text:
Can I apply for a faculty position after 14 years of postdcoc?
I did my pHD in 2007. After that I worked on several univeristies as post doc and postdoctoral associates. I mentored students, did TA, wrote proposals, and worked with industrial collaboration projects.
What is my possibility to become a tenure faculty ?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/61880/40589

Out of curiosity, why did you do this? And it would help to have an idea of your productivity (publications).

Probably the hiring committee will look at your recent publications, not your Ph.D. from 15 years ago.  Even a current academic, applying for a new job, will base the application on recent publications, not on something from 15 years ago.

You can certainly apply. There is nothing to prevent that. But, like any candidate you have to meet the qualifications and present a positive case.
Depending on your field, you may be expected to have a pretty full CV, with papers and such and also good letters of recommendation (in those places where they are valued). You might also be asked to explain why you spent so long as a post doc. That may be easy to do, depending on your research and its outcomes.
But only a hiring committee will be able to say whether you can be offered a tenure-track position.
And, as you make applications, it is better to cast a wide net and not focus on only a very narrow subset of universities. Match any application to the needs of that institution as best you can discover.

You could probably become a professor with that sort of experience at some institutions worldwide, but in the USA for example, the university will most likely want "the big names" in the field. That can be a PhD student with little experience but big impact (very rare), or otherwise rising stars. That is quite difficult to achieve, and I suppose is not directly related to experience.
But, obtaining experience leads I suppose "monotonically" to better chances of a faculty position, no doubt. 14 years is easily enough.

You can certainly apply but the chances are slim: there’s a point when the work you did in the past is no longer relevant for your future research prospects.  Maybe underwater basketweaving was a big deal 14years ago, but now all the rage is in zero-gravity painting.
The difficulty is that you will be compared in all categories - publications, student supervision, grants - with people 14 years out of a PhD.  In particular,
you will need to present the case that recent work would be relevant for future work: after all, hiring committees will not hire you for the work you did in the past but for the work you will do for them in the next so many years.
There might also be the technical difficulty of salary expectations.  Normally, someone with 14 years of experience will command higher salary than a more junior candidate, and the $$ might simply not be there to hire in the upper pay grades.

I doubt the OP's education has become obsolete while a post doc. It isn't like they were a life guard in Hawaii. But they might need to be a bit flexible on salary unless they have been very productive over the 14 years. Productivity wasn't mentioned in the question.

@Buffy realistically however very few people are hired on a tenure stream position 14 years out of a PhD, even in teaching universities.

True enough, but everyone is an individual and needs to make their case.


text:
Is it common to ask professors for an editable copy of their lecture notes (so I can improve them)?
I'm a grad student in Italy, for context. My professor wrote some lecture notes about a course I just finished. They are not well written, not because the professor isn't good but because he wrote them in a rush since he wanted to give us some material for the period of Coronavirus, so he wrote them lesson-by-lesson. I think future students could benefit from well-written notes, and I would like to ask the professor the LaTeX source of the notes to add some lectures that he skipped and fix some grammar/paragraphing issues (and obviously give them back to him afterward, without sharing it with anyone if he doesn't tell me to). Is it common to do this? I don't want to seem over-flattering.
Update: the professor was super kind and he replied that he thought it was a good idea, but only if this didn't interfere with my ordinary classes. I'll write a few more chapters and then send them to him.

I think the specific case is not common. But there is no harm, I think, in asking. But you also want them for your future career and so it might be worth the effort.

I wouldn't phrase it as "to improve them" but rather to "add my own notes".  Much like you might write on paper.  Of course if they are in acrobat format (or even kindle) you can annotate those without having an editable version.

In Germany, it used to be par for the course for students to actually LaTeX lecture notes taken during lectures, from scratch. Not sure it is still done today. But as prof I would be grateful for such cleanup jobs to be done on notes I developed.

Tangentially, it is extremely uncommon to ask professors for an edible copy of their lecture notes.  I need to get my eyes checked.

Why not just ask? The professor may or may not allow you to do this but I doubt they'd be offended.  Professors are just people.  Be professional of course, but you don't need to walk on eggshells around them.

@Cireo: Glad I wasn't the only one who read it that way first time around!

No, in my experience this is not common.
But that shouldn't stop you from asking. Your suggestion is certainly within the reasonable parameters in which simply offering your help wouldn't be offensive. (Provided of course you do so tactfully, i.e. following the usual etiquette when pointing out that someone else's work could be improved upon.)
I have friends who would be very happy to receive such an offer as they would finally turn their messy notes into something of high quality! But bear in mind that while accepting your offer may seem like a "no brainer" to you, there might be perfectly reasonable reasons why your professor might turn you down. For example, even though your offer seems like a way to improve the lecture notes at no cost to the professor that is not the case. Improving the notes will require co-operation and further editing by your professor as your professor will have to make sure that you did not introduce significant mistakes or misinterpretations. And they simply might not have the time for that!

It might be a good idea to send the fixes in small chunks so that the professor can check and apply them one-by-one when he has time. For this a version control system like Git can really help. Perhaps the professor could dump the LaTeX into a private GitHub respository that's shared with only Mauro Gilberti.

It’s not common, but the situation is not common.

@md2perpe Based on my experience helping faculty while working at a university's technology help desk, the odds that a professor is even going to know what github is, much less feel comfortable using it, are pretty low

@Kevin. I suppose that you mean that the odds are pretty high, i.e. the probability is low.

@Kevin. Since the lecture notes are written i LaTeX the topic is probably in science and then it's a lot more probable that the professor is at least somewhat comfortable with programming than if his topic is for example history.

@md2perpe yes, I should have said probability is low. And while it's slightly better among scientific/technology field professors, I'd bet a dozen doughnuts less than 10% of them would say "yeah, github's a good idea" for a way to collaborate on editing lecture notes

There are two parties involved in this, you and your professor. Let us think from both your perspectives.
You wish to help your professor and also want to ensure that the notes are of the best possible quality ( you think they are not currently).
Your professor depending on his objective and personality may like this idea or frown upon it. If the lecture notes are a property of the university and the professor is forbidden from using it in any other context without their permission then he should be more open to sharing the source with you. But if suppose he was planning to write a book or thinking of leaving his job and working in some other place he might be reluctant in sharing it with you as he would like to build upon it, later.
If he were having a personality who does not like criticism from his students or for that matter anyone he would naturally get offended by your proposal. Also, it depends on how much he trusts you in sharing the source with you, not only on how good you will hold on your promise of not sharing it with anyone but also on your ability to improve the notes.
From your perspective, you are a good person offering help for free for the greater good. This is commendable and you must politely approach him. If you are really keen on doing it, you could write the notes from scratch for one lesson basing on existing notes to show that you could add value. Then send the notes to the professor asking for his review and request him for the latex source as it will help you in working efficiently.
Professors in many universities ask the students to share their notes and the best-written notes get extra credits. So students engaging in building material for lectures is not uncommon.

"Professors in many universities ask the students to share their notes and the best-written notes get extra credits." In all my experience in US academic institutions, I've never heard of such a thing. Perhaps it is more common in other places? I wouldn't do this if I were a professor, either. I just don't see the value. Good notes already translate to higher grades for most students, and for those who can master the information in other ways, it doesn't matter to me whether they take notes or not.

@CodyGray I have evidence of this from MIT. I have seen this mentioned by professors in many courses. And taking notes is one way of mastering the concepts. Writing properly helps a lot. There is no better reinforcement to understanding than writing it once.

I can see how turning in notes could be a bad thing. Consider someone who has their own shorthand (or know stenography) and can take notes faster and more reliably than someone who doesn't. The instructor/teacher/professor likely wouldn't know the code, so would negatively grade the notes, even though they are more useful to the student than in another format. Even if that only means losing extra credit, that's not rewarding the student for their useful (to them) notes.

While I don't remember any explicit credit for turning in notes, there usually was some sort of collaborative Google Doc (or, rarely, LaTeX pdf) on any challenging subject. Sometimes even maintained and worked on by many generation of the students (some of which were now in the position of teaching ;P).

FWIW, it is fairly rare (i.e., I can't think of a single example) for universities to claim copyright over scholarly work produced by faculty. Patents on stuff developed with university (or outside) funds, yes, but copyright would muck up a lot of academic publishing.

Show the value of your proposal
Drop a mail on these lines (omitted salutations and format that is likely to be region specific).

Your notes were helpful for me but I did notice that they could be enriched by additional material and minor formatting improvements, for example as in the  attachment.  I felt these changes would benefit future students. I would be happy to make such changes and submit for your approval. If this proposal sounds fine, you may please suggest how to take it forward.

Showcase the value you plan to add in the attached document. This would :

Make your intention and the value clear.

Give the professor, the option to respond keeping his obligations with respect to ownership of notes or any other concerns.

Go ahead and ask.
It is extremely uncommon.

In many years of teaching I have never had a student ask this.

But I wish they would!
If by chance I see that a student has very nice notes, I sometimes ask if they have any interest in helping to produce improved class notes for the class.  But so far, they have never been interested.  Often, they simply refuse to believe that their notes are any good.
On the other side, I sometimes mention to the class that if people can help improve the notes, we would appreciate that, and sometimes someone does offer to help.  But so far it has always turned out that their contributions are not very good, so their "help" is not useful, and the project does not get to the level of producing collaboratively generated documents.
Maybe I have just had bad luck with this mismatch between people's note-producing skills and their willingness to help -- my statistics on this are lousy, because the total number who ever offered to help is very low.
If a student is able to produce notes that are good enough that they would only need light editing by myself before being distributed to the class, this would be very valuable.
Provide a sample.
When you contact the professor, your first email should already include a sample of the improved material (your compiled PDF).  That is the only way your professor can decide whether or not he is interested in your help.  (Yes, this will require re-typing some stuff since you don't have the LaTeX sources yet, but typing time is just a tiny fraction of the time and effort required to produce good notes, so having his LaTeX source is much less important than you think.)
(The other answers are also good -- I just wanted to emphasize that (1) you should go ahead and ask, and (2) you should provide an example of what you are offering.)

No, it's not common
The professor may think this notes as a finished product, as in it's not intended to be edited in an integrated process.
How not to be over-flattering
Show, not tell.

Write a email thanking for the lectures and volunteer to help with the notes;

Attach a small sample of your suggestions as notes placed over the PDF, or in the body of email, placing the original text and the suggested text in succession;

Wait for the reply;

With the OK from professor continue sending your text suggestions and inform you are a sufficient LaTeX user that could work directly in originals. Ask for a change a process or a change of pace;

The professor may or may not want to change from a "revision only" to a "shared source" process. Keep sending your suggestions, either way.

This process will allow to you and professor to workout a good balance for both.

At least for another data point: at this time in my life, while I might be willing to give people the TeX source-code [sic] for documents, I would strongly hesitate to get embroiled in co-authorship with students, for several reasons.
It's not exactly that I'd "mistrust" students, but that I'd feel the necessity of ultra-scrupulously editing... and possibly to the point of changing entirely the "voice" of what the students wrote. Not to be hostile, but to be relatively sure that the "tone/voice" of my intention did come through...
Yes, there is the idea that everyone's a peer of everyone else. Yes, morally, that is possibly true. In terms of technical expertise, I don't think so, although I do not want to spend time arguing with people about it. E.g., to argue that 40 years' experience is no better than 1 year's experience seems implausible... but believing this seems to be important to a certain demographic. (Sure, otherwise it might be tooooo depressing to think that there's no real way to accelerate 40 years' experience...)
Actionably: you can ask, but do not be offended if faculty don't want to get embroiled in a situation where they'd need to endorse your revision of their notes.

One concern I see in this is matters of impartiality and confidentiality. Assuming by "course I finished" you mean you already got graded for this course, then this isn't as much of an issue. However, if you haven't yet been graded, someone could reasonably claim that your interaction with the professor in this way was an attempt at influencing them into giving you better grades. In addition, there might be comments or other elements in the original notes which aren't included in the final document that could get the professor in trouble if they were to leak.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it advisable to work on something your thesis advisor *isn't* an expert of?
Context: I'm looking for an advisor for my master thesis in holography, and I've received some interesting proposals that include "the necessity to be able to use numerical methods to solve integrals and differential equations", because the professor's level of programming experience is pretty basic. Now:
PROS

the professor actually needs someone to work on this, it feels like I'm not "just" a student that needs a subject to work on
I think a knowledge of the subject might prove itself useful for a future doctorate
I like the subject!

CONS

if I have doubts on how to proceed, the professor probably won't be able to give me all the help I could ask for in a standard "the student works on what the professor's working" kinda thesis

Is there anything I'm missing that should push me towards accepting/refusing this proposal?

Make sure that there's someone in the department (PhD student, postdoc or other professor) who knows how to do the numerical/programming work so you can go to them for help if necessary. I was in this exact situation for my PhD and in the end it was great because I taught myself how to program.

It could be a good experience, as you are more independent, and thus has to take more responsibility.
However, as the advisor is less familiar with the field, it is crucial that you do a thorough literature review first, to ensure that the problem you are trying to solve has not already been solved.
Also, note that after a PhD, you are very likely (expected, almost) to be an expert on the topic of your PhD - you should be more of an expert than your advisor on your particular topic. It does not require extreme amounts of work to become a (word-leading, even) expert on something if you focus a year or two on it during PhD studies.

The question is asking about a Master's thesis, not a PhD. And also it seems like the supervisor is an expert in the field, just not in programming (common in physics).

I confirm what @astronat said: it's a Master's thesis, and the supervisor is expert in holography and can do very simple programming, but the problem they're working on would require more advanced skills.

@MauroGiliberti A master's thesis does not need to have a high level of original research, so then I suggest, no need to worry at all.

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


text:
How should I help students establish career goals?
Every time I get a new research student, I ask them what they want to do after they graduate.  I want to help them achieve their goals.  Invariably, it goes like this.
Me:  What do you want to do after you graduate?
Student:  I don't know.
Me:  Make an appointment with career services.  They are experts in helping you make career plans.  The earlier you plan, the greater your chance of success.
One month passes.
Me:  Did you go to career services?
Student:  No
I have never worked outside academia.  How can I improve on this process which has been failing miserably?

These are adults - it's their responsibility to care for their career; you are a mentor, but not their daddy or mummy. You can give them the advice once or twice; but, if they do not use it, do not repeat it until they ask you on their own, once the question has bobbed up into their awareness. Responsibility is a "matched contributions" game.

The way I ensure compliance with my children is to give them a reward when they have carried out the target thing.  Would that work for your students? Example: a piano teacher I know has a special bulletin board in the waiting area.  When a student can get through their note-reading flash cards with the target speed, s/he is invited to put his or her photo up on the bulletin board. Of course, in your case, you might not want to make it so public.  But maybe there could be a special restaurant lunch with the advisor after the career services visit.

@CaptainEmacs but wouldn't a good mentor see mentees following their advice?

@AnonymousPhysicist I have many of my students achieve quite successful careers. Quite a few make a point of letting me know how far they got and tend to keep in touch; that includes all levels of degrees. I would take that as a signal that they consider me a good mentor. But I believe that one needs to respect the students' own boundaries and not impose one's own values on them. Overeagerness in mentoring beyond the student's ambition or readiness is likely to be counterproductive.

Student: I don't know. -- For a new student, this is the best possible answer. How could they possibly know what they want to do after they graduate before they have done any research? It's the students that think they have their lives planned out decades in advance that I worry about.

Let me just add one comment from the perspective of a student whose supervisor did not care at all what I did after graduating: thank you for thinking about this.

You do not mention if your research students are graduate or undergraduate students.
First consider the extent to which career services at your university may or may not be helpful for your students. For instance, it may be helpful for resume and cover letter writing or interview strategies. However, it is designed for the whole student body and many not be helpful in pointing students in a specific discipline into a career path. So, they may not value career services as a resource for learning about future careers.
Second, it may be that your students have a narrow definition of what types of jobs there are in your field or what type of work is involved with different types of jobs. Your students may be open to learning more, but are unsure what questions to ask or where to research job opportunities. This may also be why students are more likely to look into job opportunities later in their education, than early in their education. They know more later about the field.
One suggestion to improve the process is to organize a seminar that includes faculty in your department and local professionals in your field to talk about careers in your field. Students will find this more inspiring and can learn more. You can make this a regular event (annual, each semester) and rotate the panelists so that students can see a variety of job opportunities and perspectives. I've seen this done in several disciplines and students seem to appreciate it. Also, since the panelists are basically discussing their own experiences, there is minimal prep for the people who volunteer.

The last paragraph is excellent.

The first two points aren't very relevant to my question.  The third point would be a good suggestion to my department head.
I can't assess the helpfulness of career services if students won't try them.  Students seem to have no definition at all of what jobs are available.

The third point has been done at my university, so here a short warning: Make sure that you know beforehand what they will be talking about. We had a seminar called "mathematicians in industry", the students were all hoping to finally here someone telling them what all these things they learn are good for, but what they got was pure propaganda for the company and the jobs they offer. The only connection to math was that the speaker happened to hold a math degree...

@Bemte- One way to avoid this is to have an online registration for students that includes a question about what they want to learn from the event. Then you can give talking points to the speakers ahead of time.

When I grade students' homeworks, and see that they consistently are missing answers to problems and thus making a low homework average, I will often suggest to them in written feedback or email that they attend office hours, study, and/or work practice exercises prior to the midterm. Some of them take that advice, but others don't and end up with a C average (or worse) on the exams and the class overall.
I think you're finding a similar situation here. You give students some advice on how to improve their careers, and they don't follow the advice.
It's our job to provide students with learning opportunities and environment, and advice, but ultimately the student has to take some actions of their own to succeed. Although it's tempting to take responsibility for our students' success, we can't make the choices for them.
Think back to when you were a student. What career support did you expect from your professors and advisors? If you're meeting those expectations, then you're doing your job here.

This does not answer the question.  The last paragraph is terrible advice.

I think this is a conversation that should evolve over time. For a new PhD student in the US, who might be beginning a 5 year program, "what do you want to do after you graduate" is a big question and they may not know yet. I think it's worth asking, because some students may know and of course the earlier they know, the earlier you can give them concrete advice. It might be useful for you to give them your perspective on the pros and cons of different, common options -- of course you can emphasize this is just your perspective and they should seek out other opinions as well, and you aren't telling them what to do or judging them on their decisions. But I think just providing a framework and emphasizing this is an important thing to be thinking about early on -- even if the student doesn't know exactly what they want to do -- is already being supportive.
But there are still intermediate steps that can seem more attainable and real and still are useful even if they don't know what they want to do after graduation right away. For example: "you should be thinking about giving a good presentation and networking at your first conference. What are ways you can prepare for that?" Or, later on, "you should start thinking about who might be able to write you letters, and what are some ways you could get other faculty to know your work." These smaller-scale career-development conversations can naturally become larger ones over time, by building trust and establishing a language.
And I think it is worth revisiting the question of long-term career goals with the student regularly, say every 6 months to a year even for students who had a clear answer on day 1, since plans may change (actually, in general, "career development" discussions can even be more frequent depending on your relationship with your students, although these might be about smaller scale issues than "after graduation" talks). As a student approaches graduation, they will start to have to grapple with whether to continue as a postdoc or pursue industry opportunities. They will also have more information about how they like academia and their field, and what their skills are. Students approaching graduation may not feel comfortable telling their advisor they are thinking of leaving academia; if you want to be supportive, then making it clear that you want to support them regardless of their decision can be extremely valuable. Showing them to career services is certainly one track, but if you have colleagues who have changed fields, then putting your students in contact with these colleagues is also very valuable, since it is very hard to get good information about non-academic jobs from within academia. And, on the other side, for students that want to pursue a postdoc and tenure-track position, there are many steps that are valuable to take before writing job applications that students might not think about; starting a conversation 6 months before job application season starts might help prevent common pitfalls.
Of course it is also on the student to act on advice and take responsibility, but I think my overall feeling is that if you want to be a supportive advisor, having these kinds of conversations regularly, and trying to be as non-judgmental as possible and letting the student find their path in their own time, are good ways to help guide a student develop their own career.

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


text:
The average decision time of math PhD application (Brandeis, Tennessee, York, SFU)
I've applied for the math PhD program for the upcoming Fall 2018. The schools I applied include Brandeis University, University of Tennessee, York University and Simon Fraser University. Since it has already been about 10 weeks from the deadline and I have not heard any news from them, I would like to ask anybody with experiences of applying the math graduate program of the above schools: What is the average decision time of the schools I mentioned?
I am struggling with this since one high school in my country is inviting me to be their math teachers, and I need to sign a one year contract if I accept. It's impossible to let them wait for months for my response. Or anybody can give me some advise on this issue?

Did you check your e-mail spam folder?

I've checked all folders. Actually, I've emailed the graduate adviser of one of them but there's no reply.

Note that there is not one single University of Tennessee. The main campus is actually UTK (the pieces of paper you get upon graduating from UTK, UTC, UTM, UTHSC, UTCVM, and UTSSI are identical except for the city of presentation listed).

For most American grad schools, April 15 is a significant date for admittance offers.
Here is the relevant link about the April 15 deadline. In essence, students who receive offers for grad school admittance are allowed to wait until April 15 to respond. What can happen is that students who receive offers sometimes wait until the last minute to decide, and thus the grad schools don't know if they have enough slots to offer someone further down their waitlist until around April 15.
Thus, I think the latest you might get an offer from a grad school is April 15, or perhaps a day or two later.

If they give me the offer around April 15, how much time will I have to make a decision then?

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


text:
Is there something like withdrawal charges?
I have served as a reviewer for allied academies and decided to submit an article myself, but couldn't find any info regarding APCs.
After some months I was told that my article is accepted and I have to pay a huge amouth of 1406 Euros (sorry but I do believe it's an insane amount of money I can't give especially for a journal without an impact factor).
I wrote to the editors and accountant I want to withdraw the manuscript for it is impossible for me to pay (this is more than 2 times my salary), so they asked me how much can I pay, and I honestly answered that so far I have never paid more than 100 USD (my university can not help me in paying the manuscript). So today I have received an email stating: "Following the standard practice of Open Access publishing, an author is obligated to pay the processing charges for the submitted manuscript after acceptance. If you would still decide to withdraw the paper, we request you to bear the expenditure incurred by the publisher. We ensure you that we will retract the Article from Website after processing the withdrawal charges of USD 119$. This is the minimum fee and maximum discount given to the Author."  Sorry but why should I have to pay anything? It's not like they have paid the reviewes (I have never been paid for that)... I really don't understand the situation. If I pay they will withdraw the article if I do't then what? They'll publish it?

First line of the business's Wikipedia page: "Allied Academies is a reportedly-fraudulent corporation chartered under the laws of North Carolina".

Also, it seems oddly convenient that the "withdrawal fee" is just about what you said you'd be able to afford

Thank you I didn't know. I friend of mine asked me to be reviewer and I never have checked really anything if it was not normal - I was doing my job honestly there were very nice and very bad articles. I thought it was some university alliance .

I would be curious of the consequences. I doubt that someone would prosecute this for real.  Even more with oceans in between or so. I have seen similar questions here. So by waiting or digging the site you might get the good answer.

@Luigi, You should post your comment as an answer. It's a very short answer, but it's pretty definitive and it should help other academics who run into "withdrawal charges" from journals without having been told about it initially.

If you haven't already transferred the copyright, then I think you still own the copyright of the paper and you can prohibit them from publishing it.  If they publish it anyway, suing them would cost more than 119 dollars, but the real purpose of prohibiting them from publishing the paper is not to prevent publication but to make it possible to submit the paper to an honest journal.

Don't pay them a penny/euro
This is a scam.  Cut all ties with this journal/company.  I've never heard of any reputable journal charging thousands (or even hundreds) to publish an article.
In the future google the journal name first.  There is also
https://beallslist.weebly.com/
to help filter out scam publishers.
Rules of thumb for vetting publishers
1) Don't pay to get published.  Journals generally work on a subscription method where subscribers pay administration overhead.
2) If you do have to pay, it should be a conference paper with a date, and location.  Some conferences require that at least one of the paper's authors attend.  Be sure there are a date and city attached.
3) Paper retractions/withdrawals are generally big deals triggered by incompetent or unethical research practices.  Fees associated with this would obviously be a hindrance to accurate reporting by authors.
Edit:
You're not the only person this has happened to.  See https://web.archive.org/web/20130903150917/http://www.jfdp.org/forum/forum_docs/1013jfdp1040_1_032912094346.pdf

There are plenty of places that are quite happy to publish whatever you want for a fee.  In general, don't pay to get published.

I should note that there's a small amount of nuance in your first point - many reputable journals have page or color charges.

There exist good open access journals that will ask you to pay to get published, for example PLOS One and PeerJ. Then there are scam publishers who try to disguise themselves as bona fide open access publishers. And there is a large gray zone in between.

@Fomite - Some journals do.  The section is called rules of thumb because there is the occasional reputable journal that has some screwy practices.  Those fees are usually much smaller.  The first line points out the amount of money involved is the eyebrow rasing part.

The main point of your answer is correct, however:  There are reputable journals that do charge thousands of dollars for publication.  Nature Communications jumps to mind.  https://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/article-processing-charges


text:
Should I take GRE again?
I am aspiring to apply for a PhD programm in the US. I would like to apply to Harvard but my GRE math subject scores are at 78%, 820/990, while I hold a masters degree in Pure Mathematics with GPA 9.1/10 and 9.5/10 for my undergraduate degree.
Do you believe that there might be any chance of someone getting admitted with such a low GRE score? Should I not try applying to it at all?
In addition, I would like to ask, to what extent are TOEFL scores taken into consideration beyond constituting a standard qualification?

I suspect you are from India. Yes? I doubt that you will have language difficulties in the US if so.

The question "should I retake the GRE?" has been asked and closed many times on this site. https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=retake+gre+is%3Aq

If the university generally provides funding through a teaching assistantship, TOEFL and IELTS scores are very important. Usually my grad program had 1 TA per class but one quarter I had a co-TA because he didn't meet the English requirements to be a TA on his own. Our department was small and well-off so they could afford to do that.

My advice is that you are putting too much emphasis on one thing and too little on another. GRE subject scores in the US are only one measure with others more important generally, especially good letters of recommendation. Better GRE scores are good, but not the ticket. You might even do worse on a future test - who can say.
Places like Harvard, and most others, don't base decisions solely on such numbers. And many doctoral institutions are lowering the impact of standardized tests, questioning their predictive value.
But the "more important" aspect is that you are putting too many eggs in the Harvard basket. If you apply only to the very top institutions and nowhere else you are likely to be disappointed. The doctoral program at Harvard is a minuscule fraction of good, even excellent, programs. And getting rejected at one such institution leaves you likely to be rejected at other very similar places.
I suggest that you cast a broad net; a selection from, say the top 50 or so universities. Apply to Harvard if you like, but the competition will be fierce. Get good letters of recommendation, predicting your success.
Take the test again if you like, but don't expect to see much difference in the outcome overall.

Buffy thank you for your answer! I sm not relying solely on Harvard, but among the universities I would like to apply, it is the only one requiring a GRE test. Moreover, I would like to ask about the emphasis put on TOEFL scores in general amongst US universities.

@Math2323, get good letters.


text:
Getting letters of recommendation
I aspire to apply in the US for graduate studies. All universities require at least 3 letters of recommendation. I have secured all of them but one is from a lecturer that just served as my master thesis' co advisor. Should I ask a letter from a more senior faculty member or someone who taught courses that I participated in? I have been in substantial touch with just two professor during the whole of my studies.
Edit: lecturer here stands for a regular faculty member of the university.

Does the lecturer have a doctorate?

Yes, the lecturer is a regular faculty member, though to a university different from the one I studied in

Yes, if the lecturer is regular faculty and holds a doctorate then, for US applications they would be an appropriate letter writer.
The letters are relatively important in the US, compared to some other places. They need to honestly and confidently predict success of the candidate in their doctoral studies. A person with whom you have worked closely is in a better position to do this and be believed than someone, perhaps more senior, who doesn't know you well. I would think that a co-advisor on your thesis would be in a good position to make judgements and has the experience to make a valid prediction, having gone through the process themselves.

Note to the worldwide audience that "lecturer" means different things in different places/countries. I would hesitate to ask for a letter from someone who doesn't have a doctorate as they may not have the background to judge what it takes for success.

Generally, it is a good idea to ask senior academic staff (i.e., lecturers and professors) for a letter of recommendation. I think asking anyone with a PhD (i.e., post-Docs and higher) is generally OK.
It's even better if you get those letters from people researching or teaching within the field of study that you want to continue.
Having said that those letters of recommendation only matter if it is a tight race between a few candidates and the spots are limited. In many cases, they don't really matter that much. Don't get me wrong, if they ask for N letters, get and submit those letters.

This is good except for the idea that letters don't matter much. In the US, they matter a great deal.


text:
What do you do when you don't know how you came to know something?
In the field of computer science a lot of times there are things you do that you just acquired during your years of studying in the field. Be it random tutorials you found on the web but of course never wrote the URL down and now you can not find it anymore. Quite probably the website doesn't exist anymore. Be it stuff your professors taught you in their freshman classes but you are pretty sure they did not invent the concept, be it stuff that came up through mere experimentation and it somehow "worked" and years later you find out that actually everyone is doing it that way. You have absolutely no idea how you came to know about stuff, yet now you want to write about you using this knowledge to achieve some goal, for example explain a procedure that you used to acquire some data. In the most common case it would be something like "I read about it on Wikipedia a few years ago." - Wikipedia is not a citable source and the article by now looks nothing like you remember. You can follow the citations in the article in the bottom, but:
It is considered very bad practice to search for literature about something after the fact that you used it in your work. How do you deal with this conundrum of knowing stuff that needs to be explained to someone but having no source you can point to that supports your explanation? The problem isn't knowing stuff, the problem is not knowing where to look for the knowledge you already have.
An important addendum to the problem is: You have never read a textbook about anything. You are 100% sure your personal sources of knowledge do not include reading a citable book.

If "everyone is doing it that way", do they all cite some source for the concept when they use it?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/10045/68109

I’m at an age where I have little clue where I learned something. If pressed I will assume it is in one of my favorite old textbooks and often I’m right that it is there. Whether that is actually where I learned it from is usually irrelevant.

Well but what if you never read a textbook in the first place. I know it seems weird but in my whole career I wasn't ever required to read one. It is not like I will look up and read a freshmen textbook now to see if I COULD have learned it the old fashioned way.

@salbeira: Actually, I think that's exactly what you should do.  See my answer.

For purposes of citation in a paper, all you need is some appropriate source where the reader can find the relevant information.  It doesn't have to be the same source from which you originally learned it - indeed, nobody really cares how you originally learned it.
So this comes down to general literature search techniques: check standard textbooks, find other papers that use the fact and check their references, talk to collaborators or other experts in the field, ask on CS Stack Exchange, etc.  If you can find the original paper that introduced the idea, that's ideal, but a textbook that gives a modern presentation is also useful, and you can cite both.
If the fact is "common knowledge" in your field, it may not be necessary to give a citation at all.  Again, if you're not sure whether that applies to this particular fact, you can ask other experts in your field what they think.

It is considered very bad practice to search for literature about something after the fact that you used it in your work.

Says who?  Sure, if you're sufficiently well organized, it's nice to find references for all relevant facts as you use them.  But if you're not quite that well organized, or find that this would break up your workflow, I don't see anything wrong with going back to fill in references after the fact.  This is very common.

"If the fact is "common knowledge" in your field, it may not be necessary to give a citation at all." I think this deserves even more emphasis. If it's something that you as a junior author picked up long ago (maybe in some course in your freshman year) it's probably not something that an expert reviewer would need a citation for.


text:
Please I need a help about co-authors roles?
I am a PhD student. I thought about 4 main top interesting objectives in my area. I also have done 3 of them totally alone. I have two main supervisors. They only give me a very general comment and feedback such as the English language (they ask me to edit my writing). They also asked me to increase the number of observation of my data. Sometimes they asked me to do something which is not accepted in my topic. I mean it is wrong. I then discuss that with them. I have done the first paper. I did all the computation, Literature review, main idea of my paper, result and everything in the paper.
Now one of my supervisors asked me to join him as a co-author. He said that due to his feedback and comment.!! I sware his comments are very very general.
Is that acceptable? Must I include him as a co-author? Did he have a right to be a co-author in my paper?
Please help me?


text:
Thesis by monograph, Must I publish my papers?
I am a Ph.D. student. My Ph.D. is by the monograph. I really do not exactly understand the requirements relative to the publication. That is, Must I publish all my papers. Or can I just write my thesis as a chapter with the result? Hence, I do not need to publish my chapters. I just would like to understand the requirement. I search in my uni, however, the information therein is not clear.

You're going to have to ask someone locally.  There aren't any universal rules on such things, and we have no way to know what your institution requires.

This will probably be closed because no one here can possibly know your institution's requirements. But, I'll take a stab at some general comments that apply to most institutions:
Thesis by monograph means writing a long "report" that your university approves.
Thesis by publication means stapling together a bunch of published papers.
In general, thus, if you are going for thesis by monograph, there is likely no requirement to publish. But, there are several good reasons to do so:

Papers are very important for you if you want an academic career (or any career in research)
Papers are very important for your advisor's and co-workers' academic careers. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if your advisor required/expected you to publish your good results
Papers are useful to the field as a whole, as papers are much more widely-read than thesis monographs

I should also clarify that publishing a paper does not mean just submitting a chapter from your manuscript to a journal. This is not the forum to describe how to publish papers; your advisor should help you with this.

My supervisor told me that, it is not required to publish my papers before submitting my thesis. That is all.

This depends also on the university. For example, I have to write a monograph, nevertheless, my university requires me to publish at least one peer-reviewed paper and most professors expect at least 3 papers.

This also depends on the discipline. Some (e.g. history) mainly value manuscrips/books, others (e.g. economics) mainly value papers/articles. In some countries (e.g. Germany) you do need to publish the manuscript, but that usually covered by vanity publishers(who in that case have a legitimate role in academia).


text:
Advisor never included me in their research
I am a current 4th year Ph.D. student in social science. In my first year, my advisor asked me to focus on my courses so I did no research even though I wanted to. In my second year, I proposed my own project and I collected data for it, with feedback from my advisor. I have yet to publish the data…
I attribute this mostly to feeling lost without having the process modeled for me first - which I have been advocating for by being put on someone else’s project for the last several years. I would think it’s because my advisor is likely ready to retire but the student after me is now on a project with my advisor and two other faculty.
I feel like a crucial step in my development was not given to me. Am I right for feeling robbed? Isn’t it standard that your advisors use you as a research assistant? But at the same time, I feel like a complete failure for not publishing something yet, even though I don’t want to go into academia.

By ... '4th year Ph.D. student', you implying a US/CAN doctorate?

In my second year, I proposed my own project and I collected data for it, with feedback from my advisor.

That's a great supervisory support from your advisor.
Beyond this, what have you done with the feedback on your collected data in terms of insightful analysis? This is what would lead to publication far more than the 'data'.

I have yet to publish the data.
Perhaps, this is where you should direct your energy.

As a doctoral student, showing some level of independence, initiative, creativity, and writing for publication are essential aspects of your 'training' and evidence of your 'doctorateness'.
It appears you're more on #assumptions mode. I'll recommend you teach out to your advisor. Engage with what you've done with the feedback on your collected data. Show draft of manuscript idea, even if it's one or two pages.

Isn’t it standard that your advisors use you as a research assistant?

For completeness, RA isn't cast in stone. Ain't compulsory.
Regarding your including you on (other/additional) research, let's look at it this way. You've got a research that reached data collection. There're feedbacks. Should your advisor 'overload' you with more research?
I'll stop with a poser: Do you need additional research for your doctoral study writeup?

I think the answer to your question requires self-reflection on your part.

Why do you think your project hasn't yielded any publications yet and how would joining another project help?
What do you expect to learn on someone else's project? You mention having the process modeled for you, but what exactly are you looking for.
What exactly do you feel has been "robbed" from you?
What is it that you're looking for from your advisor (other than being put on another project, which you seem to be a bit fixated on)?

I don't think you were "robbed" of anything. It sounds like your advisor is allowing you the space to develop your own ideas. I would argue that this is exactly what you want in an advisor, especially considering that you admit they continue to give feedback and support.
I think that it is natural to feel lost in the process of research. But as mentioned in another answer, developing independence is part of the journey. Your energy should be directed towards your current project.
All that being said, if you feel you need more specific guidance, you should ask. However, that support does not necessarily mean you should be added to other projects - you have your own.


text:
Obtaining a PhD title in statistics without new theoretical results (i.e. theorems)?
Is it possible to defend a Ph.D. thesis in statistics without proving any theorems? I think the answer is affirmative since I've seen a couple of theses in that fashion. However, I'm unaware of how common/rare they are.
My follow-up question is: If I doubt (and I have good reasons to do so) my abilities to prove any original results going on towards my last Ph.D. year, should I:
i) notify my advisor about it, or
ii) just go through the motions (perhaps attempting to prove results as my advisor instructs me) and focus my effort on simulation studies and real-world applications.
Under many circumstances, if the advisor in question is somewhat empathetic, i) would be the better answer, as they would possibly provide alternative theoretical problems to be solved or focus their effort on simulation studies and applications. However, I'm afraid my advisor might simply give up supervising me (which again, I have good reasons to believe). That makes option ii) more tempting. The risk with this approach is that they could simply not allow me to defend a thesis without any theoretical results.
Now I will pre-emptively answer some questions that might be asked:
Why do you doubt your abilities to prove original results?: First of all, my background is not in statistics, so I feel that my "intuition" with regard to theorems in probability and statistics is behind my peers. Moreover, I haven't been able to prove even the simplest original results (conjectures, rather) that have been pointed out to me.
Top statistical journals tend to publish papers with theoretical results, is that not a worry of yours?: I plan on getting an industry job after my Ph.D., so I'm not worrying about publishing in top journals.
Why not give up on your PhD title?: That would mean having to pay back tens of thousands of dollars that I received, and I don't have that money.
Related questions:

What happens if a math PhD student fails to find a proof that is the main objective of his/her thesis topic?
PhD theses in mathematics with no "big" results or no results at all

"having to pay back tens of thousands of dollars that I received," I don't understand. Are you receiving scholarship or TA ? Would you please explain ?

I'm afraid explaining that point would only help pinpoint my country or particular university. However, I can assure you the information provided in the question is accurate.

You say that your background is not in statistics, but you are getting a PhD in it -- so, supposedly, your background will be in statistics. Do you not think that in itself merits the extra effort? Self doubt is a constant struggle during one's PhD but (I believe that) anything worth doing, is worth doing right. The right way here would be to build up to a place, through practice, from where you feel comfortable enough to take a chance on a proof. Sometimes they don't work out. That is just the reality of mathematics; but sometimes they do!

I got a Master's before starting my PhD, and I also did not have faith in my ability to prove hard results. I will forever be grateful to my advisor at the time, who made me go through the process of just reading textbooks and working out the proofs. Sometimes we'd do it together on the board, and sometimes I would do it independently. At some point I realised that I had stopped fearing and learned to just love the process of thinking about a proof. If you really want a PhD, perhaps you should explore something similar with your advisor.

PhDs are assessed in different ways in different places, and even in the same place there is considerable variation between different reviewers. So a general answer can't be given.
That said, as a statistician I surely think that a PhD-worthy thesis can be produced without proving original theorems. A number of statistics PhD theses are applied; they may involve modelling and new methodological developments; these may not be groundbreaking but rather adapt things that already exist to the specific data to be analysed. Theory is not always (easily) available for methodological novelties, and quite a bit of methodological research is done via systematic simulations. A well done simulation study, a new methodological idea, and a competent discussion of existing literature can carry major weight of a PhD thesis. On top of that, in applied theses there can be issues such as handling missing values, and making sense of a large body of non-statistical literature that has implications on the analysis.
I have seen certain examples where PhD candidates do "theory for the sake of having some theory", and I didn't find this very convincing, even though it cannot denied that in this way a certain ability is demonstrated that some people expect. (These people probably are in Mathematics departments; elsewhere I don't think this is generally expected.)
Note also that some mathematical theory is rather easily available, for example showing whether an ad-hoc distance is actually a metric, i.e., fulfills the triangle inequality (it depends on the distance whether that's easy of course). I have seen a number of people introducing maximum likelihood estimators for some model, and one could show that these are asymptotically normal by just checking the assumptions of standard theory.
As a thesis reviewer I would criticise lack of theory if the thesis, in my view, "calls out" for such theory (e.g., asymptotic normality of the ML estimator is used but not proved, and neither in the literature for the specific instance), and I convince myself that the theory would have been easy enough to do. (If it's not there, I'd like to see a discussion and reasons why not.) But this only concerns specific theses, and would in most cases on its own not be a reason for failure anyway.
Note also that your situation, doing a statistics PhD without a very strong mathematical background, and lack of training and confidence with proving theorems, is not unusual. Many others have been in the same situation, and I believe that most of them eventually got their PhD.

Is it possible? Certainly. I don't know how common it is, but (as an example) scrolling through the Statistics thesis repository at Carnegie Mellon University there are quite a few non-theory theses. For example, early in my time as a PhD student there, when I myself was nervous about my ability to publish theorems, I was heartened to watch the defense of Bronwyn Woods, whose thesis contributions "include the organization of existing resources, methodological advances in segmentation, motion correction and clustering, and the development of prototype analysis software." Very useful, important, and rigorous work, making substantial contributions to statistics -- just not primarily about theory.
Your PhD studies are a time for you to learn how to produce rigorous, original, publishable research in your field. And specifically in the field of Statistics, there are quite a few other ways to produce rigorous, original, publishable research beyond just proving theorems. So if you aren't keen to focus on proving theorems (which is fine!), you should aim for a thesis topic & advisor that let you practice producing the kinds of rigorous, original, publishable research you can feel confident about.
So I do suggest that you speak with your advisor.

In an ideal world, the advisor should be OK with the idea that a non-theory thesis could be a better fit for you. A good advisor should be happy to help you find a path along which you can make contributions to statistical research. (Even from a purely selfish perspective, they'd look better for advising a non-theoretician who goes on to be successful, vs for advising an unsuccessful theoretician.)
But if the advisor is adamant that your thesis must be mostly theorems, they are probably not the right advisor for you. (Not necessarily a bad advisor for others -- perhaps this advisor only works on theory and genuinely isn't qualified to advise a different kind of thesis.) Beware the sunk-cost fallacy; it may be better to take one step back & find a new advisor, instead of pushing further on a thesis you cannot complete. Is there someone else in your department who could (co-)advise you? Maybe another member of your committee, if you have one already?


text:
How can you win a Fields Medal?
Consider someone who is pursuing a PhD in mathematics.
Is it possible for him/her to win the Fields medal?
To win a Fields medal, do you have to be an Assistant Professor?
What are some different ways through which you can win a Fields Medal?

It’s wide open, best of luck if that’s  a goal of yours.

I am somewhat reminded of the following story: One man came to Mozart and asked him how to write a symphony. Mozart replied, “You are too young to write a symphony.” The man said, “You were writing symphonies when you were 10 years of age, and I am 21.” Mozart said, “Yes, but I didn’t run around asking people how to do it.” (https://medium.com/@cdixon/one-man-came-to-mozart-and-asked-him-how-to-write-a-symphony-66e66eddd275)

You get a Fields Medal by publishing mathematics that is widely recognized as extremely significant. Grigori Perelman had no academic affiliation at the time of the award and at least one other recipient was in a research institute, but not an academic. No, you don't need to be an academic (and assistant professor isn't necessarily the first job in any case, depending on location).
I didn't look closely enough at the record to see if anyone has done the work as a student. but it shouldn't be hard to do as there aren't very many awards.
Yes, a grad student could do the necessary work, but it would be extremely unlikely, rare, and difficult. The Fields is awarded for "above and beyond" the normal scale of mathematical insight, captured in one or more significant publications.
It is about the math, not the person.

It is indeed possible to do Fields medal-winning work as a PhD student. Two examples are Manjul Bhargava, who won a Fields for his work on the parametrization of arithmetic objects and the geometry of numbers, and Peter Scholze, who won a Fields for his work on perfectoid spaces. In each case, much of the relevant work was done in graduate school.
However, each won their medal several years after finishing their PhD, after their work was published and widely read and appreciated by others, and after they further built on it and did further (spectacular!) work. This seems to be typical from what I can tell.
So, short answer, yes (if your thesis is extraordinarily good), but you'll probably end up graduating first. Incidentally, neither Bhargava nor Scholze was ever a tenure-track assistant professor; each was appointed a full professor at his PhD-granting institution soon after graduation.

The statutes of the prize are quite clear, and nowhere do they mention the need to be an assistant professor or to hold any academic job. (When Grigori Perelman was offered (and declined) the Fields medal in 2006, he had recently quit his research-only position at the Steklov Institute.) There is an age limit that might rule out some people pursuing a PhD:

The Fields Medal is awarded to an individual mathematician whose 40th birthday must not
occur before January 1st of the year of the ICM at which the Fields Medals are awarded.

However, realistically speaking, the bar to win one of the highest honors in a field is very high. A few great mathematicians meet it, but the vast majority do not. Note that there are at most four medals awarded every four years, whereas the number of math PhDs awarded each year in just the US is over 1200 according to the AMS surveys.

Only 1200? That's surprising low (to me), aren't there like a few thousand colleges in the US?

@BrtH The vast majority of colleges in the US do not have PhD programs in mathematics (or indeed in any field).

Why would the age limit rule out PhD students? While it is written in a particularly convoluted and confusing way, as far as I can tell that statute means that you cannot get  the medal if you are over 40, so only a very small proportion of PhD students would be affected. If anything, that makes it more likely that PhD students will get it, not less.

@terdon I didn't write it would rule out PhD students in general, just some PhD students. The clause does indeed mostly rule out older, more established folks, but those weren't the subject of the question.


text:
Result of one paper is different from paper to paper
I am a first-year PhD student, and I am trying to learn how researchers write papers and reproduce existing work.
One thing I’ve noticed is that, for instance, paper X presents results from dataset D. However, two other papers, Y and Z, which use the same dataset D, cite paper X and compare their results with it. Interestingly, the numbers that papers Y and Z report for paper X's results are slightly different from the original results in paper X and even from each other.
Is this happening because the authors of papers Y and Z reproduced the results from paper X and used those for comparison? What happens if the reproduced results of paper X are lower than the published results?
How can we trust the reproduced results of paper X from the authors of papers Y and Z when comparing them? Could it be that they used slightly different data preprocessing techniques that lowered the results for paper X but increased their own results?

Do Y and Z state why they present results different from what they cite? Is the difference relevant for the gist of their comparison?

@MisterMiyagi No, they just put numbers in the table, and don't talk about it.

Medical PhD student here. In my Bachelor's Thesis, I used a publicly available dataset in order to test some hypothesis, different from the hypothesis the original authors tested. Before doing my analysis, I first tried to replicate the analysis of the original authors. To my surprise, although I could compute the same values for means and counts, I couldn't replicate their values for multivariate models. In the original article, the authors explained that they "controlled for factors such as age, gender and familial history", providing HRs and ORs only for the things they were interested in, but not for any of the cofounders.
What might be happening is that the original authors have not provided enough information about how they analyzed the data, thus making it very hard for others to "guess" the exact methods/models they used.
Moreover, different software (and different versions of the same software) can use slightly different methods/models/statistical tests. SPSS is a good example, newer versions using Lilliefors test instead of Kolmogorov-Smirnov for assessing normality. R also can use different types for sum of squares in ANOVA, while SPSS defaults to Type III (I think), without letting you choose. https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/20452/how-to-interpret-type-i-type-ii-and-type-iii-anova-and-manova
In multivariate models, depending on the software used, different results can be obtained by simply choosing a different order for the predictors, or using a stepwise method instead of the enter method.
In genetics, depending on the protocols/machines used for reading DNA/RNA sequences, raw sequence data might contain "barcode" sequences that would be automatically discarded by the (proprietary) software used for data cleanup after reading, but you may not have this exact information or access to the cleanup software, while the repository requires authors to upload raw readings before cleanup. Different reference genomes might have been used (see HG19 vs HG38). https://www.thebiomics.com/research/human-genome-assembly/hg19-vs-hg38#:~:text=HG38%20includes%20additional%20data%20that,version%20of%20the%20human%20genome%20.
A personal beef of mine is with Brainstorm, which computes quantitative electroencephalography values based on EEG recordings. They don't provide an archive of past versions, and this year's versions have made significant changes to the interface, not only changing defaults but completely removing some options that I used last year in computing values. Essentially, I'm unable to reproduce past results using the only version available today. https://neuroimage.usc.edu/brainstorm/Introduction

The tl;dr version of this nice answer is that what the OP has observed happens often for a variety of reasons.

Thank you for depth explanation! Yes, I wonder later if I were to write paper that needs to compare with others, should I use number from paper or number I got from reproducing their work, which is slightly lower than original work.

@ParkBo I'd recommend using the number from your reproduction, so you are making an accurate comparison, such as the exact same statistical test. If the difference between your reproduction and their paper is more than a rounding error, though, I would add both rows to the table.

@Davidmh Thank you


text:
Should I list a dual affiliation in publications when incorporating prior independent work into my current full-time research?
I’m currently employed full-time as a researcher, and my institution has asked me to integrate a tool I originally developed during my prior independent consulting/research. The tool was created before my current role and represents substantial groundwork from that time.
Some colleagues suggest I should list both my current institution and my former consulting affiliation in publications to reflect the tool’s origins. Others caution that this could imply I’m actively engaged in multiple roles, which might conflict with my full-time employment status.
Questions:

Is it appropriate to list both affiliations in such cases, and if so, how best to present it?
Are there alternative ways to acknowledge prior independent work without potential conflicts?

Any advice from those who’ve faced similar situations would be very helpful. Thank you!

Where do you want to list both affiliations? You only say [your] institution has asked [you] to integrate a tool, but for what purpose and occasion? Is this about publishing a paper and your tool is part of an experimental setup? Is this about publishing software, and your tool will be part of it? Is this about generally publishing your affiliation, e.g. on a work or private website?

@MisterMiyagi The institution requested that I incorporate a Python library I had developed previously (during independant work), building further capabilities on top of it to meet their project objectives efficiently. The aim is to publish the resulting work in a journal based on the progress achieved during my contract. There are also plans to eventually make a free version of this tool available online.

@MisterMiyagi The dual affiliation is intended specifically for the upcoming publication, for which I am the primary author.

Is your consultancy still active?

I am employee 100% with the institution right now, but aiming at working again as independent after this research contract

If your previous work has already been published, just citing the original publication is enough. If you are publishing it (or using the results in a publication) for the first time, you can consider it as work that started before your current employment. In such a case listing two affiliations is standard practice. A double affiliation does not always mean that you are simultaneously employed by two institutions. It can also be understood as the list of places where you worked during the whole duration of the project, which can last for much longer than a single employment contract. The second affiliation gives credit to the other institution which paid you while you did what has now become an important part of the publication.

If you keep your consultancy active, or expect to return to it in the future, then this is probably something worth doing. But if it is dead and will likely remain so, there is little point in it. Especially for a consultancy of one. You "are" or were that consultancy. Your name is enough.
However, not for ethical or legal reasons, you may want your current employer's explicit permission for such a thing, just to help maintain your position there and their good will.
You can, instead, put in something like an acknowledgement statement that names the consultancy, though if it doesn't have a name independent of your true name it is hardly worth it.  But you could note that package X predates your current affiliation and was developed independly.

"You can, instead, put in something like an acknowledgement statement that names the consultancy": Some formats also allow a notes section which could be used to provide details of a dual affiliation if you want to explain something about it. That might be more suitable than using the acknowledgements. Or you add a footnote.


text:
If an article has been released under an open access license, is its corresponding questionnaire also open-access?
I am interested in using a questionnaire found within the appendix of an article that has been released under a CC BY 4.0 International License. Am I free to use this questionnaire (in accordance with the article's CC BY license) for my own work, or would I need to contact the authors for permission to use it?

I would presume that the point of publishing it under CC-BY was to allow people to use the questionnaire (after all that's the point in developing it and publishing it). It's good to ask, but it would never have crossed my mind that the questionnaire wasn't usable.

Unless the appendix has a separate license, which would need to be stated explicitly, anything published under such a license can be used elsewhere. Don't forget to give credit, however. If you republish the questionnaire it should include the author's name.
Note that I'm assuming that the article and its appendix have been published as one. If the original was separate from its appendix then a separate license would be required, which might require contacting the authors or other copyright holders.
Note however, that "use" is a loaded word. You can "use" copyrighted, unlicensed work. But you can't republish it (copy it). The ideas within copyrighted work (like all ideas) are free. Ethics requires giving proper attribution, but the CC-BY license goes beyond that. The license applies to the words and expression used.
It might be useful to contact the original authors, however, especially if you are trying to replicate their work. They may have useful suggestions.


text:
How in depth should a background section on cams in an undergraduate thesis be?
I am writing my thesis on the design and construction of a robot that has a lot of mechanical parts in it. A big part of the project is the 2 cams that I am using and I'm not sure how much I should write about cam analysis in the background section. My plan is to explain the general mechanism and include the equations, with explanation, necessary to analyse the cam. Then I would refer back that background section when I am performing the analysis of my specific cam. This would result in a pretty lengthy section on cams as there is a lot of maths involved, but it is an important part of my thesis.
Should I do this? This is for my undergraduate honours thesis, and I don't think that cam analysis is common knowledge among engineers, especially since I am not a mechanical engineer. Another issue is that almost all of my knowledge of cam analysis comes from the Cam Design Handbook 2004, so there would be very few references in this large section. Is there a better way that I should be doing this?

This is a question for your advisor.


text:
Being a postdoc in Canberra
I have worked in a top public university in the US collaborating with well-known people and have been contemplating applying to Australian National University Canberra for another postdoc. I am an international person and will be on visa. Wanted to learn from people how life could be different (better/worse) with postdoc salaries and benefits in Australia (e.g., medical expenses, which feels scary in the US). I have a dependent partner who is also skilled to find a job. Would also love to know about societal acceptance of international people in and around Canberra.

From the folks I’ve known from ANU, Canberra (and Australia in general) are quite welcoming.

Australia is a multi-cultural country.  Sure, there are idiots here and there, but the majority of the population is very sensitive towards diversity, especially universities.  You will find people speaking up instead of brushing it off.
As for medical, it is far cry from the USA. You can look this up.  You can also look up the premium you'll be paying; a family of four cover is around $300-$350 AUD per month.
My only complains about Canberra: too quiet and cold during winter.

The ANU is (arguably) the highest ranked university in Australia and consistent ranks within the top 50 universities in the world (roughly commensurate with universities like NYU or the Sorbonne).  (See discussion in comments below on ranking systems.)  It is an elite research university and is a nice place to study and work.  The ANU has an extremely successful research record including many world-class research groups and hubs, and consistent success in attracting grant funding and producing research output.  It also has a substantial cohort of international students and is a highly attractive study destination for students from China and other Asian countries (mostly because it is geographically closer than elite universities in Europe and the US).
Canberra is the hub of the federal government in Australia and it is a highly educated and affluent population (probably somewhat similar to the central parts of Washington DC, but at lower scale).  It is a comfortable place to live and work, though perhaps somewhat expensive relative to some other cities.  The city has a substantial proportion of non-white migrants and is only slightly less multicultural than major Western metropolises like London.  Migrants make up about 28% of the Canberra population (see this relevant news article) and within the central areas near the city and the ANU the proportion would be higher again (since many of the outer suburban areas of the city are less multicultural than the mean).  Canberra has a substantial population of migrants from England, China, India, the Phillipines, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, and many other countries.  No-one will bat an eyelid at a non-white migrant living in the city or working at ANU; it is so common as to be banal.
You can find information on the academic salary scale at ANU here (note that the unit of measurement in this schedule is $AUD, not $US).  Postdocs are typically Level A appointments, but I'm sure the position description for the position you are contemplating specifies this.  You can find information on health coverage for temporary visa holders in Australia from the Department of Home Affairs (which is based in Canberra).  Broadly speaking, migrants on a temporary visa are not eligible for Medicare coverage.  Most major health insurers in Australia have policies for healthcare coverage for overseas students and my (vague) understanding is that this is quite a bit less expensive and scary than in the US.
Full Disclosure: I am an alumnus of the ANU and have also worked there as a researcher.

"The ANU is the highest ranked university in Australia" -- depends on the ranking system.  Further, it is depends on the subject and discipline.

I refer here to the overall ranking in standard research assessments, not rankings of specific subjects or disciplines.  While there is some variation between ranking systems (and occasionally the University of Melbourne comes out on top), my observation has been that the ANU is ranked highest in a fairly consistent manner throughout most standard ranking systems that focus on research.

@VitaminE: I have edited the answer to now say that the ANU is arguably the highest ranked, and directed readers to this comment section for discussion.

For what it's worth, US News and World Report ranks ANU as number 6 in Australia, while "The Times" Higher Education ranks it as number 5. This is consistent with my view of ANU as a research mathematician.

Interesting.  QS puts it at number 1, and I recall it being ranked number 1 in many previous years (though again, that is an overall ranking, not one for a specific discipline).


text:
Arrhenius's 1887 paper
I am writing a review and the mixture law of liquid viscosity was supposedly first proposed by  S Arrhenius in "Arrhenius, Z. physik. Chem., 1, 285 (1887)" as cited in this paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/164799b0
It has not been possible to find the above 1887 paper by Arrhenius. Does anyone have access to it and can share it? Thanks

Visit your local friendly research librarians.

I don't have access to the Nature paper you cited (it's behind a paywall), but I did get a list of references at the bottom of the web page, and clicking on "Google Scholar" for the Arrhenius reference leads to two papers (or at least two different titles). Googling (in Google-Books, date-restricted to 1800s to omit irrelevant mentions of the paper) the titles of the papers (use quotes for a phrase search) took me to this freely available item and to this other freely available item.

What exactly is your problem? I mean, did you actually try to go via the bibliographic details in the reference? Your example is very easy to find indeed if you have access the journal. Or is that your problem?

https://doi.org/10.1515/zpch-1887-0133

And it is available from Sci-Hub under that DOI.


text:
How to discuss/arrange/settle on a graduation plan with my PhD advisor?
I am a sixth year PhD student in a STEM field at a US university. I want to do a postdoc after graduation and remain in academia. I am unsure how to discuss/arrange/settle on (couldn't find an accurate verb to describe, as you'll see) a graduation plan with my advisor?
Context to consider:

As an international student, I need to maintain a legal status, which means there is limited time between PhD graduation and starting a postdoc job. I have mentioned this to my advisor, who has mentored international students before. There are past instances where international students remained in the group after graduation as a postdoc for some time. Still, I am worried that my advisor is not fully aware of this, and may suddenly ask me to defend, graduate, and leave when I have not secured a postdoc position;
I get along with my advisor, and my publications have fulfilled the graduation requirements/expectations.
As you may wonder, I don't have postdoc job lined up yet. It is not because I cannot find one, but because I have not started job searching. Why? When I raised the idea of looking for postdoc positions a year ago, my advisor thought the current project I was (and am still) doing had potentially high impact, and did not want me to disclose it to other professors to avoid being scooped, since I would talk about my PhD research in postdoc interviews. In addition, my advisor also encouraged me to work with influential professors in the field (competitive to get in) for my postdoc and said it would be difficult to land as a postdoc in those research groups with my existing already published research profile. I kind of agreed with the assessment and kept working on my project without mentioning about postdoc with my advisor again ever since, thinking it would be mutually beneficial to both my advisor and myself to get a nice paper out. Over the past year, my advisor wants better and better results coming out of this project to publish a big paper, but I don't know if continuing this is good for me, when my advisor also remains silent about my graduation timeline.

My reservation about bringing up this matter again is that I might appear as unproductive and unwilling to work anymore. My advisor's recommendation letter would be crucial so I could not act on my own in postdoc job hunt. If I brought up this matter again, perhaps my advisor may not become unhappy, maybe just a little disappointed (or unemotional, if you think cynically that many advisors nowadays think students are "spendable"), but you never know what is on my advisor's mind.
Hope I have made my situation clear and would appreciate any suggestions.

When do you plan to graduate (certainly not this Spring, since nothing is ready, and your hopes of finding a job at this point are not impressive)? It's completely and utterly fine to discuss your graduation plans with your advisor. Assuming that you want to graduate next Spring, job search will start this Fall. You might need some preparations before that, so I see no reason why discussing it might be problematic. In fact, it might be concerning that, being at the 6th year, you and your advisor didn't discuss the graduation for the entire year.

"you never know what is on my advisor's mind", no, we don't, but you can find out. You need to have an honest and open conversation with them asap. Sending a version of what you have written here as an email would be a good first step.

This is crazy. Of course you can and should discuss a graduation timeline and lining up a postdoc. Your advisor, if they are even near reasonable, should encourage you and even help you find a good postdoc, through their contacts. How would they think that wanting to finish will make you less productive? It won't, and your advisor should not assume this.
How should you discuss it? Make an appointment. Have a plan written up. In a matter-of-fact tone, tell them you are finishing and want to establish a plan for the final stretch. Don't be demanding but also don't apologize for wanting to finish.

Unfortunately, having an irresponsible advisor is not that uncommon. The question is what the student should do in this situation.


text:
How do I approach a professor for a Ph.D. Admission?
It is about 10 km between my house and the professor's office (at the university). I have emailed the professor but have not received any response.
The professor doesn't know me. He works in my area of interest. I want to work with this professor.
Moreover, a government funding agency offers me a Ph.D. scholarship.
Ph.D. admissions are taken through a direct interview (viva) at that university.

What country are you in?

@Buffy India  .My residence is in New Delhi

"It is about 10 km between my house and the professor's office" Die you actually physically drop by at their office to talk, then?

@MisterMiyagi To be honest, I'm a little afraid to speak with the professor.

You'll need to put your fears aside and go visit him. Make an appointment, perhaps through the university. Put together a CV and a couple of ideas about research and just do it.
It is natural to lack confidence for many people, but it is only through practice that you get over it. And you will have to interact with him in any case if you are accepted as his student.
If you know anyone at your current institution who might know him, ask them about what to expect. Or ask them about what to expect in an admissions interview in India in any case.
I don't know why you haven't gotten any response. I don't know whether the university is currently "in session" or not. I don't know what you put in your email. Sometimes too much or too little can be an issue. But seek advice locally on what is expected. Some people are just too busy to respond to blind emails. Make an appointment. Go. Good luck.

Caveat, I don't know how doctoral admissions works in India. In the US, you apply to a department and its admissions committee, not a professor. In Germany, IIRC, it is usually to the professor.