text:
Advisor walked in while I was complaining about her; How can I minimize the damage to our relationship?
I work in a lab. This evening, thinking that my advisor had already left for the day, I started telling my peers in the lab that she has a bad attitude about a few things, and she was showing off a lot about her work last summer. Out of nowhere, she walked into the lab and was visibly upset, and I feared that she had heard what I said.
I just finished my masters and had asked my advisor about pursuing a Ph.D. She kind of gave an OK and I am supposed to meet with her tomorrow morning to discuss about it.  Although our relationship has been on and off at times, I feel bad because she helped me a lot in past and now she will feel I am an ungrateful jerk.
What will be the best way to approach this issue so that I can minimize the damage to our relationship?
Update: My advisor said she doesn't have funding so she cant take me as a PhD candidate, which I know is load of crap, she has lot of money. As one of the answers advised, I thanked her for her help over the last two years. I am torn, depressed, angry, and tearful. Most advisors help their students find jobs; mine just told me sorry and good luck. Fortunately, another advisor had offered me a position; I had planned to decline, but now taking it seems to be my best option.

I do have to wonder why you want to work with a person that you seem to dislike ? And also, "showing off about her work" can be construed as "excited about research" or even "how to survive as a researcher".

@Suresh There are issues with everybody, that doesn't make it a deal breaker. I don't dislike her, but there are some things about her attitude which i strongly detest.

And even if she doesnt want to do PHD because of this incident , i still dont want to leave on this acrimonious note because we have been working together for around 2 years. I just want to say sorry but if she asks me "sorry for what?" and then i dont know where to begin because i dont know specifically what she heard

Two things are just about impossible to put back: toothpaste squeezed from the tube, and words uttered from the mouth.

I read all the comments and I still don't understand why you would like to work with somebody with attitude traits witch you "strongly detest" (where the dictionary defines detest as dislike intensely, loathe, despise). I understand the need to not leave the successful prof-student relationship in possible ruins, but maybe you should re-consider either your standard wording-choice, or weather you really like this person and would want to work with her.

@penelope My advisor asks me to teach some classes even though i am an GRA and not an TA. She is poor at planning. We go for month without work and we are made to slog at the end to achieve our goals. At same time i never took the intiative to streamline the process. So blame lies with me too becuase my professor sometimes is too busy .From what i have heard from others , she always put a good word about me to other professors .She is not perfect but i guess she is the best advisor i can have.

You made a major mistake, so let this be your lesson that when talking about others, Keep. Your. Mouth. Shut. "If you must speak ill of another, do not speak it, write it in the sand near the water's edge." ~ Napoleon Hill;  As a note, even if you are right about a person, you are only right about a person for a time - you never know who that person could later become.

I revisited this question today just out of curiosity. I see your update. Let this be a lesson about which advice below you shouldn't have followed.

If you had such major criticisms of her, why didn't you ever once try to privately deliver the feedback to her in a constructive way? Did the others share your opinion of the criticisms? Why would she trust you won't blow a fuse next week too?

Well... I am not an entirely mentally normal person so take my suggestion with a lot of salt.
The damage is already done, and you probably cannot do too much on her side. Your side, though, can be fixed. If it bothers you enough to make a new account and ask this question, you probably do care, right?
This is how I will approach it:

Before the meeting, prepare a thank you card and/or perhaps some little snacks/gifts (chocolate usually work, as long as she is not diabetic Other choices are small office plants, coupon to a nearby restaurant, etc.)
Go to meet with her and act as if none of these had happened. If she confronts you, apologize and emphasize that the experience made you feel very bad as well. Remember to emphasize the feeling. Depending on the outcome, if she confronts, then talking about PhD project is probably a bad idea. Leave the gifts and thank you card, and tell her that "I fully understand why you are upset, I hope you can give me another chance to talk about this in another time. I'll be outside in the lab if you need to talk to me."
If she does not confront you, then go ahead and talk about the PhD project. Pay attention to it, because it may actually be things you spend a few years on.
When it's all set, regardless of the outcome, give her the thank you card and the gifts. No need to mention your stupid chat. Just say something like "Just my thanks to your constant help through my Masters studies, and I look forward to working with you as a PhD candidate." Or if you're unlucky "Just my thanks to your help through my Masters studies, I learned a lot and I hope these little gifts will make up for all the hard times I caused you."

If she talks to you about the PhD, then she has forgiven you (unless she is a psycho who has decided to torment you.) If she decides not to and withdraws the offer, your thank you gift will also work. Either way, you'll have a chance to express your thanks, and that probably can help you feel better about your mishap.

And please be professional in the future. Badmouthing is a really bad habit.

I'm not sure that a gift is necessary. Personally, if this had happened to me (as the advisor) I'd be laughing inside. But I would want to know why the student wants to continue working with me.

@Suresh, I put an "an/or" there. If my student does this to me, I hell sure want to get a chocolate bar out of it. Not sure about the supervisor, though.

I wouldn't recommend this action. To me, it comes off as tacky groveling. If I heard someone badmouthing me in front of their peers, the last thing I'd want is some kind of gift from that person, as though the awkwardness could all be glossed over with a chocolate or a gift card. This might help defuse the situation, but, then again, it could backfire, too.

I also would not recommend this action. I have had folks grovel to me and personally I find it insulting and would rather them just get to the point. I would recommend simply going to her with your concerns, clearly and concisely but with an open mind, ready to hear what she has to say as well. If she did overhear your conversation with your peers and chooses to open a discussion about it, then you can talk about it with her. If she did not overhear you or chooses not to discuss it, you have at least done the right thing by going to her directly and treating her with respect.

Do not do this. It comes across as trying to buy your way back into her favour. Also, it is insincere to say "thank you for being awesome" when what you mean is "I'm sorry I was bad."

I can't help to read your suggestion as chocolate with a lot of salt.  That might not be taken well. ;-)

The fact that this was both suggested and accepted is very disappointing. Patronizing, groveling, false gifts and thank yous pave the road to general lack of responsibility, and could easily be the subject of a long rant about larger collective social problems...

@gerrit have you had salted chocolate? It's delicious.

If the OP is male (or lesbian) and in USA, gifts to a female professor are a really bad idea.  If the professor is offended already, it is ammunition for accusing you of "sexual advances."  If the professor did not hear the comments, gifts could be interpreted as such, which could lead to getting you in trouble, or (possibly just as bad) responding in kind.

From what you have said, I am not sure even if she heard you. All you need to do for now is to STOP this attitude. You will never find a perfect supervisor... Yes, you can talk with a friend about how difficult your life is with this supervisor. But this should be out of the lab and avoid -- as much as you can -- other students with the same supervisor.

Show her that you value her research and expertise (in case you don't value her research, then find another supervisor).
Do not talk about anything happened unless she started the talk.

I completely disagree with @Penguin_Knight on the gift thing. Being so nice in a typical meeting indicates something weird is happening. Do not do it. (I believe this is a cultural thing some people may see it really good others will think about it in a very bad context.)

If you have an issue with your advisor you should approach her about it in private, calmly, clearly, and with an open mind and an idea of what you want. If you choose to speak to others without approaching her then you cannot be surprised at unexpected consequences.
As for the current situation; if your advisor definitely heard you, then apologizing to her in person, privately, would be the honorable course of action. Of course, if there's a chance she did not hear you, this would not turn out well for you.
So, I recommend that you simply approach her with your concerns as you originally should have (and do it soon, because if she did hear you, the longer you wait the more permanent the damage may become). Also make sure you have a clear idea of what you want to get out of the conversation ahead of time. This is a reasonable approach whether she heard you or not. If she didn't hear you, then this brings your concerns to light in a mature manner. If she did hear you, this opens up the potential for a conversation about the incident. If she chooses not to mention it, at least you approached her with your concerns and gave her an opportunity to legitimately hear where you were coming from.
Also, whether she heard you or not, don't simply pretend that this situation didn't happen; go into it with the mindset of "yes, it did happen, and that means it's time to have a real conversation about the issues that have been bothering me before the tension gets even worse".
Do not grovel, this only shows that you do not feel comfortable with your ability to handle confrontation, and raises many red flags (too many to list) and defenses (even subconsciously) to the person you are groveling to (one of the worst cases being that the recipient takes it as "I can't believe you think I'm so foolish as to fall for your grovelling" and thus fails to reciprocate any respect).
Do not be close-minded or have a "putting your foot down" or "shoot first ask questions later" attitude, this will normally put somebody on the defensive immediately and kill most chances of progress. Be calm, clear, and treat her with the same amount of decency and respect that you would expect from anybody else -- even if you strongly disagree with her behavior. Going into these kinds of things with a clear head (and a clear goal) will also help give you confidence that can keep you from getting on the defensive and closing doors / burning bridges.
And most importantly, do not forget that you may not get what you want out of this conversation; but at least you will end up doing your best to be reasonable and work with the situation. The relationship may not be perfect, but it is there and it is up to you to make the best of it.

I completely agree with Jason C's answer. If you are sure that your advisor has heard you, then a sincere apology would work best. Something similar happened with me long ago, and I scheduled a meeting with the offended colleague early next morning, before anyone else was in the office. My apology was sincere and she immediately understood that I had no problem with her on a personal level, just that I had a problem with her working style. She did make an effort to change her style as she realized it was inconveniencing me. We had a fabulous relationship afterwards and never mentioned that incident again. But I definitely learnt a lesson: when you have a problem, discuss it with the person concerned and not with anyone else.

"My advisor said she doesn't have funding so she cant take me as a PhD candidate, which I know is load of crap, she has lot of money." - this is not a load of #@$!, but the truth: she has no funding - for OP.
What's worrying about the update is that at that point OP has not learnt the lesson and now seems to imply they are entitled to supervisor's funds after a behind-the-back, but public put-down. Do they seriously think getting a position here is anything else but a moonshot at that stage?
The only person OP should be angry about is themselves. And the best thing to do for themselves is to learn for the future. It would be a very generous supervisor to overlook something like that. And, to be honest, a naive or desperate one.
Others have commented about the contradiction between disliking the supervisor and the desire to work with them - but the contradiction works both ways. The supervisor is well advised to stay away from people that do not believe in their work; and even if the disbelief is well-founded, it means that there will be friction, and an uphill battle to get anything done that does not conform to OP's expectations, standards, or opinions.
OP (and supervisor) are much better off going separate ways. OP could consider switching university if their preferred topic is not supported at their institution. And, by next time, they will hopefully have learnt a crucial life lesson.

I disagree with some of the comments on here and think they are at the best naive. I don't know of a single student who hasn't complained about their adviser. Being a student is a stressful time, advisers are overworked and can often neglect their students. I know because I have done so.
I adore my PhD adviser. I also was very irritated at him sometimes. He is human like everyone is and hence has faults. When you're a stressed out student, minor faults have real consequences. Often as faculty we don't recognize how what we do affects them.
I have had students complain about me before and I never took it personally. I owe a service to them regardless. Also their complaints were usually valid and if they weren't, that's even less reason to care. Sometimes people get stressed out and they blame others for their situation. It happens and it isn't a big deal. If they were irritated to the point where we couldn't work together I would try to find a solution because it is best for them to have an adviser they can work with more easily.
You can apologize but I also don't think it's a huge deal. If a professor can't handle students complaining then they can't handle students because all students complain.

There are many things that students can very legitimately complain about, some outspoken ones even tell their supervisors what they want changed. And then there is complaining about the supervisor's "attitude"; and we do not seem to be talking about things that directly affect the student, such as micromanagement, harsh treatment or anything like that. No, about the "supervisor showing off". Seriously? OP sounds like a teacher tut-tutting an overenthusiastic pupil. Supervising such a candidate is, from experience, tiring, exhausting and an uphill battle. Supervisor bowed out right on time.

That is awful that it happened. I think it is clear she does not want to take you as a student going forward based on the funding comments. These remarks may have played a part in it. But at this point there is nothing to lose by talking to her and express that you were frustrated and that you still want to work things out if that is even an option. Otherwise, you have a backup which can be a good alternative. Either way, she could be a potential reference in the future, so it may help to clear the air and express your gratitude and apologies.

I disagree with some of the comments above saying that you made a mistake. If you sincerely and objectively believe that she is really bad, then not complaining is making a mistake; though you could probably do better in choosing the venue of submitting your complaint.
To answer your question, you must go deep into yourself and ask yourself what do you really want.
On surface, I have two contradictory things:
A) You want to do a PhD with her;
B) You think she is an incompetent advisor and explicitly talk about it.
You need to ask yourself:

Is she so bad that she deserves your negative comments in open public?
If (1) is true, then, is she the best advisor you can find?
If (2) is true, then, do you actually want to do a PhD?

Of course, everything comes with a reason. You might have some good reasons that you want to make a public complaint. Find the true reason, and honestly communicate with your advisor. If your advisor understand you, then no damage is last.
Do not fabricate some fake reasons or explanations and hoping she can understand you. Do not pretend to be nice just to get she advising your PhD. Follow your true heart.

I don't understand the downvotes to this answer. This is the only reasonable answer IMO.

@user479223 Didn't downvote, but it's not clear what this tries to say.

@CaptainEmacs It tries to encourage OP to follow their true heart, rather than make-up some explanations that are not from their own heart.

"Following one's true heart" in one formulation or another is a bit of a misleading advice here. There is not one heart involved, but at least two, OP's and the supervisor's (plus possibly, the receiver of the gossip). A complaint is not necessarily truth. It might be, but then, it might not. In fact, a good rule of thumb understanding criticism is about is to see whether it matches better its target or the critic themselves. Second, OP seems to be contradictory: they judge the supervisor dismissively, but still want to be supervised by them. What does "follow the heart" mean in this case?

One more thing. You say: "good reasons to make a public complaint" - well, either they don't like the supervisor: then they should be happy to leave after  complaining. Or they would like the supervisor to change: then they should say it, diplomatically, to the supervisor. Or they want to vent: then they need to be far more careful. Given the depth of the criticism that shines through here, I think this is more than just the occasional venting. OP is seriously dissatisfied. Really, nothing in OP's above decision-making makes sense to me, and OP should clarify things if they want a good answer.

In short, given the contradictions, OP's actions are a mistake. It is unclear to us what OP tried to do. There are criticisms that have distinct purpose, even if they may harm the critic (think whistleblower) - but here, it's really not making any sense. Therefore, yes, I think we are justified in saying OP made a mistake, under any perspective I can see. If you still believe they didn't, please explain.

@CaptainEmacs" OP seems to be contradictory: they judge the supervisor dismissively, but still want to be supervised by them. What does "follow the heart" mean in this case"-- This is exactly what I try to ask the OP. If his/her true heart is the former, then, he should leave for a better advisor. It his/her true heart believes that the advisor is good, then s/he need reflect on the public complaint. I don't personally judge if anything here is a mistake or not.

@HighGPA Ok, I kind of get it. However, I think it's not about judgement. A mistake is a mistake. It means, in its simplest form, that goals and actions do not align, and here, even being agnostic to them (we do not know OP's goals), they do not align at all. In other words, I cannot conceive a scenario in which this is not the case. There is no point beating around the bush. One can imagine strange actions that still may make sense under some kind of perspective, but not here.


text:
Patching things up with advisor? He has been avoiding me since I found a simple answer to a problem he thought would be challenging
I am international STEM PhD student in the UK.
My advisor asked me to try and attempt a question that he has been thinking about for more than five years. He was always very encouraging, but wasn't confident that I would be able to solve it. I wasn't very confident either.
It turned out to be much simpler than expected (and the simplicity of the solution was perhaps his blind spot). I managed to solve it. Since I told him about my solution, he has turned markedly cold towards me, hardly ever replying to emails and appearing a little aloof/defensive during meetings.
I am not a mind-reader, and hence wouldn't like to speculate on why he is acting this way. What are some things that I could do to make him like me again/not screw up my job application? He has collaborators at the very top places, and I'd love to do a postdoc with them.
I have thought about offering him co-authorship, playing up his contribution to the project, etc. But all of these attempts could backfire, as he may feel insulted, etc.
Like I said, I think he is in general a very decent person, and has always been encouraging towards me.

“offering him co-authorship” seems like a strange phrase here. If this result is important enough to publish, surely you would include your advisor in the author list? You would not have anything to publish without them… if you proposed to publish a result without your advisor, that would definitely explain the breakdown in the relationship to me.

@mhopeng- The advisor being co-author with the student is not a norm in my field. Students are expected to write single-author papers, and acknowledge the advisor's help in the relevant section, even though the advisor may have told them about the question and provided a lot of help and guidance. This is different from engineering, where the advisor is almost always acknowledged.

Feels like we may be missing important info about the interaction that you didn't notice, or didn't think is important.  Also, even though this is in the US, you might mention the cultural background of your advisor to help us rule out underlying cultural sensitivities.

I think @ScottSeidman may be on to something here. More details are needed about how exactly you told him about your solution. If it was as a surprise in a group meeting and you said "Oh it's easy!" then that could really have been a serious faux pas for some "old style" professors.

I suggested an edit to your title, to make this post easier to find by others who may have similar issues in future. Feel free to make further edits if you like. Also, I agree with Scott that it's worth reflecting whether you said or did anything that your advisor may have misinterpreted (though I assume you would have mentioned it if you thought this was the case).

Seconding @ScottSeidman. I want to chalk it up the PI's identity being crushed a bit (because for many in STEM, interest := difficulty, and the problem turning out to be easy might be an enormous blow to their life's work), but I do get that tingle that says there's something else going on.

If you are posting this question in your real name, that is a step in the wrong direction as your adviser might see this as a personal affront towards him if he runs across it, and moreover he will likely be resentful of the fact that other people might google your name and easily (I’m guessing — I didn’t try) find out his identity.

I'd guess offering him co-authorship is a mistake as he might take it as condescending, plus the usual reasons.
I'd guess the advisor is disappointed in themself, not in you. That can be hard to accept. Acting badly in such a situation is common enough.
It is hard to suggest that a student act like the adult in the room, but that may be what you are faced with. Let me suggest two alternatives, with the first recommended over the second.
If you have good relations with another faculty member who also has good relations with the advisor, seek advice from them. They may, actually, be able to be an intermediary. It is also good to have someone on the faculty knowledgeable about such things in case things really fall apart.
The second is to ask for a sit-down with the advisor and start off with "Where are we? How can we move forward?"
Congratulations on finding the insight to solve the problem. If it has been hanging about for several years it is likely an important contribution. Your solution method may be more important than the question itself, actually, as can be true in pure math.

With the caveat that any answer to this question is a bold attempt at mind-reading, I will humbly add my two cents.
It is not uncommon for academics in STEM fields to have a pet question, on which they hang a (usually over-optimistic) internal belief that when they finally find (and publish) a solution, they would be able to upgrade their academic and even social standings among their peers.
From that point of view, having a younger and less experienced person solve the problem, is hard to reckon with, and even more so if the solution was simple (or seems to be simple in hind-sight).
It is very possible that you advisor is confused by this turn of events, for several reasons, including potentially a perception that his very ability to advise you in your studies is now in question.
My advice therefore would be to:

Give your advisor the time he needs to come to terms with the new situation. If your advisor is a decent person, he won't hold a grudge against you for long, and would be happy to recommend you to their peers. As long as you don't take advantage of the situation, your advisor will finally come to the correct conclusion which is you should not be blamed or accused for finding the solution.

Think of all the different ways this person has been good and kind to you and how that attitude has contributed to your PhD's experience so far. Find the time(s) and place(s) to express your favorable view of him, and your gratefulness for his kindness.

Keep up your academic work and consult your advisor as you did before - This will help signal that nothing's changed from your side, and that you would like to restore the routine. If he doesn't immediately reply - simply remind him that you want to keep advancing your work and that his inputs would be appreciated.

HTH!

Unless there's some context not specified in the question, the advisor's reaction is not normal.
If they didn't think you had some chance of solving this problem, they were setting you up for failure, which is awful. Now that you have solved it, they should rejoice and be congratulatory, glad that you have together* cracked a long-standing problem. Arguably an advisor's greatest success lies in their students going beyond where they have gone.
You are self-aware enough to resist speculating; so do consider that the apparent distance might be unconnected to this incident. You are in the best position to judge this.
*As others have pointed out, many of us would view this as a joint success shared between you and the advisor. There's a high chance that the advisor sees it the same way, and they could be greatly offended by you suggesting co-authorship.
Since your primary question is about what to do, I suggest you don't bring up this solution for a while. Let them decide where/when to publish it, while you focus on other research areas (assuming this wasn't your only research problem). Attend meetings (if that's a thing), interact normally, keep doing your work and wait to see if there's any change in their outlook towards you.

Yes, as described, not normal, but unfortunately there are academics who do not behave like human beings and if this case is the case any reasonable response may elicit further weirdness. Your answer is pretty much optimal, but I rather fear more weirdness in store for this student.

If they didn't think you had some chance of solving this problem, they were setting you up for failure, which is awful - It doesn't sound like that to me.  Advisors often suggest hard problems, sometimes with the thought that the student might have an idea and make partial/related progress, or if not, they'll suggest moving on to a different problem after a short time.

@Deipatrous I generally agree with what you mean, but "there are academics who do not behave like human beings" seems like a huge overshoot here, and an unnecessary dehumanization. Feeling hurt and holding some unreasonable grudge against a less experienced person who solved something you worked on for 5 years with such ease is a very human feeling. Academics are not robots, and not perfect.

I would follow the advice from @mhopeng's comment, prepare a draft of an article with two names of the authors and submit it to your advisor for approval. From the ethical point of view, he seems to have made significant contribution to the matter, and you may be mistaken about what is "a norm in your field". Let him explain it to you if it is indeed not "a norm in your field". If he declines co-authorship, at least you will have offered it to him.

I second this as the best (and more importantly, the most non-confrontational) way forward. Based on the question, I think it's safe to say this is a math/physics/cs/eng situation, in which case co-authorship is most likely to be just assumed; not even a question. Given the information provided, this path gives some more wiggle room to figure out what the PI is actually thinking.

@AtomJZ I wouldn’t say co-authorship is “not even a question” for maths. The hurdle for co-authorship is quite high there, and I’ve seen cases where the supervisor proposed the question, and even provided very meaningful guidance and feedback without expecting to be a co-author. Of course, YMMV.

Other answers have done a good job of capturing how your advisor may reasonably be feeling, and that your advisor "should" be able to maturely handle those feelings and treat you fairly, but in terms of reality it is helpful to accept that,

everyone has feelings,
feelings are not always rational,
even someone who tries to objectively handle irrational feelings may struggle, it is simply not always easy,
doing some small things to help your professor resolve their feelings in a productive way will lead to the maximum happiness for you.

So I agree that your current thoughts about what you can do for your professor will probably backfire, because they are pretty transparent and sort of rub it in your professor's face that you solved the problem and not them.

I have thought about offering him co-authorship, playing up his contribution to the project, etc. But all of these attempts could backfire, as he may feel insulted, etc.

Instead, use the Ben Franklin effect. Find something your professor can do/provide for you that you want/need, and ask your professor for it as a favor. The key is that it must be absolutely sincere, the more serious it is the better.
The good news is that this shouldn't really be that hard, because you do seem to think your professor is good at their job, and it's part of your professor's job to teach you (and your job to learn) (both math and non-math things like collaboration, publishing, etc.), so you should be able to identify some area where your professor is particularly strong (best if they are proud of being strong in this area) and you aren't that strong and ask them to help you.
The best part is that this is, once again, absolutely sincere. You are not just inflating your professor's ego to soothe them, you should actually get something of value out of this, and that it has a side effect of reaffirming your professor's self-worth and re-establishing the teacher-student relationship is also nice. This means that even if your professor recognizes what you are doing it's almost impossible to resist the effects because they are just natural outcomes of things that are true.

To provide a slightly different point of view - if your field is a slightly more experimental or engineering related one, maybe the problem is a different one? Maybe you (in your inexperience with the specific challenge) have oversimplified the problem and have "solved" an easy case, or produced a solution that will not really work in practice?
I see this happen quite frequently in applied CS - advisor poses a challenge to student, motivated student disappears for a couple of weeks to return with a glorious "I have solved X by applying well-known method Y", only for the advisor to point out that this straight-forward solution really only applies in highly idealised special circumstances - and that the goal is more to think about how to do it with practical complications A, B, and C in mind.
With that in mind, maybe the "coldness" you perceive is more disappointment that you have not really grasped the problem yet. Or, alternatively, the meeting when you presented your solution has not gone well, and what you are experiencing now is the aftermath of you discarding the limitations your advisor wanted to you to teach about.

Just to make clear, I don't know if that's happened, it could certainly also be the case that OP's solution is great and the advisor is being unreasonable. I just wanted to raise this as an alternative possibility and it's up to OP to decide if that's possibly the problem here.

If this was the case, the professor would've let OP know. I can't think of a reason for him to confirm OP's solution while it not being one, and then turn a cold face out of pure disappointment. The only reasonable flow of events would've been the prof explaining OP why is their solution a bad one, even if only in a few words.

@Neinstein I generally agree, but then I note that OP's question does not say that the professor has explicitly confirmed that a solution has been found. I have seen way too many misunderstandings where a polite professor tried to lead a student towards discovering their mistake, whereas the student remained completely oblivious. As I wrote, it's plausible to me that the "coldness" is an artefact of the advisor's frustration that the student does not get that they have, in fact, not solved the problem.

Even in this case, he would've let the student know that he does not think the solution is correct or complete. I don't see how could the student think they found the correct solution while they didn't, unless the professor made very, almost implausibly blatant communication mistakes, or unless the student is utterly, absolutely oblivious. The solution not being correct, or enough, is a key information that's almost impossible to misunderstand.

I appreciate your point of view, but this is not the case here.

I think @ScottSeidman may be on to something here.

Feels like we may be missing important info about the interaction that you didn't notice, or didn't think is important. Also, even though this is in the US, you might mention the cultural background of your advisor to help us rule out underlying cultural sensitivities.

More details are also needed about how exactly you told them about your solution. If it was as a surprise in a group meeting and you said "Oh it's easy!" then that could really have been a serious faux pas for some "old style" professors, whether they are from another culture or not.
Instead, in a private meeting, something like "Professor, I think I may have found a way forward" only, along with the first half of your solution, pointing the way would have been the appropriate way forward for some.
This way you feel them out carefully, to see if they want your solution to work or not.
Some professors may help you complete it, even encourage you by saying "you're almost there, what's next?" and, believe it or not, others may say "No. You're completely wrong. That can never work" at which point you create the appearance of disappointment and simply drop it.
Later, they will "discover" the solution themselves and appear to forget your contribution. This happens all the time though much more so in context where Confucian influence is afoot, at least in my experience.

You shouldn't need to handle your advisor with safety gloves, and certainly not try to lead them on like a rabbit.   While in some cultures you may be expected to be more tactful, in the UK or US, generally being direct and polite is appreciated.

@Kimball I certainly agree with that sentiment, but we shouldn't need to say "excuse me" when we burp and fart in public, and yet we do in the US. Humans are weird and the nature of their weirdness varies. Professors in the US are not all necessarily "American style". It's a diverse country and a diverse population, so depending on the details (which haven't been shared in this case) different approaches can have different and sometimes unexpected results. While we shouldn't have to be tactful, there are nonetheless benefits to being aware of how to be.

It's not reasonable to basically "gift" a possibly important discovery to a professor, and especially not in such a condescending way. While this may have avoided the conflict, the solution is not to give away OP's discovery, it's to get the professor over with his (childish but very human) grudge.

@Neinstein please consider posting that as an answer, describing just how a student does that to their professor

@uhoh there are plenty of other answers doing just this, written by much more experienced users than me.

@Neinstein the purpose of reiterating their points in comments is then....?

@uhoh I didn't reiterate their points. I expressed my concern that I find your suggested solution bad and harmful. It sabotages the student's career, can be considered unethical as it is essentially gifting a discovery to someone who didn't make it, and frankly, it's not reasonable to expect anyone to gift a (maybe significant) discovery to their professor, in a way they will never ever be credited for it, just because maybe the professor can't handle the situation as an adult.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
I found a counterexample to one of the intermediate assertions in a proof but not (necessarily) to the overall result – how to publish this?
I am working on a paper which builds upon work from a paper from the 1980s.
In that paper, a result of the form A < B < C is claimed in generality and is necessary for the proof of a result.
I have a counterexample wherein A > B but A < C, and the result technically still holds for my particular example, but it demonstrates that their way of proof fails in generality.
Is this worth including in a paper generalizing their results? Or is it better to just send to the journal that published the previous paper? I attempted to reach the authors of the previous paper multiple times but have received no response.

Depending on the social proximity of you and the people of the previous paper, it can be good to start a conversation with these authors and even invite them in your counterexample proof paper.

@StubbornSnail the paper is from the 80's and the authors have failed to respond to our attempts to reach them.

@AnotherPerson Oh yeah in this case it does not seem worth it or even feasible. My comment applies more to the "we are contemporary researchers so let's meet up and talk" case

Why not publish it? You're showing their proof is incorrect.

I think the latest edit to the headline question is now inconsistent with the actual question of the OP. I suggest "assumption" is incorrect and suggest something like "conjecture" or "claim" is better.

Do they actually claim that the final result requires A<B<C, or do they claim that their proof is valid only if A<B<C?

@jcaron, my reading is the intention of the OP is the former. That is, a necessary condition. That is the only way it is a counterexample. For a sufficient condition (or an assumption), it isn't a counterexample at all.

I'm actually unclear on what the error was. Is the error that "A < B < C is claimed in generality", but you found a counterexample to that (so, the equality doesn't hold in general)? Or is the error that "A < B < C is ... is necessary for the proof" but you have an example where "A > B but A < C, and the result technically still holds" (so, the inequality is not a necessary condition)? Or, something else? It might not matter in terms of how to proceed, but just to be clear that there actually is an error.

I agree OP’s description is unclear. My interpretation is the paper claims “if X then Y”, and the proof argues “if X, then A<B<C, therefore Y”. But OP found an example where X is satisfied, Y is also satisfied, but A<B<C is not satisfied, demonstrating that the paper’s proof is invalid, but not actually demonstrating that the stated theorem is incorrect. OP, can you confirm/clarify if this description fits your situation?

@Buffy: My interpretation is the same as Dan Romik’s. In my own words: The main proof is basically A < B < C ⇒ Y (for some class of cases), where the latter is the main result. This proof thus assumes A < B < C, and this assumption is either taken for granted or shown separately (wrongly, if the asker is correct). The asker found a case where A > B and thus has a counter-example to the proof’s assumption. However for that particular case, Y still holds. So, if the main proof is correct, A < B < C is sufficient for Y but not necessary.

@DanRomik that is the exact situation I am describing. The argument in the proof is incorrect but we are left in limbo with regards to whether the result is actually true or not.

This is about the content of research, and therefore off-topic, but will get a pass because it's about math.

You may be interested in Lakatos' concept of "local but not global counterexamples"; see e.g. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lakatos/

@AzorAhai-him- hmm, you're right. I didn't even realize this is off-topic if not for being math.

@AzorAhai: I do not see this. A question about the content of research would involve the details of the proof, the counter-example, etc. This is about whether this is publishable and where and thus the actual research is irrelevant. The only reason the field is not completely interchangeable is that (most) other fields do not have a rigorous proof structure and field-specific customs matter.

Currently the title says "Can I publish this as a paper", but the text says "including in a paper generalizing their results". These are quite different to the point that some may give opposite answers, so I recommend to bring title and question in line.

@Wrzlprmft The question here is - as far as I can tell - "Is this novel enough to publish, or should I just send it to the authors?" This is about the content of research. If I asked the question "My questionnaire didn't show the same factor structure in my sample of participants, should I publish or email the authors?" it would be immediately closed.

@AzorAhai: There are two steps to deciding publishability: estimating the impact (as in consequences, not as in impact factor) of a finding, and determining the value of findings with such impact in general. The first part is not suitable for this site, the second one is. Here, the asker has clearly outlined the impact and thus done the first step, which is how it should be. In your example, this can be done as well with some extra information on how strong the difference between the findings is, etc. This is easier in mathematics, since a proof equally falls with any of its components.

@Wrzlprmft I do not think the OP has "clearly outlined the impact," unless you happen to be a mathematician.

Yes. For example, in 1966, Lander and Parkin published a counterexample to Euler's conjecture on sums of like powers in the Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, which is somewhat famous for being one of the shortest papers ever published.

More such short examples are here.

I don’t think what OP is describing is a counterexample in the strong sense you’re describing. See my other comment where I asked them to clarify.

(In other words, your “proof” in this answer that OP can publish a paper seems incorrect, but your conclusion may still be correct, similarly to what I suspect OP’s situation is…)

I also agree with them comments by Dan Romik. This answer is not really relevant to the actual question by the OP. The question is not about settling an established conjecture, but more about correcting an error in the literature.

It’s tempting to try how long it takes to find this counter example on a modern computer. CDC 6600 would have been 1966. And find out how much of a coincidence this counter example was.

@gnasher729: I wonder what the search space was. Were they only looking for 4 powers of 5? Or other permutations of counts and/or powers?

It's amusing when that paper is brought up because it isn't a good example: it would be considered unethical salami slicing today. The real paper is L. Lander & T. Parkin, "A counterexample to Euler's sum of powers conjecture," Math. Comp., v. 21, 1967, pp. 101-103, mentioned here, which describes the algorithm and other results. They sliced one sentence to a new paper. (Doing this was more acceptable in the days of print journals and lack of metrics)

@user71659 when you disprove a conjecture of Euler’s, I suspect that the usual “metrics” don’t really apply, and no one will particularly care how you choose to publish your results, even today.

@user71659: I think you have a misunderstanding here, this has nothing to do with salami slicing. At the time, it was common to publish short "research announcements" in journals such as Bulletin AMS. These would simply state the results, with little detail about the proofs. The actual paper with full details would then appear in a different journal. Today announcements like this are less common, since we have things like the arXiv.

People here are referring to OP's discovery as a "counterexample", but I think it's useful to point out that "counterexample" can be used to refer to three distinct types of things:

Someone makes a conjecture that all mathematical objects belonging to some class X satisfy property Y. I later find an object from class X that doesn't satisfy Y. That's a counterexample that disproves a conjecture.

Someone proves a theorem stating that all objects belonging to some class X satisfy property Y. I later find an object from class X that doesn't satisfy Y. That's a counterexample that invalidates a theorem. It demonstrates that the previously claimed "theorem" is actually not a theorem at all, since it is a false statement, and therefore also shows that the earlier claimed proof must necessarily contain a mistake.

Someone proves a theorem stating that all objects belonging to some class X satisfy property Y. I later find a mistake in the proof. This  demonstrates that the proof is invalid, but doesn't demonstrate that the theorem is false. The theorem may be false, or it may be true - we revert to an earlier state of not knowing whether it's true or false.
This type of invalidation of proofs (which is not uncommon) is not really a "counterexample" in a general sense. But in OP's particular situation, OP seems to have demonstrated that the proof is invalid, by finding a counterexample to a subclaim used as part of the purported proof. As they clarified in a comment, the situation is roughly: the theorem in the original paper claimed: "if X, then Y", and the proof reasons as follows: "if X, then A<B<C, therefore Y". OP found a counterexample to the "if X, then A<B<C" subclaim, by finding an object satisfying X but for which the A<B<C (intermediate) conclusion is false. This shows that step in the reasoning of the proof to be invalid. However, since the object satisfying X also satisfies Y in OP's case, it leaves open the question of whether the statement of the "theorem" (which now would be more properly classified as a "conjecture" or "assertion") is correct.

Now, to address your question of whether a "counterexample", in any of the 3 senses discussed above, can/should be published. The answers are: yes, yes, and yes. For a situation of type 1, @DanielRCollins's answer provides an example (or perhaps I should say a "proof by example"...). People finding counterexamples of conjectures is something that happens practically all the time. Here's one other well-known example.
Situations of type 2 are a bit less common, but still happen occasionally. Here is a list of stories about such situations from a MathOverflow discussion. And the same goes for situations of type 3, which are listed in their own MathOverflow thread.
In all of these types of situations, the discovery of the "counterexample" was new knowledge that was of interest to mathematicians, and deserved to be shared with the community, usually through the standard mechanism for sharing new knowledge, which is publishing the results. In some cases this was a major discovery, in other cases only of marginal interest to anyone (which is also the case for many "ordinary" new results), but at least by default it should be regarded as being at least as publishable as any other legitimate new research on a similar topic.

perhaps the distinctions made by Lakatos, of local vs global counterexamples, may be of use to this discussion. (See the first enumerated list of section 3.1 here for a summary: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lakatos/#ProoRefu19631976)

@JohnMadden indeed, thanks for the reference. My classification does seem surprisingly similar to his.

Yes, counter examples are welcome to be published as they correct the record.
They are especially important if they give insight into why the original fails. Adding that insight would be helpful and welcome.
It is worth doing a search, of course, to assure yourself that what you have isn't already published.

The paper where you generalize the results would be the best place to point out the error/mistake in the older paper from the 1980s. Others can then cite your work as a reference for the correct proof, and there is no need to publish an erratum.
The alternative is to attempt to publish separately some kind of comment/erratum, but in mathematics publishing such things is unfortunately rare, and usually the original authors would be involved.
You might also find it difficult to get a comment/erratum published, and it might even be rejected if it is not considered significant enough.

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


text:
Teaching with a textbook
In the past, I was only teaching graduate-level courses where I was creating the material myself. It was slides with material from various books, research papers, and my own work. Accompanied by exercises and small projects that I would build from scratch.
This year I have to teach a new undergraduate-level course. The material I need to cover is more standardized and there are at least two very good textbooks that cover the material nicely (pdfs available at the library, incl nice examples, etc.).

Should I still build my own material? It seems like a waste of time since the material is very basic and standard and I could not reach the quality of the textbooks that are at several revisions. On the other hand, I would avoid issues like this: Professor only teaches what is already in textbook. Should I quit going to the lectures?
If I teach the textbook, doesn't it feel like cheating? I mean, I'm explaining things they can find in the textbook. For some students, it's useful because they need someone to ease them into the subject before they dig deeper. For others, they can simply read the book.
Another way to go is to develop complementary material to the textbook (lab exercises, computer examples, etc.) but still, teach the book. But, I am not sure how I feel developing supplementary material to someone else's textbook.

Any experience to be shared or references?

Is this for a mathematics course?

@Buffy Engineering course with extensive numerical exercises. They need to learn the technologies, basic principles, and methodologies to analyze case studies.

I think that the third option is widely accepted. Students will complain about the other two, though different students and for different reasons.
The book is an outline and is a fallback for students. If it has good exercises, then they can get practice. But you will still want your own exercises to supplement in many cases, and certainly for exams. But I think a lot of, maybe most, professors follow the outline of the book even if they don't lecture precisely from it. Their exercises may be a mix of those taken from the book and those they develop themselves.
And, encourage students to take good lecture notes and not depend completely on the book.
And using your own material lets you adapt a bit for your students if they don't fit a standard model.

"And using your own material lets you adapt a bit for your students if they don't fit a standard model." Does this refer to the material I develop as part of option 3 or option 1?

Both, probably.

Even for most graduate courses, I find having a textbook useful.  Part of the reason for this is that I think it benefits students to get multiple perspectives on the same material.  From my personal experience as a student, I know that sometimes having an instructor follow a text too closely can be a problem, since if a student has trouble grasping the particular presentation of an idea—and that idea is presented exactly the same way in the textbook and in class—it can be real difficulty.  (This can be particularly an issue when a lecturer is teaching from a book they wrote.)
When I develop a course, using a given text, I try to do a few things.  First, to avoid confusion, I adopt the textbook’s notation whenever possible.  That means that students will have a consistent mathematical description of the material, whether they are looking at their notes from my lectures or reading in the book.  Second, I try to choose examples for my lectures that complement the book.  Sometimes, the specific derivations or examples in the textbook are complicated enough or important enough that I cover them in class in the same way that the book covers them.  Other times, I let the students read the text and choose different examples, so as to expose them a variety of different approaches to the same kinds of problems.  Third, I try to identify points in the book’s treatment that may be unclear, so that I can provide extra elucidation of these specific points.

I had a similar situation twice during my adjunct teaching career. Maybe my experiences are useful.
1 I was teaching an all-new undergraduate course. At that time, there were no textbooks (there are some now). I planned to teach entirely from my notes. I was advised by the more experienced members of the department that students really like to have a textbook assigned. So I assigned some text (which covered about 1/3 of what we did in class) and used a lot of my notes.
2 I was teaching an undergraduate course that other people taught before in this department. Everyone involved felt that the books used before were unsuitable. (One was someone's Ph.D. thesis - a very good one, actually, but it assumed from page 1 that the students already knew everything that they were supposed to learn in this course, and then proceeded to discuss interesting stuff outside the scope of the course. Another is a "popular entertainment" style text, not suitable as a textbook at all.) Once again, I said I wanted to teach from my notes and was advised by other more experienced members of the department that students really like to have a textbook. After a lot of searching, I found a combination of 2 books that covered most of what I needed (I still have out lots of notes).
TLDR: Students like to have a textbook, to have homework problems assigned from a textbook, and to have assigned readings, even if you don't use all of the textbook, and supplement it with a lot of your own materials.  Therefore I vote for option #3.

This is from the perspective of someone remembering what it was like to be a student.
These are some reasons why having a textbook was very useful.

When you are solving a hard problem on a problem set, it helps to be able to go and study text and examples written up very carefully to check every step of your understanding. Notes taken in class are imperfect records of a lecture and so are not a substitute. A good set of lecture notes from the teacher could serve this role as well, but they won't be as "student-tested" as a text book, which can lead to them being too high level or skipping too many steps.
The same goes for studying for exams. The lecture notes are often a really good starting point for remembering what material was covered and going through examples done in class. But if there's a point where one can't remember what the point was based on the notes (or maybe never understood), having a textbook means you can go back and review those points in detail.
Being able to read ahead in the book before a lecture lets you have an idea of what the material is before seeing it in lecture, which can mean you know what parts are tricky and that you need to pay attention to. Although, to be honest, I did not do this as much as a student as I probably should have.

Having said that, these are some reasons why I didn't like it when professors did some version of "just teaching out of the textbook" without adding any of their own insight (for example, showing slides that were just going through the textbook material in order)

The lectures often felt "stale". I think classroom learning is partly about transferring material, but on a deeper level it is also about transferring enthusiasm about the subject and showing how an experienced person thinks about it... in other words, how to learn and to "be" a practitioner of that field. This comes across much more clearly if the professor organizes the material in the way they find the most logical. It is very obvious if the lecturer is bored with the material.
The lectures often felt pointless. Even if this wasn't strictly true because one can ask questions to a lecturer they can't ask to a book, it is hard to feel motivated about attending a lecture as a student if you know you are only going to get information you can also get in a textbook.
A person can explain something in different ways than a book. Much like a film should not be a shot-for-shot remake of a book, a lecture should not be a word-for-word reading of a text. The lecturer should take advantage of the medium and their experience to explain things in a way that can't be done in a textbook (demos, live coding, videos, informal arguments, little tricks, adding some personality, tangents, examples of how these concepts show up in the wild, making the material "feel" more personal and approachable by having a person talk about it...), and leave aside things that can be better done better in a book (every single step with every notational i dotted and t crossed of a 10+ page derivation).
Having access to different explanations of the same material is incredibly valuable. If your lectures are based on, but modified versions of, material in the text, then students automatically have access to two different ways through the terrain.

For these reasons, from a student-centered perspective, I would vote for option 3.


text:
What are acceptable purposes in Statement of Purpose? Can I say "I have no clue"?
I understand that honesty is the best policy, but is it a good idea to say "I have no clue" when the SOP explicitly asks me to describe my "intentions relative to graduate study and life beyond the University"?
Basically, I don't have any ten-year plan. The main reason I'm going to apply for the program at the university is that the degree can give me great resources and offer me better choices after graduation. (Other reasons include I have friends in that area and I love the weather in California, but I guess those don't count?) I haven't really considered my life beyond the university, though: life is just too dynamic for me to answer questions like whether to stay in academia or to enter the industry at this point, and I don't want to eliminate any possibility as early as now.
On the other hand, I do have some long-term goals, but I don't have a detailed plan on how to realize them. I just keep them in mind when making decisions. However, these goals are probably too ambitious, bold, and maybe stupid to be used as an intention: I'm going to develop a framework to unify statistics and machine learning, turning all current work into "miscellaneous earlier efforts" like Newton did!
To clarify, I'm applying to both Masters and Ph.D. programs, because I don't really know what I'm after, so I'm just exploring different options and will take the best offered.

"I have no clue": what a poor motivation from this candidate, reject
"I'm going to develop a framework to unify statistics and machine learning, turning all current work into "miscellaneous earlier efforts" highly motivated but too much ambitious candidate, reject
Since you have some broad idea, the first one is false. But you are already having some glimpse in your future, which is "getting an in-depth knowledge and either use it to further our knowledge (academia), or implement it into real-life by working in an industry 5-10 years down the line".

Newton, as the commitee that will evaluate your application, was standing on the shoulder of giants, but he (as the commitee) had to climb the giant first, which is rather diminuitivly expressed as "miscellaneous earlier efforts".

"I have no clue" is not going to get you far. The committee will probably interpret that you will not be very motivated, and motivation plays a big role in succeeding in study programs, especially if they include research.
You are also not expected to know exactly what you want to do the following ten years. From your question, you seem to know as much or as little about your future plans as the average applicant to graduate study, maybe even above average.
You are interested in the topic, and want to study further to learn more about it and have a better chance to make valuable contributions, either in academia or in industry. Say that.
You are not sure yet whether you want to continue in industry or academia, but you want to experience research in academia and be able to make a better informed decision afterwards. Say that if it is true.
You can mention your long-term goal, but make sure not to make it sound too ambitious/impossible to do. For example, I am interested in analyzing Machine Learning from a statistical point of view, with the aim to hopefully provide the community with a better understanding of why artificial intelligence is so powerful. Suit this to your own needs.
The fact that you have friends there and like the weather is in my opinion also worth mentioning, but without focusing on it. Mention it last, and only in one short sentence. Although this does not say anything about your ability to do research, it adds to your motivation to go there.
And just in case, do not copy-paste any of my sentences, but use them as a guide to come up with your own. This is about your motivation (not mine), and answers on StackExchange are public and easy to find.

Well, it may or may not get you very far. Truth be told, after reading dozens, maybe hundreds, of dishonest "I have always dreamed of doing research in X" SOPs I am by now very partial towards students that say "X seems like an interesting and important area to study but I don't (yet) have much bigger plans beyond that".

Maybe there's also a cultural aspect to this - I feel here in Europe many applicants are pretty honest and down to Earth when applying to grad school, where Asian and American applicants come across as a bit overexcited.

@xLeitix yes, I also frown at overexcited statements of purpose. But "I have no clue" shows even a lack of effort/interest that is more likely to be harmful, especially at the first stage of an application. There must be a reason why you applied here, after all. If I get an "I have no clue" at an interview, I am more likely to not care much about it if the rest of the interview caused a good impression, but in written documents there is just too much competition and too little information.

I agree that "I have no clue" is maybe... a bit too direct. That being said, there's a lot to be gained from being very direct and honest.
Early in my bachelor, I applied for a summer internship in a company that makes emulsions, which I have zero interest for. In the interview, when asked about why I wanted to work there, I just told them the truth: "The salary you offer is excellent". A few of my friends also applied and BSed that they had a big interest in what the company did. I got the job. They didn't.

I'm applying to both Masters and Ph.D. programs, because I don't really know what I'm after

Figure out what you want first, then apply for graduate school if necessary.  The question clearly shows you are not ready for graduate school yet.  Do something that pays well while you figure out your goals.

However, these goals are probably too ambitious, bold, and maybe stupid to be used as an intention: I'm going to develop a framework to unify Statistics and Machine Learning, turning all current work into "miscellaneous earlier efforts" like Newton did!

That's not too bold, just don't say you will do it next week.  You might achieve that over the course of a career.  It could be phrased better.

What are acceptable purposes in Statement of Purpose?

For a PhD, there is only one purpose:  to conduct research in some specialized topic.


text:
How to parse the question "How many hours did you take at the institution?"
I am filling in a form for graduate research at a US university. They have this question in the previous college attended part of the application form: How many hours did you take at the institution?
What does this question mean? How many hours I have spent in college, or how many hours I have been in college classes to earn a bachelor's degree?

This can mean a lot of things, I would suggest asking the research program in question directly.

Ask the people who set the question. Not random folks on the internet!

If you state what system you've taken your credits in, you might get a better answer than the very generic one I gave, some sort of suggestion for how to convert. Otherwise, you can ask the program that you are applying to - they may or may not have some familiarity with your system, depending on how common applicants are from where you are. They might be simply trying to determine whether you have a 4-yr or 3-yr degree. (I guess in all this I am presuming you do not have undergraduate education at a US institution)

What distinction is there between your two options anyway?

In the US, university education is quantified as "credits" typically expressed as "credit hours" referring to 1 hour per week of instruction for a semester (so about 15-16 hours of face time). A course meeting 3X weekly would be worth 3 credit hours and is usually expected to involve an additional 6 hours weekly of work outside class. A 4 year bachelor's degree is about 120 credit hours.
I'd interpret this the same as asking for how many credits you took with that institution, expressed in an appropriate conversion to credit hours.

I have attended 20 hours in a week, does it mean my credit hours are 20*4=80 hours in one semester?

@lsr729 No. The US system is credit hours per week so you might have had the equivalent of 20 credit hours. The US also has classes like laboratories that only count for 1 credit hour but meet for 2 or 3 hours a week.  However, Semesters and quarters in the US are longer than 4 weeks so there's no easy equivalent.


text:
Found a mistake in advisor's paper - what should I do?
I was reading over some of my supervisor's old papers and I have found one from 7 years ago in which part of the analysis is fundamentally flawed which effectively undermines half of the conclusions. The issue is in a paper in a subfield of a subfield so it's unlikely that any other people will find this mistake.
My question is what should I do. On one hand, I feel like I have moral obligation to let him know so that the issue can be resolved. On the other hand, I feel uncomfortable bringing it up as I don't want it to have any negative repercussions on our working relationship.
What should I do in this scenario?
Thank you.
Edit: This question is different from Should I warn my professor about some errors that I've found in his paper? as in that case it was a paper in advanced access (e.g. one that was worked on recently), while in this case it is a 7 year old paper.

Have you considered that he probably already knows? People are human, mistakes happen.

@user1150512,  Maybe, you can simply approach him at the "RIGHT" time, and politely present your question/finding to him directly ?  It could be that either you or he made a mistake in this case. It should not be big deal to figure this out as both of you are professional educator and student.

If you can only find one error in my past papers, you aren't looking closely enough. Understanding comes in fits and starts and isn't always correct.

First, I'd double-check your work. Are you certain this is a mistake? Is there something you're missing? Do the best you can to understand what's going on.
Second, I would definitely raise this with your supervisor, but do so from a perspective of questioning and seeking clarification. Rather than appearing in judicial robes with the paper in hand and declaring it flawed by the laws of humankind and the universe, approach it as a question: There's a step in the paper that you don't understand. You think the step should say "XYZ", but the paper says "XZY". You're not sure if you're making a mistake or if there is an error in the paper.
There's nothing disrespectful about this humble approach, and you get a double benefit that if it turns out you are the one that is wrong then you have no face to save, and hopefully learn something along the way.
Mistakes happen, and they don't indicate the person making the mistake is dishonest or flawed in some fundamental way. Next steps to take after this will depend on how crucial the flaw is and what other work it might impact. If you take these steps and there are still some negative impacts on your working relationship, well... probably that person wasn't worth working with anyways, and some rift was going to develop sooner or later anyways. It would not be your fault.

I don't think you need to be quite that weak kneed. "One of us has an error. Can we work through it?" or "I can't seem to follow the logic here. Is there an error, perhaps?" But certainly double check your reasoning first.  Think of errors in old papers as an opportunity for new work - new thinking. It is a positive when caught. Beware of fragile egos, of course.

@Buffy I would say my advice certainly tilts towards massaging the fragile ego, but in my mind the examples you give are perfectly within my suggestion to approach with a questioning/clarifying approach: both "one of us has an error" and "is there an error" avoid any declaration that someone else is wrong before even starting the discussion, which is something that might provoke unneeded defensiveness. That said, I would have taken a more direct approach with my own advisor, but I also knew his personality and that doing so wasn't going to be an issue.

Yep. Not a good idea to run down the hall in the department yelling "Dr. Buffy screwed it up. Again. Ha". (Even if I did - again.)

When Prof. Nick Katz at Princeton found the mistake in Wiles' original attempted proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, according to the Nova episode on the proof, he went to Wiles and said something like "I don't understand this step here, can you clarify it?" They went back and forth a few times before it became clear that there really was a mistake. Katz is no shrinking violet. Just an example of how Krause's suggestion is actually what people really do.

This is good advice for any similar situation, in academia or out, and regardless of which way the power dynamic goes. Obviously, more specific relationships might have different answers, but this is the right general model.

Regardless of your "moral obligations", any reasonable advisor would be happy to hear this from their PhD student, especially if you make it sound like a (potentially tricky) question, not an accusation of making a simple mistake.


text:
Should I attach my published paper to an e-mail when following up with a professor about a PhD position?
I have written a professor from the USA about a Ph.D. position with my CV. He replied saying its excellent and I should apply in the next fall. Now I have some queries which I will ask him in my next mail and one of my paper has been published today in a very good journal (which I wrote 'submitted' in my CV). Should I include my paper in my next mail saying you can have a look? Will it add extra value or a good impression?

Are you just trying to make a good impression, or are you actually looking for feedback on your work? Either way, you should be clear about why you're sending him the paper, as "can you have a look?" gives no indication about what you're hoping to achieve from the exchange.

Is there a problem with attaching the pdf? I didn't think that would be a big issue?

I wasn't sure whether you question meant mail as in email or snail mail...

Why are you emailing him again?

Honestly, I find the whole discussion in the comments and the other answer rather strange. There are two options:

The professor doesn't care about reading the paper. If you sent the paper attached to the email, he can just ignore it.
The professor wants to read the paper. If you attached it, perfect. If you didn't, either he has to go look for it on the journal's website, log in the publisher's website because many don't do IP-based authentication anymore, and eventually find the "PDF" button behind all the crap that publishers put on journals' website these days; or ask you to send it to him in case it's not public yet (e.g. it was accepted today and it will be months before the journal even mentions it publicly) or his university doesn't have a subscription to the journal. That's a complete waste of time.

We're in 2019. Getting a 5 MB attachment in one email is completely insignificant. If the professor is on a roaming data plan in Belize and hasn't set his email client to not download attachments automatically, it's his own fault, and he will rack up hundreds of dollars in charges anyway from all the email a professor routinely gets every day.
My opinion: write your email with your additional queries and so on, and conclude with something like "By the way, the paper 'XXX' that was listed as submitted on my CV is now accepted in journal 'JJJ'. I have attached it to this email in case you would like to take a look." Unobstructive, no pressure.

Well, hey, even if you find it strange, I'm someone who gets emails from potential PhD students and attachments annoy me. We're in 2019. We don't have to attach every single thing to an email when the internet is right there.

Just send the link with a "By the way, if you are interested in seeing more of my work, I have just had this paper published in X journal: LINK"

Or in the case that the paper isn't online, just include a statement that the paper has been published and give its title and the journal ref, offering to send a copy if requested. But wait for the request.


text:
How is the Researchgate (RG) Score calculated? Why does it change over time?
While using Researchgate platform for a while, I could not understand how the change of the RG score is carried out. For example, after my first paper RG=1. Afterwards, it became 0.99. Then, after the second paper, RG=1.13. Few days after it became 1.12.
Do you have any idea how this change is carried out? What is the issue behind the score decrease?

https://explore.researchgate.net/display/support/RG+Score

Update: From July 2022, ResearchGate will remove the RG score. They put out an announcement in which they give their motivation for doing so, which shares many of the arguments from the critical article I cite below.

While ResearchGate provides some rough hints on their support pages (see @GoodDeeds's comment), the details of how the RG score is computed are not publicly disclosed.
Relevant article from the London School of Economic's Impact Blog: The ResearchGate Score: a good example of a bad metric

One of the most apparent issues of the RG Score is that it is in-transparent. ResearchGate does present its users with a breakdown of the individual parts of the score, i.e., publications, questions, answers, followers (also shown as a pie-chart), and to what extent these parts contribute to your score. Unfortunately, that is not enough information to reproduce one’s own score. For that you would need to know the exact measures being used as well as the algorithm used for calculating the score. These elements are, however, unknown.
ResearchGate thus creates a sort of black-box evaluation machine that keeps researchers guessing, which actions are taken into account when their reputation is measured. This is exemplified by the many questions in ResearchGate’s own question and answering system pertaining to the exact calculation of the RG Score. There is a prevalent view in the bibliometrics community that transparency and openness are important features of any metric. One of the principles of the Leiden Manifesto states for example: “Keep data collection and analytical processes open, transparent and simple”, and it continues: “Recent commercial entrants should be held to the same standards; no one should accept a black-box evaluation machine.” Transparency is the only way measures can be put into context and the only way biases – which are inherent in all socially created metrics – can be uncovered.

It is a mysterious metric. When I looked into it at some point, it seemed that for most researchers (i.e., those that either don't use research gate or simply use it to store copies of their articles), it was roughly as follows:
Something like a log (or similar transformation) of the sum of the research gate calculated impact factors of your published journal articles.
The general logic is clear:

Research gate has its own version of impact factor for each journal based on its own citation database. This is presumably highly correlated with similar  journal metrics that estimate average citations per article in a journal over 2/3/4/5 year period (e.g., Web Of Science impact factor; Scopus Cite Score, etc)
Thus, each time a researcher gets a publication, the "impact factor" gets added to the total impact factor of their publications.
However, the raw sum of impact factors would lead to a highly skewed distribution. E.g., someone with one paper in a low impact factor journal might have a score of 1, but a prolific researcher with hundreds of papers in high impact journals might have a score in the thousands. Instead, research gate scores tended to range from 0 to about 60 or 70 or something. So, there was some kind of order-preserving transformation going on (e.g., something like a log).

Assuming the above is all correct what would cause scores to fluctuate? First, if you published a new journal article, then your score would go up. The higher the research gate impact factor of the journal, the more your score would go up. Also, because of the transformation, scores rise more rapidly at the low end of the scale. Second, if the journals you published in rose or fell in calculated impact, then your score would also fluctuate. Presumably, over time, if you have a lot of publications in a lot of different journals, this variation could be quite subtle.
Is this a good metric?
Assuming the above stated understanding of the metric is correct, is it a good metric?
In general, it should correlate quite highly with h-index in the sense that (a) it is a measure of career-level research output rather than a measure of annual productivity, and (b) it also has the built in log-style scaling of total output whereby each additional increase takes progressively more output.
That said, it is more immediate than h-index and other metrics based on  citations to a researchers articles. Citation-based metrics such as h-index and total citations measure citation impact, which also simply increase with the passage of time since publication. The sum of impact factors is more likely to align with annual researcher citations as the sum of the impact factors is roughly equivalent to sum of expected citations per year (albeit over longer periods of time articles can enter the citation decline phase, and this would no longer hold).
I'm also not sure how it dealt with research output that lacks a research gate impact factor (e.g., books, book chapters).
In focussing on the impact factor of the journals, it does not reward researchers who write highly cited works that in some sense out-perform (from a citation perspective) the journals that they appear in.
Both h-index and sum of impact factors ignore various confounds including (a)   articles with fewer authors are not weighted more in the metric, (b) authorial position (e.g., first, second, last) is not incorporated into the metric, and (c) discipline variation in citation practices is not considered.
And finally, there is the standard critique of all citation based metrics. I.e., quality and importance are not equivalent to article or journal-level metrics of citations.
Of specific relevance to Research Gate Score, they also appeared to have a bunch of other ways of increasing the metric (e.g., by answering questions on the site and so on). These are irrelevant and just add noise from the perspective of evaluating a researcher's career research output.


text:
Is a joint science PhD/JD a bad idea if I end up pursuing academic science?
Question. I'm going into my third year as a PhD student in oceanography, and due to my interest in law, I'm considering applying to the concurrent PhD/JD program at my university. I’m wondering whether this might damage my future prospects as an academic scientist.
My background. I have long been interested in both law and science, but I'm not sure whether I would end up pursuing law, science, or both after graduation. My scientific research (computer models of the global carbon cycle) has implications for law and policy, but is completely independent from law and policy in itself. I think my background places me at the very top in being able to understand the science, but that is only one of my interests in law. My interest in science has not waned at all, and my scientific career is going pretty well. It’s my interest in law that has grown.
The program. I've come to learn my university has a pretty flexible joint program (7 years instead of 4-5), and they’ve stressed that the course load can be made flexible to accommodate thesis research in my home department. At this point I believe I could maintain a level of scientific productivity even when studying law half- or three quarter-time. Financially, I think it's likely I could do the program for free, but worst case I might no longer be eligible for my $25K/year stipend. This would not be a dealbreaker, and I would find out before having to commit
My concern. My concern is that I don’t know exactly how I would want to use the two degrees. I'm interested in many different types of law. I would never be unhappy that I took the time to study law, if only to quench my intellectual interest. I would only regret the decision if I decided to pursue an academic career in science and this damaged by chances. Specifically, I'm worried that:

It could suggest a lack of commitment, i.e. a kind of 'Carl Sagan effect', where a professional interest outside your area of research is counted as a lack of seriousness.
A JD would obviously reduce my scientific productivity for a few years while studying. While I believe I can maintain some productivity, the number of papers, citations, etc. would necessarily decline over that period.

What is the cost of pursuing JD pathway, in time and money? (For Example, 1 year longer to graduate, and additional 30k in tuition/room and board)

Thank you for that question! That's an important point which I accidentally left out. I will edit my question.

Two thoughts: (1) I feel like a previous version of this question (or someone else's similar question?) was far more answerable because it made clear the goal was to end up researching in the PhD field rather than I've hit an impasse as my once certain future as an academic scientist seems not so sure. I don’t know what I would end up doing after such a joint program, whether it be as a full time lawyer with knowledge in science, a full time scientist with knowledge in law, or someone who toggles between the two – perhaps with an academic professorship and a personal legal consultancy.

Given (1), (2) is that you're now asking random strangers on the internet to decide what is the best life for you and best plan to consider. My self-referencing advice on that point is to not let the Internet decide such important questions for you.

That's an incredibly unfair reading of what I wrote. I asked for advice in making my decision which is of course different than asking someone to decide for me. A similarly unfair reading of your comment would have me think you are advocating decisions in the absence of advice.

Interesting question.  There are so many factors to consider, including time, cost, workload, etc.
It does seem though that having credentials in both disciplines can give you both a unique perspective and a means through which you can influence public policy. Forward-thinking academic departments may see that as a plus.  Of course, others could see it as a lack of commitment to pure science, but I'm speculating.
You should consider that the merging of science and law is not uncharted territory. A great example is Vanderbilt's law and neuroscience initiative, funded by the MacArthur Foundation. See
Vandy Law & Neuroscience for details.
However, Vandy does not have a 'law and neuroscience' department, and I doubt that the law school or school of psychology (housing neuroscience) would specifically look for a candidate with both a PhD and JD.  But, it would certainly fit. This may be true of other institutions as well.

To me, the answer is simple.  If you prefer being out in the open, setting-up field labs and are not too worried about the loss of revenue (in the near to medium-term) that will be lost by not pursuing Law, then go for the Oceanography research.  However, if you are more of a people person, looking to change personal outcomes of clients and would welcome the extra certainty and financial security of being a successful law practitioner, then law is the way to go.  Law is always changing -- just as science -- so both topics will keep you stimulated.  Always go for the topic that you would do for fun, then you will succeed as enjoyment will be a huge motivator for achievements in your chosen field of endeavour.
IF CASH IS A PROBLEM IN THE NEAR TERM...
Look into the most attractive, yet future-proof, and marketable combination of unique research interests in oceanography and/or Law that can be pitched to funding stakeholders.  A good, well planned and articulated PHD proposition and pseudo-business plan can be all that's needed for great PR for the university and guaranteed funding, together with a pathway into business afterwards.

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


text:
What should one consider when pondering a career as a scientific editor?
I'm in my 2nd year postdoc, considering getting a science-related job. I looked for jobs at PhD level, and found that one of my options is becoming an editor for a scientific journal.
How many years' experience (after a PhD) is typical for an entry-level editor role? What else should a recent PhD know when considering such a position?

Note that there are a wide range of positions labelled as "editor". Some are very high level, others not.

Too many questions in this one blurb sorry Wilde with little or not detail in specific job. It is like saying tell me more about a researcher position... why can't you figure out whether a researcher position is worthwhile. Resolve all my anxieties about my research position please (but I will not tell you any detail about the research position).

Thank you Buffy, this is something I noticed too. That's why I got a little confused and asked about the requirements. In my case, I mean entry level.

Sorry Poidah did those questions somehow offend you? I didn't mean what you described there. I am totally new to this type of job, just would like to hear about it from someone who is doing it or has done it before, anything, really, I am not looking for a sophisticated thesis of 800 pages to give a full review of this job. Don't stress yourself :) Take care!

@J.Wilde I think what Buffy and Poidah meant is that "scientific editor" covers many different kinds of jobs: first, editors roles in scientific journals and conferences are usually just academics who are not paid for it (at least that's not their full time job); then there are some editors at Springer or Elsevier, but afaik they don't really manage the scientific side in general; and there are also scientific editors in some mainstream media, which can range from prestigious senior position at NYT to part-time job in a small outlet... Do you have something specific in mind?

Echoing other comments: certainly in the sciences, junior journal editors are mostly not paid at all by the publisher, but usually are academics who do the editing as pro-bono work.

@Erwan, thank you for the insight. Here is one job advertisement that I saw: link. It is with Elsevier. The requirements are rather general but the responsibilities include a lot of things that seem to need specific or previous experiences.

@J.Wilde ok this falls in the 2nd category that I mentioned. As you certainly noticed there's an important communication/management part in the job, but it's not a senior position so my guess is that they don't require too much experience. I think the best thing to do is to contact them and ask details directly.

I'm a former academic publisher, and assume you're looking to join an academic publisher full-time. Do note that absent a very few elite journals like Nature and Physical Review Letters, you are not likely to be handling only journals (or be directly involved in choosing the papers to publish). You will also be doing books.

How many years' experience (after a PhD) is typical for an entry-level editor role?

For these entry-level positions, in principle, a Bachelor's degree suffices. In fact, many of my former colleagues had more or less completely forgotten everything they learned in university and they got along just fine. Especially ironic was the case of an English Literature graduate who couldn't read calculus symbols handling an engineering journal - and she did well enough to be promoted.
(In fact there are positions even more entry-level than these entry-level positions in which a high school degree suffices, but the job responsibilities are very mundane and tedious.)
But you have a PhD. This means you won't be working at entry-level. You'll have more advanced duties that people with Bachelor's degrees might not be comfortable doing. These could include:

Acquiring new projects (this is a big one). E.g. you might be expected to identify a niche in the market for a new book, write to people who can write that book, and commission them to do it.
Attending conferences. You might have to manage the publisher's booth, answer questions about your journals and review processes, network, and yes, acquire new papers/books.
Come up with a strategy to advance your journals. This isn't easy, but it has to be you, because most people with Bachelor's degrees will have no idea. It could involve, for example, finding a trendy topic and commissioning someone to edit a special issue on it; or perhaps to split the journal into two new journals each with different focus, etc.
Help the people with Bachelor's degrees out when they approach you with (academic) problems. In my experience this was actually quite rare because most of those people aren't confident enough to ask, but it can happen. Real-life example: a paper is accepted, then during copyediting the desk editor discovers that there are only four data points. The authors have drawn a line through two of the points, but since it's only four data points, they could equally have drawn one of several other lines that also go through two points (they would fit worse, but still look good enough to be viable). What do we do now?
Make a decision on whether to accept projects. The authors put together a publication proposal, the acquisition editor has gotten reviews for the proposal, and now you have to decide whether it's a good idea to take on the project. You'll need to appraise the reviews as well as how many copies of the book you can expect to sell, etc.

What else should a recent PhD know when considering such a position?

You're going to experience a ton of rejections when acquiring projects. I think the ratio of the number of replies to the emails sent is at best ~20% (and that's only if you're good). The ratio of acquired projects to emails sent is obviously even lower. You have to be ready to deal with this.
You're going to meet people who're very critical of you because they view academic publishing as a scam, and you by working for an academic publisher are complicit in the scam. For example, you could be doing your best to get top management to approve a lower article processing charge (APC) for your journal, knowing that these lower APCs are going to lead to the journal making a (hopefully temporary) net loss, and then get the very authors you're trying to help openly wonder how it's acceptable for you to charge APCs at all in the first place. You have to be ready to deal with this. If you end up doing the job you linked in a comment, it's going to be especially bad, because lots of academics hate Elsevier.
Don't expect to be well-paid, at least at the beginning.

Thank you @Allure, the answer is informative. The things you mentioned are what had puzzled me in the job advertisements. It is a little surprising to hear that some people view academic publishing as a scam and think publishers are complicit. It is true for most of the publishers or just for those like Elsevier? What about those like Nature-Springer or Science (AAAS)?

@J.Wilde Hard to say. Based on personal observations (I freely admit this is easily biased) it seems Elsevier is the most hated publisher, but other commercial publishers are just as distrusted. However most academics also seem to not be able to identify which publishers are commercial, e.g. Nature is published by a commercial publisher, but still commands a lot of respect. If you want to sidestep the issue it's probably easiest to work for a university press.

Also, if you've not seen it, you might be interested: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46402/career-options-in-scientific-academic-publishing-for-phds-and-postdocs