text:
References in a research article conclusion
Can I put some references in the research article conclusion to clarify my future work?

Wait a sec, how exactly does a reference (which points towards previous work) clarify your future work?

@posdef, I criticize a previous work (reference) and try to overcome the problem in future work.

@user137684 Then what was your current work doing?

I'm having trouble parsing this question.  So, you're writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal, and you're asking if it'd be appropriate to add references to your prior work in order to discuss your research direction and what you intend to do in the future?

Possibly related:  "How can I signal that I don't intend to follow up the items in my “Future Work” section?".  From the discussion in that question, it sounds like some folks are used to seeing "Future Work" sections while others haven't heard of it before (which is kind of a weird disparity).

Thanks for all of you, let say that I have a  method in my field which suffer from some problems, in the present paper I solved one of these problems which take a lot of therotheical derivations (takes time) which allows me to be published as research article. The new method improves the results but it still have problems (you can say that the improved method still can be criticized), which I want to overcome in future work.

The two main functions of a reference are:

Make sure that you don't take credit for someone else's work.
As an "external appendix", e.g. "you can read more about this in ..."

If your conclusion contains parts where function 1 applies you have to include the appropriate citations. If your conclusion contains a part where function 2 applies you can do so, but as a matter of style I would be reluctant to do so. A conclusion is there to emphasize the main points of your article. Adding a link to an "external appendix" is not helping.

If the others' work is not relevant enough to be part of the big picture of the problem you lay out at the beginning of the article, then it may not be worthwhile to include it at the end. You can probably write the ending in a way that makes clear that you know people have already done work on it:

These results might prompt us to revisit/further consider a broader/related question: [question]. [While X and Y have notably approached this question, a focus on [some aspect related to paper at hand] may shed new light on the subject.]

If your only reference to the other paper(s) is in the conclusion, do not criticize them. It's not the place for a nuanced critique that is needed in such a situation, plus you don't want to needlessly antagonize those authors and their colleagues, who may be among your reviewers. If a key part of your current research article is the critique of the other research, then it may be appropriate to bring it up again, but try to take the tone in the conclusion of "building on" others' research rather than "correcting their hideous mistake." ;)


text:
Is taking a sentence in English language and reformulate in french, a plagiarism
I am writing my PHD thesis in french, sometimes I took some sentences, phrases from english references and try to rewriting them in french so that the meaning is close.
Is this a plagiarism?

Do you cite your original source? Are you taking just a sentence at a time or whole passages?

Have you checked the plagiarism section of the student code of conduct for your school/department? It may include a clause specifically about translated work.

Yes, basically taking someone's language, thoughts, ideas or expressions without correct referencing is plagiarism...
Edit based on comments:
If you reference the material correctly, even though you translated and / or paraphrased it, is fine.

The OP did not say that they were not giving correct referencing. It would not be plagiarism, and also not demote the OP's own work to say something like 'blah blah blah (LeBlanc, 1793 - current author's translation)'

@JeremyC the OP did not make it clear that they were giving correct referencing either...

@SolarMike The response would be perfect if you added a condition. "If you do not reference ... . If you do reference, however, ..."

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Coaching centre or self study?
I'm currently 15 and I still have around 2 more years here at my school in India. I took admission in a reputed coaching centre here for my career oriented studies last year. I want to be a student at the Indian Institute of Technology (which is the best in India in terms of engineering and technology, and whose exam - the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) I am bound to give in 2019) and my coaching centre prepares me for the same, and shall continue to do so for the next couple of years. The quality and level of teaching at my centre is, without doubt, great.
However, I have friends at my school who, without going to any such coaching centre, can match or perhaps outsmart me in several fields of study, by simply just studying and researching at their homes through the internet, books and other sources. This fact leaves me in a state of dilemma regarding my decision of joining the coaching centre. I don't regret my decision, but I'm just starting to feel a little sceptical about it, because when I started to self study like some of my friends, I felt that I could do perhaps as much the same level of study, or even better (than my coaching centre), by just studying on my own.
The biggest advantage of such methodology is, in my opinion, that you can study at your own pace, unlike at a coaching centre where study is time bound. Those guys can delve deeper into any topic of their choice, without any sort of pressure.
From the past couple of months, I am studying differential calculus on my own, which shall be taught to me at my institute after a month or so. I think I'm doing pretty well and am going good at it, without any guidance or assistance. I have been able to solve many of the questions that my institute has to offer regarding the topic. So the thing which is troubling me is that can't I do this for other subjects and topics as well? And in this way, I won't be requiring any formal help and support for my studies. This is what some of my pals have resorted to.
But one advantage which I feel students like me have over such students as my friends, is that we get an exposure to the exam pattern and are quite accustomed to the time bound type of exams. Furthermore, we can get to know our ranks at various levels and thus improve accordingly. For example, at my coaching centre, I give several periodic tests which give me an insight into my performance, and where I need to improve. I also get to know my rank at the national level, which is quite a boost for me.
I won't be leaving my coaching centre for the next 2 years to study at my own, but I just want to know if students like my friends, who do not go (and do not wish to go) to any such coaching centre, do they have any significant advantages over students like me, who go to an institute for academic assistance?

Sorry, this site doesn't handle questions about undergraduate admissions.  See http://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic

This is not a question regarding admissions. See the tag used, it's 'career-path'

You might be able to resuscitate your question by asking people to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of self study vs. institutional study.  But even then it could get closed by virtue of varying from one person to another.

Graduate students do not have the "coaching centre" problem that you are facing. Voting to close.

The people I am talking about, including me, are neither graduate nor undergraduate. We are just school students, as I have mentioned.

Let me, painfully and clearly, spell it out for you: this is not the appropriate site for high school questions.

@MadJack The reason I voted to close was because the OP claims that it's about career path. If the OP specifies that it's about admission, I would vote to "Leave it to Open". Please see my meta question three years ago.

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


text:
How to become a researcher?
I would like to follow a line of investigation but I have some doubts. I'm mathematician and currently finishing my master's degree in Latin America. I know that I have a lot to learn to make impact articles, but I would like to start by publishing results from my point of view with alternate demonstrations or a different approach, and progressively improve. But I do not know where I can make those publications and have them seen internationally, I know some Latin American magazines but being in Spanish or Portuguese it is very difficult for it to become international. I like constructive criticism, so I am not afraid to publish something and know my mistakes either in editing or presentation, I want to continue improving. Perhaps this query is out of place on that website but I would like to know your point of view, since many here have gone through the same thing as me, and I would like you to share your experiences with me to continue improving.
I'm sorry about the tags but I didn't find a suitable one for this query.

A PhD is the standard way to get trained in academic research. While that doesn't mean it is impossible to do good research without a PhD, my impression is that most people who think they can skip the training step have misled themselves. A PhD isn't just a title to hold, it's a mark of having completed this training program.
It's certainly possible to publish as a masters student, but you'll want to get input from a research advisor. Even "low impact" work is difficult to publish properly, and you can do damage to your reputation (or, at minimum, waste your own time) trying to do it yourself.
I would not advise trying to publish without a research advisor's assistance until you've successfully published several papers with assistance. A research advisor will be able to help you decide what appropriate venues there are for the work you're doing, and how to frame your work in a way that it will be interesting to other readers. If you're in mathematics, it seems even harder in that in many subfields research papers are extremely niche and there may be only one or two people in the entire world that are even remotely interested; it does not sound that you're at a point where you know how to find those two people, so you need additional support.

I think you should start by looking at journals that publish the kinds of papers you expect to write.
Journals written in English are likely to be more widely  read than those in Spanish or Portuguese, and your English is clearly good enough for you to consider them.
I don't think you should worry about international visibility. The practice at putting your ideas on paper in a way that makes them attractive to the editor of your journal of choice is what you need now. You will get the criticism you need from the referees.

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


text:
What does 'AE Recommends' imply in journal submission systems?
I have submitted my manuscript to an IEEE transaction after four months of being under review, the status has been updated to 'AE Recommends', what does this imply? Does this mean chances of acceptance are higher?


text:
How to start a short contributing conference talk?
I am a Ph.D. student in mathematics in number theory and would likely give a short contributing (15-minute) talk at a big conference. I have prepared short slides for the talk but plan to go with chalk and talk. I have given slides presentation before but have no experience with chalk and talk. I need your suggestion, provided I am not very good at writing mathematical notations.
My main question is another one. Certainly, there are invited, speakers. But, I was not invited but applied to the conference, and then the organizers accepted my registration with partial financial support (accommodation+food). Many others belong to my category. Now those who are invited will thank the organizers at the beginning of their talks e.g., they will say "I thank the organizers for their invitation".

But since I am not an invited speaker, how should I start the talk? how should I thank the organizers?

Thank you for your suggestion.

It seems like you are asking two distinct questions (How do I give a chalk talk? Should I thank the organizers?), neither of which coincides with the question in your title (How do I start a talk?).

Only in number theory do people think it is a good idea to do a chalk-board talk :-)

@AdamPřenosil, How do I start a talk? I mean what should I say at the beginning of a talk? The other question is different, I agree of course.

Thank the organizers for what they did to make it possible for you to attend.
Don't try to write lots of mathematics on the board. That would be my advice even if you were good at it.
Imagine yourself in your audience. What are the very few most important things you would want the speaker to do to engage you? Talk about how your work fits into the field. State your results in as informal a manner as is consistent with correctness - don't fuss over technicalities. Invite audience members to catch you some time later in the conference to talk about details and collaboration.
Congratulations and good luck.

In particular, you can say "thanks to the organizers for the opportunity to speak."

It's possible traditions are different in mathematics or by country, but in my field, I'd say these ways of starting a talk are common:

Just start talking. Everyone thinks their talk is the most important and wants to spend more time on it at the end. This is rude, but the beginning is a place where you possess the time, so just start.

It's typical that speakers are introduced by someone before they begin; for some talks, this may include a recitation of the speaker's CV and a list of all of their Nobel prizes. Others it is, "the next speaker is Dr. Smith from College University." The speaker can respond to this, "Thank you," and then (1).

Start by thanking your collaborators/coauthors/students who contributed to the work you are presenting. You avoid rushing at the end and missing this key step by doing it up front.

To me, it would be a waste of time to listen to a thanking of the organizers at the beginning of each talk.


text:
Is it a good idea to omit part of a multiple surname for publications?
I'm about to publish my first article and from what I've been reading, everyone suggests that you should be consistent with the name you choose. My first name is "Sobhan" and my last name is "Omranian Khorasani". In my country, I always introduce myself as "Sobhan Omranian" and never mention the other part and I want to keep it that way in my academic career. The problem is that if I mention my full name, then I would be probably known as "S.O. Khorasani" which is unwanted.
My question would be, would I face any issues regarding my ID (e.g., university admission or applying for a job), if I omit the last part of my family name and then for the sake of uniqueness, add a middle name? (Something like "S.A. Omranian")
If yes, can I improvise and and add a hyphen between my multiple surnames? (Omranian-Khorasani) or are there better ways to achieve what I want.

Whatever you end up doing pick one version and stick to it.

Or perhaps more journals could start publishing using the (sm)all caps for surname convention that many journals use to make it super clear whether it's surname first, or more than a single name in the surname.  I have to admit, I find it absolutely amazingly (in a sad way) that journals and databases still haven't figured out that not everyone has a single family name that appears at the end of the full name. (I leave this as a common, as I recognize entirely that desiring journals and indexers to fix their systems isn't exactly in your power)

Also see: Choosing author name

Relevant example in my field

If you're in any doubt as to your quasi-pen name being accepted, then make it a habit to explain the connection between the name you use for publishing and the name on your passport in a paragraph in an email early on in the relationship.  If in doubt about uniqueness, google your name.  If your name is fairly common, then you'll want to have a pseudonym.

In Spain we typically have a very similar situation: two surnames, with the first being considered the most "important" in the sense that if we need to omit one, we omit the second. For example, someone called Juan García González can be called Juan García or Mr. García for short, but never "Juan G. González" as most US-centric systems would abbreviate it.
The typical approaches most researchers take are either signing just Juan García (omitting the second surname), or adding a hyphen (Juan García-González) to fool the American databases into thinking they are a single surname. Typically the first solution is chosen by authors whose first surname is rare, and the second one by those whose first surname is common and who would have ambiguity problems if they used the first approach (e.g. García is extremely common, so there can be dozens of authors called J. García, and therefore signing as García-González is probably a better idea).
Lately, a Spanish governmental science foundation has adopted these approaches as official recommendations, and many universities have followed suit and recommended them to their personnel as well. It's in Spanish, but just in case you are curious or it can help anyone else, here is the recommendation guide describing this: https://www.um.es/documents/793464/2907606/Recomend+Fecyt+DOC051115-1.pdf/0a403f57-253f-4f07-9bdc-762ff5a9a557
Thus, I think you should be safe both as Sobhan Omranian or as Sobhan Omranian-Khorasani, and you can choose between both depending on whether S. Omranian is common or not. I don't think adopting a middle name in your "pen name" would be problematic either, as you can always provide evidence of authorship of your publications if needed. But I would stick to the simpler, tried solutions just in case. If they are considered to work in Spain and even recommended officially, they should work there too.

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


text:
What can be done (by the community as a whole) to make it easy (for persons other than the authors) to reproduce numerical results in a paper?
For example see reproduced papers repository.
I am restricting the scope to theory papers that have some results obtained through numerical techniques. The fields may be as diverse as physics, mathematics and the things in between.
How can one make this process of reproducing papers more frictionless? Is there a way one could incentivize independent reproduction?

What is the linked repository an example of?

How can one make...reproducing [results] more frictionless? By writing good papers, especially in terms of describing methodology.

@user2768 the linked repository is an example of papers would be reproduced independently of the authors.

What about the differing abilities of the readers? Some won’t have the maths or software skills to create the solutions or debug them...

Thanks for the clarification: Perhaps edit to clarify

Given that creators have some rights to the things they create, you need to provide incentives for transparency to creators/authors. Hopefully they are positive incentives.
But many authors are hesitant to reveal all of their computer code or the actual data that they use in research. There are many reasons for this, some valid, even essential, and some less so.
Some (many) don't reveal all because they fear, reasonably or not, that their ideas will be stolen and that others will capitalize on them before they, themselves, have a chance to follow up.
Some don't reveal their computer code, realizing that it, in final analysis, isn't very good code and is a bit (or a lot) fragile. Or, again, they want to use it in future and don't want to enable others to "scoop" them using the revealed resources.
Another reason, especially for data, is that in many cases the data cannot be revealed for reasons of privacy. This is always an issue in any research with human subjects, even questionnaires on technical topics. It is difficult to anonymize data properly as statistical methods are pretty good at extracting information about individuals from many data sets. So, recognizing the difficulty, it often seems best to just keep it private.
However, I question the value of calling research reproduced if it relies on the same code (or other method) and the same data. If you want to properly reproduce research I suggest that you take the hypotheses of a paper and devise your own experiment independently and run it on independent data. If you get the same results then you have additional information about the value of the hypotheses. The simpler way (same code, same data) guards a bit against some sorts of academic dishonesty, but doesn't otherwise advance the state of knowledge very much.
But if you want to see the code and the data, you have to find ways to overcome the reluctance of the authors to make it public. I think that is easy in some cases and impossible in others, with everything in between pretty common. Moreover, the "easy" cases don't get you very far.

Let me note an important and disturbing current situation in the US. Since the current administration is hostile to science in too many ways, it has declared that scientific studies that are not completely transparent will not be considered in matters related to human health (air and water quality, etc) or climate change.
The effect is to make almost all human studies off limits for consideration, since the law also requires privacy of human subjects and much of the research on which, say, air quality standards depends was done under earlier (confidentially required) rules. Thus, only phony "science" provided by stakeholders (coal burning industries) will now be considered to set air quality regulations. In effect, the Environmental Protection Agency is now misnamed. The administrators are actually hostile to a safe and clean environment.
This is a strong negative incentive for transparency. Reveal all or be punished/ignored for your work. I hope this sort of thing ends soon.

Sorry! @Buffy I slightly changed my question to better reflect what I had in mind. Maybe you would want to revise your answer.


text:
What does "open" mean in science?
I understand that open science is based on open data, open access, open source, open methodology, etc.
However, what does "open" exactly mean in context when we talk about "open science"?

"Transparent"
If I had to condense the meaning of open in open science to a single word, it would be transparent.
The primary purpose of having open source software, accessible data, open access publishing, permissive licensing, and all of the other things we associate with open science, is to "open up" the scientific process as much as possible: allowing and enabling free and anonymous scrutiny of research outputs and the process that produced them, and for the repurposing of those outputs and processes for new research.

Hmm, it's common courtesy in StackExchange communities to provide a comment when you downvote someone's answer.

(Hard to know what the down-voter objected to...) Indeed, in addition to, or to make feasible, transparency and accessibility, economic barriers have to be removed or mitigated so that people not lucky enough to be "on the inside" in (e.g.) a U.S. university (with MathSciNet access, and so on) can have a fair chance. For-profit publishers who add ever-less value are  obvious candidates... and so on. Economic issues loom large.


text:
How to become competitive for PhD in data science?
I want to apply for Ph.D at a good Western university (e.g., in the UK or US) in data science. I have a master's degree (no thesis) and only one publication in a local journal. Will I be competitive for such spots? If not, how can I improve my profile?

I would check the admission criteria of universities you are thinking of applying to.  Your question cannot be answered because you have not provided sufficient details, and what is your definition of a 'good' university?

What is a good university in your eyes?

See also https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44604/what-is-the-admissions-process-for-top-uk-graduate-programs-what-is-a-considere?r=SearchResults

The term "data science" is a catch-all, not a research domain. One of your first goal should be to try to narrow down the research domain you're interested in. There's a massive amount of research being done around Machine Learning, it ranges from very theoretical topics (strong statistics background required) to very applied topics (the majority of the research).

The PhD committee in top universities looks for a number of things which includes your publication record, the quality of your references, your work experience, etc. If you wish to do a PhD in a top university you should strive to have a publication in top conferences.
Your publication record in a local journal would be of little help if you wish to be selected for top universities. So you have some work to do before getting acceptance-ready.
Firstly, start by implementing papers from top conferences like ICML and reproduce their results. While you do that understand thoroughly the concepts in those papers. This might require you to revisit your foundations in mathematics. Make sure you maintain your code in Github.
Make a list of top research groups you would like to work with and follow their work. As you follow the step above you will gain more confidence and you would be in a position to comment on their work. Start engaging with them on social networks.
As you start engaging with them you would understand the research direction in which these groups are working. Start reading more of their work and try to identify gaps in their work, which they would also mention in their conclusions and future work sections of their papers.
Try to formulate research ideas which address these gaps and try to write proposals. This would be a bit difficult without guidance, especially if you are from the non-English speaking country. You could use paid service to proofread your proposal.
If it is possible to find a good academician in your country, touch base with them and offer to collaborate with them. Look for someone who already has a decent publication record. By collaborating with them not only could you publish more and gain experience in writing, but also get good reference letter.
There are only a handful of 'good' universities in this world and it is not easy to get into them. But if you work hard you sure will succeed. Best of luck!

disagree that there are only a "handful" of good universities. There are multiple good schools in every country on the planet, and people doing solid research in all of those places. If your goal is to get an education, at least the top 50% of universities worldwide can handle that job well. If your goal is to do top-level research your choices narrow somewhat, but i would wager there are still at least 200-500 schools in that range.

@roger-reject since the OP is asking about PhD it is obvious that the question is about research. As for 'good', I consider only the top 30 universities in the world to be good. Beyond that the quality is abysmal. But I agree to disagree with you on that as 'good' is subjective. But when you add universities from "top-50%" I would consider many of them as a total waste of time and money. It is better to learn from online resources than most of these second-tier universities.

agree to disagree, but anecdotally i can say that in my school we regularly recruit students for PhD programs from both top and 2nd tier universities in my country, and the 2nd tier university students are almost uniformly better educated, while the top tier students have more extracurricular experience (like undergrad research, participating in academic competitions, etc.). So depending on whether you want solid research experience, or solid grasp of academic fundamentals, YMMV.

@roger-reject you are talking about recruiting students from 2-tier universities. The context of the discussion here is about doing PhD in 2-tier university. In any case, a student from a 2-tier university could always excel. So one has to take into account the law of large numbers.

Huh? Only "top 30" are "good"? I agree that 50% is probably too high simply because there are a ton of junk universities, but "top 30" is an incredibly narrow window. Only people at those "top 30" universities might make that claim, and I think foolishly so. In most fields you will find many of the "top 10" researchers in that field are not in the "top 30" universities. Also I use scare quotes on everything because ranking universities like this is pretty subjective and often carries little meaning.

@BryanKrause A top researcher might come from any university or research centre. That does not make his or her university good/great. As I mentioned "good" is subjective. Researchers even from Stanford university end up as not-so-good engineers in the Bay area doing practically no research. Top 30 universities possess certain qualities which increase the probability of the students studying there to become exceptional. The quality of your peers is also extremely important. Being connected to students who will become top researchers in future is extremely significant.

@kosmos Your point about peer networking is extremely important and well taken. my point is only that you seem to be saying that research is the main/only goal of doing a PhD. As you said, many/most PhDs don't end up doing high-level academic research, so getting improved education can also be a valid goal for your degree. In this case, I believe an "honest" university (i.e. not a degree mill, for-profit, etc.), even if it's not top-tier in research, can accommodate that goal reasonably well.

@kosmos That still sounds to me like an...incredibly narrow viewpoint. But, like roger, I guess it's an agree-to-disagree situation.


text:
A new PI or the brilliant current PI
We, STEM students, until we get somewhat a permanent position in our career, we work in different labs, with different PIs and people throughout our student life, starting from bachelor to our post-doc; we like some, we hate some, and in rare occasions, we really like some.
Even though I'm just starting to my master's degree this year, I've worked with a couple of different PIs already, seen different research environments & groups, worked with many different Ph.D./Master students & technicians, dealt with much administrative staff, got around many unnecessary formalities.
Now, I'm currently working (as a short-term intern) with a brilliant PI, with brilliant Ph.D. students in an amazing institute with friendly & supportive administrative & technical staff.
Even though my current affiliation with this group & institute is temporary, it is quite possible (and probable) that I can do my Ph.D. here.
However, if I look into the past, it is clear that all those new experiences - working with different people, in different places - had a positive impact on me, and each case I was glad to move to a new research group, with a new project.
That is why I have the Marriage Problem: I'm quite happy with my current settings here, so if I want to do my Ph.D. here I'll know what I will be getting into, who I will be working with, what the research experience will be, etc.
However, if I choose (or want to) do my Ph.D. elsewhere, I don't know whether I will happy there, whether the PI will spare as much time as my current PIs, whether I will be able to work as efficiently as I'm working with my current PI, whether the actual research will be interesting as that of my current PI, whether I can get along with other students & staff, etc.
I'm sure that this is a common dilemma that many academics have faced/been facing during their career. So my question is the following:
What criteria are important to consider in such a situation? Would not-changing-PI have a big opportunity cost if you happened to be able to work with almost anyone you want? Would I be taking a lot of risks in the early stages of my career if I happen to pursue a research direction that I'm not familiar with? Can you share you experiences if you have any?

My brilliant Master's supervisor, who I really wanted to do a PhD with, advised me to go somewhere else. Like all of his advice, it was absolutely the right thing to do (I ended up in a much bigger department, with more money and collaboration opportunities, doing a project much better suited to my interests than I even realised at the time). In short, talk to your current supervisor; they know you and your situation best, and whether you'd benefit from going elsewhere.

Shop around and get offers from multiple places.  Visit if that's not prevented by the pandemic.

What are the reasons for the close votes?

The criteria I think are important here:

Growing your social capital. In academia, the size and diversity of your professional network is a huge determinant of your success (think co-authors on grant applications and papers, colleagues on editorial teams, and advisors for your PhD students as well as diversity of ideas, methods, and philosophies, and, yes, employment opportunities). It sounds like you've already built a great network where you are, so a good thing to do might be to go an build another one somewhere else, obviously without abandoning your current contacts and relationships.
Slightly contradicting my first point, what kind of professor do you see yourself in a couple of decades? Some people love interdisciplinary research projects, leadership positions in international networks and consortia, and variety and mobility in general. Others do their best work spending years or decades looking into one or two big questions, surrounded by good PhD students and loyal colleagues. I.e., it's also a personality question.
How would the move affect your life outside work? Will you have to sell your house, move to another part of the country you've never lived in (or to another country that speaks another language), and rebuild your life? Do you have care responsibilities for your parents or children? Can your finances handle it? All this is a huge thing that often gets overlooked in the pursuit of some imaginary professional success. Over the decades, I've seen junior colleagues move to the UK from the other side of the globe just to pack up and go somewhere else 2 years later, without much to show for it.

For the first question, to be honest, I don't see any "professor" material in myself; I see myself as a permanent research scientist in a research institute in a couple of decades. And for the second question, the move wouldn't affect my life outside academia, because I practically don't have any and/or minimal things, so technically I can pack my everything and even go Australia/China/Japan to do Ph.D., then fly to Mexico to do a post-doc.

@onurcanbektas: If you don't have any life outside Academia, you should definitely try to change things! I have seen some whose only life is Academia and who were burned out. Also, today nobody can afford to be sure of having a research career - too many (eg hiring) decisions in Academia are random and if Academia is everything for you, you will lose everything if you have bad luck. Please, for your health, try to mantain a life outside of Academia!


text:
Is it ethical to use data you overheard in a conversation?
I do research on particular elites of a particular society and rely heavily on interview data. In one fortuitous dinner, at the table behind me sat three people who are exactly the people I wanted to get access to.
Furthermore, they were discussing something that I am precisely investigating! I was attentive to their conversation (as they were, honestly, speaking very loudly) but by no means eavesdropping and their conversation - if viewed in the context of my work - can prove to be very valuable.
Can I use that data for my work? It does not seem ethical to me. But, if I do not use that data, I know I will be 'deliberately' weakening my research and not being true to what I do now know.
Thoughts? What would you do and what would you suggest I do?

The problem with using this information is that it is (IMO) not "citeable". What would you provide as a source? You can neither say "interview", nor "personal conversation", nor "participant observation". Is this data in any way sensitive? Could you ask the people you overheard for an (anonymized) interview? This would resolve the issue, if they were ready to repeat or confirm the information you overheard.

Exactly, that's the conundrum that I am facing. I cannot say that it is an interview because it is not. I like your suggestion of trying to contact them for an interview (and I am actually trying to find a way to contact them) but let's assume they ignore me. Should I just discard this information? It is always very difficult to 'unhear' what I already heard...

So conduct some further research to get that data, this avoids all the issues of no proof due to hearsay, people saying you did not have the right to use basically a private conversation etc etc

Your question reminds me of the situation journalists sometimes find themselves in, where they know something but don't have the sources to make it stick and be possible to report on. Maybe there's advice to be had from people in that field, although I think that you should be even more careful with sources than sometimes seems to be the case in the press.

You may have better luck over at https://psychology.stackexchange.com/ ,even if you are not doing psychology, as observational studies are fairly common and someone can probably pull the relevant sections from the APA code of conduct.

Can you confirm what you've heard from other sources? It's different to find out something, or to confirm what you've already found out.

Without understanding your research topic and methods, it is hard to say objectively if you can use the data. That said, the American Psychological Association (APA) classifies naturalistic observation as exempt from the informed consent process. This does not mean it does not require approval by an ethics board (i.e., an IRB). Naturalistic observation studies are valid in a wide range of fields including Medicine, Psychology, Zoology and Ethnography. That said, as with any research methods, it takes skills to conduct and interpret naturalistic observation studies properly and within the framework of their limitations. This seems like a nice starting point: http://peace.saumag.edu/faculty/kardas/Courses/RMPA/naturalisticobservation.html

I'd say this is not usable directly, though it can influence how you conduct future research.
See parallel construction for a similar problem in law enforcement. Certain evidence may not be admissible in court, but a law enforcement officer can use knowledge of the inadmissible evidence to find admissible evidence. (Note that I am not saying this is right or wrong of law enforcement to do, just that it happens.)
How this might work in research is that you observe a situation in your personal life, but obviously it would be scientifically and ethically questionable to use this evidence. You can avoid the problem entirely by conducting a proper study, using your previous observations to help design the study.

Thanks for this, I have not heard of parallel construction before this and is something that sounds interesting although I'm not sure how I can use that in my case.

I explained my understanding of how parallel construction works in practice a bit more. Let me know if this doesn't help you understand how you might be able to use the approach.

Not only is it unethical (as I think you already know), it is also bordering on being unscientific. You are a scientist, not a news reporter. Your research should of course not be unnecessarily weakened, but one thing strong research needs, that this research will not have, is reproducibility. And for that reason alone, you should find some new, credible source for that data.

Can interviews ever be reproduced? I thought that social sciences usually cannot achieve the level of reproducibility expected in natural sciences.

Indeed, interviews are interpretivist in nature and reproducibility is not an issue that concerns social science with regards to interview data. I am more concerned about the ethical dimensions.

Just because they posted on SE, does not make them a scientist. I have limited knowledge about how conservations can be used in fields like International Relations, Sociology, and Anthropology but imposing the reproducible science framework on them is likely inappropriate.

Reproducibility of course does not concern the data itself (it never does), but the conclusions drawn from the data.

Your institution (and/or any journal you want to publish your research in) probably has strict rules about how to use "human subjects" in research.  This applies to interviewing them.  You need to get advance approval, and specify how you will do the interviews.  So... you cannot use what you overheard.  Maybe you can use that information to devise the protocol for your eventual interviews, though.

The described scenario did not include an interview so I am not sure your answer applies.


text:
Research partner switching authorship before publishing to Arxiv?
We’re currently publishing a preview of a paper we’ve just gotten accepted to a conference and of the five of us, one member started an Arxiv submission application first. This means that the rest of us were not able to submit an application in lieu of his, even though he did not have the final version of the paper. In submitting the work to Arxiv, he actually switched the originally alphabetical authorship so that his name went first.
How can you force someone to remove their submission? We keep texting him, but he is ignoring us, and if this continues, this falsely authored version will be what is published and out there, but different from the legitimate version of the paper.

Make sure this is actually malicious.  If so Contact arXiv.
For co-authored papers every author should be an owner of the paper. Usually, the person who submitted the paper gives the other authors the password. It sounds like that will be problematic in this case, but you can claim ownership of your paper without the password through the arXiv system.  (This will require manual intervention from someone at arXiv.)
On the contact form there you should probably explain exactly the situation.  They are going to be the only ones who can properly address and sort through what is going on.
Needless to say, you should make absolutely sure that this rogue coauthor is intending to do this and it is not some sort of mistake.  It seems like extremely odd behavior since the paper is already submitted with the correct authorship, so it's quite easy to prove he has changed the order.  Also, once you bring this to the arXiv's attention it could have consequences for this coauthor, such as getting banned from submitting papers, etc, so make sure the act really is malicious before doing this.

+1 for "claim ownership", though I think it can be done with less drama.  The Claim Ownership form just asks you to list the paper(s) in question, there's not even any space for comments or explanation.  So the OP (or another coauthor with an established arXiv account) can simply try to claim the paper, without involving the arXiv moderators in the gory details.  If successful, OP gets the paper password, which can then be used to upload a corrected manuscript and/or edit the metadata, and all is well unless the rogue coauthor tries to object.

In that case, or if the moderators don't grant ownership to the OP, then OP can explain the situation to them.  But this has the advantage that if it is simply a mistake on the part of the rogue author, it corrects it without accusing them of anything.  Likewise, even if it was intentional, it lets the rogue author save face by saying it was a mistake and thanking OP for fixing it.

I see two possible ways:

Wait until the “real” paper is published and contact the ArXiv.
Try to obtain the paper password. Every author gets such a password after a successfull ArXiv submission to share with their coauthors. One function is that coauthors can officially register themselves as authors; the other one is that authors can update the paper, including the order of authors.

Two notes:

The situation you describe is ripe with escalation. I suggest by all means to carify the situation before acting, as the latter has a high potential to exacerbate matters.
I am not aware of any case where ArXiv author order matters in lieu of the order on the actual paper. The main incentive I would have to fix such things is to avoid confusion, as papers are often identified by their author order.


text:
Should I notarise my transcript or attest it?
US universities ask for an official transcript. Can I send a notarised copy of my transcript? If yes, is it better to attest it by my university officials or notarise it?

When a US university asks for official transcripts, they are asking for transcripts to be sent directly from the institution at which the coursework was completed or the degree earned.
If your previous institution cannot send transcripts directly, find out from the US university what their specific requirements are. For example, see this FAQ from the University of Mississippi, which also describes how to get officially certified transcripts in case your institution cannot directly issue official transcripts.

Overseas universities may not have a mechanism for issuing transcripts directly to US universities.

@aeismail good point, see update.


text:
If I proposed my PhD this year (but have not defended) can I say that I graduated this year?
I am in a PhD program, and all I need to do is defend.  There is still a little more work I need to do before this, but my degree is essentially finished. I have totally completed all other requirements (classes, qualifying exams, proposals, publications, etc).
In my field (engineering)  it is common to immediately begin applying for jobs after the proposal.  So, after many interviews, I was offered a job.  They want me to start ASAP.  I am thinking this will push my PhD defense back 1 to 1.5 years.
Anyways, on my resume, linkedin, etc I would rather say me PhD was 2009 - 2015 (6 years) than 2009 - 2016/2017.  (7-8 years).  Would it be acceptable to state that this year (2015) is my graduation year?  I feel I'm selling myself short is I state 2016 or 2017 as my graduation year.

No, you can't state that 2015 is your graduation year. The year you graduate has a well-defined meaning -- it's the year the university confers your degree to you. Period. Writing that 2015 is your graduation year would be the same, ethically, as writing that 2013 is your graduation year just to make your resume look more impressive.
Your resume will, correctly, indicate that you're working at the same time as completing your degree, which should be impressive enough for anyone doing bookkeeping on your dates.

You haven't graduated, or even fulfilled all the graduation requirements: it's unlikely but possible that you could fail the defense, and it sounds like you haven't even quite completed everything you need to do before the defense.  Otherwise why would it take 1 to 1.5 years to reach that point, even while working full time?
You can give an honest description of your current progress towards finishing the degree (for example, that you have completed all requirements except the formal defense, if that is the case), but you should not exaggerate or suggest you have already graduated.

It's your CV, and you can write what you want on it.  However, if you are asking whether it is any way honest or acceptable to others to list a graduation date which is not the accurate one because you think it will make you look better: of course not.  That would be a form of academic dishonesty, and if you give inaccurate information to a future employer, it could itself be grounds for your dismissal.
There is some doubletalk in your question itself.  No PhD degree is "essentially finished" before you finish and defend the thesis: that is the single most important (and most challenging) part.  Moreover the idea that you are "essentially finished" is undermined by your estimate that your graduation date could be put off for a year or more.  If you are really finished, then you can arrange to come back to defend your thesis...on a weekend or during your vacation time if need be.
A much more serious, responsible thing to do would be to discuss this with your employer.  If it is common to look for people who say they are in their final year of their PhD and ask them to start working before they defend and graduate, then they must have some policies and opinions about how to do this.  Moreover, since they are hunting among "almost PhDs" it seems very likely that they want you to get a PhD, which means they should act in a way that will allow you to finish the degree.  If that is not the case, then having the PhD is not very important to them, and if it is important to you then maybe you should reconsider whether this is a good fit.
One final piece of advice: you are worried that by taking the job your graduation date will be pushed back unacceptably.  In my opinion this is not a serious worry: people receive a PhD 1-2 years later in many circumstances.  Even for an academic career taking a little longer to do a PhD is usually not a real issue.  For an industrial career I think it would matter even less.  Your real worry should be: are you sure you are going to finish your PhD at all?  Going from "essentially finished" to "1 to 1.5 more years" makes me concerned on your behalf.  Please make an explicit plan which leads to you getting your PhD in year X (whatever X) is before you accept the job...or accept that you may well be abandoning your PhD by taking the job.


text:
For conferences with an abstract deadline shortly before full paper deadline, does the "no simultaneous submission" rule include abstract submission?
It's generally forbidden to submit the same paper at two different venues at the same time. In addition, many computer science conferences have two different submission deadlines: a deadline for the submission of abstracts, followed by another deadline (1-2 weeks later) for the submission of full papers. A complete submission consists of an abstract and the accompanying paper.
Let's say we have a situation that involves two conferences, A and B:

Conference A had its abstract and paper submission deadlines some time in
October. A's website says that acceptance notifications will be sent
to the authors on December 7.
Conference B has its abstract submission deadline on
December 1 and its paper submission deadline on December 8.

Is it OK to submit a paper to A and an abstract to B simultaneously, cancelling the submission to B in case the paper is accepted at A?
(It surely seems advisable to ask the conference chair of B, but since I know the chair of B personally, I don't feel comfortable asking, since this might come off as a request for favouritism.)

Ask the PC chairs.

Just to add that this is field dependent. Apparently in CS, conferences papers are more like regular papers. In biological sciences it's generally ok to submit similar abstracts in different conferences, as most of the times there is no "full paper" format to be provided later.

@Leon Meier This sounds more like a practical issue, rather than a moral one. In my particular case, the odds of that happening are very low, since the PCs do not overlap. (The paper is about applying a B-type-of-thing to an A-type-of-problem.)

Indeed, that's why I said "very low" rather than "zero".

That's the first time I ever hear of an obligation to have a straight answer to that question. I think it's perfectly possible to care about the target venue, but to not have a straight answer to that question: the same paper can be equally interesting for different audiences and communities.

Thanks for clarifying. I agree that this is valid argument against submitting the abstract to B, even if I'm not sure if it's a moral one, as it seems to be about not hurting people's feelings - strategically a good idea, but not necessarily morally.

@LeonMeier: "a common reviewer who gets the paper in both A and B" - to my knowledge, abstract deadlines shortly before the actual submission deadline are generally used for the organizers to get an idea of what topical expertise must be available among the reviewers. Reviewers are not actually learning about the papers at that point. My greater concern would be that, after a rejection from A, the authors have only one day until the submission to B, which will only allow for very minor changes (maybe legitimate, but maybe looked down upon by some).

@Leon Meier In my case, even if the paper had exactly the same set of reviewers, a rejection at A would not automatically imply a rejection at B, since A is a more selective conference than B.

@Leon Meier Sure, but if the general assessment is "good paper, but not good enough for A" (which is my worry), then this would imply a bias in favor of acceptance at B.

@Leon Meier Yes, if the reviews from A went into this direction, I would perhaps cancel the submission to B anyways and put more work into the paper before resubmitting. But I assume the paper is good.

To answer this question, let's recall why many journals and conferences do not allow multiple submissions. So,

Is it OK to submit a paper to A and an abstract to B simultaneously, cancelling the submission to B in case the paper is accepted at A?

Multiple submissions are beneficial for authors, since they generally increase the chances for a paper/talk to be accepted and/or reduce the time until acceptance.
However, this strategy is not beneficial for journals/conferences, since each venue will spend time and resources on processing the submission (register and peer-review it), and only one journal/conference will eventually publish it. The efforts spent by reviewers of another journal/conference will be wasted.
This strategy is also damaging for the community of researchers. Firstly, peer-reviewers and editors are also academics, and they do not have much time to spare, so it is best not to waste it with pointless review process. Secondly, and more importantly, readers generally benefit from well-written and well-edited papers, and this relies on careful and time-demanding peer-review process. Faster acceptance may indicate better organised peer-review process, but it can also mean that the process is superficial (like it is in predator journals and such). By preferring a faster route, one can waste time of highly professional reviewers and also rob himself of a chance to get their valuable advice and improve their paper/talk accordingly.

So the answer is no - it is not OK.

This answer accurately describes the drawbacks of simultaneous submission in general, but I'm not sure if it addresses the specific situation here. Unlike regular submissions, abstracts submitted to conference B will not be subject to a standalone peer-review process - rather, the abstract is an "entry ticket" for submitting a full paper which will be subject to peer review. So I'm not sure if the argument of wasted effort still holds.

@lighthousekeeper Conference B sets up two deadlines. It is only natural to assume that they are going to do something in between (if not - what's the point of separating them?) It may not be peer review, but it should be some processing of abstracts.

Usually, the time between the deadlines is used to assign reviewers to papers. I think the added human effort is close to zero, since the submissions are processed automatically by a conference system, and the reviewers will at this stage pick their preferred abstracts based on interesting keywords, rather than read all abstracts.

@lighthousekeeper Conference B asks authors to submit abstracts, not just keywords, for peer review. It is natural to assume that reviewers are encouraged to read abstracts, not just keywords. It may work differently in practice sometimes, but we shouldn't rely on this.

B will have a least 50 abstracts, based on its earlier acceptance rates and paper numbers. In this case, I think it would be unrealistic to assume all reviewers to read all abstracts. But I see that some reviewers might in fact do so, so that's a small (still, from the purist point of view, prohibitive) bit of evidence speaking against submission of the abstract.

@lighthousekeeper I don't see where are you going with it. Maybe not all reviewers read all abstracts, but some reviewers still have to read your abstract. If you only use conference B as your plan B, you're going to waste their time.

@DmitrySavostyanov My point is: I agree that some time waste is involved, but I'm not sure if the amount of time waste is so large that anyone will care. From my (limited) experience as PC member, the time spent on each individual abstract is minimal, and it seems normal that not all submitted abstracts are followed by a paper.

@DmitrySavostyanov: "Conference B asks authors to submit abstracts, not just keywords, for peer review" - if we go by the OP's words (and this matches my experience), B does not ask authors to submit abstracts for peer review. B asks authors to submit abstracts. "It is natural to assume that reviewers are encouraged to read abstracts, not just keywords." - it is not clear that reviewers are involved at this stage at all. In fact, it would be somewhat unlikely that possible reviewers could be invited, sent material to review, and made to answer within a mere one or two weeks. Instead, ...

... chances are titles (and keywords, which are often requested along with the abstracts) are used by a program chair to sort the expected submissions into one out of various thematical buckets for the upcoming peer review, and if title and keywords are not sufficient, they will have a superficial glance at the abstract to perform the categorization.

@O. R. Mapper In my area, authors self-assign their submissions to given thematical buckets, so there is no extra effort for the organizers. On the other hand, at least in the cases where I was involved, the PC members were allowed to read the submitted abstracts before the full paper deadline.

There are particular conferences where the "no simultaneous submission" rule is refined so that it explicitely does not apply to abstracts. For instance, the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS) have the following policy:

Submitted papers must be in English presenting original research. They must be unpublished and not submitted for publication elsewhere (this does not apply to abstracts).

Unfortunately, for the conference B that motivated this question, this is not the case.

I think that it would be (maybe) OK if conference A included such a clause, not B. I say "maybe" because depending on how it is phrased, it could mean either "it doesn't matter if you submitted this work in a venue where you only submit an abstract (e.g. a workshop or a poster session)" (aka "abstracts are not publications"), or "it doesn't matter if you never submitted more than an abstract about that work (even if the abstract will later become a full publication)".


text:
Pros and cons of not having PhD advisor's letter of recommendation after postdoc?
I have finished my PhD and am currently a postdoc. Since receiving my PhD, I have not worked with my PhD advisor. I am planning to apply for jobs for after I finish my postdoc — mostly tenured-track positions.
I am considering not asking my PhD advisor for a letter of recommendation. I feel this might be appropriate because I plan to ask my postdoc advisor to write a letter, because my PhD advisor may not have kept up with my current research, because my coauthors know my work better, and for other reasons.
What are the pros and cons of not having my PhD advisor as a letter writer?

Why would you not want your PhD advisor to write a letter?

There are many reasons: he may not be interested on the topics of my current research, I have several coauthors who know my work better,...

Also he will retire shortly, before my applications.

None of those reasons seem compelling enough to not get a recommendation letter from your supervisor. It would raise questions if he doesn't write you a letter, and such questions are best to avoid.

Check out this answer to a similar question.

@eykanal: This really isn't the same question, actually; asking if a letter has to be from a professor is not the same thing as an advisor.

@Dave Clark: Can you expand your answer with more details? Thanks.

@Benjamin Mako Hill: Thank you for revising my question, which made my points clearer.

@aperson: Retiring shouldn't be a problem. Retired  and emeritus professors write plenty of recommendations! IRT the revisions of your question, it's my pleasure.

You should ask your supervisor for a letter.
Not having your supervisor write a letter is going to raise red flags. People are going to ask themselves, why isn't this candidate's thesis supervisor writing a letter? If you don't have a letter, you need to answer that question. Unless there's a very good reason to not have that letter, I think that it's better to avoid the question altogether. The reasons you've given so far do not seem good enough to me.
You suggested that (1) there may be more appropriate letter writers and that (2) your advisor might not be up-to-date on your current research.
I think these are not good enough reasons to not ask your thesis supervisor to write a letter and I think you can easily address these concerns:

You should also ask your postdoc supervisor to write you a letter. Not doing so will also raise red flags for similar reasons. If there are other great letter writers, ask them as well. For the tenure-track jobs I applied to, each expected three or more letters. There's room for everybody.
You can prioritize the more important or relevant letters. In your cover letter, it is normal to list the names of people writing you letters and it is normal to list those names in the order that you want them to be viewed. You can also specify in the letter which letters reflect more recent relationships, closer collaborations, or relationships closer to the core of your current research efforts.

It is not a critical problem if your advisor is not up to date on your current work. Presumably, their letter will talk the work that they know about and about your qualities as a researcher, colleague, and person that will not change. Also, you can point your advisor to or summarize the work you've done more recently.
I provided a copy of a draft cover letter, research statement, and teaching statement to each of my letter writers so that they could see how I was pitching and framing my work. I didn't do this because we were out of touch, but it seems like something similar would help address your concern.

The only time that you shouldn't ask for a letter of recommendation from your PhD advisor is when you are not allowed to ask for one. This is not often the case, but it does arise in a few instances. The best-known one I can think of is that in Germany a Doktorvater (supervisor) is not allowed to write a letter of recommendation in support of an applicant whose PhD he supervised.
Other than that, you should have your PhD advisor write a letter; it is expected by just about everyone that the supervisor will write a letter, and it will definitely raise questions for you if you do not submit such a letter. If there is a particularly compelling reason, then, you should have that well in hand at the time when you are writing your applications. Otherwise, you'll have a lot more explaining to do, and probably a lot of potential postdoc supervisors may not even bother giving your application a second look.

Hello, Thanks for the answer. However, it seems that you misunderstood my question. I am a postdoc already, and I am asking that after I finish my postdoc, what are the pros and cons not having my PhD advisor writing letters.

I'd think you'd still be expected to have a letter from your PhD advisor, unless you could come up with four other letters from your time as a postdoc. Also, you could keep your advisor current on your work by forwarding them copies of your recent papers!

unless you could come up with four other letters — Any successful postdoc should be able to get four other letters, but the PhD advisor should write a letter anyway.

@JeffE: Four other better letters?

@aeismail: Sure, why not?  All else being equal, a letter from someone without a vested personal interest in your success is better.  That's why advisors are never (well, hardly ever, at least in the US) asked for tenure letters.

I wanted to reemphasize something that Benjamin said in passing.  If they're asking for n letters, they mean at least n letters.  So asking your advisor for a letter doesn't mean that you'd need to not ask the other people.  Ask your advisor for a letter and ask the other people who know your current work better for letters.

Are you sure that we can send more letters than asked without making the recruiters uncomfortable?

I'm not sure what you mean by "recruiters" which makes me think you may be applying to very different jobs than what I'm familiar with.  For math tenure track jobs I'm quite confident that even though ads only ask for 3 or 4 letters, candidates sending 5 or 6 is typical.  See this comment thread for more discussion on this point: http://sbseminar.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/some-advice-on-job-hunting/#comments


text:
Can my work on manufacturing, designing & fabrication of an electric solar vehicle be considered as an original research & can it be published
My classmates and I are pursuing B.Tech in Mechanical engineering and we have formed a team to manufacture, design, fabricate, and develop an electric solar vehicle which would operate under safe speed. We are designing it in a way to reduce weight and make it much lighter. We are also trying to minimise the cost of production &  making sure that it works both at day and night.
We have designed it using Solidworks and have taken into account all types of loads and stresses that will be generated. Apart from these goals, we are also working upon various other parameters which include efficiency and other considerations. We have fabricated the solar cells on our own.
We expect to complete our work in a couple of months. I want to know if our work can be claimed as an original research and if we can publish it. If so, how many people can be authors on the research paper ?

The simple answers to your questions are that, yes, you can claim your work to be original research and you can have as many authors as you like.  That said, the fact you think your work is original and of publication quality does not guarantee that any journal will agree.  Your best bet is to discuss the specifics of your project with your advisor (I assume you have one?) and follow his/her advice.


text:
How valuable is a conference paper in Avionics and Aerospace Engineering?
I am a student doing my undergrad in Electronics and Communication engineering and wish to pursue a career in Avionics. My paper was selected for presentation at 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Science and Technology Forum and Exposition 2016 (SciTech 2016). I have another paper which was selected for presentation at IEEE Aerospace Conference 2016. According to my understanding, these are reputed conferences. I was wondering how valuable these papers are for my admission at a grad school and my professional career. I have to spend a lot of money to attend these conferences. Is it worth it?

I recommend to modify your title to say something like "... conference paper in ?" (where your field is aerospace engineering or something like that?). The value of conference publications varies significantly between fields, and the question seems a lot more generic (and thereby less answerable) with its current title than what you probably want it to be.

In the closely related fields of electrical and optical engineering, this would make you a good candidate for grad school, even for a second tier conference, especially if the paper(s) were good.

@O.R.Mapper - Acknowledged!

@daaxix - How good are SciTech and IEEE Aeroconf?

I'm not in aerospace, but a quick glance at the sponsors/presenters at both of these conferences left a very good impression.  SciTech had speakers from some major industrial players (Lockheed, Boeing), big research universities (Harvard, UT Austin), and key government positions (DARPA, GAO).  The IEEE Aerospace Conference had JPL and NASA engineers everywhere, not to mention Ivy League researchers and more.  Again - I'd defer to those who are actually in the field, but these both look like highly reputable (not sure about selective) conferences.

There is 2 parts to this question:
(1) How valuable are conference papers to grad school admission?
The answer to that is field-dependent. In some fields, the value of conferences as means of publishing scientific content is perceived small. In others, primarily Computer Science, conferences are of major importance, hence papers in good conferences are perceived as very valuable for admission.
However, arguably, even in fields were conference papers count less, having published in and attending good conferences may make you stand out of the crowd in grad school admissions. Primarily, in these fields (e.g., physics), undergrads that have good journal papers to their name are very rare, so having been to a conference as an undergrad is already pretty good, even if it does not count for all that much in the grand scheme of things in the research field.
(2) Is it worth it given that conferences are very expensive?
I am of course generalising here, but as a rule of thumb, you should not have to pay for your own conference travels, as long as you have an accepted paper as an enrolled student. Most universities have stipends and travel grants that you can apply for, you can act as a student volunteer, or, most importantly, your university department covers your travel expenses.
Assuming that it is indeed not feasible for you to have your costs covered, you will need to take the decision yourself. Whether it's "worth it" depends not only on the value of a conference to the admission process, but also on how much >1000 USD are to you, personally. Clearly, the story is different if you are a foreign student living of a small stipend than if you come from an upper middle-class family in the US.

Thank you for the answer! The field is Avionics and Aerospace engineering! How important are conference papers? And how good are AIAA SciTech and IEEE Aeroconf?

@SriHarshaPavuluri  unless someone is from those fields, they can't answer that. The best person to answer that might be your supervisor. A quick litmus test for whether a conference is good or useful is to look at the lists of attendees and invited speakers. If a number of well-respected academics are attending, it's probably a good conference. If it's full of no-names, then maybe not...

In most cases, universities do admire students who publish in important conferences, as students need to put their institute down. It actually helps the universities in their research rankings.
So, I would suggest contact the secretary of your department, and explain the situation. Most likely, they have some money laying around to fund you to go to these conferences.

How good are AIAA SciTech and IEEE Aeroconf?

@SriHarshaPavuluri It depends on many factors, such as number of influential contributes in the domain of research, how many citations their published papers get over the years and so on. All these factors should be take into considerations by you (the author).


text:
Should I provide a letter of recommendation/reference to every asking student?
It's the time of year we lecturers get asked for references from graduating taught postgraduates who seek to move on to do a PhD. While I'm generally happy to act as a referee, I'm unsure whether there is a best / standard practice here. I'm naturally more inclined to agree to providing a reference when a) I remember the student, and b) the student's work had merit.
Is this wrong? Should I provide a reference even when I don't remember the student or their work wasn't particularly good?

@BenCrowell Did students who you caught cheating ask you for reference letters? :O

You don't have to provide any student with a recommendation. In fact, it can actually be a detriment to the student to have a tepid recommendation. If you find yourself unable to write anything beyond what can be confirmed by a transcript (e.g., that the student did take your class or that the student got an A in the course), then that is usually a sign that you're not someone who should be writing a recommendation letter.
My personal method is if I know the student very well and s/he did good work, I write the letter. If I cannot recall who the student is, I ask for a one-on-one meeting to get a sense of why s/he is asking me for a letter. If there is a compelling reason that I (instead of someone else) should write the letter, then I usually agree with the caveat that it may not be a very strong letter because I'm not as familiar with their work. If there is no reason that I should write the letter over someone else, then I usually decline.

I don't know about the USA, but in Italy in the undergraduate and also graduate level is not very common to get to know a professor. There is no time to interact, ever! You can ask some questions at the end of the lecture but they won't remember you. the only time to interact would be when writing a master thesis, but for that time you probably already sent the applications!

Should I provide a reference even when I don't remember the student or their work wasn't particularly good?

(tl;dr: no)
Why would you? The entire purpose of references is that you are staking your name and reputation on your declaration that you know a particular student and think their work makes them worthy of recommendation.
If their work was rubbish or, worse, you don't even have a clue who the student is, how can you possibly be in a position to write them a reference?!

You should be honest up front about how strong a recommendation you can write.
While of course there's nothing stopping you from refusing to write it at all, that seems to me like a somewhat unhelpful thing to do. Even if you have nothing good to say about the student, why wouldn't you give your opinion of them when asked? You don't have to, but why not? So, the question you're asking shouldn't really come up.
In practice, students probably realize that a bad recommendation won't do them much good, so if you're at a point where you hesitate to write it because of how bad your relationship was, they probably wouldn't want the recommendation from you anyway. If you tell them ahead of time, "I can write it but I won't be able to write a positive one because I don't feel comfortable vouching for you to that extent", the student will put two and two together and try to look for another recommender who will write a better letter. Perhaps they had a "backup option" in mind: Someone who hasn't worked with them as much, but might have a more favorable opinion.
Often a student will have a list of possible people to ask for a recommendation, and it is helpful to know if someone at the top of the list won't write a good one, because they can just move on to the next person. Probably the student would prefer that you told them you won't write a strong recommendation instead of agreeing out of a feeling of obligation and then writing a weak letter.
I think some people also deliberately agree, and then write a negative letter (whether through outright criticism or just damning praise) to sabotage the student's career. I personally find this dishonest and mean, but the recommendation is supposed to be a confidential appraisal of the student, and I can see how some feel it is justified (for instance, perhaps you wish to stop a very careless student from becoming a heart surgeon because it will put lives in danger). So, I suppose it's your decision whether you think the student is just not good enough to help, or so bad that you should actively impede them.


text:
Ask clarification to reviewer of paper
I got a review that I cannot understand. It has a number of English grammatical and spelling errors. Also, technically it does not make any sense to me. How should I proceed? Can I somehow ask for clarification?

Could you please elaborate more as to what is your question?

Are the English language errors so severe that they are the reason the review doesn't make sense to you? Or are these just somewhat annoying and your lack of understanding is based on the content of the review?

@quarague I think he is asking clarification about stuff that have nothing to do with the article, I am thinking to answer "Thanks for raising this point, but this issue does not apply to our case", or something like that

If English is not your own first language, then you might first want to ask someone you know with "native" English skills to help interpret the review.
Then ask the editor for clarification of the review, but be detailed about what parts of it you don't understand. Most editors will be willing to work with you, but I can't guarantee that all will. But if you don't ask you won't learn anything.
And, it may take some time to resolve this. If the editor has doubts about the reviewer or the review they may ask for another, which adds to the time.


text:
non-responsive academic program advisor/manager
My graduate program advisor/manager (one, who manages logistics of students; not for thesis) and I had arguments about how he proceeded the work (e.g. dropping my course without notice by self-speculation that my workloads are not achievable). Thus, I had arguments with my graduate program advisor/manager and resolved it during a face-to-face meeting.
Afterwards, I had a problem with working with him. He does not provide right information to my inquiry on a visa and has been ignoring my email inquires on a visa for over 3 months.
Following the advice from @Buffy, I involved my advisor to report the department and addressed this issue.

Is this someone who manages the teaching assignments only or do they also have some overview of your research? Does "dropped your course" mean a course you were supposed to teach? And how are they also responsible for visa issues?

Your edit makes it difficult to understand the problem and also difficult to interpret my answer.

Does this edit look okay with you?

Yes, thanks. It makes sense again. I hope it worked out in the end.

This seems to be an administrator level problem. Escalate it through the administration as necessary. And get your advisor to argue on your behalf. It seems odd that someone would disapprove a course that the advisor approves.
But there is probably a better advocate for the visa problem. If they aren't doing their job, escalation is warranted, and perhaps necessary.


text:
Job Advice for Pursuing a Tenure-Track Position in the U.S. (Postdoc in the U.S., Teaching-track/lecturer in the U.S., Tenure-track abroad)
Among a tenure-track job in Asia, a teaching track in the U.S., and a postdoc in the U.S., I wonder which options would be better to pursue a tenure-track job in the U.S. eventually?

It matters what tenure track job in Asia.  NUS is not equivalent to a third rate university in China.  It also matters what field, and in particular what kind of university support you need for your research.

Yes, “Asia” is a big place, and US academia is also a big place. I think we need quite a lot more information to have a hope of saying anything useful.

In many fields and countries, it's rare to get a tenure-track position right after a PhD.  Generally speaking, if you want to go into tenure-track academia, a strong post-doc or two (or three depending on the field), with good publications is an asset, though it is also good to build up a teaching dossier.  I suspect the post-doc would allow you to be a more productive researcher than a starting faculty in the short term, though tenure-track in China probably has other advantages.


text:
conference invoice
I reached out to conference for invoice of conference registration.
However, I was told that they only issue a receipt. There is not way to issue an invoice of my registration. I was little confused about the response of an international conference. I wonder if this is common to accept as it is or I can further discuss conference organizer about it.

Could you elaborate on why you think you need an invoice?

@mmeent: See the first comment from the OP below the accepted answer: "...because my administer rejected my reimbursement request due to lack of invoice."

@Heinzi Yes, but comments are not the place to clarify a question.

@mmeent: I agree. I just wanted to give you the information you were looking for. If your comment was not meant as a request for information, but rather as a suggestion for the OP to improve their question, I apologize for misunderstanding it as the former.


text:
My advisor shared my unpublished/ongoing work with another student without notice
My work has been rejected from a conference. I am working on it to get accepted. As the conference is annually occurred, I think at least 6 or more months will be required to make another submission.
However, I just noticed that my advisor shared my work with another student without notice. The other PhD student asked me how to apply my method into his project, which I was pondering for one of my next action items.
I am upset about my advisor, because he barely provided feedback on how to improve the outcomes. He does not copy his discussion with another student.
I felt like he just tried to share my ideas to have more publication.
I understood that students should discuss and collaborate each other to improve research. According to another student's email, he does not seem to have any intention for collaboration. He just mentioned that he read my draft of paper and considered applicable to his research, so he just wants to know the implementation details.
I understand the value of collaboration. However, I am not sure if another student and I are supposed to work together, since my advisor did not inform anything about discussion with this student. The other student does not seem to have any intention of collaboration.
Should I just talk to my advisor not to share my undergoing work without any notice and inquire if I am supposed to collaborate or not?

Can you explain a little more which parts of this interaction with your advisor bothered you, or what worries you about this in the future?

If your paper got rejected from a conference, the usual thing to do is submitting it to another conference right away, not waiting one year and submitting it to the next edition of the same conference.

There are two things that you need to address here: your advisor sharing your work with the other student, and the other student's request.
Regarding your advisor sharing your work, you should talk to your advisor about this but do NOT express anger. S/he was probably doing what they thought was best and did not realize it would upset you, and it is VERY important to keep a good relationship with your advisor, so I wouldn't start a fight over this. Just a simple "I appreciate this opportunity to help them with my methods, but I would appreciate it if in the future you would check with me first before showing my drafts to someone." or something similar. Keep it low-key, do not go in angry or expecting an apology, just express your preference for how situations like this should be handled in the future.
Regarding the second situation with the other student -- ask them if they'd like you as a collaborator on their paper! It's never too early to start working collaboratively!

Is it okay if I tell my advisor about my anger? because I felt I do not have a  good relationship with my advisor right now. Last week, when I shared my recent updates, he made a comment without understanding my work properly. Thus, I tried to explain my work again and address his point is not applicable. Then, he just yelled at me to do what he mentioned and finished meeting..

Is he the irascible type?  Was this out of character for him?  If it weren't for this incident, I would have said that you should calmly tell him you felt uncomfortable when the other student spoke to you about your work.

Yes, he is. I am not sure if I am supposed to arrange a meeting with him. Do you think an email communication should be okay?

I don't think you need to set up a meeting just for this. Maybe bring it up next time you happen to be talking to him anyway?

Seems that you are worried about the method authorship, right?
If so, perhaps you should consider to publish a preprint of the work, the rejected version for instance. Many conferences and journals accept papers with prior preprint on servers like Arxiv.org. But remember to ask the permission from your co-authors to publish the preprint.
About a colleague interested in using your method, I would say that this is great. I would even ask him to collaborate on his project. Your method is not even published in traditional venues, but it's already impacting the community.

I think this really needs to address the advisor interaction more. In particular, you should not put a preprint of the work out there without your advisor's permission!

Sure! Mainly because the advisor should be one of the authors. Edited.

you should not put a preprint of the work out there without your advisor's permission -- Unless it's only your work, in which case your advisor is not a coauthor and you don't need their permission.

Thank you for suggestion. I will also check the possibility of this with advisor if necessary.


text:
Professor keeps students tests. No taking notes home when reviewing them.
A friend of mine has a professor that does not allow the students to take home their graded test. The process the teacher has is like this:
Students come to class and the professor has everyone put everything away except a pencil. The tests are handed back and the students are allowed to see what they got wrong, and make notes on the test itself and ask questions. At the end of class, all tests are given back to the professor, and the students are not allowed to keep any notes made. Students may go to office hours to "visit" their test again if they would like.
The online quizzes are also peculiar, as they only show if a student got a question right or wrong, leaving out both the correct answer and the answer the student gave.
The reason the professor is so secretive about the tests is she allegedly reuses the tests. As such, she doesn't want students to be able to get last semester's test and be able to cheat from it. The professor thus far has been rather terse/short with students when they ask about how she runs the class. As such, only a couple students have asked her about these things.
My questions are:
Given the circumstances, is there any point in trying to ask the teacher to do things differently so that students can better learn from their mistakes?
Would talking to the department head be beneficial or would that be pointless and possibly rude?

Q1 - I doubt it, from your description.  Q2 - As long as you are not rude in the way you present your question, I see no harm in broaching this.

Talking to anyone other than the professor them self comes off to me as pointless because there are typically no similarities between how each professor handles their course material.
A common reason in some of my courses was this: some questions come from a publisher's test bank, and the university has agreed that materials containing the questions won't be distributed. It doesn't make sense to me at all, and end up a way to continually reap money as banks change, ultimately never helping the students.
What I would do is schedule regular office visits if it's within her time to do so to go over the course material you're struggling with. My suspicion is she's rather set in her way. Yoou definitely don't want to go over her head as this would earn some demerits!

there's probably a fair reason — Could you give an example of a fair reason?  None of your reasons qualify.

Contractual obligations don't qualify?

No.  Allowing yourself to be forced into unfair conduct does not make the conduct fair.

@JeffE You're right, I've edited my question. None of those policies ever helped anyone out (and to be honest a recycled test bank never held up either).


text:
When should I introduce a reference?
I am currently writing my research proposal and I have a piece where I quote a book. In summary I am saying the following:

Mr. X says that there is a very high probability that squares have four sides. This can be concisely summarised as "a polygon with four sides". ...

Note that at the end I am quoting him directly.
When do I put a citation to Mr. X’s book?

Immediately after the first sentence.
At the end, when I stop referring to him in the paragraph, i.e., after the second sentence or later.
Both?

Disclaimer: This is my opinion
I can think of a couple ways:
First, edit the first sentence so that it does not require a reference:

It has been postulated that squares are very probable to have four
  sides. For instance, Mr. X concisely summarised that ‘a polygon with
  four sides’... (Ref)

Second, chain the sentences together, eliminating the period:

Mr. X, a main proponent who suggests that there is a very high
  probability that squares have four sides, concisely summarised that ‘a
  polygon with four sides’... (Ref)

Or

Mr. X says that there is a very high probability that squares have
  four sides: he summarised that ‘a polygon with four sides’... (Ref)

Third, keep the current structure.
I think it's acceptable to cite only once if you can keep the subjects consistent:

Mr. X says that there is a very high probability that squares have
  four sides. He concisely summarised that ‘a polygon with four sides’...
  (Ref)

The fact that the first subject is "Mr. X" and then the second subject became "This (idea)" causes the disjoint feeling. Unifying the subjects will leave no room for misinterpretation.


text:
PhD course grade impact on postdoc and fellowship applications?
This past spring was the second semester of my PhD program. A professor of a core course refused to grade my final assignment because it was late after deadline had been extended. The professor had read and provided feedback on various drafts of the manuscript throughout the semester.
However, I only missed the deadline because of an emergency. A couple of days before the deadline I had to drop everything I was doing to tend to urgent institutional review board (IRB) issues. On the day the manuscript was due, my  old thesis advisor emailed me demanding to withdraw a presentation from a national conference immediately until IRB exemption was granted. This was more urgent than submitting the paper because there were serious legal implications attached.
Thank goodness the Chair of my Doctoral Committee was made aware of the issue. I spoke to the Chair, who suggested I explained to the professor I had an emergency and even told me to drop their name. I did just that, but the professor still refused to  accept the paper and gave me a C+ (38.9/50) without counting my final. I also explained the emergency situation, to no avail.
I don't want to push too hard on this matter, but I am very worried that a C+ will prevent me from receiving fellowships and getting a good postdoc position in the future.  For those of you out there with first-hand knowledge of the impact PhD-level course grades have on one's career, will a  C+ diminish my chances of getting a fellowship and being strongly considered for competitive postdoc positions?

similar questions: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37043/does-gpa-transcript-matter-for-academic-jobs-after-the-phd and http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15212/when-applying-for-postdocs-should-gpa-be-on-your-cv/15222#15222

In my field (math), nobody looks at your grades, so this will not make any difference.
A personal anecdote: I had a first-year grad course with a tough grader who gave me a B- in a core subject. This did not affect my trajectory in the least; I still passed my quals ahead of time, I wrote a thesis and graduated on time, and I'll be starting my post-doc in the fall.

Yep. Grades aren't a perfect indicator of skill or talent at the PhD level. At least in math anyway. Often times problems take very specific observations or tricks that you might not be aware of. These observations can be the difference between an A or B. I ended up with a high 70 in a course on Banach Algebras. I knew the material pretty alright but there were always a couple of incredibly hard questions on homework assignments I couldn't get. Many others couldn't either. The main focus is research which has a very different skill set than coursework.

Thanks! Both your answers were helpful, but you both skipped over the funding issue.  My program funds us for the first two-to-three years  and then we have to find  another funding mechanism. Have either of you had any success with NIH, NSF or Foundation funding?

@Octavia Sorry, my answer was meant to include funding agencies. I've only dealt with the NSF, and they didn't ask for my grades. I can't speak on the NIG or Foundation, though.

Grades don't matter.  What does matter is good time management and  interpersonal relationships and it looks likes you are struggling with both.

RoboKaren, you are correct. I have been struggling with time management because it often seems like I don't own my time. Even when I plan things out, a new fire pops up and I feel compelled to run to extinguish it. As for interpersonal skills, for me the two goes together. The time management issues is causing me to over-promise or miss deadlines which is what happened in this situation. Do you have any constructive suggestions or resources someone in my situation can refer to work on these areas?

That's a whole another (and quite good) question. I think you should post it here and see what responses you get. I would put the emphasis on time management when formulating the question (as A.SE doesn't like multipart questions).

The best way to defuse the poor grade is to understand why it happened and have a plan for preventing it from happening again. This is one plan for preventing late work in the face of firedrills. It is applicable to paper deadlines, preparing a talk etc. as well as turning in coursework.
Pick a date well ahead of the official deadline.
Do the work to whatever standard you can by that date. During this phase, concentrate on essentials. Aim to get the work to a point where submitting it would be better than not submitting it.
Save a copy of the work in submittable form. If you are going to file physical paper, that means having a printout in your backpack. For electronic submissions, it means having a copy on e.g. a thumb drive you keep with you.
Continue to refine and improve the work, periodically replacing the ready-to-submit copy with a better one.
If faced with a drop-everything priority shortly before the actual deadline, first spend a minute submitting the current ready-to-submit copy.

This is a very good advice to prevent it from happening, but not really an answer.

@davidmh, what do  you suggest?


text:
What should an unofficial transcript consist of?
My university only issues an official transcript on paper ( Will take me a month to get it). However, we have a separate student's portal where my "grade history" can be accessed. It is a list of all courses along with the grades and my CGPA, but does not contain anything more than that. Would this work while sending it to a  professor that needs to see it for grad school?

Yes, that's probably fine.  The list of courses, grades and GPA is about all that an official transcript contains anyway.
You can include a note to the professor asking them to contact you if they need anything else.

Thanks! Is it okay if it does not contain the credits of the subjects?

Probably.  You can ask the professor to let you know if they need that information.