text:
Why upload to academic preprint sites like arXiv?
The recent question about the legality of uploading to arXiv made me realize that I don't have any understanding of why one would upload to a preprint site.  (I don't work in a field where they seem to be common.)
Why would one be concerned about getting a manuscript on arXiv, if it's already under review with a journal?
Is it because of the long publishing timeline of journals?  (That could explain why computer science — which publishes much more in conferences — doesn't seem to do much with them.)

probably not worth a full answer, but another is the absurdly slow review process in math.  I have a paper that's been on the arXiv for 4 1/2 years that is still waiting on a decision.

I don't think this is really a duplicate: this question is specifically about arXiv, whereas the other question is more generally about publishing working papers e.g. on personal websites. The answers are very different, too. Voted to reopen.

This is definitely not a duplicate, since the revised version of the other question is specifically about working papers discussing work in progress.  The arXiv, on the other hand, is mostly used for posting essentially finished papers (i.e., ready to submit to a journal or similar).

Note that you can also upload "postprint" (the accepted manuscript) to the preprint archive. That's what I do with those of my papers that fit on arXiv: in my field it is still a gray zone whether a previous manuscript on arXiv would be compromising the novelty.

@cbeleites: That's interesting.  In math it's clear that a previous manuscript on the arXiv is fine, but in some cases unclear whether posting the accepted version violates the publication agreement.

@MarkMeckes: that's true, not all copyright transfer agreements allow this. But nowadays many do. Also see  the changes in German copyright law which allow this now for publicly funded projects after 1 year embargo.

Related: Are there any examples for an ArXiv publication nurturing or preventing plagiarism?

@BenWebster but then why one would submit on journals, if their papers get equally reviews in there? Or is this incorrect?

@Ooker One submits to journals mostly because one wants tenure.  From time to time, one also gets useful feedback from referees, but that's very unpredictable.

In mathematics, there are several reasons to post to the arXiv:

It provides free access to papers that might otherwise be hidden behind paywalls.  Of course you could achieve this by posting on your web page, but your web page may move or disappear, while the arXiv is far more stable.  This means it's better for archival purposes and it's better suited for citations.  [Note that this is not just about preprints: it continues to be relevant long after publication.]
It attracts readers.  Many people pay close attention to arXiv postings in their area, in a way that doesn't happen as much with journal tables of contents.  I don't have statistics, but my impression is that a substantial fraction of the people who learn about my papers do so through the arXiv.  If you can get noticeably more attention for your research with almost no additional effort, why wouldn't you?
It establishes priority.  Submitting to a journal does not: if you submit to a journal without circulating your work publicly, then you may still end up sharing credit with anyone who makes the same discovery before your paper is made public.  The way to establish priority is to distribute your work so widely that any competitors cannot credibly claim to have been unaware of it.  Submitting to the arXiv is the easiest way to show that you have done so: it's widely read, and it preserves all versions of the article with time stamps.
It's conventional.  This varies somewhat between subfields, but once arXiv use reaches critical mass in a given area, it becomes the standard way of announcing to the world that you have completed a paper.  At that point, not posting to the arXiv looks strange.

Compared with other fields, mathematics and physics are anomalous in making heavy use of the arXiv, with physics even more so than mathematics.  As I understand it, in high energy particle physics the arXiv replaced an elaborate system of paper preprint distribution that was used in the late 80's (and it rapidly became popular since it was obviously better than the paper infrastructure).  Usage spread to other areas of physics, from physics to adjacent areas of mathematics, and then further into mathematics.
Things are trickier in other fields, because many of the advantages depend on network effects.  If nobody in your field pays attention to a server, it's not conventional, and it counts for little or nothing regarding priority, then there's less reason to post to it (although it still has some value).  I'm not surprised that it catches on only slowly and spreads primarily to adjacent fields, but I expect green open access servers like the arXiv will become more popular over time.

Great summary of the appeals. Makes me wish my subfield actually was bigger on arXiv / preprint usage!

@MatthewG. Somebody has to start the trend! Why not you and your collaborators?

@DavidRicherby It's a good point, and one I'll be raising next time the research group gets together.

As I see it, the main reasons to use arXiv and similar preprint servers are:

To disseminate your paper without waiting for the peer review and publishing process. This is a serious issue - in mathematics, for example, peer review often takes a year or more, and it can be several more years before your paper gets to the front of the queue to actually appear in print.
To make the paper permanently available to readers who don't have a subscription to the journal where the paper is published.
In some cases, to disseminate and solicit comments on a paper that may not quite be ready for publication, while at the same time establishing priority.

Incidentally, from the computer scientists here, I've gathered the impression that CS uses arXiv very heavily, to the point that it practically supersedes journals as a way to distribute papers. Perhaps I'm mistaken, or it varies by subfield?

Definitely varies by subfield -- Looking at it I see the CS section indeed appears healthy, but I've never read a paper which came from arXiv. Must be my subfield-- or perhaps it's big gap in my knowledge base.

It varies a lot. A crude approximation is that the closer the field is to mathematics (TCS, ML etc) the more likely you are to see stuff on the arxiv. For example, I don't think anyone in computer architecture posts on the arxiv.

Very subfield-related. In software engineering, I have so far seen a grand total of zero relevant papers in arxiv (however, I do not follow it closely as the ROI is very small in my field).

What are the similar websites like arxiv in engineering and other sciences?

@parsa: I don't know. Ask it as a new question if you like.

Let me add one point not mentioned by other answers so far.
In fast moving fields (e.g., most of computer science), a great benefit of publishing technical reports in recognised/citable series (at least an ISSN)  and/or arXiv is to get a citable reference before publication in a more serious venue, such as a conference, or a journal.
So the workflow is as follows:

write and polish a paper
before a submission to a serious venue, publish it as a TR/arXiv preprint (unless this clashes with a double-blind, or copyright policies of the target venue)
submit to the target venue
right the next day you can write a next paper referring the work you published as a preprint. It can be either an incremental work, or something else using the result you achieved recently, etc. All this you can do way earlier than the paper really appears in proceedings, or a journal issue.
if the work was accepted at the target venue, good for you
if it wasn't, you still can refer to the work, while improving it and submitting next time/elsewhere/etc.

As you see, the turn-around time is what this is all about. Of course one should be later careful regarding replacing references to TRs with references to the really published stuff in CR versions - if there's time/space for it.

This makes a good point about the different time frames of research and publishing.  In some fields, like math, the validity/interest of a paper may depend a great deal on other, very recent papers, by the same authors or not. Frequently those older papers are not yet in print, maybe still being refereed, when the newer papers are being refereed.  Without access to the older papers, it can be difficult or impossible to make a reasonable decision about the publishability of the newer paper.  But this argument is less for an individual author than for an entire field.

Some researchers (supposedly from respectful schools) will use preprints as a way to hack the double-blind process and to try to impress possibly hesitating reviewers with their name or the name of their institutions. Preprints usually appear in Google Scholar if you work in that field.
So, by the time the paper gets to the reviewer he or she already knows who wrote it. In my opinion that violates the double-blind process, but the official position is that it does not, at least in conferences where I submit. Is anyone aware of different policies?

See http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16831/is-it-legal-to-upload-a-paper-to-arxiv-when-it-is-under-double-blind-review-for?noredirect=1&lq=1

If papers were posted on the arXiv before submission then I argue it would be easier to branch out.  I also think it would increase the quality of submissions and the speed of progress.  Overall, it should benefit your community and so, albeit indirectly, yourself.
I quote from this blog post an illustration.

The current system reinforces the partition of research into
  (sub)areas, making it hard for an outsider to leave their own. Of
  course, it is good to have a domain of expertise and produce deep
  results in it. Still, I think it would be better if it was a little
  easier to work in different areas.
To illustrate the difficulty, suppose you want to start working in
  new, hot area X. To learn the background, typically you have to read
  papers. However, for every paper that you read, it is not uncommon
  that there is another one which is or was under submission. Indeed,
  the community is producing great results the majority of which is
  rejected due to capacity constraints. So unless these works are on
  electronic archives such as the arXiv, you don’t have access to them.
Who does? The experts of area X, to whom these papers are sent so that
  they can be properly evaluated. But it may be hard for reviewers to
  ignore submissions until publication. Suppose for example you have
  been working on problem Y for months and now you are asked to review a
  paper that solves Y. Are you going to ignore this information and keep
  working on Y despite knowing that you will be beaten? Also, when the
  paper does come out you’ve had a long time to internalize its
  implications.
The edge currently given to an insider over an outsider is months if
  the paper is accepted right away; it may be years otherwise.

@TobiasKildetoft why doesn't it answer the question?  It explains why it would benefit your community and so indirectly yourself.  It seems to me a valid reason "Why would one be concerned about getting a manuscript on arXiv, if it's already under review with a journal"

It seems to be an explanation of why it would be of benefit to the scientific community if there was a requirement to publish on arXiv. This is not what the question asks.

@TobiasKildetoft It explains why it would benefit the scientific community if people do it.  A requirement is just a way of enforcing this.  I have reworded my answer to put the emphasis on people rather than on requirements.


text:
Should the personal/research statement be technical?
Related: Choosing research ideas to include in a statement of purpose
I know I must describe my past and current research in my personal/research statement or statement of purpose. But do I use technical terms?
I was given the advice that since the people reading my statement are mathematicians (I am applying to US for applied mathematics), they should know what I am talking about.
Although I am applying to applied mathematics, it would also be nice to hear from other fields (biology, computer science, engineering etc) about this.

At least in computer science: Yes, but.
What admissions committees are looking for in your application is strong evidence of research potential.  One of the indicators of research potential is the ability to write about your chosen field in its native language; not just technical terms, but their proper usage and context.  In particular, if you are describing your past research results, or a particular future research problem, you should describe it just as any professional researcher would.
However, there is technical language and technical language, and you want the former.  The vast majority of your statements should be understandable to a general audience of (in your case) applied mathematicians, not just to experts in your chosen subsubsubfield.  For the really technical details, cite the literature or point to your own work on your web page.  (The ability to effectively explain your research to non-experts, demonstrated knowledge of the literature, and willingness to embarrass yourself in public by posting your work to the web are also strong indicators of research potential.)

I believe there are two types of documents: statement of purpose and research statement. The research statement describes what are you going to do in the PhD.. am I correct ?..I saw this requirement in the CS @ Oxford.

@seteropere - UK application process is different from the US. For the UK, you need the statement I mentioned and a research proposal (pick a project, details of how you plan to do the project) + supervisor before applying. For the US, you don't need to pick a project, supervisor or have a detailed research proposal. Just the general statement of purpose.

In the US, the research statement is called a "statement of purpose".  But if you want admission to a top department, you need to write a research statement.

@JeffE - Thanks for taking time to answer my question. To clarify: when you say "research statement" you are referring to a description of the applicant's past, present, future research like what you described in an answer for the related question. For the UK, this is also the best way to meet the statement of purpose requirement. However, in the UK, they also require a detailed research proposal (can be ~6 pages) outlining step by step how you plan to e.g. acquire data, analyze the data, what kind of reports you will produce when for a specific research topic agreed by a supervisor.

in your first sentence of the last paragraph, I think you mean "there are everyday language and technical language"

@Ooker.  No, I wrote it correctly. "There are dinner jackets and dinner jackets.  This is the latter." — Vesper Lynd, Casino Royale.

Meaning of a quote in movie Casino Royale (2006)

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How does Google Scholar rank search results?
I am attempting to identify how Google Scholar chooses which publications to rank highly in search results.
I'm aware that Google Scholar uses metadata from academic websites, but therein my understanding of the process ends.
My query: What parts of Google Scholar's process for indexing and ranking search results is public, and where can that information be found?

Here is what the about page says:

Google Scholar aims to rank documents the way researchers do, weighing the full text of each document, where it was published, who it was written by, as well as how often and how recently it has been cited in other scholarly literature.

Here is an academic article that attempted to deconstruct the ranking algorithm: Beel et al 2009, PDF
They suggest that two key factors were the citation count (more citations pushes the article higher up the search list) and the search term appearing in the title. They review a wide range of features.
Note that the article is 10 years old and the algorithm has presumably been updated over the years.
References

Beel, J., & Gipp, B. (2009, July). Google Scholar’s ranking algorithm: an introductory overview. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on scientometrics and informetrics (ISSI’09) (Vol. 1, pp. 230-241).

I think it is part of Googles business model to keep that information secret. If they specified how the rank is calculated people would try to game the system and it would become less useful.

The algorithm, which is what they keep confidential, is just one component in a process. Looking at how they do search rankings on their traditional search engine, you can find other factors including the popularity of sites and the money spent on promotion. I'm just unclear on what, if anything, they have likewise disclosed about the process for google scholar. I don't want to extend those details revealed on their main service without evidence they also apply.

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


text:
How to present participation in undergraduate research experience programs on CV when applying for jobs in industry?
I am mathematics undergraduate student interested in joining the workforce out of undergraduate (quant finance and data analysis). The past few summers I have been participating in pure math research programs (REUs), and I am struggling to write a résumé section for the REUs.
If any mathematicians are reading this, my most recent REU problem is PDE regularity. I'm at a loss for words on how to explain that to a layperson without making it sound useless.
How do I effectively talk about my work/results in the context of a resume read by applicant tracking systems and human resources?

This sounds like a question for industry people (i.e. [workplace.se]). I'm not sure a bunch of academics are the most qualified people to answer this... (Don't cross-post, though)

Where did you do REU? Academic institutes  or industry companies? Lp regularity and blow-up of solutions to pdes from fluid dynamics are not too far away from industry if you apply for jobs in large aerospace companies.

I don't think people consider going from undergrad to a job "transitioning from academia to industry". Without demeaning it, it's probably the most normal thing to do after undergrad. You also won't have the same issues as people transitioning from academia. For example, people won't expect you to have experience coming out of undergrad, while after a Ph.D you need to sell your time in academia as a reasonable alternative to industry experience.

Buddy its a transition from a resume focused on academia to a resume focused on getting jobs in industry

As a general note, do not use so many contractions and abbreviations. Writing terms out in full, at least the first time you use them, will never be wrong and may save a reader some time and effort.
You need to think of your resume in terms of what it tells the expected reader about your suitability for the job you are seeking.
Don't try to explain the subject matter of your research project "to a layperson". If the project does relate to a potential job, the hiring manager will either be a mathematician who understands the area, or will have mathematicians who understand the area on their technical staff, or at least will have arranged to consult a suitable mathematician on the hiring decision. If it does not relate, the reader of the resume probably does not care what the project was actually about.
A research project may tell a potential employer other things about you. Can you work independently on a specified problem? Can you write a coherent, readable report? Is your work good enough to lead to being accepted for a research project at a high prestige institution?

Also, this has been asked quite a few other times.  Look at the "related" questions as they may be helpful.

@DaveKaye none of the related ones seem actually related. Can you post the ones you find relevant? Thanks!

@small.pde Hmmm....they seemed more related when I first looked.  So just to give general advice (from someone who made the transition from industry to academia and back) you have to turn your academic work into more of what industry pros will be looking for.  That's going to be things like discrete, accomplished tasks.  Did your research unravel some result that had been previously unattainable?  Did you give presentations on that work?  Did you teach to students and have meaningful outcomes from that?  It's gonna be along those lines that you'll have to convert your resume.  Good luck!

Without demeaning your accomplishments, undergraduate mathematics tends to mean you're barely getting into academia and mathematical research. In fact, I am in the middle of my PhD with some published papers and that's still the case. Because of this, what you're learning/researching in undergrad is not as esoteric as it  may seem. The topics at REUs are usually chosen because they are easily approachable by undergraduates and widely applicable.
Let's take Lp-regularity. Sure, you can dig deep into pure-math, looking into Lp-regularity of PDEs on manifolds etc., but this is actually a very relevant topic.
You say you're interested in quantitative finance? One of the biggest areas of research and application in quantitative finance is stochastic (partial) differential equations (SPDEs). Many models in the field (including the Black-Scholes model) use different forms of stochastic differential equations. Understanding the regularity results of these equations is crucial to understanding the error estimates for the numerical methods which are used to solve these models. One of the biggest recent results in the field (which resulted in a Fields Medal in 2014) is Holder-regularity of some solutions to SPDEs (and using a Holder-regularity approach, "Regularity Structures", to famously solve the KPZ equation), and people have already shown how this framework can be used to make numerical methods for previously-intractable SPDEs. In fact, in many cases one can only understand "the solution to SPDEs" via Sobolev spaces and Lp-regularity, making it essential to understand the numerical methods and simulation. So simulating financial models with low error requires the mathematics you learned.
But many PDEs require understanding Lp-regularity since many PDEs require talking about Sobolev spaces. In fact, one of the main uses of modern mathematics in industry is Finite Element Methods (FEM, or Finite Element Analysis, FEA). All of these numerical methods are derived for solutions in Sobolev spaces, this is not a fringe topic: this is central to the simulations used in the areospace industry, the petroleum industry, NASA, etc.
Also, some of the main methods in Data Analysis (especially in manifold learning) these days are closely related to optimization on PDEs, usually proving convergence in some weak norm and using facts about the eigenvalues of LaPlacians that you'd be familiar with.
All of this said, I think the best thing to do would be to scramble through Wikipedia and find out how what you learned is related to all of these different fields. Or pick up the Princeton Companion to Applied Mathematics and see how the study of PDEs is showing up in systems biology, genomics, medicine, finance, computer science, etc. You don't need to know all of it, but a good understanding of where you currently stand would give you a good perspective on how you're useful. I am not an industry person so I can't recommend on how exactly to put this in your resume, but with this understood you should be able to cater resumes to the jobs you're applying for.
Even if you don't end up doing something directly related to PDEs, I think most people would like that you have some understanding all the new stuff that's going on. At the very least, you will seem "experienced with math and number stuff".

I feel that this doesn't answer my question. My question is how to put my work on a resume so that it gets past the human resources desk and into a trader's hands

Understand how what you've done is useful for the fields you're applying to. I told you where to look in quantitative finance. You're one step away from having a theoretical background in the PDEs for Black Scholes under certain conditions etc., and understanding what "the Greeks" really mean. Having that on a resume can be key for some quant positions. If you truly look at how these parts of PDEs are related to the jobs you're applying for, your resume will write itself. As I said, this type of research is not esoteric at all, and it's highly applicable.

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


text:
Should the first page of a thesis chapter have a header and footer?
I am writing my Master's thesis.
I find it unprofessional to prevent the first page of the chapter to take headers and footers.
Should the first page of a thesis chapter have a header and footer?

not that it matters too much, but you write it is "unprofessional to prevent... to take". This is a double negative. So do you think it's a good idea or not?

If your institution or supervisor have a fixed opinion on this, adhere to this. Otherwise, consider the following:

Having both, a header and a footer, makes your layout rather crammed, so it’s not a good idea anyway.
Usually, the header of a page layout contains the page number and the title of the current chapter or section (varying on odd/even pages).
Usually, the chapter heading is designed in such a manner that it is open to the top.
In this case, using a header on the first page on a chapter is bad for two reasons:

It breaks the layout of the chapter heading.
Except for the page number, it contains redundant information: Your chapter title and your section title will be on the same page.

As the page number is rather small, it can be stowed away at the bottom of the page, so it is there for the purposes of citing page numbers. For leafing through the thesis to find a particular page, a gap in the page numbering at the head is not a problem.

Hence it’s quite common in professional typesetting (just look at some textbooks) to omit the header on the first page of a chapter and instead have a solitary page number at the bottom of the page.

Many universities have quite specific requirements for formatting and layout of theses and dissertations.  You should first check these requirements with your university's graduate college (or whatever entity oversees the approval and publishing of theses/dissertations) before you alter formatting.

This cannot be emphasized enough. Please follow your university's rules on formatting very carefully when you submit your document.

@SeanRoberson Instead, I cannot emphasize enough that not all universities have rules on thesis formatting, and thus I think that we should be able to provide more information on the rationale of certain stylistic choices.


text:
Would adding paragraph about the motivation provided by someone who doubted me to my final year project acknowledgment be unprofessional?
In my final year project, and since it will be my last postgraduate year, I want to add a taste of truth in my Acknowledgment, where I think it's the personal part of the project, where you are allowed to express yourself.
After thanking my professors, supervisors, parents in a very formal and professional way, I am eager to add this paragraph at the end.
I had a period where I was the underdog in the high school, I was treated badly, and I lost motivation to study because I wasn't encouraged, all my work and even good results in exams were not even appreciated. I was called the stupid dude, the person who thinks he knows but knows nothing, and ... and all of the this was by my math teacher, not my colleagues.
After that I was accepted in one of the top universities in Lebanon, in one of the hardest entrance exams, with an acceptance rate of not more than 15%. And after entering the university I was a top student.
For that I have written in the last paragraph of my acknowledgment:

Since it’s the end of the years I spent in the Lebanese
  University-Faculty of Engineering, I’m glad to thank the math teacher
  who once told me: "you will never pass the entrance exam of the
  Lebanese University-Faculty of engineering, my nephew failed surely
  you will fail ". Thank you dude, you were my motive, and proving you
  wrong was one of my goals.

Would this be unprofessional?

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

"Professional" is not what you should be asking.  You should be asking "will I be better off if I write this or if I don't?"  You will be better off by whatever feeling of revenge you feel if you write it.  You will be worse off if somebody reads it and reacts negatively to you because of it in a way that matters.  The odds of this are hard to evaluate, but probably very low.  The "professional"  thing is not to include it.  Going forward, I would suggest this event doesn't matter but it is practice for holding your tongue in difficult situations.

I would refrain from adding this to the written/electronic version of the project report. It's very personal and uses colloquial language that should be avoided in a formal report, even in the acknowledgement section.
Having said that, you may still give to that particular teacher a copy with your personal hand-written dedication.
Btw, great example of negative motivation (or what it's called): a negative comment with positive result.

Although it could feel cathartic to "stick it" to this teacher (who was clearly quite rude), it probably isn't worth it. I wouldn't recommend that step.

+1 for giving that particular teacher a copy with a hand-written dedication.

I certainly think it could be worded in a more positive and professional way. It comes off a bit salty and as if all your research work was to prove one man wrong.
If I were to read your work, I would certainly get a bad initial impression.

He could write it subliminally, in such a way that only he and the teacher would know (assuming the teacher would read it). For example, "It's the end of my time at the Lebanese University-Faculty of Engineering and I’m glad to to have passed the entrance exam through all the challenges. Ultimately, I am thankful to the teaching staff who believed I would be able to scale this hurdle, for it requires adequate mentor-ship to succeed in such endeavors".

@A.T.Ad That's beautiful :) I truly hope the asker does that. Perhaps adding the name of the relevant teacher would be helpful in clarifying the point being made. It wouldn't be harmful in your version.

@A.T.Ad I'm going to use your Paragraph, it's well written and explains the point I want to deliver, which is mainly never allowing people's opinion to be your reality.

@A.T.Ad Nicely written! Subtle, professional, and well executed.

@elia: Please do reword it, so it isn't verbatim traced to this site...

I originally wrote this as a comment, but as I am seeing different opinions in several answers here I feel like I need to write a full answer:
Although it could feel cathartic to "stick it" to this teacher (who was clearly quite rude), it probably isn't worth it, and definitely is not worth showing it to this particular teacher.
Don't do this. No, it is not professional, it won't gain you anything.
People who know your situation might think it's funny - these are the people you should share this with, in another context, or anonymously somewhere if you are looking for some validation. Post it on Reddit under a throwaway, let people comment on it here.
People who don't know your situation well, or who have a positive predisposition toward the person you are referring to, or just don't know you are likely to have a different opinion. They might see this as petty, vindictive, or just disrespectful. It just isn't worth your trouble.
If this teacher was that rude to you, unless you think it was intended as motivation, they've shown they aren't worth your time at all anymore. You achieved what you wanted to achieve - move on and be your own person.

A bit immature and passively aggressive. :)
I too would advise against adding the passage as is. Yet, I'd suggest you replace it with something targeting at people who may be reading it, focus on perhaps how to stay true to one's dream and don't give up even faced with adversity or discouragement.
Second, would you like to reconcile with the teacher? It's clear that you're not over him (since you use "dude" I assume it's a male) and would go so far to dedicate a paragraph to his comment. Why not pay him a visit and tell him the good news? He could be upset about his nephew's failing at that moment. I do think after these many years, you both may have a different feeling. Give it a thought!
Let the negative nagging feeling go and enjoy your career.

Unfortunately, yes, it's unprofessional.
You could perhaps say something like this instead: "I'm glad to give special thanks to the math teacher who motivated me with his words about the Lebanese University-Faculty of engineering's entrance exam."
Only you will know what you really mean by that.

I had seriously been considering dividing my Ph.D. dissertation's "acknowledgments" section into expressions of gratitude and a few paragraphs with condemnations - of university management for oppressing the junior academic staff and for some things they had done to me which, well, are beyond the scope of this answer, but are quite terrible and sometimes illegal (I took them to court, too - and won twice). I actually couldn't wait to have the university library admit a copy of that into the archives for posterity.
But then some time passed; and I gave it more thought; and I realized that other than a brief (though sweet) sense of vindication, it would better to take the high road and keep the admonishments and denunciations out my dissertation. Looking back at it years later, I know I'll feel I did the right thing.
Still, you know what you really should do?
Go visit your old school, and ask the headmaster for permission to speak to the senior class. If they let you do it, you could use that opportunity - not to make a personal attack against that Math teacher, but to give your story as an example of why they should not be discouraged by nay-sayers, even if they are the supposedly all-knowing teachers.
And - you can always write an article or opinion piece and try to get it published in a newspaper. I can guarantee you it'll have more readers than your thesis :-P

Don't. It seems immature and passive aggressive. And it belittles yourself and your work if you indicate that you spent years doing what you did not out of interest in the subject or because of job prospects or whatever, but to spite this one person (and it gives undue power to that person).
If it is important for you to mention the episode, then do so; but do it in a straightforward and honest way instead of ironically, and try to formulate it "positively", such as:

My high school math teacher once told me I would never pass the university
  entrance exam, but my parents (? or whoever..) never stopped supporting and
  believing in me, for which I am eternally grateful.

Or:

My high school math teacher once told me I would never pass the university
  entrance exam, which was hurtful and disheartening; but in the end I succeeded. If you are a teacher: Please refrain from belittling your students; if you are a student: please do not let yourself be discouraged by disparaging remarks.

This is one of the best answers on this site. Well-thought, well-explained and with pratical suggestions

Don't even spend a second of your valuable time on writing to or about these lousy (peep). Send them to (peep) when you see them in person. Or tell them to see Figure 1. Meet them after work outside the building and let them know how good you are such that they avoid you in the future. But don't leave any written trail of your attitude. It's better to remove them from the Acknowledgements altogether.

You're a student, not a professional, so "professionalism" is a category error.
However, I find your proposed paragraph rather crass and it suggests that you've spent years and years harbouring a grudge against this person. You might consider something along the lines of the following, which still tells the funny story but does it without (IMO) making you look bitter and obsessed.

Since this the end of my time at the Lebanese University-Faculty of Engineering, I’m glad to thank the math teacher who motivated by telling me: "you will never pass the entrance exam of the Lebanese University-Faculty of engineering, my nephew failed surely you will fail."

At least, repeating "my nephew failed" still seems petty since it paints that teacher as an idiot (even if maybe correctly).
PhD students can certainly be professional or not. For graduate students (as the OP) this seems borderline—but they'll be judged as adults by anybody reading (especially if they stay in academia). So maybe professionalism is a category error, but in practice you best behave professionally even as a student, especially in your thesis.

That's the sort of paragraph that people who already like you will find funny.  Some people who don't know you are going to find this negative.  They might wonder why this teacher would say this to you.
I would use the space to thank the people who helped you.  And if by some chance the teacher who said that to you reads your acknowledgements, he should have some idea why he's not mentioned.  I think that when positive people have nothing to say about someone it has almost the same effect as when negative people have bad things to say about someone.  (I'm not saying you're either.)

"They might wonder why this teacher would say this to you." +1. Sadly, some will think he was correct and you barely managed—including other professors with an elitist attitude.

How about:

For all the wonderful time I have spent in the Lebanese University-Faculty of Engineering, I am glad to thank all those who have supported me or made me very motivated to do my best against all odds, including the university entrance exam.

Very accurate, and if you send your paper to your former math teacher, he/she would certainly know what you're referring to, yet nothing in it is accusatory.

Answer this: Do you think this would be a sign or moral superiority or do you think a comment like this would come from exactly that kind of people who told you you're not going to make it in the first place?
I think it depends on the person you want to be here - besides the fact that such a statement in a formal report is kind of inappropriate. Do you want to stay above this? You showed them anyway. Don't you think not letting them know what you think is a much bigger punishment? If you write something like this, all they're going to do is say: "Yeah, he made it. But come on. Look at this poor comment he wrote into this document here."
Think about it.

There is nothing wrong to tell the truth.
What is the purpose of an acknowledgement? To show others how you make it in the end after so much hardship. An acknowledgement is also the integral part of your paper, so when you become a Nobel prize winner in future, it will be very interesting for us to read this part. As to the teacher who is not friendly or who should not be called an educator at all, why do you bother to consider how to keep his or her face because he never did so for you.
Go ahead with your writing.

"so when you become a Nobel prize winner in future, it will be very interesting for us to read this part" -- do you really think this is helpful advice?

To help a young person to have his own confidence, is there anything wrong? Isn't it helpful enough?

Giving people unrealistic encouragement, and encouraging them to be confrontational or arrogant, is not helpful

@YemonChoi -- "confrontational" is just a bad word for a person who resists mistreatment; "arrogant" is just a bad word for "confident" or "assertive".

@bubba I disagree. Just because those words can be misused, this does not mean they are always non-applicable. My comments are based on experience of actually being a student and now being a teacher. I believe in giving constructive advice, not just the advice people want to hear.

When the student writes down everything on his mind, he also wants to help others to see the world in reality, and it is also very objective because he is simply a recorder of the fact and others will benefit from such writing. If the readers are teachers, they will know they should not give ill-treatment to students because it is very hurtful; if the readers are students, they will know the world is what they think it is like and that they have to make a lot of efforts, even without the help from a teacher.@Yemon Choi

"and it is also very objective because he is simply a recorder of the fact" -- in my experience, as a student and teacher and author and referee, this is very often not the case.

Aiming for a Nobel prize (rather than research) will harm, for instance, people with impostor syndrome (endemic among grad students). "Confrontational" is a good word for those who fight when it doesn't further their overall interest (say, writing inflammatory acknowledgments rather than using a punching bag). And "arrogant" is a good word for those who show overconfidence: "humility is generally good" is now IMHO supported by studies on overconfidence bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overconfidence_effect).

Personally, I would include the comment, or something like it. I think it needs some re-wording (the word "dude"seems inappropriate, to me, for example), but the basic sentiment is OK, in my opinion. Clearly these thoughts are important to you, and they deserve to be expressed.
But note that I said "personally". In other words, this is just my own approach to things, and it may or may not work for you. I'm often considered direct (abrupt?), outspoken (harsh?), innovative (undisciplined?), and undiplomatic. I'm sometimes accused of being "unprofessional", and I actually regard that as a compliment, because, to me, "professional" typically implies stuffy, formal, and humorless.
So, short answer ... some people certainly will regard your comments as "unprofessional". That label doesn't bother me at all, but the key question is whether or not it bothers you.

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


text:
Is it okay to refuse a laptop from a new university if you already have your own personal laptop?
I got a postdoc position and I am moving to a new university. I was  contacted by my new professor about choosing a laptop that the department would buy for me.
The option they have is roughly the same model I have currently as my private machine, and the one that I have used to finish my grad school. Thus I find another laptop unnecessary, but also a hassle (having two computers means installing the same stuff twice, etc.).
My question: is it a bad idea to refuse their offer?
Additional information:

I don't have problems using my private computer for work, nor mixing personal and work stuff on the same machine. I did that during my graduate school.
But also I understand the pros of getting a work computer (e.g. if the laptop is broken or stolen it will get taken care of) and that my response of refusing their offer may be strange.

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

It surely matters where you are.
In the U.S., at many universities, "privileged information" of various sorts is supposedly not ever to be kept on "personal", as opposed to "institution-owned and maintained" machines. Or, as in some comments, as soon as you do have work-related data on your personal machine, that machine becomes liable to Freedom-of-Information warrants, and you yourself can get into various sorts of trouble for insufficiently guaranteeing security.
A similar issue exists (depending on jurisdiction, etc) with regard to email accounts. My (U.S. R1) university account is subject to search without too much probable cause. Some of my colleagues hesitate to have any substantive-sensitive discussion by email because the University's policy is that we are not to delete any such email, but preserve it indefinitely. That kind of thing. (No, it's not clear how this would be enforced, nor what the impact of "pleading ignorance/technical-incompetence" would result in. Maybe it's just CYA policy on the part of the institution.)

Wow, I had no idea that the law (in the US I presume?) worked like that. That seems a little unfortunate. I think it healthy for universities to have a strong sense of freedom to communicate ideas without fear of official reprisal, yet from what you describe the system is not really set up that way.

@TheoreticalPerson, fortunately, operationally, you'd never guess that those were the official policies. They are the announced policies, and even though no one comes around "checking on you", if by mischance something unfortunate happens, the Uni has "covered its @$$" legally by having told you that you couldn't do anything at all... and you are all by yourself out there in violation of privacy and other data laws. With good luck, all this is irrelevant, of course. As with many things, the question is about how catastrophic the failure modes might be, as opposed to not-good-but-not-so-bad.

We had a person die on the job. The university had 2 disks one for work stuff and one for personal stuff as a student/worker. Now this person had saved everything under personal network disk... as a result we had to plan and enumerate what files we needed from the disk for 1 week and then with the supervision of 1) Our manager 2) Universitys Lawyer 3) Executor of estate we could under 1 hour dig for files we deemed nessesery to use. After that it all got sealed for 50 years. Admittedly I am not in US but legal reasons across the globe exist.

@TheoreticalPerson In academia the law is applied not so much to prevent exchange of information and more for two purposes: (1) to protect the IT infrastructure of an institute from harm via infected devices. This usually means only centrally administered computers gain access. Computer users generally hate it but there are some benefits to it. (2) Data protection issues. If you’re working with human patient data, there are all sorts of (good and important) restrictions and regulations of how the data must be handled so no private information gets leaked accidentally.

@TheoreticalPerson The goal is not to restrict your freedom but to be able to control the IT infrastructure and prosecute its misuse. Imagine someone using a legitimately-looking university e-mail in scams for example.

@DmitryGrigoryev I appreciate that the goal might not be malicious, but it never is. What if a country like Turkey had similar laws regarding indefinitely preserving communications, and little protection from searches? Things said in a more naive, stable, time might land one in a bad place.

@TheoreticalPerson The problem of Turkey is that those laws and restrictions are applied to personal communications.

@DmitryGrigoryev I agree that it is a problem if surveillance is applied to personal communication, but I think it is also a problem if it is applied to academic communication.

If you are at a public university many of the things on your machine may also be subject to FOIA requests.

@TheoreticalPerson I used to work at a university research department.  We collected and studied people's medical data.  It would not have been OK to share this data.

@emory, I agree absolutely. But this is doesn't prevent people sharing data that they shouldn't. If the user is malicious, this is not going to help, and it could have quite extensive side effects.

"No, it's not clear how this would be enforced" — Many email hosts (e.g. Office365) offer long-term archiving of emails such that even if a user 'deletes' them they'll still be available in the archive. Probably for precisely this reason.

@TheoreticalPerson Simply said, are you fine with every single file on your computer becoming potentially public information? The IT department of your university unilaterally to decide to remotely reformat your machine with a basic image (e.g. if it got infected somehow)? With someone else having the ability to stealthily look at every single file on your computer without you noticing and being able to install arbitrary programs (including keyloggers)? I somehow doubt it, but that's exactly what you're agreeing too if you join your private laptop to the work domain and use it for work.

In this case in particular the rules are not just here to protect the university (although it makes their life a great deal easier as well; and depending what you're working on it might very well be a requirement) but also to protect you. I fail to see how this limits freedom of communication in any way - you can still share information you want easily, but without all the downsides.

The University could log all of the emails, both you send and receive through its systems. A "no delete" policy is technically unneeded for that. It could be needed from a psychological view: to let understand with all of its users that they have your mails and they can any time check it.

+1 for the legal aspects. I absolutely wouldn't accept a student keeping sensitive health information on their personal computer in my lab.

First, I would strongly suggest that you have a work computer and a personal computer, and then keep those two separate for legal reasons. Although this is not the place for legal advice, and there are many other factors to consider, you should know that in general:

Your employer owns your work computer, and can legally confiscate it at any time and for any reason. Thus, you should consider any personal information you have on your work computer to be accessible by your employer. This includes personal information like tax forms and private correspondence. It also includes information you might not want your employer to have, like criticisms of the administration or job offers from other institutions.
Academics tend to have many varied endeavors inside and outside of their academic profession. Your employer probably has a very strong claim to the intellectual property rights of anything you create on their computer, even if the IP does not relate to your university job and even if you're only using generic software such as Microsoft Word.
Your position at a university may expose you to FERPA or HIPAA protected information, and your university may have specific expectations about how you access that data. My university insists that all laptops use whole-disk encryption because the loss or theft of unencrypted student records is a major FERPA event that must be disclosed to the government and/or public.

Second, there are some practical and legal problems with retaining your own computer from a software licensing point of view.

There's a high probability that a lot of the software on your current computer should no longer be used according to common academic licensing agreements. This is definitely true for certain specific software such as MATLAB, which are generally licensed to the university for use by university students and employees (this is called a "site license"). Since you are no longer a student of that university the license demands that you stop using that software.
This all depends on the specific licenses that your university has negotiated, but the situation above is very common. It almost certainly applies to any proprietary technical software you've got, and there's a very good chance that it also applies to any proprietary productivity software you've got (e.g. the Microsoft Office suite, VPN software, etc.). It may in some cases apply to the operating system itself, though this is less common today than it used to be.
The reverse of the above situation is also a problem. Many university licenses stipulate that software may only be installed on university owned computers or on student computers. As a postdoc you're no longer a student, so their IT department might balk at installing any work-related software on your personal computer.

The IT department might, by policy, decline to assist you with your personal computer in any way. Depends on the institution.

@200_success In my experience the IT department may also, in practice, decline to assist with a university owned computer…

I've always taken this approach (+!) though the work machine is a desktop and I do use my personal laptop for limited work-related stuff (e.g. presentations which aren't confidential).  A laptop that would suit me for portability wouldn't be up to everyday use so it works well and sidesteps any licensing/compatibility issues. Our helpful local IT people will advise at least when it comes to work-related tasks on personal hardware -- I don't just say that because one of them knows who I am here!

@200_success the large part of reason why I like to use my own laptop is that I can work without the IT department assistance (which usually boils down to intervention).

It's not at all necessarily the case that: 1. the employer owns the laptop (in some places they just buy you one, and don't provide tech support); 2. if the employer owns the laptop, that it can confiscate it at all; 3. That if the employer can confiscate the laptop at all, it can do so without prior notice and proper procedure. In fact, 2. and 3. are rather unlikely - although I suppose it depends on the legal regime under which you live. I think that even in "employer is all-powerful" states the US this is probably not the case. Having said that - this is not a bad recommendation.

I know someone who wrote an app using his work laptop. Completely different market segment, but once it was commercially successful, his employer tried to get a piece of it. They did drop the claim before it got to court, but only because the company decided the cost of going after it (including a severance package) was more than they'd win. He dodged a bullet!

@einpoklum I've never seen an employer that didn't issue their own hardware, and make you sign an agreement that says 1) they own it and everything on it, 2) you agree to constant monitoring (whether they do it or not is another story, but they CAN) and 3) you agree to surrender with any or no notice. Literally every single one, even the tiny ones.

@corsiKa: So, you've never seen my two academic employers. Also, that is very sad... are we talking about the US?

@einpoklum The two universities I attended in the US both issued their own laptops, including post-grad positions. And the employers I was referring to were in the US and Canada.

Canada too? I mean, the US I would believe, I thought things were not that bad in Canada.

@einpoklum IANAL, and in the US the question of whether an employer owns all data on an employer-owned computer varies state-by-state. I would not be surprised if it was a similar situation in Canada, because it's not really a privacy issue at hand here it's a property law issue. Your employer owns their laptop and they can do anything they want with it including looking at anything and everything on it's hard drive. E.g. if you own a laptop and loan it to a friend you still retain ownership rights- your friend cannot claim that you are no longer allowed to access portions of your hard drive.

@David: Well, IANAL also, but the phone company owns the phone line and the ISP owns its routers, and still they don't (?) have a right to fully inspect your traffic/phone calls. Of course, the US government copies everything anyway but ignoring that "minor point" there's some expection of privacy, isn't there?

@einpoklum You have a fundamentally different relationship to your employer than a telecom company. Your employer can generally monitor anything you do on employer-owned computers (even real-time screen watching), intercept any communications you send over employer-owned networks, listen to any calls you make using their phones, read any emails sent through their email, see anything you send and recieve on their work cellphone, etc. Most of this is because they own all of the equipment involved. https://www.privacyrights.org/consumer-guides/workplace-privacy-and-employee-monitoring

"Your employer can generally monitor anything you do etc." - not so. That is, it depends on which state you live in. In many states in the world, employees have a legally-established expectations of privacy in certain situations, and the employers is not allowed to monitor those aspects of their activities. (Example: Reading personal webmail on a company computer.) In fact, what you describe sounds - to people from many places in the world - like a totalitarian distopia. Again, I assume you're talking about the US, right? :-(

@einpoklum Yes, I'm talking about the US, which I thought was clear from previous comments. Canada, FYI, also allows employers to monitor their employees technology usage in the same ways as above. There might be some stronger disclosure requirements though. I don't know what Canadian law says about the development of original IP on employer-owned technology.

@einpoklum Even in Europe which has much stricter privacy regulations than Canada or the US generally, the employer still owns the hardware they themselves bought and gave to the employee to work on. I have a hard time seeing why that'd be surprising or somehow morally dubious. I mean you wouldn't try to take your desktop home with you either if you quit, right? There are good reasons for these things as well, without being malicious or anything. E.g. if an employee gets sick, the employer might want to let some other employee handle business mail.

And in Europe at least, if the employer informs you that you're only supposed to use the work computer for work, they have all the right in the world to "spy" on your communication, since after all the only thing you could be doing with the machine would be work related and therefore not secret. I'd be rather surprised if Canadian law differed much in that regard. Which yes is why every sane person won't use facebook or private email on a work machine - you've got a private phone, use that.

@Voo: Sorry, but I can't understand how you fail to see the problem. A laptop on which employees typically conduct private business and private conversations which their employer has a right to spy on and read/listen/watch all of that?

@einpoklum It's a laptop provided by employer to do work that you're getting paid for. There's a very simple solution to your problem: Use your private devices for private conversations and work devices to do work on. Otherwise you'll always have to live with compromises and in the end business has a large vested interest at having devices with their data on it under strict control, which clashes with your interest in privacy.

It's probably best to write to them saying you would prefer to us your own computer and ask whether that's an option.
If they do require you to use their machine, you could order one with very similar or compatible hardware to yours, image the disk of your old laptop to an external hard drive, and restore on the lab computer. No installation or configuration necessary.

About using personal computers for work - ignoring any possible legal arguments, I would advise taking a work computer if you have got the option.
First it can save you the hassle of lugging it around as you can transfer data and emails between them using cloud/web services (be it private or public cloud); it also saves both of them from wear and tear.
Talking about wear and tear, your personal computer may also benefit from:

Not being used so much;
Not being carried around.

Talking from experience, when I entered my last job they did not have the option to have a Mac / MacBook Pro, and I used my own during two years. It ended having a LCD problem ensuing a small fall and the laptop being moved around every day.
I also lived nearby, and I wanted to walk. Often it was a hassle or depending on the time of the day, even insecure to carry a computer with me.
Nowadays, I have a MacBook Pro at home, and other at work, one has 5 years, the other has 4.
A top-of-line work notebook can be costly, and accepting a work notebook, depending on the part of the world, can signify saving between at least 2000 to 5000 dollars at the end of a few years.
As for the question of reinstalling everything twice, one notebook used to be a clone of the other for years. Lately I do prefer to have two distinct devices, at home I have more software installed that I paid from my own pocket, than at work.

Try asking them for something else, instead. Perhaps they don't provide you with a desktop computer? You might exchange one for the other, and have IT manage your desktop in case you'd rather avoid the hassle.
Alternatively, ask for some other research budget allowance to be made available.
There's no certainty you'll be obliged but it's worth trying.

There are two main benefits of using your personal laptop for work:

You have administrative access to the system. This can be really helpful, if you frequently install new software. IT departments often have good reasons for not giving administrative rights to the users.
Depending on your field, you may find that research projects last longer than postdoctoral affiliations. Hence it can be unwise to rely too much on employer-provided resources to do work.

On the other hand, extra laptops are rarely harmful, especially if they are similar to the ones you already use. Make your working environment easy to synchronize across multiple systems, and life becomes easier when you lose a laptop or move to the next university.
The above only applies to research that you do more for yourself than for your employer. You should use employer-provided resources for teaching, administration, and other duties, which you do directly for your employer, as well as for handling sensitive data. This remains true regardless of whether you are formally required to do so or not.

Certainly there is no harm in accepting the laptop/computer from your office/ university. Keeping seperate things for office and personal use is good practice. For any software issue or defects etc you can look towards university people. And moreover u need not carry it daily if there is safe place in office where you can keep daily after leaving the office

The question mentions explicitly the hassle of having to install/update everything twice.

You seem to see two choices: Accept their computer, or refuse to accept it. The obvious third way is to tell the professor that you already have a laptop that is practically identical to what they want to buy for you, and ask whether the expense is really necessary.
Often it is: If their laptop is locked down for security reasons. If they want the right to get it back at any second with no research material stored on your private computers, and some other reasons. By asking you either save them money, or you will be told the reasons why you can't use your own laptop.
So "refusing" to take the laptop is a bad idea. Making a suggestion is much better.


text:
When applying for grants, does the NSF care that I'm "poor"?
When applying for US NSF grants as a PI, does it help my case to discuss how little funding I've had?
To give some background: I am a new-ish faculty member; so far in my career I've received 1/2 of a rather small NSF grant (shared with a co-PI), which didn't even come close to covering the actual cost of a PhD student.  On this shoestring budget I've been able to produce a bunch of good work, but in ways that are not sustainable as a long-term funding strategy (getting financial help from senior colleagues, begging my department to let me use startup funds past the original deadline, sending students away for internships so that I don't have to pay for them some semesters, etc.).

Question 1: When applying for new grants, will the NSF panelists consider my productivity relative to my budget?  Or do they only care about productivity full stop?  If the former, how do I effectively convey this lack of funds in my proposal?

Confounding the situation is that I am at a very highly ranked place in my field.  In past talks with programme managers at the NSF, I have heard the message, "we try to spread the funds around and not give it all to people at rich institutions like yours."  The problem is that I'm not rich, and if my university has money, I'm certainly not seeing it.  Ergo, my impetus to ask this question: how do I convey to the NSF panel that I'm actually pretty "poor"?
Another confounding factor is that students at my institution far more expensive than the national (US) average: I have to ask the NSF for about USD $92k/year for each PhD student I want to fund, whereas I have colleagues at other places who pay about half as much. So even the small amount of money I do get from the NSF doesn't stretch very far.  I don't get the sense everyone on the NSF panels realises how big this discrepancy can be: for instance, after receiving the grant above (which covered <1 student) I asked my PM about submitting another proposal; the response was along the lines of, "Why don't you just have fun and enjoy doing research on your current grant?" Which leads to my second question:

Question 2: In my proposals, should I address the fact that PhD students are particularly expensive at my institution?  Or will this just turn off panelists who think I am "too expensive?"

To put all of this another way: I once had a vagabond friend who told me, "if you want to beg for money in the rain, you should hide your umbrella."  Should I be making it clear that I don't even have an umbrella?

I don't have any relevant first-hand knowledge to support an answer, but I suggest this is usually done by finding ways to spin it 'positively', e.g. 'despite a lack of financial support I have achieved these amazing results:'

I would actually worry that it might work against you. "No one thinks enough of my research to fund me" would be a terrible message to project. The easiest grant to approve is from someone with a long history of successful funded research. No risk seen. This is probably less of an issue for a new academic.

I would speculate that the NSF thinks that the extra cost of having a student at your particular institution is not their problem. To give you an example, ERC grants the same amount of money whether you're in Switzerland or Romania. You can probably fund at least 4 PhD students in Romania with the money it costs to employ one in Switzerland (this is a conservative guesstimate). But then again, you may be able to attract much better students at ETH Zurich than at Bucarest (I suppose you see what I'm hinting at, from the perspective of the funding agency).

Interesting challenge. I haven't served on any of the panels. From word of mouth, my assumption would be any proposal will be evaluated mostly on scientific merit. It might help your case that you've been productive without much funding, but then the lack of funding might also be a perverse signal of less previous success. We can all hope they evaluate the proposal on merit, but the history of decision making even among experts suggests other heuristics are likely to matter. In your case, I would hesitate to explicitly signal the lack of funding.

Having served on ~10 NSF panels, I don't think any panel will care that you're "poor," both because that is difficult to evaluate and because what the panel cares about are the scientific merits of what you're proposing and the likelihood that you can do it. About evaluating "poverty:" resources available vary a lot between and even within universities, and this is impossible to assess. Suppose you can't support a graduate student and the student works as a teaching assistant -- does that, in actuality, take 20% or 80% of their time? Also, how would one fairly evaluate resources shared by colleagues (as in your case)?
More importantly, the panel cares about your proposed work and the likelihood that you can get it done. The quality of past work definitely matters, and what you've done with the resources you have available is important. The quantity matters, but I've been happy to see that quality counts more than quantity.
Aside from all this: Will anyone feel sorry for you given that you've had financial help from senior colleagues and are at a top-tier institution?! I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader...
About Question 2: You want to tell the panelists that the NSF's (and therefore taxpayers') money would go farther if they gave it to someone at a different institution?

Thanks for the feedback; useful to get information from an inside perspective.

"Will anyone feel sorry for you given that you've had financial help from senior colleagues and are at a top-tier institution?!" There are certainly some things that make life easier at a 'top-tier' place, and also some things that make life harder.  Just like anyone else, I have good reason to worry about my career ending, losing my job, having to move my family, etc.

The issue raised by question 2 is a very good one. I'm constantly amazed that the NSF and NIH agree to pay the ridiculous tuition amounts charged by private universities in the US, rather than simply refusing.


text:
What are the main factors driving popularity of US higher education among international students?
Observation: According to OECD stats, the number of international students at US higher education institutions is the highest in the world and still rising (see also Wikipedia here and a report here).
Question: What are the main factors underpinning the observation above?
I am interested in (partial) answers pointing to studies, or sources of statistical information on the topic, not solely opinions.

This is a reformulation of this question

Some info, including a flow map, from UNESCO: http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Pages/international-student-flow-viz.aspx

@charlesmorisset interesting point.

Indeed, the rates are not that good, also, it would be interesting to know how many higher education institutions exist in other countries.

“the number of international students at US higher education institutions is the highest in the world” — it's much larger than most of the other Western countries! Charles' argument is good, although it is only an estimation: if you aggregate Europe to compare it with the US (a good idea), you also need to remove intra-European fluxes, which you cannot do from the above-linked statistics. Otherwise, you overestimate Europe's “foreign” students…

@CharlesMorisset: indeed an interesting observation, however I suspect the number is hugely inflated by intra-EU mobility. From the OECD stats, it should be possible to clean up the numbers, as they state how many students from which countries are where. If I'll get some time, I'll try to process the numbers.

I personally appreciate walkmanyi's great efforts to make this question much better than the original one. Also, I like his and other answers below. When I review the question for close, I had to think very hard. I still believe it's too broad and too arguementative. Please see my comment below walkmanyi's answer. Thus, I voted to close.

Ever heard of experiment design? We have a factorial table here: {US vs. EU | US vs. an individual country like UK or Germany} X {absolute terms | per capita terms} X {international student defined as "born outside of the country in which a student studies" (which will encompass intra-EU transfer students) | "had to obtain a long-term visa to go to another country to study" (excludes these intra-EU students)}. Define your freaking terms, academicians, before going on to state that the OP is based on wrong assumptions: in absolute # of visa-bearing students, US is undoubtedly leading the pack.

Abstract
Firstly, the answer will tackle the question's false assumption that the US is the most attractive destination for international students. Secondly, I will cite some of the factors making a country/region's education system attractive to international students. Finally, to tackle some of the comments, I will present a chart showing number of international students per capita in selected countries.
USA is not the most attractive destination for international students
According to the OECD Factbook 2011-2012: Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics, the number one destination of foreign students among OECD countries is Europe followed by Northern American region:

European countries in the OECD were the destination for 38% of foreign students in 2009 followed by North American countries (23%). Despite the strong increase in absolute numbers, these proportions have remained stable during the last decade.

To put the numbers above to global perspective, observe also that

Foreign students enrolled in G20 countries account for 83% of total foreign students, and students in the OECD area represent 77% of the total foreign students enrolled worldwide.

Factors driving attractiveness of higher education in OECD countries
Again, according to the same source (emphasis added):

Language as well as cultural considerations, quality of programmes, geographic proximity and similarity of education systems are determining factors driving student mobility. The destinations of international students highlight the attractiveness of specific education systems, whether because of their academic reputation or because of subsequent immigration opportunities.

Commenters to the question cite the ratio of international students per capita as an indicator of attractiveness of education system for foreign students. While I do not see any direct correlation between attractiveness of an educational system and the ratio of foreign students per capita (countries can be arbitrarily protective, or non-protective w.r.t. their own citizens), I prepared the following chart from the OECD data (relevant to year 2009):

The chart was constructed by merging data from the OECD.Stat with OECD countries population data from OECD population 2009 as published in the corresponding section of the OECD Factbook 2001-2012. The computation is done on non-citizen students column for the year 2009, except for United States it is the number of non-resident students (due to lack of a non-citizen students datapoint).

Hi walmanyi, I appreciate your effort to rework the original question into a more amenable form. I still have doubts about the usefulness of the question: the first part of your answer means that the question is based on incorrect facts, and the second part answers that the main factors driving “popularity” are “academic reputation” and “immigration opportunities”. I'm not sure what we've learnt by saying that! And this comment doesn't mean to disparage your answer, but rather that I still don't think this question is a good fit for the Q&A format. It's just too broad.

@F'x: incorrectness of the assumption: so what should we do with questions which are based on incorrect assumptions which are however not easy to see through? Should we delete them, or keep them with an answer which debunks a myth? As for the second part of the answer, consider that as a partial answer only, a cite from a somewhat(?) authoritative source. It should at least give a hint that there exists some body of research on the topic.

the “incorrect assumption” part is not the problem (at least not for me), I'd be happy to let such questions live… but the question itself should be answerable. But the document you linked to and user4231’s quotes all end up saying the same trivial thing: situations depend all, but people who move do it because they think they will be better of.

I do agree with F'x, people do it because they think they will be better off. The issue itself is subjective, I just don't know how anybody can have an objective answer.

Not a full-fledged answer, but there was a post (by Marginal Revolution) pointing to a paper [1] that reports alumni control of the Board of Trustees as a key factor:

All this is made possible by a model that transfers control to those
  who value it most, that is the alumni, who then drive competition for
  students, faculty, facilities, research, programs, global ties, sports
  coaches and rankings. Conversely, they also provide funds and guidance
  to maintain uniform excellence in all these pursuits. This maximizes
  the value of the degree or the “sheepskin” that the alumni are
  figuratively cloaked in for the rest of their lives.

[1] “Why is Harvard #1? Governance and the Dominance of US Universities” – Working Paper 2012, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.

Your question is interesting me so I did an hour or so of internet search for academic studies of the reasons behind brain drain in recent years. I will give here some results which I found. It is not a total answer to your question and I do not think anybody can completely answer your question because it is a very complex and highly studied issue. Reasons (driving factors) depend on each individual. Paper 2 makes useful distinction between PULL and PUSH factors and gives a list of useful examples of the two.
-- Brain Circulation Replacing Brain Drain at Science CareersBlog:

"Brain circulation," meeting attendees noted in a consensus statement issued 6 September, is the "mutli-directional flow of talents, education and research that benefit multiple countries and regions and the advancement of global knowledge." In an era when many scientists and scholars move between several countries to pursue training and research, the statement suggests, "brain circulation" often more accurately describes international mobility than "brain drain," which implies a unidirectional flow that only benefits certain countries.

This is in agreement with Charles comment. Maybe the situation is not so disymmetric than it used to be.
-- Analysis and Assessment of the “Brain Drain” Phenomenon and its Effects on Caribbean Countries at FLORIDA ATLANTIC COMPARATIVE STUDIES JOURNAL:

In order to understand how the “Brain Drain” happens, we must spend some time discussing migration and the reasons people leave their home countries in the first place. The reasons many Caribbean natives go abroad and fail to return home fall within two categories often referred to as pull and push factors. Push factors are circumstances or events in the home countries that result in persons leaving. Examples of push factors are the structural adjustment programs enforced by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank on developing countries that increased unemployment and reduced government funding on social programs in these countries which then led to increased migration. Pull factors are the incentives in the receiving countries that encourage persons to seek employment opportunities there. Examples of pull factors are the immigration incentive policies of the receiving countries that tend to attract higher educated, skilled and trained personnel. For example, the H-1B visa system in the U.S. is often used as a stepping stone by immigrants who want to acquire employment-based permanent residence there. The current immigration policy in the U.S. enables those applying for the H-1B visa to have the dual intent of attaining temporary work status but intending to apply for permanent residency (Kapur and McHale 2005). Other developed countries have similar immigration policies that continue to attract highly skilled workers from developing countries. Currently in Australia, employers of immigrants are not required to prove that domestic workers will be adversely affected by the employment of foreign employees, in fact, all they need to show is that employing the immigrant will be, in some manner, beneficial to Australia (Kapur and McHale 2005).

-- China's brain drain is a report on a Gallup survey:

This article argues that education, employment and family are the main reasons behind China’s brain drain. The article also provides useful statistics concerning the issue.

-- Thai Diasporas and Livelihood Strategies in Thai Society here:

This article uses traditional definitions of Diaspora to examine the phenomenon of the brain drain in Thailand.  It also considers the reasons for emigrating to another country in terms of personal livelihood

(last few examples are taken from here: http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~eroberts/cs181/projects/2010-11/BrainDrain/)


text:
How should I reference a repository of data and resources created to accompany my publication?
I'm writing a research paper and there's a large amount of code and data related to the study which may be of use to those who would read the study. They can confirm the correctness of the techniques, modify it for their own purposes, perform new analysis on the data, etc.
All these relevant files exist in a public repo, but I'm uncertain what's the best way to reference these. Would it be a citation? Just drop the URL directly into the paper? Other ideas?

Short Recommendation: Include the URL in-text followed by a full citation and end of text reference. If using someone else's repository, do the same, and probably also include a citation to the accompanying paper, unless the authors request otherwise. Place this citation in a prominent position in the method. If the open repository is a big part of the contribution of the paper, consider also including the URL in the abstract.
Longer Answer
Researchers in my field of psychology are starting to use the Open Science Framework as a repository for archiving data, code, and other materials. These repositories include a short URL that is meant to be stable (e.g., https://osf.io/5krfq/ ).
When referencing these repositories, I have read papers that just include the URL, and others that include a full citation. For example, the full citation for the above using APA style might be:

Wynton, S. K. A., & Anglim, J. (2017). Abrupt Strategy
Change Underlies Gradual Performance Change: Bayesian Hierarchical
Models of Component and Aggregate Strategy Use. Retrieved from
https://osf.io/5krfq

So in summary, I don't think the standards for data and repository citation have been formalised sufficiently yet.
I think there are a few considerations:

If there are any questions about the stability of the repository URL, then you need to provide more information. For example, if the repository is hosted on a standard university website, then it is quite likely that the URL might change over time. Even in the case of something like the OSF, it might still be safer to include additional information. References work well because there is redundancy.
In general, providing a URL in the main text makes it easier for the reader to see that the repository is readily accessible.
In many performance evaluation systems, citations of papers are counted, whereas citations of other resources may not be. This may be changing, but it is worth thinking about.

Referencing existing repositories by other authors
If you are referencing an existing repository that other authors created, then you should look to see what requests these authors made. For example, they may want you to cite a particular paper that is linked to the repository. More generally, there is a arguably an ethical and professional obligation to acknowledge those providing the repository by using a full citation.
Referencing your own repository that accompanies a paper
If you are creating your own repository that is linked to the paper you are writing, I quite like the idea of including the  URL in text as well as the end of text reference. E.g.,

Data and code is available at https://osf.io/5krfq (Wynton & Anglim, 2017).

And then you include the end of text reference as above.
This has the benefit of making the URL very clear to the reader (e.g., encourages the reader to click the link) but it also has the benefits of full citations (e.g., the reference is more robust, creates a practice of citing data and code as equal to citing papers).
Note about blind review: If you are submitting your manuscript to a place that does blind review, you need to do another step during the review process to prevent disclosure of author identities. One approach is to put a black mark over the author names in the in-text citation and end-of-text reference. OSF also has the benefit that you can create a custom-URL that provides a read-only view of the repository with author names removed. When such a feature is not provided by your repository service, you might need to instead attach anonymised versions of the materials and black out the link.
Where to put this citation/reference? There is another issue of where to put this reference. E.g., Abstract, author note, first sentence of the method, some other section of the method, etc. There are several considerations:

More people will see it if you put it in the abstract. The author note is another relatively prominent location. Thus, if you see the repository as fundamental to the contribution of your paper, then you may want to include the url in your abstract, and then include the full citation somewhere in the method.
Some journals have conventions regarding this. e.g., some journals have badges for open data or open materials, some journals ask for a section in the method with a label like "Open Practices". If so, then it makes sense to follow these conventions.
If you want to draw some attention to your open data and materials (but putting the url in the abstract feels excessive), then I think the first sentence of the method possibly under a section heading like "Open Practices" is a good option. Thus, it will be clear to any reader that gets to the method that these materials are available.
If you think the repository is not that important, then it could be placed in whatever section seems most content relevant (e.g., end of the participants/data description section or somewhere in the section discussing the data analytic approach).

Personally, I like the idea of "Open Practices" (or something similar) becoming a  standardized section in manuscripts where the authors explain what materials have been made open or are made to justify why they are not open.
What name to give to repository reference: Another issue, which I have not yet resolved, is what is the best title for repositories that accompany a paper. Possible titles:

Identical title as accompanying paper
Related title to accompanying paper: e.g., "Data and code for [insert paper title here]" or "Supplementary materials for [insert paper here]"
Something very descriptive: e.g., "Data and code examining ..."

If you use the identical title as the accompanying paper, this creates the potential for ambiguity when people cite the paper or the repository. However, it might make it easier for people to find. And if getting citations to your original paper rather than the repository is particularly important, then it may be the case that citations to the repository will get counted towards the paper depending on how the citation engine (e.g., Google Scholar, Scopus, etc.) matches articles. Such repositories can also often host a pre-print of the article. In that sense the repository becomes almost a landing page for the actual publication that is not behind a publisher's paywall.
From a descriptive perspective, I think that something like "Data and code for [insert title]" seems better. It makes the link with the accompanying paper very clear, but also makes it clear that it is a distinct academic artefact.

I typically have a subsection at the end of my methods section that is like this:

Reproducibility and open source materials
To enable re-use of our materials and improve reproducibility and
  transparency according to the principles outlined in Marwick (2016),
  we include the entire R code used for all the analysis and
  visualizations contained in this paper in our SOM at
  http://dx.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RTZTH. Also in this
  version-controlled compendium are the raw data for all the tests
  reported here, as well as additional regression diagnostics and power
  tests. All of the figures, tables and statistical test results
  presented here can be independently reproduced with the code and data
  in this repository. In our SOM our code is released under the MIT
  licence, our data as CC-0, and our figures as CC-BY, to enable maximum
  re-use (for more details, see Marwick 2016).

That specific paragraph can be found in this published paper
Marwick, B., et al. 2017. Movement of lithics by trampling: An experiment in the Madjedbebe sediments, northern Australia. Journal of Archaeological Science 79:73-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2017.01.008 preprint: https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/7a6h6/
And minor variants of that paragraph can be found in most of my recent papers. By including this kind of paragraph in my publications, I am trying to fulfill the recommendations in this paper, which echoes ideas found in many other similar manifesto-like papers on reproducibility:
Stodden, Victoria, et al. 2016  Enhancing reproducibility for computational methods. Science 354(6317):1240 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6317/1240
The Marwick 2016 citation in the paragraph above is my in-depth discussion of computational reproducibility for archaeology:

Marwick, B. (2016). Computational reproducibility in archaeological
  research: Basic principles and a case study of their implementation.
  Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, doi:
  10.1007/s10816-015-9272-9, preprint: https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/q4v73

Just to clarify, the paper you are quoting is Marwick et al (2017). Presumably the earlier Marwick (2016) paper is a side point. Most people would not have such a paper where they have published on reproducible methods. They would just be writing a standard paper with a repository that accompanies it.

That's right, I'm doing something like option 3 from your list of 'Where to put this citation/reference?' I've edited my answer to clarify where the paragraph comes from, and what the citation is. Probably every research discipline should have at least one paper like my Marwick (2016) to show members of the community some of the open science options that are relevant to their ways of working.

If the rest of your paper is using MLA/APA/Chicago/etc. citation, then these sources should be treated no different. You should maintain consistency throughout your paper.


text:
How to know whether a journal accepts concurrent submission to the journal and arXiv?
I am considering submitting my paper to both a computer science journal and arXiv. No version of the paper has been published in any conference or anything at this point.

Is this going to be an issue with the journal?
Should I hold off submitting to arXiv?
If this is journal dependent, how do I find out about the journal policy?

a good resource is this: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php

You cannot get a good answer to this if you don't specify your field.  In math, it would be shocking at this point if you didn't submit to the arXiv, but for many other fields it's different.

It mainly depends on the specific journal.

The field is computer science

What kind of computer science? Theory tends to follow the same practices as math; other subfields tend behave more like engineers.

@JeffE System performance - Queueing Theory

What's the name of the journal? In the end, the answer depends on the concrete journal.

It's an IEEE journal

So, judging from the answers here...It "could" be an issue. Interesting.

My understanding of arXiv was that a publication there was tantamount to a "technical report" at a university.

@BenWebster "in math it would be shocking if you didn't submit to the arxiv" seems a bit excessive - there are some mathematicians who don't use it.

@FedericoPoloni Which I consider shocking.  How is anyone supposed to read their papers?  Dead trees 5 years after they were written?

@BenWebster Quite some journals also publish online before printing. Furthermore, they might put a preprint on their own homepage and link to it. So just because they don't use arXiv should not mean that they don't publish online. I also heard of situations where a paper was hold back by the author until the journal publication (and hence not put on the arXiv), to allow for more study on the topic, preparation for a conference, etc.

@Bemte That does not eliminate the potentially very long waiting time from submission to acceptance. I have no idea why anyone would delay putting a completed paper on the arXiv to allow for further study when it has already been submitted. It is not like that further study could make it into the paper anyway.

@Bemte The online journal publishing is better than nothing, I suppose, but  what is the point of writing a paper if you don't want people to read it?

The answer is field dependent, in particular some fields in the humanities tend to consider "already published" what appeared even on a web page. Also, Glam magazines such as Nature and Science want to be able to keep the papers secret until they release them, possibly with communication toward the press. In mathematics, the most theoretical parts of computer science, and some of physics you can definitely put a preprint on the arXiv before submitting to a journal (there might be journals who don't enable this, but they would be a small minority). There is an excellent resource to determine the policy of a journal or publisher.
All of this could be gathered from previous comments. Now, the reason why I write this answer is to stress that for Elsevier, the default policy is that you can put your preprint on the arXiv and later update it according to referee's comment ("postprint" version), but you do not have the right to put the postprint on the arXiv between acceptance and 12 months after publication if the preprint was not there before. To avoid trouble you should thus put your preprint on the arXiv before acceptance (before submission being the easiest way).

Well, some Elsevier journals are pretty "glam" (per ¶1 of this answer).  OP, or OP's university, may end up having to pay for Open Access with the journal.  It doesn't hurt to ask the editorial staff!  A quick email or phone call could save OP considerable trouble in the end.

My understanding is that it won't be an issue. The latter is mostly dependent on the aspects relative to the legal nature of the copyright (the contract between you - the author - and the publisher - the journal) and the pair-review process. My understanding is that what you publish in ArXiv is a raw manuscript which is the "raw-material" that goes into the pair-review process. The pair reviewed article (pre-print) has suffered many "transformations" based on the the reviewing-editors' requests. The copyright you're required to sign, regulates the pre-print and not the raw-manuscript. Therefore, putting your raw-manuscript on ArXiv shouldn't be an issue as long as the raw-material and the pre-print are not identical. If the latter is false, the reviewers would have not suggested any changes (not even cosmetic changes - rephrasing some fragment, for example) to the article, which, in my experience, is quite rare.

That's not the main point here. The main issue is that the journal's editors could refuse the manuscript because the result has already appeared online, so it's no longer "unpublished". It's well within their rights to do so, since publishing a paper or not is their own decision and they are free to set criteria and conditions. In some fields journals routinely do that, in some they don't (and doing it would be considered outrageous).