text:
My professor skipped me on Christmas bonus payment
I am a fourth-year data science Ph.D. student and my professor always tends to send bonus payment at the end of November for all of his Ph.D. students.
This year, all of my teammates got the bonus, even the newly admitted students (I asked them indirectly). Some of my colleagues' behavior is so frustrating as they keep talking about the issue.
I don't know if he decided not to pay me intentionally or he just forgot me. My performance is considered excellent and he is satisfied with my publications. Should I send him an email and ask for the bonus?
Update: I got the bonus. The professor forgot to send me an email that I will get it.  I just got them in my bank account without any emails or notices... I also asked to meet my professor yesterday and today we meet and discussed my thesis table in general. He is more than satisfied with my work and performance. I did not ask or open the topic of the bonus.

"Some of my colleague's behavior is so frustrating as they keep talking about the issue" - what does your colleagues' behaviour have to do with it?

talk to him face to face - btw if you move to industry with a DS-Phd you might get twice your professor's salary. so i would care too much ;-)

Damn you get bonus payments?

You should NOT "ask for the bonus" but you could as WHY he did not pay you the bonus.  It is quite possible that he simply overlooked you- or he might have problems with your work or your behavior that you need to know about.

In general, you should never expect a bonus.  They happen or they don't.  In your case, I'd suggest another tack; the next time you are talking to your advisor, ask him if there were bonuses this year.  You should get an answer to your question from that.  If not, it provides a path to further questions

@Flydog57 This is extremely dependent on context and culture. In many cases bonuses are part of a collective labor agreement or were negotiated during hiring as trade-off for a lower salary. In such cases, a certain level of performance entitles you to a bonus, and the professional thing to do is to claim it.

The last part of the last sentence is incomprehensible (missing word?). Can you fix it?

@Araucaria-Nothereanymore. I just updated the question

I think you need a more serious conversation with your advisor. You need to know if he is unhappy with your performance and if there are things you need to do to improve it. If the answer is no, then you can bring up that you didn't get a bonus. Perhaps it was a clerical issue or an issue in the delivery. But if you are not meeting expectations it would be a time for reflection.
But asking about your performance rather than your bonus would show some sense of seriousness about your work.

It is also a good move as the advisor being very unsatisfied with the performance of OP is potentially a much bigger issue than bonus payment (yes, I like money, too, but still).

@Greg, and, of course, the professor might be mistaken and have misconceptions that should be cleared up.

I think asking about the bonus as a side question would be fine, just as long as it's not taken as the focus of the meeting. It may just be a clerical error that needs to be fixed and not bringing it up may not fix the error.

I would definitely have a meeting with your advisor to weave this into the discussion.  Many years ago (1974) in graduate school I received a poor grade on a test, lower than other classmates.  Our marked-up exams were returned to us and a friend and I compared our marked-up exams; mine had fewer negative comments than hers.  I met with the professor, took in my marked-up exam, and asked about the grade.  Turns out she had mis-recorded the grade (an honest mistake), apologized profusely, and change my grade.

This is most certainly a mistake. I doubt that you could possibly go from "excellent performance" to being the only one not receiving a bonus in just one year. And if somehow you managed to mess up this severely, then there is no way your advisor did not communicate this clearly to you several times (There might even be legal implications in this case). So no need to worry.
Talk to your advisor or send an informal e-mail, and simply state that you did not receive the bonus and kindly ask him to check if there was any error in the processing. In contrast to what other answers suggest, there is no need to completely question your self-assessment of your performance.

Agree with the last sentence, but I would not be unnecessarily blase about the approach. Simply stating that you didn't get a bonus in a casual email only works if you are absolutely 100% sure that it was a clerical error, and you can't be 100% sure until you've asked.

@MadPhysicist You are technically right, but my point is that OP can be certain (in a more colloqial sense) that this is indeed a clerical error. OP knows he is not underperforming compared to his peers, so no need to overcomplicate things.


text:
Citation - Collection of images for machine learning
I posted this question yesterday which leads to my current question.
When I use a collection of images, which are not my own creation, to generate classifiers that an object-detection algorithm uses, how do I need to cite them?
The images are never used directly in the final algorithm, but the features in the cascade classifier that have been extracted from them. There are likely hundred(s) of images necessary to achieve a well working object-detection.
The algorithm is part of larger software project and I will need to write a report and hold a presentation about my research.

Let's look at what some popular image databases say:

The website for the CIFAR image databases, which are widely used in machine learning, ask that you cite them.

This tech report (Chapter 3) describes the dataset and the methodology followed when collecting it in much greater detail. Please cite it if you intend to use this dataset.
Learning Multiple Layers of Features from Tiny Images, Alex Krizhevsky, 2009.

Another often used database, the MNIST handwritten digit database, does not contain citation information, but a search on Google Scholar shows over 450 papers citing them.

It sounds like these features are an important point of your work and are extracted from training on the images. You should definitely cite the database for in your work. You should also cite them in the future if you are just using these databases to evaluate a technique (like object or hand writing recognition).
There's little harm to be liberal with citations.

This is certainly true, but in your examples it is a database and basically one source. In my case all of them could be from different sources. That is why I was unsure how I would cite them. Writing hundreds of links in my report does not seem to be the right way as well.

@John I misunderstood. I didn't realize you compiled your own database. There's some ML work on systems that independently fetch images or videos from online to teach itself. I'm not too familiar with that area, but it might be similar enough that you can copy what they do.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Taking out a loan to pursue a degree in theoretical physics in the EU. Bad idea?
How common is it for students to take a loan to pursue a theoretical physics degree in Europe, as a non-EU foreigner.
Theoretical physics and mathematics students are advised not to take a loan as there are very few jobs in both the fields. I was admitted to a Masters Theoretical Physics (Quantum fields and Strings) program at Uppsala. So far I am still looking for a scholarship.
Is taking out a loan to pursue a degree as non-EU citizen in one of these two fields always a bad idea?

What country are you from / want to work in after?

Are you Swedish? It's one thing to get a loan from CSN to cover living expenses (which most Swedish students do), and quite another to take out a loan to pay hefty tuition rates.

I am from India. I want to work in Europe after.

If the program is free for nationals, it's free also for other EU citizens, but not necessarily for non-EU citizens. How much is the tuition? Are you eligible for subsidized loans in Sweden or in your home-country?

"Theoretical physics and mathematics students are advised not to take a loan as there are very few jobs in both the fields." Hmm? Who is given that kind of advice? And where did they get the idea that most students of theoretical physics or mathematics are supposed to work within these fields later on?

There are three things the cost of tuition means here, and they give you information about whether or not taking out the loan for a theoretical Master's degree a good idea.

It is expensive to train someone in this work, and someone has to pay for the training. The way that academia has developed, it is usually the sponsors of later research who pay (government, universities, private foundations). (In contrast, professional degrees are often paid for by individuals themselves, although it varies by country and profession.)
Financially, unless you are independently wealthy, you need to check how easily you can pay back this money after you graduate.

I'd suggest researching the pay levels of various careers that you can pursue with that Masters degree. If you want to immediately work in an industry that pays well (e.g. designing infrastructure for the advent of quantum computing??? at a government laboratory???), and grads from that program have a reasonable shot, then it is not unreasonable to take a loan.
However, if most related jobs do not pay well or require a Ph.D., then you are unlikely to get your money back (soon) by working in the field. You might then be forced to work in, say, software to pay the bills, if your programming skills are transferable enough.
This recent question seems to find it is rare for academic positions to be offered to Masters graduates in theoretical physics.

The cost of the program to you (that is, the absence of a scholarship) may be a signal about where you would rank.

Funding is certainly a signal for doctoral programs, in my (U.S.) experience. I had several doctoral acceptances where I was told I wouldn't be funded in my first year, but that I could probably find a teaching position; I was one of the more borderline candidates they decided to accept, apparently, and when funding is limited schools tend to invest in the strongest students first, to attract them to the school and make sure that they have the best chance of success. This also told me I might have trouble getting professors' help at those schools, because their time is a limited resource, as well.
If this is true in your case (i.e. others have funding for the same program, and thus you have information about how you compare), then use the information to further inform your actions. It might mean you must be at the very top of your Masters program to have a strong shot at becoming a Ph.D. student. It might also mean that you should in some way improve your application to be more competitive for scholarships or funded programs in the future.

While this is by no means a complete answer, here is one thing that you have to think about: What happens if you are not able to finish your studies or get a job after your graduation? And how likely is this possibility? Any loan that you take would likely be easily paid back if you get a job in Sweden/western Europe (I think this based on experience from Denmark where it would be possible to pay back such a loan even on a less-than-average salary). However, what happens if you are forced to go back to India? I would think that would make the loan very hard to pay back. What happens then? Is that a risk you are willing to take? I'm not saying you shouldn't do it but I am saying that you should be prepared for the worst and know that you will not be completely screwed if that happens.
Lately, Sweden has taken quite a hard approach on immigrants and I am not sure how that would affect you. Across the bridge in Denmark, recent Danish graduates from outside the EU can get a work visa of some sorts relatively easily. Is this the case in Sweden? Would you be able to get a work visa in Sweden/western Europe in case you fail to finish your degree for whatever reason?

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

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


text:
How do disabled computer scientists publish?
Given that computer scientists publish in conferences, which typically require that presenters be present, how do computer scientists who are disabled, have broken legs due to a car accident, or have any similar travel restrictions, publish?

What you seem to be asking is "how do people with mobility impairments travel?". That... is perhaps a tad insulting, and probably off topic here IMHO.

@Flyto That may be the case, if that actually were their question. Stack Exchange asks for good faith in its terms and good faith doesn't mean reading between the lines for a bad faith assumption. Their question at its core focuses on publishing when a person has problematic travel restrictions that don't amount to laziness or character flaw, but rather a condition that may require accommodation by law. They're asking what that process or accommodation may look like in the context of academia. It also appears that relevant responses have presented themselves. It's on topic.

SetFlag(enabled,true);  Life hacks!

I think this question could be made more useful by getting more specific. As it is currently it is a bit unclear which kind of travel restrictions specifically are meant. You can see that also with the answers which are very general.

I'd tackle a tangent issue, but one to which I was a witness personally.
Remember Eyjafjallajökull?
I personally know someone, who was going to present their work at a conference, but could not travel because of air travel shutdown.
They made a video presentation, basically their slides with their conference talk voice-over. It was shown at the event.
I would guess, that other inabilities to visit the conference (that do not result in paper being pulled), such as inability to obtain a visa or disability, would be handled in a similar manner.
Notice that it is typically required that one of the authors presents the paper, so if you have many authors, e.g. your advisor is on the paper and you break a leg, the advisor could present it even without triggering the exception rule.
Of course, if you are a sole author, or the inability to travel applies to all authors, or if you insist to present the paper yourself, but cannot travel, above issues arise.

I will never forget how one of my professors announced he would have an assistant replace him in the next week's lecture due to himself being at a conference – but added that the former statement only held true “modulo volcano”...

I ended up presenting at the first conference I ever attended because my supervisor was too ill to go.  I watched the first session, used the second session to adjust my presentation based on what I'd seen, and then presented in the third session of day one.  Nerve wracking doesn't quite cover it.

Equality of access for disabled people is a legal requirement for public services such as transport and buildings in many jurisdictions, particularly in the EU and North America. There are many disabled academics and researchers who teach, research and publish.
One only has to look at examples like the late Stephen Hawking to see how it is possible.

Books, TV, Conferences - SH did them all and better than some with all limbs functioning...

I don't think SH is a good example here. He was so famous, that I wouldn't be surprised that conference organizers and others made special accomodation for him and to make sure he felt welcome.

Off-topic, but I just realized that Sherlock Holmes and Stephen Hawking have the same initials (since the comments confused me ever so slightly). What a strange and delightful coincidence.

In many cases, maybe all, it should be possible to work with the program committee to find a solution. If they have sufficient prior notice something can usually be worked out. Possibilities include those named in other answers here (video, ...), but also having a third party present the work.
In a last minute situation it may be hard to do anything but have an announcement at the conference that the author(s) couldn't attend because of ... The paper would still be part of the conference proceedings and so is still an official "publication". The only thing not included would be the actual presentation of it.
For those with long standing issues (Hawking) who publish regularly, the committees will know how to make something work.
But, contact the committee in all such cases.
I should note that it isn't the talk at the conference that makes it a publication (invited talks excepted). It is the paper. There are many disabilities that make it impossible to actually give a talk, including the inability to speak at all.

Publishing and attending conferences are related, yet independent things. A conference paper with multiple authors is generally presented by a single person. So even if I was the lead author of a paper, and a co-author of mine held the talk, I can consider the paper being published.
I guess, not presenting your own papers at a conference is nothing unusual. A colleague of mine fell ill during the conference, so our boss had to present her paper, as she wasn't fit to present it herself.
On other occasions, only a select few of our group attended a conference and presented the contributions of our group.

Note that policies about presentations vary; many conferences (at least in my field) would not be happy with "only a select few of our group attended a conference and presented the contributions of our group", assuming the presenters were not authors on some of the papers, unless there was a "good" reason none of the authors could attend (usually visa denial, last-minute emergency, etc). Of course exceptions can always be made, but one should always check before assuming.

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


text:
How to deal with an adviser that wants to force you to get his desired results?
I'm doing research for my PhD thesis based on a sensitive subject related to biomedical applications. In fact, our workflow is:

Build a computational model
Verify the developed computational model based on tests and data available in the literature
Apply this developed and verified model to some other data to measure an important parameter for clinicians that people's life will depend on that.
Investigate the result of this application on that data as well as its outcome and relevance for clinicians.

My problem is the fourth stage in this workflow. First of all, nobody ever did the fourth stage in this workflow for that particular application before. There are some similar models in the literature that tried to investigate the outcome of applying a similar model for that application but their conclusions are so general and vague where a definite conclusion cannot be drawn. When we apply that developed and verified model to that data, it produces some results which may look counter-intuitive at the first place, but there are a few papers in the literature that actually confirm similar observations. These results are not bad but kinda look like a negative result. We are confident in our results because this model is validated and verified based on several independent cases.
Unfortunately, in my PhD adviser's eyes, these results are worthless cause they are not desirable and he thinks nobody will buy this results if our conclusion is something counter-intuitive (well counter-intuitive based on his thoughts at least...). Every week in our group meetings, he reminds me that these results are worthless and I should change the developed model in a certain way. He doesn't give me direction regarding what way I should change the model, but it is important that we get intuitive results right now.
I'm feeling like he is forcing me to search for his desired results. It is possible for me to do that but I believe that's cheating or could be called hiding the truth. My question: Should I change my model to get his desirable results? if no, what's the proper way to convince him that this counter-intuitive results maybe is the truth and we should live with them?

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

The meaning of unexpected results
It is important to be skeptical about your computational approach. However, at the same time, computational approaches are (almost) completely worthless if we just ignore them when results are unexpected (unless you already have dominant evidence that the result is not only unexpected but also simply wrong). An exception would be if your approach is in the area of generative models, where a parsimonious model is suggestive of an underlying mechanism, which is not the area of your model: you are trying to do prediction for an unknown case (extrapolation).
The art is in determining whether your initial model of the world (i.e., expectation) is wrong or if your computational model is wrong.
In a long discussion in chat, I think we came to a conclusion that in your specific case, it may be that this is an issue of extrapolation to a condition where you do not have truly comparable training data.
How to stop worrying and learn to love the model
If you want to convince your advisor, colleagues, peer reviewers, or yourself that your model should be trusted, your next steps are to test the conditions that lead to your result.
Do all the appropriate tests for model convergence in the original training. Check for input parameters that are outside the range in the training set. Use graphical representations of your model to show how input are mapping to outputs. Remove or scale variables to test the sensitivity of your model to those changes. And additionally, as your advisor suggests, figure out what it takes to make your model fit the expected result. All of these approaches will help you find if something is wrong in the model or support you if something is wrong in the prior expectations.

Any computational model which tries to model a disease scenario has flaws, since all models try to reduce an extremely complex problem to a simple one as Buffy pointed out in their answer.
Furthermore, your question makes me think that you are working in/with a computational/bioinformatics group. If the results that you present are counter-intuitive, I must side with your advisor on the statement that a study which presents counter-intuitive results will not be well received. Any counter-intuitive results derived via computational models will need to undergo vigorous hypothesis testing via experimental methods to be well accepted by the community.
If you still want to present such findings, you can

Avoid any mention of causal links.

You can present the results as a secondary finding while comparing your model to other such models described in literature.

You can also break up the bigger finding into smaller parts which may be well received by themselves, but not together (Present them independently).

Coming to the part about

measure an important parameter for clinicians that people's life will depend on that
Investigate the result of this application on that data as well as its
outcome and relevance for clinicians.

Results from single academic studies are rarely used as a backdrop for larger clinical applications. Any academic finding however grand they may be, will undergo control analysis in multiple rounds of replication studies, and then it will be presented as part of a larger landmark review article. Results presented in such a context may end up reaching the desk of a clinician. Even then, they will think twice before applying those results towards their patients.
Although it is great to think about the ethical context of studies in basic research, I would strongly advice you to think about yourself in the grander schema academic research before you associate a high weightage towards such concerns.

"If the results that you get from the validation are counter-intuitive" NO. In fact, validation completely makes sense and its results are intuitive. The part which is not intuitive is that when we apply this validated model to solve another related problem and then it starts to show some counter-intuitive results but not always. We have no priori data or assumption about that latest problem but just our logic says we should get for example results as X but our model for some cases shows X but for some other cases show Y which is not intuitive.

I think this answer is so far best of the bunch due to its mention of avoiding presumption of causation. But you seem to be arguing about how to best use intuition to lead research and publication. This is not necessarily good. See the paper by Ioannidis. Intuition is a source of bias and bad for science ultimately.

I guess I'm going to have to support your advisor here. Your characterization seems a bit odd for a situation that wants to make clinical recommendations where people's health or safety may be endangered by bad advice.
You seem to want to imply that your model is a substitute for reality, and even is superior to reality since it has been "validated". But in reality, no model is perfect. No model perfectly captures reality. It is an abstraction from reality of course and makes some simplifying assumptions. Models are simple and reality is extremely messy.
A model that "seems" to predict reality is useful, of course, though it may not do a good job in some cases - edge cases in particular. But perhaps "his desirable" results, simply means "sufficiently matches reality".
The validation of your model is not proof that it gives good advice in all necessary situations. If you have any evidence that it sometimes fails, then it would be extremely unwise, even unethical, to apply it as is in clinical situations - at least without other evidence for the suggested regimen.
A model with little consequence for human health and safety can be somewhat flawed and still useful. But I'm worried about this situation. Perhaps all your advisor is saying is that you can, and should, do better. It seems to me, at least, to be wise advice.
Again, a model that shows any evidence of failure in some situations is suspect. If the application of the model is critical, then even minor evidence can be dangerous.

Well, in some sense yes, it's about that model in some situations produce a counter-intuitive result that is hard to understand it is the reality or it's just because of error associated with the model. This counter-intuitive result has some grounds in the literature but the problem is: nobody studied it quantitatively with numbers to judge this case is bad and this case is good. I can change my model to get perfectly intuitive results but I think because of "endangering people's life", it's not ethical.

Apart from that, I'm wondering which part seems odd? Is it possible to elaborate it a bit more?

You seem to want to suggest that your model is more "valid" than reality. You don't want "intuitive" results, you want results that match reality in all necessary cases.

I'm a bit confused... "You seem to want to suggest that your model is more "valid" than reality." no, my model has its well known errors, limitations, deficiencies, etc. but that's acceptable in the context that I'm doing research, so we don't want to say we have something that is more strong than reality. "You don't want "intuitive" results, you want results that match reality in all necessary cases." In reality, based on tons of available literature in this field, the evidences match better to the prediction of my model in comparison to my adviser's hypothesis but he doesn't want to believe.

Why he doesn't want to believe? Well, cause he's not an expert in this field. That is it. His primary research before I join his research lab was completely different research topic and this topic is started when I started my PhD.


text:
Are you expected to bring poster presentations to academic conferences?
BACKGROUND
I am attending an academic (engineering) conference where I am schedule to speak for my paper which was accepted, using MS PowerPoint/videos to assist my talk.  This is my first conference.  Currently I'm only bringing nice clothes and my lap top and the basics.  Due to lack of money, I'm only arriving on the day I'm scheduled to speak, then leaving immediately (cheapest roundtrip available).
QUESTION
Am I expected to bring a poster presentation to the conference?  Or is it typical to only give a talk (with a powerpoint, etc)?  I've checked the website and it says nothing about posters - but I don't want to be embarrassed and not have one.  I tried calling but couldn't reach an informed person.  Am I expected to be at the conference the entire time, or just for my talk?

I think there is slight misunderstandig of what paper, poster, presentation, speak, oral presentation, poster presentation actually means in academia. If any of my colleagues says "I'm having oral at " it causes youngsters to giggle but the old academic can't se why...

This might also be dependent on your field of study. I've never heard anyone use the phrase "I'm having oral at..." in almost 20 years.

Imagine everyone only came for their own talk -- who would be there to listen?

Usually if you are presenting a poster, it's because you

submit a poster abstract to a call for posters, and it is accepted, or
submit a paper, and you are informed that it is accepted for a poster presentation instead of a talk, or
are otherwise informed by the organizers to bring a poster.

If you don't fall in any of the categories above, then in my experience, you aren't presenting a poster.

Am I expected to be at the conference the entire time, or just for my talk?
Many people arrive late, skip sessions, and/or leave early.  However there are several reasons to minimise this:

You can pick up a lot from the other talks.  Not necessarily specifics but things to consider, that might be relevant to your own work.
If everyone only attended for their own talk, there'd be no audience.
Timing tends to slip, but if someone's missing you can end up speaking earlier than planned - if you try to cut it too fine you could make things tricky for youreself or the session chair (who you should consider your friend).
The break sessions could be called "networking sessions" by career-focussed optimists, i.e. good informal discussions happen there.

So as an absolute minimum you should be there in good time for the start of the session in which you're scheduled to speak.  You should also stick around for the whole session, which is likely to be a group of talks more or less related to what you do. Some conferences require you to upload your presentation onto their system before starting (to avoid fiddling with laptop cables every few minutes) so you need to allow for this, checking the instructions.

This is meant to address the extra question at the end.  It got rather long as I wrote it.

While ff524's answer covers the relevant cases here - and your letter (e-mail) of acceptance should clearly point to the kind of presentation you're supposed to give - if still in doubt, contact officials from the conference. If neither said e-mail or the web page of the conference tells precisely what you need to do (which is quite sad) get in contact with someone like a Conference Program Coordinator, a representative of the chairing committee, or your responsible session chair (if known yet) and kindly ask to provide this information.
If your paper abstract was accepted for a talk (oral presentation) you're most likely not required to bring a poster. On the other hand if presenting a poster some venues/conferences might chose to additionally do a Poster Preview that require the authors to prepare a very brief presentation (1..3 minutes, just three slides) along with the poster.

Your talk will usually be one in a block of four or five talks (a "session"); in my field (mathematics), it usually looks bad if you do not attend the rest of the talks in your session. As far as attending all the talks, it can be very mentally exhausting to attend and try to concentrate on every talk so in some ways it is wise to plan to attend the talks that might be interesting and skip the others.  However, if you are attending only one day of a weeklong conference, you should attend and make yourself seen throughout the day (especially if the conference is funding your attendance in any way).
If your are giving a talk and it is described as such, plan to show up with a powerpoint presentation. Unless a poster is explicitly mentioned, it will not be needed.

Seems like other answers have already covered the bit about the why you would want to attend other sessions that the one you give a talk on. I can add one more bit there, that is if you only are only there for your own talk it may give the impression that you do not consider other people's work worthy of your time.
Besides that, regarding the main question of bringing a poster or not: all conferences I have attended so far (about half a dozen) and conferences I have considered applying to considered poster and oral presentations as separate forms of presentation, which makes most sense to me.
So I'd say unless it is specified somewhere (letter/mail of acceptance, conference guidelines etc) that speakers are expected to have a poster presentation as well, I'd assume that you are not expected to bring a poster.
But of course, when in doubt, check with the organizaton committee or conference administration, that's what they are for.

I'd say that the one who attended for their own presentation only either thinks the others' work doesn't worth their time or are too poor to afford longer presence. Both options send them to others' blacklist either because of their arrogance or the risk of lousy lab equipment.

Am I expected to bring a poster presentation to the conference? Or is it typical to only give a talk (with a powerpoint, etc)?

It depends on the form of your presentation of your paper and the conference rules. I won't say that it applies for all conferences, but as far as I know (and was involved):

If you have oral presentation you are supposed to have you slides with you in form of .pdf, .ppt, .pps or any other form defined in conference rules. Sometimes you are expected/allowed to use your own laptop. Sometimes you are allowed to use only the PC provided by the organisers.
If you have poster presentation you are supposed to bring your poster with you on your expenses (you = they who paid the conference fee, tickets, etc.). It is recommended to bring one "big" poster to be displayed, several A4 versions and visit cards.

You will be informed about the mandatory details when your paper will be accepted. Some conferences can be attended with flash disk, clothes and wallet only without any discomfort. When returning from some conferences you will mutter "I should have taken all the stuff with me." I strongly recommend asking someone who attended the conference before for details...

Am I expected to be at the conference the entire time, or just for my talk?

It depends on you and on the one who you represent (your advisor, your faculty, university, employer).
You are expected to be there to present your work. Some conferences maintain blacklist and whitelist of organisations based on presenters attendance on their speeches/poster sessions.
Keep in mind that conferences are there to present your work (and proof it was presented is mandatory to get funds), to know what the other groups are doing and to be in contact with them. I think second and third shall not be neglected.
You wrote It is matter of lacking money. Who is lacking the money, you personally or your faculty? If you are lacking money, don't bother - the conference fee and living cost shall be covered by your faculty - you are representing them on regular business trip. If the faculty has limitted budget they will pay you at least one whole day at the conference so try to push as much as you can out of it. For you personally, obviously.


text:
How can I cite my dissertation in a paper that will be double-blind reviewed?
A chapter in my dissertation has not been published in an archival conference. I am writing a paper based on the chapter for a conference that does double-blind paper review.
The paper will include pretty much the entire chapter, which presents a method, and will perform additional analysis of the method. The analysis on its own, without the method, is not enough to merit a paper. In the interest of the full disclosure, I should cite my dissertation. How do I do that without revealing my identity?
Is citing my dissertation without name and institution, just the title, appropriate or not?
I know there were similar questions recently, but none asking about the dissertation. The dissertation is different because it is a publication, a literature search will return a hit, but does not count as one, and is considered OK to publish chapter from in conferences and journals. The field is Computer Science.

possible duplicate of How to make a paper completely anonymous for reviewers?

The difference from the previous question is that when you are extending the new publication from the old one, the delta between the two needs to larger. Your new one must have enough contributions to stand on its own. So, you can write the paper as if you were extending a third party's work. This is not the case with the dissertation chapter-based paper.

Oh, I see.  So you're concerned if you cite "afaust's dissertation" and submit your paper with no name, they will reject it saying "This whole thing just plagiarizes afaust's dissertation!"

@NateEldredge Exactly.

I may mussunderstand the situation, but have you considered to publish all the relevant part in your paper? I mean on the long run, even if you cite those details, they might be totally inaccessible to the readers if they are only in the paper. And the very same problem (your approach makes no sense without the details) may hurt the quality of your paper.

You are trying to cite unpublished material. The fact that you wrote it or it could compromise a blind review is secondary to the fact that it is not available to reference and so can not support your (new) paper.

The challenge here is seems to be to ensure that if the reviewers do stumble across your thesis, then the failure mode will be penetrating blinding rather than accusations of plagiarism.
It is my belief that with an "extract" paper like this, the thesis should be cited in any case.  In most cases, there will be some connection to other portions of the thesis that could motivate such a citation (e.g., a motivation or an application).  I also think that it is good to explicitly acknowledge the relationship to the thesis, e.g., "This manuscript is based on work also presented in [cite]", though the customs of your field may differ.
Then you can appropriately blind the citation to the thesis, e.g., "Ph.D. thesis, blinded for review."  This makes the relationship clear without violating blinding.  At that point, you are preserving blinding to the best of your ability, and while a reviewer can certainly try to penetrate blinding if they want, you certainly won't run into any problems with misunderstanding about plagiarism.

Your goal is to publish.  The conference apparently requires that review be double blind.  I do not see any reason why you should care if the reviewer figures out who you are; simply cite your own work in the normal way.  Then you will have complied with the conference's requirements because you have not explicitly identified yourself.
In my experience reviewers do not like incomplete citations.

I don't see how that addresses the concern expressed in the comments, namely that the paper can be perceived as a plagiarization of "someone else's" dissertation (because reviewers will not know that the paper author is the same as the dissertation author).

It seems to me that, if the paper is acceptable except for the plagiarism issue, a reviewer could reasonably recommend that it be accepted if and only if the author is afaust. I did essentially that once when I was "blindly" refereeing a paper whose content I had previously heard in a talk at a conference.

@AndreasBlass, that might qualify as an answer.


text:
Can we submit our research paper for review at two IEEE conferences simultaneously?
Can we send our research paper to two IEEE conference simultaneously, and then after acceptance, decide which conference proceedings to publish it in?

Related question: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7273/publishing-same-research-paper-on-a-national-conference-as-well-as-international - However, that question deals with whether one may publish a paper in two conferences, while this question deals with whether one may submit a paper for review to two conferences with the intent of withdrawing one later.

No.
It is considered unethical in the academic community to submit a paper for simultaneous review at multiple venues (unless it is explicitly permitted by the publications, and you disclose this on submission).
The IEEE guidelines on multiple submission prohibit multiple simultaneous submissions:

Authors should only submit original work that has neither appeared elsewhere for publication, nor which was under review for another refereed publication.

The guidelines further specify that failure to disclose, on submission, that the work is under review for another publication, can result in (after multiple offenses)

suspension of publication privileges in all IEEE Publications for 1 year and rejection and return of all papers by the author(s) that are currently in review or in any IEEE publication's queue (papers may be re-submitted after suspension term has expired).

In addition, engaging in this practice can irreparably damage your reputation in the academic community.

Short answer is yes, but it is unethical. Even when you read the agreement before submitting your paper it appears that the work should be original, that means that it should have not been submitted to other conference or journal.
You must put in the shoes of the reviewers, in one hand you make them waste time by reviewing one paper that is already being checked up in another conference. Also you are getting one available spot that could be filled by another research paper by another person.
One advice, take your work in academia more seriously than just submitting like if its a game.

I understand your motivation, because IEEE only looks into how to protect reviewers even though many of them are not competent or up to the level of the submitted manuscript. Such incompetent reviewer will normally  ask for pointless revision or may reject the paper if s/he doesn't understand the paper main idea and contribution even though the other reviewers of the paper could praised it and accepted it.
Such incompetent reviewers  usually will not understand the paper because they accept reviewing papers that are not within their subdomain or area of expertise to just adding service part to their CVs.
Unfortunately  IEEE has a serious problem in its current procedures of selecting reviewers which is done randomly, and that means the editor will look into the reviewers pool of the journal and sends some invitations randomly for possible reviewers. The issue will be exaggerated when that reviewer accept and judge your work regardless of whether they are qualifying for that or no. Unfortunately, they can hurt you by judging wrongly your work and escape simply because their identity  are protected by the Journal.
Also, IEEE has no real commitment to any time span of the reviewing process, they may announce the reviewing process takes three months for example, but actually they may let you stuck awaiting for the decision much more time. Therefore, IEEE violates what it should be a fair process for publication in many dimensions, and if your paper received three reviewers decision, for example two acceptance and one rejection, IEEE Editors normally go with the rejection and neglect the majority decision  opposite to any fair judgment system . They should go with the majority of reviewers decisions but unfortunately they don't. So I can't say it is not possible solution to overcome such a pain by trying for multiple submission because you also can't put your future under such messy, uncertain and unfair  circumstances.  You can be a student who needs one more paper for graduation, or you can be a faculty needs one more paper for promotion, or you can be a graduate student needs one more paper to get hired  or to keep your position, and if you lost that chance of publication on time  because of some incompetent reviewers then the impact could be huge on your life.
Those incompetent reviewers are actually very bad people who may destroy other people life and career just to add some lines in their CVs reflect their service as reviewers for journal x or y.
I don't encourage you to violated any journal rules, but act in a smart way, and don't make mistakes can be taken against you. On the other hand  protect your self from such possible unfair environment. try to search  for journals or conferences that accept multiple submission.
The process of submit paper should be similar to the process of sending applications for admission to universities. So you are able to send multiple applications to many universities  but in the end of the day you will accept only one offer when offers come. IEEE should also do the same to protect authors for wasting time and efforts, but unfortunately they don't.
Therefore, do what is best for you because publishers especially IEEE only care about their regulations and reviewers and their CVs update with the editorializing or reviewing service.  Your career growth and future plans  for sorry is not among their concerns at all.

Without paragraph breaks, this is incredibly hard to read.

Could you clarify your statement that IEEE editors choose reviewers randomly? Is the probability distribution uniform across the whole "pool" of reviewers, or is it strongly peaked near the topic of the paper? If you're saying it's uniform (or close to uniform), could you provide evidence to support that claim?

Randomly means, no data to validate reviewer credibility except the reviewer claiming of his ability to judge a paper.  So the system itself is working on non reliable reviewer pool.  Therefore, if a reviewer accept an invitation, the editor has no clue whether he could give right or wrong judgement. The evidence of that is the discrepancy between reviewers decision. Some accept the paper and others reject it. If who accepted are right  then the who rejected  are selected  randomly,  and if who reject it are right then who accept it are selected randomly randomly.

IEEE allows certain authors to submit and publish work that is currently under review.
IEEE likewise allows certain authors to submit and publish work that was previously published.
IEEE likewise allows certain authors to submit and publish work that was published by other persons.
Numerous examples can be found by searching the web.

It would be better to provide some references (links) where IEEE mentions these stuffs.

When you say "certain" author, what exactly do you mean? Do these author possess some special characteristics?


text:
Does a few years work in-between study hurt Physics PhD application to a top 20 US school?
All things being equal how would a good US graduate physics admissions weigh these paths.
Scenario 1: 4 year Bachelor of Science. And then direct application to graduate school.
Scenario 2: 4 year Bachelor of Science. 2-3 years work at a government department doing mathematics (not research). And then application to graduate school.
Scenario 3: 4 year Bachelor of Science. 2-3 years work at a government department doing mathematics (not research), whilst doing a part-time 1 year Masters spread over 2 years. And then application to graduate school.
Assume scenario 1 & 2 have same number of published papers, and scenario 3 adds one more paper of higher quality.

It seems like you are suggesting the applicant published during undergrad. The quality of this publication is going to matter a lot in determining which situation is better.

Lets say 2 ok co-authored papers where the personal input wasn't that significant to be honest (from a summer research placement at a top US school). And maybe one first authored paper of low standard (supervisor thinks its publishable but I am not proud of it). Its actually turned me off a bit, which is why I want to take a few years off to get work experience. I just don't want to hurt  future prospects of admission.

Sigh. All this emphasis on publications, from people who don't even have grad degrees. :(

I only add it as a consideration. The crux of the question is whether a gap from physics will be harmful to an application and whether a MSc makes much of a difference.

"supervisor thinks its publishable but I am not proud of it" You should be warned: scientists always think their work is inadequate.  So relax.  Also, learn about "imposter syndrome."

I'll offer several opinions.

Work experience does not help you get in to physics PhD programs.  It probably does not hurt either, but you should explain in your application why you did it and how it made you a better student.  Use a better explanation than the one you gave in the comments.
I actually view an MS as a black mark.  In the US, if you have an MS in Physics it implies you either
a.  Could not get in to a real PhD program.
b.  Failed out of the PhD program.
c.  Dropped out of the PhD program.
An MS in physics will cost money and essentially duplicate the first part of the physics PhD.  A PhD makes more financial sense than an MS.  This is not true in other countries or disciplines.
Publishing more will definitely help your application.  If you have lots of publications the rest of your background will be ignored.

Though you did not ask, I would like to point out that delaying the start of your PhD will delay the end of it, and the benefits that come from having completed it.  On the whole I recommend you start your PhD now, assuming you really want to get one.

Thanks for the reply. Yes MSc being a black mark is an interesting one, in Europe it seems almost compulsory. For what it is worth I did a project in the US but I am not from the US nor do I study there. The attraction of the job is that I won't end up being in my late 20's without good work experience, I'll also have a good pool of savings to supplement the PhD pay. And the attraction of the MSc is that the government will pay for it.


text:
What do the anglo-saxons use as "soggettario"?
A soggettario (in Italian) is simply a list of subject headings: it's a kind of thesaurus, used both as manual/tool for cataloguing and for browsing subjects and finding all books in a certain subject within the catalogue.
For instance the LCSH or the Nuovo soggettario. I can search a topic, browse the hierarchy and end up in the OPAC listing the titles.
So, does this whole thing have a single name in English? Do you use it?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it may be more suitable on English SE.

I don't know... it's about what people use for this procedure. The English name might not be a direct translation. It's not a matter of linguistics but of reference.

If you are refering to a list (or database) of keywords the correct term would be Search Index, or simply Index

I believe the topic fits the community, because it is about the functioning of research facilities (such as libraries and databases). I strongly believe that AcademiaSE should host these topics.
Nevertheless, this particular question is more about the english language itself: the english term for the italian "soggettario" is "Subject Headings List", or "Subject Index". This is a simple matter of translation.

To be more accurate, the "Soggettario" is not just a list of terms (thesaurus) or subject entries. It is actually a manual containing the rules to create and organize the subject headings. A proper translation would be "Subject Indexing Tool", as expressed for example here: http://thes.bncf.firenze.sbn.it/index_eng.html
In the same way, the France National Library uses the term "Indexation Matière" (lit. Subject Indexing): http://www.bnf.fr/fr/professionnels/anx_catalogage_indexation/a.referentiels_sujet.html


text:
Publishing in multidisciplinary open access journals in computer sciences
My this question is specific to Computer Science discipline(or, Engineering discipline can also be included).

What about publishing articles, from computer science domain, in multidisciplinary open access journals?

The reason for asking this question is that I had seen on some blog that researchers do not give much credit to such articles (from computer science domain) which are published in open access journals especially in multidisciplinary journals. Some researchers have quoted that don't spoil your CV by publishing in these journals and in research community such articles do not have much respect.

What would be the reputation of the articles, from computer science discipline, published in these journals. — That depends on the article.  Obviously.

@JeffE Sure, but that does not mean that you will not have at least some sort of initial impression of the probable strength of the paper based on where it is published (even if this might just be some fairly broad range). If I saw someone in math with many publications in PLoS One it would certainly give me a weird initial impression.

@TobiasKildetoft Sure, I have implicit biases like everyone else, but I try to ignore them. (A mathematician wearing a three-piece suit with a velvet cravat and a spider brooch everywhere would certainly give me a weird initial impression.)

I have changed the question as previous one does not clarified my point properly.

What is the reputation of multidisciplinary journals in computer sciences like Plos One and IEEE Access.

It is not possible to comprehend the answer as 'reputation' is undefined.

Both of these journals have impact factor higher than 3 while IEEE access was started just four years ago. On the other side, it took a long time to get even an impact factor for computer science journals.

This is trivial. Thomson Reuter has to generate the statistics related to the number of articles published, the number of citations, etc. for a long period of time to generate a number called Impact Factor (IF).

What would be the reputation of the articles, from computer science discipline, published in these journals.

As @JeffE pointed in his comment, it absolutely depends on the article itself. Every article published by a specific journal should not be weighted the same.

Can we compare the impact factor of these journals with other computer science journal having similar impact factor.

Comparing two different journals based on their impact factors is pointless and inconclusive.

It is not possible to comprehend the answer as 'reputation' is undefined. What's more, neither is 'computer sciences', 'multidisciplinary' or 'journal'. How did OP ever think they would get an answer on that one?

@sgf Right.. Multidisciplinary in the context of computational biology is far different from computational robotics.

"It is not possible to comprehend the answer as 'reputation' is undefined."
What a garbage response. The word "reputation" has a very clear definition in this context and this question is far from being incomprehensible. For instance, I can tell you that IEEE Access is a journal without a particularly high reputation, but it is a few steps above being a predatory journal. An expert in this domain could be more specific.


text:
Mimic lecturing on blackboard, facing audience
I teach mathematics at MSc and PhD levels. My preferred method of teaching is old-fashioned: talking and writing on the blackboard at the same time.
Why? Because it has many advantages:

Handwriting: imposes few restrictions on notation and illustration. (Complicated figures I could project from my laptop, but I have no need for this in my courses.)
Flexibility: whenever this is useful, it is easy to 'deviate from the script'.
Natural speed: it imposes a natural speed on the speaker. Preparing slides using LaTeX or PowerPoint and just clicking through them, I find myself proceeding way too fast.
Parallel displays: having several boards available for writing makes it easy to keep some text/examples on display on one board, while writing on another.
Dynamics: referring to information on the different boards allows me to move through the room, adding a more dynamic aspect to the lecture.
Ease: it is a low-tech way of achieving all these things simultaneously with easily available means.

The main disadvantage of this method is that I spend a significant amount of time of each lecture with my back to the audience.
Question: What would you recommend as a means of communication that combines the six features above (most importantly, the handwriting and parallel displays), but facing the audience?
Obviously, a low-budget solution would be appreciated, but my institute is usually pretty generous in investing in technology that improves teaching, so don't let that restrict you!
What I tried: Many things, including writing by hand on tablets (iPads, Digital Paper, reMarkable, etc.) and projecting this in the classroom. Perhaps I haven't found the optimal device for this yet, but it often comes out pixellated, delayed, and less readable than my usual handwriting on paper or the blackboard. Using a document camera to project my handwriting on paper works well, but can project only about half an A4 paper at a time to keep it readable for people in the back of the room and, like other approaches, has the disadvantage of not having parallel displays: it's hugely important to be able to keep definitions, examples, theorems from earlier on for easy reference.

Also posted at Mathematics Educators Stack Exchange.

This thread should be thought-provoking, https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/a/731/689

Gadgets are not necessarily an improvement, vide the succession:     Blackboard -> Overhead Projector -> Power Point -- EWD1305

What prevents you from simply doing both? have a set of slides prepared and do them, and if you feel the need, use the blackboard. This allows you to react on questions from the audience quite dynamically, while reaping in all benefits of using slides. And if you notice that what you have on the blackboard is essential, just include it in the slides for the next time you give the same course. This allows iterating on and improving the slides as well.

In my experience, the main disadvantage of this method is that my institution believes it is old-fashioned and therefore, without argument, automatically bad.  As such they refuse to support it by maintaining blackboards properly, etc.  Not my problem - not my students' problem - purely the institution's problem.

@TobiaTesan I think the technology is just now (well, the 3 years ago as I was leaving school) coming into its own. I had a professor who wrote pages under a very sharp document cam, but then pressed a button to save the picture and keep it on one display while moving on to the next page. Multiply by 4 displays and you are on par with the big sliding blackboards of old, with the benefit of saving the notes for later upload (and not having to wipe old chalk off everything).

It seems like most of the answers are simply challenging OP's assumptions and requirements; I am tempted to downvote them all.

I think there is a big difference between the resolution and writing clarity of the most recent technology than compared to a few years ago. I haven't tried it out myself but I've heard e.g. that the most recent iPad pro with the apple pen delivers a hugely improved writing experience. Combine that with higher resolution projectors and it might be worth trying the approach you have tried before but with the most recent technology. (I use chalk and blackboard myself but I'm curious to try out going the tablet route mostly to have a written record of the notes for the students.)

@FedericoPoloni … because? It seems not only valid but in fact desirable (because it’s helpful) to challenge OP’s assumptions if they are incorrect. That said, you can of course disagree with specific points in answers (and downvote for that reason).

@KonradRudolph We've had this discussion in Meta before

@FedericoPoloni Hm. I think this scenario is different, rendering the discussion irrelevant for this question. Otherwise, by your own words, we should be putting the current question on hold. And I don’t think there’s a case for that.

@user2705196 It's not only a matter of resolution, it's a matter of size. For some of the proofs I present in my lecture (in theoretical CS), I need three or four movable blackboards, preferably simultaneously. The area that is available for projection in my lecture halls is typically much smaller.

@KonradRudolph The problem with the other question is that the set-up was not clear, and it was mixed with OP's personal story. I think that this question is clear enough: "these are six properties I want, what teaching support can I use to have them?". If you are not answering this question, what you have is a long comment and not an answer.

@FedericoPoloni They are answers. But pointing out that somebody has an X–Y problem can be necessary for a potential solution.

Whatever else you do, get yourself a small microphone. When you're talking and facing the blackboard, it's hard to hear what you're saying.

Do not assume that facing the audience is actually better.  It depends on the type of content.  For example, if you are explaining a diagram (detailed hydraulic system for instance), you want the audience to concentrate on that, not the presenter.  The audience is still getting plenty of stimulation by having a live human voice along with visual content.  You actually don't want the presenter to distract the eyeballs from the intricate content.  (I see this wrong often with recorded talks where the video operator concentrates on the podium versus the charts, or shows both but with inadequate scale to see the slide charts.)  If you are doing math (as opposed to history or literature), the content is more intricate and you should have the audience concentrating on the formulas, not the speaker.
Take some occasional time to address the class when that is appropriate.  Examples are a "sea story" about test performance or industrial application of the math.  But these will be a minor amount of time within a math lecture.
I mean, if you really wanted to, you could write backwards in grease pencil on plexiglass like in an old Navy combat information center.  But really what is the point.  People concentrate on the status (content), not the writer anyways.  The one advantage is that you don't have a body blocking part of the board.  I believe there are now electronic versions that would flip this around for you (or you can use an OHP).  But still I think you lose a lot from having a lot less screen space than board space (especially with sliding boards).  So, the small advantage of facing is at the loss of huge amounts of content physical space.

I agree to the extent that I don't want the audience to focus on me instead of what I write. My aim is rather that I want more focus on the audience to check for questions and/or whether too many of them are nodding off or generally going on mental-screen-saver...

@Mark Turn around occasionally to check on the audience. I completely agree with the present response. I really dislike writing (or seeing somebody write) on a small pad/paper when it is projected. It is strongly confined and looks like Spock looking into his visor device. When on the blackboard, you make large arm movements, so the whole body movement that produces the writing is obvious to the audience - do not underestimate the effect that it makes, it's far more natural.

Great point.  I guess, you could (1) turn occasionally to check fr raised hands or ask for understanding (or oral questioning to test comprehension) or (2) encourage interruption.  I would only do (2) in the context of a rather intimate class size.  Obviously 1 is not full time, but I think occasional is fine.  It's probably hard to both explain complicated math and check comprehension in parallel anyways.  And a serial process is a nice break of the flow anyways.

w.r.t. point 1: that's fine if you've got a tie-clip mic, but facing the board can make you hard to hear if there's a lectern mic or none at all.  Obviously this depends on the size and acoustics of the room as well as your voice, but it doesn't have to be a big room.

@Mark rearview glasses would suffice for that purpose

@PyRulez My son has toy "spy glasses" with small mirrors at the sides that allow you to look behind you. I guess I'll confiscate them for educational use now.

@Mark I wear a mirror on my left wrist when biking.  Visiting a bicycle store will yield many possibilities.

I think your point 1 is simply wrong. Facing the audience is definitely better, for the simple reason that it makes your speech vastly more intelligible. This should be entirely uncontroversial: Everybody who’s ever attended a lecture knows that the way the speaker faces greatly impacts the ease of listening.

The retro-projectors where one wrote on the plastic film allowed one to go "back in time" as it were... rewind...
Of course one could lay a diagram on top then remove it etc
So, you can have a single slide with a particular expression or theorem that you need often and drop it on as necessary.
One comment mentions a "camera" to project a document - one that was used to do this is called an epidiascope...

Horrible! I remember a prof using such scrolling projectors, and he kept scrolling around, especially back, to remind audience of previous stuff - impossible to follow, makes you lose thread, you force yourself to read/take notes as fast as you can before the next scrolling takes place; after scrolling back to current stage, you have to constantly search again for location you are reading. Do not use! Stick with the good old blackboard where text does not move all the time! Your back to the audience is a very minor nuisance compared to scrollable plastic film.

There is a modern version of this, where you simply write on paper and a camera transfers this to the projector. This way you can show past notes without moving everything else, but the available writing space is still nowhere near a proper set of 6 or 9 boards, even if you have two of them. I know some people who actually prefer them to blackboards, since you can also prepare some sheets beforehand and don't have to budget time for cleaning if the boards are full.

Also another note, those retro-projectors are a problem for left-handed people as the students will only see the writing hand instead of the last written line.

@CaptainEmacs so the prof used it badly... There are profs who use blackboards badly, or slides badly...

These projectors were used at ETH Zürich back in the 90s. It wasn't so bad, but I never managed to not stick on the plastic scroll with my sweaty hands, making horrific messes. I remember Marvin Minsky giving a guest lecture using one, resulting in an incomprehensible scroll of modern art. It got snarfed by some students for publication. They are really best if you have your slides prepared beforehand or if you write really slowly and deliberately.

Some of my schoolteachers used these, and those that did used them effectively.  Some of my undergrad lecturers used them, but most used them badly.  In a lecture situation they seem to work better if there's a 2nd projector for any pre-prepared slides, which are used judiciously.

@DavidTonhofer scroll OHPs were much better with "permanent", i.e. alcohol-based, pens than water-based.

@SolarMike "Scrolls do not confuse people, Profs confuse people." - of course, but, after all, there are media that invite bad use more easily than others or require more discipline to not abuse it. Of course, you can give brilliant presentations with any medium. I remember a world-class scientist giving a 2.5 hours presentation, with no break, with only a handful of slides, the first appearing after 45 minutes - and an audience hanging on to every of his words with rapt attention. They can do it, but not everyone can or should try.

@CaptainEmacs One of my professors gave every lecture (2 hours and 12 lectures) for stress and structures with 3 whiteboard marker pens - no notes - us final year students were sweating....

@SolarMike From your description it is not clear: was this masterful or a disaster?

@CaptainEmacs He could do a master class, he was superb... Clarity of progression and ease of explanation does not make stress in 3d easy...

I didn't know the word "epidiascope"...in my question under the heading "What I tried", I mentioned projecting my handwriting on paper using a document camera. I suppose that is the modern-day equivalent.

This answer is going to broaden the question asked to instead be, "How can I give the students a better experience, while still delivering content through speaking and hand-writing?"
I would suggest spending dramatically less time lecturing in class.  Instead, record the (majority of your) lectures electronically, and share them with your students online.  You can use whatever setup you like -- writing on the board(s), writing on paper, writing on a tablet, writing on glass and having the image left-right reversed -- with one or more cameras recording your lectures. You can edit the footage as you like, to allow the parallel displays you enjoy for example.
This has several important benefits:

Students can view your lectures at their own pace, at their own convenience, with the ability to pause, rewind, replay, and fast-forward.
You can use class-time more effectively, by taking advantage of the circumstance of all these people in the same room.  Have them talk to each other!  They can work on exercises, or go through details of proofs, or work on more ambitious projects.  Small groups are most effective, size 3 or 4.

Both of the above benefits are much more important than the ability to see your face during lectures.

That sounds great, but what if there are 200+ students, as was the case in my undergraduate lectures.

OP asks about graduate courses.  2. Even with 200+ students, some of the classtime can be spent in active learning.

This is not a light change to the course though, because it assumes a lot more at-home study from the part of the students. I imagine that the load at OP's university is balanced on him actually explaining things in class, and not on him asking his students to study videos alone in advance. At the very least, a reduction in the number of total in-front hours would be expected.

@vadim OK I have been to 250+ graduate courses. Yes, you can set a quick task or two, but no real engagement is possible with individual learners.

+1 for recording lectures: makes life a lot easier if you can't attend classes sometimes. -1 for replacing regular lectures with that: it literally doubles the time students have to spend studying your subject, which is hardly something everyone can afford. Moreover, this means students can't ask questions, correct mistakes, etc. until the next in-person class, which can heavily hinder the understanding of a lecture (what if at t=10min you don't understand a result? so long for the rest of the lecture!)

In my opinion complex concepts which involve a lot of mathematical equations are best taught by interacting with the audience and allowing students to write along with the instructor. Many people have suggested here the use of a document camera. How about a transparent-board camera?
I like what Rob Edwards from SDSU uses for his courses on YouTube. For example check out this one. Here is a screenshot:

He uses dark clothing, dark background and a transparent board to write on facing the audience. A camera captures the board content from the front and then inverts the video to project on a display, so that it is in the correct readable orientation.

I have tried this for recording segments of my lectures. For classroom use, it doesn't really suit the purpose. Partly due to the "wrong" orientation when writing on the glass in front of a live audience; partly due to the small size of the glass surface relative to most blackboards (of which I fill many during an average lecture).

If the space in which you lecture permits, you could simply put some big mirrors next to or between your blackboards. That would let you continue to write with your back to the audience as you do now while also being able to casually glance at them (or at least some of them) without turning around.
Less unusually, if you're in a small classroom setting you could angle your blackboard a bit away from the class. I've seen plenty of rooms that had a portable blackboard positioned like this before, and it allows the teacher to stand to one side of the blackboard and glance sideways at the class while writing. (I suspect that this is not what usually motivates such setups, and that they're typically done due to a lack of space for the extra blackboard at the front of the room, but there's no reason you can't deliberately use this approach for the visibility benefit.) Of course, in the context of a big lecture hall this would be annoying to the class.

Yeah, it really depends on the setup of the classroom.  Some have convenient sideboards that are still far enough away from the students that they can pretty much all see all of them; for other classrooms, the students are so close that even the main board is not visible very well for ones on the opposite side at the front.

@kcrisman It also depends on the size of the class. If you've got a class of 10 in a room made to accommodate 30, you can sit them all on one side to ensure they can see. If you've got a class as big as the room can accommodate, you've got to ensure the board is visible from every seat in the room.

Yes, I absolutely agree.

The document camera is, in my experience, the best approach by far.
It has a couple of unique advantages, including producing permanent copies of the lecture notes, both for your benefit when preparing exams and (possibly) for the students' benefit (if you decide to make these notes available, whether to everyone or only in special circumstances). Another advantage is that it's more natural to use than a vertically-mounted chalk- or dry erase-board, so your handwriting comes out more much readable and requires less effort. Finally, it is more accessible to students sitting in the back of the room, where blackboards are generally unreadable due to size, shadows, etc.
The only significant drawback is the need for specialized equipment. But if your institution is able to provide that, you should take advantage of it.
The limited display capability is not a real drawback. It is quite rare that you need to project more than half or two-thirds of a sheet of paper at a time. It simply isn't feasible to talk about that many different things at once. If nothing else, it forces you to keep in mind the audience's human limitations. If you really need to give a "big picture" view, you can always zoom out on the document camera.
While it isn't strictly necessary to make eye contact with your audience, especially since many students will be looking down to take notes anyway, don't underestimate the advantage of being able to actually connect with your students in appropriate contexts. If you are looking out at the class, it's much easier to judge understanding, see those with questions, and just make yourself seem friendly and approachable.
Document cameras allow you to face forward and give a natural lecture, while maintaining all of the advantages of a "chalk talk".

Giving an up vote as I think doc cams are the way to go for many things.  But in mathematics it is actually quite necessary often-times to allow for people to see as much as three boards' worth of material at a time; I had to today in my linear algebra course.

Apart from the limited-display concern, which really is a concern for my purposes -- as @kcrisman mentions, it is quite essential to keep a lot of material for reference -- I do agree that document cameras are great. His/her suggestion in a separate answer below to combine blackboard and document camera might be the way forward for my courses.

I think OP is quite explicit here on his requirement for a lot of display capability.

Not different enough for a separate answer: I generally use a note-taking app on my iPad, connected to an overhead projector, as a virtual document camera/whiteboard. I get an immediate electronic permanent record, which I can easily distribute to the students. It's easy (with practice) to scroll back to previous "boards" and/or copy-paste-modify previous examples on the fly as needed. I can prepare complicated figures/examples in advance.  The screen space isn't as large or as persistent as a blackboard, but on balance it works pretty well.

I don't have a lot to add to these contributors in terms of nitty-gritty details, but I think that if you can get it having a good setup with both document camera AND chalkboard is best.  (Or possibly multiple doc cams.)  At least, that is my experience with mathematics in a number of different settings.
When I am in a room that allows for it, I will have certain definitions just continuously on the board, and then dynamic examples (whether computer-generated or paper) on the camera screen.  Or you can use the chalkboard for stuff that has to stay up a long time, for which you know people will be copying down anyway - and then you can stand aside as they (hopefully) internalize.
Or, if you have time ahead of time, put needed definitions on some side boards (we have side whiteboards in some classrooms) that you can point to, while keeping attention up front.  In any case, you can think dynamic versus static content for the two 'devices' (if a chalkboard is a device).
It does depend upon the type of course.  Honestly, for graduate coursework you'll probably be flying so fast it won't matter what technique you use.  Given the setup of many rooms in many universities in many countries (but not all of any of the above, of course), I would recommend the doc cam + chalkboard combination as an easily attainable via media that gets at most of what you want in a lecture-based course.
(Whether you want to do a lecture-based course is a different question, but I won't wade into that here.)

You could write up the main points one butcher paper, then roll them up and put them on the walls. Then you can write out the detailed steps and project them onto the board, then as you finish a section, unroll the summary. This will also provide a stopping point for people to ask questions.

This would work very well for certain class types, and I've seen something like it done effectively in education and social science courses, but for a graduate mathematics course it might be tough.

Write with chalk pen/white board marker on plexiglass, video this, then flip the video stream horizontally (in real time) for projection. You'll get 1:1 eye contact, with the students who appreciate that, and whenever they need to clearly see your content they can watch the video. Even better if this is saved for later viewing...

I had such a math teacher in college. He would walk in, start writing on the board, and not stop until the end of class, then walk out. It was horrible. Everyone in the class hated it. A few complaints later, and he started turning around periodically to see if there were questions, and if the class was keeping up.
Spending a significant amount of your time with your back to the audience isn't a problem, as long as it's not all of the time. Just check in with the students, and make sure that they know it's ok to interrupt you when your back is turned (assuming you're ok with that).

I think one possible solution could be the use of a camera-projector system also often known as a document camera. A common example I've seen in universities around Canada is ELMO your university may consider investing in these and placing them in classrooms around campus.
This system also allows for you to switch to any detailed diagrams or animations you may want to present to your class through your laptop hooked up to the same projector.

OP and some of the other answers already discuss document cameras. What does your answer add to the discussion, apart from suggesting a particular model?

Apologies, I didn't notice the other answers at the time of posting


text:
Reporting Plagiarism in Older research
Disclaimer: I apologize for the vagueness of this post as i do not wish to speak negatively about anyone particular on a public forum.
I've been doing research on a specific topic looking at two articles, one a book published in the 1991 and the other an article published in 1964 in an academic journal.
I noticed that the procedures followed in both papers are very similar and the method seems almost identical, However the 1991 book makes no reference to the 1964 paper and claims its model is new.
I find this incredibly dishonest, its possible that I'm an idealist with reference to a highschool understanding of academic honesty but I think at the very least it should be reported to the publishers.
How do I report possible academic plagiarism to publishers? Is such an activity worthwhile?

Is it at all plausible the 1991 author didn't realize the 1964 work existed and came to the same conclusion? It's sometimes possible for independent workers to come to the same answer. It's also gotten easier to find past work since 1991 thanks to digitization (though in other ways harder due to the increased volume of published work).

How certain are you that this is not simply independent discovery, and what you makes you so certain about it?

@anjama because the earlier article was in a well respected journal. If a proper literature review was done then this would have been the first paper found on the topic.

A "proper literature review" was much harder to do in 1991 than it is to do today.

Indeed, I suspect that most articles from 1964 were not even entered into the databases by 1991

@EconJohn Is the 1964 paper widely cited, and widely cited before 1991? Does the 1991 paper cite others that cite the 1964 paper? What work does it build on, and is it the same work as the 1964 paper?

If the 1964 paper was really that well-known in the community as of 1991, it would have been a particularly stupid choice of paper for the authors to intentionally plagiarize.

Supporting @NateEldredge for what happens when you replicate something that is well-known: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9602/rediscovery-of-calculus-in-1994-what-should-have-happened-to-that-paper - such a thing may occur by accident but likely not by intent. Also very related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7360/how-common-is-it-to-inadvertently-reinvent-the-wheel-in-academia

The perception of plagiarism has evolved significantly along the years, and practices that are not tolerated nowadays were instead not unheard of in the recent past. I recall seeing several papers from the 1980s and 90s replicated almost identically in different venues, without any cross-citation or copyright notice.
Moreover, bibliographic searches in the past were not so easy, and the authors of the most recent work may have found the same result independently and missed the older work.
Since almost thirty years have now passed from the publication of the second article, I'd ignore the matter: nothing really useful would come out by bringing it up.

Agreed, but you could mention the older article to the more recent authors, without making any claims of impropriety.

@Buffy: Assuming, of course, that they are still around.  If it's been 28 years, it's quite possible they are not.

@NateEldredge the author of the latter work is alive the earlier one is not unfortunately


text:
Is finding an interest in Mathematics in late teens not a good sign for amazing research capability?
I am 19 years old.  I was average in high school in Mathematics. I never participated in IMO or related competitions.  As a result I didn't  join a prestigious undergraduate school. However during 2nd year in abstract algebra courses I developed an obsession for the subject. My advisor told me to look over some graduate level abstract algebra textbooks which I certainly will.
My school can offer me some grad level courses in my fourth year like Class Field Theory and Modular Forms. Nonetheless, not being able to attend a prestigious undergraduate still haunts me. I know it will certainly affect my graduate school admissions.
In the long term, do late bloomers in Mathematics have a chance to pursue good research careers in Mathematics?

Forget "prestigious." I came from a relatively new school to one of Texas' best schools. If you can do it, nobody can stop you.

Late bloomer? You are 19, not 90. Anyway, passion, drive and ability matter far more than age (and the percieved prestige of your current university).

You don’t need to be “amazing” to have a good research career, I think. Maybe if you wanted an amazing career. :)

You can still move to Princeton if you do really well in undegrad.

I find that most people don't really know what mathematics "is", at least what it is at a research level, until they've taken some courses like abstract algebra, etc., requiring theorem proving.  If you're appreciating it at that level more than you did the more basic levels, this bodes well.

Note there are many (I want to say most, but I don't know the statistics) PhD mathematicians who never did competitions etc.  Also I can speak from my own experience: it is possible to move from a not-so-prestigious undergrad institution to a more prestigious grad school.

I was a late bloomer and now I'm a f***ing rockstar. Don't worry.

It is somewhat common to find highly intelligent, promising students that find it difficult to apply themselves in topics they are not interested in. Upon finding that one topic, these people excel quickly because it consumes them. I actually know scientists at top universities that previously flunked out of college for just that reason. So the fact that you’re experiencing this now is not surprising; in fact you’re fortunate that you’re still so young - plenty of time to dive in.
On your less-than-reputable undergrad institution, this may hurt you a bit as names do matter, sadly. Fortunately, if you mean to go academic in life, this is less a problem for undergraduate institution than graduate. So, you should set your sights on a good graduate school and start working on it. The best way to do this is to gain the respect of a professor you know to secure a strong letter and also start reaching out to specific people you’d like to work with. Take a very impassioned, personal approach, and you’ll be given a bit more consideration than the nameless others that apply.
Good luck, future mathematician!

"Less than reputable" is stronger than what OP said. Maybe it was an issue with English?

@aparente001 fair point. OP merely notes undergrad wasn’t ‘prestigious’. Yet, I stand by my comments irrespective.

I'm just recommending that you edit that bit.  The answer is otherwise helpful, I think.

+1 For LOR. A letter from a respected PI can go a long way.

It might be easier to advance well in a more scintillating, rigorous department.  But there's a lot to be said for being a big fish in a little pond, for example you might find more personal attention in the little pond.  And it's easier to stand out (make a big splash!).
If you want to transfer, in principle, after the sophomore isn't a bad time to do it.  But check deadlines carefully.
Will you run out of courses to take at your current college?  In some locations, one can take a couple of courses from a nearby more rigorous department or a larger department in the senior year.  You might not be able to transfer those credits in; but that might not cause problems if you've collected enough credits at your home institution (without adding in the transfer credits) in order to graduate.  If you know that the transfer credits won't be accepted, you might want to save some money by auditing when you register for the summer class(s).
It might be worthwhile to check if your college has a foreign exchange program.
Let's say you finish out the degree where you are, but don't get into the level of program you would like in the first round. In this case, it can be helpful to take some additional classes somewhere with a strong teaching record, as a non-matriculated student, to build up your knowledge and experience.
I can't swear to this in the context of a pure  math programs, but in my experience with applying to a top-notch computer science department, the undergraduate institution's name didn't matter.  They were looking at the transcript, essay and recommendations.  I think for math, the GRE would be on that list as well.  If you can get some undergraduate research experience (possibly this coming summer).
Would the delay (compared to your peers) hold you back?  Not necessarily.  Many people think the undergraduate degree is some kind of race.  It isn't.

Not at all. I was just an enthusiast before but am now studying highgrade mathematics. Not to mention it only happened in two years span. I am now 21.


text:
How to respond to papers that put forward unreasonable criticisms of my research area?
My research area (not me specifically) sometimes gets attacked by a handful of people who don't know what they're talking about. I don't have a problem with fair criticism, but these people are just being unprofessional.
To be more specific, the abstract of a critical paper might be something like:

We use technique X. After extensive testing we find that X is completely impractical. Moreover, X fails to do Y or Z. We conclude that X is a research dead end and the researchers working on X don't understand what they are doing.

A more accurate summary of the paper would be:

We implement A - one of many techniques from area X. A is widely known to be inferior to other techniques in the literature of X, but we are unaware of more sophisticated techniques. Some basic tests confirm A's inferiority.
 Due to failing to properly use A, it doesn't do Y. Moreover, A doesn't do impossible task Z. (No one claimed that A does Z.) We thereby demonstrate that we don't know what we are doing.

How does such a paper get through peer review? Simple: They publish it in a different community, where no one understands X. Unfortunately, this terrible paper then becomes one of the most visible papers on X in that community.
Most people in my area completely ignore the criticism, although some do try to rebut it. As easy as it would be to ignore the critical papers and hope that others do too, the reality is that the misinformation they spread is harmful to my area.
I was wondering whether others have similar experience and can share what worked and what didn't. Can you win by arguing with an idiot/troll?

Respectfully.

I don't know of a respected journal in any field that would publish ad hominem language like "the researchers working on X don't understand what they are doing."  So I have a hard time taking your question literally.  Do you have a link to an abstract?

@DavidKetcheson I don't want to name names. Here is the precise quote: "Some of the examples in this section are lifted directly from the X literature, suggesting, at least in some cases, that the proponents of X do not themselves fully understand the theory."

@user49405 that's a much more measured statement, and I guess it is not in the abstract

I think I know the paper you're talking about; I agree that it's unprofessional and the authors are not acting in good faith. However, there is no point in getting upset about it or responding in an equally unprofessional manner. If anyone asks me about the paper, I dismiss it by pointing out that it was published in a student-run journal whose title includes the phrase "Journal of Entertainment" and that's precisely what the paper is good for.

You can't change what is already published, so there is no point in trying to.
What you (and the people in your research area) can do is ask yourself why they used A instead of X. Maybe there is an easy-to-use free implementation of A, while it takes a PhD to really understand and implement X properly? In that case, you and your peers should fix the problem by releasing a tool to do X. Possibly an automated one, with a simple interface and no magic parameters to tune. Then you can recommend it to people in the other field.
Another thing you can do is collaborating with someone in that area, and publishing a benchmark paper where you test several algorithms and you show that X really works. A paper of this kind may be easier to publish in their area than in yours, where this fact is common knowledge.
If you simply call them idiots, you will never fix the problem. This is the wrong attitude; the blame can't be all on their side. You should borrow this principle from user interface research: if your users make mistakes frequently when interacting with your program/website, it is not their fault because they are idiots, but it is your fault because your interface is bad.

This is good advice and I try my best to follow it. However, the issue is bigger than an innocent misunderstanding. They are maliciously attacking our work. They are making false assertions and acting as if they are experts in the area, which I think is dishonest and unprofessional on their part.

Respond with data. Respond with code. Even if you earnestly believe that they are being malicious, respond as though they are merely mistaken. Make this about the work, not about the people.

+1 The customer is always right. Take any criticism and find a way to make it constructive, even if it isn't.