text:
What's the best way to deal with questions that I don't understand because of accent during/after a talk?
You can prepare a talk from a to z, know exactly what you are going to say and how (and this is even more important when English is not your first language and your skills are not top-notch) - but what can you do when you are asked a question with a thick accent that you just don't understand?
You can ask the asker to repeat the question, but this is only possible once, and if you still don't understand, you're in a jam.
This can lead to some seriously awkward moments...
What would be the best way to deal with such a situation?

What I usually do is to try to piece together as much of the question as I can and then rephrase/guess/fill in the blank in my own words ("So you are asking whether..."). If my guess is close enough the person asking usually relents. If not, repeat this process until the question is clarified.
In the long term the only solution is to try to expose yourself more often to different accents so that you learn to understand how they differ from the "standard" ones.

Also, once it becomes clear that you simply can't understand what the person is saying, often someone else in the audience who does understand will jump in and repeat the question.

I have two suggestions that you might consider. Neither is a panacea but one or the other might help.
If this happens frequently, or is likely to, have a colleague who has "native" speaking skills and with whom you are in frequent successful communication listen for questions and relay them to you as needed. They can understand the speaker and you can understand them. I'm very deaf and have trouble understanding almost every conversation. But I can communicate well with my spouse, as I hear her everyday and know how her mouth moves when she is speaking. She often has to interpret for me in any social situation, even among friends where accent and language are not an issue. Some deaf speakers have colleagues or others use sign language to relay questions.
The second way, that works in some, but not all, situations, is to ask the questioner to meet with you after the talk in a quieter environment where conversation is easier and you can have some back-and-forth that is hard in a public space. Questions asked in auditoriums can be hard to hear even in the best case. A disadvantage, of course, is that others don't get to hear your answer. But even here, giving "I'm not a native speaker" as the reason for the request to meet is probably a good idea.
But I would avoid any suggestion that the other has an accent or other possible communication issue. Own the problem yourself.

Just be frank and say ' Sorry, but It's hard for me to understand your accent as X language is not my native language and I learned it for certain region.', then repeat the question to them and ask if you got it right, and if you didn't for X word, politely ask them to repeat that word or to change it.
In a more normal conversation this will help you learn more on the language and the other person will learn their accent might be hard and that it is not personal. In a standing talk or presentation start the same but right off but you can ask for rephrasing right off, or someone will repeat the question for you.

There are people who would be offended that you comment on their accent. I would avoid that. Leave out "your accent" and it is more friendly.


text:
Going from a Canadian Master's to an American PhD? [CS]
This was inspired by another question here.
In Canada (and Europe as I believe), the graduate school process is a little different than in the US. The default here for people going into academia/research is to do a thesis-based Master's (1-2 years) followed by a PhD (4-5 years). The Master's is basically the first two years of an American PhD (according to Canadian professors I talked to), except that it culminates in a thesis.
Of course in the US, the default is to directly enter a PhD after undergrad (this is rare within Canada).
Question: After I graduate from a Canadian thesis-based Master's, what are the prospects of me doing a PhD in America? How do committees evaluate such candidates? Would the connotations of having done a US Master's and then applying to a PhD hold here (as in the question linked above)? Once admitted, would I be treated differently than direct-to-PhD students?
My field is theoretical computer science FWIW.

You can probably be guided by the following as well as other answers there: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/177418/75368

@Buffy yes I've seen this (linked in my question). The answer is about US Masters and a lot of the points don't apply to Canadian ones. I'm wondering if due to the country differences, someone with a Canadian Masters is treated differently by a committee than someone with an American Masters, and to what extent.

Again, the same applies. Don't fret.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
To what degree is institutional affiliation a conflict of interest when submitting to a conference?
I'm submitting to a conference, and in the part where you're supposed to indicate conflict of interest, they indicate that same affiliation is a conflict of interest.
So I've declared affiliation CoI for those program committee members with the same affiliation as me.
My question is: will this preclude them from reviewing my submission?

Yes, it will almost certainly preclude them from being involved in any way with handling your submission. That is the whole point of flagging someone as having a conflict of interest, so if they were not precluded you would not be asked to indicate those committee members.
Source: personal experience, including as recent program committee co-chair of a large conference.

It is unlikely that you would be precluded in any way. More likely is that some committee members might have to recuse from any decisions if the conflict is deemed serious. Not all "same affiliation" relationships are conflicts, of course.
But it is a committee management issue, not a sorting one.

I think you’re answering a different question from what OP asked. It’s not about whether OP’s submission would be precluded from being reviewed, but about whether the people OP flagged would be precluded from being reviewers for the submission.

I flagged them specifically as being the same affiliation in the "conflict of interest" part of the submission (it was one of the drop-down options). It seems Buffy you're saying this might not preclude them from being a reviewer, while Dan is saying it definitely will?

@DanRomik, and OP, I interpreted "them" as the committee as a whole (i.e. the conference), not those specific individuals. As I said: "some committee members might have to recuse".

I'm curious about "Not all 'same affiliation' relationships are conflicts, of course", because my conference seems to think otherwise. Am I interpreting this correctly?

You have to list them, of course, but they may judge that, for example, having taught you one course in the past isn't sufficient reason to require recusal. Being your advisor is a different sort of situation, of course. You list - they judge. You list potential conflicts. They judge actual conflicts.

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


text:
Using work from someone else's talk for oneself
I work in physics.
Throughout my graduate career, I heard about people who have been known to see work done in a talk and subsequently catch up to that work and then-some, and attempt to publish first. I ignored this lore assuming it wasn't really true.
Now I am presenting at a conference where there will be someone (actually a big-wig) who has a reputation for this sort of maneuver, and I don't have a pre-print yet to post online.
Any recommendations about how to mitigate the potential for this to happen (besides being ready sooner obviously, I'm working very hard on this work). Thanks.

Give the impression that the preprint is almost ready so that big-wig sees no chance to be first.

Assuming you have results that are developed enough that there is something to steal, why are you giving talks before writing it up? Write it up and put a preprint on arXiv or similar. It doesn't have to be in 100% ready to submit form, just include the important parts that you are trying to establish precedence for.
Alternately, give a big-picture overview that does not give enough small details that your results could be recreated easily. Presumably your work would take even a big-wig months of compiling data, running computations, or SOMETHING before they could write a paper and submit it before you.


text:
Writing lit review for publication in a good journal: what to do about papers published in dubious journals?
I'm publishing in a field related to applied linguistics, and I'm making use of a new theoretical framework which has been used only in 4 published articles. 1 of those articles was published in an in-house university journal and the other in a very dubious open access journal, i.e. the kind of journals that publish basically anything.
Do I cite and probably critique these 2 papers in my lit review or ignore them?
I've certainly made use of these kinds of journals or conference proceedings in the past myself, which tend to have limited or no peer review. Those older papers of mine haven't really been cited by others, nor would I expected them to have been. But now I'm a bit further along in my career and publishing in journals with good citescores.
The articles aren't terrible, but somewhat misuse/misunderstand the theoretical framework I'm using. One in particular describes and tries to use the framework as if it's quantiative when it's actually qualitiative. I came across the papers late in the writing process, so I can't say they have contributed to my theoretical framework or analysis. I feel if cite them at all I'm giving them weight and weakening the impression readers would have of the framework. One of my main purposes in writing my article is to popularize the framework. I also don't think it's great to cite some obscure paper in a well-known journal just to tear it down.
What does everyone think? Is it better to ignore these papers, or do I have a responsibly to cite and critique all studies which make use of the theoretical framework, however suspect the publication source is? Obviously I'm leaning to the former, but I'm open to a change of mind.

Somewhat related: Is it wrong not to cite a bad quality paper when the literature on the topic is scarce?, Should I cite a really bad research paper published in my small research area?

Generally I'd say the issue is quality, not where the papers are published.

title: lit review for publication

You title seems to suggest your paper is a review paper. However, reading through your question, I understand you're indicating the lit review section of your manuscript.
If your manuscript is a review, you ought to review all four papers that have worked/used the framework.
In this instance, it's the lit review section within your paper, you may, you may not. However, you'll be doing a disservice to the research community by ignoring willy-nilly

One of my main purposes in writing my article is to popularize the framework

In popularising the framework, you'll do well in highlighting/showcasing the ways it's been used and how it should not be used, also how it's been used innovatively.

somewhat misuse/misunderstand the theoretical framework I'm using. One in particular describes and tries to use the framework as if it's quantiative when it's actually qualitiative

I'm not a mixed-methods person and hence don't get caught up in the quantitative and qualitative discourse. I'm inclined towards plurality (multimethods). Without a sight of the paper, I'm not in a position to comment appropriately.
However, it might be that the authors might be attempting quantitising the qualitative framework. If it's not, you used be able to point this out in your manuscript without necessarily 'tearing their paper down'. If it is so, them write on 'innovativeness' of their quantitising approach and how best to use the framework qualitatively.

What does everyone think? Is it better to ignore these papers, or do I have a responsibly to cite and critique all studies which make use of the theoretical framework

Ignoring might not be the best. More so, you've said that the articles in themselves ain't overly 'bad'.
Yes, you should rather critique all (relevant) previous studies. What you should guard against is criticise.


text:
Presentation - citations on the title?
How uncommon or weird is it to put my citations in a powerpoint slide at the title ? I really want to put the citations in the slide and not only at the very end.

At the very least, don't underline the citation, since it's not part of the actual slide title.

I would prefer if the reference is in the first line of the slide (perhaps after a definition) instead.
Putting the reference in the title does not seem very aesthetic.
Also, it seems that this page of the slide does not contain a definition, which is definitely needed.

thanks ! You are right it does not look good. I'll do as you have suggested.

Slides are different beasts from papers and the style should match the medium. For example, we usually enumerate equations in papers, but shall we do it on slides? Clearly, readers can not go back until the presenter himself does it, so why wasting space on numbers in the first place?
Applying it to your example: why would you need [1]? Simply put reference if you feel it's needed. Or symbolise, [Kingma et al 2015].

For a presentation, such citations are entirely useless. The very structure of presentation means that the audience cannot move around in a presentation and scroll into the future to look up what something refers to. As Dmitry Savostyanov
points out, references on the slide like (A.N. Person 2016) gives some partial information that might be of use to informed audiences or introduce other characters of the story of research. They do have the advantage that they can be viewed at the appropriate time in the presentation.
Now I was discussing presentations, not slides. Some people distribute slides as handouts and handouts can be read in a nonlinear way at the time and convenience of the reader. Putting such citations in the title might well make the slide into a better handout- but certainly into worse presentation slides. Slides are generally suboptimal as handouts. Since you are using LaTex, it should be easy for you to make proper handouts out of your slides if you want handouts, and if you are willing to put in the effort, you can use the advantages of ordinary written communication there. If someone is stuck in using something like PowerPoint and wants handouts, but is too lazy to produce handouts, one should at least have two sets of slides, with the one for presentations not containing useless references the audience cannot access at the time of occurence.

It would be better to introduce that reference giving to it some seconds of your talk. If it is in title, that should be the frame or the motivation of the work.  Nothing wrong but I find it bit weird. However it will surely attract the attention. But nowadays everyone will start searching it instead of listening to you.

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


text:
Going to academia after research job in industry
I have received an offer for an R&D position in a private company. I see that they do quality science, not differently from universities in my field, and they have awesome labs. Plus it’s a fixed term position, I would directly skip the postdoc.
Would such a path allow me to go back to academia in the future, if I will want to? Or would I have to do a postdoc?
This company publishes a lot, so assume that my publication record will be fine.

It depends on the company and the field. Microsoft research and the old Bell Labs (say) certainly allow(ed) you to.

Am confused - aren't postdocs fixed-term?

I wish you luck. Things change, and they will in the next few years. The market could be completely different, as can a position.

Given that it is a company, they may want to keep some things secret or file a provisional patent before allowing you to publish.   This means you are not 'free' to publish whatever and whenever you want.

Sure it's possible. You just need a strong-enough CV to compare against the people who did do the more traditional postdoc route. Couple of examples of people who did it:
Ivar Giaever became a professor at Rensselaer (RPI) without doing a postdoc, but after accumulating a lot of research experience at General Electric.
Anwar Ibrahim had teaching positions at Oxford, Johns Hopkins University and Georgetown University without doing a PhD or postdoc, but with a lot of government experience.
W.E. Moerner after getting PhD worked at IBM research center, served as visiting professor, and later gained tenured professorship

They collaborate with my previous university and they publish as much as academics, and in my same exact field. They’re basically a private research institute and they directly give a long term job instead of hiring Postdocs.

@NearIR sounds like you'll be able to find a job at a university later, if you wish (don't need to say "find an academic job" since the job at the research institute is effectively an academic job).

Yes, you can do that. But, it might be a mistake to wait too long if that is your real goal. Moreover, consider the issue of letters of recommendation that you might want from academics in a year or so. It would be good to find a way to stay in contact with your advisor and other professors who know about your work and can recommend you highly. You don't want them to have a cloudy memory of you when it comes time to ask.
One way to start out that continuing relationship is to tell them now that you will probably want their help in the future and ask them for any advice they might have. Make sure they understand your long term goal is to return to academia.
Moreover, keeping in contact is a good way to keep open the possibility of future collaboration and start to build your own circle.
I don't know of any field in which a postdoc is required per se. What is needed is a way to buffer from the job market and build a reputation so that you compete with others for open positions. You can probably achieve that with such a position.

They collaborate with universities and national labs, so I don’t think that letters will be a problem. I collaborated with them and, besides that they are a private company, they do just the same as we do in academia. They publish in the same field, they go to the same conferences as me, the boss is an editor, etc. They also have labs that you can find in national labs, but rarely in universities. Basically it is a privately run research lab. If - as you users suggest - the postdoc per se is not a formal requirement to go back to academia (in case I want), then it should not be an issue.

And... we’d already be working together with my university on a big international project.


text:
Higher impact factor vs. more focused journal
I am going to publish a paper and I narrowed my alternatives down to two:

the first journal has impact factor 9.2, but it has a broader audience, in terms of research topics.

the second one has impact factor 3.8 but it is more focused and more familiar to my research community. The paper may be seen more easily by people that work in my field.

The paper would be in the scope of both the journals, which alternative would you pick?

Depends on the type of papers you are writing.  That is, you need to consider the audience of your paper; writing for a general audience is very different to a specialize audience.  In my area, general journals (so called magazines) have minimal equations for example.  Also, they are more focused on getting concepts across as opposed to being bogged down by formalism; they tend to be introductory in nature.

Thank you for replying. Both the journals are focused on the formalism, none of them is a ‘‘magazine’’. The broader journal covers many aspects of mechanical and material engineering (equations of state, mechanical response models, chemical behavior and/or magnetic properties of materials, multiphase/multimaterial transport phenomena, and respective practical applications). The second journal is more focused on chemistry and transport processes (which is also the topic of my paper). My paper would fit in the focused journal and be in the scope of the broader one,but together with other topics.

Both journals have a strongly mathematical layout.

then my suggestion is simply to select one arbitrarily.  If the paper is good, it will be read if it appears in a reputable venue.

My other suggestion is probably update your question to name the journals in question.  Someone in your area may provide more specific answers; e.g., the review process, or expectations of the communities that read one or both journals.

The first journal, high impact -> more reads + broader audience -> citations

This question was asked a long time ago, but remains on the unanswered queue. The comments suggest two different approaches.
First, this question has been asked at least twice before here:
A journal with higher IF but general scope, or a journal with less IF but specialized scope?
How to decide between sending paper to a specialized journal or to a journal with broader audience?
Many people hate the idea of impact factor as a metric by which journals (and hence researchers) are judged. But, the sad fact is that this metric still is used in some places, e.g., I have seen it mentioned by external letters on tenure and promotion cases. Hence, all things being equal, if you can get the paper published in the higher impact journal, that might be better for your career. If you are worried about the paper not being "seen" enough by specialists if you publish it in the higher impact journal, you can fix that by uploading a preprint (in math, we use arXiv for this), giving talks about the research, emailing your paper to relevant people, etc.
I echo what was said at the second linked thread above, that what matters MUCH more than impact factor is whether or not the journal has an editor who would be sympathetic to this specific submission. I also echo the advice to look at what other papers they have published recently to see if they do tend to publish papers like the one you've written. Lastly, think about how long the review process takes. Sometimes a more general journal is harder to publish in and you might lose time waiting for a negative referee report, if you misjudged the fit of your paper to that journal. If you are in a hurry to get published, the specialized journal might be a better option (but, check about waiting times there too; it's a bit random which journals tend to make authors wait a long time and which get reports quickly).

If the question is a dupe, it's probably better to flag it as dupe to get it out of the queue than to answer it.

I think that was tried and the question was for some reason not closed as a duplicate

@user176372 Turns out one cannot vote to close a question until one has 3000 rep. And, viewing the history (close votes etc) also requires a higher reputation than I had when I wrote this answer.

Makes sense, David. At risk of explaining something you already know that's related: You should have enough rep to flag a question as a duplicate, or for any other "close reason". At our rep level that doesn't count as a vote, but it does add the question/answer/comment to a queue that the users with a vote crunch through. I seem to be able to see close votes (once they've happened) in the history, but maybe this is a holdover because I've deleted this account at least once when it had more rep.

@user176372 Very interesting that you can see close votes! I can't see them right now at 2175 reputation, but probably will at 3000 when I can cast such votes. It's been a long time since I was a user with such low reputation. On MathOverflow probably more than 10 years ago.


text:
When should one go for a double blind peer review?
Field of interest: Astronomy and Astrophysics (please do share your knowledge and experiences for other fields as well)
Many journals allow the author to request for a double blind peer review.
When should one go for it? What is the current best practice?

"Many journals allow the author to request for a double blind peer review."  What is the alternative?  Single blind peer review?  Open peer review?

If you don't know why then you definitely don't need to request for a double-blind peer review. It goes into one direction: 1) you have a good reason to ask for a double-blind review -> 2) you request it (if it is not the default process).

You can try IJMPD for a double blind review.

Scientific publishing and peer review, no matter what anyone tells you, is very unfair. Therefore, double-blind vs. single-blind (or open) peer review really depends on which choice you think tip the scales in your favor (or at least tip it less in favor of rejection).
The pro of double-blind review is that nobody will judge you based on who you are, your apparent gender (based on your name), or what part of the world/university you come from. The focus will (hopefully) be primarily on the science. Thus, double-blind review seems to be the most ethical choice.
However, maybe you or your boss are big-shots, come from a major R1 university, and are generally part of the academic elite. Then you may WANT people to judge you in part based on who you are! I'm sure we all can think of a few papers in our fields authored by "the big guns" that got published in big journals despite being more or less incremental research!
Open peer review pushes this to the extreme. If you're a powerful person in a position to ruin someone's career, a hypothetical peer reviewer in an open system would be loathe to reject or harshly criticize your paper for fear of future retaliation.
As far as "best practice," I think this varies quite a bit by field. In my field (applied physics/engineering) double-blind and open peer review are only options in a couple of journals that I'm aware of.


text:
Applying to a phd program outside of my field
I have a biology bachelors degree and have been working in a lab for over a year now. My PI is moving universities and recently asked me to join her new lab as a computer science student (I’m interested in bioinformatics but that university doesn’t have that). I have one non-first author papers where I did data analysis work. I am also doing a data science certificate, though it will be from the university she’s coming from and half way completed by the time I apply. I’ve taken python and have research experience using R.
Is it worth applying?

I can speak with some direct experience, having applied to a PhD in one field but having a background in another (a little closer than biology vs computer science, but similar enough that the experience is relevant.)
In the context of a United States school, I think it is worth applying.  I applied to an R1 school, was accepted, and completed the program.
When applying, my advice is to be open and transparent about your experience, and that you understand the challenge you are setting yourself up for.  It's not terribly unusual to move from one field to a related one at this stage, and if your desire is to do research at the intersection of your old field and your new field, that is something to mention in any application statement, essay, etc.
My personal advice to you is this:  You will have to pass whatever breadth requirement (often referred to as the qualifying exams, although they are not always exams, anymore) your chosen institute has, in your new field, and on their timetable.
These requirements are usually published, so you should absolutely take a look through those for your institute of choice, and make a plan for how you pass those requirements.  It is not impossible.  Anyone with the drive and intellect to complete a PhD can probably self-train up through those qualifying requirements.  But it is significantly harder than just taking those equivalent courses during an undergraduate experience.

(a little closer than biology vs computer science, but similar enough that the experience is relevant.) --- Probably better would be to use "different" in place of "similar", since I assume the intended meaning is that while your two fields are closer (i.e. more similar) than biology and computer science, your two fields are still a bit different -- different enough that your experience is relevant to the OP's situation.

Based on what you've shared, it sounds like you've got a pretty solid background in biology and some experience in data analysis and programming. Moving from a biology lab to a computer science-focused lab can be a big leap, but you've got a lot of subject matter experience, and maybe you just need to boost your data science skills a bit more?
It's a chance to combine your biology knowledge with some cool computational techniques and there's huge demand for people who can bridge the gap between biology and computers.
Another cool thing about this opportunity is the chance to network and find mentors. Joining your PI's new lab means you'll be working closely with an experienced researcher, and you might get the chance to collaborate with new people at the new university. Having a solid network and mentors who can guide you in your research and career can make a world of difference, trust me. Also these people can give you feedback on whether or not to do a phd. i think getting feedback from multiple people is important because most will be all positive and supportive, but you need to get a variety of perspectives. get a professor to review your application/cv well in advance to see if there's anything you can improve on. e.g. extra courses ahead of time that might help and be short? I once had a professor go on about how he loved my machine learning experience even though it was only a day course, and he ignored my masters degree for some reason. Even the small stuff can count.
Ultimately, it's your call. Think about your goals, interests, and what this new lab can offer you. Don't forget if you really want to pursue this apply to several places. Don't hesitate to have a chat with your PI and get their insights. They'll know more about the new lab and can give you some solid advice based on your skills and aspirations.

Okay thanks! My main concern was if the admissions committee would admit me. But I already have guarantee funding so I wasn’t sure.


text:
As a student, can you publish about a hobby project far outside of your major and how does one do that?
I've been thinking about going through the process of writing and publishing a paper about the topic of a project I'm pursuing in my free time (purposefully keeping it vague because it's niche enough to doxx me).
The issue is, it's not at all related to my field of study, there is no way I'll be able to pursue this in the context of my current studies.
I casually inquired with some of my university friends and they said to contact a professor from a relevant field to mentor me and that the professor would probably be excited that someone would voluntarily be interested in such pursuits.
My questions are:

Is this something that is allowed? I'm afraid that if I reach out to a professor, they'll just laugh at me.

How much should you already have prepared before reaching out to a professor? I have a topic in mind and an idea for a methodology but I haven't actually put together anything yet specifically for this (though I do have a lot of raw data from research I've done for fun).

I know this is closely related to the idea of publishing as a non-academic. But in my head—with the caveat that I have no clue how this works—I would pursue this formally through my university as opposed to writing it up without any guidance and then trying to get it published. (I haven't found anything at my uni about how this would work but I first want to make sure that it's not a waste of time on account of it being a dumb idea).

The two 'questions' posed are seemly disjointed to the title.

Of course it is "allowed".  Just don't claim (or hint) in the paper that your university has something to do with it.  Use a non-academic email address as contact.

Donald Knuth published The Potrzebie System of Weights and Measures in *Mad Magazine" and no one batted an eyelid.

But what is your intent? To develop your credentials in the second field (e.g. towards career, or further publications)? If you only want to publicize/ share your findings, you don't need to write an academic paper and go through the submissions process, you can simply present at a user-group or on the fringes of a conference or user group meeting, or blog about it; you get instant feedback, connections and you don't have to invest and wait months for a journal submission, and you don't have to try to find a helpful professor. Honestly, academic publishing can be glacially slow, laborious.

LIfe suggestion: try to stop being afraid of people laughing at you for doing something that you really want to do and feel is worthwhile.

@David. Better yet, learn to appreciate feedback, especially the negative. It's what ends up moving you forward.

Write up the paper. Find a relevant journal. Go to the journal website. Click Submission Guidelines or something like that.
Submit.
A professor might help you find a relevant journal. Or tell you if the work is worth publishing. Or help you match your prose to the journal style. But it's not crucial to have a professor behind you.

Just make sure in advance that you don't have the same name as a renowned expert in the field.

@MarkMorganLloyd Yeah if your name is Karl Friedrich Gauss, you might want to go by "Fred" instead to avoid confusion.

OP should first check the submission guidelines before writing the paper! You probably meant "write a rough draft of your research findings" first.

@MarkMorganLloyd: why? your name is your name - you do not cheat or anything by using it. If the journal does not publish the ORCID then it is their problem.

@WoJ I was thinking of an anecdote from years ago. Readers' Digest (or similar) received an essay from Larry Adler which, after copious desperately-needed editing, they published. Presently a follow-up arrived, where the author appended "I thought you might like to know a bit about me. I'm a 20-year-old college student...".

@WoJ to be unconfusing.

@MarkMorganLloyd - If the journal doesn't use ORCID, you may as well take advantage of your name... That's on them

@ScottishTapWater Better yet, adopt a publishing moniker to purposefully mislead the editors.

In general, all depends on how much time, resources, and data you are requesting from the professor. If you already have a solid idea and need a little bit of help, most professors will entertain a short meeting (just send an email to the professor). I would strongly recommend you that you conduct a thorough literature review (which you can do on your own) and highlight how your idea is different from anything that has been done in the relevant field. This would also let you know if you are on a wild goose chase or your idea holds any water.
Just a word of caution, if you are not an expert in the field and haven’t done some homework professors would think it as just waste of their time.

A literature review is a very good idea regardless of anything else. A very closely related bit is that I can't count the number of times I've gotten something valuable out of putting together a question (or proposal) and trying to preempt all the "what about" and "did you try" responses I could see coming. In computer programming, that effect is often called  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging

No reason this wouldn't be allowed or even discouraged. I'm a public policy student. Most of my papers are decidedly NOT geared to public policy journals in any sense of the word. They're geared almost exclusively to econometrics and statistics publications, that many people in my department wouldn't try to or couldn't publish in.
But so what? Even if this was just my hobby, which it isn't, nobody can stop me or would want to stop me, because most of us are adults who can publish wherever we'd like to.
Anyways, I reached out to a friend about a paper we're currently working on. I'm not as good as he is, but I'm good enough to keep up with him (generally) both as a coder and as an econometrician. I like working with him because he's a serious worker and we work well together. I mention this, because so long as you can demonstrate to whoever you work with that you're a serious, knowledgeable worker, then most people will be more willing than you might expect to reach out to you! So, reach out if you want. You can develop new connections just like that.

Generally agree with this, although, to be fair, the boundary between public policy and economics is pretty porous. Lots of people I know in econ PhD programs get hired in public policy, and some in the opposite direction as well.

I did my PhD in physics and published an article about evolutionary biology - just because I was interested in the topic and thought that the world was painfully missing my ideas in that area.
I sent the paper, got published, did some gna gna gna(*) in front of my wife who was a biologist and that's all.
I feel that way too many people assume that publishing requires some sanctification from a "Professor" or another deity. If your idea is sane and passes the reviewers then you are good to go!

a professor from a relevant field to mentor me

Mentoring is great but usually requires some motivation from the mentor. It really depends on what you want to be mentored about.
If this is "how to write a paper", well, it may be tough (except if they are to be a coauthor, maybe)
If this is to help you in their field then you may be more lucky.

(*) I told you in French

Just one perspective I didn't see mentioned in the other answers is that while I don't know what field this research is in, in my field, reaching out to another professor and having them mentor you on this paper and ultimately included as an author on the paper (per whatever the authorship conventions may be in your field, of course) is a good way to build your network and form collaborations. A very good practice to get used to, and it's the kind of thing I wish I'd been in a better position to do when I was going through school.
However, there are of course many caveats. Getting another professor involved could be invaluable for their experience and insight on the study topic. Having that experience is really valuable for understanding cultural expectations in the field and avoiding you getting labeled as an outsider (usually not explicitly, of course). Or, the professor's involvement could result in a large change of focus that distracts or detracts from your desired vision. I would be reluctant to put my name on a paper whose ideas I didn't materially contribute to, meaning they should want to put in significant input. You might not know how much of a barrier this will be until you try.
Agreed with the other answers that you should do a thorough lit review and make sure you know your stuff. If you don't, reviewers will let you know for sure.
Also journals commonly charge publication fees. If you're on your own, I assume you would be responsible for the cost. I have no idea how that would work.
But good luck! This is an ambitious task and you'll learn a lot either way.

One key question to me is whether to include your institute or not.
Pro: The affiliation would help people to judge your level of professionalism and what is your usual field of research.
Con: It might be not allowed by your institute or people giving you grant money might raise an eye brown.

Before adding your affiliation, talk to your advisor and/or institute head.
In any case, inform them that you are publishing a paper, they should not learn this from some external person but from you directly.

Kary Mullis, inventor of PCR, published his hobby paper on cosmology in Nature journal during his training years.

Fair enough the questioner ask can and how. So, the answerer should perhaps add the how part. #QuestionTitle

This will depend, in part, on the nature of the data you've collected. If this data was collected from people or animals and the proper ethical procedures weren't followed (including oversight by an IRB), it may be entirely impossible for someone to join this project or for a venue to publish any results. This is true even if the experiment is obviously harmless and ethical. Approval has to be received before data collection.
Even if you've been performing experiments on a computer or measuring trees outside, the professor you contact may still want to rerun data collection using their own ideas about best practices.


text:
A career in academia which is NOT being a prof?
I would like to pursue computational biophysics for PhD but I know for sure that the path of academia being a professor is NOT for me. I love modelling and simulating biological systems (even human brains are very interesting). So what are the possible jobs for me?

Why do you insist on it being IN academia?  What I would do (before you start the PhD) is look into places OUTSIDE of academia where this degree could be useful.

@DanielHatton - well, the prejudice against many successive postdoc contracts is valid - there are other non-tenure track research staff positions, often soft money, that are appropriate for long term employment at a university. Then there are all the positions outside of a university setting to consider as well...

What are the specific aspects of being a professor that you don't like?

@DanielHatton OK, I admit I am not too familiar with computational biology. My own PhD is in psychometrics, and I spent my career working with social and behavioral sciences.  In those fields, a career from successive postdocs would not pay a livable wage.   Is it different in some fields?
In any case, I didn't say that the OP should NOT go into academia, I just asked a question.

Prof. is a broadly used term that strongly depends on the country. E.g., my current position does not feature the word professor or any cognate thereof, but the closest analogue in other academic systems is some sort of professor. Same goes for lecturer or reader positions in the UK. Thus to get any useful answer, you need to [edit] your question to be more specific about what you want from a job.

I am confused about the question.  The term "professor" usually has a connotation of research plus teaching.  On first reading, it seemed like you were asking about non-research positions in academia, so my original thought was "well, there are lots of teaching positions, I've outlined some here".  Upon second reading, it looks like you are actually looking for research positions without teaching.  Can you please specify?  What, specifically, are you looking to engage in and to avoid?

University research hospitals could be a good place for your work. Computational biologists can work with physicians and their high-throughput data. Often comes with a secondary appointment as a faculty member at the affiliated university. The teaching is maybe a quarterly workshop for residents.

This question would be easier to answer if we knew the country in which you reside or in which you wish to get an academic job. In some parts of the world, a professor is someone who teaches, so there your question would be interpreted as "can I get a job in academia without having to teach?" In other countries there is a strict hierarchy of who is called what, eg in Germany both  Universitätsprofessor and Lehrprofessor have the word "professor" in them, but they are distinctly different jobs in terms of their daily work schedule. In the US, it's a word salad of Permanent/Temp Assistant/Associate Full-Time/Part-Time Adjunct/Visiting/Tenure-Track/Non-Tenure-Track Research/Teaching, etc., so you end up with people working under titles such as Visiting Assistant Research Professor (ie a semi-permanent, non-tenure track, non-teaching, soft money position.) So, if you don't like teaching, there are research-only positions. If you don't like writing grants, there are teaching-only positions. And everything in between.
If you are looking for a position that has all of the benefits of academia, e.g. job stability (for those tenured), intellectual challenges, freedom of choosing your research topic etc., but does not include the usual burdens of teaching (prep, grading), grant writing and administration, and administrative work, well that's true for you and me buddy, and for every other researcher out there. Those jobs don't exist in the universe I've inhabited so far.

Within academia, per se, there are some top schools that have "Research Professor" positions that minimize teaching, if that is your concern. The teaching that is done is mostly guiding doctoral students.
But these positions are few and mostly open only to the very top candidates, I'll guess. Perhaps that is you, or not.
But a number of research labs, say in the pharmaceutical industry, have "academic-like" atmospheres. I know people in my own field (CS) that hold such positions at large multi-national corporations. Their environment is a lot like academia, but only focused on research. We go to the same conferences, and such, and read one-another's papers. Collaboration is also there.

Yes also university hospitals for those in computational biology. No tenure, but comes with a sort-of-honorary faculty position and let’s you partner with physicians on research.


text:
Is a Master Student ready to be a Review Editor?
I just published my first paper (originated from my monograph) in a prestigious journal and that same journal invited me to be part of their Editorial Board as a Review Editor. I feel that this is a good opportunity to improve my skills (e.g.: writing, specific field knowledge, etc) and help others with their papers but I also feel quite intimidate by this offer since I barely started my Master and only know PhD and postdoc students that are reviewers.
I already talked a bit with my supervisor and he feels that this journal is too "high-level" for me, maybe a "lower" journal would be ok to accept it.

@corey979 Thank you for your response! I did think about contacting the Board before accepting or declining their offer to tell that i'm interested but feel too inexperienced, as you suggested, but didn't know how to approach them. Any tips on how should I approach them on this matter? Thanks.

As @Roland says, I am curious too. Either your first paper is a milestone (in that case congratulations! ) or the journal just enter your name in a database of potential referees. Ps: congratulations to you for the first paper filed, anyway :)

@Roland I'm not so sure myself, they didn't say much about the "title" inside the Editorial Board. However, I contact the board member that sent the invitation as corey979 suggested. After stating my lack of experience, he suggested that I should decline the invitation since it would be more logical to get some experience before hold such position. Maybe the sent invitation to all authors from recent published papers.

@Alchimista Haha it is a nice paper for a first timer but hardly think it was a milestone. As I said to Roland he said I should decline the offer since I don't have any experience. But getting this kind of invitation was nice for my ego anyway haha

This does not seem to apply to you, but in general there are lots of predatory journals out there that invite any scientist whose e-mail address they can acquire as an editor.

A Review Editor is a relatively low-stakes position, particularly if the journal already boasts some degree of prestige. Most journals publish various genres of scholarship. The title here refers to one of the lesser-known classifications of peer-reviewed publication: book reviews.
In similar fashion, academic conferences comprise various kinds of panels and time slots. You may be invited to share your extensive and fascinating original research in a ninety-minute panel discussion wherein you are the sole presenter. Or you may be accepted to the conference in combination, grouped into a panel with three other academics whose research aims match yours, or because your various conclusions seem to inform one another, or because all four of these hypothetical research efforts will likely appeal to a common audience segment (for example, an analysis of a budding marijuana industry may fit nicely paneled together with an exploration of the hidden meaning in children's cartoons). Some dedicated scholar will accept an offer to keynote the event, an honorary and certain center of attention. And some presenters will merely stand in the hallway with posters that compress their meaningful researches into two thousand square inches.
For peer-reviewed journals, book reviews are the poster boards of our publication-dependent life. Some scholars publish original research; others synthesize previous scholarship, often applying common wisdoms from earlier eras in analysis of some recent event or phenomenon. Some scholars read lengthy academic texts from other scholars--noticed works that show early indication of high impact--and review the book along a pretty standard range of criteria. The review editor (typically there's only one) offers copy edit and review for these submissions and recommends a certain number of them for inclusion in the journal's upcoming volume. (I hope no former or current reviewers of academic texts feel slighted here; I certainly intend no insult.)
Of course, your question was, "Is a master's student ready...?"
I suppose that depends on the student. I've met more than one instructor who began teaching university courses before completing undergraduate study. (No, seriously. Singly-assigned as instructor of record and paid a lecturer's wage.) If this response has helped you garner a sense of what you'd be stepping into, and if that doesn't sound dull, or terrifying, or somehow jointly meaningful and thankless, then give it a go. Sometimes I worry I'm too afraid of not winning some award or notoriety at a task and I let thoughts of prestige or career steal away interesting opportunities.
If it were me, I'd take it. I don't think I would spend too much time considering the offer an honor, but I think I could probably collate the reviews of impressive books and assess them according to a rubric that's already been hashed out for me. Then I'd see if I could somehow parlay it into earned credit toward my degree.

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


text:
Is omitting a school with blank transcript considered unethical in academia?
Suppose one was accepted to a school of higher education, but due to personal reasons withdrew three weeks after the beginning of the first semester without registering for and attending courses. Suppose he is now reapplying to other schools and has to submit all transcripts from the universities attended. Is including information about such a school relevant on an application? There is no transcript to submit, and no grades.

If you did not register (and did not attend), in the U.S. I think we'd say that you never attended (whether or not you were accepted).

If you did not enrolled/registered yourself, you did not attend that school of higher education. You could maybe insert this information of being accepted by that school but never registered somewhere in your submissions if there is such space for extra info on the Education section.

The semester formally started but the plan for study was never submitted and the classes were never attended physically.

@Jerry But did you had a registration number or something that can prove you enrolled in that school?


text:
What are the typical qualifications of a competitive candidate for a physics theory tenure track position at a mid-ranked R1 institution?
I currently work in a small 4-year college and wanted to hear from people who have been part of the hiring process for tenure track faculty in mid rank R1 institues in the US.
What makes a candidate competitive these days in terms of (but not limited to ) the following:

Publications (both number of publications & citation)
Past grants
Having or not having previous post docs.
Previous Teaching experience
Diversity of Publications.
Conference Presentations
References

All of the above, of course. But are you asking for concrete numbers? Hiring isn't a matter of adding up points, but assessing candidates' strengths and weaknesses. What specifically are you asking we provide you with?

Not a concrete number but a sort of average. For example, mostly competitive candidates ususally have this and that. This factor matters more that that. etc.

This is impossible to answer. Every university has its own standards.

I think that's a very good question: OP asks for ballpark average for at least a minimal threshold of a "US 50-150 ranked" university. I don't think there's any problem with the question. It is very well defined.

I can't answer in general (other than in general terms) but I can give advice for someone in your position. R1 universities, even mid-range ones are primarily research institutions, though they have a varied mission, especially if they are state universities.
But the main questions that will be asked of you and evaluated in your application to such a place is how will you fit into their research program. Some people do that by having some unique practice and experience and others by fitting into an existing research group. You will need to deal with that. Your 1, 2, 6, and 7 are probably the most important sort of factors.
I suspect that your current institution is very different in that regard (though not all are). And, if you can potentially lead a research group that will be attractive to doctoral students, all the better.

His or her present institution might be not have PhD students in physics (or any other physical science discipline) for he or she to lead a research group.

@robertbristow-johnson, most R1 institutions will have such programs. And if they don't, probably want them. I can't actually imagine a mid-range R1 with no solid Physics program at the doctoral level.

I think the OP wants to get into an R1 university and presently teaches at "a small 4-year college".

@robertbristow-johnson, yes, that is my understanding. So, whether or not they can lead a program at their current institution isn't the question, nor the intent of the answer.

It depends a whole lot on the university, department, and even specific committee.  Here is your list with some things crossed out (almost never relevant) and some added in bold:

Publications (both number of publications & citation)
Past grants
Having or not having previous post docs. Evidence of creativity and potential in previous research experience.  (Almost without exception, successful candidates have postdoctoral experience.)
Previous Teaching experience
Diversity of Publications
Conference PresentationsInvited presentations (conferences and colloquia)
References
Alignment with departmental research priorities
Race and Gender
Past activity with regard to "diversity, equity, and inclusion"

Everything in this list is usually somewhat relevant, and sometimes very relevant.  Personally I care almost entirely about 3 and 7.  For recent hires in physics at the University of Arizona it has been mostly 3, 7, 8.


text:
Journal inserts errors into paper then ignore corrections at proof stage. What should I do?
A paper was accepted by an Elsevier jounral and when I recieved the proofs they had inserted a large number of errors throughout the paper. The errors weren't significant but it makes the paper look sloppy. I pointed these errors out at the proof stage and assumed they would be fixed. When the "online first" article was posted the errors remained. Have contacted the journal manager but they have taken no action. What should I do?

You should escalate? Elsevier has a hierarchy of editors.

@DimitriVulis, why not make it an answer?

they have taken no action Did they acknowledge receipt and then took no action? If so did they explain why?

They might already be planning to fix them when making the final published version. The "online first" version might deliberately not have had all the errors fixed. But I agree with the others that you should do something about it, in case this is not what is happening.

I'd be tenacious in insisting that they fix the errors that were introduced in the typesetting phase. I'd also assume that the journal didn't do it on purpose. If you think about it, they publish a lot of papers and mistakes do sometimes happen due to random chance. Maybe this only happens with 1 in 1000 papers but maybe it's your (unlucky) day. Many authors don't read the proofs that carefully, so they will probably be very glad that you are so conscientious in checking things, once they recognize that there's a problem.
In addition to Dimitri's suggestion to escalate to a higher editor, I think it would also be wise to write to the administrative assistant (probably this is the person who sent you the form to sign to give them permission to publish). That person probably has MUCH more to do with the typesetting phase than the professors sitting on the editorial board.
The point is, at the end of the day it's your name on the paper, so it's worth the effort of getting this fixed. You correctly identified that the easiest time to fix it is in the proofs stage or in the online publication phase, before it's printed. Good luck!


text:
Is it appropriate to work on papers outside of my doctorate?
I am starting my PhD in October at a UK University. I am skipping my masters and going straight to doing my PhD. Although this has saved me time, it has also removed my opportunity to publish my masters and I will therefore be starting with one less publication than usual. I should also mention I have been given a scholarship to do my doctorate at the university.
Now the issue is that my undergrad supervisor, who works at a different university to the one I'm doing my doctorate, has expressed interest in continuing to work with me on the project I was doing under his supervision. However I think he is hesitant as I have accepted the place at a different university. Like I said I am skipping my masters and therefore could use as many publishing opportunities as possible.
My question is whether it is appropriate to ask for permission to continue working with my undergrad supervisor. I would still be working on work directly related to my PhD, however will also be working on the other project in my free time.

In general you need to consult with your doctoral advisor on this in case they think it might interfere with your progress. However, that is a matter of time and effort that might be spent better. It shouldn't be a question of publishing, per se, though.
But you have time in the short term to work on anything you like.
If you already have a doctoral advisor, though, it would be a good idea to discuss it with them.


text:
Database of publicly funded research
I am trying to create a database of publicly funded research projects related to the topic of environmental assessments in trade agreements, so that I can map these and do some other analysis. Does anyone know if there is a database or online resource already out there?
My best idea so far is to scrape google scholar, but this will be super inconsistent in getting data on who funded certain projects or where they took place.
Do any more expereinced researchers have any ideas?

Many funding bodies have databases of funded projects, such as the German science foundation (DFG) having GEPRIS, or the US National Science Foundation having the NSF Award Search.
You could pick a sample of funding bodies and perform a manual search to obtain your data. Whether it is useful depends on what you need to the database for. Note that the texts in the existing databases are covered by copyright, so you will have to adhere to their terms and conditions.

For the US, you can use USAspending.gov.  Here's an example search.
The search isn't great, but it's the only way you're going to find most contracts, particularly with DOD.  You can download the data, but you'll have to spend a lot of time combing through it, as the keywords may or may not capture what you want.  If you find award numbers in the context of Google Scholar, you can look them up here.  The main issue is that some of the cited award numbers won't match the FAIN (Federal Award Identification Number) in formatting (NIH is the most famous for that, because they add some additional info, e.g., the year of the project).


text:
Applying for a maître de conférence position in applied math (section 26) - is there an in person audition?
I am curious about the French academic system, specifically when one is applying for a maître de conférence position in section 26 (applied mathematics). My main question is: after gaining qualification and submitting your application for an mcf position at university X through the CNU/galaxie system, is there an in person audition at university X as well? When do these usually take place?
For instance, this year the synchronized applications will close at the end of March. The decisions will be released at the end of June. So, between the end of March and June, presumably applicants to university X will have to travel to university X to give a short talk? What if you apply to many schools - will you be expected to travel to all of the universities?

Just for our general education, can you provide a link, preferably to a site in English, that defines the position you are asking about? Thanks.

I don't know of such a site to be honest. The position is the equivalent of tenure track assistant professor in the USA except people in this position get a decision about whether or not they will be tenured much sooner (usually after ~1-2 years).

Good enough. Thanks. And good luck, assuming you are the candidate.

@Buffy Don't you have access to Wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ma%C3%AEtre_de_conf%C3%A9rences&redirect=no

@N.I., I know I'd be no help for many reasons. I just wanted clarification. I'm surprised it is on US wikipedia, actually. Always trying to learn.

It is a two step process. You apply on Galaxy, and once the system closes, a first selection is made exclusively on the basis of the application files: just a few candidates will be auditioned. You must attend auditions, and if you have been selected for auditions by several universities, you can either chose to decline an audition, or you can try to attend several of them even if you have to be at one location in the morning and another later that day.
If you decline an audition, you will no longer be considered for that position.

Is there any way to know when the audition will be for a given university in advance? Imagine you have some commitment already in May, you would want to ensure that there were no audition dates at this time or at least know in advance to move things around.

@j.kookalinski The closest thing to an official source of information is Opération Postes: http://postes.smai.emath.fr/2022/CONCOURS/liste_postes.php?nature=MCF&section=26 (username "postes", password "p2022"). Look for "Dates CSE" > "Déroulement des auditions". Most of them are not yet known. It's unfortunate but if you are seriously considering an application for an MCF position, you should act as if the whole month of May is booked. There are 100+ applicants for any position, and the committees aren't going to make arrangements for anyone.

I see, thanks for the input @N.I. . I knew of that website but you've made it clearer where to look.

@N.I. I am having trouble understanding what some of the dates in that table mean. Do you know what the date for commission audition is?

@j.kookalinski There are 59 job openings listed in the link I gave you. Which one are you talking about? For each job, the committee meets twice: once to decide who gets interviewed (usually late March or April), and once to actually interview the people (May). Sometimes they decide on the same day on who to hire, and sometimes they meet a third time (typically, the next day). So if you see two or three dates in increasing order in the page "Dates CSE", they're that.

Sorry, I didn't mean to ask if you knew the date for a particular job opening; I meant to ask if you knew what is meant by the dates in the column for commission auditions. Based on your response, I guess the commission audition date is when the committee meets in late March/April to decide who gets through to the next stage (interviewing in May)?

@j.kookalinski In the first meeting, they decide who gets to the next stage based on the submitted applications. The candidates don't come to that. Usually they write the list of selected candidates on Opération Postes the same day, and the official notification comes a few days later through Galaxie. In the second meeting, they actually interview the candidates. In normal times, the candidates have to physically come to the university for that. With COVID some interviews have moved online.


text:
Ownership of environmental samples (or other material) analyzed during a PhD
I am a PhD student researching environmental science in Europe. As such, I have received hundreds of environmental samples, including water, sediment etc. over the past year and a half, the extensive work with which has let to two peer-reviewed publications. However, I am still struggling to understand who actually owns these samples - is it the faculty, my supervisor, myself, or the party that sent the sub-samples in the first place? My question is basically - what can I do with the samples without looking at potentially serious issues. More specifically:
1) If there is considerable disagreement between myself and my supervisor as to which analyses are to be carried out on said samples, from a strictly legal standpoint, am I free to carry out the analyses I want to, and which I am sure will benefit my thesis, even though my supervisor disagrees with my approach. There is more than enough material to carry out both mine and my supervisor's methodology.
2) Can I sub-sample and share some of these samples with other institutions or individuals for the purposes of possible (not documented or otherwise agreed upon) collaboration? Again, I strongly suspect my supervisor will not be happy with this, but would it be considered illegal or as academic/other misconduct. Obviously, my supervisor would know and probably be a co-author on any ensuing publications (if any).
What are the possible repercussions of the above? Could I be expelled from the program, or my PhD revoked after the fact? I could not find any discussion on such topics, and instead kept coming across the usual "fabrication, falsification and plagiarism"-related discussions, hence my questions!

Thank you for taking the time to answer! I am not employed by the University but a PhD student (the University's Intellectual Property policy states that any IP produced by a student during their studies would be considered student's property). I have indeed used the university laboratories to prepare the samples as part of my PhD, which is mostly self-funded except for the laboratory-related fees such as consumables. The party supplying the samples addressed them to me but my project is a collaboration between the sample supplier and the University. The samples hold no commercial value.

I agree and @Roland you should put this together as an answer


text:
Attempting to move an accepted PhD to another university
I've currently had my proposal accepted at a good university in Britain, this with the assistance of a wonderful professor there.  However, it does appear the better path for me would be to shift this to a university in Bruxelles for a variety of reasons (the first being I've moved there, though there are better funding opportunities as well).
First, I'm wondering if this is frowned upon, and if I'm doing a disservice to my former supervisor, who I'd love to still work with if possible.  I'd hoped to integrate this between two universities, though am reaching a bit of a hurdle here as well.
Second, and perhaps for the reasons listed above, I've had a bit of an issue maintaining contact with individuals in the departments who would be interested in my research.  I've taken the time to look over potential supervisors' papers, and have received response from one professor who has since gone silent.
As I do know what I'm looking to do, and who I'm wanting to set up a meeting with - and since the issue is now becoming quite time-sensitive due to pursuance of funding - I'm getting a bit frustrated I cannot set up a meeting, this despite weekly attempts at contacting professors.
I know this most likely sounds a bit complicated, but I'm afraid I'm starting to feel that I'm spinning my wheels; I've not much experience (outside of my degrees) with what to expect in the academia, and don't want to push things that shouldn't be pushed; however, if someone responds, and then goes silent, should I take this as a sign there's no interest?  Sigh.
Okay, somewhere in there there's a question.  Thanks to anyone who may be able to help.
Best Wishes
Jim

To get informed answers, we're going to need a better idea of what you want to know. Are you concerned about how to do a degree at two different schools? Are you trying to start your program somewhere else? Something else?

Did you apply to this other university? It sounds to me like your question is "I have an offer from one university, but now I want to go to a different university that I didn't apply to".

Exactly so.  It would be very much better if I could switch universities prior to commencement, this due to price, paperwork/immigration problems subsequent to Brexit and proximity to where I live now.

However, I'm also a big fan of my first supervisor, and if I could have joint supervision it would be wonderful.

Why would some other university that you did not apply to consider admitting you? They have gone through their admit process, and have made their selections.

Acceptance for a PhD typically isn't the same process as applying for a MA etc.  It's about getting to know your supervisor, and having them support you through the admissions process (which, if they agree to supervise the project is administrative).  This is why it's so hard to pin down prospective supervisors in the first place I reckon.

"First, I'm wondering if this is frowned upon" - i.e. trying "to shift this to a university in Bruxelles"

What can I take from contact going silent - should I take that as loss of interest?

Did I understand well? you want to leave UK, and stuy in Belgum, bcs it is near your house and you have advisor and funding there?

Universities handle their PhD admissions independently. That is, if you don't want to continue your PhD at the university where you are currently admitted, you have to find a supervisor at the other university and get newly admitted there. If you already have research results from your current place, it may be possible to integrate them into the new PhD project, but that should be discussed with both the former and new supervisor. Such a move would not really be "frowned upon", as it can happen because of various understandable reasons, but in case you had already started your PhD, some people may interpret this as failing your first project and may have questions on this later during your career.
If you were in contact with someone about starting a PhD at their place, but they don't follow up, it may indeed mean that they lost interest, or maybe don't see a chance to have you doing this, for example because of a lack of funding or supervision capacity. Best would be to explicitly ask whether they still see a chance of having you as a PhD student.

"but some people may interpret this as failing your first project" I don't think OP has started yet, so this would be a non-issue. It wouldn't need to go on a CV, there would be no unexplained gaps etc.

@WanderingChemist indeed if it's not yet started it won't matter for the CV. I wasn't sure about whether it's started or not from the OP's question.


text:
What defines legitimacy of a DOI
My coauthors and I recently published a paper on https://www.ijnrd.org/viewpaperforall?paper=IJNRD2307102.
The doi which was assigned to us is http://doi.one/10.1729/Journal.35162.
According to my knowledge doi.org is the sole provider of doi.
Were we scammed into registering for a unscrupulous journal?

The title question won't really help you answer the question of whether you got scammed (you did).

Yup, it's a predatory journal. You got scammed. For future reference -- https://libguides.library.arizona.edu/c.php?g=945334&p=6815520?

@Arno, I know India has a much higher number of people who publish in predatory journals, so if others around you think of them as legit, you're probably not going to notice the warning signs. However in this case I believe Abhitay is an undergraduate student who tried to publish an engineering project with his group (he and his co-authors lists their affiliations as B Tech at the university). A lot easier to miss the signs as an undergrad with little to no support from an established academic.

@Abhitay, if part of your fear is that you lost a chance to have your work published in an academic journal I can offer some good news to you, though it probably won't be what you want to hear. While I'm not in NLP (physics instead), the paper I read didn't read at the level of an academic paper. Instead it read as an implementation project performing a minor extension rather than something granting further deeper insight into the field (I saw no analysis of the literature nor the results). Basically, you'd need a lot more work to get published in a non-predatory journal.

If you are worried about potential impact in the future, you could try to convince your co-authors that the journal is predatory and agree to request they withdraw the paper. They probably won't (since its predatory and more papers looks better), but at least then if asked about it you can say you didn't know better as an undergrad and have asked for it to be withdrawn. That would probably lead to it being ignored in future evaluations when you apply for positions. If your co-authors don't agree (they may have other motivations than academic) then you can ask academia SE how to navigate this.

DOIs are unique identifiers governed by an international standard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier). They are of the form doi:10.1109/5.771073 (often shorted to 10.1109/5.771073 by omitting the doi: part).
There is only one registration authority, the DOI Foundation, As stated on https://www.doi.org:

The DOI Foundation is a not-for-profit organization. We govern the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) system on behalf of the agencies who manage DOI registries and provide services to their respective communities. We are the registration authority for the ISO standard (ISO 26324) for the DOI system and we are governed by our Registration Agencies.

You can look up any DOI on their system, like this: http://doi.org/10.1109/5.771073 which will resolve the name and redirect you to the publisher's current location for this item.
So: to check that a DOI is valid, it should be of the form 10.numbers/suffix and it should resolve on https://doi.org

In your case, you can see how this is not actually a DOI, but a fake identifier:

The supposed DOI is a URL, but the domain is doi.one (not doi.org). If you visit the doi.one webpage, there is a typo in the first sentence:

DOI.ONE System Provides a Digital Network for Research Artical [sic] and Digital Objects

" it should be of the form 10.numbers/suffix and it should resolve on https://doi.org" doesn't resolving on https://doi.org suffice?

Technically, http://doi.org/10.5555/12345678 has the right form and resolves correctly, but is considered a fake DOI by Crossref. (5555 is a test prefix.)

@FranckDernoncourt I mean, it still provides a heuristic if you're not online, or doi.org goes down for some reason. I didn't know it had to start with 10..

@AzorAhai-him- true but the heuristic isn't sufficient to check the legitimacy in all cases.

What defines legitimacy of a DOI

Check the DOI on https://dx.doi.org/


text:
My DOI was changed from fake to real
In continuation to What defines legitimacy of a DOI
My paper was assigned a fake DOI, but they changed it to https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8150058 which has the doi.org as the prefix.
Is it allowed and is the new DOI legit?

That appears to be a legit DOI for a Zenodo deposit. Adding a legit DOI after initial publication is allowed, of course. (Otherwise papers published prior to 2000 could not have DOIs.)
But that doesn't change the fact that you published in a predatory journal. No self-respecting journal would upload your paper to a general-purpose open repository only to get a DOI; they would register the DOI themselves and have it point to their own website.

Not all self-respecting journals even have websites, mind. Limiting your scope to just major journals, sure, but smaller journals in more niche subjects do not necessarily. Many of those (and even some larger ones) use their publishers’ websites as landing pages, or indeed those of online repositories like (C)LOCKSS or similar.


text:
What to do when one failed a course in their early years in Bsc which is not part of their major subject
I am a 1st year Bachelor of science student from India, from a well reputed institution, and I want to take physics as my major. I am very passionate about it, and a few of the senior professors continually discuss physics with me and let's say I have a good rapport with them.
The system in my school is that one studies for 2 years, all 4 subjects- Math, Physics, Chemistry and Biology. After that in one's 3rd year, they get to choose their majors, after which their masters will get combined with their bs to give a combined degree including an ms thesis.
My situation is, I have failed this semester's biology course (math and physics are all A+ for the last two semesters, and hopefully maintained like this), and the reason is that I simply didn't maintain proper attendance numbers. This will be a backlog for me and I can only clear this backlog in my 4th semester, where I will be graded for this course only on that semester (so in this semester in one's report card, it counts as an F, till the 4th semester, and in the final report card, it will show in two places, one as an F this sem, and once in the 4th sem).
My question is, will this have an affect on my future graduate (PhD) applications to either abroad places or places within India, like TIFR or Harish-Chandra institute, and how much leeway do I have in terms of explaining away this black mark on my card? I have, or at any rate should have by the end of my 5th year here, a bunch of professors who will vouch for me, but I have heard from many sources that most places, especially abroad use grades as a first screening device and this black mark I feel will have a significant negative effect. It would be nice if someone could also explain the process and how one could resolve this and make it not as bad as it is.

Related/duplicate: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38237/how-are-ph-d-applications-evaluated-in-the-us-particularly-for-weak-or-borderl

There are huge differences between different countries and even different universities within the same country regarding how PhD applications are evaluated. In many places this may not harm you at all, but nobody can guarantee that this is so everywhere. Also often it's competitive, so it may depend on how many of your competitors look flawless without such issues.

I'd say every serious academic is aware that one might has a bad day at some point or that there are still unfair/sexist/"God gets an A, I get a B so perfect students get a C"/whatever professors. I'd say serious professors will most likely not hold this against you if it is not important and.you have other great credentials.

I can't give any advice about India but in the US it wouldn't be a problem and there is nothing to do. If you want to study physics, biology is pretty distant with quite different process. Math might be a different matter. Courses that have a close relation to your major will (here) be weighted more heavily than others. Moreover, very early stumbles are not necessarily limiting. No one is perfect and most of us realize that.
But for better advice, speak with one of your physics instructors who knows the systems and the requirements that will apply to you. If you get the same sort of advice, then rest easy on this issue.


text:
Is it fine to email several people regarding internship programs and potentially have to turn down one?
As stated above, is it acceptable to email many people requesting mentorships at once; hypothetically, if two people were to say yes, is it okay to say something like "I apologize, but someone has already accepted me?" Thank you!

Yes, in fact this is very normal. People (both students & supervisors) know the chances of any one opportunity happening is low, hence students apply to multiple positions at the same time.
See the list of Academia.SE questions on "decline offer" for examples.

Also true of course for any employment or similar application. Any other course of action leaves you too vulnerable and takes too much time.

Yes, it is acceptable
It is perfectly reasonable and normal to approach several people about the possibility of them mentoring you. A common way of doing this is to make your email enquiry both enthusiastic and non-commital (a bit like a first date)! You might choose to use words like "explore" and "sound-out" and "know your thoughts" . Something along the lines of "I'm exploring the possibilities for obtaining a mentorship [at the conclusion of my studies/in the last six-months of my PhD/etc]. [Insert personal background and interests here]. I'd be very pleased to hear whether you might consider me as a prospective mentee".

I'll note that being openly non-commital makes you sound unenthusiastic.  This may increase your chances of being rejected.  You don't have to lie and say you'll definitely respond to an offer, but words like "explore" strike me as less than ideal.


text:
PhD advisor as a Marie Curie mentor
I am a European researcher and I had my PhD in 2018.
After two post-docs between Germany and Canada I am planning to apply for a Marie-Curie individual fellowship.
The best choice for my research would be to choose the person that was my PhD advisor as supervisor, but I am not sure whether this could give a bad evaluation for my application.
Did anyone have similar experiences?

It's not ideal, but also not necessarily the end of the world. A number of the evaluation criteria touch on gaining new skills, enhancing career prospects etc., and on what you can bring to the host lab.
This is easier to write if you are going somewhere new, but not so obvious if you're applying for somewhere you've been before. So you'll need to make a very clear case why going back to the previous supervisor is best for your development - what are you going to learn there that you didn't learn in your previous time in their lab? Bringing in new expertise somehow (e.g. new collaborators, secondments etc.) may help you mitigate this too. You'll also clearly need to articulate how you're beginning to act as an independent scientist, which is again trickier with a past supervisor.
But, if you can make a clear case addressing those issues with respect to the evaluation criteria, you may still be able to write a successful application.


text:
Is it appropriate to have multiple recommendation letters for an application?
I'm currently enrolled in a university program and looking to switch. I know the program I'm looking to switch into is notoriously competitive, and I'm looking to improve my chances in any way I can. I have a few profs who I know quite well and I think would write good letters of recommendation for me. That being said, is it appropriate to submit multiple letters of recommendation?
My inclination to submit so much more than is required is because the application process caters to high school students rather than university students, on top of the already competitive nature of applications.
A letter of recommendation is not required for the application, but I know it will improve my standing significantly. So I assumed having multiple really good ones would put me even higher up. On the other hand, it could also seem like I'm reaching for praise, especially when no letter of recommendation is technically required. I may be completely misinterpreting the purpose of a reference letter.
In addition to that, if the answer to the above question is that only one letter of recommendation is necessary at most, then is it ethical to ask multiple profs to write letters anyways and then choose the "best one"? My gut reaction is that this is very unethical, as it is wasting the time of the profs, especially after reading this question, but I thought I'd ask it in this context anyways since it might be slightly different.

You can ask for multiple people to write letters for you, but you will not be able to compare them. If you're in the USA (and it sounds like you are) I believe the applicant usually has to waive their right to read their reference letters. See here for more info: http://wiselikeus.com/collegewise/2010/09/should-you-waive-your-rights-to-see-your-letters-of-rec.html

An applicant need not waive the right to see letters of recommendation.  On the other hand, I need not write such letters, either, and I use that waiver in my decision because I believe institutions give more weight to confidential recommendations.  (If I can't write a good recommendation, I decline, but I still want it to be confidential.)

You should submit what is asked and nothing more.  If they ask for 3 LORs, submit 3, not 5 or 7.  If they don't want any at all, don't waste everyone's time submitting any.

If, however, you know someone who can give your application a personal boost outside the application process, go for it.  I've done that at my own institution and at my alma mater.  "I understand that Ms. X has applied to our program.  We should admit her.  If you have questions, let me know."


text:
Is it ok to fail with analysis?
I'm a graduate student and I am really worried about the quality of my master thesis. It's my second year in graduate school and I've already done some pilot studies. But, entering the school, I was absolutely new in the real science (cognitive psychology) and now I'm afraid that data I collected is too dirty and statistical analysis I provided just incorrect. I have to present and publish my results anyway if I want to end graduate school and become a phd, but I feel ashamed of them.
So, I wonder is it ok to have problems with data when I'm just studying or I should refuse to publish or present these results?
My supervisor thinks everything's great and local journals will accept papers, but it is just bad, isn't it?

Mistakes are really, honestly the best way of learning. If your supervisor is happy, I think you are doing fine.

Cognitive psychology PhD here - the signals are weak, the noise is strong. But even then your effects may be replicable and tell a compelling story. Have faith in the data, for it is truth, but do feel free to note limitations and alternative explanations in your discussion.

I cringe every time I have a look at my own old Ph.D. thesis. Your Ph.D. is the beginning of your academic/scientific career, and as such will contain your worst beginners' mistakes and your worst material all round. Rephrasing this in a positive way, you will improve as you gain more experience. As humans do. Anything else would be a surprise.

Since your supervisor thinks that everything is fine, you should not be ashamed of publishing your results.
If you are still unsure: You should talk about your concerns to your supervisor and request an honest opinion. Keep in mind, that he/she is also (partly) responsible for the quality of your results!

If you explain the shortcomings of your data/analysis/methodology in your paper, then you can publish with a clear conscience.

Imposter syndrome

I am really worried about the quality of my master thesis

This is normal. You are still being educated in your field, but working alongside professionals, reading professional papers; this means you're judging yourself against an unduly high standard: of course your pilot studies are not "as good" as a "finished" piece of work from professor or a postdoc.
This can cause, and be compounded by, imposter syndrome. In imposter syndrome, you  fail to correctly judge the standard of your own work (or set your standards unduly high) and, as such, underestimate your own ability leading to the feeling of being an "imposter". This is incredibly common - most (non-sociopathic) academics will experience it at some point in their careers!
To overcome this (and to identify when perceived concerns are actually valid) it is important that you take on board feedback from your colleagues. Your peers (the master's and PhD students you directly work/collaborate with, attend class with etc.) and supervisors/lecturers will be able to help you identify your strengths and weaknesses. Most importantly, they will be able help you overcome the imposter syndrome by providing a realistic judgement of your skills. In your case, the feedback mechanisms are suggesting that everything's fine:

My supervisor thinks everything's great and local journals will accept papers

How to judge/assess your own work

I'm afraid that data I collected is too dirty and statistical analysis I provided just incorrect

The best way to deal with this situation, is as follows

Make a list of specific problems you perceive in your analysis (e.g. should have used this kind of hypothesis test, should have compared these variables).
Make any easy fixes (running a T test, for instance, can often be done quite easily).
Now consider whether the remaining "problems" seriously undermine your conclusions.

Do not use perfection as your standard for this: nothing in research is ever finished or complete, especially "pilot studies"; just consider whether the data supports your conclusions.
Consider if you can resolve any undermining by hedging or changing your conclusions (e.g. "x causes y" --> "x show strong positive correlation with y")

Look at published papers - is your analysis of comparable methods/standards? Have you performed a similar level of rigour?
Listen to your supervisor's advice. They're the expert. They've published before. If they think the paper's fine, it probably is.

When you follow this, you'll probably find that your work is in far better shape than you initially thought.

On a related note:

I have to present and publish my results anyway if I want to end graduate school and become a phd

Where does this come from? Unless publication is a requirement for graduation (unusual for a master's?), this simply isn't the case. You do not require publications to successfully apply for a PhD. So (unless they're a requirement for graduation) don't stress over publications, treat that possibility as a stretch-goal instead.

Some light relief

References for the images would be appropriate.

Images are not usually linked, hidden references aren't useful references.

@Nij I'll happily replace the images with links for stylistic reasons (in response to a now-deleted comment), if desired. However, I'm bemused about claims of inadequate referencing. Hyperlinking of images is the default behaviour of the SE editor, and normal online practice, so it is surely expected and not "hidden". Additionally, the PhD comics images all clearly have "www.phdcomics.com" and "Jorge Cham (c) 2017", so I'm not sure how I could have referenced those more clearly?

Images hyperlink to the host, not the source of the image, they are not always the same thing. It's not difficult to make the reference clearer: [image] [via source](https://www.wherever-it-came-from.zzz).

I think the beautiful thing about a statistical analysis is that, when done right, it includes the odds that it is incorrect.
The honest thing to do is to include as part of your paper possible confounding factors that may make your conclusions invalid.  A good reader is thinking of these anyway, so it only makes you look better to state them in an open way.
You don't have to (and shouldn't) put this in a way that insults your work.  But perhaps something like, "A future study where [the data in question] is gathered in [suggested "less dirty" method] would be useful in further understanding this issue."
Frankly, I think your impulse to want a high quality standard for your work is an admirable one.

It is really difficult to answer this question without knowing your work (and knowing your field to some extent). Maybe there really is a problem with your work, maybe it is just impostor syndrome, which in my personal experience seems to be really common among young scientists. I don't think anyone here is in a position to tell you which one it is.
Personally, I believe that the reason scientists do low-quality work often is that they fail to recognize the problems with their methodology. Having doubts is normal, and I would even go as far as to argue that it might be a good sign because it shows that you have the right attitude, whether your doubts are justified or not.
I agree with the general sentiment of the other answers that it is probably best to ask for feedback from your peers. You have already convinced your supervisor, which is obviously quite important. If you need more positive reinforcement and are worried about particular problems in your work such as the statistical analysis part, consider asking someone to review just that part for you. I have often asked fellow graduate students who I believed to have more expertise than me in a specific field for their opinion on specific parts of my work. Of course, their opinion doesn't carry as much weight as the opinion of an experienced scientist, but it could provide you with some orientation. If several others think your work is fine upon closer inspection, I wouldn't worry about it.


text:
use of "carrier" for affected individuals
I'm the process of paper drafting and stumbled upon the question, what's the appropriate name for individuals, who are affected by a disease, which is likely due to a mutation.
I was using the term "carriers" until now (like in: group one constists out of mutational carriers, group two is a control group).
Now I've read that the word "carrier" is just short for hereditary carrier (Wikipedia: has inherited a recessive allele for a genetic trait or mutation but does not display that trait)
So how do I refer to patients that are affected by the mutation. I've thought about "patients", but the control group consists out of patients, too.
Is there a correct word for this?

Perhaps on the English stack? What is the dictionary definition of carrier?

I'm sorry, the question isn't correct here!

Look at the previous research on this disease, and check what those papers are using to designate these people. If there's a conventional way to refer to them, you'll want to conform to that; if they use different words you'll have some options to choose one you like from.

I have heard of the opposite (genetically inherited the mutation with no sign of disease) as an asymptomatic carrier, so I checked if symptomatic carrier exists. It does not seem to be very common, but it has been used in medical publications.
This does imply a genetic cause though. Which means if you are not yet sure there is a mutation behind it, I would not use the word (genetic) carrier in any case. (Unless you know it is either that or a pathogen, as a patient can also be a symptomatic or asymptomatic carrier of a pathogen.)


text:
Adding an author to a conference paper only for sharing the cost of conference registation
Is it unethical to add an author to already finished conference paper just for the purpose of sharing the cost of conference registration?
The added author shares similar research interest but has contributed nothing to the paper in question.

Yes highly unethical and against authorship rules of any reputable journal / conference.

If the other person is, in effect, offering you a bribe to be a co-author, then yes, sounds pretty unethical. Your reputation is worth more than the value of the bribe, I think.

Yes. Could you explain what makes you think it could not be unethical? (This is an honest question, I do not mean to insult you.)

I'm not sure I even understand the goal of 'sharing the cost' of conference registration and how that is supposed to work. But, no, this is not appropriate.

How? Isn't conference cost per person? If not you might have been a victim of low quality, predatory conferences...

@xuq01 Conference attendance is per person but the publication of the paper in a proceeding is per article. It's not a low quality conference.

@Haque To start with, some labs add members of the lab as co-authors even if only a few were directly involved in a research. Secondly, the cost of conference registration can be almost 80% of some people's salary in some part of the world. This is excluding the cost of attendance.

I do fully agree that you are right. However, you are asking about the ethics of this practice, not if this practice is usually done or is necessary to have both money for living and for the conference. Your reasons, while they are very good, seem to be unrelated to ethics.

Yes. This is unethical. Any paper author should contribute intellectually to the paper. Even if that is supervision where the supervisor sometimes gives high level guidance.