text:
After Bachelor in Physics - Research?
I'm finishing Applied Physics this month, and the next I will finish my other bachelor degree, engineering. I have many ideas for starting my own research (at the frontiers - not doing things already attempted) and I feel like it would be a waste of time to attend a graduate course, also because I learn more on books than from listening lectures.
In my specific case, I already started attending conferences since a couple of years and presented a poster at one of them. I'm interested in theoretical physics and the possible connections with biology.
Does it make sense to try for one year to do something on my own and see how it goes?
I think that people here sometimes get annoyed at me for reason I don't really understand, so I will explain: I read quite a lot of papers until now, so I have some idea of how it goes nowadays. I don't really want to pollute ArXiv with some utter nonsense, but rather the contrary. My aim would be to learn what I would learn in a normal course, by myself, more deeply, and not only basic things of everything. This example here shows some good resources. For example Feynman learnt calculus by himself, but better. In modern times there are many resources for self-teaching and something like Physics from a theoretical viewpoint should be perfectly doable and learnable from books on my own, like for programming or Biology. Anyway maybe this question is more suitable for Quora?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

To be able to do meaningful research, "hav[ing] some ideas" is not enough. Also, graduate school isn't just "two years of forced learning by repetition". Many graduate courses are very resourceful and teach you the essentials to understand what has been done in the areas you're potentially interested in.
While it is possible for you to learn on your own and do high quality research, your picture of grad school doesn't reflect reality.

So could you tell me also, what IS enough..?

There's nothing as 'enough' for research, but you should get the prerequisite so that you can understand the literature, talk to people. After all, you don't want to reinvent the wheel.

I'm not too sure if you're asking what to do next semester or what to do afterwards, so I'm going to answer them both.
Next semester:
It can be a good idea to take graduate courses in undergrad as it shows you can handle the material. It's also possible, and highly encouraged, for any perspective researchers to start working with a professor as soon as they can.
After graduation (aka. go to grad school):
As you've pointed out, many parts of grad school involve taking classes. That being said, no one likes those parts and they're not really important in the long run. If you're any good, you'll be able to pick up most of what a class would teach you on your own.
The point of any PhD program worth its salt is to teach you how to do research. It's an apprenticeship with you learning from others in the field and creating meaningful connections with other researchers. You might be able to learn this on your own, but it's probably easier and more helpful to go through the program.

Thank You, but the hassle of the whole thing is that I don't like the idea of going through two years of forced learning by repetition. I learn more on my own than in class, so I was wondering if I should really go for a master. I was adviced by some more experienced people to avoid PhD if I can, also as far as I can see is not a really nice life (btw: might it be just that it's different between Europe and US?).

If you want to do high-level research in physics, it really helps to have a PhD. Else you'll be playing second fiddle to someone who does. I'm not too sure on the system in Europe, but a lot of US universities let you skip the Masters or get it while you're working on your PhD.

There are master courses lasting one year, however you're right, but you probably need high grades for that (working on PhD without master), which I don't have.

Re "avoiding PhD": don't most positions require a Ph.D.?

@StephanKolassa I don't want to get a position

You're seriously misguided both about what a research career requires and what is the purpose of a grad school.
Graduate school is very much "learning on your own", only with the possibility of direct support from more experienced peers and supervisors. The main goal of a PhD program is not in the study courses and lectures, the goal is is to enable capable students to learn how to properly do research. This implies that students after bachelor studies are not generally not considered ready for doing independent research. It's possible that you're an exception from this general pattern, but you have not named any specific reasons in support of this, so it's a priori unlikely.
Most likely any papers you can publish at this stage will not be very good, even if you're genuinely capable: without a grad school training you won't have sufficient training to recognize what's considered "good" by the community you want to impress. Even the papers actually happen to be good (i.e. not only interesting ideas, but also solid methodology, broad knowledge of the field, awareness of which research questions are "hot", etc.), they are unlikely to be noticed by the community in the first place, as being an independent you won't have the same opportunities to make academic connections and to promote yourself. Furthermore, being an independent researcher without solid credentials means that you have to constantly fight an uphill battle to be taken seriously.

Does it make sense to try for one year to do something on my own and see how it goes?

The best you could do in this year is to try to maximize your chances to be accepted in a good graduate program.
You say that you want a career in science, but "independently from a university". Being an independent scholar is unfortunately not a viable alternative at your stage of research career. The only viable alternatives are governmental or industrial research labs, but there are fewer of these jobs compared to e.g. postdoc positions in academia, and they nevertheless typically require academical credentials. Perhaps more to the point, they're unlikely to offer you more freedom in your research compared to a university.

You have a point, but I would like to make you notice that graduate programs are different from country to country, so "Graduate school is very much "learning on your own"," it's a statement invalid for some places in Europe. Academics often show elitism, but when you confront people with facts they change. Also, "...hey are unlikely to be noticed by the community in the first place..." I think the only way to be "noticed" it's with solid new advancements, which is likely to happen both following school or not

Don't apply for these grad schools then, search for a better match instead. As for "being noticed", it's not a binary predicate, but more similar to a real-valued function. Science is a human endeavor, which means that it involves politics to some extent. There are plenty of examples how valuable scientific results remain obscure for years, until they are rediscovered by more reputable and better known research groups.

"I feel like it would be a waste of time to attend a graduate course, also because I learn more on books than from listening lectures."
You are quite right about this.
"Does it make sense to try for one year to do something on my own and see how it goes?"
Absolutely not.  Listening to lectures is not an important part of graduate education in physics.  Some PhD programs include lectures, some do not.  But in every case it is the independent work that counts.  The value of doing your research in a (good quality) PhD program is

They will pay you
There will be other people to work with
You gain reputation

None of these things will be provided to independent researchers.

Thanks. I mean to try to work on my own also because if I will want to access a PhD I would like my own "results" to count for it, though I have an around 85% avg on my grades I don't like school system and spending other time trying to get higher grades makes me feel I waste a lot of time. I don't mind those things you mentioned, really. Not at the beginning at least. The central point of my discussion is what you said, "But in every case it is the independent work that counts"

Learning, plus increasingly doing more research. You need to specialize in a specific direction after a few years.
But you need to go to grad school! And it's better to take courses. Self-learning should complement your formal program, not to replace it.

if is this an answer - to what question, sorry?

To the question "Does it make sense to try for one year to do something on my own and see how it goes?". I answered, though it's doable, it's better to go through a formal program and supplement it with "something on your own".

As others have mentioned, graduate studies are less about classes and more about research apprenticeships.
You already know how to learn theory. What can you work on next? Collaboration. Physics research, and research in general, is for the most part a group effort... for many reasons. Some reasons are bureaucratic, while others are purely pragmatic. If I were you, I'd find a way to work with a professor - someone whose personality suits you - who is active in an interesting field. The easiest way to do this is through graduate studies.
Also, regarding classes...I get it. Sure, I often learn better on my own as well (though it's remarkable how often I recall my professor's mannerisms and metaphors when explaining certain phenomena!). But my grades and classes do give me one thing: credibility. When a professor assigns you a grade, they are vouching for your skill, tenacity, reliability... a host of factors. Regardless, it becomes easier to progress in research when you have established experts supporting you!

this was valuable, thanks. it's that I have some fellows that are on grad school and as far as I can see it's not as you all are describing, maybe I just need to change university. Or try at least one semester.


text:
“making it look good”- is it always important?
Recently I created a project report for the project that me and my classmate are working on. The project report goes to the external examiner to whom later we have to give a demo on our project.
Me being inclined to designing (web designing, graphic design, etc) I decided to make the project report look really good. A nice clean report with good choice of paper. And care taken while choosing font etc.
It turned out to be much much better than anyone else's report. BUT! The first thing I heard from other classmates was. "Making project report look good is of NO USE. Your project (Application) should be good enough and it's all that matters"
Is it true? from a general perspective of people. Does "making it look good"  matter at all?
I couldn't find any other section more relevant enough to discuss this question. Please let me know if there is any.

The most important thing is the report itself, and making it looks better can make it even better.
making it looks good is very important, it can gives you a competitive advantage ;)

In brief, in addition to good fuller answers: yes, always make it look professional. The fact that you'd take the effort is a sign of your general conscientiousness and care and competence. Insufficient in itself, but surely manifest by a serious person. The "false converse" of the idea that geniuses neglect ordinary things... is ... false... and irrelevant. :)

My opinion here would depend strongly on the details of what you did. If "care taken while choosing font" means avoiding Comic Sans, then yes, that's worthwhile. If it means worrying whether to use Times Roman instead of Computer Modern, then no, the difference won't be noticed.

A good-looking report will put me in the mindset that you took the assignment seriously, and aimed to turn in quality work. I think that counts for something, not nothing.
That said, if a report is just that – good looking, with little substance behind it – I will see through the façade very quickly, and all those superficial niceties might even count against you.
Assuming that's not the case, though, if two people turn in equally good work, yet one is formatted much more professionally than the other, that might earn an extra point or two – assuming I'm grading with some level of subjectivity, and not merely following a strict rubric. Shame on me, though, if I let mere appearance carry much more weight than that.
That all said, your classmates seem to be very shortsighted. Okay, maybe your extra effort will get you a 94 instead of a 93. Or maybe you'll just get a 93, with nothing more than a mental note that I thought your report looked really good. However, what you do in my classroom might – and perhaps should – extend far beyond my class. Presumably, you're in my class for an education, not merely for 3 or 4 credits. Get in the habit of turning in good work, and that might turn into something that translates into a valuable life skill.
One more thought: what's going to happen after you graduate, when all those folks from human resources ask you to include the names of three professors on your job applications?  One of them might well call me, and ask, “What do you remember about this guy?”
Perhaps I'll answer, “Oh, I remember him. He always turned in exceptional work.”
Those two sentences might prove to be worth far more than an extra point or two on an assignment.
Incidentally, I had one student bring her term project into a job interview. They hired her, largely based on what they saw in that class project. Just a couple weeks ago, another student asked if my name could be listed as a reference.
“I hope they call me,” I replied in my email. “I distinctly remember how your work always seemed to go above and beyond what everyone else was turning in.” Imagine how that will sound in the ear of a corporate recruiter who is sifting through a pile of job applications.
It's your call. It's also your future.

Thanks, our project has enough substance, as I said,myself having that "it should look good no matter what" mentality. I made sure I do whatever required so that I'm satisfied with it.

If your content is as good as the cover you used, it is ok. But if you are trying to create a good looking report about a badly implemented project, it is just a waste of time and shows that you concentrate on the trivial things rather than on important ones.
Those who judge your work won't judge it by its cover, I hope. That said, if the report is about a project aptly implemented, it shows that you are a perfectionist and is a good thing.

I don't think it's clear that showing perfectionism is a good thing.  There is such a thing as diminishing returns, after all.

@Nate: I noticed that if I mentally changed "you are a perfectionist" to "you show attention-to-detail", it was easier for me to have wholehearted agreement.

The answer by Abraham is spot on. I would just like to add the following: Good design will not kill anyone but bad design can. By design I am primarily thinking typography and illustrations. I am not so concerned about reports made during your studies but rather when you are in the work place. A report, no matter how well conceived can become overlooked if it is hard to read and if illustrations are not clear enough. There is of course a risk of over-doing the design and a somber tidy look is usually the best. So if your work is good and your design of the report also allows people to grasp the content with ease, you are doing very well!

Tufte's Visual Explanations offers an excellent case study of what can go wrong if you don't present things well in the Challenger explosion.

@aeismail I agree, Tufte is a very good source. I have all his books and really recommend them myself!

In my honest opinion,it's impossible to separate content from presentation. They may be two separate aspects of one thing but they are not two separate things. Taking your classmates' view to extremes would have us turning in work without bothering to check for spelling or grammar.

You heard from your classmates that the look of the report is of no use.
But your report was better. I.e. they turned in work inferior to yours.
In life, you can generally disregard the worthless advice and nay-saying of your inferiors, and just do it your way.

Left unqualified, that's a rather cavalier attitude to take, and I would advise caution. Just because they're not your "equal" doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't learn from them.

i like criticism on my work. and its good, it helps to improve one's work. but this was more like a statement by a group of people. So I was uncertain whether, mistake, if any, is on my part or not.

I mean, obviously, if the substance of the paper is bad, the polish will be, well, "lipstick on a pig".

There are two key elements in a report: content and structure. These can boost each other. A better content will make a judge (referee, reviewer, etc.) feel that the person has something to say, and thus the judge can overlook small mistakes in structure, and only ask for corrections. On the other hand, when a moderate content is prepared really good, the judge will give credit to the work and instead of rejecting it, (s)he would ask for betterment of the content. Usually those who prepare a very good-looking project, pay sufficient or professional attention to other aspects (the content) of the work too. At least they show they are fond of this work, no matter how their content is moderate or even not so good.
So I suggest you keep up the good work and always make your (important) reports super good-looking. That works most of the time. It has worked for me all the time.
Besides, it is normal for people to try to underestimate people who are very superior to them. :) So don't take them seriously.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Ethics of spending research money on food and meetings
I assume this varies from different universities/research institutes/countries, however, is there a general percentage or ethical rule on how much money from a grant can or should be spent on food and meetings?  When I was a graduate student I didn't need to deal with this too much, but also never really saw any of my advisors going out to nice dinners or having meals with people on research funds, granted, they did do it with the internal budgets of the institute.
My current situation had me get a grant for around 20,000 USD, the project is 8 months, and was asked to list how much money I will spend on food and meetings.  I had always thought of this to be inappropriate as research money should be for research.  Am I over thinking it and this is a normal practice?  I was told 1k of the 20k could be for food, but asked for 200 instead, out of my own thinking of what should be appropriate for giving students or interns coffee  (this is separate than the money reserved for travelling to conferences).

What do you mean by "meetings", if not "traveling to conferences"?

"meetings" are me using the funding to pay for a train ticket to meet some collaborators on a project and buying whatever our food or activity is

There are many events one might hold to benefit a particular research effort, for which it is usual to provide at least coffee, fruit, and pastries (at least at my school), sometimes more:

You invite a researcher to visit your university and give a talk about his latest work, which is directly related to, and will help bootstrap, your funded research.
A major goal defined in your grant is to publicize a particular bit of research. You hold an open house and invite visitors from industry and academia to disseminate the results of your research.
A goal of your research is to develop certain tools and methods and then publicize them. You hold a workshop or "summer camp" for grad students from other universities to teach them how to use the methods/tools you've developed for your research and get their feedback.
You have a collaborator at another location working on this research effort with you. He visits your university once a year for a project meeting, including lunch.

Depending on the nature of the project and the funding, one or more of these may be an  appropriate use of funds. Generally, to be permissible, it must be for an event that directly contributes to the goals of a specific research effort (not e.g. a department event). Sometimes, the grant is given explicitly to host such an event (such as a workshop or summer camp).
(Obviously: follow the rules from the university and the funding source about how the money may be spent. The NSF, for example, has very specific guidelines on the subject.)

so it seems that all of the guidelines are related to providing some sort of light meals or snacks?  Do you have suggestions on cost wise, since coffee for 2 students vs 100 is a big difference, but i could see from your answer it can make sense.  What about "including lunch" having a difference from 50 dollar steak or 10 dollar sandwich.

my situation for "following the rules" is that im not in the states anymore, and I am looking for help on the ethical aspect, since there doesnt seem to be much of a strict rule on the food and meeting situation for my funding

Well, I only have US experience; but I think what these have in common is, "the meal/meeting is actually a part of work towards the funded research, not the entertainment." If there are no official guidelines and no country/university-specific norms, that's what I'd follow. (I can't think of any scenario where a funded research meeting calls for a steak, let me know if you think of one :) )

If we're taking about paying for regular meals while traveling (rather than providing food for a meeting or event you are hosting), I think the rule on cost is "be reasonable and don't spend more than you usually would just because the grant is paying for it"

im not sure when it 'calls' for a steak, but I have been at them were I was bought a steak, and sushi, and a few other over the top situations.  Maybe it has to do with not being able to pay someone for a collaboration and instead buy them nice things?  Maybe its like a academic prostitute

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


text:
Bad GRE subject test scores in Brit/Am Lit---any chance at PhD admissions to an English Lit program?
I want to apply to PhD programs in English Literature this December. I have pretty good stats from a good liberal arts college + summa thesis, but I majored in Russian Lit. I took a couple of English classes in college but I probably won't do very well on the GRE subject test in British/American lit. Is it possible to get into a PhD program with a good all-around application but bad subject test scores? Should I address my lack of canon-knowledge in the personal statement or leave it be?

The OP is asking about the GRE subject test in English, not the GRE general exam. The verbal score for the general exam is arguably relevant, and I can say for certain that the subject test score is definitely important.
This question was asked a year ago as I write this, but for those who see it in the future, I would recommend using a test prep book or similar to do some crash studying for the subject test. I took it twice, myself. The first time, with no such preparation, I got a 530. The second time, after reading the Princeton Review book, I scored a 680 (above the 90% mark, in percentile terms, which is more important than raw score). Both scores were reported to the schools I applied to. Someone at the one I ended up going to told me they were impressed by how quickly I was able to increase my score. I was impressed by how little this test must actually mean if I could just flip through a study guide and practically nail it. This was in 2001, by the way. Things may have changed. But I doubt much.
I should add that I was, in fact, an English major. But I didn't have broad exposure to all periods and studied very little theory as an undergrad, so I was in the dark in that respect. The Princeton Review guide was very good at getting me up to speed on material likely to be on the test (as well as offering a useful test-taking philosophy). It's better and more efficient than reading the entire Norton Anthology, that's for sure.
You have to realize that the top programs in English receive in excess of 300 applications a year, maybe more, for annual classes of a dozen or so students. To say that the GRE isn't important is suggesting that overworked members of admissions committees aren't looking for any excuse to trim the pile, which in fact they are. Everything is important.

Just like in the sciences, the GRE is not particularly important for admissions to humanities PhD programs. That said, the GRE can be used as a tool to decide who gets the limited funding and the most desirable TA positions. As for the personal statement, you need to address why you want to switch from Russian Lit to English Lit. In fact this should probably be the core focus of the personal statement.

While I agree that the GRE isn't the most important part of an application, I don't know that I'd agree that it isn't important -- if the a school asks for it, they will use it in the admissions process. Furthermore, when you have lots of similar-looking candidates on paper, weak GREs are one of the easier ways to cull the heap of applications.


text:
What simple events can a graduate student club organise to network with former students, companies, etc.?
I'm a graduate student in Engineering. This semester we're going to form a graduate student club. We're thinking about creating some networking events with former students, companies, etc.
Do you  have any related ideas that are not hard to implement and not too expensive?

Simple ideas:

Seminar where a professor gives a talk on his/her current research. Provide beer.
Invite an alum from one of the companies you're talking about to give a talk on something new from the company. Provide beer.
Simple cook-out, which includes beer (even better if this is a recurring event, monthly, once a semester, etc.).

More involved ideas:

Mini-poster conference, where a quorum of students have posters about their current research. Alum can act as judges, if you want to award prizes. Provide beer.
Invite a famous alumus to give a talk. This always involves more work than you're expecting, but can have big pay-offs. Might necessitate actual cocktails (and possibly pay for the speaker, but if you play it right you should find an alumnus willing to do it for free).
Field-trip to a local engineering firm that may have something interesting to look at (or a tour). Drinks at a local bar afterward.

I completely agree, but sometimes it is hard to be allowed alcohol on campus. Pizza is a good second choice (but yes you need to bait people with food/drinks).


text:
PhD: what happens if I quit?
Here's my story. I moved from my home country to the UK in October to start a PhD in the UK with lots of excitement and positive expectations. However, what I discovered once I started was that the division I am in had never funded an Academic PhD project before (they focus on professional doctorates), the environment is not a research one (I share the office with lecturers and tutors, apart from another PhD student who won my same scholarship). My main supervisor, although supportive, is only at the university for for 3 days per week, has never supervised a PhD and has not an Academic PhD (but has the professional doctorate). My second supervisor does have a PhD, but follows me very occasionally, since only taking care of the 20% of the supervision.
Therefore, since the beginning the experience has been very isolating and not really stimulating. In addition, for various reasons, I have changed the theme of my original project and since then I have the sensation that my main supervisor is not really interested in this, even though saying otherwise. Also,  has no particular expertise in the specific subject I am doing research on, but has to supervise many people from the professional doctorate as well and is generally very busy (and yet doesn't even check emails during the whole weekend).
Moreover, I am doing clinical research and I have to face many logistical difficulties, such as the fact that the hospital in which I should work in is quite distant from the university (at least hours roundtrip), the collaboration from the staff and patients is hard to get and basically my PhD depends on lots of people whose sudden disappearance may lead to very big problems.
As a result, I am now approaching the 10th month and I haven't done anything yet, apart from having started the literature review the draft for a survey. I feel as this project is going nowhere and even if I managed to fix some of the logistical issues, the isolation, the lack of expertise of my supervisor and the lack of a research environment really bother me. My supervisor actually said my PhD is a "pilot" for the division to see if they should fund any other PhD in the future, but the problem is that the pilot is not going well.
I find myself thinking about quitting quite often in this period, but I am terribly concerned about the possible consequences: even if I quit I still would like to pursue a PhD somewhere else, but what are the odds of getting any other scholarship after having quit one? Also, I obviously can't apply somewhere else without quitting here, because I need updated cover letters, so this means that I would have to move back to my home country just to restart submitting applications. And without any money, of course.
I haven't spoken about it  because I think that once I disclose my reservations  with my supervisor would definitely lose interest in the project, so I am taking some time to think before doing anything. The problem is that I really don't know what to do. I moved to the UK because I thought I could have better opportunities compared to my home country, but I think I ended up in a quite peculiar and difficult doctoral experience; I am afraid that the fact of having already obtained funding is going to prevent me from having any other opportunity if I quit. Also quitting would have a very big impact on my psychological well-being, since I do not see myself as a quitter and I would totally feel it as a personal failure, despite all the variables that I have told you.
What do you think?

Also, I obviously can't apply somewhere else without quitting here, because I need updated cover letters ... -- Can you elaborate on why you can't look for other opportunities while remaining in your current position?

You might investigate what support is available to you from the research council/similar who are funding your research. It's in their interest to make sure the project is a success, so they may be able to help - in particular, it might be possible to transfer your funding to a different institute (or at least, spend some time in a different environment).

Of course I can look for opportunities, but I cannot apply, since I would have to inform my current supervisor, which means that if I don't get the new position the situation here would become quite hard to sustain. Also I am funded by my division.

Talk to your advisor. "It's clear to both of us this pilot is not working out as intended. Do you think I should consider leaving/going to another program?"

I am not so sure it is clear for him, and I am afraid he might start looking at me in another way (i.e. with less interest/effort/motivation in his supervision role) if I speak about quitting.

Also, what are the odds of getting any new funds if I quit? Wouldn't an admission board look at me as an unreliable investment?

"at least 4 go and come back". Maybe "4 hours to go and come back"?

One minor comment. This situation doesn't sound good, but I would recommend trying to spend some time outside your work doing something you enjoy. This will help you stay relaxed, and keep a cool head, and some perspective on the situation. Granted, it will not do anything to help your situation directly, but reading between the lines it sounds like you are getting very stressed with yout situation, so it should help you at a personal level. I've had plenty of work-related difficult periods myself, and going to dance classes helped very much in one of those. But that is just one example.

It's not really clear to me what kind of answer you are looking for. Are you asking "should I quit?" or "how should I quit with minimal damage?" or "how should I look for a new position after quitting this one?" or something else?

he doesn't even check emails during the whole weekend — Good for him.

Whatever you ultimately choose to do with your PhD, you should not blame yourself for anything that you cannot reasonably foresee. If you continue, it won't be your fault if it still doesn't work out. Likewise if you leave, it doesn't mean that you're a failure. Just try your best and don't regret your choices but make the best of the outcomes.

What is the professional degree involved?  My research also is done at a medical school, and I have never had any confusion between the engineering PhD I'm getting and an MD.  But I do wish I had known about Eng.D when I started my graduate work...  Consider whether your struggles are related to the environment not being good for PhDs, or the environment not being good for you getting the experience you want and some degree to show it.

Just wondering what advice you were able to take, and what your situation is now?

"I think that once I disclose my reservations with my supervisor would definitely lose interest in the project". Wow, what an open-minded advisor! And to boot, he doesn't check emails during the weekend - we want him relaxed during the weekend, don't we, especially that he doesn't futz with tiresome project details anyways. Good for him.

If the program is really a pilot, then there are likely some people somewhere in the department who would like it to succeed. I would definitely recommend finding those people and seeing whether they can assist with any of your issues, both logistical and advisor-related.
Past that, though, I would definitely also seek other options. For many PhD graduates, their advisor plays an important individual at the start of their career, and not having that resource can make things very difficult for you. Given that you are already in an academic vacuum, you probably don't want to have that kind of handicap. Take care to make sure you're giving yourself the highest likelihood of success.

Originally written as a comment, converting to an answer at ff524's suggestion.
Addressing the spirit of your problem, if not the exact question asked: quitting should be the last-case scenario. Clearly you're not happy, and you need to talk to your advisor(s) about that. But do think about whether there are changes that could be made that would improve your situation. Could you spend time at another institution? Should the focus of the project change? Pilot studies don't necessarily work "straight out of the box", so everyone ought to be open to discussion. It may be that no solution can be found - but unless you raise the issue, people may not realise there's a problem.
Also, do note that many, many PhD students worry that "they've not done much" in their first year. But often they've actually learnt a lot, about their subject and about the world of research. So don't be too disheartened!
Edited to add: I have known at least one case where someone started a PhD, it didn't go well, and after a year they quit and started a new PhD in a different department at the same institution. However, I'm not sure what the details of their funding were - it's possible that they simply transferred their existing money to the new project.

Thanks for the swift answer. My biggest problem, apart from the environment, is that my research is pretty much out of my on control, since it relies on lots of other people (i.e. clinicians in hospitals providing me patients) and this is turning out to be quite hard. This is leading me to face continous issues through project edits that are making me run late in terms of practicalities (ethics application, data collection, etc).
When all these psychological and practical issues are summed it becomes really hard to see any positive point in this experience.

@Csar These are the sorts of issues that a good advisor should be helping to resolve. Again, make sure that those in your supervisory chain appreciate the issues. (Equally, do be aware that every research project has its setbacks: if we knew all the issues up-front, it wouldn't really be research!)

I have already told my supervisors some of these issues, but his answer was that every PhD has its own. I can't help thinking that this is not the experience I left my home country for, because of course having to do my PhD abroad in another language makes everything harder, but I thought it would have been worth it for the environment and the opportunities.

@Csar He is, of course, correct. Whether the issues that you are encountering fall within the normal spectrum is not something that anyone here can say. Certainly, some students are let down by their advisors. Some others have unrealistic expectations that their advisor will hand them a PhD thesis on a plate. It sounds like you would benefit from talking to someone who knows how research projects in your field generally play out, and who can advise you on whether your experience is normal or not.

Let me give you a very practical advice: Every big project is accomplished in many small steps. In order to get a better picture of what is going on, make sure that you have a good protocol of all the small steps you're taking. If possible, establish a weekly routine with your supervisor. Everybody has some kind of daily habit, try to figure out when your supervisor is, e.g., arriving to office, going for lunch, going for coffee, etc. Since, as you're reporting, it's difficult for you to get hold of him, try to catch him at some of these points, repetedly. This way you can build up a habitual relationship. You can't fix all of your problems in one discussion. You have to partition down your project related problems/difficulties into smaller, prioritized portions and then start discussing those independently. Giving your supervisor a brief update on what you plan as your next, small step can be done while walking to the coffee machine. All he has to do is to say "yes", "no", "maybe"- and this DECISION is what you have to document. So, also as a way to protect yourself, you have a proof of how you decided in agreement on how to proceed. Trust me, at one point all these small steps will add up to your larger project and you will feel back on track.

Thank you for your comment. I know that I can't achieve everything right now, but I've spent basically my whole first year planning and now I find myself still editing the plan and trying to find alternative studies because those that I've drawn are stopped by some issues.
If summed up with all the enviromental issues it becomes quite frustrating. Also I don't know if not having a supervisor who's an expert in what I'm doing is a major issue or not.

To just come back on your very last remark, as a PhD student, your free (and also expected) to build your own network. Your supervisor "can open doors", i.e. establish contact with those experts you're looking for. But it's your job to find them. What it boils down to in the end is writing papers where you're the first author, your external new expert friend is the second author and your supervisor is the senior author. If in turn your external friends start to put you and your supervisor on their papers, trust me you'll get the attention of your current supervisor.


text:
What does [ctb] stand for?
This R package f.x. states:
"Kurt Hornik [ctb]"
I assume this abbreviation is coming from academic publishing - hence why I ask it here.

ctb = Contributor.
It's not so much about academic publishing, but (academic/open source) software. One has authors and contributors. Contributors added a bit of code, but presumably did not contribute to the overall design efforts.


text:
Is it ethical to approach a professor asking for a (unadvertised) postdoc position?
Some postdoc positions are formally advertised. Arguably, even more exist on a "gray market" - they are not advertised, and a person seeking a postdoc is supposed to contact a professor directly.
One ethical concern that I see here is that in some situations even when the agreement between the professor and prospective candidate is made, the position still has to be advertised (e.g. this may be a legal obligation in some countries). The advertisement will attract a number of applications, none of which has a chance to succeed, since the deal about this position has already been made behind the curtains.
My second concern is a bit harder to formalise. Is it true that when a candidate approaches a professor with a request like this, some serious ethical restrictions arise? Is it more difficult to turn the offer down, if you were the one asking for it? Is it more difficult to terminate the postdoc contract earlier than expected (and move to permanent position, for example), if you were the one asking for it?
Should I keep trying to apply only for a officially advertised positions, or should I give up and approach senior professors directly?

Clarification needed: are you looking to ask about a known position that colleagues have said actually exists, or are you looking to simply ask if the professor has any funding available for a new postdoc?

I'd like to talk about positions that do not exist in public space. The recommendations of colleagues to ask a specific professor, for example. Word of mouth. Networking through your current supervisor. Any situation when a candidate should initiate a contact with prospective professor, asking for something that is not publicly here yet.

@DmitrySavostyanov: That still doesn't really answer the clarification question.  The question is are you asking about positions that are known to exist (even if not publically), or are you just asking people without knowing if they have postdoc positions at all?

I am sorry, I do not see any difference between these two regarding the ethics. Can we discuss both?

Why would it be harder to terminate early?  If you approach a potential supervisor and successfully write an application together, you're arguably more independent than if they have the money and hire you for a project they need to have done.

@gerrit What I mean is a position funded from a grant / project / department of a professor, not a result of joint application to a council.

In some fields this is the standard way to "apply" for postdocs.

@DavidZ I agree that this is very typical, but are there any ethical concerns here? For example, early marriages are typical in some countries, but are not considered ethical in the rest of the world.

I have no special experience in applying for or managing postdocs, but this is just my take on the ethics.
As regards your first question, I would say it is the professor who is being unethical if he arranges backdoor deals for postdocs, while still openly soliciting applications which he has no intention of considering.  I don't see anything unethical about approaching a faculty member to ask if they have or will have postdoc positions available.  If they don't want to give you special treatment, they can easily and fairly say something like, "Yes, we will be accepting applications in November, I'll forward you the job ad when it's ready."  If they tell you you are a lock and then mislead other applicants, that is their issue, not yours.  As an applicant, I can't see that you can be held ethically responsible for how other applicants are (or aren't) considered, since you have no real control over that process.
As for your second question, I think those issues shade from an ethical level down to the level of personal courtesy.  My impression is that everyone applying for every job tells the offerer that they are really interested in it, even if privately they view it as only a backup option.  I agree this is somewhat distasteful in that it's not totally honest and straightforward, but I don't see any way around it and I think everyone expects it.  Unless you were down on your knees begging for the postdoc, I don't think people would consider it a real ethical breach for you to reject it.
Plus, it's easy to avoid getting in too deep by making your inquiry diplomatically: instead of saying "Hey I really really want to do a postdoc with you have you got one?" you can say "I'm looking into postdoc opportunities and your work looks very interesting, will there be any postdoc opportunities in your department/lab soon?"  By mentioning opportunities, plural, you make it clear that this is only one of many options you're exploring, and you can avoid appearing to make a commitment at an early stage.  There may come a later stage where they ask you for a handshake agreement that you will accept the offer when it is officially made, and if you reject it after such a handshake, that could be considered unethical, but at the early stage you're describing I don't think it would be an issue.
In the end, I think the questions about rejecting the offer or leaving the position early come down to personal and professional courtesy and the desire to maintain good relationships with these people.  As a nonacademic analogy, imagine you call up your friend and say, "Do you want to go to the movies?" and he says "Yes" and then you say "Okay, you can go by yourself, I don't actually want to go, I was just asking."  You may not be cited by any ethics board for that, but you will be perceived as a jerk.  Likewise, if you string people along making them think you want a postdoc offer, and then cavalierly drop it, even if it's not an actionable ethical breach, you may gain a reputation as a sneaky and underhanded negotiator, which will not help your professional career.

In some countries, public announcement is compulsory. (But some people may publicly announce it on the physical notice board of the department and that's it).

Ah yes, the physical bulletin board, final destination for all announcements that are supposed to never be read.

I think you are making a much bigger deal out of this than what it is. Ultimately, you seem to assume that this is something shady that should be avoided, as indicated by your word choices ("gray market", "should I give up and approach senior guys directly"). This is not the case. It is not more honorable to score a publicly announced job than to get one that has been offered to you personally and without lengthy official search.
Hence, the ethical implications over other postdocs are minimal to non-existant.

One ethical concern that I see here is that in some situations even when the agreement between the professor and prospective candidate is made, the position still has to be advertised (e.g. this may be a legal obligation in some countries). The advertisement will attract a number of applications, none of which has a chance to succeed, since the deal about this position has already been bade behind the curtains.

This may or may not be true, but it is certainly not your ethical issue. This is a problem that the professor has to deal with.

Is it true that when a candidate approaches a professor with a request like this, some serious ethical restrictions arise? Is it more difficult to turn the offer down, if you was the one who was asking for it?

I don't see why this would be the case. A postdoc is a postdoc is a postdoc. You do not bind your soul to this professor for eternity because he has offered you a job directly. Generally, turning down offers may cause some -unwarranted- hard feelings (everybody involved is just a human, after all), but the same is also true for any other job search.

Is it more difficult to terminate the postdoc contract earlier than expected (and move to permanent position, for example).

No professor should fault you for terminating a postdoc early to move on to a faculty position. Of course some will, but, again, this has little to do with how you got the job in the first place.
So if you have a network: go ahead and use it!

Thank you for your answer. Do you think that the ethical situation with early career positions like Assist Prof or Lecturer is the same? I.e. there are no ethical concerns to activate your network and ask a friendly Head of Dept to open a position for you?

@DmitrySavostyanov There's no ethical concern, but the answer will likely be that (s)he can't do that.

This is not uncommon in some countries I am familiar with.

It depends when and how you end employment. If it's in the middle of the semester and an important experiment and you are the only person who knows how to run it and you don't train a replacement, that may leave hard feelings. If you notifyin March that you are taking a new position in August and that you are happy to wrap up all loose ends, you're advisor will be much happier.

There is a reason for this. This is not a private company. Post-docs (and some other people) may be paid with public funding, therefore the professor cannot choose someone out of his whim. The position must be publicly advertised and the best candidate according to some objective criteria must be chosen. While this is not a big deal in post-docs it may be for tenured positions. Ethics aside, it's against the rules (maybe laws) and the selection process is a lie, but well... what isn't?

+1.  I agree almost entirely.  My only quibble is that you cannot separate the professor's ethical problem from yours quite so easily.  As an extreme example, if the postdoc were funded by organized crime (and you knew this), you would still be ethically on the hook.


text:
How to judge the quality of my own paper?
I am a B.Tech student in my final year, and am interested in publishing a paper. I have read a few articles in IEEE transactions and ACM transactions on my topic of interest, Software Engineering, and thought I can also produce such an idea. This semester I worked on a project under a professor in my institute, and I have written a paper based on my findings. My question is how can I judge the quality of the paper I have written? I want to find the perfect place to publish it, but don't want get demoralized by sending it to a top publisher and getting rejected. I should add that I don't think that my professor will be much help in determining the quality of the paper because I fear the professor knowledge is very  old and outdated and doesn't have any idea of current research.

I am sorry to say but I do not think your English are  good enough for writing a research paper. So, you need someone more senior to proofread and correct your paper (or more likely to write it from scratch)

I think when you say "journal written by you" you mean "paper written by you".  The journal is the organization which publishes paper or articles.  So in other words, you have written a paper and want to know how to judge its quality.  Unfortunately there are no easy answers and I think that you need to find a mentor with experience in the field.  If not your current advisor, then some other experienced researcher whom you trust.

@Alexandros for English,i have experts...

Why exactly don't you think your professor would be of help? That would otherwise be the default answer here.

I find it a little odd that on the one hand you're uncertain about your ability to evaluate your work, and on the other hand you seem very confident that your advisor doesn't know enough to evaluate your work.

"don't want get demoralized by sending it to a top publisher and getting rejected" - ability to deal with rejection and failure is arguably one of the most critical skills of an academic.

@Suresh basic fundamental are on the fingertips of my professor, but he in unable to comment to my work. He is not very much into research work.

@Alexandros The irony. What you stated is correct; agreed. But the irony...

I don't believe this question can be answered.  Yes there are a few basics one must have in a good paper but at the end of the day it comes down to the taste and mindset of reviewers.  Many seminal papers have been rejected initially and did not appear in supposedly top venues.  No doubt there are many poor papers been published by the transactions for example.  Having a supervisor who has a track record in these journal is key so you get a paper that looks and feel like it belongs.  After that it's a matter of luck and maybe your reputation.

You should read papers in the field and compare your paper with some of them. If your idea is good and it hasn't been explored before, your paper will have a few revisions and the quality of your writing style shall improve, leading to publication. However, I advise to talk to your peers, TA or professors about, since they will see the paper in a more professional way and maybe proofread it. Good luck!

@ Superbest have a good point. The ability to pass over failures, negative referee reports, good ideas which doesn't work as planned is very important.

@PanglossianOporopolist some people have one English, others have several? :)

If your adviser is a coauthor, he has to agree with whether the paper is suitable for submission to a particular journal.
Otherwise, you could judge the quality of your paper by comparing it with published papers in the journal you intend to submit your paper to. However, I recommend asking for other people's opinion about the paper; this would be people you know, who have had some publication experience.
Is there an upcoming conference which you can submit your paper to? It is a good idea to submit the paper to a conference first.

Yeah, I am thinking about SEDE 2014
http://theory.utdallas.edu/SEDE2014/

@CyberBoy SEDE has a very bad reputation: http://sede-2011.blogspot.com/2011/09/fake-paper-accepted-by-sede-2011-20th.html

Another idea would be to submit your manuscript to a pre-print repository and see if you get some comments on it. Of course, you should take into account the fact that not all journals publish works that have already been posted in a repository. Additionally, you could also send a pre-submission inquiry to some journal editors with a brief summary of your research. If an editor shows interest in your paper, you can then submit it to the journal.

"not all journals publish works that have already been posted in a repository" which journal please? if a journal is not accepting preprint versions to be submitted online prior to peer review then is violating copyright laws. The leading journals are open to arxiv and other repositories.

@Mikey Mike: Wikipedia has this list of journals by their preprint policies.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals_by_preprint_policy  According to this list, there are a few journals that are incompatible with accepting preprint versions and others which are unclear about whether they would be willing to accept them.

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


text:
Is it right to submit a conference abstract knowing that I will not attend but my advisor will give my talk instead?
My postdoc finished 9 months ago. My former supervisor has asked me to submit an abstract on my work to a conference next year.
No-one intends that I will attend the conference. My ex-supervisor has an invited talk there, and basically wants current and former group members to also submit contributed talks that  can also be presented  if the main authors don’t show up.
The supervisor essentially wants to be able to give three or four talks for the cost of one attendee.  I don’t really feel this is right. On the other hand I also want to remain on good terms with them, as they are a reference on my current job applications, and we are also still working on papers together.
Should I refuse to submit an abstract? Or just bite the bullet and write something?

He essentially wants to be able to give three or four talks for the cost of one attendee. - Does the conference allow this? If so, what's the problem?

If he says you can present if you attend, then I don't see any poor intent if you choose not to and he presents your work in your stead.

I do not think cost is the issue here. One does not pay to present.  One pays to attend.  Honesty is the issue.

There are no funds available for me to attend, so I could only present myself if I self fund. Which my old boss knows I can't afford.

Who are the authors? Just you? Or you and your advisor?

There are four authors. But the advisor is the only one of the  four still at that institution.

@AnonymousPhysicist: "One does not pay to present." - some conferences see this differently. (They require one attendance fee per each/every two/every three presented papers.) Chairs of such conferences can usually be "convinced" that they do not want to be a roadblock for a group that does get so many on-topic works accepted at a time, though.

I think it can be acceptable if and only if it is clearly communicated in the submission that the former supervisor is the intended presenter.  Deliberately misrepresenting who will present at the conference is dishonest.  If in doubt, contact someone at the conference.

On most (CS) conferences I have been to, it seemed fully acceptable that the identity of the presenter was not known (to the session chair) until as late as the beginning of the session. At this point, I fail to see how there could be any "misrepresenting who will present", unless the OP's advisor personally claims he is someone else while talking in front of the audience.

I would say it is right: I have never seen any conference put a cap on the number of talks a speaker can give, and it's quite commonplace that the speaker is not the primary author.

I agree it is common, but that does not justify deliberate dishonesty.  I generally assume that if the primary author does not show up it is due to honest mistake.  For example, I once presented for someone who was having a baby during the conference.

@AnonymousPhysicist Seems like there are some customs in the OP's field that I am not aware of: is submitting an abstract considered as a commitment from the primary author to present?

In my opinion, yes it is a commitment unless otherwise specified, because if you do not show up you have wasted the reviewers' and attendees' time.

I agree it isn't unusual for a co-author to present, but as @AnonymousPhysicist says, this is normally when the primary has had to pull out at short notice

@Bob What is the field and does the conference specifically ask that primary author should present unless they unexpectedly cannot make it after the abstract has been accepted?

@FranckDernoncourt The field is materials science. I don't know if the conference specifies. It looks like I will have to at least begin the online submission process to see if there is any further guidance.

@Bob Well if the conference specifies no rule, you can't break any! :)


text:
My current LOR is "good but not great". Should I switch to a LOR whose doesn't know me well, but certainly thinks I'm a top student?
I'm applying for graduate school in a hard science this year, and most things on my application are pretty good so far. Two of my letters should be strong, but regarding the third one, the professor told me in the interest of full disclosure, that his letter will be a positive one, but certainly not the best he's written. This particular researcher is well known in his subfield, which isn't the field I'm applying to, but it's not very far away either. I've taken many of his graduate courses, and also did an independent reading course with him. The graduate courses went pretty well, but the reading course didn't unfortunately, (mostly due to a difference in style) and as a result of all this interaction, he knows me well, and he thinks I'm a good but not great student. Now I'm really hoping I can get into at least one of the better schools on my list, and it's insanely competitive, particularly in my subfield.
Another option of mine is asking another professor who doesn't know me that well and is in mathematics instead than the hard science I'm applying to, but he certainly thinks I'm a top student, since he was responsible for many of the math awards I got and I did really well in the one class that I did take with him.
Q: Would having two great and one good letter hurt me at the top places? My impression is that students who get admitted to top places have their professors say that they're the best student they've seen in many years, and not having such a letter could result in rejection. Which recommendation should I go for? Is it advisable that I even do both and send in four letters?

I think professor "you're good but not great" is doing you a great service by letting you know in advance that his letter will not be one that you want in your application.  If you are applying to an insanely competitive program, then indeed such a letter would jeopardize your application.  I've done graduate admissions at the 50th best math department in the US, and we can do better than "good but not great".
A letter from someone in an adjacent field is definitely not as good as a letter from someone in your field, but getting a letter from someone who was responsible for "many of the awards" you got is certainly strong.  The sentiment that you have award-winning mathematical skills should be a positive one on an application to graduate school in the sciences.
I would definitely switch the letters.  Also remember that the first professor really helped you out.  It is not the sort of help that is worth an effusive thank-you on your part, but it is worth keeping in mind and perhaps remembering to do for someone else someday.

Thanks for your answer and I've just sent an email prof 2. When I asked the first professor initially, he said I should focus on the schools rated from 10-20 and said that I have a very strong chance of getting into them. So he certainly thought well of me, perhaps just not top 10 material. My other reason for considering still sending his letter was that my other two should be strong, and I thought that it would have been acceptable to not have all three letters be glowing. What would be your thoughts on sending his as a fourth letter?

"When I asked the first professor initially, he said I should focus on the schools rated from 10-20 and said that I have a very strong chance of getting into them. So he certainly thought well of me, perhaps just not top 10 material."  This conveys a slightly different impression. Perhaps not top ten material is rather different from "good but not great".  As I said, I have done graduate admissions at about the 50th best math department in the country.  When we get letters which describe the applicant in these lukewarm terms: e.g. "recommend" versus "recommend strongly", it does not bode well.

You sound like you may not be completely clear of what the professor thinks of you and/or what he meant.  The key question is: why has he chosen to disclose to you that he would give you a sub-optimal recommendation?  I don't know why anyone would do this other than to suggest that you should look for stronger recommendatins elsewhere.  If I thought a student would be well placed in the 20th best program in their field, I would certainly write them a very strong letter and I would not be warning them that their letter might not get them into the top ten.  No one letter does that.

Also, you described that you reading course you took as "not going well".  That's quite negative. In terms of it being "acceptable not to have all three letters be glowing": that's a strange remark.  Yes, it's acceptable but it may not be enough to get you accepted.  Are you really not aware that top programs (not just the top 10) mostly to exclusively accept candidates whose applications are superior in every way?  (Perhaps you don't fully understand what "insanely competitive" means?) Anyway, no, it would not help to submit an additional letter which is worse than the others.

He did indeed clarify his reason for doing so: He said his letter would  be unlikely to get me into the top 10, so I should add other programs that are easier to get into, to my list as well (since at the moment my list is quite top-heavy). And yes, you are correct that I am a bit unclear about his opinion of me, mostly due to the mixed results of my interactions with him. The reading course, didn't go well, which like you mention is quite a bad thing. He mentioned that I was the first person who he gave a non-A to in a reading course, which felt like quite a slap in the face at the time...

... but after that course, I took two of his graduate courses (and one before it) and did well in both of them, and my time spent chatting with him during office hours generally left a good feeling, so I thought I may have redeemed myself somewhat.

I recommend you speak again to all potential letter writers.  Tell them the range of schools you want to apply to and get their reaction.  Then tell them that you are trying to figure out who to write for you so as to maximize your chances of getting into the schools that you mentioned.  You should get an idea of how enthusiastic they are from the response.  Of course you want all letters to be glowing.  Based on what you've said, I think this professor is signalling clearly that he's not going to write the type of letter you want, but it's up to you to figure that out for yourself.

Thank you for your help. I'm sure of my other two letter writers. It's just the third one I'm being indecisive about. As of now, I'm leaning towards the math professor.

Pete, I think the warning may not be a red flag, so much as a reality check. Say I'm writing a top-20-but-not-top-10 letter for a student (i.e. the last sentence of my first paragraph contains the phrase "top-15 department" or equivalent). Certainly there is nothing about this situation that would be cause for warning the student; I have a high opinion of them and will write a strong letter. But if I then learned the student was only applying to top 10 schools, I would feel the need to clarify that my letter is not going to make that happen. I agree with your overall advice though.

@Tom: In this case there is some other evidence that the professor does not have a uniformly positive opinion of the student.  I'm also a little skeptical of the difference between a "top ten" and "top twenty" letter: does one really write a letter thinking, "This should get the student into Texas but not UCLA"?  I agree that "You should not only apply to the very top programs" and "FYI, I won't be writing you an excellent letter; maybe someone else can" are very different messages.  Opinions do differ, and it is worth the trouble to try to find the people who think the most highly of you.

Also, that's why I think it's good idea to talk to all the potential writers about this.  Maybe one person is being more forthright about the calibration of their letter.  Just because someone says "Okay, I'll do it" does not guarantee that their opinion of you is higher or that their letter will be stronger.  It is awkward to ask about these things, but it is your life and your career, so I think the conversations should be had.

I can tell you from personally witnessing the contrary that even a professor who writes your recommendation letter can't really predict whether or not you'll be admitted into his own department correctly. So don't expect that to jeopardize your application.
That said, if you think your second recommendation will be stronger then send that one in instead of this one which you know isn't great; I don't see the benefit of not doing so.

"Not the best I've written" is probably a huge understatement, and he's letting you down easy.  Pretty much all letters of recommendation are positive ones, so he's basically saying he'll write you a bad or mediocre letter.
I would definitely go with the one who doesn't know you as well but will say good things about you.  I think people understand that most undergrads aren't going to get to know three different professors on a super personal level.  But it would be bad if you did get to know professors and they said bad things about you.
Besides, it's nice to have someone who can attest to your mathematical ability, since that trait is strongly prized in many of the hard sciences.


text:
Can one 'wear out' an editor with bad papers?
Should the fact that a journal's editor is 'human' be a factor in submitting manuscripts?
Example - say I'm writing 4 manuscripts. The first three are 'bad' and the fourth is good. Then I submit them to the journal, one every 6 months or so. The first three will be rejected. But will they affect the ruling of my 4th submitted manuscript, even it is much better?
I.e., should I keep in mind that the journal's editor gets my manuscripts and by the time I get to my 4th and 'good' manuscript,  will they already have a biased opinion on my works?

Why would you submit papers that you know are bad?

Speaking from personal experience, you can certainly wear out this referee with bad papers. However, there is a difference between "bad" and "OK but not strong enough to get into this journal at this time"

@Davidmh That was not implied in the question.

Journals often have more than ten editors.  The last time I tried to get two papers in front of the same editor, they were routed to different editors.

If you are sending a lot of bad papers that can certainly influence your chances. If I were to get two papers rejected in a row from the same journal, I would probably not submit to the same journal a couple of months after.

@Davidmh perhaps the example was too extreme. I of course mean that I think the paper is good enough, but it turns out I was wrong.

As a referee, there are certain names that are red flags to me, and I will tend to refuse to referee their papers.  Presumably the same would happen to an editor.  I would certainly be unhappy if the editor sent a paper to me from an author who had a history of poor work.

I can imagine a situation like this:  There is the top journal in your field.  You submit all your papers there first, even though (so far) they have all been rejected.  But you keep doing this, hoping to one day make the grade.

Perhaps this depends in part on the rate of acceptance? If a journal rejects 95% of submissions, for example, then the fact that an author has had some past submissions rejected may not have quite the same implications as in the case of a journal that only rejects, say, 60%. Also, if the journal does double-blind review (as they should), then neither the editor nor the referee will know it is the same author. (At least, in theory. In practice, it may sometimes be possible to tell.) Unfortunately, double-blind review is less common than one might hope.

It may also depend on why the papers are rejected: are they not quite good enough (but almost)? Were they on topics which the editor already had selected articles on for the next few issues? Were they off-topic but for an understandable reason (i.e. the editor sees why the author thought..., even though not...)? Or were they well below the minimum standard? Plagiarised? Unreadable? Gravely and obviously misguided or mistaken? On topics completely unrelated to the journal's area?

Should you keep in mind that the editor is human? If I interpret your question literally then the answer is vacuously "Yes," since undoubtedly the editor is human, so if you want to achieve the best results then surely you would take that into account, along with any other information that can help you reach good decisions.
But I assume that what you really meant to ask was more along the lines of "To what extent should the fact that the editor is human play a factor in my submission decisions? Discuss."
Well, in that case I would say: to a very large extent. More generally, in academia reputation is really, really important. Your reputation is shaped over time by the quality of the products (papers, talks etc.) you deliver. A bad reputation from writing and submitting multiple poor papers will almost certainly result in a negative bias against you that could easily translate to a less kind and more judgmental treatment from editors and (in areas like mathematics that don't have double-blind reviews) reviewers.
It's worth mentioning that the effect also works in the other direction, and someone with a very good reputation after publishing a series of brilliant, groundbreaking papers could come up with a mediocre paper and still have a reasonable chance of being treated more kindly by the editor and reviewers. Is this unfair? Maybe -- or, one might argue, maybe not, if you consider that the editor and reviewers have limited time and need to invest them in the papers that they think are statistically most likely to advance science in a meaningful way. A paper from an author who has a good track record is statistically a safer bet. Of course, one should not get carried away with such reasoning and still give the paper you are reviewing a careful reading and do the best you can to stay impartial in your evaluation.
The moral of my answer is that there are many ways in which the three "bad" papers in the example could be turned into "average" or maybe even "good" papers by putting in additional work, and that it's very worth going to the trouble of doing this, because there is much more at stake than just those few papers - indeed, the quality of the three papers can have a significant effect on one's future submissions and career as well.

I like this answer a lot.  To a large extent you said what I wanted to say in my answer, but in (I think) a clearer, less controversial, less personal way.  Good job.

Thank you very much. I liked all the answers, but this is maybe the first answer I would read.

Funny question - should the fact that a journal's editor is 'human' be a factor in submitting manuscripts?

You don't have to take into account the journal editor as human being -- e.g. there is nothing wrong with submitting to an editor you have never heard of or met but whose credentials look relevant -- but in my experience (I am in mathematics) I get better service from editors with whom I have a prior acquaintance and a prior (positive!) professional relationship.  So my answer to this would be If possible, yes, try to make this work in your favor.

Example - say I'm writing 4 manuscripts. The first three are 'bad' and the fourth is good. Then I submit them to the journal, one every 6 months or so. The first three will be rejected. But will they affect the ruling of my 4th submitted manuscript, even it is much better?

Like @Davidmh, I am wondering why you are submitting three manuscripts that you describe as 'bad'.  (Admittedly you call them "'bad'", not "bad", but still...) I am also wondering why you are submitting manuscripts that you know will be rejected, but I gather here you are setting up the premise of a hypothetical.  Finally, I wonder whether you have a good reason for submitting four manuscripts in such rapid succession to the same journal, whether they are accepted or not.
But let me answer your question first: yes, having three manuscripts rejected from the same journal can conceivably affect the way your fourth manuscript is received, even though in theory it should not, and you have already identified the reason: editorial boards consist of human beings.  Three 'bad' manuscripts is enough to establish a pattern that you don't understand the value of your own work.  People who are involved in processing your fourth paper will find it very difficult not to view it with that lens.  Of course this does not at all mean that your paper will be rejected: if it's sufficiently good it will almost certainly be accepted by that journal or by some other journal of similar quality.  (But that would happen no matter what...)
So I do not recommend the practice you propose.  Just to address a few side issues:
1) Unless you have a clear reason to do so, publishing too often in the same journal also looks (moderately) bad.
2) Some journals turn out to have quotas on papers from the same author.  Once I resubmitted to the same editor of the Proceedings of the AMS within a year after getting a paper accepted there, and he told me that he couldn't consider the paper.  Another time I had a paper accepted at a leading combinatorics journal with a large backlog, and within a year of acceptance I submitted a followup paper (with a different set of authors) which went deeper on the same topic.  The editorial board discussed the matter, decided that with their large backlog they didn't want to publish two papers on the same topic in such rapid succession...and then asked me whether I would be willing to combine the newly submitted paper with the already accepted paper!  (Needless to say, the answer was no.)  These stories show that editors of journals certainly do have memory of authors of past submissions, and even past successful submissions can be a reason to want to submit elsewhere in the short term.
3) Gian-Carlo Rota quipped that the mathematical community calculates the worth of a mathematician by taking their best paper and dividing by the total number of papers they've written.  This is deliciously cruel and obviously not to be taken literally -- in fact one needs to show a certain level of research activity in many hiring and promotion decisions at most research universities -- but there is more than a grain of truth to it.  At this point in my career I write about 3-4 papers per year.  If I were (quite counterfactually, obviously) in a negotiation to trade X past publications for one publication in a journal which is one level higher than the best journal I've published in so far, then my starting offer for X would be more than 10.  Rota is right that it could actually help to increase my research profile in certain elite circles by removing most of my publications that do not contain major breakthroughs.  This is something to think about with regard to your "three 'bad', then one good" proposal.
Added: When I left this answer, I thought the OP was in the field of mathematics, based on his SE activity.  Then I found a comment which says he is in computer science.  So it would be useful to him to have an answer located in CS, as well.  Some of what I say should carry over, but maybe not all.
Further Added: In the first version of this answer, I wrote "better service and also better results from editors with whom I have a prior acquaintance."  After having thought about the italicized passage, it is not clear to me that it is true (so I took it out).  For instance I can think of two journals that have rejected at least two and accepted none of my papers in recent years, and in each case I had previously met the editor and had positive professional relations with them.  In fact when I get even one rejection from an editor I don't really know, all else being equal I will probably not resubmit to them: maybe they're not biased against me at all, but if I don't know them at all, why not just take my chances elsewhere?  What I think is true is that an editor who knows me is much more likely to know where I am coming from professionally and (i) find me a competent and fair referee and (ii) expend some effort to make sure that the referee process is done in a reasonable amount of time.  Also, when I talk about "knowing editors," of course I mean professionally: I'm not talking about spending time on their yacht.  Someone whom I have met and talked to at a conference, whom I have done a good refereeing job and gotten thanked for makes a good choice for an editor to submit to.  I am not a journal editor, but I do a lot of service-related academic tasks, and I will say: I never set out to do a bad job, but knowing that an especially good job would help out someone who has helped me out in the past can make me want to work a bit harder than otherwise.  I imagine that many if not most people are similar: this is a positive form of social reinforcement.

Thanks for the illuminating answer. Something that's not clear to me - why is it bad practice to submit to the same journal? I see many faculty that submit throughout the years to about the same journals, especially in the case of high quality journals. Should one in the name of diversity submit to another one?

It is not necessarily a bad practice to publish too often to the same journal, but it can be viewed (a bit) badly.  If the journal you keep publishing in is Annals or Inventiones, go right ahead.  If it's not perceived by your peers as being at the very top, then people will wonder why you are not being more diverse: there are literally hundreds of reputable math journals, with fine gradations in prestige.  On the one hand it seems strange that so many papers would be of exactly the same quality.  On the other, some may start to wonder whether you are reaping benefits of friendly editors.

I get better service and also better results from editors with whom I have a prior acquaintance and a prior (positive!) professional relationship That's interesting, the general sentiment in my field is that  you must have no professional or personal relationship with the reviewers. Knowing the reviewers personally sounds too much like old friends patting each other on the shoulder.

@CapeCode: "editors" =/= "reviewers"!

@PeteL.Clark This is more a matter of tone than of substance, but your bolded rhetorical question "why not put all one's efforts into publishing one great thing?" may be overlooking the various pressures on a practising researcher in different countries/systems. The NA model looks somewhat luxurious from this side of the pond, for instance. (I agree that in principle it would be better to publish less and publish better; just wanted to say that the tone of what you wrote could be construed as let them eat brioche )

@Yemon: I certainly agree that there are exigencies for people to publish, sometimes severe.  But "first let me spend several years writing three bad papers" is pretty dramatic.  In fact, based on a later comment by the OP, this may not be what he really meant.  (Added: okay, I removed this passage.)

@CapeCode I absolutely agree with you.  The unfortunately reality is that pre-submission discussions and relationships with editors is often a key part of getting papers into very high-profile journals.

Some comments have been removed. Please keep comments civil and constructive.

@Chris: It is not really clear to what extent editorial goodwill is a finite resource.   A desire not to take authorial history into account is one of the rationales behind double-blind reviewing, for instance.  I am not saying that I myself believe it is necessarily bad to take authorial history into account when editing, but my understanding is that most editors would say that they should not do this.  FYI, I am not an editor, but as a referee I try not to be unduly dismissive.  Anonymous Math. writes "Of course I know these speculations are unfair."  Perhaps you should ask him about it.

"[Y]ou must be taking as an axiom that some social notion like forgiveness or equality is more important than raw quality." Well, yes: I hope that most journal editors believe that it is more important to follow certain procedures than to try to optimize the quality of the papers at any cost.  Papers are supposed to be peer-reviewed, not selected by editors based on their feelings of a given author's inner worth.  There is certainly an amount of accounting for "authorial priors" which would be inappropriate.

A steady stream of rejected submissions can definitely leave editors feeling annoyed, assuming the papers are definite rejects and not borderline or debatable cases.  I rarely see this in practice, but when I do it leaves me speculating uncharitably about the authors.  Are they so clueless that they have no idea how likely their papers are to be accepted, even given the clearly established pattern?  Are they submitting as a protest, knowing that the papers will probably be rejected but feeling that we deserve to waste time rejecting them if we are going to be so unfair?  Are they trying to game the system by submitting papers they know most referees will not recommend for publication, in the hope of slipping in by getting a careless or sympathetic referee?
I don't actively hold this against the authors, but I do try extra hard to make sure consistent standards are upheld and random fluctuations don't reward this submission strategy.
Of course I know these speculations are unfair, and I don't necessarily believe them about any particular case, but I have to wonder.  What particularly annoys me is that conscientious, hard-working referees are a limited resource, which I'd rather not spend on scattershot submissions.  I've never actually reached the point of explicitly suggesting to the authors that maybe they are submitting too many papers, but I've considered it.
Note that this might be field-dependent, and I'm in mathematics (where publishing practices differ somewhat from other fields, and where refereeing is a much more difficult task).  I've sometimes heard people in other fields describe an iterative submission process where you always start at the top journals and move one step down with each rejection.  If this is common in your field, then maybe editors are used to it.

While  one could get too worried, I would say even one bad paper can sour a journal editor. If you believe the paper has no real chance of being accepted, or has major issues, then you are wasting the editor's and reviewer's time. If the editor remembers your name when your next paper comes around, while they won't reject out of hand, they may treat it with less respect, or be more suspicious of any minor issues, now you have proved to produce very low quality work.


text:
Citing "p. x" to mean page ten of a book looks confusing since "x" isn't clearly a Roman Numeral
By theory, I should cite page x (page ten) like [Krusche1999, p. x]. If it were on page iii or page xi, it would look better, such as [Krusche1999, p. iii] or [Krusche1999, p. xi]. However, it is on page x, so we end up with p. x. At least to me, I won't understand, what p. x means at first sight. What do you think? Any good ideas?

Ah, it took me a few seconds to understand this is a problem similar to the 4th subsection of section 10 in APS style, i.e., Sec. XD

To me, "p. x" seems more or less as understandable as "p. xi".  In isolation, "x" wouldn't look as obviously like a Roman numerical, but after "p." I don't see any other plausible interpretation.  So I wouldn't worry about this (but maybe other people would find it weirder than I would).

This suggests an interesting possibility for my next paper: "We refer the reader to [Krusche1999, p. x], where x is the solution of equation (17)".

@AnonymousMathematician: I disagree: An x at any place where a number (or a title, or something) is expected inherently makes me think "Someone forgot to look up the exact page and substitute the placeholder in their camera-ready version." as the most plausible interpretation. That said, I am totally in favour of writing "p. x" nonetheless, as a page reference is only irrelevant eye-candy for readers who don't actually look for the page in the source, and readers who do will immediately find out what is meant by x.

@O.R.Mapper has the right idea - besides, if the page number really is "x" you don't have a lot of choice. This should be a rare occurrence anyway as (lower case) roman page numbering is generally used for front matter which doesn't tend to contain anything worth citing (anything in the abstract could be better cited from a more detailed part of the work).

@ChrisH Yes, roman numbering system is usually used to number pages before the main part of the book. But I did want to cite a sentence in the prelude.

If the style guide doesn't otherwise say, you could put the Roman numerals in italics. Many books do that anyways. Plus, because it's italicized, to me, it would stand out more as a "I intentionally put x".

@guifa Bad idea. By default (and following ISO standards), LaTeX typesets all mathematical variables in italics.  So at least in communities that use LaTeX, setting the x in italics ("p. x") suggests more strongly that x is a variable—that is, a placeholder—than setting it upright ("p. x").

To expand on AAA's answer, the correct answer to any question about citation style is always "check with the guidelines of the journal in question." To give one example, the Chicago Manual of Style clearly lists how to cite introductory page numbers. Your journal will link to something similar; check their documentation and do whatever they say.

If the journal's style guide covers such points, your answer is perfect. But I don't recall coming across a journal in my own field (theoretical comp. sci.) where the style guides go into anything like this level of detail.

@DavidRicherby - Good point. Many journals (where "many" is completely unquantified) will simply say "use APA style" or "use IEEE style", which simplifies things. However, if a journal tries to "roll their own", then yeah, that's an issue.


text:
How to find people who do similar research?
I am 28 years old and did my PhD last year at an applied math institute and left. However, I am still in good contact with my old working group  and my PhD adviser told me I should come back.
At the moment I am a self-employed programmer. Although I really like my current job, I sometimes wonder if I should give the academic career another try. The main reason why I left was that I did not feel integrated in research society.
To be more precise, most articles I read where between 1950-1960. Most of my focus area are was out of scope from my adviser (he is an expert in numerical optimization, I was doing measure theory and Markov operator theory combined with numerical optimization). I had a lot of fun to modernize old theorems and try to apply them to numeric problems. Although I enjoyed the freedom of doing research on my own, I often was wondering if the results that I found are already known. My advisor was often surprised about my fundamental results, but he could not tell me if they are actual new. In fact, after searching persistent for one of my main theorems, I found it in a booklet from 1960 written with a typewriter - with a much shorter and genial proof.  Although most of my other theorems have been peer-reviewed and published in B journals, I am still waiting for someone contacting me: "Hello, your result X in journal Y is known for a long time".
The author of this typewritten book is actually still alive (85 years old), on facebook and on top of that even accepted my friend-request. However, lives in New York and I live in Germany, so I can't easily visit for a short talk. I did send a text message, but  never received a reply, I am not sure if it was because they do not want to talk about math anymore or if they just did not receive it, because facebook sometimes hides messages.
I was searching the web for professors doing similar research to what I am interested (by entering some keywords together with university into google). However, when I scanned their recent publications, I had no idea what they are doing.
I think I might missed the opportunity to connect to other working groups. I love teaching and doing research, but I also hate doing isolated research and having no defined task.
Is there any specific way of finding people who do similar research that I am not aware of?

I was sending him a text message, but he never replied I think you need to find an easy way for him to write in Math if he wants to reply. He probably doesn't know how to use LaTex. Remember, he is 85 years old and published a typewriten book.

Call him. That is what people did before Internet.

I find ResearchGate useful for this purpose

Assuming that this person is NOT well versed with technology, but still accepted your FB request, you might want to consider reaching out to his/her family members (who might be in his/her fb account)?

MathSciNet is a pretty powerful tool for finding things in math, and some parts of applied math (from the question, I think it cover your areas).  (There's also Zentralblatt--I'm less familiar with that, but I think MSN will have more relevant tools for you.)  See about getting access to that as a guest at a local university.
Then here are some things you can do:

Starting with papers you know that are close to your area, look them up in MathSciNet and look at the papers citing them or citing their reviews (of course you can do the first with Google scholar also, for papers that are available online).  Read the reviews to see if they are of interest.  For the ones that look interesting, repeat.  You can similarly look up all publications by a given author.
You can also search in MathSciNet by Math. Subject Classification codes to look for papers in certain subareas of applied math.
Without MathSciNet access, you can search for things on the arXiv or Google Scholar with keywords/authors/etc.  I guess this is what you have been doing.  Note, unlike Google Scholar, arXiv has subject classifications and anyone can read any paper listed there.
The subject has probably advanced a lot in 50-60 years, so it's may not be strange if most of the stuff going on now doesn't seem (at least on the surface) too close to the papers you were reading from the '50s and '60s.  So you might try looking for and reading some survey papers/lecture notes/textbooks to get a better sense of the area first.
If possible, try going to some conferences/local seminars and talking to people.


text:
How to critically review an article when one doesn't have proper background knowledge?
I am in talks with a PhD supervisor for admission to university who likes my profile but has given me an article to review. Although the article is related to my broader research area, there are some terminologies that I don't have proper background knowledge. I have read the article and have fair understanding of it. I have written a summary, problem statement, proposed solution and methodology  in review format provided by supervisor but I am stuck at critical review section as I don't have proper background knowledge. I want to know how to go about in this case? How should I review this critically?
Any help would be appreciated.

Initially avoid thinking to review it critically. Just read the whole paper once. You will get the notion of the work. Then you can think of any critical suggestion you could give with consultation with your supervisor.

You have two main options here:

Write the review. When does he expect it by? Do you have time to learn any of this background knowledge? If you do have time, I suggest you start by finding the sources that the article cites. This might help with the terminology and it will certainly help you place the article within the context of current research. You don't say what field/discipline you study, so I can't provide more detailed advice until you do.
Tell him you don't have the background knowledge. This may sound like a bad idea, but if you start off an advisor/advisee relationship with dishonesty, you're heading for disaster. If you do a good job writing the review, he will assume that you have all that background knowledge and terminology. This will likely mean that you will be playing catch-up, trying to learn what he thinks you already know. If you tell him, be diplomatic. Show him what you've completed and point out specific terms and parts of the article that you're having difficulty with. Ask for books/articles that could help you write it.

If the references in the article don't help you and you are unwilling to tell him that you're having difficulties, I suggest contacting a professor that you know from undergrad.

This is really the whole point of the challenge the supervisor has presented you. I bet he was hoping to hit you with something that wouldn't exactly be easy for you. He's trying to get you to stretch a bit and get out of your comfort zone. I don't know what he intends by the review format that he gave you, but if you have any critiques, concerns, or other thoughts about this article, this is where you should put them. It almost doesn't even matter if you're right (almost), but you need to show him that you've thought about the article, that you can explain its implications, and that if there are things that worry you about it, that you can explain them.
If you are really stuck, it's probably worth looking through some of the articles that are cited by the article in question to give yourself some more background. This should also help you set the article in the context of some of the rest of the literature.