text:
How much editing can one ethically accept from one's advisor on a fellowship proposal (e.g. NSF/NDSEG/etc.)
I'm applying for graduate fellowships right now (I am a first-year graduate student in a STEM field), and am preparing to submit the application. My advisor has been helping me out with it for a while, and at one point, he took my draft of my research proposal and made some somewhat significant edits to it. He added several paragraphs, deleted some of my wording, added some sources, and so on. Altogether, at least half of the text in the proposal—a lot of it is figures—has been written or edited by him, while half the text is still mine (and I made the figures and the general outline of the proposal).
For obvious reasons, I'm uncomfortable asking him whether or not his contributions are too substantial (I don't want to say "I think you did too much of it, so I'm going to change it back" or to do so behind his back), but at the same time, I'm cautious about whether or not it's unethical to receive that kind of help on the proposal for my fellowship application, because I'm not sure how these things typically work.
So, is this something that typically happens with these kinds of applications, and is it unethical/immoral on my part to use such a proposal (i.e. something that gives me any kind of unfair advantage)? Or, am I thinking of this too much like a competition that requires solely my efforts for my submission?
Edit I just want to stress that when I say about half the text was written by my advisor, I mean that I initially wrote the paragraphs in question, but they were substantially edited to get the idea across in a better way.
On that note, would it be appropriate for me to further edit his edits? At that point, though, I feel as though I'd be editing it just to avoid acting unethically, not to improve the proposal. Basically, what action would I take in order to ensure I'm not acting unethically here?

You apply for money and your adviser will profit from getting you granted the money, too. He will get some research he is interested. Why shouldn't every adviser support his student in that way?
You should also learn how to write proposals. Not just by writing it, but also to give it the finishing touches and fixing the issues you could not yet identify yourself. That's why its good to get the feedback and support you received from your adviser.
I don't see it unethical at all. It would be problematic if you could not perform the research you describe in your proposal or know it will not work or know someone already did it.

I think you hit the nail n the head with your second paragraph - that is, usually, why parts get re-written...

If this is for an individual fellowship like an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, your advisor's reworking of your proposal sounds over the line. If he had discussed the specifics of the proposal with you at length, you wrote the proposal on your own, and then he made a few followup edits, that would be kosher. But if he actually wrote half the proposal himself, then it seems to me that it would be at the very least misrepresentation to submit it as your own proposal.
Even if this is common in your field, it's not good practice on the part of your advisor. Part of the point of applying for graduate fellowships is to train students to write proposals on their own. Try asking him if you can use his "suggestions" to rewrite the proposal in your own words.
Response to OP edit: Since you say the ideas were yours, that's better that what you initially wrote. But I still believe that your advisor should not be putting pen to paper on your proposal for substantial edits. Your writing is part of your proposal, so it should be yours. This isn't the same thing as applying for a grant--it's more like applying to a program. Your advisor should have discussed his suggestions with you and then you could either take them or not.
Edit: Although I seem to have gotten an equal number of upvotes and downvotes, the downvoters are simply wrong. A GRF (along with the other federal fellowships) is not the same thing as a grant.

In a presentation by the program director, Dr. Gisele Muller-Parker, she said "the GRFP program funds people, not projects."
  (source)

Submitting an application which has been extensively rewriten by someone else is misrepresentation.

"Part of the point of applying for graduate fellowships is to train students to write proposals on their own": But the main part is to do research, isn't it?

Training requires feedback, corrections from the adviser is direct feedback in a tight loop. You won't get detailed feedback from funding agencies beside a decision money granted or not.

@usr1234567 That's not actually true about funding agencies, and what the advisor did wasn't feedback, it was substantially rewriting half the proposal.

@MassimoOrtolano The main point is to compete honestly for the fellowship.

The US fellowships the OP mentioned are not "funding" in the sense that the application represents the student and not just the research project. Submitting documents which are substantially someone else's work is unethical, which was the OP's question. I have no doubt that it goes on a lot anyway, but it's still unethical.

Your main goals with the research proposal are i) to convey the message (in this case the aims of your research, contributions and likely future impact) in as clear a manner as possible and ii) to get funded. I see absolutely no issue with your advisor or any other person that you would like to provide feedback to your application, suggesting revisions and changes to your drafts. For me that includes both editing the written text as well as recommendations for the proposed work, expanding scope etc.
Having said that, the application is yours and you are the one who has the final word into what goes and what not. So treat the contributions from your advisor positively but critically and accept the ones that you find improve your funding proposal.

If Person A has an idea and Person B does half of the writeup, that's not feedback, that's co-authorship.

@AytAyt Ghostwriters by definition don't come up with anything novel, but they are often credited as co-writers.

@AytAyt Which means that they should be credited but they sign that right away.

@AytAyt The point here is who did the work. In this context, the writing itself is part of the work.

@ElizabethHenning I completely disagree with you! It is a funding application, if my mother can give me useful feedback, I will also send it to her for review and comments.

If your mother rewrote half of a term paper which you submitted as your own work, your professor would correctly accuse you of academic dishonesty. Some people here seem to believe that substantially rewriting half of something is "editing," but I disagree and so would most professors.

@ElizabethHenning So you are implying that universities do not employ "grant writers" to prepare grant applications for the professors? Or that this is a dishonest practice? How is that any different?

The key point is that the particular fellowships the OP is applying for are not like grants. I explained this above.


text:
Affiliation for manuscript publication
If I am among the co-authors of a manuscript which I worked on while I was in a Laboratory during my Erasmus Experience, should I be affiliated only with the Laboratory or also the University I regularly attend?

The easiest way to handle this is to use the "present address" option that most journals offer authors. You would list the laboratory where you did the work as your affiliation in the header, and list the university you regularly attend as your "present address" to show you're not there anymore.
On the other hand, if you continued to work on the paper at your university (for instance, if the research was carried out at the Erasmus lab, but written up after you returned home), then you'd list both as current affiliations.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Importance of supervisor support in being accepted for PhD
this may seem like a silly question, as I know every institute is different. However, I was wondering how likely is acceptance to a PhD program when you have a supervisor on your side?
Background: I am applying for an incredible PhD in Ireland. I have very interested supervisors, who loved my proposal and I had two very promising meetings with them, one via Skype and one face to face. They offered me a desk and a new lab to set up, but they informed me it's now down to the academic council. They informed me it’s a formality and there is a high chance of acceptance unless something dramatic happens.
I will add I do have a weak undergraduate degree, but a strong masters which resulted in a publication. I also have worked as a lab technician in Italy and London so have a good bit of experience outside academia.
I may be overthinking a bit as I am waiting for feedback from the college, and starting to feel the nerves.

Welcome! I edited out your thanks at the end of the question--they're supposed to be as direct as possible, and thank you statements are taken by all as implied. :) Your situation sounds promising to me, but others with European experience may have more apt remarks.

Unless you fail to meet the minimum requirements for admission, having an advisor who is willing to support your application and commit the resources to support you as a graduate student is generally sufficient to get admission in Europe (and at many schools in the US). Most of the time, even under “normal” circumstances, the people responsible for admissions will want such a statement of support from someone in the program before an offer is given.

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


text:
Can an applicant's funding offer for PhD programs in the US be taken back and given to someone who's already declined it?
This question pertains to math graduate programs in the US. Suppose a school sent a financial offer (TAship) to a student A and put a student B on the waitlist in the event that A declines the offer. Student A then declined the offer by signing the letter, so the school sent the offer to B.
My question: is it possible that the school will rescind the offer from B if A changed his/her mind later on and decided the take the offer given that
i) B has not yet accepted the offer.
ii) B has already accepted the offer.
iii) The date that A signed the letter to decline was before April 15th.

Note that your question is not really math-specific, but applies to essentially all programs at schools that have adopted the so-called April 15th resolution of the Council of Graduate Schools.
Once a student has turned down an offer of financial assistance and the offer has been given to someone else, it would be exceedingly poor form for a department to "claw back" the offer to give it to someone who has already declined the offer. If the student really wanted to attend—and the department still wanted the student—it could perhaps use a declined offer to get the student, but it couldn't take one that was "in the field" or already accepted to do so.
In general, the student has one chance to accept or decline. Student A could have waited until April 15 to decline the offer but decided to do so early. That decision is essentially irrevocable. It is also impossible for the school to rescind the offer to B once B has accepted, unless there exists cause to do so. (Examples where cause to withdraw a financial offer exists might include if student B fails to graduate or is shown to have made a fradulent application.)


text:
What is 'Diamond' Open Access?
I have heard of 'green' (self-archiving in a repository) and 'gold' open access (immediate open access in a journal), but what is 'diamond' open access? How does this differ from green or gold open access?

Diamond open access is like gold, in that the article is immediately open access in the journal, and nobody has to pay to read it.  However, in gold open access, the author (or their institution or funding agency) normally has to pay a publication fee to get the article published.  In diamond open access, they don't have to pay, so the process is completely free of charges to both authors and readers.
See http://www.jasonmkelly.com/2013/01/27/green-gold-and-diamond-a-short-primer-on-open-access/

You have warmed this librarian's heart with this correct answer. :)

A bit off topic: How, then, does the journal pay its expenses?

Some through in-kind support and donated labor. Some (see e.g. the Open Library for the Humanities) through pass-the-hat support from libraries and relevant university departments. Some grants. Some advertising. Some a mix of the above strategies. There's lots of ways.

You could also phrase it this way: Diamond is like green, but with peer review.

Diamond is gold, but the author (or their institute etc) pays 0.

See also this article by Bob Rosebrugh on "Experience with a
Free Electronic
Journal::Theory and
Applications of Categories",  a diamond open access journal: Notices of the AMS, January, 2013. : http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/noti930 ."The word “free” in the title intentionally has two
meanings: free of cost and in a state of liberty. The
thesis  of  this  note  is  that  mathematics  journals
should be free and that this can be achieved much
more easily than might be supposed. "

Diamond open accesses are definitely the correct way to do journals. You could argue that there is some cost for editing the journal, but this is essentially peanuts in comparison with the price that what the journal actually costs if you take into account the work of the editors / referees / authors (and which are not paid usually). So if the community already pays 95% (or more) of the journal via this, why not paying the remaining part and hosting simply the journals?

I'll add a Venn diagram defining the different types of access:

Source: Jamie-farquharson - https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21598179 CC BY 4.0. Wikimedia Commons.

A diamond open access journal can be paid for through the Society's membership fees, which include access to the Journal. If journal access is free anyway, you may ask why would people pay membership fees? Because they believe in the mission of the Society, want to support the open access journal, get a discount on annual meetings, and generally support that society and journal.

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


text:
Why does professor prohibit me talking to people?
I'm considering a PhD and asked a professor at my university. I suggested a topic to him that he accepted. I applied and he offered me a position but I didn't accept yet.
Later he changed my project's topic to one that suits his interest. I said I would like to do the original topic that I got accepted with. Then I asked more about the project and it turns out he works in collaboration with another university. They divided the work up between themselves, but what the other university researchers is a lot closer to my personal interest than what he works on.
I asked my professor their contact details, so that I could ask them if I could work with the other university. He explicitly prohibited me from talking to them. He told me I would give bad reputation to him if I contacted them.
I am extremely confused as to why he prevents me talking to people. Even a simply inquiry email is not allowed. So I contacted the other university anyway. They told me that they would be happy to see me but they don't want to poach students from their colleagues.
I keep asking my professor if I could do my original topic with the other university that works on that exact topic that I'd like to do. But he keeps telling me that I either do his topic or I should do my PhD somewhere else.
I am utterly confused now and have no idea what is going on. Can someone please explain?

I'm not clear on your question.  What's going on seems simple: your potential advisor feels some ownership of the ideas he suggested, or of you as a student he has found.  When he suggested the topic, he was offering you the opportunity to work with him, and he did not intend to offer the topic to you to work on with someone else, even a collaborator of his.  Whether this is reasonable depends on what is common in your field.  In math in the US, this would be unusual.  In other contexts, it may not be so strange.

@Anonymous Mathematician I approached the professor and I suggested the topic. He agreed then later changed it to his own preference. It's in the field of computer science. Why is it wrong for me to work with the other group just because he told me about them?

Hmm, if you suggested the precise topic, then it's pretty weird.  (My interpretation of "He told me about a project he works on and that he could potentially supervise me" was that the project was his idea.)  Overall, this sounds like an unpleasant situation, so you would probably be better off finding another advisor.

@AnonymousMathematician yes I suggested the topic, and he changed it after accepting it initially. He works on something else, but the other group works on my topic. He told me about the other group, but he says I cannot contact them. Why can't I contact them? He says because that would ruin their collaboration. Why?

It's hard to say, and probably only your professor could give a definitive answer.  There may be no good reason.  It sounds like you have tried to discuss it with him, without getting a satisfactory answer, and have approached the other group, but they are not willing to do anything without his permission.  At this point, it's not clear to me that there's anything you can do except to move on to other options.  (Even if this other group agreed to work with you, the same issue might cause trouble again in the future.)

@AnonymousMathematician it's something to do with poaching students. I looked it up and it means "appropriating students by illegal means". It sounds like students are properties and I am somehow owned by my professor at this stage because I talked to him? What is this about?

The idea behind poaching is that it's rude to try to compete with your colleagues or collaborators for a student.  This is an important social rule, because it's much harder to work with people if you are afraid they will try to take advantage of this relationship to attract students away from you.  You are right that it doesn't really apply here, because you are not yet his student.  But your professor seems to be offended by the idea anyway (perhaps he is easily offended), and his collaborators do not want to make him unhappy.  This may be unfair, but you probably can't do anything about it.

@AnonymousMathematician Thanks for the explanation. I don't want them to compete for me. I just want to work on the topic of my choice. The other group works on that topic, he doesn't. Why is poaching relevant here? Can he be insecure about not having me? Anyway, something doesn't look right to me here, or I'm missing something really big...

He might be insecure, or really need students, or feel very competitive and hate losing, or have a complicated relationship with these collaborators, or feel an unfair sense of ownership (that you are his discovery), or any number of other possibilities.  Ultimately, I doubt you will ever get a satisfactory answer.  You might learn more from talking with your professor, but there might not be any good reason.  I wouldn't worry too much about this.  You've learned a valuable lesson, that this professor is difficult to deal with and perhaps unfair, so now I'd focus on finding another advisor.

@AnonymousMathematician Thank you, I have had many meetings with this professor and also lots of emails. I guess that's how far I can get. I will look for another supervisor. I don't know how to accept your comments, so if you can somehow move this to an answer, I will upvote and accept it :)

My experience is that this kind of things are extremely frequent in academia. The only thing I can tell you is welcome, have a seat, and enjoy the show if you like pain. But in this case, I'd say get the hell out of there.

There are several possibilities for this behaviour.

You're good, he knows that, and the collaboration with the other research group is more formal than you may know (maybe they are in the same funded project because it was the only way to be funded, while the two groups may be in competition). In this case, he doesn't want you to go “behind enemy lines”.
You're not the one he was looking for, he recently discovered that. He is very close with the other group and he don't know how to tell you that you are not a good fit for his group and relatives. So instead, he changed what he said in order to make it unacceptable for you, hoping that you will leave, and that you will also not go to the other group.
He's not reliable, he had a weird idea of what is a student.

By the way, except if you are a recognized genius, this is unlikely that the other team will accept you if they are close to your current advisor and want to stay that way.
In all three cases, only one option: run far away.

This is a red flag. Find someone else to work with.

Easy to say, hard to do. If you start eliminating possible advisors every time something looks weird, you'll end up with no PhD. The flag should be almost black (or very strong red) to stop working with somebody you're already in a relationship with.

I agree with @nibot.  Forbidding your student to talk to another researcher about their own ideas because it will make you look bad is not "something looks weird".

Your situation isn't quite clear. Are you deciding whether or not to accept a position, or have you already accepted and are trying to switch projects?
In the former case, if you're getting that kind of pushback from your advisor, then he probably is not going to be the kind of advisor you'll really want to work for in the long run. In which case, you should look for someone else to advise you (in other words, pick "somewhere else.")
On the other hand, if you're already employed by the advisor, your choices are more limited. It sounds lie you're writing from somewhere in the European system (otherwise, you'd be talking about applying to a different department, rather than another research group). The problem is exactly what the other group told you—they can't be seen as poaching a colleague's student. That's a major social faux pas, and would probably make their collaboration impossible to continue in the long run. Therefore, again, you probably won't get to work on the project you want, because you won't be able to move over to the other group.

What I'm asking is why he is prohibiting me talking to people. He offered me a position, but I haven't accepted yet. I have the feeling he is sabotaging me, and thinks that because he offered me a position, he owns me. Actually he didn't even offer me a position formally, only verbally. I don't understanding poaching, as I am noone's item and I am not owned be anyone else. Is this how this goes in the academic world?

There is no logical (or even legal) reason for him to prevent you from contacting people. If that's the way in which he chooses to operate, this is a "red flag." I would never work for an advisor who wants you to work in his group without consulting anyone. It's a sign of an advisor on a power trip—or worse, someone who's terrified of being "scooped," and therefore cuts his students off from the rest of the research world as a result. If I were you, I would avoid accepting this position if it were at all possible.

I don't really see why you are concerned at all! When you apply for PhD admissions, you have can always suggest who you want to work with, based on their and your research interests (you have to like them and they have to like you). I guess my question is how did you get paired up with him in first place and why?
You make it sound like you are stuck with him, but you aren't. Now if he hired you to be on his project (remember this is his project/funding), you are to work for him and do it the way that makes him look good, (he has expectations to meet too and he wants to do a good job and look good to his superiors/sponsors). If you aren't interested in his project (and it clearly looks like you are not), don't west your time or his staying on his team. Approach your program and request to be teamed up with a different adviser and provide your reasons.
I hope you understand that, in most cases in research based universities, you don't get a PhD admission offer unless at least one of the professors in the department you apply to is interested in your research topic. Now it would be unfair of you for a professor to hire you (recommend you for admission) so you can be in his team and then expect him to let you work for someone else. While he doesn't own you, he also feels that you would be an asset to his team upon your admission into the program, otherwise he could've recommended a different candidate whose interest matches his research/project.
The bottom line is however, you should get out there. Approach your department Dean's office and request to be teamed up with a different adviser and explain your reasons. Keep in mind however that in most cases at PhD level, a professor will only agree to work with you/serve as your advisor if he feels that he is familiar with your research interest and that you will be of a great asset to his team. hope that helps. Remember that your tuition weaver and other monetary benefits (monthly stipend, medical insurance, etc) you receive while you are pursuing your PhD studies is covered by the money that is allocated to his project. So it is important that have interest in the work/project he has for you and you are confident you would succeed doing it.


text:
Is it possible to acquire a letter of recommendation without meeting face to face?
Of course it is not a good idea, preferably one would meet up with the professor to make the agreement.
In my case, I've talked to the prof for a year, and then went off work for a year, now I need a recommendation letter. In September I emailed him my situation WITH the invitation for a meet up at his office. He told me he is willing to provide a reference, but did not address the meeting up issue.
Now it is close to application deadline and I've yet to received the letter from him despite a few follow ups. I'm worried it is the reason is that I did not meet up with him so he might have forgotten who I was (which is understandable). I will attempt to email him once more with a more urgent tone, perhaps he will respond this time, but should I also invite him again to a meet up or is it too late?
Any profs care to share their ideas?

does 'talked to the prof for a year' mean you have never met at all?

It is even possible to do research and write a paper together without meeting face to face!

I write letters all the time for students I've taught, but whom I haven't seen for a long period.  I do ask for specific information:

Tell me what the deadline is!
Include your student number.
Remind me which of my classes you have taken, and when.
How did you distinguish yourself in those classes?
How would you describe yourself? What are your strengths? What are your weaknesses? I am going to have to answer those questions when I write your reference, so the more details the better.  I have to have personal knowledge of anything I write, so remind me of those things I may have forgotten.
What are some of your academic and nonacademic accomplishments that I may not know about?
Tell why you're particularly qualified for the job, educational program, or award you're applying for.
What makes me particularly qualified to write a letter for you? That is, why should the recipient of the letter value it over a letter from someone else?
Include a copy of your application essay.

Put that stuff together, write the professor a note saying, "As the deadline of [whenever it is] is approaching, I thought the following material might help you.  Thank you again for agreeing to write a recommendation."
The professor who has that material to hand can complete a letter in a much shorter time than if it all had to be looked up and remembered.  People (that would be me) tend to do the easy things before the hard things.  Make this one an easy thing!

The complete text of what I ask of students is here: http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/faculty/rbrow211/recommendations/index.html

Is it possible to acquire a LOR without having a face to face meet up/agreement?

Yes, of course. It happens all the time. People are not always geographically co-located with their letter writers.
If you are worried your professor might not remember who you are without a face-to-face meeting, then the major concern is whether he will be able to write a strong letter for someone he barely remembers without a visual reminder - not whether you have met to discuss the letter in person.

If you are within driving distance, I would suggest trying to meet the professor at their office hours and show up with a resume and a letter explaining your purpose for whatever you are planning on pursuing.  By doing this, you can get in front of them and show urgency in the letter.  This is a very common tale, and you are certainly not alone.  Be appreciative of the LOR, but also be firm in the need for it.  Offering coffee is always an option too.
Hope this helps.


text:
What would be considered a "competitive" application for mathematics postdocs in the US?
What are the factors that make an application competitive for postdoc positions in pure mathematics at top tier universities (e.g. MIT, Harvard, Princeton, UC Berkeley, Stanford) in the US?
Clearly, one needs

Good recommendation letters
Interesting research articles
Some teaching/service experience.

In what proportion are the above needed? E.g. how many good articles, how many courses taught, etc. make an application competitive?
Is there any other important factor I haven't mentioned above?

Some additional factors that could play a role: (1) Lab/institute where you did your PhD; (2) Previous personal communication with the potential advisor; (3) Relevance of your work and skill set to the research interests of the potential advisor. In some fields, the advisor often has some project in mind and will be looking for the best person to pursue it.

Teaching experience is going to be irrelevant to a research postdoc.  Some research postdocs give the candidate an opportunity to teach, but this is more about giving the postdoc a chance to gain teaching experience than it is about getting a good teacher.

@BrianBorchers: The asker is most interested in research postdocs in mathematics in the US.  I think pretty much all such postdocs require teaching.  I agree that the candidate's teaching experience will not be of primary importance, but I don't think it is completely irrelevant.

There's no simple answer.  In particular, there are no quantitative standards for how many papers you need.  For postdoctoral research positions in mathematics at top departments in the U.S., it works roughly like this.  (For those from other fields, note that these positions are filled by departmental search committees, not individual professors, and they often involve some light teaching but are focused on research.  The postdocs are independent researchers, not under the direction of any professor.)

Teaching experience and the teaching statement don't matter much for these jobs.  The department will want to know that you aren't a truly terrible teacher, so you won't raise tons of complaints or create a serious problem if you teach a class, but they won't really care whether you are an excellent teacher or just minimally adequate.  (At best that would serve as a tie breaker between otherwise equally impressive candidates.)  Just write something sensible and uncontroversial for your teaching statement and don't worry about it much.
Quality matters much more than quantity for research papers, and trying to write more papers at the cost of writing worse papers is generally a bad trade-off.  In practice, the typical number of papers varies a little by subfield.  In some cases (such as theoretical CS), it would be very unusual to have only one paper, and it had better be amazing if you want to get a job that way; in some other subfields, having half a dozen papers might make people suspicious regarding their quality.  To gauge how your application compares, you can try looking at the CVs of people in your area who have recently started the sort of job you'd like, but keep in mind that counting papers won't reveal their quality.
Strong recommendation letters are absolutely crucial, and getting good letters is worth a lot of time and thought as well as preparation in advance, for example by talking with potential letter writers so they are familiar with you and your work long before you apply for jobs.  Choose your recommenders carefully, and don't limit yourself only to people at your university.

Are there are any specific considerations for applicants applying from abroad, e.g. UK?  What if the applicant doesn't have a position for 2014-2015?  Is recent teaching experience necessary?

Many adverts state that "recently" awarded PhDs are preferred.  What counts as "recent" here?  (These clarifications seem broadly relevant to the OPs question and don't justify their own separate question but apologies if this is not the appropriate place to ask).

@P.Windridge: one year ago is almost certainly recent; ten years ago almost certainly is not. Someone who is finishing a postdoc that they took right after graduating is probably OK. Apart from that, someone who isn't a new graduate has to play it by ear. For an anecdotal example, I was hired in a competitive (top ten) postdoc which I applied to the fall after I graduated and started 15 months after graduating, so it is certainly not necessary to be a new graduate.


text:
Can we get a PhD in mathematics without publishing?
Do many universities allow students to get a PhD in mathematics without publishing a paper?

It is typical in the U.S. that mathematics Ph.D. students do not publish anything at all prior to earning a Ph.D., I think even at the elite places. Publication per se is not such a high priority, nor over-literal gauge of accomplishment, as it seems to be in some CompSci and Engineering disciplines (at least in the minds of some people).
That is, to be clear, especially for people who've thought, or been indoctrinated to think, that the measure of the value of something is the prestige of the conference or journal or ... in which it was published, the idea in mathematics still does seem to be that the thesis advisor and thesis committee decide whether the candidate has done sufficient work to earn the degree.
Seems a sane system to me, especially given the acceleration of freneticism elsewhere.

In such cases, if the student is pursuing an academic career, they will try to publish papers based on their thesis research as soon as possible after graduating.

@paul garrett: About your subjective option on the sanity of that system: The issue with that system is that it does not protect against bad committees with low quality standards awarding a PhD to pretty much anybody. Requiring prior publications does help here.

@RobertBuchholz, no, but surely we can gauge the quality of a degree by the quality of the department, in the first place? The reputation of the department? In any case, for the vast majority of math PhD's, waiting for the current two-year-plus turn-around on a first paper or more would make a PhD last 7-8 years instead of 5-6. Also, in my experience, a less astringent writing style is tolerated in math theses than in usual journal publications, which I do also think is a good thing.

... and, in any case, advisors rest their reputation on the theses they sponsor. People don't like to squander that... I've heard this argument of "bad committees giving out cheap theses" before, but I'm not a fan of fundamental mechanisms being determined primarily by wishing to thwart cheaters, etc. Are there convenient examples of cheap theses and bad committees and corrupt advisors? :)

@Gradstudent, sure, exceptional students sometimes do have publications before completing a PhD, nowadays. But it's not required, in the first place. Second, the most common REU-type publications are not going to help anyone get a post-doc at an elite place.

@Gradstudent, ah, thanks!

Yes, it is very common for students to earn a PhD in mathematics without publishing any papers before graduating. Here are a few pieces of context:

I have read a couple research articles that analyzed the Mathematical Review database, which is a very thorough listing of mathematics publications. One such article is "Patterns of Collaboration in Mathematical Research". It states that 42.7% of authors in the database have only one article (likely taken from their thesis) and another 14.6% have only two. I recommend that paper highly for more information on mathematics publishing.

Publication rates in mathematics vary significantly by subfield, because the threshold for the amount of progress needed for a new paper also varies by field. In some subfields, it is common for researchers to publish many (smaller) papers. In others, it can take years to write a single paper.  Publication rates also vary by author: some prestigious faculty rarely publish, others are prodigious writers.

My general sense is that publication rates are increasing: mathematicians in general publish more than they used to.

I see much more emphasis on graduate student publication than I did in the past. While the majority of students publish nothing before their PhD, I think the number who do publish is going up. Similarly, there is more emphasis on undergraduate research, and this translates into more publications by undergraduates. In the 1970s, say, publications by undergraduates were much more rare.

The increase in publication is especially true at mid-level schools, e.g. non-elite state schools and some larger non-elite private colleges, which want to raise their research profile and so expect more research than in the past. Historically, say 30 years ago, one might have been able to get tenure with only one or two papers, and teaching was the most important criterion. Now, research is the primary criterion and many of these "aspiring" schools. On the other hand, I had a job interview once with a school that explicitly emphasized they did not expect research - this trend toward more publication is not universal.

There is also a distinction between top students (e.g. those who are competitive for prestigious postdocs and for job offers from R-1 schools) versus typical students (who may be perfectly qualified for academic jobs, but are not competitive for R-1 positions). In my experience, top students often have research collaborations outside their thesis topic before graduation, and often have other publications before graduation. But these students make up a small percentage of PhD recipients overall. Even at prestigious schools, not all PhD students are on track to be competitive for R-1 positions. And publication rates again vary by research subfield.

Mathematics in particular is sometimes used for a "vocational" PhD, because it has always been possible for some to find work in industry (e.g. software or R&D) and government (e.g. the U.S. National Security Agency) with a PhD in mathematics. My colleagues and I often talk about bright researchers who we "lost" to non-academic jobs. For students who do not plan to continue in academia, I think there is a smaller incentive to publish extra papers beyond the PhD before graduating.

Quick comment: I don't think "R-1", whatever it means, is widely understood outside the US. Great answer!

Indeed, would you mind briefly explaining the meaning of "R-1"?

Link is dead but archived here

I think the answer will depend on the country, so let me answer for France.
From what I see, I would say that one is generally allowed to defend one's PhD without having published a paper, but only if the thesis contains the material for at least one international publication. This is judged by the two or three PhD referees and then confirmed by the PhD committee.

Yes, also true for UK. The judgment of referees and committee is obviously vulnerable to political pressure from the leadership of the institution where the student did their work. It is a massive problem.


text:
Grounds for complaint? Professor skipping class, inaccurate grading criteria
I am taking a graduate-level summer course and have observed several problems. I would like outside opinion on whether these observations are valid grounds for an official complaint, or whether I am the one being unreasonable.
First, the professor canceled one lecture entirely and cut short another 8 lectures. (There are 18 scheduled lectures of 1 hour, 50 minutes.) In most cases, the early endings were by more than 50%. All told, there were supposed to be 33 hours of lecture, but we received only 24 hours. This is an approximate 27% shortage. All of the lectures are recorded as part of my university's distance education program so there is a trail of indisputable video evidence here.
The professor is also the director of an academic program at the university. His most frequent reason given for the class times being cut short was that his other duties as director created schedule conflicts. Little if any advance notice was given about the canceled or reduced lectures.
In every class I had ever taken, from elementary school through graduate school, if the teacher/professor/lecturer could not attend for any reason, some alternate arrangement like the following was done:

Substitute lecturer
Recovering the lost time through alternatively scheduled class meeting. This "make up" session was recorded and made online to the entire class, so students having conflicts could still watch it.
With student approval, extending the duration of the remaining lectures

However, in these cases, the professor did not do any of those.
I might be willing to understand a 5-10% reduction in received lecture time as part of random noise or "stuff happens", but 27% seems ridiculous to me.
My university's faculty handbook states:

For brief absences, faculty members shall make appropriate
  arrangements subject to the review of the chair or dean as requested
  and according to University and school policies, so that absences
  interfere only minimally with their normal teaching and other
  responsibilities.

No arrangements were made in these cases, and 27% seems to me far beyond a "minimal" interference.
I consider this first issue to be the most egregious. It seems like a flagrant dereliction of the professor's job duties. This course for several thousand dollars in tuition. Is it fair to say I have not gotten my money's worth? Would a university ever issue a partial refund in such a case?
Second, the homework assignments were not graded according to the written instructions. For each of the assignment for the course, the professor posted an "instructions" document that said what we were supposed to do.
The first assignment's instructions had language along the lines of "You must implement these visual features...". The second through fourth assignment documents had no language whatsoever about look or feel. The fourth assignment grade is still pending. But I was penalized on the second and third assignments for look/beauty/aesthetic reasons.
Only after I questioned the TAs did they give me a grading rubric that showed how exactly we were to be graded. In most cases, there was a correspondence between the instruction documents and the rubric documents. However, the rubrics had additional criteria relating to aesthetics and beauty that are indisputably absent from the instruction documents. This "beauty" aspect varied between 10-12.5% of the grade. These are the exact words in the grading guidelines: "Grader subjective score of look and feel." Again, this was not documented up front. Only after my assignments were graded did the TAs send this document, and only because I specifically asked for it.
I emailed the professor about this, and his response was: "I thought I made it clear on the first day of class that you were to [make visually pleasing products]". However, assignments 2-4, in direct contrast with the first assignment, had no documented requirement for this. It seems completely nonsensical for an instruction document to be only "partially" complete. We ought to be graded by only what the documentation says, and exactly what it says. Or am I being overly "grubby" by insisting that we only be graded by exactly what the instructions said to do?
Should documentation not trump everything? Is this a valid grounds for making an official dispute/appeal of the grade to the department chair?

The number of hours taught is objective and I think you have a legitimate reason to file a complaint. I am not sure about the look feel issue. Is the class about design of something?

@scaaahu web programming

Another question is what do you want to come out of this? I think you have a legitimate complaint, but whenever you complain about someone or something, its worth thinking about what is likely the likely outcome. I'm not sure what will happen, considering it seems like this professor is senior.

I agree with @Neo. I feel bad about having to give this advice because it shouldn't be an issue. But, before taking any action, you should weight what you'll gain from this vs the possible repercussions. Unfortunately, not everyone can take professional criticism. So think carefully because you might depend on this professor in the future (another class, thesis committee, etc).

@Neo I have no idea what will happen either. I never had a professor just blow off class like this. This is the only class he teaches, and I am not in a thesis program.

You should split the lecture time question from the grading question because the answers are unrelated.

I wish you wouldn't include the name of the university.  Since there are probably few graduate courses in the field offered in summer, the faculty member in question might be easily identified.  Please consider editing.

Should documentation not trump everything? —  In a web programming class?

Edited to remove identifying information.  Regardless of their merits, StackExchange is not where you should voice complaints about specific instructors.

@JeffE understood. In a previous question on SE, only after I specifically identified the institution and academic program did I really get helpful answers. Hence the inclusion of that info in this question.

"We ought to be graded by only what the documentation says, and exactly what it says" -- is this your opinion that you're asking whether it's shared or not, or is this what your university's general rules say? I would have thought that if you really were informed, expressed as a rule of the class, that assignments must have property X, that means assignments might be graded in part on X, regardless of whether or not each assignment recapitulates the requirement. If day 1 says "all assignments must be done in Java", and but assignments 2-4 didn't repeat this, should C++ be OK?

What did the other students think and how did it affect them? Did they just shrug and work around this guy as best they could, or will they back up your complaint? Re the unstated grading criteria, do they share your criticism or are you the only person complaining? Did he discuss or allude to the grading in class, after assignments? etc. I agree he sounds like an unreasonable lecturer, but in a senior position. What grade did you get, and what do you think you should have gotten? Is this the difference between D and C, or B and A?

Was all material covered? I went to a lot of lectures that was like "We've blocked off 2 hours, but there's really only an hour's worth of material, the rest is just questions and random banter" - much more common in higher level courses.

Just as good writing style counts when you've been assigned to write essays, it's not surprising that good coding style counts when you write programs. They are presumably trying to get you to write quality answers to these assignments rather than merely asking you to fulfill a contract to the letter. Yes, it would have been better if they explicitly mentioned this. Do you have an idea of what a fair resolution would be?

@corsiKa No, there are topics on the syllabus that did not end up being covered.

@Mark Plotnick Seeking that points deducted due to lack of visual "beauty" be restored.

@smci There are many other students willing to file a complaint. The final exam is tomorrow, so don't know impact on final grade.

One thing I can say, regardless of whether it's right or wrong, is that in the working world you are always being judged on unwritten (or at least not public) requirements. Especially in software, you can spend months on a project and deliver a perfect-to-spec application and have it rejected because "we know that wasn't in the spec, but it's critical to our use of the tool". I'm not saying that's an excuse, but it is something you need to learn to deal with and accept in the course of your career.

@SteveJessop the former. I doubt the university has a policy that goes into that level of detail.

@tony_tiger: At least as far as homework assignments, you do know: did this drop you (and other people) from A to B, or B to D? Also, was this the first year these criteria were used, or was it anecdotally known on the grapevine from previous years' students?

I think we can all agree that missing more than 25% of the lectures is unacceptable (and the excuse that the instructor has other academic commitments is unconvincing to say the least: if I cancelled class every time I had other looming academic commitments, I would be cancelling class a lot more than 27% of the time).  This is one of the more serious complaints I can think of bringing against an instructor: literally, you did not get what you paid for and what the university is committed to provide.
Some tips:
1) Your second complaint is so much less serious than your first that I suggest that you totally swallow it for the time being and possibly take it up later if it is still relevant after you are finished pursuing your first complaint.  With respect to the second assignment the instructor can say "I mentioned the aesthetics early on in class and I even put it explicitly on the first problem set.  If at that point a student doesn't understand that aesthetic considerations are important in web programming then giving them a lower grade on assignments is the best way to drive the point home."  And I think that the instructor may have a point there...but anyway, this is all quite debatable compared to the missed classes, which is really not.
2) Your first complaint ought to be taken seriously by everyone who hears it.  I think it is overwhelmingly likely that you will hear "We'll look into the matter and ensure that it does not happen in the future."  But would such a response be satisfactory to you?  I think it probably shouldn't be.  So you should think of specific, reasonable suggestions for what can be done.  Could you ask for a partial refund?  Yes, it is reasonable to ask.  It would also be reasonable to ask to be withdrawn from the course (without any penalty or stigma) and get all your money back.  I would also consider asking to be withdrawn without penalty from the current course and given free enrollment in the next semester (or during the following summer).  Which of these two to ask for depends on your own schedule, your level of interest and commitment in the material, and also whether the same person will be teaching the course the next time around.  Note also that these resolutions render moot the grading issue in your homework.
I'm sorry that this happened to you.  Good luck.

As a teacher academically nurtured in central Europe, I find it interesting to see that you as a experienced professor find the first issue egregious. Here in the german-speaking area, where universities are typically tuition-free, I can safely say that in many cases teachers don't even know nor care how many hours a course is supposed to be. Honestly, courses being more than 27% shorter in actual teaching time than what it says on the can is extremely usual in both, Austria and Switzerland (likely Germany as well, but can't tell for sure).

If you want to know how it works then - basically, there is sort of an formal or informal understanding what is supposed to be taught in a course, and then the teacher pretty much independently decides on class time that suits this goal. Yes, of course there are formal rules, but they are so loosely correlated with reality that you can spend years at a university without even knowing the formal rules.

@xLeitix, If your scheduled to teach 20 times - in 2x2 lessons - during this fall, your saying it is normal to cancel 5 of these lectures? Without any form of replacement? I've studied in Denmark - which is also tuition free - and I would say this would result in a outcry from the students.

@xLeitix I can confirm for some professors in Czechia (but it is not the norm). But the only full professor I know well enough from Germany is not allowed to go anywhere else when he is teaching. He was a leader of an international project and in some weaks there was no chance for having him for a meating.

@xLeitix Apparently (but not surprisingly) this seems to hold only at public and tuition-free schools. In private universities in Austria, students regularly demand (and get) replacements for missed lessons. (And as a student at a public university, I always was happy if there was one less course I needed to go to.)

I am only going to focus on the lecture issue. There is no question that missing over a quarter of the scheduled lecture time is inappropriate.
The effectiveness of complaining depends on who is doing the teaching. A complaint like this could get cause an adjunct to not be hired again. For tenure track and tenured faculty, the depaetment head MIGHT say something in passing. For a department head, nothing is likely to happen. Complaints like this are not worth a Dean's time.
As for a refund, it is more likely the university will alow you to sit in for free the next time the course is taught.

"Complaints like this are not worth a Dean's time." I'm not completely sure about that.  We just went through an accreditation cycle, and something that was emphasized to faculty was "Make sure all classes meet for the full scheduled time."  Apparently this was something the accreditors were paying special attention to. (I presume because it is easier to check than more subjective issues of teaching quality.)  I think a dean is likely to be very attentive to anything that impacts accreditation.

But I agree that even so, the most likely outcome would be "professor told to be more careful in future" - not necessarily much consolation to the student.

I think engineering accreditation can be even fussier about contact hours than general accreditation is, but this may not apply to web development the same way it could apply to more formal or well established branches of engineering.

It's unlikely that problems with a graduate-level class would have any effect on accreditation, because only undergraduate programs in computer science are accredited in the US.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
Communicate Author or Publisher for asking detail?
I have trouble finding out an expression in a theorem (click here to the problem)of a paper by Yann Bugeaud (page 12) , and I tried to contact the author through his e-mail but he didn't reply (don't know whether his e-mail is invalid or he ignored intentionally).
I already asked this question on Math Stack Exchange without success. I have also posted it to math overflow, but it seems to me, it will not get much response.
Under the circumstances should I contact the publisher/editor of the paper or is there any other way to get the detail of the paper?

The Math.SE mods are volunteers selected by the community to help maintain the standards of that community. Vague complaints about them are unlikely to be productive or to encourage people to feel like helping you much at all.

Sometimes it takes a bit longer to get useful feedback in user communities, and it might never come at all. Try promoting your question. Have empathy. Good luck

Your question on MathOverflow has multiple upvotes, but no answers. This seems to show that people think it is a good and interesting question, you are just unlucky that no one with the proper expertise and time to spare has come across it to answer it yet. Unfortunately, it is possible that no one knows the answer to the question.

@setholopolus Small correction/suggestion: it suggests that some people think it is a question deserving of a closer look, but at time of writing the comments seem to indicate that the question might be better suited to MSE. (I have not looked at Bugeaud's paper or thought about the question myself)

The editor and publisher will have no special insight into the contents of the paper.  The publisher doesn't even have any particular mathematical expertise at all.  It is a waste of time to contact either of them.
You speak about "the detail" as if you think that a more detailed version of the proof is out there somewhere, and if you ask the right person they will send it.  I think it's more likely that no such version ever exists.  The author may never have written another version - or if they did, there's no reason to think it exists anywhere besides their own notes.
Asking on MathOverflow was a good idea, and you can also talk to others in your field who may be familiar with the paper or the techniques involved.  But this is more a matter of having them help you figure out what's going on - not a matter of sharing knowledge that already exists.

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


text:
A couple questions regarding graduate studies
I am currently a first year physics undergraduate in a obscure university in a obscure country. My goal is to continue on to obtain a PhD in physics from the best university I possibly can in order to put myself in the best possible network of researchers and academics so I could maximize the quality of my own research. However there are a couple of questions I have.
a) Considering the fact that I've failed my first year at the university and am retaking failed subjects, how is that fact going to affect my prospects of continuing my education (Masters and/or PhD) ?
b) Since it impossible to get research experience as an undergraduate in my country, what can I do to make up for that as an undergraduate?
c) How actually is important undergrad GPA for graduate studies? How are GPA scores interpreted in admissions, meaning what admission officers use them for?
d) Considering that my interests are in theoretical physics, is it really important to be in a high ranking institution, and if so why?

Everything is built from foundation. You failed the first year and are re-taking failed subjects. I think you should get all A's when re-taking those failed subjects before asking question (b) and (c).

Please ask one question per post! Also, I believe some (maybe all?) of these questions have already been asked and answered on this site, use search to find them.

See: How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students?, How essential is your GPA for admissions to PhD programs to US universities in Theoretical Physics?, How much will a poor first semester affect my grad school chances?, How handicapped am I in graduate admissions if I graduated from a lower tier university?,

(continued), What does "university ranking" mean for a graduate admissions committee?, How to improve profile for graduate admissions in mathematics, when coming from a country where quality of math education is poor?

Right now you are inspired to study physics.  Maybe your interest will continue, maybe not.  Time will tell.  What I do know is that this is a good time to learn how to manage school anxiety.  The skills you learn now will stand you in good stead later if you continue in academia.  // Have you figured out why this first year went so badly, and what sorts of changes would help you do better?

In addition to ensuring that you get high grades on your retake (as stated by scaaahu), I would recommend that you get involved with research projects early on and try to get publications out of them-this might compensate for any poor performances in your undergraduate studies. Since you've mentioned this is impossible in your country, perhaps you might want to try and do this abroad during your holidays. Also it might still be possible for you to attend conferences and submit abstracts or posters. It is not the end of the world if you've failed some courses in your first year. In some universities, the first year doesn't count towards your overall GPA. I would advise that you check this with your university.
Generally speaking, the higher the ranking of the university is, the better your career prospects. Of course, if you work with "important people" or highly respected research groups in your field, it might not matter so much.


text:
Not enough guidance from advisor
I'm a third year PhD student. I'm not getting much guidance from my adviser. We only meet once a month, and he keeps giving the same general advice. As a consequence of that, we have had to cancel one project since I have no motivation at all for that project.
Now having the new project, things are getting the same. I'm worried about my progress as some of my lab mates are about to graduate. What should I do? I realized my responsibility in driving the project by myself, but most of the time my idea are discarded. Recently when I showed my result, he claims that's garbage without any reasons. What should I do? I'm really thinking of dropping out if situation is not getting better.

"most of the time my ideas are discarded". That in itself is not a sign of a problem, as long as reasons are given, and something is learnt from them. We spend most of our time as researchers coming up with useless ideas. Having said that, saying that results are "garbage" is not useful without explaining why.

possible duplicate of Advisor isn't advising

@Suresh "We spend most of our time as researchers coming up with useless ideas". very nice statement!

"we have had to cancel one project since I have no motivation at all for that project". What exactly is the relation between having a meeting once a month and not being motivated? This to me sounds more like an excuse rather than a good enough reason.
In the third year of your Phd having one meeting a month is not too bad. Your supervisor is assuming that you know your way and at this stage you should be left to figure it out yourself rather than him spoon feeding you. Of course he will still have strong opinions and might say what you have done is not the right way. It might be that he is busy/not happy with you/thinks he has mentioned to you before how you should do it and you are not listening or that you have a problem in your relation that you don't even know of. If for instance you are just not motivated the way you described its not unnatural for your supervisor to not be so happy with you.
Next time you meet him once he rejects your idea ask him for suggestions and guidance on what to do. Ask politely and genuinely, and if he is not forth coming explain that you need help to figure it out. If he says your results are garbage ask him given his freaking awesome powers and knowledge how he would have done the work differently. He is only human and sometimes complementing somebody can go a long way. At all costs try to be more motivated and don't exhibit the behavior you described in the first part of your message. That's not going to do you any good and might be the root cause of all of this pain.
I don't see why you should drop out after investing so much time and effort. It is in the interest of both of you to sort out the situation and no PhD advisor would like to see someone dropping out after three years (at least for their selfish interests).

I'm worried about my progress as some of my lab mates are about to graduate.
I'm really thinking of dropping out if situation is not getting better.

Before you pull the nuclear trigger and drop out, I strongly suggest that you take some time to figure out when you want to graduate and what you have to do to accomplish that goal.  Be very specific (e.g., "I will prepare the following work for conference X, which has a submission deadline of Y;" "I will be ready to propose to my committee on Z").  Once you put this on paper, you can go to your advisor and ask him to review it with you, and to make suggestions or provide other guidance.  If you can't get your advisor to agree to the plan, at the very least go to another professor (possibly the ombudsman, if there is one) and talk over the plan with him/her.  You need something concrete or you could linger forever.
I was lucky in that my advisor forced me to come up with a plan early on (within the first year of working with her), and we came to an agreement on what that plan was going to be.  The proposal stage of your eventual PhD work is a similar agreement with your committee.  I had a tacit agreement from my advisor that if I met all the goals, I'd be ready to graduate, and I worked hard to make all the deadlines I had set.  That in itself was a big motivation, and it worked out.
As far as your projects go, you must be personally invested in getting them done.  That's one of the driving factors in every Ph.D, and you (hopefully) have an intellectual desire to work on the project, so I suggest trying to get into the mindset that you really want to find the answer to the questions posed in the project.  That's the fun part of being a scientist, after all! :)

Welcome to the PhD world...
Where the advisers have little time for you and your ideas are always bad...
... Until you realize that the PhD is a learning process as well! Learning how to do research, how to be independent, how to have integrity and how to push the boundaries of science by a tiny delta...
In the course of those 3 years I am sure you have learned a lot and have become critic about what you do and what others do as well. That is the first step to understand your work was not all in vain!
Find a hint from your adviser, something he inspires you to do and something you think he is right about! (there has to be something, after-all he is still your adviser after 3 years...).
Use that hint as inspiration (although you don't love the muse) and work on something you believe is good. Your adviser is not the only reviewer of your work, scientific community (those papers we submit) are also an evaluation of our work.
Get inspired from the adviser, evaluate your work through scientific community and have confidence.

If you are want to have this degree You have to motivate you by yourself, too. Just wait hints from supervisor is not enough. You have to work in your research idea and you can request a bit your supervisor by diplomatic way. You write to him email every week and can give to him update reports, what you doing and how is your progress. Of course, you will nee hints. But I must have some own idea about your future thesis and you better have to work on this idea. You can try write paper to conferences. Conference reviewer evaluation is always good impact to researcher. If just you want you can find way and your method how you can handle situation. Just give to your self some time. And please think, what is important for you! If PhD is important you have to move... You must work by yourself, first...


text:
What is the typical Legal Structure of a modern College?
I'm very perplexed as to how the terms College and University are archaically used to denote associations of people, but are in modern times being used to denote buildings or realty.
What are standard organizational structures in a legal sense for different Colleges in a US-based Research University??
For example, if the corporation of the University Trustees makes the policies providing for faculty appointments in a College of Arts and also in a College of Education, will these different Colleges typically be like departments in the same corporation, or do they have separate Legal Personalities?
Are the Colleges associations or corporations, or merely administrative units defined by the internal policy of the Trustees to distinguish different collections of offices?
Do the Colleges have members, and if so who are the members? Are all the matriculated members, or just current students? Are the faculty members of the College?

I don't agree with the close votes on this. It's definitely a collection of question, but they are elaborations on the main question: "What are standard organizational...."

This isn't complex for someone who knows the answer. It can be answered simply with a legal definition of some established College. Example: "Microsoft Corporation is a legal person created by the State of Delaware whose corpus consists of the directors and beneficial owners of its stock. It has several wholly owned subsidiary corporations. This is the most popular type of business organization for Fortune 500 firms." Maybe that example is inaccurate, but it answers all the questions corresponding to my question about the colleges in three sentences. I don't see how my question is too broad.

As I understand it, in a typical private U.S. research university the different colleges or schools that make up the university have no legal independence, and they are simply administrative units within the university.  (On the other hand, part of the endowment generally consists of restricted gifts, which can only be used in certain ways or by certain departments.  This can give the corresponding parts of the university more power or independence in practice than one might otherwise suppose.)

Do the Colleges have members, and if so who are the members? Are all the matriculated members, or just current students? Are the faculty members of the College?

This is entirely a matter of university policy.  Current students, staff, and faculty would usually be considered members of their corresponding colleges, but this can vary (and some universities just aren't organized this way in the first place).  In practice, this generally doesn't mean very much: it may determine some requirements for students in addition to departmental requirements, it could be listed as an affiliation on your publications (although departments are more common), it might give a few privileges such as building or library access, and it tells you how to fill out university forms, but it's otherwise not a big deal.

I suspect you are correct, but I will hold out a little longer to see if I can get a more definitive answer.

Generally this, where there's a single legal university entity. However occasionally this can be quite complicated with large private universities, and state university systems. For example the Claremont Colleges, or the complex Columbia University, Barnard and Teachers College relationship.

Another example of a complex university structure is Cornell University which has both publically and privately funded components.

Oxford University (constitution) it seems was able to get the Crown to either recognize as or raise into corporations each of the Oxford Colleges. Additionally, the members of these Colleges (example charter), including students and faculty, also appear as individuals in the membership of the corporation of Oxford University. Oxford University as a corporate person seems to be a charter party exercising control over the Colleges, but is not itself a member of those Colleges.
When we get to USA State Universities, there seems to be some oddities where the Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association Act (Ohio's UUNAA) might implicitly turn Administratively created Colleges into William Blackstone Corporations. This is because UUNAA seems to assert that almost any group of people with a voting membership and a succession continuity plan and that isn't forbidden to acquire property will be able in principle to hold that property in mortmain perpetually outside of Probate, just like any regular business corporation. In the USA, these entities would likely be deemed Quasi-Corporations, in part because they probably don't have the same constitutional Due Process rights that a generic corporation would have. Any governance rights which the University Trustees have vested in the faculty via a Union Contract are possibly relevant for determining the legal status of the Colleges.
Since any legal personality for colleges seems unintentional in the University Policies I have read, I am going to assume until further notice that Anonymous Mathematician deserves the Check Mark.


text:
Making figure legends for papers in the biological sciences
I'm in the process of writing figure legends but realized I don't actually know what to include or what to exclude. I wrote them based on intuition and tried to copy what I've already seen but I was wondering if anyone had good suggestions or references for making figure legends for papers and reports in the biological sciences.

In general, the figure should contain a title which concisely captures what it's showing: 'Effect of manipulation A on measure B', or 'Level of A influences property of B', or 'B vanishes when A is larger than X', or some such.
After that you would go on describe what the figure shows, as precisely as possible - go panel by panel and say what's on the axes (and in which units), what denotes statistical significance in the image (e.g. gray shaded areas), what the colors mean, that sort of thing. You can also write what the main statistical finding is, using just words (i.e. no p-values or similar).
Those are the basics. However, take into account that some journals allow unsubscribed readers to see the title, abstract and figures of their papers. If this is the case, try to imagine what it's like to be able to read just the abstract and see the figure with legends, and build from there. See if an experienced reader can infer what your specific contribution is from this information only (in fact, many people will anyway just skim over the figures before deciding whether to read the paper). This often means that the figure legend should also include a mini-recap of the experimental setup or specific manipulations next to the finding it depicts, but the exact contents will vary depending on what you're showing.

I would also that you can sometimes point the attention of the reader to a specific part or feature of the figure, e.g. "Nuclear membranes at the bottom of the figure appear to be elongated and distorted".

The chosen answer suggests going through panel by panel and stating what's on each axis and its units or what the colors mean. You shouldn't need to do this: axes labels tell you what is on the axes and that's where the units should go (not in the caption). As for what the colors mean, that's ideally the purpose of a legend.
I have a post about this that goes into more detail about avoiding long-winded, procedural, and uninteresting figure captions.


text:
I want to submit a paper to arXiv.org, but I'm not affiliated to an Institute. What can I do?
I have a paper which I'm interested in submitting to arXiv.org.
However, the submission guidelines say an institutional affiliation is required for submission. I've graduated in physics from Unicamp in Brazil, but I didn't follow a scientific career. My current employer doesn't relate to physics.
What do you suggest that I do? Is there a way to submit my paper? Or is there an alternative to arXiv.org?

See also Submitting to arXiv when unaffiliated in Math Overflow.

you can submit to vixra.org and then put them in wikipedia with vixra link to gain visibility :D

If you have no luck, you can always fall back on http://vixra.org/ [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ViXra ]
Many papers there look distinctly dubious at the very least, or trivial, as one would expect from an unmoderated repository. But I'm sure some are sound and worthwhile.
Although perhaps not ideal, one advantage is that at least you'll have evidence of when your paper was submitted, in the event of priority disputes. Also, it is handy to give a standard(ish) URL for references.
The guy who founded ViXra and runs it, Phil Gibbs, is a physics graduate himself, and as clever as a tree full of owls. But there's no getting away from the fact that in academia ViXra is generally treated with a fair degree of contempt.

I was reading the about page and I just LOVED it! Thank you!

I'd be very careful with viXra.  Fair or not, it has a reputation for containing primarily crackpot work, so it's not something you want associated with your paper unless you firmly believe in the principles behind it (namely that there should be no filters whatsoever).

Whatever you think of the bulk of the content on vixra, posting a paper there will serve to secure priority--assuming of course that the idea is genuinely new and interesting.

In my experience securing priority is not even worth thinking about.  Your only goal should be dissemination: you want your paper to be read by the research community.  If you succeed, then priority isn't even an issue.  If you fail, then it really doesn't matter if you've "secured priority".  The best case scenario is sharing credit with whoever independently rediscovers your ideas and succeeds in disseminating them.  A more likely outcome is being relegated to a footnote ("some aspects of Smith's work were anticipated in an unpublished manuscript by Jones that was never widely circulated").

Given the amount of crackpot stuff on arXiv, I'm still surprised viXra even exists.

What if I first publish on viXra and next try to publish on arXiv?

I opened a question for that.

I was identified with viXra philosophy, and I'll try it. Maybe I'll put some similar paper on arXiv later, if I get endorsed. Thank's!

I don't see where it says that you must have a institutional affiliation,
Reading comprehension is not my strength.
It also says that you must represent your affiliation correctly. If your current employment is concerned with certain areas of Computer Science or Mathematics (and your paper is in a related area) this will probably count. Otherwise, I'd suggest entering "none", as that is the truth of the matter.
However, I believe that without either an affiliation or a history with arXiv they will expect you to get endorsed before they accept your submissions.
As for finding endorser they write

If you're looking for an endorsement, you can find somebody qualified to endorse by clicking on the link titled "Which of these authors are endorsers?" at the bottom of every abstract.

Now all that is left is for you to convince one of these people that you are serious and competent. Assuming that you were previously affiliated with a institution in the appropriate field you should probably use your contacts there to get in touch with an endorser: they are like to suspect that anyone who contacts them out of the blue is a Not-Very-Serious-Person (tm).

Great! I didn't know about it, thanks! Regarding institutional affiliation, it's on the link I provided, under "Take Responsability": "The following information is also required for submission". The first item is the institutional affiliation, and the second one is (if I got it correctly - did I?) the official number of papers of that Institute.

As of 2019, the linked page no longer mentions affiliations.

You can upload your paper to Zenodo and/or ResearchGate.
Also, unlike arXiv or viXra, Zenodo and/or ResearchGate have the added benefit that assign they can assign a DOI to your paper for free.

Why the downvote?

@Matthias I'm not the downvoter, but this does not really answer the (obsolete) question.

@fqq The OP did ask "Or is there an alternative to arXiv.org?".


text:
Rumor mill and math job
After starting the application process this year, I found a wiki page at UC Davis that lists people who have supposedly been shortlisted, invited for interviews, or given offers for faculty positions in mathematics.  I am listed in couple of places, and I wonder if this can harm my application.  What are the pros and cons of this open source?

I mean this web-site: http://notable.math.ucdavis.edu/wiki/Mathematics_Jobs_Wiki

For reference: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/117889/shortlists-and-job-offers

Ah.  Well, it's a wiki, so if you're actually worried, you can take your own name off; the moderators might even agree to keep your name off.  But as @user4491 says, the effect of having your name on or off this rumor mill is likely to be minimal.

I can probably agree on the effect on the actual offers, but on the other hand it seems if a name appears shortlisted then other departments may consider to the applicant, in the case they missed something in his application. I am not talking about the final offers, of course...

I am a professor at a top 20 school in mathematics and I have been on our department's hiring committee for the past several years. I can assure you that we take absolutely no notice of the contents of that particular website when making decisions. We consider ourselves competent enough to form our own judgements on any particular candidate. In the past, we have interviewed plenty of people whose name occurs frequently on that list, and plenty of those whose name does not appear at all.  Moreover, the accuracy of that website is dubious at best; at my own institution it sometimes lists people who are not at all under consideration, and usually doesn't list people who are - including those who have been given offers. The only time I made any attempt to edit the website was when it claimed that we  didn't have any positions available at all (which was false). I suspect that at least on one occasion someone invited themselves to our institution to give a talk and then put their own name on the website as a candidate (they were not). Thus, I suspect that the effect this particular website has on job offers is minimal at most.

What are the pros and cons of this open source?

I see three pros of these types of lists. The first is that it can alert you to jobs that you did not know about. The second is that it can tell you something about where the status of the hiring process is. For example, if the list says an offer has been made and you haven't had an interview, then the odds are not good. The third use is that it gives you an idea of who is getting interviews and offers and with the help of the internet, how your CV stacks up.
The cons are pretty simple in my mind. In fact, each of the pros has a pretty substantial con. First, there are much better ways of finding out about jobs. Second, the list is not accurate; just because the list says an offer was made, doesn't mean it was. Further, I am not sure of the value of knowing that your application was unsuccessful. It seems reasonable to want to know, but I am not sure how it changes ones outlook. Third, there are better ways to figure out what the weak points of your application are.
As for being listed, I don't see any potential for harm.

I'm not sure anyone claims that the Rumor Mill Wiki has any particular value other than satisfying morbid curiosity.

Could it be that it helps departments to reconsider somebodies application, when they see that it was lited many times? In that case big shots will be even in a better position, then they were before. This might reflect negatively on those who are less listed....

@user26565 NO. Search committees simply do not work that way. It just isn't information that is useful.

@StrongBad, is there any law/rule that would prohibit the search committees to look at the rumor mill  and decide based on it, e.g., user2013's scenario?


text:
Industry certifications as program entrance requirements?
I've noticed several academic programs that require, or accept in lieu of more traditional entrance evaluations, industry credentials for admissions.
Is there a comparative analysis of programs that allow industry licensing/certification versus those that adhere to more traditional entrance requirements like the GRE?
The specific credential that I'm thinking of is the CISSP (1).  This certification has been eligible for transfer credit equivalency for some time (2), but I've only recently seen the certification as an admissions requirement (3) for an academic program.
Some data points that I would would be interested in are:

How do examinations, such as GSE/CISSP/CISM/etc, compare to the GRE in terms of overall academic preparedness?
Is there is measurable difference in the comparative difficulty between the different categories of examinations?
If you've taken both types of examination, industry and academic, is one class of examination better or worse for gauging candidates, and why?

Refs:

The Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) is an industry standard credential and certification.
For example: American Public University System (private, for-profit) and Walsh College, MI (private, non-profit)
Capitol College, just one of several examples.

APUS is not a public university system; it is a private, for-profit, online institution.  Don't walk.  Run.

I didn't say that it was a public institution, it is only mentioned as an example of a college that accepts transfer credit from certification or license... but in either case does that have any impact on the question or potential feedback?  I ask out of honest curiosity.  The APUS (APU & AMU) is accredited by the 'Higher Learning Commission and a member of the North Central Association', so I'm not sure how the status of public or private is relevant.

The phrase "US education system" in your footnote suggests that APUS is representative of the US education system.  It isn't.  Also, the word "public" in the name of the institution suggests that the institution is public.  It isn't.

Mia Culpa. I was working under the presumption that being a regionally accredited institution would provide an acceptable reference point.  Can you recommend any guidelines that might help me identify a 'real' school?

I've also added a reference to Walsh College, a brick and mortar school in MI that offers '[possible] advanced standing credit [12cr hours] in the MSIS [program]'.

To start: if it's listed here, it's probably not worth it.

aeismail, I've already edited in an additional reference to address JeffE's concern.  Thank you for the wikipedia reference.

What kind of academic programs are you interested in?  If you're asking about graduate programs in computer science, for example, I don't know of any that would accept industry certification in place of GREs, or that would offer academic credit for an industrial certification.  (On the other hand, many computer science graduate programs don't bother with GREs, either.)

@JeffE, I'm not sure how your questions could possibly be advancing the discussion but on the assumption that you're not just trolling, please see the OP. The phrase "several academic programs" (although a bit out of context due to recent edits) denotes multiple programs and not a specific one.  If you can think of any specific differences between any specific programs that would alter the context or applicability of any given answer please let me know and I'll adjust the question accordingly. Thanks.

@grauwulf: For most academic programs, the honest answer is "Yikes! Take the GRE already!"  I'm trying to narrow the question enough to solicit something more helpful.

@JeffE lol.  The GRE wasn't a problem for me and I'm already in the program I want to be in.  That being said, I found many of my certification examinations to be far more strenuous than any test I've taken at or for school.  Back on topic: Now that we have so many different admission 'standards' (GRE/GMAT/Comps/License/etc) there seems to be a growing divide in how programs are structured.  I'm just looking for information on that.  I may have found the material to answer my own question so if I see no answers from the net by this evening I may be able to answer my own question here.

Can we move some of this to meta. I am not sure if these types of programs are on topic.

Is there a comparative analysis of programs that allow industry
licensing/certification versus those that adhere to more traditional
entrance requirements like the GRE?

I am not aware of a formal analysis of the differences. One could probably divide graduate programs into two camps, with some gray area between. In a really general sense, academic research doesn't prepare you for industry jobs and industry jobs do not prepare you for research. Therefore, the two type of graduate programs are research targeted and industry targeted. I would argue that any program that accepts/requires/weights industry certifications falls into the industry targeted camp. The two camps are so different that trying to compare across them is silly.
As to your other questions

How do examinations, such as GSE/CISSP/CISM/etc, compare to the GRE in
terms of overall academic preparedness?
Is there is measurable difference in the comparative difficulty
between the different categories of examinations?
If you've taken both types of examination, industry and academic, is
one class of examination better or worse for gauging candidates, and
why?

Standardized tests in general are pretty rubbish metrics and that is why most admission committees also request transcripts, essays and recommendations. The GRE is likely marginally better at predicting success in research targeted programs and the industry exams will be marginally better at predicting success in industry targeted programs. As for difficulty, it really depends on the experience of the individual. Is an History exam more or less difficult than a Math exam?
Yes, but it depends on the individual. Individuals with an industry background will likely find the industry tests easier than the GRE, while those following a research based academic career path will likely find the GRE easier than the industry exams.

I've contacted two schools to ask them what their reasoning for one path over the other is, and I'm still waiting to hear back from the industry focused program for more specific details, but I think that your answer is pretty much what I've gleaned so far.  I'm going to accept this but I will also add another answer once I have more definitive feedback.  Thank you for your response.