text:
Professor posting videos of his lectures online. Allowed?
Suppose I am a Professor working for a reputed university. Am I allowed (by the university) to make teaching videos of my courses at home and publish them on a platform like YouTube or somewhere else and monetize them?

The title and body of your question seem to be asking different questions.  It is defiantly wrong, and probably illegal, to video someones lecture and post it online without their permission.

What does your contract with the university say?

@User65535 You probably haven't understood what I am asking. I am not filming some prof's videos and posting them. I am the professor, filming myself at home, teaching the course in front of a camera. Now tell.

@JonCuster Actually I am not a professor. But I am just imagining this case for some other reasons. So I don't really know anything about the contracts.

It is only your contract that is likely to make this "not allowed".  If you have no contract that assigns IP you produce to anyone else I cannot imagine what law you would be breaking.

You can also check the faculty handbook. A lot of stuff is tucked away in there. Typically, this kind of thing is your IP, especially in the era of COVID (universities have relaxed a bit on this), but you should check with your chair who can direct this to the proper parties.

See also in the help https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask ... "You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face" If you're not a professor, and not facing this problem, it isn't clear what the actual problem is that you face so it's not meaningful for people to answer your question. Perhaps it is an XY problem question, in which case we need to know the actual problem to solve.

Perhaps a professor making a video and posting it on YouTube should be considered analogous to a professor writing a book and publishing it.  The latter is common in academia.

Standards and laws differ (widely) from place to place. I never worked at a place that constrained me from such things, but some questions on this site imply that in some jurisdictions your entire intellectual output is claimed by your employer even when it is a university.
But you can learn the specifics of your case by speaking with some legal officer of your university. They can point out what contractural and/or legal rules apply to your specific case.
As an example, though not the same thing, some universities claim patent rights on any patentable material produced by faculty and may (probably will) share in any proceeds that accrue. In such cases patents are filed in the name of the university. While this seems like a bad thing it also means that the university assumes the cost of filing the patent (lawyer fees...) and defending it. These costs can be substantial.

Note that the fact that you produce these "at home" is probably not relevant if you have contractual obligations.

Thanks for the information!

It depends on the wording of your contract with the university.
In general, professors monetize their academic work all the time. Be it through writing textbooks, consulting, patenting, building startups based on their research etc.
Universities may be entitled to royalties from any such activity, though the exact amount may vary. For example, Stanford received $114M from royalties in 2020 alone (it's worth mentioning that Google pays them royalties).
If you are planning on making online lectures and monetizing it, the best course of action is probably to let the university know that you're planning on doing it. They'll help establish who holds intellectual property rights to the material exactly.
Most institutions have a legal team whose job is (among other things) to protect the university's proprietary rights, and they'll know what to do in this situation. That said, they are protecting the university's interests, not yours. If you are serious about this (and not just uploading lectures for a few extra bucks off of YouTube ads), then it may be worthwhile to consult a lawyer who specializes in IP/labor laws.

If your university has a workers union, it may also make sense to contact them. They sometimes offer legal services for these things as well.

Thank you for really useful information!

This cannot be answered because there is no general agreement between universities and teachers. Whether or not you are allowed to do this simply depends on whether your university allows this or not.
For your information: at some universities this is definitely allowed, but there will usually be explicit agreements about who owns the IP and who can profit from such videos.

Thank you so much!


text:
"Gold" open access restricting use of accepted manuscript?
We have had a paper accepted with Mathematische Annalen (Springer). As my university has an open access agreement with Springer, the paper will be published as (gold) open access, with a Creative Commons license. However, when asked to sign the license agreement, it contains the following paragraph:

Immediately after acceptance the Author may deposit the Accepted Manuscript to any location,
and under any terms (including, but not limited to, under a CC BY licence), provided it is not made
publicly available until after publication. The Author will include an acknowledgement in the
Accepted Manuscript, together with a link to the Version of Record on the publisher’s website:
“This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable)
but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any
corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI]”.

If the paper is being published open access (which is paid for through the licensing agreement), why are we asked to agree not to upload the accepted manuscript? Why should we be restricted in the wording used in how to acknowledge the "version of record"? Why should we not be allowed to publish it with post-acceptance improvements, if we retain the copyright?
[There is also a paragraph about the "submitted manuscript", stating that this may be made available but that the author must include a specific acknowledgement that this manuscript has not undergone peer review or any post-submission improvements.]
I don't recall such a requirement in previous Open Access agreements. It seems that it would potentially leave us with fewer rights to use the article in which we retain copyright than others who are free to use it under the CC BY license!
Has anyone else seen this type of wording, and experience of how to deal with it? My first reaction is to strike out this part of the license agreement and sign (by hand) without it.

@Roland Well, it seems that by signing the agreement, we would agree to not exercise these rights that the CC-BY license would otherwise give us, when others are not restricted in this manner. I mean, either that or the corresponding paragraphs are meaningless anyway.

@Roland No, under cc-by you cannot remove the acknowledgment. CC specifies that you must attribute the work in the manner specified by the licensor.

Sounds like the person-in-charge at Springer sent you the wrong license agreement. I'd just write to them and ask them to clarify.

The agreement would, if you release the accepted version under an open access license, restrict the ways in which you can distribute the accepted version, restrictions that others are not subject to. However, the agreement does not restrict your use of the version of record.

@Allure This actually is verbiage Springer puts in some OA license agreements. See e.g. https://www.faimconference.org/images/FAIM_2022_LTP_OA_SN_Switzerland.docx This is

@Roland True, but in part. The definition of "attribution" in the CC includes a URI o hyperlink to the licensed material provided by the licensor. (Section 3(a)(1) here) So licensees cannot remove the URL of the version of record. But I think you are right for the rest of the blurb, it can be removed without consequences.

Maybe instead of publishing in a "golden" access journal is better to publish it in a journal like f1000research or Open Research Europe.
If we don't stop using just HIF journals for prestige and instead use true OA journals with proper Open Science principles the scientific publicing landscape will never change.

@KY You may be right, but particularly when publishing with junior co-authors who are looking for jobs / promotions, publication in certain journals can make a real difference. Also, it is still true that papers will receive more attention if they appear in more well-known journals. Publishing with an institutional open access agreement does not seem to be the worst option while these facts remain true, as long as it does not restrict access in some way after all.

Then the problem is of the directors of the departments that instead of understanding Open Science principles they still focus on Impact Factor.
I hope Funders will push even more for more transparency and Open Science in the future.

While not a seasoned academic (or copyright lawyer), my reading of that statement is that these rules apply to the article before it is published (i.e., while it is still an 'accepted manuscript'). Once the article is published (after typesetting or in a full issue) you would be relatively free to use it how you like (assuming, of course, it is referenced correctly, like any other article would be).
I think this paragraph of the agreement is mainly to cover them in case of changes made to the manuscript during the publication process. Once it's published, everything is fixed in place; before it's published, minor changes can occur in figures or formatting or data, etc. Most early access papers do the same thing by putting huge watermarks saying:
This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI]
(or something like that). Take a look at any 'accepted manuscripts' in any journal and that is what you will see. For example, one article I just looked up in Chemical Science has this in the margins of each page:

(I've only posted the margin because I don't know about whether I'm allowed to post a full page, even if it is open access...)
Again, I'm not a seasoned academic (still a few months from getting my PhD), but that is my interpretation.

Also not a seasoned academic or copyright lawyer, but this was my interpretation while reading the question.

To answer the "why": Springer (and other publishers) want people to use the published version, which has their branding, and preferably to get it directly from them, increasing their download statistics. Letting people use the accepted version, even though it brings in exactly the same direct revenue (i.e. none), would make it difficult to justify that the published version has added value, and jeopardise the continued willingness of institutions to pay open access fees.
What they'd like to do is stop people posting the accepted version, but they know that's not going to happen. So they instead are trying to impose a more "reasonable" condition which will still mean that most people end up looking at "their" version of the paper. They probably aren't concerned about whether it is actually enforceable since they don't want to antagonise authors by enforcing it. They just hope most authors will respect the conditions, and accept that a few people will either ignore them or find a way around them.

I don't think that those restrictions are illegal, because they are a private agreement between you (the copyright holder) and Springer. However, this sort of clauses are moot because they are very easy to circumvent.
Step 1: deposit the accepted manuscript on a USB stick, and give it to a friend. Tell them that you license the work to them under CC-BY. This is your right, because giving the manuscript to a friend does not make it publicly available.
Step 2: ask the friend to upload the manuscript to your repository of choice and make it public. They can do it by following CC-BY, and they are not bound by any additional restrictions, because CC-BY explicitly forbids such restrictions.

Academics should not do things in bad faith.

@ScottSeidman This is not bad faith; this is applying CC-BY to its letter and to its spirit. If anything, the poor attempt to add additional restrictions to CC-BY is bad faith from the publisher (and bad lawyers).

But it does seem like intentionally subverting the restrictions and, perhaps, poisoning the relationship with the publisher. Using an intermediary to commit murder isn't a defense, I'll note.

Of course it's bad faith.  You're recommending signing off on an IP agreement without intention to honor it -- all for the purpose of not waiting a few weeks for an official online version to appear.

@ScottSeidman I am honoring the agreement to the letter.

@Buffy Sorry but that is a very flawed analogy. Committing murder is illegal. The actions I suggest are not illegal and do not violate any agreement with the publisher or any clause of the CC-BY license.

And let me add that if there is someone intentionally subverting restrictions here it's Springer. Open access should mean open access, and CC-BY explicitly forbids additional restrictions.

We simply disagree, and I've already stated why.  Might be interesting to ask in law.se, but I'm not curious enough

This just shows how stupid including this in the agreement really is. I will propose to my co-authors to sign the license agreement amended to have this part of the text struck out, and let's see what will happen.

I have seen this type of wording. My university has (probably) the same agreement with Springer. I have normally put the accepted manuscript (without post-acceptance changes) in a repository. I thought that's good enough for me. I have occasionally forgotten to add the requested link/information, and in other occasions I haven't looked up the precise wording and just wrote something to this effect myself. Nothing bad has ever happened because of this.

Thank you for all your comments. I have reflected some more on this, and it seems that the requirements in the agreement are essentially toothless, because it does not and cannot restrict you from uploading some version of the article other than the accepted version. After all, the copyright remains with the author.
The only issue could arise if there is some other entity (such as a funding agency) that explicitly requires you to make the "Author Accepted Manuscript" available after acceptance without an embargo period. At least in the UK, this is not currently the case - for "Gold" open access papers, there is no requirement for the AAM to be made available also.
So I think in the end such an agreement does not genuinely restrict us as authors on how to use our articles, but it still leaves a bad taste in my opinion.

As I said in my answer, I don't think the aim of the comment is to restrict your use of the article, and that you will be free to do whatever you want with it once it is typeset and published. Before that, they just want to make sure you make it clear that a journal has already accepted it, and it does not represent the final form of the article. That is literally all they are saying—use it as you wish, so long as you add the disclaimer that it is not the final version of the article, and the journal in question has already claimed it. You're looking for restrictions where there aren't any.

@isolatedmatrix I respectfully disagree. As long as I have published, there have been terms in copyright and (more recently) open access agreements  about acknowledging the publication of the paper in a journal. This text is new. Just because the restrictions are ineffective, does not mean that they are none.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Does marrying your PhD supervisor put doubts on your PhD?
I have a professor in my university. He has married his PhD supervisor, and students are now making fun out of it as he didn't work on his PhD.  Instead they were in relationship and this and that.
I was wondering how this decision affects his academic life.  Do people doubt his degree as being softly defended or can people trust the expert knowledge of such a person?
Especially if a student wants him as a supervisor and when the student knows about this, what can be the effects of such a relationship on the student's decision?

Is getting a PhD the only reputable thing the professor has done (beside gaining a professorship!), or does he also have any research output, project participations, etc., going on?

As far as i know, he is not involved in any projects and he do ask students to add his name to publications despite not even contributing a single word.

You are allowed to answer your own question here.  In this case I would encourage you to do so.

he is not involved in any projects and he do ask students to add his name to publications despite not even contributing a single word — If true, this is a much more serious issue for his prospective students than his marriage.  On the other than, this could just be rumor driven by disapproval of his marriage.

The answer to your question strongly depends on the specific traits and attributes of the person the question is about. There is no reasonable way to judge a person's academic merit based solely on their personal life, because these two things may have no effect on one another (romance between academics is certainly not unheard of, and can lead to a "two body problem" in competitive areas of research). Whether or not one can "trust the expert knowledge" of anyone should be based, first and foremost, on previous display of such expertise/knowledge, i.e., their work.

@JeffE but it is possible that his Phd was a bit fun for him then learning thats why he is in this situation now

@user37208: This is definely not a reliable way to allay such doubts out of students (not collegues)! They are likely not to know his quality research, whereas they know and tell about the marriage fact.

Let us call the professor A, his advisor B. Let T be A's thesis.
If T was finished before the relationship, and the examination rules of the university were complied with, then there is neither a legal nor a moral issue. Don't worry, A writing T and then sleeping having a relationship with B is a non-issue. It's none of our business.
If the examination rules were complied with, but T was not finished at the time point the relationship started, then T lost some of its credibility, and all lost some of their reputation (to an extent which is difficult to quantify without knowing the details): A, B, and the university department.  One has a perfect right to doubt the credibility of T, the reputations of A and B, and the status of the university department. Prospective fresh students are right to raise such doubts. However, if nothing else has happened or will happen, the doubts must remain doubts and one should presume innocence.
To restore the reputation of A, of B and of the department and the credibility of T and remove the doubts, the department should evaluate T independently.
To evaluate the qualification of A, a prospective student should evaluate the quality (perhaps also the quantity) of the work of A outside A's collaboration with B.
If the examination rules regarding T were not complied with (e.g., B had a conflict of interest in a sense defined by the rules), one should insist on starting the standard procedure prescribed by the rules of the department.

In short it does have effect.even if the marriage takes placr later. The relationship started during phd.  And student will do doubt any ways.

A thesis should be assessed by and defended against a third-party committee. The supervisor will always be partial. Hence, approval of the thesis should not be influenced by the supervisor, and then it should not matter what kind of relationship student and supervisor has...

@Arnfinn:  I have never been part of a thesis defense procedure in which the advisor's opinion was not heavily (or even overwhelmingly) weighted.  Even when a student was clearly not prepared to graduate, it fell on the advisor to make that call, not the rest of the committee.

@Buzz: Well, I've seen some theses being rejected by the appointed committee. High time to make some changes in the assessment and approval process of your university if what you describe happens...

@Arnfinn i will agree with Buzz that your advisor has pretty much hold on the defense. As the external examiners are given a few months time to go through thesis and then conduct the defense in which the externals do have tendency to follow the advisor, as the advisor is the second person fully aware after the student.

This situation would likely be a serious concern for the folks in the department where he graduated and for the first place that gives him a job.  They would probably look into it and may or may not take issue with how things are done.  Depending on the details it could certainly affect his ability to get a good placement.
Once this person has their first job I would think everyone subsequently will assume that there was no issue and will not care.  By the time he is in a position to supervise students, he should also have a track record of work in the field since graduation and things that happened in graduate school are irrelevant. After your first few years of work, your credibility is based on what you have done while working, not on anything that happened in graduate school.
I find it hard to imagine a professor being in a position to supervise a student but the student basing his or her decision in any way on something that happened back in graduate school.

Latest accomplishments matter
Just as PhD students are not evaluated based on their high school grades, professors are not evaluated based on their PhD thesis. A PhD thesis is not your peak achievement (well, except right after defending it), it's simply a summary of your first serious research that should be superseded with more, better published research as you gain experience.
Any doubts about the "strength" of your thesis defence matter mostly for the purposes of getting your first post-PhD position (e.g. a postdoc placement). But for a professor it's mostly irrelevant (unless we're talking beyond simply a weak thesis and suggesting fraud or plagiarism), what matters is the results of their recent research and teaching work. That is what indicates their expertise or lack of it, not their thesis or its defense.

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

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


text:
PostDoc relocation Expenses
I have recently accepted a postdoctoral position at a reputed institute in the UK. I am an oversees applicant, who will soon be moving to the UK to take on this role. During the interview, I did not enquire about relocation expenses, assuming there would be support for that, but I have now been told that postdocs in this institute don't get a relocation support. On top of this, new regulations on the UK visa mean that I am now having to pay almost 1200 GBP just to get a visa and permission to be in the UK.
The town I am moving to is quite expensive (almost London rates) and I am now having trouble raising money for the airfare and paying initial rent and deposit, let alone having money for food and miscellaneous expenses. I am in a very tight spot and don't know how to take the next steps. This role has come after a lot of difficulty, and this situation is making it very difficult. Any advice on what I could do ?

Even if you would get relocation expenses, you would likely have to pay it out-of-pocket first and only get reimbursed after considerable time and bureaucracy on the university side.

From what you've said, you're currently not in a position to afford the cost of relocation. You also say that the area you're moving too is quite expensive. Are you likely to be able to afford to live there after you've relocated?

@Ian_Fin The postdoc salary is quite decent. Once I start working, I could manage the expenses and afford to live there.
I am just unable to front the upfront setup costs. I have just come off a few months of not being paid and in addition to this, the currency conversion from what I was paid in my last job to GBP isn't really that great either! So, the savings haven't really accounted to much!

Some places offer money to people in difficult financial situations. Maybe your institute has something like that and it's applicable to your case?

@NewPostdoc taking into account rent/food/living/etc. would you still have enough money left over to pay off a loan (either from a bank or from friends/family) during the length of your contract? Not sure how easy it would be to find/get such a loan, but it would be the most obvious way to secure the money upfront.

If you live alone a postdoc salary outside London (currently between £29301 and £38183 per year) you should be able to find cheap enough accommodation to pay off £100+/month for a bridge loan, perhaps with the exception of Oxford.

Yes, I will be earning enough to payback a loan over a period of 10-12 months. Will be difficult to do it sooner than that.  The challenge at the moment is that I might be able to raise some funds from friends and family, but it will be close to 25-30% of the set up costs and not more. Even then, they might require me to repay within a short duration.  I am not sure, if a bank would give me a loan.

Is it advisable to mention my situation to my PI or HR ? Could they help in any way or would this impact me negatively?

@NewPostdoc Did you accept the position before you found out that there would be no relocation costs? How did you find this out?

@ian Unfortunately yes, I accepted it before asking. This is my first postdoc role. In the past, I know of people who were offered moving expenses and I therefore assumed there would be one. Neither the PI , not the HR offered it, I finally asked the hr and pi recently,  and they emailed back saying there wasn't one.

@NewPostdoc If you accepted the position without knowing whether there would be relocation costs then the PI and/or HR are somewhat entitled to feel a little irritated if you then reveal you're requiring relocation costs in order to begin the job. That's not a reason to withhold this information from them, but it is something you may want to factor into your decision. One thing you may need to keep in mind is that one option you have is to withdraw from the job. Of course, if you do this it's best if you don't leave it until the last minute as that may only increase the irritation

The challenge with the relocation expenses have emerged more so recently due to a few change in circumstances and changes in the visa requirements which have now meant that I am paying double.the amount that I had allocated for the visa. Not in a position to withdraw from the job, at this point.  Will figure something out. Thank you very much for your comments and advice. I appreciate it very much.

I'd consider it the norm not to be offered to pay the relocation expenses, not the other way round.

In my personal experience when coming as a postdoc to the UK, I asked whether there was any help for relocation expenses from the US to London. They covered a lot of it, including airfare for me and my spouse and a huge container in a ship with all our stuff. I think in total it was over £4k. They did not cover visas though, which were expensive. Also, I did have to pay everything upfront and had it reimbursed later after I arrived. You should definitely ask again!

I think dbluesk's experience is the exception.  Postdocs may be coming for a year or two so relocation expenses don't make a lot of sense for a university to cover. // If you were coming to the U.S., you could get a loan in a credit union in the same town or city, on the basis of the letter of employment.  Hopefully that is the case in the UK as well.  Suggest you put most of your belongings into storage for now. // Perhaps your new employer would be willing to buy your plane ticket.  Also I wonder if their int'l student office has some tricks for getting the visa cheaper.

I would like to caution people commenting, who have primarily North American experience, that things can work very differently in the UK, especially when academia and immigration intersect

You have been told (by HR I assume) that postdocs can not claim their relocation expenses from the University. However, there is a chance you can claim (some) reimbursement from the School/Department or from your PI's grant. It is a bit late to negotiate this already, but it probably does not hurt to ask.
However, if the answer appears to be negative, unfortunately, there is not much to be done. Welcome to the dark side of academia.

I'm not sure why this point wasn't brought up yet, but have you considered the possibility of a part-time job?  The easiest as an academic would be to tutor high school or undergrad students. With your credentials there shouldn't be too many problems.
Or you could apply for jobs with very low requirements, like cashier at a grocery store, waiting staff at a restaurant, etc. Most people take up a second job when they're short on money.
You could also ask your PI of they can cover it by explaining your financial situation. But honestly, if I were you, I'd just get a part-time job to raise at least some part of the funds before asking others for help.

I am not familiar with the details of the relevant legal issues, but if you need a visa to come to the UK as a postdoc, then getting a part-time job might be far from trivial

@YemonChoi as I understand the OP's post, the OP hasn't even raised the funds for airfare or visa application, so I'm assuming the OP is in his country of citizenship for the time being. I'm just advising him to use that time wisely.

Sana, point taken - perhaps you could clarify that your advice applies to seeking work before coming to the UK. OTOH, it says near the start that the OP "will soon be moving to the UK to take on this role".

Thanks Sana. Couple of companies that I had previously spoken to, before I got this role have shown interest in offering me some consulting work. I am trying to find out figure out if I would be allowed to this part time.

@YemonChoi I am allowed 20 hours of part time work per week.

@NewPostdoc OK, but double-check on the visa. The UK is not in a particularly easy-going phase right now when it comes to such matters...

@YemonChoi nothing has changed so far regarding immigration. It might change when Brexit is triggered, but for now, if the university made an offer, it's because they can definitely sponsor him on the right visa, which is usually a Tier 2 for a postdoc. This means 20 hours of part time work per week.

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


text:
Should I ask to work on professor's project?
I have a professor that I've gotten to know pretty well. Currently we're going through and learning about a newer area of mathematics just for the fun of it. It was my idea to do it and now he's looking to do more with it. He wants to do research on an application of this area of math next summer through next fall. We plan to continue studying this area for this coming apring semester as well, but I would love to actually work on this project with him.
Because we know each other so well, I think he would enjoy me working with him on it overall. The problem is that he's going abroad to do the research. What I want to know is if there's any potential for me to work with him on this and on whether or not I should ask him for the opportunity? Or should I just wait and see if he approaches me on it?
I should point out that I will have graduated by next summer.

I talked to my professor. We talked a little bit about what I could do for the project, how we would communicate and what he would need to figure out before saying yes or no. We have our weekly meeting tomorrow and I'm sure he'll have more to say on the matter. Knowing him he's probably pretty much made a decision already. I definitely don't think he would have asked me about, though, because he chuckled when I brought it up as if it hadn't crossed his mind. But thank you guys for encouraging me to talk to him!

Yes, you should ask! Don't be shy -- there's nothing at all to lose. In the worst case, he'll point out that the logistics of collaborating remotely are hard, or something like that. No one is ever upset that someone is enthusiastic about working with them. If you're worried about the lost opportunities of doing research with someone more local: having a project you like and an advisor you work well with seems far more important than local convenience here -- it's not like you're in a field that needs a lab and hands-on training.

To add to this -- even if he's not willing to attempt the long-distance advising position, he's still a fantastic reference who can point out other professors who you might be able to work with.

It sounds like fun, but shouldn't your primary focus right now, in the area of planning for the future, be on figuring out what structure you want your life to have after you graduate?  It sounds like the idea of doing research is intriguing for you.  If so, you may want to apply to grad school.
Perhaps this particular professor and this particular project will be compatible with that.

I have every intention to go to grad school. Potentially it could he a question of working with him on the project now and applying to grad shool later or doing both at the same time.

@SarahWilson - sounds like a plan.  I suggest you take a look at the testing and application due dates and make yourself a calendar.  Research can be very absorbing and I wouldn't want you to miss any deadlines while you're having fun with a project.


text:
Should I mention mental condition?
I graduated on time and on the top back then, but after that I had some problem with major depression and anxiety, hence I have some gap on my CV and for a while, I either couldn't work or worked below my qualification. My world literally fell apart but now I am trying to get back to my old dream. Next year, if everything goes well, I want to go get a master degree.
How should I explain myself? Do I need to mention my history with depression? I am from a country where mental health is still really badly stigmatised, but I'd like to apply abroad. I am not sure what's appropriate to say and what's not.
Thank you.

It is not wise to mention it officially in a CV or any document. Rather if asked in future, you can verbally or informally discuss it during interviews. I would not mention it.

@Coder I disagree somewhat. Many postgraduate applications (in the UK at least) have a separate part of the form where you can fill in your disabilities, and mental health problems are classified as such. This part of the form does not affect your admission (and, as far as I know, is not disclosed to the admissions committee), but is used by the university's disability office to help and support you if and when you begin your studies there.

Thanks for the answers so far. @Natalie will it reduce my chance of getting in though? I mean.. on one hand I am afraid they'll see me less than others with more experience and emotional stability, on the other it'll be an unexplained gap on the CV. I don't even know how to word it on the motivation letter, should I end up mentioning it.

Think about how much of your worry is being caused by the anxiety itself, and read @aparente's great answer below. Your mind is perhaps making this seem like a bigger issue than it really is. As Coder says, don't mention it at this stage- you can always go in to more detail further down the line.

data point: I was told specifically not to mention it for an application in France

In general, there is nothing wrong with mentioning a health problem when it is relevant, and that includes mental health.  However, in this case, I don't see a particular reason to mention it.
People step off the hamster wheel all the time, for a variety of reasons, including their own health/mental health issues, having a baby, caregiving for a relative, being a trailing spouse and not finding the right position in the spouse's location, etc., etc.  Sometimes a person is just plain tired after completing a degree.
Regarding the comment from @NatalieHogg, please note that after you are admitted to a program, you can still bring any disability you may have to the attention of the students with disabilities office.


text:
Is it OK to send the same research proposal to several professors?
I am a prospective PhD student in the humanities and I have already got in touch with a potential advisor in the university I would really like to work in. I have drafted a research proposal (as I have to submit one with my application) and sent it to him for feedback.
At the same time, I am planning to apply at other universities as well, my first choice being very competitive. I have already found a couple faculty in other uni's I'd be also happy to work with (same research interests etc). Problem is they both require a research project draft when making first contact.
My question is: is it OK or 'ethical' to send the very same research proposal to a few different potential advisors? How common is it? Am I really free to contact as many advisors as I want, hear from them and then pick the one I want to work with (assuming more than one are willing to take me in, on their part)?
I know this might sound anxious but I really don't know how it works when it comes to the 'application etiquette.' Thank you all!

You don't say which country/cultural context the applications are for. I'm familiar with the UK setting in particular. Here, there is no problem using the same research proposal for different applications -- it's even expected.
There is the additional wrinkle in the situation you describe that one potential supervisor might be investing significantly in the development of your proposal. If you were to go to a different institution, having made good use of that contact's input, then it would also be reasonable for that contact to be a teensy bit hacked off -- unless there were mitigating circumstances (e.g. appreciable difference in funding levels).
Generally, however, it will be expected by potential supervisors that applicants will be testing the waters at more than one institution (they ought to advise applicants to do this in any case!). Transparency should not be a problem in most cases (i.e., inform your contact that you are, in fact, applying elsewhere too). Unless you're dealing with a prima donna/primo uomo, that shouldn't be an issue.

Yeah, I was actually talking about the UK! That's quite reassuring, I'll follow your advice.

@prospapp Glad that was a help. Since your context is the UK, perhaps it's also worth noting that the research proposal is often weighted as one of the factors for ranking applicants for scholarships -- additional incentive for making it clear, sharp, thoughtful, well referenced, etc. Good luck!

and what if more than of one application with the same proposal accepted? Is this common the academic context to refuse an offer when they accepted the proposal? Can it make some trouble? (@wrzlprmft♦ )

I'm sorry, @Eilia, but I'm not actually sure what you're asking. Are you asking: what happens if one is accepted at more than one university for the same proposal? That can happen, and it should not make for trouble. (You accept one, and decline the rest!) If that's not what you had in mind, please do clarify.

@Dɑvïd, You hit the spot! My concern was about the moral and even intellectual issues when two professors accept my plan and I have to decline one of them. Can this cause some problem in the future, e.g. when they possibly selected as reviewer for my future paper (based on the proposal)? You know, I want to look at the case from pessimistic perspective. :(

If you wrote the proposal entirely yourself, I see no problems with trying multiple universities. Do note the deadlines: you don't want to be in the situation that you need to choose between accepting an offer of a "lower-tier" university while still waiting for your first choice university to respond.
If you incorporate the suggestions of the faculty member of one university in your proposal to other universities, I'd at least let that faculty member know. Something like: "your university is my first choice, but as you know it is very competitive. Do you mind if I use this proposal to apply to other universities as a fallback"? This achieves 2 things: first of all it prevents a possible faculty member that might feel taken advantage of by using his/her comments to get into a different university. Second of all the advice you get might predominantly apply to his/her university, and might not generalize to other universities.

Thank you. At this stage, the proposal is entirely my own work: I'm still waiting for feedback from my first-choice potential advisor. Obviously I would never send a proposal which includes a faculty member's suggestions without letting them know: my question concerned this first draft made only by myself.


text:
Are we allowed to use the figures of a published paper in our poster/oral presentation at a conference by citing the source of figures?
Is an author (coauthor or corresponding author) of an already published paper in a journal (IOP and Elsevier) allowed to use figures of the (already-) published paper in their poster or oral presentation at a conference by clearly citing the source of figures once the figure appears? Indeed, the presentation is a review of what we have done in different papers.

In general, this depends on what the authors agreed to in terms of the copyright transfer or publishing agreement. For example, IOP's Author rights and article sharing policy grants authors publishing in IOP subscription journals the right to

reuse their original figures, tables, and text extracts (up to 400 words) in future published works.

The more detailed version of the policy states that, for subscription articles for which the copyright form was submitted on or after 26 April 2016, authors have the right to (for non-commercial use)

(from paragraph 2)

make oral presentation of the Final Published Version (all or part) and include a summary and/or highlights of it in papers distributed at such presentations or in conference proceedings.

In addition to the rights granted in paragraphs 2 and 4 above, IOP and/or its licensors also grant the Named Authors the right to reuse, without further permission, their original figures, tables, and text extracts of no more than 400 words, in future published works of which they are an author. When reusing content in this way, the Named Authors must display adequate citation information and IOP’s and/or its licensor’s copyright notice. This information is necessary in order to show where any reuse requests should be directed and to avoid any suggestion of self-plagiarism.

Posters are not explicitly mentioned, but presumably count as a published work as far as copyright is concerned.
Note that IOP also publishes some journals owned by other societies, for which other policies may apply.

Thank you very much. In my case, I am sending only a few-line abstract to the conference (to apply for a poster/oral presentation), and then, in my poster/oral presentation, I cite the figures; is this assumed a future publication? Since the abstract which will be published on the conference website/proceedings does not contain any figures.

@Martha97 For an authoritative answer, you can of course email IOP and ask for clarification. My reading is that, if you copy some lines from the paper abstract for an abstract, it would fall under the cited part of paragraph 2, "include a summary and/or highlights... in proceedings". I guess that, in a very conservative reading, that clause might only apply to oral presentation. Of course, they don't own modified/new lines in the new abstract, there may be, e.g., fair use arguments, and, in practice, they're unlikely to be bothered by you promoting the paper.

I have already sent them an email on Friday, but not received an answer yet, and I am in a hurry to prepare my poster. But as I checked on Elsevier's author's right, they also mention that the reuse of material is fine. I will definitely NOT use the same line of my paper in the poster; it will be of course different.

Yes, even from articles by strangers, and you don’t need no stinkin' permission
In all countries I am familiar with, citing work for the purpose of critical commentary (i.e. the typical use in a research paper) is allowed under exemptions to copyright. See, for instance:

in the US, the "fair use" exemption (statute at 17 U.S.C. § 107, but it is mostly a creation of case law)
in the UK, "fair dealing" as defined by §29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
in France, article L122-5 of the code of intellectual property, §3(a)
in Italy, article 70 of the April 22, 1941 law about copyrights

Reproducing a figure, sound sample, video etc. is covered by such exceptions.  It does not matter that you are the author of the work or not. It does not matter that the copyright holder agrees or disagrees with you doing it.
There are some conditions, but if you are following basic academic ethics, the rule of thumb is that you are never going to violate copyright. (The only exception is stapler theses, which often reproduce in extenso the content of published articles. In that case, you have to be careful about permissions - even if it’s your work, you transferred an exclusive publication right to the publisher.) Typical conditions are:

In some countries (e.g. France or Italy), you have to clearly identify the source of the cited work (else the copyright exemption does not apply). As an academic, you are doing that anyway, otherwise it would be (self-)plagiarism.
In some countries (e.g. UK or Italy), the work has to be of a non-commercial nature. Scientific papers are typically not produced aiming at commercial profit (if I ask JK Rowling to send me the PDF of Harry Potter, she will tell me to buy it at the bookshop; if I ask Jones to send me their latest Nature paper, they will gladly send it for no charge). Maybe for-profit publishers might have difficulties in Italy (where the law is strictest) but as a researcher you are in the clear.
In most countries, there is a proportionality requirement: do not reproduce more of the cited work than is necessary to understand the context. As an academic, you are doing that anyway, otherwise the review poster/presentation/article would be a rambling mess of useless copy-pastes.

Editors might not know this, though
Some reviewers, editors or publishers might refuse to republish figures and other excerpts without permission from the original publisher. If they believe that is a legal necessity, they are wrong (see above).
Of course, being wrong will not stop them from rejecting your article or otherwise doing unpleasant things. In that case, yes, you might play the "getting permission" game. That is no different than when reviewer 2 asks you to do some pointless change to the article - if it is not too much of a bother, go for it and do not argue. Whether they ask you to obtain permission from the authors, publisher, or from the king of Belgium, it’s the same thing - go ask and get it from the author, publisher, or king of Belgium.


text:
Enrolling in a PhD Program and trying to obtain medical insurance
I personally do not know what to do. Currently I am employed in a state forensic hospital full time. I want to attend a PhD Program full time in Biomedical Engineering. I have been struggling with the idea of leaving my full time job because I have great medical insurance that took me a very long time to obtain. I obtained this job primarily for my wife especially who has heart problems and diabetes as well as my son having heart issues too. The insurance on my job has secured these issues where my wife and son are covered 100%.
Leaving my full-time job would crush my family. My school offers externship programs only for student and grants benefits to primarily the student. I can't transfer the insurance that they are offering me to my wife and son, as the policy does not work this way. I am very scarred and frightened about making a move to the PhD Program simply because I won't have the specific coverage that they need. Because of this I have thought about taking a online PhD Program that in Public Health that I am not really interested in. It is attractive because it allows me to stay in my full-time job and maintain insurance, but I wouldn't be happy with my PhD choice. I am not sure what to do! My family comes first and I realize this, but I would really love to be part of the PhD Program without the anxiety of looking back with fear because of the complex medical conditions that they presently have. I really couldn't concentrate in my course work knowing that I am enrolled in a PhD Program and not having adequate insurance for my wife and son. Can someone help me in how to handle this issue?

Which country are you in ? USA ?

What exactly is the help you're looking for?

Most universities in the USA have some sort of discounted health insurance programs for students. It won't be as good as your employer plan (probably), but it is better than nothing. You may also be eligible through Medicare, which is free health insurance through the U.S. government, if your income as a PhD student is a below a certain threshold. Thresholds are based on family size, so if your PhD student income is the only income for your family of 3, you are likely eligible for free healthcare through Meidcare.

I was in a similar position when I started my PhD, so I can speak from experience. I was married with children, and needed to figure out the health insurance thing before deciding if I could go to graduate school, and if I could go, which program was best for someone in my circumstances.
The first thing you need to know is that there is no such thing as a "normal" or "common" PhD program in the US. It's the Wild West out there, and there are as many combinations of schools, programs, financial aid offers, etc., as there is a market for students looking to improve their credentials. So if your question is "can I get an online PhD", or some other workaround to the residency and health insurance issue, the answer is "yes." But to the questions of "can I get a worthwhile PhD", the answer ranges between "probably not" to "maybe."
Most worthwhile PhD programs have both a residency requirement and a health insurance requirement. The residency requirement means that you need to be present on campus for some period of time during the duration of your program. This ranges from having to be present on campus 9 months of the year, to the ridiculous, in which you only have to be in-person to sign a paper one day a year. If you can pull off getting a PhD in an institution without a strict residency requirement depends not only on the university policy, but the type of program. A linguist studying the evolution of languages in a remote region of the world almost necessarily needs to be off campus, while a biomedical engineer or a molecular biologist will need either to be on campus 12 months of the year or install a $6 million lab in their home office.
On the health insurance requirement, it again, depends on the program. Some schools give you free health insurance, covered as part of your TA/TF contract, and this extends to subsidized family insurance. Other schools just tell you to get insurance on the open marketplace and show proof of insurance. There's no point in me summarizing all of the possible options here, and you really have to read the fine print. For example, a university offering you full insurance coverage and a subsidized family insurance option can later tell you that the "subsidized" option is $5,000 to $10,000/yr depending on your family size.
About the Medicaid option mentioned in the comments, you really need to check your eligibility and not rely on anybody telling you that you'll "probably" or "likely" qualify. Since your family already has serious pre-existing conditions, a mistake in this area can cost your tens of thousands on dollars in medical bills.
The decision of going to grad school is not like shopping for an undergrad degree. You need to decide on a topic, then make a list of prospective advisors, find out the different residency requirements and health insurance options offered at the institutions where these advisors work, find out the Medicare eligibility options, etc.
In my case, I solved the issue with a mix of university subsidies on family health insurance, my wife getting a job that offered health insurance for her, paying for state-subsidized health insurance for the children, odd jobs, extra scholarships from my department, etc. It was probably the most stressful thing, as any slight change in my personal circumstances required a complete re-configuring of the health insurance options. Did it work at the end? "Yes." Was it worth it? "Maybe."

Perhaps no one has mentioned it to me, but I've not encountered any residency requirements. I have a program mate who lives many states away.

Then your program has no residency requirement.

"The decision of going to grad school is not like shopping for an undergrad degree. You need to decide on a topic, then make a list of prospective advisors, find out the different residency requirements and health insurance options offered at the institutions where these advisors work, find out the Medicare eligibility options" Very important point.

It's unclear where you are based, and we are probably discussing wishful thinking, unless you have already been accepted in a PhD program.
From what you present and assuming you are based in the US, you have three solutions, in order of feasibility:

move to another country providing better conditions to PhD students and to their citizen in general;
take out a hefty loan throughout your PhD and be sure you can cover insurance and any medical conditions out of your pocket;
do your PhD remotely.

The third option is basically impossible, unless you have already a connection to someone being a professor and willing to support you to that extent.
In any case, you should check what are your employment perspectives and possible salary after your PhD, because given your family ties you have not one but two person dependent on your salary.
This consideration are valid if you want to pursue a PhD only to have some career prospects. If you pursue a PhD for the academic career, or for the improvement of human conditons, etcetc, please note you are doing it for your selfish ego (as plenty of current academics and of perspective academics).
Why?
Because research and knowledge will advance with or without you (unless you actively sabotage its progress, like the Catholic Church did with astronomy or Virkow did with Semmelweis). The earlier you understand this deep motivation, the better (and the better you will be able to understand the other people in the academia).
There is nothing wrong in having a large ego and letting it out, I am quite sure it is more damaging (trying) to repress it.

I faced almost exactly your situation and my heart goes out to you.
My solution was to do what it took to maintain full time employment while doing a PhD (which is in progress). It has not been easy, and I would not recommend it to anyone who isn't in an extreme situation.
Insurance wasn't really the problem. The health insurance I could get as a student is very good. The problem is that serious illnesses often come with major expenses no insurance will cover (special diets that require more expensive food, accessible housing, etc, etc, etc).
Even though I could insure my family as a PhD student, I couldn't cover the other expenses.
You're facing a lot of personal choices that no one can make for you, but what I will say is whatever you decide to do you need to make sure your family, your supervisor at work, and your advisor at school is on board and in support of your ambition. That is the only way this can work.
So I would say that instead of applying broadly to programs, try to meet potential advisors. Some will be very interested in you because you have work experience and this personal history of stepping up to meet difficult challenges. The ones who aren't interested might connect you to one who is. If you decide to exclusively be a PhD student, ask hard questions about funding before leaving your job.


text:
Is taking the SAT ueful when when applying for a graduate degree in South Korea?
I'm studying computer engineering and I want to do my graduate studies in South Korea.
Is taking the SAT to prove my math and English skills helpful for my application?

Why not take GRE ?

Isn't SAT more for undergraduateb admission?


text:
The article Publishing Charge of 775$ was not settled and Now there is a debt collection payment request. They're warned of potential consequences
Recently, my girlfriend, who is a Ph.D. scholar in an institute in India, and currently awaiting her thesis submission, submitted an article to Hindawi.Ltd., in which she is the primary author and her guide is the corresponding author. There was an Article Publishing Charge (APC) of USD 775, that the concerned research group was supposed to settle, conditionally, once the article gets accepted.
The research article was accepted, and the research group was instructed to make the settlement for the APC. Instead of duly paying the APC, her professor totally ignored responding to the mail. Even though he was prompted, on multiple occasions, to either pay the amount or respond to the email, he simply postponed taking any step to address the issue. Emails kept coming regularly reminding the professor of strictly paying the APC, and seeking a valid explanation as to what blocks him from duly responding to the emails and initiating the payment process.
His stand/ opinion was that it could be due to a miscommunication between the team that manages the APC and that that is associated with publishing the article. In other words, the professor was looking forward to a possible scenario where there would be no longer any emails from the Publication house, or there would be a relaxation/ waiver in the APC, put forward by the Publishing group.
Recently, the research team received two emails, dated a week apart:
Email 1

Debt collection – Payment request
Total outstanding amount: USD 775
Dear Sir or Madam
As an international operating debt collection company, we have been
instructed by our client Hindawi Ltd. The Atrium
to secure immediate settlement of this outstanding amount. Our client
advised us that they have not received a satisfactory explanation for
your non payment and we therefore require that you send your
remittance until
15.09.2023
in USD to Hindawi, bank account no.

After receiving this email, the professor sent an email, apologizing to the publishing group for not duly responding and requesting the publishing group a waiver and not toss the article out.
He received the following response.
Email 2:

Thank you for your message. We suggest that the authors share the fee. Please make a payment directly to Hindawi and send a proof of payment. Otherwise it may cause problems to place future publications with Hindawi or Wiley. The publishing fee can not be waived. Your manuscript has been reviewed and published. The service has been provided and must be paid. We hold all below stated authors and Universities/Institutes liable for the claim. The debt collection procedure will be continued until receipt of payment.

Now, the professor is asking the first author (my gf) to help him make a decision and suggest a response that could reply to the recent email. She is currently on a fellowship and she is yet to receive the forthcoming installment (According to the funding agency she needs to wait for another three months).
Question

What is the solution to this problem? Is there any way this problem can be settled?

Is there any way the professor can avail of a waiver in the APC?

Will it affect my girlfriend's future scientific career, in case she wants to continue in academia? Another article from the same group, co-authored by her is still under review, with Willy.

What are the preventive measures she should take so that any consequences of the said issue do not befall her?

External links have a way of becoming obsolete. Please either copy the content of the second e-mail as you did for the first e-mail, or (better yet), summarize the second e-mail.

require that you send your remittance until --- I think they mean "by" instead of "until". I'm not even sure what this means (literally) with "until" -- possibly that you can dribble in the remittance bit-by-bit, such as $1 per week, until the given date is reached, after which the requirement has been met, regardless of the total amount sent by that date; or maybe that if you send the remittance then it has to be done by that date, and if you don't send it by that date then the requirement aspect is voided (interpretations I'm sure they did not intend).

Who signed what contract and with whom? What is the paper trail? Did your girlfriend sign the contract? Then she is responsible for paying, just as anyone is responsible for paying for any purchase one signed the contract for. Is there an email or better a formal contract where someone agrees and promises to reimburse her? Or did the professor sign the contract? In the latter case, his institution is likely bound to pay, because he signed in his capacity as an employee of the institution. In the end, you may need a lawyer to sort this out, unless you can settle with the publisher.

@DaveLRenfro That's common in the Indian dialect of English.

"paying the fee" doesn't seem to be in your mind as a possible solution. Any reason why?

@justhalf, that is quite elusive as to why he doesn't want to pay. One reason, that he currently says as told by my gf, his scholar, is he doesn't have any project fund.

@justhalf, earlier his stand was that some professor, he knew from other institution, had been in a similar situation, and later a waiver was granted. In fact I'm not affiliated with the group in any way whatsoever, except the fact that my friend is his student.

@justhalf 775 USD is a large amount, especially in India, because of how currency conversion works. I don't think most PhD scholars can easily afford it.

@AgnishomChattopadhyay Yep, got it about the amount. My question was implicitly more on "if you wasn't planning to pay, why agreed to it?"

"As an international operating debt collection company, we have been instructed by our client Hindawi Ltd. The Atrium
in USD to Hindawi, bank account no"
This is not how debt collector works: when they collect debts, they ask them to transfer to them, because they bought them at a heavy discount from the original creditor. You can be 99% sure that this is some minion at Hindawi playing the trick "let's scare the debitor".

@EarlGrey There are third-party debt collection agencies that work like that, acting on behalf of the original creditor, often on a contingency basis. Debt buying is only one business model.

@Anyon surfe, but none of them work at the scale required by an international level business as the one from scientific pubblishers

@StephanKolassa Whether or not the individual who signed the contract is personally responsible entirely depends on the contract. It's not possibility to determine liability with certainty without seeing the contract.

To think of this another way:
Your girlfriend and her advisor have contracted to purchase a product. That product is "publication".
Generally, if you contract to buy something or a service, obtain that thing, and then don't pay it, you owe a debt. Depending on the nature of the agreement and the place you live, there are different mechanisms that someone owed a debt can pursue to obtain what they are owed.
You do not, typically, purchase a thing, walk away with it, and then hope to negotiate the price later, at least not where I live.
It's really between your girlfriend/her advisor and the publisher to work out a suitable agreement. They might consider offering a smaller sum of money that they are willing to pay; maybe the journal will be happy to accept it to avoid further trouble. It may be possible to withdraw the submission and send the paper to a different publisher, though if it's already been accepted and a contract already signed, the publisher may not be happy with this because they are missing out on revenue. Otherwise, potential risks to your girlfriend depend entirely on the contract signed and who is named responsible.
If she is considered personally responsible for the debt by law, any consequences for being in debt may apply to her: these consequences will depend on local laws and I won't attempt to provide any advice on that. If the institution is considered responsible, it's up to the institution what the consequences are. Imagine you're the employee of a grocer and you promise on the store's behalf to purchase a truckload of rotten fruit. The store may be responsible for paying for the fruit, but if they're upset that you've made this agreement they could fire you from your fruit-purchasing job.
As far as the future if the debt remains unpaid, Hindawi/Wiley can certainly follow through on their policy that people who haven't paid for past articles can't publish future ones in their journals. That seems like quite a reasonable policy, isn't it? There are other publishers, though, and academic institutions are not likely to check whether applicants for jobs or educational programs have a dispute with some particular publisher.
Another answer has suggested not publishing with Hindawi; I think that's a reasonable course of action, but possibly too late in this case. One should consider their choice of venue before submitting, not after acceptance, and that choice should include considering the reputation of the publisher and any costs involved with publication.

My read of the question is said girlfriend has no such contract. It would appear the advisor agreed to it but I can't be quite sure.

I guess where you live isn't New York then.

I doubt that the author is responsible for the payment, but the institute is, as the letter stipulates. The institute might, unfairly, try to withhold it from her but that would be a travesty, IMO.
I doubt that a waiver is possible at this point and should have been requested much earlier.
I don't see how this will affect a career long term. It is a purely financial situation, not an academic one.
But, either the professor should make good or she should take it to higher authority at the institute. I would try to avoid making it a complaint against the professor (just as self protection), but indicate that funds need to be found. The reputation of the institute is on the line here. Let the dean, or whoever, put pressure where it needs to be put, but let them know of the situation and the need for resolution.

In my opinion, Hindawi is a predatory company.
Do not pay the money, withdraw the paper, and submit somewhere reputable.

If it has been published it may be too late. Another publisher might not be interested.

-1 Hindawi is not a company, and if you knew who actually owns Hindawi I somehow don't think you'd still call them predatory.

@Allure "purchased in 2021 by John Wiley & Sons" according to Wikipedia.  That is too recent to matter.  Wikipedia gives extensive reasons to believe they are a low quality publisher.

@Allure Hindawi is a (subsidiary?) company in the UK: https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08671628

Disputes like this are why OA publishers will generally issue a "APC confirmation" before accepting an article, and will not accept the article before the APC is confirmed. The fact that the dispute got where it is suggests that someone confirmed the APC, and then let the paper get published anyway in spite of repeated reminders to pay the APC (as opposed to notifying the journal office to halt publication).
I hope you can see why this is abusive, dishonest, and will get your girlfriend (+ her professor) blacklisted by the publisher.
Don't confirm the APC, for any reason, unless you are intending to pay the stated amount.

What is the solution to this problem? Is there any way this problem can be settled?

Paying Hindawi is the easiest solution. Where the funds for that are going to come from, I don't know. Any other alternative would depend on the goodwill of Hindawi.

Is there any way the professor can avail of a waiver in the APC?

Not unless the journal office approves it, which in turn will require goodwill from them. Your girlfriend & her professor have acted sufficiently dishonestly that they are likely to have no goodwill. Any waiver would therefore be very pragmatic, depending on factors such as:

Are papers by this author likely to be highly cited and therefore increase our impact factor?
Is this author a Big Name?
Does this author submit a lot of papers to our journal?

Will it affect my girlfriend's future scientific career, in case she wants to continue in academia? Another article from the same group, co-authored by her is still under review, with Willy.

Academics are likely to not care. Disputes with a publisher are not academic in nature. Wiley however might blacklist. If they do, you can expect the other article (and all future ones) to be automatically rejected.

What are the preventive measures she should take so that any consequences of the said issue do not befall her?

See the bold highlight above. The journal sends APC confirmations to avoid issues like this one. If your girlfriend cannot or does not intend to pay the APC, she needs to tell the journal office before the manuscript is accepted. The journal will probably hold off on acceptance while they sort out the APC, and they will only accept once there's a mutually-acceptable APC.

She will be completing her PhD in the near future. I am curious if any of her articles will get rejected by Wiley when she tries to communicate with different institution credentials (different institute email IDs, etc. from her post-doc)

@VijithKumarV it's possible and depends on whether Wiley is paying attention. If they can tell that it's the same person, they should in theory block your girlfriend even with the new institution credentials, but it's possible they will not realize it's the same person (even if the name is the same, there are many namesakes in the world). If you marry and she changes her last name to yours, that would add an extra layer which Wiley would have to check through.

Institutions are responsible for paying the publication fees (they are as responsbile as providing desks, chairs, pens, papers to their employee). Every institutions is proud of showing on their homepage how much they are "world-leading institutions publishing breakthrough research in repsected international journals". It is time to put their money where their mouth is.
Paying publication fees out of one own pockets is not unheard of, but it is as well extremely unfair.
From the debt collection email, it seems to me it is an empty threat, however your relative other can try to squeeze out from all this simply answering to the editor that they have to deal directly with the institute administration, addressing the bill to them and putting it at the attention of "your professor xyz".
Institutions are huge bureaucratic entitities: their administration is better at dealing with other huge bureacrutic entities (publishers) than any researcher...

I do not think institutions habitually or automatically pay APC’s.  It could be a policy of the institution , but it is not a policy of all institutions (at least not in North America).  I suspect this very much depends on the funding source of the research project, and how this is managed by institutions.


text:
How realistic it is to change to a different field of mathematics after PhD?
Once I was told that in mathematics, after one gets a PhD, it is very hard to change one's field of specialization (within maths). Is this true? What are the reasons? How common are counterexamples?
In your answers please also specify what country are you talking about, if you believe it matters.

You need someone who is prepared to invest some of his time and reputation into helping you into that new field. If you have a common goal (i.e. funded project) and/or something to give in return ...

It depends on what field you wish to change to. Could you kindly state or list out the field(s) you have in mind?

@ÉbeIsaac: I do not want to be too specific. Let me tell you one example from the past which is quite exceptional however. A. Grothendieck started in functional analysis and then switched to abstract algebraic geometry which is very different field. Are there analogous examples today?

Oh. So by changing specialization, you mean changing fields within Math, not across other fields in STEM, right?

@ÉbeIsaac: yes.

Here is one example that comes to mind.

I think it's quite misleading to hold up examples of very talented mathematicians or mathematicians from the distant past.  The answer depends heavily on the field you want to switch into, hold closely related it is to the field you wrote your dissertation in, and how talented and hard-working you are.
In the most classical, long-established subfields of mathematics, there is a large amount of background one needs to learn to be able to do significant, original research.  To take the worst example I know, a graduate student who wants to work in the general area of the Langlands program needs about 18 months to 2 years of dedicated study after their second year graduate courses to get to the point where they can tackle some problem of interest to the research community, and this is with an advisor to guide their study and steer them away from pitfalls that would result from having an incomplete knowledge of the field.  (In particular, this means the graduate student likely still has some blind spots in their knowledge that would greatly slow down their research if they didn't have an advisor.)
A graduate student doesn't only have the advantage of an advisor; he or she also has a good deal more time.  Most postdocs and almost all professors have more teaching responsibilities than graduate students, and professors also have service responsibilities which increase as one gets older.  Furthermore, one also has to do enough research to write somewhere between one and two reasonably significant papers a year (depending on subfield) in order to be competitive for jobs that allow time for research and eventually to earn tenure in such a job.  If one wants to switch into a new field, then one presumably has to do this research in their old field while learning the new field.
If someone in representation theory or algebraic geometry or other parts of number theory wants to switch to working on Langlands, then he or she needs to learn the material in one second year graduate course (because they already studied the other two or three that a complete beginner needs) and another 18 months of specialized study.  It's true that some patterns of thought will be familiar, even if the specific ideas are different, so one is going to learn somewhat faster when one learns their second field, but moving into a new field still requires at least a year of dedicated study unless someone is an unusually fast learner or extraordinarily hard working.  Most people don't have the time and energy to fit an extra year of work above their other duties within any reasonable timeframe.  Fifty years ago, one could have given up a couple years of paper-writing to accomplish the switch, but someone trying that today would never get another job that allows significant time for research in today's far more competitive job market.
Most areas of research don't require as much background as Langlands, but unless one is moving into an essentially brand new field requiring minimal background, switching fields requires a substantial amount of time that one simply rarely has after obtaining a PhD.
Lack of an advisor can be an issue, but it is less likely to be one than lack of time.  Many fields do have a significant amount of "folklore" that is well-known to experts but not clearly stated in print anywhere.  These are usually ideas that are too advanced and specialized to appear in a graduate textbook, but at the same time too easy to be the subject of a research paper.  At some point this folklore is used to establish more significant results in a paper, but since "everyone" knows it, it might not be explained very clearly or be easily found by someone who needs it for some other purpose.  However, most fields have experts who are quite friendly and willing to explain the necessary folklore to new entrants to the field, and, at worst, one does things in a clumsy way in his or her first papers in a new field and has some folklore pointed out by a referee.  If one appears talented and capable, then it is not so hard to get some help.
Researchers in countries not connected to the international mathematical community (such as in Africa) generally face much more significant problems with having access to experts than people trying to switch fields.
Is it possible?  Yes, but it's very hard.

Good answer. Just curious, what do you consider to be "second year graduate courses"?

"classical, long-established subfields of mathematics" is a big caveat. In applied math, can be simpler to move between subfields, especially if there is some overlap in methods - e.g. maybe mechanics vs biology, but still numerical PDEs at the core. A bigger fraction of the needed knowledge in applied math is "domain knowledge" where a good advisor can guide a technically adept postdoc through the first project, and where the postdoc can then pick up the domain knowledge on the fly.

@AlexMathers - in this case, it would be Algebraic Geometry, Algebraic Number Theory, Representation Theory, and Complex and Harmonic Analysis, all at a level assuming first year graduate courses covering a wide spectrum of Analysis, Algebra, and Geometry.

Plenty of people change fields, and it is probably easier in math than in other disciplines, since we don't need any equipment. And for most people, the transition is very natural rather than forced.
Assuming that you were interested in the topic of your PhD thesis, when your interest changes gradually, so will the problems that you're interested in. But since many problems in modern mathematics actually require some training to even understand, the problems you're interested in are probably going to be in topics adjacent to your PhD thesis. And in this way, you can shift to various problems.
If you think that you're interested in a topic that is completely unrelated to your PhD thesis, be wary, because it should be really hard to judge whether a problem is interesting or not. It's very unusual to be interested in a problem without knowing any of the current techniques of the field, and you should remember that many of the cranks also approach problems this way. This being said, if you're able to find a mentor in this new field who is willing to work with you on a problem, then you might be able to overcome this difficulty.

There are many doctorates who have done their PhD in one specialization and moved their work to another. Receiving a PhD in a domain of specialization doesn't mean that they are confined to it. Mathematics is no different in this aspect.
Some of the Math professors I know did change fields and worked quite successfully. Mathematicians who work on widely applicable fields, such as statistics, computational mathematical modelling, linear and non-linear optimization methods, are considered to be versatile. They change fields and can even move across to nearly any other fields in STEM to apply their expertise.
If you are specific about counterexamples, here are a few:

Jean-Michel Morel: PhD in partial differential equations; became a specialist in image processing
Michael Atiyah: PhD in algebraic geometry, then moved on to index theory in differential geometry, then to Guage theory, a part of field theory
C.T.C. Wall: PhD in cobordism theory in algebraic topology; a co-founder of the surgery theory in geometric topology
Robert Langlands: PhD focussed on the analytical theory of semigroups, but is now known for representation theory and automorphic forms
Ben J. Green: PhD in combinatorics, but also an expert in number theory
Terence Tao: PhD in harmonics analysis, but is also known for partial differential equations, compressed sensing and analytic number theory, and several types of combinatorics

So, how realistic is it to switch fields in Mathematics?
It is very realistic. Most of the famous mathematicians (as in the list above) have done it and and there are evidence stating so many typical mathematicians current generation continue to do so successfully.

It seems to me that a variant of your argument can be used to show that it is very realistic to receive a Fields Medal.

@CarstenS. :-) I see that my list is pretty confined to famous mathematicians. They were the first to appear on a shallow search. I just wanted to prove that it is possible. Besides, I found many people who did change fields but thought of giving a more verifiable set of examples.

@djechlin Thank you for the suggestion; I've made the necessary edit.

[EDIT] Just saw the comment on changing within maths. So yes, new discoveries are often made by linking apparently foreing, or weakly connected, areas. Think for instance about the proof of the Fermat conjecture by Andrew Wiles. I'l  add other examples later.
The specialization you invest on in a PhD IS NOT you. A (well-chosen) PhD is a unique chance in life to focus on a topic for 3+ years, and what you learn can be deployed in many other domains.
On a general side, mathematics has become a tool for selection. And doing great in maths does not mean you cannot do something else. Mathematics stories abound about great mathematicians who hesitated between two paths before a PhD, for instance with Greek or Latin, when those where selection tools (a century ago). Mathematics is a (if not THE) common language of science.
On the local side, it also  depends which the side of mathematics you are on, and your power of conviction with respect to the new field you want to play on. Optimization, functional analysis, combinatorics, logics, arithmetics, even topology can lead to a number of topics: data analysis, bioinformatics, economics.
I am a not a fully trained mathematician with electrical engineering background. My personal path was on pure arithmetics (Diophantine equations) and applied data compression. I switched to harmonic analysis (wavelets). I now apply what I learned (I mean the methodology) in data processing: chemistry, biotechnologies, engine management, even real-time simulation. Most of what I use comes from my shallow math background
Mathematical reasoning is a great tool.

I usually tell people something which is almost opposite (usually in the context of having an advisor who is inexpert in what the student wants to research): you can change your research area after you get your PhD, and this is fairly common.
Here are some points to keep in mind:

it's very common to work on other types of problems after you finish your PhD
often problems you work on (and this is true of most good problems) are related to other areas, so you may be naturally led to other areas from your present work.  also most areas are closely connected to many other areas.
some fields are easier to get into than others (both in an absolute sense, and also depending where you are now)
you haven't specified what you consider to be "fields" (they could be defined quite broadly or narrowly)
many problems lie at the intersection of many fields, so possibly you could do something very similar and be considered in a different field.
a lot of people in area say they do representation theory, some say they do number theory, and some aren't sure.
at certain stages of your career, you have less time (say in a given semester) to spend learning new mathematics.  but also at certain stages of your career you have less pressure to produce theorems.
moving to different places/talking to different people can lead naturally to working on different problems
it's possible to dabble in different fields, or work in multiple fields at once

In my experience, most mathematicians enjoy learning new things and will end up working on different things throughout their career.  Certainly the majority do not make a huge field shift (e.g., PDEs to geometric representation theory), but I think many (possibly a majority) of us shift quite a bit from our thesis to the point where it feels like we're doing a different kind of mathematics.  Often this is gradual, but could be sudden, and we may float back and forth between different areas.  I think most of the faculty at my department (at least among those whose research I'm fairly familiar with) have at least done some work out of their "comfort zones" (e.g., algebraic number theory to analytic number theory, Riemannian geometry to combinatorial probability, etc.)
In summary, I think it's not unrealistic to change fields, particularly if that's what you want to do.  Personally, I have been a number theorist since grad school, but in the 12 years since my PhD have enjoyed (and continue to) working on other things in combinatorics, harmonic analysis, representation theory, hyperbolic geometry, finite group theory, etc as well--I just choose to stay a number theorist because I want to.  Just be aware that (1) some areas may be hard for you to "break into," particularly without a mentor/collaborator, and (2) it may take some time to learn the appropriate things to transition.

An opening note, I am an undergraduate student, working towards becoming a research mathematician, so perhaps I am not qualified and experience enough to answer this question, but here goes

I do believe most research mathematicians have multiple areas interests among a few particular fields. Furthermore there often aren't well-defined boundaries between different fields of mathematics, if there were, well mathematics wouldn't be where it is today.
Obtaining a PhD is more an entrance to the world of mathematical research I would say than defining the type of mathematician you want to be. Though more often than not the topics PhD students would pick for their thesis would be closely related to the areas of mathematics they find interesting.
It doesn't mean that because you obtained a PhD in say Algebraic Topology, you are destined to be a Topologist for the rest of your life.
An example I can give, is that to study Algebraic Geometry (let alone write a thesis on it), one needs to have a good understanding of Analysis, Abstract Algebra, Commutative Algebra, Algebraic Topology and a bit of Differential Geometry. So I don't see why a mathematician who obtained a PhD in Algebraic Geometry couldn't also do research in Algebraic Topology, Differential Geometry or even in Algebraic Number Theory.
Different fields of mathematics are not as separated as you may think, apart from research in some of the foundational stuff I would say (Logic, Category Theory etc.)


text:
Are there inexpensive tools to monitor student iPad’s?
I am a teaching assistant for a class in which students use tablet computers to advance their projects. Yet, sometimes, we need their attention and it can be difficult for them to focus on what I tell them with such distracting tools in hand.
I am looking for a way to monitor student iPads from a teacher's iPad or computer (restrict web browsing, being able to blank the screen and etc.). Any ideas that are relatively cheap? I know similar software exists for computers.

Why do you want to be able to do this?

Similar software exists for computers that you own and control.

To some extent, I think you may be asking the wrong question. The students you are talking about grown up adults, fully capable of making choices and understanding the consequences. I wonder if your actual question is something like:

What are effective ways to deal with misuse of mobile devices in class?

You'll notice there are quite a few answers on this question, which may solve you real practical problem, yet none of them involve monitoring the students’ devices or anything else. I suggest that you address your problem directly:

tell the students your expectations,
set up rules that will govern the use of electronic devices,
enforce the rules when you are aware of a violation.

Frankly, the fact that a student would be using an iPad for purposes other than you had planned, if it doesn't prevent him or the others from learning, is not a bad thing. You can't think of everything, and surely some of the students will come up with creative yet constructive ways to use the device.

I have taught a few courses so far and we have a few policies in place for tablets/mobile phones/laptops. Very few students actually follow all the directives and frankly, we don't care as long as it doesn't disturb the class and in my experience it never has.


text:
Publishing paper as a PhD student without advisor's name
I'm a Computer Science PhD student in a US university. Recently, I worked on a problem and wrote a paper. When I asked my advisor to submit the paper to a good journal (such as IEEE Trans. on Computers), he became upset with me and forced me to submit the paper in a very poor quality open access journal. I need good publications to get a faculty position after PhD. Now I'm thinking to work on some other areas on computer science simultaneously with my PhD dissertation so that I can publish my work in a good journal without including my advisor's name. Can I publish my own work (not my dissertation work) as a PhD student without including my advisor's name?

The question has been edited into good shape, so I'm clearing the flags on it… Marcella, I think it's a good question to keep on the site, as it is a legitimate PhD-level question, so I'll not act on your deletion request.

I think there are actually two questions here. Firstly, the question you explicitly asked:

Can I publish my own work(not my dissertation work) as a PhD student without including my advisor's name ?

Yes, of course you can. Assuming it will be of high quality, it will be accepted. That being said, it is somewhat unlikely that you will be able to generate first-class research completely on your own, without a professor or at least a more senior student or postdoc to help you get started. A problem might be that if you decide to submit to a conference, your advisor may refuse to pay for your conference trip. However, from your previous posts I understand that you work in a field where publications happen mainly through journals, so presumably that is not a big issue.
However, I think you also have a second question that you did not explicitly ask:
Will publishing alone, behind the back of my advisor, help me get a faculty position? (this is assuming that you are indeed able to get some good publications accepted without help)
Not at all. You will need a glowing reference letter from your advisor to have a shot at any reasonable tenure track. Communicating explicitly or implicitly that you decided that your advisor was an "idiot" and hence took matters into your own hands will not in any way reflect positively on you in a hiring process. Hiring committees, by and large, tend to be risk-averse, and your story has a big flashing warning light all over it. What you will need to do to get out of this is transfer, to a different professor or to a different programme.

I don't really see how he would not 'like your work get published in a good journal'. It seems to me that there has to be some part of the story missing. Anyway, even if your professor likes you, I still strongly suggest transferring, because I still doubt that you will be able to get Transactions level research going on your own.

I doubt that any PhD-level scientist in the United States is "too stupid to understand your research," as you claim. Furthermore, you don't have anything other than your own beliefs that the work that you're doing is of sufficient quality for a high-impact journal like IEEE Transactions. Why do you believe the results are significant enough for that?
Furthermore, have you actually made an attempt to include your research advisor as part of your active research planning process, or have you decided he can't help you? Again, as you said, he's a senior member of the department, which means he probably has many more years of experience as a researcher than you do.
Moreover, trying to do multiple projects at once will lengthen your stay relative to focusing on one stream of research. Therefore, I would strongly recommend that you first try to mend the relationship with your current advisor before trying to jump into a course of action that will in the long run likely cause you more harm than good.
Now, all that said, if you can't switch advisors, then you have to deal with the one you have. That means, for now, trying to deal with the situation as it currently stands. For instance, you could ask why the paper you wrote couldn't be submitted to the better journals you wanted, and what you would need to do so that the next paper can be submitted. Get this in writing. Then, this will give you additional ammunition, particularly if what he demand is unreasonable. And with respect to the situation of asking other researchers what they think of the quality of the paper: next time around, when the paper is ready to go out, ask your advisor if you can send it out to some of his colleagues in the field as well as your sources, and solicit their opinion about where it should be published.
Another concern here: where is your thesis committee in all of this? If your work is of sufficient quality to merit publication in better journals than the one you're submitting to, then they may be able to get your advisor to cooperate with such a strategy.

It sounds like your advisor is not stupid—he's indifferent to your work, which may be even worse. As for your thesis committee, they need not be actively interested in your research per se. They should be interested in your development as a scientist. If that's not the case, and you can't get them to talk to you about even professional development, then you very well may need to find yourself a new advisor (even if this unfortunately means starting over at a new school).

Yes, it is absolutes fine. You can publish your research independently. I my self have such an experience. When it comes to individual opinion or perspective articles, sometimes this may contradict your advisor's viewpoint (in my case, it did and he turned down my paper from submission). But I took a chance in submitting and to all our surprise the paper has been cited well. After all, only change is permanent.