm writing CC a reference letter for . If you worked together on the XYZ or ABC projects, please send me a few of CC's specific accomplishments so I can ensure it's a strong one." No problem whatsoever. Contrariwise, "I will no longer be writing references; you stay in this group until you graduate, quit, or die." Same big program, even without the forwarded email.

@Matt I did not suggest making a legal argument, nor did I claim the professor's actions were illegal.  Like I said, I don't think this is the place to debate this.

From the information you provide, your request looks reasonable. This is probably just a misunderstanding, and definitely a terrible (over)reaction from the prof: sending your private email to other lab members is not done.
Talk to your prof. (as soon as possible) to find out what happened.

Thank you. Is it normal for undergrads to do summer research elsewhere, and then continue working at the lab during the schoolyear?

In America I suppose? I don't know - maybe someone else can answer that.

@commandercorn I say that's pretty reasonable. Most undergrads probably live with their parents during the summer and go home when the semester ends. Even if you live where you go to school, perhaps you want to explore another city.

@commandercorn In the lab I was in as an undergrad and a few of others I know, that's definitely common. In fact, undergrads (and in some cases grad students) are often encouraged to go elsewhere, to diversify their experience and expand their networks, and also connect with more (hopefully strong) recommenders.

It's at least a little rude to send a request for a recommendation letter without mentioning your plans. Of course, forwarding your email to the whole group is orders of magnitude ruder.

He had previously wrote, 2 months ago, that he was happy to write me a recommendation letter.

For any summer internships, or did he maybe think you were asking about grad school?

I also thought that it was obvious I would apply to research internships in our research area, and that it was common for undergrads to work on summer research elsewhere.

I don't know about common (maybe it's different in your field), because summer internships are short, and it's difficult to do anything productive. So I can see why he would be confused as to why you are trying to leave the lab just for a summer. He may have seen the national lab as an outstanding opportunity, but questions a lateral move (perhaps not knowing these opportunities are funded).
This isn't to excuse his behavior - he behaved atrociously, but you should really give your letter-writers a heads-up. If you had emailed saying "Hi, I think I'm going to apply to these internships, would you write me a letter?" then he could ask why, and you could explain it's because they're funded.
Like Buffy said, if he was still rude after explaining you'd like to work for money, that would be a red flag. That said, he shouldn't be accepting volunteer labor in his lab anyway, but that's another conversation.
I would probably try and find a way to exit this group immediately over the way he treated you - perhaps your grad student supervisor can write you a letter and explain why the PI did not.

It is not only rude, it is a flagrant breach of confidence to publish someone's private correspondence without permission. Nevertheless, he may have reacted impulsively (we're all human) and could be regretting his actions. It's best to try to make peace. If he continues to make trouble based on this then you need to find a way out.

Speaking as a postdoc:  as others have suggested, there are some very good reasons to diversify your network - and you have run into one of them. Explain yourself, and give the prof a chance to explain and apologize.  Try not to burn any bridges with him, but start looking elsewhere immediately.  That he forwarded your email to everyone in the lab group suggests that he is using you as an example of how he treats those who make "lateral moves."

To add onto other answers, especially @Buffy, I will share my recent experience as a graduate student in a similar situation. I will highlight where the conflict arose, and how you might proceed.
The Situation
It was about February when I started preparing an application for a well-known, although by no means 'prestigious' summer research internship/opportunity. The opportunity was directly relevant to my research area, and would undoubtedly help develop my applied scientific skills. I reached out to mentors in the opportunity, gained their support of my application, and submitted my application. Crucially, I informed my PhD supervisor too late (I had already submitted the application).
Supervisor's reaction and reasoning
The supervisor was initially very confused - why would I be seeking opportunities elsewhere when I am already in a PhD program? I believe this is a relatively common reaction among professors and supervisors - there is some expectation that the current employment is 'enough', and in many situations, it is! However, there are numerous reasons as to why a student might seek additional opportunities, such as expanding one's skillset, securing additional money for personal financial security, or not having departmental funding in the summer.
Actions I took
Gauging that my supervisor was displeased, I immediately scheduled a meeting with them to explain my actions and, holding my ground, why the internship would ultimately improve my research in the long-run. I explained that this internship is temporary and would ultimately increase my success at my PhD institution. I was very direct and honest - I let the professor know how I felt about the situation, using phrases like, 'When you say X this way it makes me feel Y', such as, 'When you say, 'Why would you be seeking external opportunities, usually that is the role of the supervisor?' this way it makes me feel like I did something wrong by securing a well-known internship that would advance my career and success in the PhD program'.
Once I secured the internship, I kept my supervisor in the loop of my progress, explained what I was doing, and ultimately they felt that they were semi-participating. I also was honest and kept my word - I did not abandon the PhD program and it legitimately helped my success in my PhD research.
Your situation (as it is a bit different)
I would recommend you try the following things:

Before proceeding, ask yourself a few questions. What is your goal moving forward - to move on from this event as quickly as possible? Confront your supervisor? Secure the internship? Understanding this will help guide your actions, emotions, and self-presentation.

Immediately schedule a virtual meeting for as soon as possible with your supervisor. Make the intention of the meeting explicit over email, such as 'Request for meeting to discuss internship X'.

Before the meeting, read the many answers to SE question carefully. Many people have provided excellent insight. First and foremost, your professor has crossed a definite line by effectively publicly shaming you, and, as an adult, you should communicate how this made you feel or how it was perceived among lab mates. For example, 'When you sent an email saying X to the lab, it made me feel as though I was being publicly shamed.'

If your professor is unwilling to apologize/doubles down in the meeting, you may want to do some personal calculus about the situation. If you'd like to keep your supervisor, I would drop the issue. If you'd like to do the internship, explicitly ask your supervisor, "I am intent on doing the internship but I realize that this is causing some conflict. What is the best way we can both move forward from this situation?" Make them engage in the process. Engage them in the process.

Hope that helps, happy to expand any of my points if unclear.

I'd try to find another professor
Whether or not you were rude, your professor acted in a way that is totally unacceptable. He betrayed your trust by sharing your private correspondence publicly, and he publicly shamed you in a very passive aggressive way. If it were me, I'd find another professor as soon as possible. He sounds like a sociopath. If you can't leave now, I'd at least try to limit the amount of leverage your professor has over you. Don't ask for more letters of recommendation from him, don't commit to additional internship terms under him or to papers you're not already committed to write. Basically be professional and cordial while limiting your professional relationship with him to what you've already committed to if you can't get out. And always be on your guard around him. He clearly isn't looking out for your best interest.
Anyway it's up to you, as you're the best judge of your situation, but I can't imagine continuing to work for someone who did that.

When it is clear as is the case here that the professor is more interested in their success than your success, it time to look for another mentor.
It is perfectly legitimate for undergrads to look around to broaden their research horizons.  Indeed, if a professor is sufficiently secure to believe their work is very interesting, she or he will not fear students going elsewhere to realize on their own that her or his lab is better.


text:
Do I need permission from motorsports organisations to write a research paper about motor racing?
I have written a research paper analysing the aerodynamics of racing cars in a particular motor sport as a hobby project (using my own 3D model and resources). However, now I’m beginning to question if it is required of me to seek permission from that particular motorsports organisation (ie. F1 or NASCAR) before writing and publishing this research paper? Thank you in advance!

If you use any data from the organizations (or any external souce) in your work, you would need to check that you comply with the license / terms of use at least.

From where did you obtain the 3d model?

This cannot be answered in a useful way without reading your paper, but the answer is probably no.

You only need permission to talk about something if you use information you have gotten from someone for which they own the intellectual property (copyright). I specifically say "talk" because writing a research paper is, in some sense, still speech.
In other words, if all you have used in your paper is publicly available information, then you don't need written approval. If you have used a computational geometry in your work that you have obtained from someone else who has intellectual property ownership over it, then you do need approval.

This is wrong.  Publicly available information may be protected by copyright.  Data is not protected in some jurisdictions.  https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11359/can-you-copyright-data  You do not need permission to critique copyrighted materials in some jurisdictions.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Why are articles and books formatted differently in many citation styles?
Why are articles and books formatted differently in many citation styles? Proceedings, websites, theses and other works are also formatted in their own way.
It really looks very inconsistent and makes the bibliography harder to read.
I know that this is a rather minor problem, but it would also not be too hard to fix it.
As an example, many citation styles look like this:
Book:
First Last. Title of the Work. Vol. 123. Series Name 456. Publisher Name, 2022
Article:
First Last. “Title of the Work”. In: Journal Name 123.456 (2022)
Differences
Title in quotes / italics and journal name in italics.
This means, one cannot just look for the italic words and have the title of the publication.
Other differences

Publisher is printed or not
Year is in parentheses or not
Formatting of the volume and number

You might argue that the publisher has a different importance for articles and books, but this does not explain the other inconsistencies.
Possible "Reasons" I can think of

Historical Reasons, but why is this not yet changed?
As a reader I am supposed to immediately tell whether this is an article or a book. But what do I do with this information?

Considered Citation Styles
The citation above is generated using BibLaTeX with the bibstyle=numeric. Considering other common citation styles in LaTeX only one does the formatting of book/article title consistently.
The described behavior is however relatively independent from the citation style, as it occurs in APA, MLA, Chicago, ...

https://xkcd.com/927/

Books and articles typically have different publication/citation data, and the info you need to easily find the source is different.

I guess I've never had a problem decoding a bibliography, so I'm not sure just what you are getting at. There is learning needed, so early on it is more confusing than later, but it comes pretty quickly. Sure, if you want to easily make a program to automatically grab data, that is more difficult.

@JonCuster I also never had problems decoding a bibliography due to this. As I said it is a rather "minor problem". However, the fact that it can still be decoded is not really a reason to make it inconsistent. As these inconsistencies are shared among many citation styles, I thought there is a good reason.

Tell you what, lets all settle on one language - that may be easier than one bibliography style...

What citation style are you referencing here?

Title in quotes / italics and journal name in italics.
This means, one cannot just look for the italic words and have the title of the publication.

You can, actually. The journal name is the name of the publication, and the article is an element in the publication. The title of the work is in italics, and subparts are quoted. Likewise, if you were citing a single chapter in a larger work, the name of the chapter would be quoted and the larger work in italics.

This answer matches what I do when I prepare a bibliography: Book and journal titles in italics; chapter and article titles in quotes. But I don't complain if a coauthor or journal does something different, as long as it's done consistently.

@AndreasBlass Zotero just does it for me :shrug:

Interesting point of view! It does not make me super happy as it still is inconsistent, but that might be (at least part of) the reason.

@A.Z. Haha, it's not really a point of view, that's why it's done.

@AzorAhai-him- Fair enough :) replace "point of view" by "point". I will accept your answer tomorrow if no other major comments/answers appear.

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


text:
What is the policy on publishing work in academia that may have already been done (but not published) in industry/military?
I am interested in pursuing an area of computer security that is very likely already being studied by security professionals in industry and perhaps the military as well. Some of it is published, but I imagine some of it could also be unpublished work that companies and the military might not want to share with the public.
I could see my research group independently developing some unpublished techniques that probably are already in use in some form or another by existing companies who don't wish to share those to the public. In this case, is it acceptable for me to publish this as my own research, given that I have no affiliation to the company in question (assuming such a company does exist, which could very well be the case)? If I do publish, can I be in trouble for publishing work which these companies/military don't want the public to be aware of (but which I developed independently)?

With differential cryptanalysis that is exactly what happened. The authors of the published work found an older industrial/government algorithm (named DES) surprisingly resistant to the novel technique. Turns out the creators of DES at IBM and NSA already knew of the attack and had prepared for it, but it was secret.

Before publishing, there is researching. Before researching, there is funding.
No money, no research. No research, no affiliation. No affiliation, no money.
Yes, you can be the lone wolf researching military secrets ... expect troubles!

It is fully acceptable to work on, and to publish, results on topics als researched in secret by companies or security agencies. From an academic point of view, there is nothing wrong with that, and neither from the point of view of stealing intellectual property. (But I'm not a lawyer!)  Whether those companies or agencies would be unhappy with you publishing some great new technique for breaking cryptosystems - probably not, but unless you believe in conspiracy theories, this is likely not be an issue.  (They might try to hire you, though.)
There have been precedents, e.g., on the best algorithms to factor numbers, or some cryptographic algorithms.  (I'd have to dig out references for that.)

If OP breaks crypto, that's the one believable real-life scenario for a Jason Bourne-type person-hunt. Many people will want to keep that secret. And, to be honest, with good reason. It is still going to be some time before quantum crypto is going to replace the classical one. What shall we do when all payment over internet has ceased to be safe in one go? Return to the early 90s?

@Captain If the NSA knows how to break RSA, lattice-based crypto, or whatever else, they for sure are using safe methods since a long time.  (Well, even if not, they probably are.)  In fact, post-quantum-crypto techniques are available, so everyone should use them.

An obvious example is the RSA algorithm the academic paper was in 1977. GCHQ had discovered this several years before https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_Cocks

@user151413 "post-quantum-crypto" - I am not a crypto expert, and have missed that. It sounds interesting, any reference?

@CaptainEmacs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

@CaptainEmacs In essense, cryptography which (hopefully) cannot be broken by a quantum computer.

@CaptainEmacs There will most likely be a protracted period of time in the future where quantum computers will be available to anyone who wants one but before we have the technology required for a quantum internet that can transmit qubits between systems secured using quantum cryptography.  This requires cryptographic algorithms that can be used by classical computers over the classical internet but which cannot be broken even by a quantum computer.

@J... I doubt that qbits will ever go through the normal Internet: Transferring them will impose extra constraints on the hardware (phase preservation at least), so it will be more expensive. But post-quantum crypto will happen, and in time before quantum computers become a commodity, so it's not necessary to make the Internet qbit-friendly.

@toolforger Yes, that's exactly what I just said.

@user151413 the government can classify your research if it deems it in the interests of national security.  this would make traditional publication all but impossible.  Having said that, this almost never happens.

What can be published is up to the journal editors and reviewers, though in some instances (national security...) the government will step in and put an embargo on publishing.
But the same thing is largely true for such things as trade secret internal things in commerce. As long as you work independently, you can write your papers and submit them. But it is up to others whether they are published.
If something "seems" innovative since all "known" uses are actually unknown then publishers will proceed as usual.
It would, however, probably be a mistake if you try to publish something that you know because of some relationships or employment but that hasn't been revealed publicly. You will probably be talking to a lot of lawyers in that case. Edward Snowden is an extreme case, of course.

Wait, the government (where?) can embargo that e.g. a private person (say, employee on a private university) can publish in a private journal?

Yes, @user151413, they can get a court order preventing the publication of national secrets. Even ones you discover independently. Or at least embargo for a "time" so that compensations can be made. Of course this is more likely in wartime. Don't publish the back door access to the Reaper Drone.

I see.  Is this US-specific?  (In any case, once it is published, it is out there ... )

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_embargo for one simple example. I would assume that in some "less free" nations it can be much more of an issue. There is a lot that you can't (safely) publish in Thailand, for example.

But if you are working in a field that is important to national security (quantum cryptography...) you probably already know that and know what can and cannot be revealed.

@user151413 It’s certainly different from country to country, but not specific just to the US (off the top of my head, France and Israel have a strong tradition of embargoing such information; so do non-Democratic states, of course, but that goes without saying). That said, the government can only prevent publication of things they hear about ahead of time. Apart from responsible disclosure you don’t generally have any obligation to let any specific agencies know about your findings, nor do journals.

Good point about government embargo on publishing. It's important to publish a draft version in a widely-accessible way before submitting to a venue under government influence, so that the government doesn't get the idea it can suppress the work.

There's also the notion of "born secret" - if what you create is so potentially dangerous that, even if you do so independently, you can't publish it in an open journal. That's the reason, for instance, that the detailed inner workings of modern thermonuclear weapons are still somewhat fuzzy.

In this case, is it acceptable for me to publish this as my own research?

Absolutely, positively, yes.
And it will indeed be your own research.
There's just a single caveat: The above is true as long as you're just suspecting "Oh, those secret government crypto researchers must surely be considering this too." If you actually got tipped off about their findings, then it's a different story.

If I do publish, can I be in trouble for publishing work which these companies/military don't want the public to be aware of (but which I developed independently)?

Ethically/morally - there is nothing wrong with this at all. On the contrary, it is laudatory, and I encourage you to write up your findings as accessibly to lay readers as you can, and publish not just in some obscure conference, but put your paper up on open-access platforms, and make posts to HackerNews, SlashDot, Reddit, or wherever is relevant.
Materially - the closer your publication is to thwarting concrete, specific commercial/military/governmental initiatives - the more likely is it that there will be some consequences to your publishing your work. That doesn't mean it is actually likely; a  paper on breaking cryptographic protocols or devising new ones is probably safe enough though. But if your publication will lead immediately to embarrassing information or criminal behavior being exposed, then you cannot discount the possibility. Just look at what governments are doing to whistle-blowers and journalists these days.

Academically and legally speaking you are all good. But if you suspect that a thing you learned is sensitive in nature. National security type stuff.
I would urge you to submit your work to the NSA for prepublication review.
https://www.nsa.gov/Resources/Prepublication-Review/
If your work is of concern to them they will likely offer you a very nice salary, and if you like this type of thing you will like working for them. I did.
And if they don't care you are likely to gain valuable feedback.

It is immoral to suppress research of interest to the public with the hope of getting bought off by the US government (or any government). -1

Any academic research ought to consider ethics as part of the decision on whether to conduct or publish results, both in how the research is conducted (e.g. human/animal experimental subjects, personal data, etc.), and the wider social consequences of the results. Techniques that could be used by criminals to more easily commit or get away with crime, terrorists and hostile states to kill people, authoritarian governments to oppress their populations, processes that cause harm to human health or the environment, or to violate human rights of privacy, free speech, right to a fair trial, etc. should be examined to determine whether publication of the results would do more harm than good. Where there are legal limits on the release of defence data (like the Official Secrets Act in the UK,) the test is generally on the basis of harm done to the national interest of this sort, and so should already have been considered as part of the academic ethics clearance.
On the question of whether you might get into specific legal difficulty, it depends on what legal jurisdiction you are operating in, and you (or your university ethics committee) should consult a lawyer locally. But if you consider the potential for social harm in your ethics process and act responsibly, you are much less likely to get into trouble with the law. As a rule, (in the jurisdictions I know about) if you have not been explicitly told that something is classified, you are not expected to know, and would not normally be prosecuted for innocently revealing something the military would rather not have revealed. But if it's something that obviously could do a lot of social harm, you could find yourself attracting a lot of unwelcome attention and criticism from the authorities that you and your university would much prefer to avoid. Check your ethics.

While I agree that, in general, ethical considerations are part of a decision whether to publish something or not - OP did not suggest there's a specific ethical concern irrespective of the government/other parties already having worked on this secretly. Also, "techniques that could be used by criminals" are practically everything. Certainly anything in cryptography can be used by criminals to commit and get away with crimes or the state to get away with its crimes-with-official-sanction. And half the free software in the world is useful to terrorists/criminals/state forces. etc.


text:
How to find out the corresponding author of a paper?
I am interested to know how to find out the corresponding author of the following paper (which is just an example for the discussion here):
https://epubs.siam.org/doi/abs/10.1137/19M1242859
It may require an access to read the full paper. Due to the copyright I prefer not to say take screen shot of the paper, but inside I find nothing indicating who the corresponding author is.
Let me elaborate more about my concern. Suppose I am the corresponding author of the paper above, and I intend to use it in a funding application. The funding provider may then check whether I am really the corresponding author. Would they contact the publisher to verify it? If so, would the publisher disclose the details? If it happens so, why don't the publisher simply list out who the corresponding author? Or the publisher would tell that in this journal we don't take the significance of the corresponding author?

There is no corresponding author.  Is there a funding agency that actually cares who the corresponding author is?  I doubt it.

@AnonymousPhysicist I have somehow participated in some reviewing activity of a SIAM journal and I know that there is a record of corresponding author in their system but not to be seen by the public. And yes, there is funding agency does care (much) about the corresponding author (or first author). But maybe not to distract for a new discussion here.

If it's not public it's not part of the paper.

I think you have to disclose the name of the funding agency to get a useful answer.  I'm almost sure this does not actually matter.

A lot of academic papers give the  email of some author. I would try to send an email

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10062/does-corresponding-author-carry-an-implied-meaning

There might be some confusion here because "corresponding author" can mean two, strictly different things: 1. an author involved in the correspondence to the journal, and 2. an author designated as contact person to the public. Probably this journal only has corresponding authors in the sense of definition 1.

I tried to take a look at the metadata.
My first attempt was at CrossRef (http://api.crossref.org/works/10.1137/19M1242859). There, in the author field, it seems that I. K. is the "first" author, while the two others are "additional" authors. However, "first" does not have to mean "corresponding", of course.

My second attempt was to download the metadata at Web of Science (full record, tab-limited file). There I found under the column RP (i.e. "Reprint Address") the information:

Kogan, IA (corresponding author), North Carolina State Univ, Dept Math, Raleigh, NC 27695 USA.

It seems rather plausible to me that the authors are ordered alphabetically, and that the Web of Science data is just wrong here.


text:
How many marks should I take off for a student using an incorrect value?
I am marking tests and a student wrote down 64 instead of -64 for one of the questions. This obviously changed the entire question and they would have gotten full marks otherwise, (i.e. all their steps are correct). They also did really well on the rest of the test. I do not know how much I should penalize them since full marks on this question would give them 87%, and anything lower would be an <85% mark. Even half marks would drop their mark to as low as 60%. How many marks would you penalize them?

Where does the 64 value come from? Was it a constant to be memorized? In the question? A result?

@AzorAhai-him- The value -64 was written down incorrectly as 64, which was the remainder. It was a constant given in the question and to be used in the steps to get the correct answer.

An anecdote (perhaps not much help for you): Andy [Gleason] was the reader for my undergraduate thesis on [math]. In those days (perhaps still) each senior was set a special exam on the thesis topic. One question on mine asked me to apply my theorems to [mathe]. But my answer seemed not to need [what happened at x=1]. When I asked Andy later about that, he gently pointed out how he’d carefully constructed the question so that [what happened at x=1 mattered]. I missed that, because when finding the critical points I calculated 2×3=12. He graciously said only that I’d spoiled a good problem.

I often wrote something like "below the radar" and gave full credit if the error was something entirely unrelated to what was being tested and the error provided no essential simplification of the task.

Related questions on SE ME: https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/12516/how-much-credit-to-give-a-short-exam-question-with-one-error and https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/12537/how-much-credit-for-a-single-arithmetic-mistake

Marks are a measurement of how well the student knows the subject. So it depends on how much of a lack of knowledge that mistake represents:

in most cases, if all steps are correct and only a number was copied wrongly, then obviously the knowledge of the subject is very good, and most of the question was done correctly, so "almost full marks" are deserved

if the mistake shows lack of knowledge (for example, if that "-64" is a value of power, which can only be positive, or if it leads to an obviously unphysical result that the student should have noticed), then one might remove more marks.

a tricky case is if the mistake leads to the problem being much easier to solve (e. g. "Write the last 10 digits of 2^(64+x)"), and it is correctly solved. In this case, it would be unfair to give full marks, as the student did not show much knowledge of the subject. Unfortunately, this should probably result in no marks.

It seems like your case falls in the first category, so I would see no reason to give anything less than "the highest mark that is not a full mark".

Marks are not just about knowledge. They are also a measure of the mastery of the tools used. Correctly keeping track of numbers is one of the key skills in some areas and may thus be part of the grading considerations.

@user2705196: Correctly keeping track of numbers is one of the key skills in some areas – It is much less so nowadays, where you usually deal with so many numbers that you need computers to take care of them anyway. Also, consider that the skill you would be actually measuring is keeping track of numbers under stress and time pressure, which is quite different from what is relevant for almost any practical application.

@user2705196 keeping track of numbers can of course be part of the grading considerations. But if keeping track of numbers under time pressure is worth 25% of the exam's score (as the question suggests), then that course does not seem to have any interesting content.

Yes, of course what you write makes sense and thus requires some trade-off as you suggest and is appropriate for your learning objectives. My comment was in response to the blanket statement "Marks are a measurement of how well the student knows the subject." which I don't believe is true.

Whatever it says in your pre-written markscheme. If you don't have one, the UK GCSE one is a fairly reasonable starting point:

Misread or miscopy

Students often copy values from a question incorrectly. If the examiner thinks that the student has made a
genuine misread, then only the accuracy marks (A or B marks), up to a maximum of 2 marks are penalised.
The method marks can still be awarded.

The short answer is, unless the rubric clearly lays out which kinds of errors merit which level of deduction, it is up to you. I would strongly encourage you to discuss this with whoever is supervising you in this role, as they may have expectations which have not been communicated clearly to you.
Grading, especially without a clear rubric, eventually relies on the judgment of the person doing it to decide "how important is this to the course? Did they miss anything important because of the minor calculation error?" In many of the courses I took as an undergraduate, the rubric was a simple 5-point scale (though you could choose to use 7, 3, 29, or whatever number you like). Roughly speaking, they marked:
5- Perfect or with minimal errors which have at most cosmetic impact
on the problem. For instance, if a student mis-copied a matrix or
used the wrong value in a calculation, a generous grader might still
award 4.5 or 5 points.
4- Minor computational errors. Some graders
will use this to remind students to pay attention by docking a small
proportion of points. Others will only use it if there is
course-relevant content involved but might not dock points for a
student misreading their own handwriting.
3- Major computational
errors. If a student made multiple computation mistakes or a severe
enough error to make their answer one which a reasonable person could
have known was wrong (and did not indicate this) then they might only
earn 3/5.
2- Partial conceptual failure. If a student got part of the question right but couldn't finish the job due to a mistake which demonstrated some kind of misapprehension of the course content or misapplication of techniques, but still did meaningful work towards a solution, 2 points.
1- Minimal progress. If a student made a small amount of progress towards a solution but then went into the weeds, they might earn a point.
0- No progress towards a workable solution.
The fairness-based reason that you might knock off 20-25% of the score for that question (or whatever the minimum relevant unit might be) is that if a student makes that type of error on every problem then they do not deserve the same level of credit as a student who meticulously checks their work. If it was possible for the student to verify their answer and they chose not to do so or if they should have known that their copying had failed them, I might mark off an additional point for that reason (because that serves a valid pedagogical purpose: if you could have checked your work but didn't, you missed an opportunity to make up the points).


text:
Masters Qualification after PhD?
At the moment I am at the initial stages of my PhD, but there is a masters program (M.Sc) I love to follow after my PhD.
Question 01

Is it possible to do a Masters Degree (M.Sc) after a PhD

Question 02

If I follow a Masters Degree (M.SC) after the PhD is it considered as a Post Doc (Postdoctoral) qualification ?

My Background
I have a B.Sc(Hons) first class, MBA, and M.Sc with 3.74 GPA

You may be able to do that, but the qualification will in most cases not benefit you. In most cases the highest degree (in your case, your PhD) is all that people look at. So this is not done very often, because you have a cost (time, effort, tuition, lost pay) without benefit. If there is a limited number of places and the program needs to select its applicants, then this may be a reason to choose somebody else who will benefit more from that degree than you will.
However, most people continue to learn new things after a PhD. They just don't do it anymore as part of a degree offering program. This could be because of the costs I mentioned before. In some cases participating a MA program takes up resources that could be better spent on people who really need that degree, and it is the responsible thing not tie up those resources. Degree offering programs tend to be less flexible then learning things on your own. PhDs use a variety of strategies to learn new things: Sometimes you do it on your own. Sometimes through a MOOC. Sometimes some members of a department decide that they all want to learn a new topic together and meet weekly to discuss a given chapter. Sometimes, ...
As to the second question: definitely not. As I said before, the qualification is largely lost.

My late father-in-law got his PhD in physical chemistry in the 1950's. In the 1970's he decided to get a masters in geology, partly for fun and partly because he had started looking at the chemistry in some ore bodies and wanted to beef up his geology. The lab he worked at paid the tuition.

Answer to question 1) I know a friend who did a PhD in Physics, after which she decided that she had enough with science, and did a masters in literature. It is not apparent in your question, but assuming that you want to do a masters in a completely unrelated field, and that it is your dream to do that masters, I will say go ahead! Sometimes, it is better late than never.
Answer to question 2) No, post-doc is not a degree.


text:
Sabbatical Abroad Without Family: How Did it Work
Hello:  Following this previous thread: (Profs who have done a full year sabbatical overseas with a family: How did you make it work?), I am equally curious about whether any prof has done a full-year sabbatical overseas without their family (in this case spouse).
I am due for a sabbatical in about 2yrs, and exploring some very useful options abroad.  Unfortunately, my spouse's job is not flexible enough for them to leave and take another job abroad. They have to remain in the US, unless they take a leave of absence, which they may or not qualify for.
Given my age, it may not be possible to postpone the sabbatical much later.
Has anyone found themselves in this situation, and taken a sabbatical leave abroad without their spouse?
How did it work - How did you manage the plans and communications around leaving the spouse behind? How often did you and spouse travel back and forth for visits?

Do you have children and, if so, who would they stay with during this time?

For my situation it is easy: I would not have my wife waiting for me when I got back. You know your spouse better than us…

@Jon Custer, that got sad really quickly.

This isn't about academia, this is about your personal life

@story_without_a_title - no, just realistic - couples do what is good for the couple. I'm actually looking at a year or so abroad, but I'd take my wife. I have no desire to go without her and be away from her for a year. A week or a month, not a big deal. A year? Big deal.

@Jon Custer Agree but not everyone has that privilege and you made it sound like you cannot trust her.

@story_without_a_title - no, that is you projecting there. After 25+ years, raising kids, going through cancer, various other things that life throws at you - I know I could not be away from my wife for a year, and she feels the same way. Every day together is precious.

@Jon Custer then it was just phrase weirdly. I’m sorry!

@story_without_a_title - no need to be sorry, these brief comments do not convey everything important. I see that you made it work, so congrats on that!

Speaking from the experience of not a sabbatical but possibly an even more "cannot say no" situation: during the first year of my postdoc, my husband had just started an assistant professor position in the US, on the West Coast. I was in the Netherlands.
We don't have kids, so it wasn't as difficult to plan and to travel. He came back for the semester break and for spring break. I flew there twice for 3 weeks each because we get 5 weeks off (thanks, Europe!) + I added a part of the university summer break here when his semester at Stanford had started but our semester hadn't. Depending on the distance that can be expensive or hard to arrange.
It's tough with this much time difference. In our case, we definitely hated it. It was tough and the visits felt too brief. However, we knew after a few months of this that he would start a position in the UK, so that made it easier because it felt like there is an end to this. So that part you and your wife will also have. It's finite.
On the plus side in your case is the fact that, I assume, you won't do the whole year in one piece, so you might get several weeks in-between your stays elsewhere. So you might do 3 times 2 or 3 months and be home between those stays to work on your own stuff. And if you have several trips that also makes it less of a big deal because you'll be gone for 2 or 3 months at a time rather than a year, which sounds and is worse.
It also depends on whether you've done this sort of separation, even for shorter periods, before and on your wife's attitude.


text:
Recommended online academic presentation resources
I am always struggling with academic presentation skills. Do you have some recommended online courses or textbooks? Courses are better. I cannot find any courses about academic presentations on Coursea. I want to learn both slide making and speaking.

"Even a Geek Can Speak"by Joey Asher. Also: Practice.

Are you primarily interested in math?

@Buffy Yes, I am interested in theoretical computer science and mathematics.

One tip: Present the topic as if you were genuinely interested in teaching someone about it. Start with a hook or some practical application of what you're going to be discussing that most people in your audience would be interested in. Then, provide relevant academic background for your topic. This will set you up to expand on the introductory points made in your background throughout your main discussion. And lastly, at all times throughout your presentation, remember that you are really trying to help someone understand something that is of interest to you. Presenting should always feel like teaching or helping someone. And most people love the feeling of helping others. So I hope that you can draw strength from that.


text:
What is a bachelor of Engineering (Honours) and Master of Engineering
Context: I am high school student in Australia and currently applying for university 2021. I am interested in engineering and I came across this "bachelor OF Engineering (Honours) and Master of Engineering" program provided by University of Queensland.
I always thought that you need a bachelor's degree to get a master’s degree? It seems to me that this program integrates Master's coursework with bachelor's? Does that mean that if I successfully completed this program in 5 years, I will graduate with a bachelor and a master degree?
UQ program link - https://future-students.uq.edu.au/study/programs/bachelor-engineering-honours-and-master-engineering-2350

looks so. But it is not very clear. I would email and ask for further information.

Could be university specific, but there are honors programs at US universities that offer a straightforward 4+1 path to a bachelors/masters degree (source - looking at universities with my kids, and hiring summer students from such institutions).

5 years seems about right, Hons in 3 and Masters in 2.

Yes, if you graduate this course you will get both a bachelor's of engineering (honours) and a masters of engineering, however this will take longer (as in 5 years rather than the normal 4 years for an engineering degree).
If you look at the AQF (Australian Qualification Framework) level you'll see that its level 9, which is a masters degree. Level 7 is bachelor degree, level 8 is bachelor (honours degree) and level 10 is PhD.
Normally (in the Australian framework) you get a bachelor degree in 3 years then you can do an honours degree on top of that which is an extra year. Rather than doing a honours degree you could instead do a masters degree which was often 1.5 to 2 years long. Some universities only offer masters degrees and for some universities a masters degree is essentially some upper year course from the bachelor degree plus an honours degree (though this also depends on the field). After either an honours (which is sometimes mixed with the bachelor degree) or a masters you can apply for a PhD, however places in Europe don't always recognise an honours degree as it would be recognised in Australia.
This degree in particular started about 10 years ago the University of Queensland started a combined masters/bachelors course for engineering (I know some people from the first cohort). This is essentially the bachelor of engineering course plus the requirements for a masters, including a research thesis which you don't need for the bachelor of engineering (honours).

Thank you for answering the question. I realised that normal bachelor (honours) degree requires 4 years https://future-students.uq.edu.au/study/programs/bachelor-engineering-honours-2455 and master of engineering degree requires an additional of 2 years. https://future-students.uq.edu.au/study/programs/master-engineering-5674. Does that mean that if I select this program, it is going to more work-extensive ?

I can't really answer that question since I only know people who took those degrees and did a different degree myself. In both cases you will only take 4 courses each semester (which is equal to 8 units), though some courses count as more than one. If you go down to 'what you'll study' and click on 'See all courses in this program' you can see the courses you have to take/what elective options are available. There is a little bit of overlap between the two courses so I think they used that and dropped some electives to shave off the sixth year.

Hi NA McMahon, it seems like they changed the AQF level down to 8????

I suspect either you were accidentally looking at the wrong page or  a temporary mistake on their end, it shows me AQF 9 when I click on the link in your original question

Hi NA McMahon, yeah no worries (Thanks for replying). They changed it back after I had contacted them.


text:
Avoiding the double effort of academic research and marketable job skills as a math PhD
For context, I'm entering a mathematics PhD program that offers several different areas of specialization, mathematical computer science (MCS), pure maths, statistics, and more. My undergrad was in pure maths, so I feel most comfortable there, but I'm also interested in MCS, although I'm essentially a stranger there, other than a course on graph theory and a chapter of Algorithms. I'm trying to decide which track to put myself on while considering job prospects after school.
After reading several posts about job prospects for a pure maths PhD here, here, and here, I've noticed a few places where you can go with your PhD.

Academia, with a notoriously tight job market, but where you get to continue doing enjoyable research, possibly gain tenure and basically continue the freedom from the same "business" demands that industry would have. I'm not sure I have the mettle to make it here, so the next options feel safer.
Industry, where your skills will probably be underutilized, or even totally irrelevant, meaning you will have to learn entirely new skills -- programming, statistics, etc -- that you're perfectly capable of learning but haven't been directly taught in your PhD studies. These are jobs like actuaries, software engineers, etc.
Industry Research, rare in between opportunities where research is restricted to what the company needs, but is still relatively open and free. Places like Google and Facebook labs.

There is obvious tension between the first two because a PhD is an academic, not professional, credential. It's simply not optimized to land you into option 2. If you're interested in options 2 or 3, the advice is that you should learn programming or something else on the side and use that to get your first job, and essentially leave the learning in your dissertation behind. This seems like an enormous waste to me. The effort and time spent learning esoteric pure math is essentially for fun (admittedly, a lot of fun), while you are still left to develop marketable job skills on your own.
So my question is: how can I choose my academic track/thesis topic minimize doubling my work? Am I merely butting my head against an intrinsic problem of academic vs professional credential? Should I see the PhD instead as an magical time to enjoy learning math, which will end but leave me mentally strong to tackle other, very different challenges? Perhaps instead it is merely an incubator, where I'm supported while developing a variety of skills not directly involved in the program?
Edit: Thank you for your responses. They're very helpful on a soul searching level and definitely respond to my question, but they weren't exactly what I was looking for.
I should have phrased it like this: What kinds of concrete choices -- courses, advisors, areas of mathematics, etc -- can I make while doing a PhD to maximize its' value after graduating?
For example, is MCS a better choice in terms of applicability outside of academia? Should I consider where a professor's students go after graduating when considering them as an advisor? Am I just worrying too much, and I should just find a problem I love so much that I think about it in the shower? What else am I missing?
Thank you again for your help.

If you see this as a problem, you should consider the option of not getting a PhD.

A math PhD will teach you a large number of completely marketable, industry-ready skills:

how to think logically and analytically

how to research challenging technical topics on your own, solve problems, and pursue difficult goals over an extended period of time, overcoming frustration and maintaining a good level of motivation

how to communicate your ideas effectively, in writing and in person (in particular, if you gain teaching experience while doing your PhD your presentation skills will end up orders of magnitude better than those of your peers who went into industry straight out of college)

and many other “soft” skills that are difficult to quantify and describe but are nonetheless extremely useful and important.

All of these things add up to a very attractive package for employers. It’s easy to focus on the “esoteric math” part of a PhD and conclude that it’s a “waste”. Will an industry job give you an opportunity to use your knowledge of Schur’s lemma or Brouwer’s fixed point theorem, or show off your familiarity with Radon-Nikodym derivatives? Probably not. But that doesn’t mean you will have wasted your efforts learning those things. Along the way, you will have learned to look at the world like a mathematician, and that, as it happens, is a darn useful skill almost anywhere you go.

A nearly necessary ingredient to doing well in pure math is the conviction / delusion that your research question is important, your efforts are relevant, and you will make a meaningful contribution to the world.  A cynic doesn't think this way.  A rational thinker performing Bayesian reasoning based on existing empirical evidence about past outcomes, placements, and job market realities, does not think this way, either.  It's clear that you don't have this conviction / delusion -- this itself makes it harder for you to do well in, say, abstract homotopy theory.  Pure maths sounds idealistic and romantic, until you come to the realisation that pure maths actually treats its younger colleagues like shit.  If pure maths really loves us, why it is making us hardworking and gifted people suffer from such job insecurity, low wage, and tremendous stress?  If your romantic partner says that he or she truly loves you verbally, but they always act abusively towards you, would you stay with them just for their sweet promises?

One of the biggest favours you can do to yourself during graduate school is to become genuinely interested in coding, machine learning, and statistics.  Stats has a better academic job market than pure math; statistical learning would not be wasted double effort; and the connections of stats professors and students are closer to industry jobs.  Some maths PhDs are smart kids, so they can wait till year 4 to have their big realisation, leetcode for a year, and still land reasonable jobs.  They then give you self-justificatory coping narratives of how their previous 4 years of intellectual exploration have been fulfilling and meaningful -- this is just copeism.  If we modify their interests from abstract number theory to machine learning, while controlling for every other factor including the level of intelligence, then the same kids would be just as happy if not happier, would have completed their PhDs one year earlier, and would have been better placed in the industry.  Despite all their copeism, deep down in their hearts, the 4th year leetcoders fully know that it's a tremendous pity that abstract algebraic topology will never show up in their professional life anymore, ever.

You seem to be under the impression that pure math has more intellectual challenge and enjoyment than coding, ML, and Stats.  The former is what you'd do if you had all the money in the world; the latter is what you do to pay the bills.  This is the cross-discipine prejudice that pure mathematicians often exhibit.  I don't think this is fair.  Look - The Invention of C, C++, and Neural Nets are among the top ten most significant technological achievements in the history of Humanity.  Proving theorems about Neural Nets actually says something important, and nobody has solved the problem.  Mathematically formulating and explaining the empirical phenomena achieved by Stochastic Gradient Descent on deep neural nets is a mathematical challenge deeper and greater than the one faced by von Neumann, which was doing the same for Quantum Mechanics, and we needed to invent the theory of operator algebras to do that.  These are fields where a lot of activities are happening.  They give you the skills and knowledge that our free market economy is rewarding - and free market is the best exsiting definition of what our society considers to be of "value."

In short, if you only genuinely and passionately love number theory, then, why, go fucking do it.  But if there's any intellectual possibility that you can be genuinely and passionately be interested in statistics and maching learning, then why don't you go ahead and develop this interest?

This seems to conflate two related but distinct issues: "pure maths" versus "proving things about ML and stats"; and "aspiring to academia" versus "preparing for industry". Some of the things you rhapsodise about in your third paragraph are not necessarily what someone would end up doing in industry.

Might I also suggest that the first half of your first paragraph makes the point well enough, and so you don't need to include the second half which is more argumentative/subjective?

I didn't go to grad school for any of the reasons you suggest. I did it because for me it was something I was good at, had fun doing, did not find stressful, and allowed me to live in a city I loved with pay that was sufficient for me at the time (as someone who grew up relatively poor). If I didn't like the job of being a grad student I would have quit and found a different job that I liked better.

@NoahSnyder Noah, I appreciate your sharing.  I’ve noted that if someone’s parents are affluent, then the economic prospects after grad school aren’t really a worry; if someone’s parents are relatively poor and grad school stipend is already more than how much the parents make, then the economic side of grad school is deemed quite favourable.  PhD student could also be the only job to get a first-world country visa.  But those with parents who are in between are those the most worried about the compensation they are receiving and are missing out.  OP seems to be from this in-between group.

I won't be overly worried. Just think about all the people who didn't go on to do a PhD. They got a job and probably living out their lives right now. You can definitely explore whatever you want, and all the best if your advisor is supportive or doesn't care that you are doing some work on the side (mine wasn't so flexible), although full fledged courses will definitely put you behind on your thesis and research. I have not figured out the best solution, however there are plenty of MOOCs or even certificates, e.g., Oracle, Microsoft, which you can get.
That being said, math PhD will definitely put you in a niche in terms of future career and set you back money/youth-wise. Read this excellent answer https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11208/78834 It is not good to start life when you are 30 in today's economy. I'm saying this because I don't want to gaslight you about the harsh reality of today's job market. No, you are not better prepared for a tech interview than a highschool student who spent his entire life hacking computers because you did a PhD.
And it is not about the lack of knowledge, it is about the lack of experience, and accumulation of experience over the years. We are in a fully experience/skill-based market as compared to a degree/whatever-is-in-your-head based market. Think about the thousands of PhD scientists who work on climate change that gets their finding rebuked by people in charge with no science degrees whatsoever. We are living in this era/climate and we can't deny this.
Ok, so you learned C++ while doing your PhD. Now you are out of the program, and you will have to compete with undergrads or highschool students who maybe doing C++ many years longer than you. Who will be hired? (Not you, because every job nowadays literally wants at least 5 years of professional software development experience.) Think about that.
Not to scare you further, but my friend in graduate school (who is much more robust in the technical-skills than me), got rejected from a bunch of high-tech companies. He taught C++ and was a TA bunch of other software courses as a master student. There is literally no person more knowledgeable in when it comes to memory management in C than him.  We spent a week lamenting how industry hands out rejection letter like candies and how it is so much harder to get into a good tech company than passing the PhD oral defense. Then we forgot about it. Mind you however, those were some top companies. I'm pretty sure he could easily work as a code monkey.

I believe that the mindset to pursue a PhD should not be this.
Landing a good paying/mentally satisfactory job in tech is always a challenge and won’t be easy for anyone, and it does not require a PhD in particular. So if getting a tech job is priority to you in your life, I suggest not pursuing a math PhD.
However, PhD studies are not just some very specific topic you will study like crazy for a couple years and then forget all about it. Being in a PhD program strengthens you socially, psychologically and mentally. One acquires more than some coding skills in a PhD program if they are doing it for the right reasons. Also, one requires more than just a desire to get a job to be doing a PhD for the right reasons.
I think one should pursue PhD if and only if they are interested and passionate about a certain topic so much that even in the shower they are thinking about it. Doing a PhD for the right reasons requires you to be married to your topic, just because you are interested in it beyond reason. Otherwise it is a waste of time and it is better to do a masters where you can learn some skills required in industry and go directly into the real life.

I don't feel there's a tension between the two at all. Your PhD will give you lots of time to work on topics that you are hopefully interested in. It will also teach you the importance of communication, collaboration, and how to teach yourself new topics. When you say you will leave your learning behind, well, that's probably the same as if you went to do a postdoc in a different field (for example). There's a very strong chance that you will never use the exact things you did in your PhD in future. You have learnt far more than just the topic of your thesis. To use your example of learning to program, given your courses, you will more than likely pick some up. Once you know the basics, what's far more important is how you think about problems.
If you want intellectual work outside academia, look for interesting companies, simple as that. Bear in mind that what a company advertises isn't necessarily what they are currently doing... There are many, many people in industry who would have been more than capable of doing a PhD, and I would advise not to consider yourself above them, simply for having taken a different path.
So, enjoy exploring interesting topics, take time to see what other people are doing, get experience of communicating (reading, writing, and presenting), and you'll be well set.

Downvote without a reason - any input?


text:
Is it normal to not understand things from undergrad?
I graduated from college with a physics degree faster than my peers (because of various reasons: financial constraint and ambitions as well as near-burn-out state). My undergrad is a decent research university, not the best of the best, but many well-known researchers. I did well in most classes but I sometimes think it's because my classes are not rigorous enough. Just saying my thought is not out of thin air because I attempted to take a graduate course at the time and I had to work really really hard for it. I don't think I really understood many things from undergraduate classes, even though I'm really good at solving problems from examples. Now I think many of the basic things I didn't understand before start to haunt me in my graduate program. Just to emphasize, the gaps I'm talking about is not just some details but in some occasions the whole subject. I still have many gaps from my peers at graduate school. Even though I'm finally filling in the gaps starting grad school, I still feel like there are a lot I need to revisit.
Perhaps my state is a result of me graduating early and pushing my schedule to a limit where I can barely sit down with a class and understand it. Perhaps I fooled everyone in grad admission into thinking I'm some sort of smart student. Perhaps it's because my undergrad didn't really have the best structure preparing me for what I'm doing now. Or perhaps I didn't really know how to learn effectively before graduate school. I don't know.
I feel worrisome sometimes about my abilities, but relieved other time when I revisit what I didn't know and finally understand it. I want to ask if other people experience similar things about not understanding many things and eventually filling in the gaps later (I mean a lot of gaps :)? Or is it a debt of a student who didn't properly go through their education?
As a final word, I know about imposter syndrome. I think I have evidence in my lack of qualifications as said rather than only disregarding my achievements. And thank you in advance for reading my long concerns.

It's totally normal to study something and then find out later that you don't understand it as well as you thought at the time.  This happens to everyone and is part of the way learning works.  As such, having to re-learn topics from your undergrad coursework is a normal and expected part of graduate study; you just have to budget the time and energy to do it.

Indeed, I would say that studying something more advanced is precisely how you force yourself to fill in the inevitable gaps in your previous learning.

@NateEldredge Thank you very much for your reply. I agree everyone will have some sort of gaps. I guess I should emphasize that my gaps are enormous, at least in my perception compared to my peers in graduate school. It's not just some details of the subject, but here are a few subjects where I think I completely missed the central points...

I don't think that's unusual either.  But I also don't know that there's a lot to be gained by agonizing over whether it's better or worse than it should be (which sounds like classic impostor syndrome); focus on what you can do to get it to be good enough.

@NateEldredge Yes for sure. I'm actively working and relearning to improve. I'm thinking about this because I feel soon enough in a year or two I'll have to decide whether to stay in academia or not. I don't want to waste my time if I'm just not good enough of a researcher... But I know, I will never know unless I just try my best.

Being "good enough" is not an innate characteristic, and your success at research will depend far more on what you do in the next two years than on what you have done before now.  There is no point in trying to make that decision now.

Your experience reminded me very strongly of how I learned fusion arguments (in set-theoretic forcing). I studied them once and didn't catch on. I studied them again and still didn't catch on. I studied them a third time and felt "Oh, is that simple idea all that's going on?!" It's possible that the book I used the third time was a lot clearer than the first two, but I don't think that's the case. More likely, the first two attempts and my unsuccessful struggles with them prepared me (subconsciously?) to catch on the third time. May you have (and enjoy) similar revelations.

Does this answer your question? "I've somehow convinced everyone that I'm actually good at this" - how to effectively deal with Imposter Syndrome

@AndreasBlass Thank you for sharing your experience :)

@NateEldredge Thanks for the advice!

I think this question is, in fact, about imposter syndrome.  But I will answer it anyway.
Many rigorous studies have shown that it is common for students who have completed physics courses to maintain the same misunderstandings of basic physics that they had when they started those courses.  So yes, it is normal to not understand things.
It is unlikely that you fooled anyone.

(+1) I think this is normal in most subjects. There simply is a lot to learn, and working through material once isn't enough to gain a deep understanding and maintain it. I find that the topics I know really well are those that I studied, restudied, and revisited many times (undergrad and grad level), where I re-asked (and sometimes answered) even very fundamental questions in every iteration. "In semester X we learned about ... " mostly means I remember having heard some of the terminology before.

@AnonymousPhysicist Thanks for your answer and the link to the other question. An answer from the other post describes it well: I only see what I don't know and as a result maybe exaggerating my own failures. I will keep working to the best of my abilities.

Do you have links to those studies?

@user111388 I don't look up links for people.  In this case, there are many examples, often published in the American Journal of Physics over the past 30 years.

I'm adding the link @MoreConfi mentioned here: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11765/ive-somehow-convinced-everyone-that-im-actually-good-at-this-how-to-effect

I want to ask if other people experience similar things about not understanding many things and eventually filling in the gaps later (I mean a lot of gaps :)? Or is it a debt of a student who didn't properly go through their education?

I do very often feel the same way and asked my advisors their opinion. Here is a batch of answers fused with my commentary on the subject.

There is a big gap between getting an A and actually understanding the subject.

It is normal to not understand something in your first try. It takes few tries for some people.

Those gaps will be filled over time as you work on those subjects further.

You can't really fully understand something before teaching a course on it (verbatim from my advisors).

I personally feel like I really understand 2-3 subjects and have a passing understanding of other 4-5. Unlike your case, I did not graduate early. I personally approach this with solving textbook problems without rereading the text. It really help, at least to me, to figure out what I do or do not understand. Another method is taking more advanced courses which inevitably require, at some point, some of those gaps you are missing. That is a good time to go back and repeat, learn in context.

Thanks for the answers. These sound good. I just had a (possibly impossible) idea of a good research who understands most things they learn. Typical story of someone like Landau. But realizing that's not realistic for everyone is pretty important.


text:
Email signature question
I have 3 Associate in Applied Science Degrees (Accounting, Legal Secretary, and Information Processing) and also a Microsoft Office Specialist (MOS) certification. How can I properly acknowledge my degrees and certification in my professional email signature?

Why did you not include your country and where you need this signature (private, working in Academia, working as taxi driver, working as politician,..)?

You did edit your question, but did not provide the country and not the profession.

Just sign with your name.

@henning--reinistateMonica: This does not "acknowledge my degrees".

In the U.S., degrees below the doctorate are generally not listed at all.  Doctorates, other than the MD degree, are generally not used outside academia.  Also, do not confuse "certification" with a degree.  They are distinctly not the same.

I should add to my earlier comment that, in the U.S., you do sometimes see masters-level degrees listed when they are a professional qualification, for example, MSW in social work, or M.Ed. in education.

Thank you for your response. I did not include said information for security purposes.

How can I properly acknowledge my degrees and certification in my professional email signature?

Name, BSc, MSc, MOS

Where BSc and MSc are the titles of your degrees. (I'm unsure what the third title might be.) Alternatively, just list the highest academic degree:
Name, MSc, MOS

Or, just don't mention them:
Name

I don't think "Mos" is a title.

@henning--reinstateMonica It's the one given by the OP. (Admittedly, I got the case wrong initially.)

yes, but OP is wrong. ;)

@henning--reinstateMonica so should the answer be down-voted due to the OP's error?

@Solar Mike not sure, didn't vote.

MOS is a certification