text:
Major mistake in my paper on arXiv, counterexample found
I am doing a PhD in an area of mathematics; I uploaded a paper on arXiv a few months back, after finding a mistake last year in an earlier paper of my PhD advisor (a long paper published in a top-tier journal and the error was not in the main theorem of the paper) which my advisor accepted and I was working on fixing it, which my advisor himself encouraged me to do, and he said his impression is that the proof can be recovered.
I tried to construct a seemingly new method which seemed to need a lot of work last year, which my advisor encouraged, but eventually to prove a weaker version of the claim at which point my advisor seemed to lose interest, as I became more interested in the methods. It seemed clear the full claim would be very hard to prove.
However, I myself made a poor error at the end and now the main claim of my arXiv version is wrong, and actually I found a counterexample to the claim of my advisor's co-authored paper (with a different mathematician) and my own current paper with the weaker claim.
However, it may still be that the method I constructed can say something new for a nicer class of objects.
When I was finishing writing this argument (which remained a bit badly written), I emailed my advisor a few times to discuss these ideas and for some help, and he didn't respond. I asked another mathematician about this problem and my advisor's lack of response, and decided to upload to arXiv.
It seemed like I did not have any other meaningful work for several months other than working on this question, which in itself was frustrating to me.
My advisor expressed his displeasure at me having submitted this paper to a journal recently, something I asked him several times earlier about when he didn't reply.  I apologized to him a few weeks back, asking him if I should withdraw the paper which he didn't tell me to do. But just now I found this error.
If I were to upload the counterexample to arXiv, should I first withdraw (indicating the error) and then upload as a revision on the same submission?
Lastly, should this have a bad impact on my reputation?

You seem to be too concerned of your reputation among the math community, but I encourage you to take care of your relationship with your advisor first. It's alright to work on fixing a mistake he made in the past, but involving other researchers and publishing your work in that direction without his consent seems a bit rough to me.

When I see people correct their mistakes, usually my opinion about them improves. So I think your reputation will certainly not suffer from doing this, quite on the contrary. If the mistake can be corrected, just upload a second version of the paper on arXiv, and if the mistake completely invalidates your paper, there is an option to withdraw the paper from arXiv (it will be still accessible, but people will see that it has been withdrawn). This is the best thing a scientist can do, and as long as you make mistakes only in a few of your papers, your reputation will benefit because people will know that they can trust you and your other papers.

The mistake is irretrievable; but I have a counterexample, and will upload that on arXiv on the same link.

People make errors, especially if they are inexperienced. You should minimize the repercussions of the error, though. Knowingly publishing false results can damage your reputation. Also, if the mistake is in a submitted paper, you should talk as soon as possible to the editor about retracting the paper. You can see it as a chance to write a better paper.
You might want to correct the arXiv paper, just so that people are not led astray.
Of course, you did not make the advisor happy by finding an error, but the relationship seems to have survived. It is too bad that you two are not working together on this.

If I understand correctly, the sequence of events is this:

Your advisor published a paper that included a strong claim.
You realized that his paper had problems, so you worked together to try to salvage it.
You eventually managed to prove a weaker version of the claim, and some computational methods, but your advisor lost interest when you gave up on the strong claim.
But you "did not have any other meaningful work for several months," so you kept running with it.
You eventually published this weak proof on arXiv and submitted to a journal, but this angered your advisor for some reason.
You found a problem with your weak proof.

This is clearly not good; this paper is a bust, and it doesn't seem like you have other lines of inquiry where things are going better. Additionally, your advisor does not respond to your messages, does not keep you busy, and is angry with you (and they don't even know yet about this most recent error!). I do not know whether the problem is with you or your advisor or both, but your current way of working does not seem like it's on the right track. I realize this isn't an answer to the question you asked, but it's the answer you need to hear: you should fix your relationship with your advisor, or find a new one. Then you can ask your advisor the other questions.
Anyway, to your actual questions:

Post a single revision to arXiv; no need to retract.
If this hasn't been published for real yet, and the only problem is with the arXiv preprint, then this will do minimal/no damage to your reputation. And as others have said, it reflects well on you that you have the integrity to correct your mistakes rather than just hoping no one notices.
But your goal in graduate school is to get a good reputation with several impressive accomplishments, not merely to avoid getting a bad reputation. You do not currently seem to be on track to achieve this.

Don't worry about the reputation thing. When I did my research, I found errors in the proof of many "leaders of the field" on a routine basis, even in fundamental works that have 10000+ citations and shaped entire fields. Research is more about mistake prevention and correcting past mistakes as best as possible rather than being perfect.
Don't worry about the feeling of your advisor. I bet that they don't even care about their mistake (because not a lot of people in the world care about the research in the first place, let alone being able to spot the mistake.) Normally people just keep these mistakes in their mind and try not to repeat them in future publications.
Don't even bother correcting Arxiv. If anyone else is so seriously interested in your paper, then they will spot your mistake, and then either issue a correction to your paper, or write their own paper without acknowledging yours (while secretly happy that they are right and you are wrong - they will never tell you). If they cited your result and made even more mistake, then this is their mistake for not carefully proof-reading a non-peer reviewed pre-print uploaded to a server hosted by Cornell university.

Is this a serious comment?

@CaptainFoo Yes. From someone who has made mistake before and realized that nothing serious happened and nobody cared. Then later found out that everyone else also made mistakes and nobody cared either.

How can you be a researcher if you don't care about the quality of the work you publish? This needs to be satire.


text:
What is the right approach to research when goal is not to publish in top conferences?
I am theoretical computer scientist. I am currently working in a local university in south  asian country. I have tried my best in the past to publish the research in good venue but have been failed. Now I am okay or fine with publishing in low tier conferences.
I have one doubt about my approach. I read top conference papers like STOC,FOCS,SODA and understand them if they seems interesting to me. Then I try to rephrase a research mentioned in the paper. After working on that question results in a paper.
The problem with approach is it takes quite a time to read and understand papers from top conferences as they are lengthy and nontrivial. This some time takes 4-5 months and total time for one paper is around 6-7 months. Many times it seems after reading these papers that there is no scope of improvement. In that case to me it appears that I should have read a paper of a conference which is not top tier. Lets say paper X is published in tier 2 conference then in most of the cases the reason it has been published in tier 2 is incomplete solution (partial solution to a problem).
Now the question is How to research if my goal is to publish and not to bother about ranking of the conference in efficient manner (time and energy)

What questions are you interested in?  What do you want to find out more about?  I have way more problems I would like to solve than I have time to work on them, and I rarely read a paper without having some reason to believe that it contains information relevant to a problem I am already interested in solving.  I find it hard to imagine someone with a PhD who is not in that position.

You can read papers faster with practice.

What did you write your PhD dissertation on?  Why aren't you working on extending the results of your PhD?  Why are you reading random SODA papers instead of the one that's most related to what you already know?

@Alexander Woo Algorithmic questions related to graphs.

@Anonymous Physicist Agree

What does your advisor say? I would never have been able to write my first paper without my advisor who had an idea of "how to write a paper for the X conference".

@lighthouse keeper I am done with my PhD and graduated.

@Coreman Did you not publish anything during your PhD? I think then you might have been set up for failure :/

I am guessing, but I think you haven't sufficiently specialized.
Most theoretical computer scientists are not specializing in something as broad as graph algorithms.  They are specializing in something extremely narrow, say specifically in list coloring algorithms, or specifically in adaptations of Lenstra's integer programming algorithm.  Your aim should be to specialize in something so narrow that you are the world expert in that very narrow area.
Don't try to understand anyone else's work completely; you only need to understand it well enough to see how it contributes to your work.  Because you have focused on your area well enough, you should be able to read (the relevant parts of) papers much faster.
The danger in doing this is that you end up producing work that no one else is interested in, but, as long as it remains legitimate research, it should be publishable in lower-tier conferences.

Thank you for answer. I don't want to tell my exact topic of my PhD. That's why I am not writing it completely.

It seems as if you are working alone. That makes everything harder. I suggest that you try to form some collaborative group of people with similar interests. It doesn't need to be local, but you probably need a way to meet them also. That is what makes CS conferences so powerful; you get to meet and interact with other researchers.
This is actually easier now, with the internet, than it used to be. You can "zoom" about, so to speak without physical travel.
If your university permits and can provide funds, you might invite someone to visit who has similar interests. Or you can possibly visit another university for a week or two in order to work with someone.
Your old PhD advisor might be able to put you in contact with people.
Once you get a few people, even two or three, thinking along similar lines, the ideas may flow. But just reading and trying to then extend the work of others is fundamentally a slow process as you have seen. If the research area is active, then others (who are probably collaborating) are going to beat you.
Strength in numbers. Perhaps you will get into those conferences in time.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Government versus Private Institute as a Faculty in India
I am from India. I have two different offers for Assistant professor (computer science) positions in India. The one of the institute is government funded and second is private college.
The main advantage of government college (or semi government) is job security and no work pressure as per my observation in India. I want to join this institute but there is one problem NIRF ranking (link)  of this institute is like 100 (getting low from last 4-5 years) but of private college is with in 40 (as per last 5 years)
My goal is to join  a college where there is a growth in terms of research and teaching. On the basis of this criteria I am not sure which institute I should join as a faculty member. Suppose that the only thing which I care is research and teaching then kindly suggest me which one will be good for me.
I am in confused which would be a better institute to join as a faculty member.
I know it is not possible to guess future but it is better to take decision on the basis of some analysis.

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


text:
Shifting from a bachelor's degree in ChE to graduate studies in Mathematics
I am currently pursuing a bachelor's degree in chemical engineering (2nd year student) from SLIET, Punjab, India, which is a Central Funded Technical Institute under the Ministry of Human Resource Development, India. Before moving on to the main part of the question, let me describe a bit about my background in mathematics.
So, I am currently involved in a group research project on discrete geometry, which is being mentored by a renowned mathematician (of UCSD) in the US. I will also be doing a research internship on algebra under a well-known faculty of IIT Bombay in the upcoming summer of 2021. I participated in PROMYS 2020 Bridge Program (as a junior counselor and researcher) and PROMYS Boston 2019 (as a first year student) as a Mehta fellow. Also, I participated in MSP 2018, ENS Paris, as one of the top 50 young mathematicians around the world. In addition to this I am a Regional Mathematics Olympiad (RMO) awardee and have also received a high-distinction in AMC 2016, back in high school.
Now moving on to the main part of the question, I wish to pursue my graduate studies in Mathematics from the US or Europe, that is, I wish to shift to mathematics after I am done with my bachelor's degree in chemical engineering.
But, as you might know the mathematics that is taught in a typical engineering program covers real analysis, multivariable calculus, Fourier series, linear algebra, vector calculus, complex analysis, differential equations (ODE and PDE), Laplace transform, probability and statistics and numerical analysis. We are not taught abstract algebra (groups, rings, fields, etc.), most part of analysis that is covered in a typical undergraduate mathematics course and topology. So, these are the courses that would formally lack from my coursework, which would seriously make my application (for graduate studies in mathematics) weak and less competitive.
Though I will be taking five additional undergraduate courses in mathematics and computer science next semester (from NPTEL), namely, introduction to rings and fields, introduction to algebraic topology, introduction to Galois theory, introduction to algebraic geometry and commutative algebra, and design and analysis of algorithms. I hope taking these courses would cover up for the lacking coursework to some extent. I plan to keep taking such additional undergraduate courses in mathematics and computer science for the further upcoming semesters too. In addition to this, I have also taken courses in Number Theory, Graph Theory and Topology during my two years at PROMYS.
I am also preparing for the GRE mathematics subject test and covering some of the undergraduate mathematics courses on my own, at the same time.
I have heard that funded masters are not a thing anymore in good US universities. So, should I be opting for an integrated PhD in mathematics from the US or should I be opting for a masters in Europe after my bachelor's? Which is easier to get into (provided my background in mathematics)? And, what else should I be doing (like more undergraduate research work, coursework, etc.) to enhance my profile in mathematics, in order to get into some decent universities?

Welcome to Academia SE. Unfortunately we don't analyse individual application profiles here, but perhaps you can make your question more general so others will find it useful too. Also, you might want to consider anonymising your question (not sure if your professors would be ok with you describing them and their current project in such detail).

@astronat, can you kindly check if the question seems fine to you now?


text:
When should I reply "thanks" to a professor's email?
I received an email from one of my professors today and I am not sure if I should respond or not. The email contained the grade I received on a paper as well as my grade going into the final. I am not sure if I should reply with a simple "Thanks" or if I should just let it be. Also, the email was sent about 6 hours ago if that matters.

Do you know to how many students he sent the grades? If it's an individual e-mail to a few students for specific reasons, it's polite to answer. On the contrary, if he did that for a whole class of 50 people, he probably doesn't need 50 "got it, thx!" responses.

If she took the time to do 20 individual e-mails, I would answer. Nothing time-consuming, along the lines of "Hi, thank you for taking the time to share this information, have a nice day". It never hurts to be nice ;)

Okay, makes sense! Thank you! Do you think it's too late to respond now? It has been a while.

E-mail is not instant messaging, you are "socially allowed" to wait until you have the time to answer properly (which I guess would be once a day, maybe a few days if it's over the weekend or vacations or busy periods etc). In any case, I wouldn't worry too much about timing, phrasing, etc... just say thanks and forget about it!

Haha I have no idea, I don't know your professor! Sounds great though

Would you thank them if they gave you the same information in a hallway conversation?

@JeffE Maybe they wouldn't thank them for the information but for taking the time to have the conversation

Summarizing all my comments as an answer,

I am not sure if I should reply with a simple "Thanks" or if I should
  just let it be.

It depends on the number of students the professor wrote to. If it is an invidualized e-mail for a limited amount of people (apparently your case), yes, a little "thank you" is the nice and polite way to go. (On the other hand, if the class is a huge auditorium of a hundred people, the professor probably doesn't want this amount of e-mails arriving in his/her inbox).

Also, the email was sent about 6 hours ago if that matters

6 hours, 24, 48, it doesn't matter. E-mail is not the same as instant messaging, and it is generally okay to skip a few days - especially in your situation: the professor is not waiting for your answer, it's just a nice thing to do, but if you wait three days or don't write at all, noone will notice.
Just write "Hi Professor X, thank you for taking the time to notify me!" and that's it!

Think of the thanks as simply an acknowledgment that you received the email. That can be helpful in correspondence  like this (course based correspondence where it might be a future nuisance if a student somehow 'missed' seeing the email or if it ended up in their spam folder.)

If you are just stuck between a response and saying nothing, I would always go with a response to confirm the receipt of the email. But in your case, 1) it was more of an informative email and if you don't have any question or complaint about, you can let it go and 2) already 6 hours has passed.
So, just let is be!

Especially due to the points listed in 1), I consider a response useful: It tells the sender that the issue is closed and they can forget about it; no more direct follow-ups will ensue.

My response was based on my own experience. If I want the acknowledgement of the students to ensure they see the email, I send the email with "read receipts notifications".

There's no correct response here, as it depends on the social mores of your group. Some people want to hear acknowledgement and will wonder if they don't get it, some people view courtesy emails like "thanks!" and "you're welcome!" as spam and will get upset if they do get it, and many more don't care either way.
My advice to you – ask your advisor sometime when there's nothing else important going on which one he prefers and just do that.

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


text:
How to look for thesis of Massachusetts Institute of Technology?
On my book there is the following reference:
Buckles, R. G., 1966, Analysis of gas exchange in a membrane oxygenator, Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
I tried to find it online:
https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582/browse?rpp=20&order=ASC&sort_by=1&etal=-1&type=title&starts_with=A
http://library.mit.edu/F/XQ39BH41Q8C9V3XHXK5XA7EMFR5V5R9QDNSCKDFTNN4JNSS2SF-02835?func=find-b&find_code=WRD&request=Analysis+of+gas+exchange+in+a+membrane+oxygenator )
but without success.
Can you show me where I can find it please?
Thank you so much for your time.

Most theses, published, are in the controlling or major library for that country - have you tried an inter-library loan request? It may not be online or are you hoping someone else has scanned it to save you the effort...

Have you tried asking your librarian?

Hello @astronat, the library of my faculty does not have it.

@SolarMike now I looking for the email of the MIT's library.

It's in the MIT library as noncirculating so I don't think a ILL would work. Details wants an MIT login. I searched here.

Inter-library loan, or order the microfilm version.

You might find what you need in the journal version.

Very good @JeffE!

You're going to want to ask your institution's library to submit an interlibrary loan request to MIT to access the thesis. MIT will prefer that you go through that channel - it has to do with ILL request statistics.  I'm an academic librarian and have worked in interlibrary loan in the past - trust me, this is your best bet, especially since there's a good chance there isn't a widely available digital copy (as is the case with most theses, dissertations, papers, articles, etc published prior to the mid-90s).

If an item is listed as noncirculating, can it still be requested (and approved) for a interlibrary loan?

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


text:
Is it normal to feel like my level is more like at the undergraduate level though I'm a PhD student?
I'm in my first year of PhD, but sometimes I forget basic concepts that I have learned in my undergraduate years. I have a masters but my masters was general not specific, and now I'm working in a specific topic in the PhD. My PhD is in the field of piezoelectricity and I have forgotten information that I studied before in Electromagnetism. I am now finding myself watching lectures for undergraduate students, but its not that bad, it doesn't take me much time to understand. But then, I get more questions in my head as I explore more and more information, and then more time passes before finishing what my supervisor told me to study.
Is this normal, or does it mean that I'm not ready for PhD? So when PhD students start their PhD, and start doing literature review, do they also review material studied before?
By the way, I also think that I have maladaptive daydreaming, so this makes things worse. :(

In my view, it's completely normal in your first 6-8 moths or so.

Does this answer your question? How to effectively deal with Imposter Syndrome and feelings of inadequacy: "I've somehow convinced everyone that I'm actually good at this"

@AnonymousPhysicist it helps, but I don't find it a complete answer to my question

@AlessandroDellaCorte thank you for sharing your thoughts, it made me feel better

I actually wonder if you have a different issue than the one you think :). I suspect that you do have the knowledge and background to complete your task, but perhaps as a side effect of imposter syndrome, are avoiding the steps you need to take to learn the material you need for your research problem.
It is completely normal to need to review information that you don't have at your fingertips. Even if you have taken and done well on courses in electromagnetism, doing a PhD in a subfield of electromagnetism means that you are now going to hyperfocus on a specific area, and you are very unlikely to remember all the details you learned about that area in your course. A good researcher is not someone who knows all the details they need and never needs to look something up; a good researcher is someone who knows how they can find what they need, learn it, and put this knowledge to use. There are some advantages to reviewing undergraduate lectures: (a) they tend to be at a higher level, which is useful at the beginning of a project when you are getting your feet wet with the subject and don't want to get lost in the weeds, and (b) more undergraduate lectures tend to be available online than graduate ones.
Having said that, what stands out to me in your question is this:

But then, I get more questions in my head as I explore more and more information, and then more time passes before finishing what my supervisor told me to study.

It sounds like you might have an issue with focusing on the parts of the material that are relevant for your research problem. This can be a big issue, especially if you end up spending a lot of time re-watching lecture videos and don't make progress on your topic. A lot of a PhD is self-driven, and requires focus in a narrow area. So it is important to develop the skill and discipline to be able to identify what you need to know, and learn those things, without going too far down rabbit holes that take you away from your goal. Of course, there's some balance, because defining what you think you need too narrowly can lead to your pre-conceived notions of how you think something works blinding you to important concepts you need to learn, so there is always some "exploration" part of learning and you cannot be 100% efficient. But, it seems to me you know that you are spending too much time thinking about questions about the lectures that are not relevant to your research.
Additionally, while undergraduate lectures have the advantages stated above, at some point you will likely find that they do not cover the material in sufficient depth for what you need to do. Therefore, it is also important to look at other sources. Probably, you will find that you need to read advanced books and research papers to learn the techniques you need. This can absolutely feel scary and intimidating if you have never used these kinds of resources before. And if you are experiencing feelings of imposter syndrome, then it's normal to feel like "you aren't smart enough" to tackle these more advanced resources. However, you don't need to believe or act on these feelings. You want to make sure that you are not using the undergraduate lectures as a crutch because they feel comfortable, but instead are making rational decisions about using the source(s) that contain the information you need at the right level to do your work.  Your advisor can help you determine what the relevant sources are.
I'm not saying this is what is happening in your case, but here a common example of the kind of thing I am saying. Many students who did very well as undergraduates have a difficult time transitioning to a PhD. They find research challenging given the difficult, open-ended problems and long timescales of a research project, and miss coursework where they did well and got rapid, positive feedback. So, they try to recreate the experience of taking courses, and do not advance in their research. These students eventually have to learn that research progress is measured using different metrics than coursework, and change the way they work to be successful in research.
Here is a relevant and perhaps inspirational quote from Nobel Laureate Stephen Weinberg (from here: https://www.nature.com/articles/426389a)

I managed to get a quick PhD — though when I got it I knew almost nothing about physics. But I did learn one big thing: that no one knows everything, and you don't have to.

Given that you were admitted to a PhD program, I absolutely believe you have the background needed to make the jump to using the research literature successfully. What you are feeling is very common, and not easy. It may feel like you are stepping outside your comfort zone at first, but the rewards for "learning how to learn" are enormous and will pay dividends throughout your career.

Disclaimer: I only speak from personal experience below.
I also had similar problems during my PhD. It helps to remember that a PhD is a specialisation in a very very specific direction of research. You do not start with Classical Mechanics when you do a literature review. Even if you do not recall the analytical solution to the whatever order differential equation. But yes, you do review material studied before, in a reasonable amount of time.
Try to focus on what is relevant for your PhD and the immediate topic at hand. If you do not understand it, discuss it with a peer. Come back to the topic a few days later, work on something else meanwhile.
Remember PhD is just as much time management as research.

Thank you, I'm just not feeling confident enough. I'm also not satisfied with my bachelor study style at my past university. So, I feel like I'm on a higher level with a background study that wasn't solid enough.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's not normal. That's because as PhD students, one would already have been an undergraduate before and therefore know what it's like. As long as you have not completely forgotten what you learned during undergraduate studies, it should be clear even to yourself that you know more than you did and therefore are not at undergraduate level.

it doesn't take me much time to understand

This is the key line. Think about how long it took to master the material when you first encountered it, and compare it with now. You might review old material (who doesn't do that?) but when you do you know what you're looking for and can skip to the relevant part, and also learn it a lot faster.


text:
Authorship for design and data analysis
I’m a Postdoc. Last year I was given some data from a former postdoc. My PI told me that the data had never been published and. I worked on that project night  and day, designed the analysis plan, did tons of analysis,  came up with a novel technique (which hasn’t been used in the literature before). I got pretty interesting results and last week when I showed my results to my PI and the former Postdoc, my PI said that she (the former Postdoc) should take the lead of the project and be first author.
I’m a bit confused, I didn’t know they had that in mind. The former Postdoc didn’t analyze the data, is it ok she gets first authorship with my design and analysis? She said she could write the manuscript (but of course she’ll need help writing methods because she didn’t do that). I felt bad about this. I do understand that it’s her data from her previous project, but I wish they had told me before I did all the work. Am I wrong,  or should I be considered first author?

What was the contribution of the former postdoc? 2. Did you explain to your PI how much effort it was for you to get these results?

"Effort" isn't enough. Where did the ideas come from? Who formulated the original questions? The hypotheses?

The former Postdoc collected the data but didn’t get results with her hypothesis. I formulated new hypothesis and did the new analysis that got the results. I might be wrong and overthinking this. I’m asking here because it helps to know the unbiased perspective  from someone who can be objective about it. I would really appreciate your opinions. Thanks!

Did you ask your PI for reasons? (This is a question, not necessarily a recommendation.)

No, i wanted but I’m new in the lab and honestly didn’t know what to do or even if my reasoning was correct

Yes, I see your point!  There are many things about this project I’m conflicted with. I’m new in this lab. So, I don’t know...the whole thing from the very beginning feels awkward.

This sound like a classic case of clinician-statistician interaction. Both sides tend to under-appreciate the contribution of the other, and conflicts like this happen a lot. For the future, the lesson is to discuss authorship as early as possible when engaging on any projects.
For now, I'd add two things to consider:

Even assuming that the entire intellectual contribution so far has come from you, the other postdoc would not be entirely freeloading. The first author has a lot of responsibilities, such as deciding on the overall presentation, writing the manuscript, presenting the results in conferences, responding to reviews etc., and I personally think that is a significant intellectual effort. It may be unfair that you were passed over, but in the end the other person will still have to put in a lot of intellectual work, while you are free to move on to other projects.

Ask yourself if your analysis method is a sufficiently strong advance to stand as a publication on its own, i.e. could you write a methods paper using some simulated or publicly-available data. If so, pitch that to your PI, along the lines of "I believe I have found some more general methods to improve PET data analysis, and I would like to write that up with a technical focus, in an appropriate journal. By the way, this won't actually need [other postdoc]'s data". The PI will surely see the cause of this, but as long you're being honest and tactful, nobody should be offended, and whatever the outcome, this should help all parties understand each other's contribution better.

Yes! That’s exactly it! Clinician-statitician interaction! Your answers and unbiased perspectives really help me, thank you all! 1) that is totally true! 2) the method is pretty novel and my PI said that, so maybe I can propose that or even continue “polishing” that method for future publications of my own

Let me formalize my comment. The effort someone puts in to a paper may have a lot or only a little to do with the intellectual content. In the worst case, the work is just grunt work: watching solutions boil and bubble and taking notes.
The more important questions for lead authorship is who drove the intellectual content here. For example, who first noticed that this is an important and "interesting" set of questions to ask? Who formulated the hypotheses? Who designed the experimental structure if it wasn't completely standardized. Who defined the standard of "success" in answering the important questions.
The person(s) who do that are the authors. Designing programs to analyze the data may be as important as that, or not, depending on the needed innovation.
I'm not going to try to judge your case (and couldn't, in any case), but those are the important questions.
I hope it is something more essential than lab politics that is the determinant here, but that happens also.

Thank you so much for this answer. Yes.  she collected the data (it’s PET data) and she had an idea at the beginning. The problem is that her idea didn’t work. So, I redesigned the experimental structure, proposed new hypothesis, did analysis, novel techniques and got the results. She’s gone write the manuscript so I guess it’s ok. I also find it confusing and that it will create future problems- e.g she wants to present it at a conference but asks me to do a “clearer” report because she doesn’t understand R. So, it’s like I’ll have to continue working every time she needs to explain methods.


text:
Will graduate programs go back to GRE after COVID?
With the pandemic going on, most schools have either decided to make both GRE and its subject tests optional. In all likelihood, would there be a big chance that this is the finishing hammer for the GRE, and make a lot of institutions move away from it?

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11812/the-gre-why-does-this-still-exist

This is an operationally relevant question!!! ... even if non-trivial to answer. And, indeed, the questions with obvious answers are hardly worth asking? :)

My U.S. grad program in math had already been reducing attention to GRE subject test for years, due to its manifest uselessness for predicting success in our grad program. (I've been involved in grad admissions here almost continuously since about 1985, and have been Dir of Grad Studies in math for two stints, so I've really paid a lot of attention to this.)
Until the pandemic, we did tell our own undergrads to take the subject test GRE, since many places still did expect it. In fact, faux-ironically, until recently, we did tend to wonder why someone would not have taken the subject test GRE if they had any idea what they were doing... in terms of preparation for or application to grad school in math in the U.S.
A number of other good programs had already, in recent years, downplayed the significance of the GRE subject test score for their applications, so we ourselves had come to "wonder less" why someone might not have taken it.
With the pandemic, and the at-least-temporary vanishing of the GRE subject test, we have more-unabashedly stated that we don't care about a subject test GRE (nor any other part of the GRE).
I would speculate that other math grad admissions in the U.S. have also figured out how to not pretend that the subject test score is a good predictor of success... all the more that it (documentably, both anecdotally and other) never was, and the last year or so has necessitated making decisions without it.

You have convinced me to retract my vote for "opinion based."  Thanks!

@AnonymousPhysicist, :)... there is an unsurprising inertia in these things... but/and in happy cases there does come a tipping point.

At the program I went to, the subject test GRE wasn't required. I have heard professors at other universities say that they don't care about GRE scores because they think that students cheat. But if it is so clear that it is useless, why is it so prevalent in the first place? Is it because "everyone else is doing it"?

This will vary by institution in the US. Some will return, others not. It is likely to depend on how the experience of making predictions about success of applicants turns out without it. If the other indicators prove adequate there will be little pressure to return.
But, I suspect that many, if not most, will return to using it since, for the institution, it give some information at little cost or effort.
Hard to predict the future, of course.

Please do not post answers that contain no information.

This is a good answer: despite the fact that the GRE is not a good predictor of graduate student success, there are a lot of people who are used to using it as a cut off, and the key point from Buffy's answer is that "it gives some information at little cost or effort."

@AnonymousPhysicist, please don't try to manage me. I don't answer to your whims. Sorry.

Another factor to consider: the GRE tests (especially subject tests, but also the general one) have increasingly been criticized from a diversity perspective- here's an example from physics (https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/PT.3.4626). I suspect that this pressure will only continue after the pandemic, and unless departments can really make an affirmative case for keeping it that the path of least resistance will become to move away, at least for the time being.

Irrespective of their use in admissions, I actually found taking the GRE and the math subject test to be valuable. Humbling, though.

@JHare That "key point" does not relate to the premise of the question, which is that programs stopped using the GRE due to the pandemic.

It's just a request.  I do not expect to manage anyone.

@AnonymousPhysicist, it is, however, insulting. Not the first instance.

One can reasonably disagree, but in my opinion, posting unhelpful answers is slightly rude.  Requesting that you stop is not rude.  You have posted many good answers, which I upvoted, and your answer quality has improved over time.


text:
How does one go about finding an obscure journal and paper?
I was reading a review paper which cited another paper, however for the life of me I cannot seem to find any hits on the cited paper. The author, title and journal return nothing on the usual sources (Google mainly). What is the best course of action to go about finding such a paper?
The citation is "R. Badulescu et al.,in
Proc. Innov. Sustainability Conf., vol. 40, 2017,
pp. 1–4."

Academic librarians are really good at this sort of thing. Perhaps you have a way to ask one.

You should specify what the "usual sources" are (google, other multi-purpose search engines, …?). Try to look up the first author if you can, or any edition of those proceedings. If everything else fails, you can also contact the corresponding author of  the paper you were reading and ask them if they could share a pointer / way of getting this paper.

@Buffy - I continue to be amazed that people don’t remember/learn of research librarians these days. The best friend a PhD student can have for literature reviews, and ever after. Spending a few hours with one is an eye opening experience.

@Clément Google is my main source. What I find strange is, I cannot even get any meaningful hits on the Journal.

@Amal What's the title of the paper? I happened to see a librarian today and show her your question. She said knowing the title could help her to find it. I think your librarian probably would ask the same question.

This is not a shopping question, but it is a "content of research" question.

"really good" is understating what a good reference librarian is capable of. I've seen librarians track down books containing English translations of century-old papers originally published in Russian.

Here's a link for the abstract book (p. 41)
http://innovation.pub.ro/archive/2017.pdf
The easiest thing would be to email the authors.
I found the article by searching in Google Scholar (scholar.google.com) for your reference. With more details I searched for some of the author names. I think the accent in the name Bădulescu might confuse the search engines.

To the OP, please note the last line on p.42 on pdf: For the purchase of the full paper please contact the authors.. You may have to pay for the paper.

Thank you so much! What did you put in Google Scholar? I could not get any results by simply copy pasting the reference. Is it the accent that made the difference?

Another really odd thing is that the conference seems to be totally unrelated to the area of the paper. I think this has made it even harder to search.

You're welcome. I first put in GS the whole bit in quotes that you put in your question. That got me to the IEEE paper by Wainstein from which you got that reference. That got me the title of Badulescu's paper. I copied that into Google and found it in the list of publications of IMT-Bucharest. After a few trial-and-errors, I searched Google for "Badulescu Mircea Dragoman" (M.D. seems to be the head of the lab or some such, because his name is on most of the papers there.) That got me the pdf I linked to.

A bit odd that most of the authors are from the university - could be a university conference with a "publication", there may not have been peer-review done.


text:
Plagiarism or just cheating?
I teach a course on how to write a scientific paper. One of my requirements is no copy and pasting. Period. Including quotation marks and an inline citation does not get a student around this rule/instruction. I consider it to be plagiarism. The instructions on every writing assignment is it must be written in their own words.
Papers are run through Turnitin and TA's are instructed to look at the score and anything over 10% that is not due to common word usage (everyone does the same topic on the first paper and they are going to use a lot of the same words on the subject)is flagged for my review.
In my opinion, this is sloppy, lazy work and simply cheating. And I call it plagiarism. That is the way I was taught through undergrad and grad school and it simply was not acceptable at all.
Is there an actual 'rule' that considers this to be plagiarism or should I just call it cheating? Both are student integrity issues.
While it is not part of the grading rubric for the assignments, it is clearly spelled out in all instructions as well in the syllabus, and  a tutorial they have to take and acknowledge they understood in Week 1.
Maybe the answer is to simply incorporate somehow into the Rubric itself so they lose significant points for not following this very clear instruction?
Any advice and information is much appreciated. I cannot get a clear answer from the university I work for.

Not even citations are allowed? What? Does this mean that students are supposed to write papers on completely fictional made-up topics just so they can practice writing? Or are all students expected to lay the foundations of completely new fields of science? Otherwise there is no way to get around building your work upon the works of others. What field you are in?

"Including quotation marks and an inline citation does not get a student around this rule/instruction. I consider it to be plagiarism." ─ Why do you consider it to be plagiarism, if the student is not claiming the words or ideas they quote to be their own?

What is your core goal in disallowing explicit, acknowledged quotes of other work?

I see some votes to close this question. I urge people not to vote to close this question. It is disturbing that someone who does not at a very fundamental level understand what plagiarism is is teaching a class on how to write a scientific paper and enforcing this misunderstanding with potentially serious consequences for their students, but it's also commendable that they reached out for a second opinion, and the more answers this questions gathers, the more likely it is that the OP might change their mind and that their students won't have to face baseless accusations of plagiarism.

Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.

Deleted comments here by people who either did not read or did not heed the notice above.

It is neither plagiarism nor cheating.
Plagiarism means presenting another person's intellectual contributions as your own. If sentence is in quotation marks and followed by [37], it is clearly not claimed as a contribution by the author. If you go and redefine what plagiarism means you are doing neither yourself nor your students a favour.
Of course you can have a rule that your student's essays musn't have any quotations in it. I think that's a bad idea, still, but not completely unreasonable.
However, if a student violates this rule it still isn't cheating. Cheating requires a level of dishonesty and deception, and having clearly-marked quotations in a text just doesn't fit the bill. I often set assignments where I am asking students to write a proof of something, and get answers that are definitely not proofs. This is not an academic integrety issue, this is just students failing to do the task they were given. They get 0 marks on it, and that's it.

A more reasonable constraint on quotations might be something like "quotations will not be counted towards the length of the paper", or otherwise limiting how often they are used. Not for issues of plagiarism, but for issues of successfully completing the intended assignment.

I agree with you except that I think this is some kind of cheating.

@PeymanMohamadpour It is not cheating. This is like having a rule students cannot use the letter "a" in their paper. Students who do use the letter "a" may fail the assignment, but they're not cheating. They did not properly complete the assignment, but there's no academic integrity issue.

Further, the OP's approach causes problems for those of us that have to pick up the pieces when students has been exposed to these idiosyncratic and misleading definitions.  Forbidding direct quotes is particularly problematic in two ways (i) it encourages students to think that paraphrasing is both necessary and sufficient to avoid plagiarism, and that plagiarism is about words not passing off someone else's work as your own; (ii) it teaches students that it's OK to change another author's wording.  Sometimes the exact expression of an idea matters

What @ChrisH said is particularly important: I'd rather have a quote from someone who spent significant time to get it just write, than a rewording that may be clumsy, hard to understand, and/or contain subtle errors that the original author was aware off and avoided.

@DanielHatton I completely agree! I do tell my students to avoid direct quotations, but I don't forbid them. And even if I did forbid them, I'd just mark them down for doing it anyway, rather than thinking even remotely of academic misconduct.

One of my requirements is no copy and pasting. Period. Including quotation marks and an inline citation does not get a student around this rule/instruction. I consider it to be plagiarism.

It may be important to consider that your personal definition of plagiarism doesn't match that of most other courses or academia in general.
Students coming in will not expect a lecturer to have simply invented their own unique definition of plagiarism even if that lecturer has mentioned it in the syllabus.
You can make arbitrary class rules, you could declare that students will get a zero if they fail to wear red on a friday or fail to use the oxford comma.
But the university itself is unlikely to consider it a student integrity issue because in reality the students are simply not following some arbitrary rule. Like if you banned them from using the letter "Z" then tried to report them to the the university as an "integrity issue" or "cheating" when some of them didn't follow that instruction.
You can give them a low score but if it doesn't match the universities own definition of plagiarism then it's simply a waste of administrators time to report them claiming they've committed plagiarim.

Careful! You copied and pasted that first part!

I have to wonder how many students' grades have been impacted by the instructor's incorrect understanding of plagiarism and cheating. It sounds like a review of grades is in order.

Eggy, For the size course that I teach, not that many.  Less than 5% come to me for review and of that less than 2% simply refuse to take the opportunities provided to fix their work. That is on them. But this 'few'  simply take up a great deal of my time. They are also all given an opportunity to rewrite the paper to meet the guidelines, without penalty for a redo which most of them do satisfactorily.
My question, which has been answered with really good advice, was not an opening for criticism. But thanks anyway.

Murphy, I appreciate your advice. Thanks

@Eggy it's worse, because if they do well in following these rules, they're being set up to write bad papers later on - and even to commit actual plagiarism by the focus on eliminating textual similarities rather than the passing off of work.

@Chris H  I agree. The goal is to have students develop reading and analytical skills so they can understand the literature at a deep level and use it to develop their own ideas and research. Both plagiarism and passive rephrasing undermine that goal.

@LyndaElaine I think if you forcefully state a policy that is contrary to academic principles and is likely to harm students, you open yourself to criticism. Fairness applies to individuals, regardless of the percentage affected. I recommend reviewing the grades of any student whose grade was lowered because of this policy.

@LyndaElaine w.r.t. Eggy's response, there are a lot of students out there who think that plagiarism is about not "using their own words" and not about dishonesty, so they write horribly plagiarised papers that just rephrase everything. This misconception then needs to be corrected (quite possibly by a trip to the academic integrity board, since 1: it is plagiarism, and 2: the students who deliberately plagiarize are doing the exact same thing, so it's hard to judge intent.) So everyone else here is needing to correct the incorrect definition you're teaching your students.

@Eggy Plagiarism doesn't undermine that goal whatsoever. It makes it harder to find the original source. It makes people incorrectly believe that the plagiarising author was more clever than he or she actually is. But you need the same reading and analytical skill, the same understanding ot a deep level, and the same development of your own ideas and research whether you plagiarise or not. In a paper, plagiarism is just the fact that a reference to the original is missing. That's a minimal difference.

@gnasher "You need the same reading and analytical skill, the same understanding at a deep level, and the same development of your own ideas and research whether you plagiarise or not." Except that students who plagiarize aren't really motivated to get that deeper understanding and I really doubt that they do.

This is not plagiarism.
Plagiarism is taking credit for someone else's work.  It is taking someone else's ideas and making the claim that they are the fruits of your own intellectual labor.  Plagiarism can occur when one copies and pastes the precise words of another author without citation, but can also occur through paraphrasing without giving a proper reference.
Plagiarism is a major offense in academia, since those in academia live and die off of the ideas they produce.  It is important in this setting that the people who first came up with an idea are properly credited, and that the entire chain of reasoning is laid out (since a flaw in a 50 year old paper by A. Adams might ripple down to preprint by Z. Zhang).  We have to know where the ideas came from, hence there are strict cultural norms regarding citation and credit throughout the academy.
Good instruction will help students to understand these norms, and to inculcate them into the ethos of budding academics.
This is not cheating.
Assuming that students are copying and pasting in an appropriate manner—that is, they are not copying too much, are properly indicating which sections of material are direct quotes, and are correctly providing citations to the original work—they are not cheating.  Indeed, this is standard practice in academic writing.
You are welcome to create your own rules for your assignments, such as insisting that students never copy-and-paste, but this is simply a standard which you would be setting in your own classroom.  Failure to adhere to such a rule would not be cheating, and would only constitute a failure to complete the assignment as instructed (much as asserting that 2+2=5 would not be cheating—it would simply be incorrect).
The distinction here is that cheating typically requires some mens rea—in order to cheat, a student needs to know that what they are doing is immoral or unethical.  But directly quoting another author (with appropriate citation) is not immoral or unethical.  Indeed, it is a skill which we, as educators, should be teaching students to do correctly.
This is a bad policy.
There are at least two major consequence I see coming from this policy:

Students will get better at actually cheating.  You have created a situation in which you are muddying the actual definition of plagiarism, while also teaching students the skills that they need to plagiarize more effectively without getting caught.  Naive cheaters plagiarize by passing off direct quotes as their own work.  Sophisticated cheaters learn to pass off paraphrased and uncited text as their own work.  You are rewarding the sophisticated cheaters.

You are failing to actually teach students what "plagiarism" is.  Real academic writing requires the incorporation of ideas which were originally thought up by others.  Most academic writing is incremental, and builds slowly on previous work—it is very rare for anything completely original and revolutionary to be published (in my own field, even revolutionary work like that produced by Newton, Leibniz, Gauss, or Fourier built on the work of others).  Good academic style quotes others when they phrase something better than anyone else, and gives credit where credit is due, but paraphrases and condenses when required.  Students need to learn when to quote, when to paraphrase, and how to properly give credit in either case.  Banning direct quotation fails to teach this skill, and muddies the waters around academic integrity and real plagiarim.

A better policy?
My guess (my hope?) is that the goal of such a policy is to prevent "patchwork papers", in which students write a paper by directly quoting several authors and contribute very little of their own analysis or original thought.  If so, there are better ways of handling this.  For example:

Set limits on direct quotes.  Explain to students that they can (and probably should) directly quote earlier work from time-to-time, but that the bulk of their writing should be original.  Set a limit on how much direct quoting they can incorporate into their work as part of your rubric.  Making up numbers off the top of my head, something like "At least 90% of the words you turn in must be your own original writing."

Don't count quotes.  If the assignment is supposed to be 500 words (or 50 pages, or whatever), don't count quoted text towards that word limit.

Grade drafts / allow revision.  Keep in mind that the goal of any assignment should be to help students to learn or practice some skill (if your goal isn't helping students, you should consider another profession).  Rather than having students put all of their eggs into the one basket of a final paper, collect and grade their work at important checkpoints—have them turn in a rough draft, and give feedback on that draft.  This gives you an opportunity to point out excessive quoting before the final document is turned in, and gives you the chance to indicate how that rough document would be graded if it were turned in as a final draft.

In addition, as has been pointed out by several commenters (both below the question, and below this and other answers), excessive use of direct quotation is poor style.  It isn't dishonest, or cheating, or plagiarizing—it is just bad writing.  It is entirely reasonable to dock students points for bad writing, but it needs to be clear that this has nothing to do with "academic integrity" or "plagiarism".  You are docking them points (or should be, anyway) because you are trying to teach them to be better writers, not because you are trying to punish them for violating academic ethics.

I really like this answer, it hits all the major points. From my own experience, one of the reasons for using verbatim quotes I've been given by my PhD students that just started was that "the opinion of this author is surely more interesting than mine" and "how could I ever hope to come up with a better phrasing than the one the original authors did". I found the issue was the mismatch in the understanding of what the purpose of the writing exercise was -- this started improving as soon as the student understood that the whole point is kinda to express their opinion, not (just) collate others

Excellent answer. I have seen your three suggestions implemented successfully.

I have a very large class with 4 TA's.  Students have been told to write in their own words. This makes them use some critical thinking skills. Simply plunking down chunks of copied information teaches them nothing.  They actually have an APA tutorial that I created with includes examples of how to rewrite things etc. I find the Purdue Owl can be quite dense and they mainly will only use two types of references.  The VAST majority of students follow the 'write in your own words' instructions perfectly. It is the 5% that take up all of my time. The quote limit is a great idea.

Xander Henderson - I appreciate your answer and you are correct. I will definitely start working this into the process. Thanks

@LyndaElaine "Simply plunking down chunks of copied information teaches them nothing." Okay, but copying a bunch of passages from other texts, plopping them into GPT and having it rephrase those passages, then copying those into a paper is also not helping your students to learn anything.  But this is exactly what the students who would have written a patchwork paper are doing right now.  Your policy is not encouraging students to think critically---it is encouraging them to find better ways of hiding the fact that they are really doing the work.

If you want them to think critically, don't outright ban quoting.  Rather, help them to learn when it is appropriate to quote, and when it is appropriate to add their own thoughts, and what you mean by their own thoughts (in my world, paraphrasing another author is not any different from simply quoting another author---real writing requires some analysis and synthesis).

@XanderHenderson "Okay, but copying a bunch of passages from other texts, plopping them into GPT and having it rephrase those passages, then copying those into a paper is also not helping your students to learn anything" - Not quite true: if they're doing it without citations, it teaches them how to get away with actual plagiarism.

The "patchwork" paper is the real issue. Rather than making a moralistic (and dubious) claim about "cheating," try just taking off points for bad writing.  Help them learn to use their own voices.

I think splitting up your guidelines will help enforcement. I don't know if it will help compliance though... You're mixing two separate things together and trying to cover them with one policy.
Situation 1: If a student copies and pastes text without citation that is plagiarism full stop. In that case just give the student a 0 on the assignment (or handle it however you want). I would expect nothing less from a college level course. Your university must have some generic statement on academic integrity/plagiarism you can reference. Your syllabus should mention the class/university plagiarism policy explicitly.
Situation 2: If a student quotes text and cites it properly that is, by definition, not plagiarism. Despite it being against your class rules, you are not going to get official support calling it "plagiarism" because it isn't technically plagiarism. So this really can't (or shouldn't) be covered by the same policy. Again, it isn't plagiarism—regardless of your personal view. You could implement a separate quotation penalty. Just communicate it clearly and you're set.
Unfortunately, in my experience, there are lots of students who just don't get it when it comes to plagiarism. You can talk till you're blue in the face, and they just keep coming back with work that isn't really up to par. It can be lack of effort, lack of understanding, or lack of knowledge (i.e., they are not able to synthesize the topic well enough to not unintentionally plagiarize). It might be worthwhile to explore these possibilities—it sounds like you are actually communicating expectations well enough as it is. So maybe it isn't your policies or grading, but something else entirely.

I probably wasn't clear enough. I was just referring to a specific issue. They don't cite at all it is a flat zero and a warning letter. The 2nd time it goes to student integrity.
Their second writing assignment is coming due in a few weeks. I added a penalty for copy/pasting. It is large enough to get their attention. They can resubmit as many times as they want to before the final due date/time.
Calling this plagiarism is how I was taught in undergrad and grad school. It was simply not acceptable at all. I never saw an official 'rule' about it. My professor said don't do it,I didn't.

We're trying to point out that you weren't taught correctly in graduate school. You have an opportunity now to learn what plagiarism really is and how proper use of quotations can help students develop critical thinking skills. Moreover, learning this is important for your own research and writing career.

@LyndaElaine, you are absolutely complete misguided. Now I went to university in a free country, not the USA, and you can believe me that if my highly regarded professor doing Analysis I had come up with this nonsense, we would have fought to the teeth to get him removed.

@gnasher Well, your wording is a bit harsh, but I do believe the OP is opening herself up to student complaints that could end badly for her. She has already hinted at a lack of support from the university on this issue. One of these days a student who has been downgraded is going to look up the definition of plagiarism and discover the truth.

Your students are going to hate your guts with such an absurd rule.
Citations are by definition, not plagiarism.
Nearly all research is based on, or is at least tangentially related to someone else's work, how do you expect your students to research a topic without being able to reference previous research? That's absurd and makes their job needlessly more difficult.
I would strongly recommend dropping this rule unless your intention is to bring down the average grade.

I think you misinterpret the OPs rule. I think he forbids word-by-word citations, in quotation marks, such as, Joe et al. claim "foo works better than bar under condition poon", as in taking the literal phrasing from somebody else. Paraphrasing (with proper attribution) seems to be allowed (and the goal, in fact). I still don't think it's a good rule, but not nearly as absurd (I think literal quotations should mostly be discouraged, but not disallowed all together).

@penelope I dare say the no-quoting rule is pretty absurd because it actually forces people to go one step towards plagiarism: Rewriting someone else’s words superficially to not trigger plagiarism detection.

@MisterMiyagi
My thoughts exactly, hopefully OP posted this as a joke and is not being serious because this is asking for a substantial increase in plagiarism in the future.

I've in the past encountered students that liked verbatim quotes way too much. Nearly every claim made by another paper was included verbatim, with quotation marks (and a citation) which I found extremely bad practice; anywhere between 90 and 100% of those should've been paraphrased. I did explain the nuance, but that was possible as I was working with that student 1-on-1. In a class setting, I can actually see how forbidding verbatim quotations could be more beneficial than detrimental overall.

@penelope obviously overuse of verbatim quotes can be an issue for some students but they do serve an important role and shouldn't be blanket banned. OP could have just deducted marks for excessive or inappropriate verbatim quotes but instead chose the nuclear option.

Actually it's not a joke and it won't increase anything. When is the last time you read an actual research paper that was nothing but passages of quotes from other works? Lots of referenced material of course. They r being asked to write n their own words. It is called critical thinking.
There was no 'nuclear' option. Students r instructed to write in their own words. If not, the report is flagged for review. Students receive an email with an OPTION to rewrite their paper within 5 days with no penalty. Up to them or they can take the O.

Hi ChellCPlus, I teach a really interesting course on Entomology to students who are not in any way shape or form involved in the life sciences. It is a required ACE course for undergrads in most of the majors here. They picked it. The scientific writing is just what the course is on. My lectures r fun,they get to do a lot of critical thinking, they have super fun extra credit things to do. Even though it is a distance course, everyone is here on campus and we plan things to do such as go on photo safaris on campus. So no, they don't 'hate my guts'. The feedback I get is actually positive.

Not only are quotes generally poor style, it, and paraphrasing, misses the point that you need to discuss what the source says on relation to the topic/question that the paragraph/section addresses.

@penelope Sure, but that's a writing style issue, not an academic dishonesty one.

I agree with those who say that this isn't a great rule. There's nothing wrong with using literature, and quoting and citing where appropriate.
That said, I get it in some ways.  Direct quotes are not how we write in the sciences, where paraphrasing and providing citation are the rules of the road, unless the exact language used is critical (in which case, we go back to quotation and citation).  When students who don't know better go out of their way to include a quote, it can just look and sound silly.  This isn't how it works for every discipline, though, and people of letters use quotes more.  It's just stylistic.
You're free to use whatever instructions and rules you please though, but you can't call a failure to follow directions academic dishonesty.  You're free to reduce grades for failure to follow your specific and clear directions -- but it's neither plagiarism or any other form of dishonesty, unless, of course, quotes and citations are missing.  IMO, though, it would just be better to tell students that in the sciences, we always use citation, and tend to choose to paraphrase rather than quote.

I agree and this is the type of advice I am looking for here. Apparently the way I was taught through grad school wasn't exactly correct. This course is an ACE requirement for undergrads at this university. My course is one of many choices. The topic is Insect Biology so assignments revolve around that. They are learning to write a research paper based a specified  experiment using the scientific method,  they are not actually conducting. And each assignment adds a new component. I took over this course and have been slowly revamping it
I appreciate your advice. Thanks

@LyndaElaine You don't like the example I gave. That's fine, perhaps it doesn't apply to your field. But all of the answers you've received are indicating that you need to back up, understand what plagiarism is, and revamp your policy. You come across as strident in your question, asking us to provide justification for a harmful policy, and then defensive toward people who are trying to explain what plagiarism is. I'm shocked that you don't know what plagiarism is. How low have you been teaching? There are many resources online where you can learn about plagiarism.

@Eggy --  this doesn't sound defensive to me at all.  The poster is amassing and evaluating feedback, and incorporating where they deem appropriate.

It's neither cheating nor plagiarism. If you want to make a rule that quotes aren't allowed (even with a citation), this seems rather arbitrary to me, but I suppose that you're free to do so if you insist. However, it's definitely not cheating or plagiarism. Look up what those words mean in a dictionary and you'll see why this is incorrect.

In my opinion, this is sloppy, lazy work and simply cheating.

It's not cheating - by definition, cheating involves deception of some kind. The Cambridge Dictionary defines cheating as

to behave in a dishonest way in order to get what you want

If they cite the quote, they're not being dishonest and therefore not cheating.
Whether it's "lazy" or "sloppy" is a matter of opinion.

And I call it plagiarism.

Call it what you like, but it's not plagiarism.
Webster's defines plagiarizing as

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own: use (another's production) without crediting the source

The Cambridge Dictionary defines it as

the process or practice of using another person's ideas or work and pretending that it is your own

Oxford University's plagiarism policy defines plagiarism as follows:

Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition, as is the use of material generated wholly or in part through use of artificial intelligence (save when use of AI for assessment has received prior authorisation e.g. as a reasonable adjustment for a student’s disability). Plagiarism can also include re-using your own work without citation. Under the regulations for examinations, intentional or reckless plagiarism is a disciplinary offence.

The point being, the accepted definition of plagiarism always includes the element of passing off someone else's work as if it was your own. If they clearly credit the source, it's literally not plagiarism. I remember my 4-year-old niece insisting that a picture of a giraffe was actually a picture of a moose. When corrected, she said "well, I want to call it a moose!" (The classic answer: "Call it what you like, but it's a giraffe!")

I don't see the wisdom of your rule against copying and pasting quotations and properly citing them. In fact, learning to do this is an essential academic skill. Here's an (invented) example:
The majority of studies in the last 10 years have found that saturated fat in the diet does not cause high cholesterol. In fact, Chen and James (2022) state, "Our meta-analysis of 568 studies conducted on three continents and involving more than 350,000 patients over a period of 25 years found almost no correlation between fat in the diet and lipid profiles" (p. 236). Among the small number of studies that found a positive correlation, 89% involved fewer than 25 patients.
If you're saying that such a use of copying and pasting is wrong, I can't agree. Here the writer is appropriately using an authoritative quotation to explain and support the writer's argument.

It is not the way scientific papers are written. The use of copy paste is discouraged. This can easily be rewritten in your words, properly inline cited and then an analysis done. In this course, until the student reaches the discussion and conclusion section, there are NO supporting arguments. They are providing the required information per the instructions in their words and properly cited.
The Madagascar Hissing Cockroach is an insect only found in the wild on the Island of Madagascar. It belongs to the order ?, family ?, species ?, and the scientific name is ?. (Citation, date).

They have to parse this out of the references, 3 of which are provided for their first paper. If I let them just copy and paste, they might as well just tell me to look at the reference and figure it out for myself.
These are VERY basic papers. The second builds on first one (different insect) and they have to create a methods section and develop a hypothesis. Then discuss. The third one they get to pick any insect or arachnid, ask a question that of interest to them, be able to find actual research on that topic and create an experiment. Based on their research, they then discuss.

For the third one, they have to send their question to me so I can bring them back down to earth and help them be more realistic. We aren't looking at the big questions in this course.
What you described is the type of thing I would see in a stats course I am taking. Not in Entomology which is my field. Nor are we doing literature reviews.
Anyway, I appreciate your comments.

You should be careful with saying this isn't how scientific papers are written. I have colleagues that do interdisciplinary work (engineering/science focused with human factors concerns included) and frequently use direct quotes in their work. You are being too general with your statements and philosophy. Direct quotes are for sure rare in straight up math, physics, and chemistry papers, but they are fairly commonplace in other sciences like medicine and biology. You are teaching your students bad academic behavior.

Science needs to be efficient.
If someone has written a good paper on a subject, and I need the results of the paper, then the right thing to do is quote the paper verbatim, and give a citation so that everyone interested can check the original paper, and nobody believes that I am incredibly clever for finding these results. And it happens that this paper may be much more important than mine: There is a minor problem that people want to be solved, and I figured how this great and famous result can be used to solve the minor problem people want solved. So the quote might be 95% of my whole paper. Still, my five percent added to science.
So what would be gained if I paraphrase this paper? I still need a citation, because whether it is paraphrased or not doesn't make one bit of difference to plagiarism. So now all I have achieved by paraphrasing is that the same subject is handled twice in the literature, in slightly different ways, which can only be confusing. Worse, while the original paper was written by someone highly knowledgable of the subject, the second paper is written by a rank amateur in the matter, so you expected it to be unclear, not very readable, and possibly to contain subtle mistakes that are not there in the original paper. Does paraphrasing it correctly demonstrate that I'm clever enough to paraphrase a complex matter? Sure, it does. But nobody asked for that. Nobody wants the paraphrased result. It's value is not just zero, it is negative.
So now I am supposed to put substantial effort into something that is of negative value. I can use my time in better ways. I can create more useful science. Or I can use the time to lie on the beach, which is still producing a zero result as far as science is concerned, and not a negative one.
What happens if you read my paper with the paraphrased result? You may look at it and verify that it supports my paper. But you don't know whether the paraphrased result is actually true. If a quote the original verbatim, then you know that a lot of people have checked this, and it's most likely true. Nobody has checked my paraphrased result. You don't know whether it is true. You cannot trust it unless you verify it. Or better, if you substitute the original and check whether the original supports my paper. In which case again, I just created unnecessary work for myself and for you.

Your approach is aligned with academic integrity standards. While there might not be a specific rule, copy-and-pasting without proper citation is considered plagiarism. Incorporating this requirement into the grading rubric can reinforce its importance and deter cheating. If there's ambiguity from your university, seeking further clarification or support may be helpful.

There is more to plagiarism than copy-pasting, actually.

Reading the question, it seems that it is about forbidding copying-and-pasting entirely, and not just copying-and-pasting without proper citation.  Copy-pasting is not, in and of itself, plagiarism.


text:
How to ask a professor from 29 years ago to write you a recommendation?
After college, I never kept in touch with this professor even though he was one of my favorite professors, did very well in his class and have thought of him often. I was basically conflicted over his expectations of me and feared he would just see me as a failure. Fast forward 29 years, I'm fine, healthy and a working professional in marketing but switching to pursue a Master of Social Work. I want more purpose and skills and my graduate school of choice requires/strongly encourages an academic reference.
I already have an employer recommendation - do I need an academic one? If so - how might you approach him. Keep it simple?

Does this answer your question? How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?

If you only had involvement with him through attending his class, it seems nearly impossible that he will remember anything about you.  The program you are applying to will recognize this, so even if he writes a letter, I don't think they will attach any value to it.

"it seems nearly impossible that he will remember anything about you" – and more importantly, even if he does, it is basically impossible that he has anything to say that will be of any relevance the OP's current situation, 30 years later.

Is this professor still working / alive?

@Sursula -- that question doesn't address the time aspect, which is really central to this question.

I agree with @DavidKetcheson . One class, 29 years ago?  Did you do something absolutely stunning in his class?  Like, say, write a paper that led to a publication in a serious journal with him as co-author? Otherwise, how will he remember you?
Instead, in your application, simply point out (in the appropriate spot) that it's been 29 years since you were in school, so you don't have any academic references.
If the school you are applying to welcomes students who are returning in mid-life, they are surely used to that. And, if they don't welcome such students, you may be better off elsewhere. If you graduated 29 years ago, then you are in your early 50s.  You probably don't want to be the only 50 year old in a sea of people in their 20s and 30s.

I started my PhD around age 40, and also had no meaningful academic references.  I had kept in touch with a few professors (when I went back for recruiting purposes) but they had no ability to say anything meaningful.  I stuck with employer references and it was fine.

I initially thought the answer is ok, but the last paragraph ("you probably don't want to be the only 50-year old...") is irrelevant, if not harmful. OP knows whether they are ready to be the odd-person-out in a sea of youngsters. I think it is not good to burden the outlook towards further education with the concern about age differentials.

You are what we call an "atypical applicant", and review committees will not expect a typical application.
I don't believe a recommendation from a casual professor three decades ago will prove valuable to a review committee, and think you should find a better way to tell the committee what they need to hear.
In terms of holes in your application package, I would think that what your more contemporaneous recommenders couldn't provide that an old professor might is some statement that they believe you can successfully complete the coursework in their program. Nobody wants to accept students that are more likely than not to flunk.  This is probably most important for PhD programs than Masters programs, as there's a bigger financial and time commitment to the students, so flunking out is more tragic.  This is less important for Masters programs, which happen quicker, with less financial support from a department.  This is why Masters programs are easier to get into.
In any case, if your GPA was a solid B or higher, that might be enough to convince a committee.  If it was lower, you should probably include something in your application package telling the committee why you don't think their coursework requirements will be a problem to pass.

I have found that professors do remember me 20 years later if I did research with them, but don't necessarily remember me otherwise. Sometimes, if they have previously written a letter of recommendation for me. However, I wouldn't necessarily ask for a letter of recommendation that old. In my situation, I am seven years out of academia. I may look for a job relevant to my old field (not in research, in computational something) some day, but I think at this point I would ask for confirmation of employment from those employers rather than a reference or a letter of recommendation. It has just been too long. If you want to do something similar, validate that you took specific classes or did specific projects, maybe you could get permission to attach additional supporting materials like syllabi (if you or the professor still have them) or course notes or assignments?


text:
Lecturers in my department presenting on a similar topic to me
Last year I presented my PHD topic at a conference and some lecturers from my university attended. This year I am presenting at the same conference. I can see the lecturers are again  also attending and are giving a presentation on a similar topic to me. Is this bad form? Should they have been in touch with me to say they are now working on a similar topic? Should I contact them or my supervisor about this?

You should always be able to talk to your supervisor about things you're uncertain about; it need not be an Official Contact, you're just asking them about what you're experiencing and seeking advice. It's okay if they respond "don't worry about this".

It may strongly depend on how similar the topic actually is, which we can't know reading this.

The presentation has a similar title to my thesis title. It is not exactly the same so I don’t think it’s plagiarism I just wonder if people who work in the same department to me should inform me or be open that they are working on a similar topic to me.

Not necessarily. Even if you invented the whole subject from scratch (which I doubt), once you put it in the public domain, it becomes a free game for everyone except for the usual obligation to give the formal credit where it is due. It is, of course, polite and often quite beneficial to share and discuss the results with other people interested in the subject, especially the colleagues, but it is neither required, nor enforced through any "ethical standards".

Do I need to worry that I haven’t published my research yet. It will be finished next year, so what if they try to publish something first?

This notion that one "owns" a certain topical niche in their research group or institution always feels like a bad practice to me. You have presumably not asked anybody except your advisor for approval before selecting what you are interested in studying. Why can't other people do the same?

Think in a positive way, no competition but collaboration. Talk to your supervisor to see whether your team can work with them to do more on the topic.
Your work has been published and presented, so it's your work. Anyone in the world can work on a similar topic and explore further based on your work. The purpose to present your work at a conference is to introduce your work to the others and get their attention. They work on it, which means your work is important and meaningful.
If they don't want collaboration, then you need to work harder and quicker. Get your new achievement published before they do.
My first-year PhD topic was presented by someone next-door. I was very angry, but claim down and move forward. There are millions of interesting topics and I am confident that I can do much better than them. So now, I am an active academic in top university.


text:
What does a professor aim at when talking about communication?
I am a PhD student at a good university in the US. I am good at my work and do my assigned tasks well. But this is the second time I heard from the second professor that I should communicate more with the other students and I am not good at it!
I don't know what they mean? I have a good relationship with the other students and I think I do work better than them. Yes, they talk more to each other but not about work, rather about anything outside of the work. I think it's not worth to spend time on those kind of talks.
Should I really engage in non-work-related discussions to be considered as a communicative student?
It's so strange to me and I don't know what to do or how to ask more about my problem from the professors if they tell me such a thing?

I don't think this is something that anyone here can answer. The best way to find out what your advisor is looking for is for you talk to them, and politely ask them to clarify what they want. You can even mention what you say here (just try to be polite in how you phrase it) -- you don't know exactly what they mean, and you don't feel the need to talk about non-work topics. Your advisor shouldn't require that you talk about non-work related topics at work, if you don't want to. (Although, I suspect you will find that is not what they are asking you to do, if you talk with them).

One can't infer from your question what your adviser meant. But they might have meant both talking about work and non-work matters.
Even if your work is good, so far, you won't ever do great work without collaborators. You get collaborators by talking to people about research. Being able to communicate ideas effectively is a great skill to have. It will also help you get a better job down the road and being a good teacher if you need to teach.
You also need to be more open to talk to people (not necessarily your colleagues about subjects unrelated to work. It will help improve your English.
The greatest skill you get by talking to people is the skill to listen patiently to what others have to say. It will help in your personal life, and in your research life. Many very good scientists are terrible communicators. But if you work with them, you need to learn how to talk to them. If you learn how to listen, and how to ask the right questions, you can collaborate effectively with them. If not, they will give up on you, just as you intend to give up on your colleagues right now.
Another comment is that is nearly impossible to build up relationships with people you don't talk to. They need to trust you before collaborating with you. If you stay in academia, you'll need to get grants, create a research group, participate in larger projects. Your colleagues from now will likely be your partners at some point in the future. They need to know that you do quality research work and you're happy to collaborate with them.
Finally, if communicating is taking a toll on you, it is not wrong to let people know you are not talking too much because of that. Most people will understand, and some might even appreciate that you're trying even if it is hard for you.


text:
Could giving an alternative approach to proving an established result be worthy of publication?
(I don't believe this is a duplicate to Can I publish a paper with new proof but the same result?, because not only am I using a different proof, but also an axiomatisation that could perhaps be seen as controversial)
I am a post graduate student of pure mathematics that hasn't published anything yet.
Hypothetically, let's say that there's an established result in mathematics that was stated and proven using a popular axiomatisation.
Let's say that if you state and prove the same result using a different (non-standard) axiomatisation, then the result becomes (perhaps debatably) more elegant.
Is it possible for paper like this to be worthy of publication?
If so, are there any specific journals that you think might be more likely to accept such a paper?
Slightly more detail:
The established result uses ZFC as axiomatisation, my approach uses ZFC + Atoms as axiomatisation. The result that I'm restating and reproving concerns general mathematical structures.

Often enough the proof of a theorem is more important than the statement of it. This is especially true when a new proof gives some insight into a problem that the original proof did not.
I don't know whether your new proof is different enough or interesting enough or gives new insight, but if it is, then it would be an important thing to publish.
An example of such a problem is the Four Color Theorem. When I was in school it was the Four Color Hypothesis and nearly everyone in my age cohort thought about it for a while I suspect. It was originally proved using computers to examine a very large number of special cases. But to a mathematician, this is a very unsatisfactory proof. One would love a short and insightful proof not depending on computation as it would be very likely to give insights into the nature of planar maps.
The reason that such insight is important is that it can often lead to solving additional, unsolved, problems.
So, you can certainly submit such a paper for publication, but it is editors and reviewers that will decide whether it "can" be published. But the feedback you get will be valuable in any case.

"The reason that such insight is important is that it can often lead to solving additional, unsolved, problems." I agree completely, but let's say for argument sake that it is not yet known whether my approach could definitely do that. Would journals still accept a paper purely on the basis of it being different and (debatably) more elegant?

That is up to them, of course. I can't predict. But "different" probably isn't enough. If the technique you use is standard for similar problems then probably not. But you need to submit it to get the feedback.

What do you mean by "if the technique you use is standard for similar problems" ?

A theorem might have two fairly straightforward proofs. Neither is more interesting than the other and neither is particularly interesting in itself. In such a case it isn't the proof that is interesting, so one is plenty. "New insight" is the operative concept here, not "different".

Presumably you'll do the work anyway, so you might as well attempt to get it published. The opinionated majority (tongue in cheek) may find it "unworthy", sure. Yet there may well be someone who'll get inspired by your work, or find the little insight they needed to keep moving in their work on another problem. I'd say that you may wish to keep at it until the publishing pursuits clearly won't be resolving in a constructive manner anymore - that is  if the idea gets rejected without any feedback that you could use it to improve it. When it comes to such a dead-end, you can just stick it on your personal website as a "white paper", push it to arxiv, etc. But perhaps don't do that until you're sure that all avenues of pursuit available to get it published in mainstream journals get exhausted.