text:
What are the archiving policies of arXiv?
In this answer it is suggested that arXiv, as its name would suggest, is archival. One of Beall's criteria is that a publisher is potentially predatory if it

Has no policies or practices for digital preservation, meaning that if the
  journal ceases  operations,  all  of  the  content  disappears  from  the
  internet.

The only thing I can find about digital preservation on the arXiv website is

arXiv submissions are meant to be available in perpetuity. Thus, arXiv has high technical standards for the files that are submitted.

While it is good that the articles are in a format which will allow access in perpetuity, the primer says nothing about what happens if arXiv ceases operations. What is the arXiv policy in regards to digital preservation?

I would presume that the arXiv is simply too big to fail.

@Arno I would presume that perpetuity is a long time for things to "just work".

The arXiv also benefits from not having a single point of failure. By design it has some geographical redundancy.

@NajibIdrissi I used Beall's criteria because it nicely described what I was looking for, not because I think of arXiv as predatory.

StackExchange is the same way. If StackExchange were to implode tomorrow, well, our questions are gone. But you should also weigh the likelihood of that versus the severity of that.

@Compass but I have never seen Stack Exchange claim to be archival and it is not in their name.

@StrongBad It's not in our name, but Stack Exchange, at least Stack Overflow, encourages information to be brought into the fold as opposed to linked as the guarantee of the question being useful and non-volatile depends on its content being hosted on the server. The service is useless if it isn't archived, even if it doesn't call itself an archive, it is still an archive <_<

Also, monthly, the entire text-based content is, in fact, uploaded to archive.org.

BioRxiv is backed up by CLOCKSS. It would be great if this were true of arXiv as well.

@Compass : That's simply false. StackExchange publishes Creative Commons licensed dumps at regular intervals. If StackExchange would implode someone else would publish one of the dumps.

@Christian I was referring the conceptual point of Stack being designed as a primary service of being a Q&A site as opposed to the secondary service of being an archival site.

@Compass : Part of StackExchange design are data-dumps and an open license. That's to make sure that the data can continue to be used long after a question got answered. If StackExchange would implode the data wouldn't be gone.

@Christian just because data is made available does not mean someone is actively archiving it. If that was the case, the answer to this question would be that arXiv makes the data available.

@StrongBad : There doesn't have to be someone who actively tries to "archive" the data. http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/71820/report-high-google-ranking-stack-exchange-content-copiers-here/173542#173542 gives you a list of various parties that do try to host mirrors. There are various machine learning projects that have use for the dataset as training data. But even if you look at people who archive more formally the Internet Archive is currently the main host for the StackExchange dumps.

From their FAQ:

What are CUL's preservation strategies?
Digital preservation refers to a range of managed activities to
  support the long-term maintenance of bitstreams. These activities
  ensure that digital objects are usable (intact and readable),
  retaining all quantities of authenticity, accuracy, and functionality
  deemed to be essential when articles (and other associated materials)
  were ingested. Formats accepted by arXiv have been selected based on
  their archival value (TeX/LaTeX, PDF, HTML) and the ability to process
  all source files is actively monitored. The underlying bits are
  protected by standard backup procedures at the Cornell campus.
  Off-site backup facilities in New York City provide geographic
  redundancy. The complete content is replicated at arXiv's mirror sites
  around the world, and additional managed tape backups are taken at Los
  Alamos National Laboratory. CUL has an archival repository to support
  preservation of critical content from institutional resources,
  including arXiv. We anticipate storing all arXiv documents, both in
  source and processed form, in this repository. There will be ongoing
  incremental ingest of new material. We expect that CUL will bear the
  preservation costs for arXiv, leveraging the archival infrastructure
  developed for the library system.

It looks like they're relying on a) multiple offsite mirrors; b) periodic stored backups at LANL; and c) deposit in the institutional repository at Cornell.
It's a little unclear if that deposit is actually happening yet or is still part of a long-term plan, but it's worth noting that the arXiv program director is also the librarian responsible for Cornell's digital preservation work, so it's unlikely to have been forgotten about!

The link is now dead, and I couldn't find up-to-date information. Does someone know if there is info available somewhere about their current archival policies?

This is answered in the FAQ for the arXiv Membership Program:

CUL [Cornell University Library] has an archival repository to support preservation of critical content from institutional resources, including arXiv. We anticipate storing all arXiv documents, both in source and processed form, in this repository. There will be ongoing incremental ingest of new material. We expect that CUL will bear the preservation costs for arXiv, leveraging the archival infrastructure developed for the library system.

The same FAQ also tells you about the current funding model (up until some years ago arXiv was entirely funded and ran by the Cornell University Library; now funding comes from also the Simons Foundation as well as other participating university libraries).
In terms of Cornell's digital preservation policies, I cannot find a full description online (probably just due to my weak google-fu today); but this would be person to contact and ask.

The link is now dead, and I couldn't find up-to-date information. Does someone know if there is info available somewhere about their current archival policies?

I would suggesting emailing the arXiv staff. There is a contact link in the help page on arXiv.

I asked arXiv on October 4, 2023:

I am involved in an overlay journal whose articles are published on arXiv, and we are asked by the Free Journal Network about our long-term archival policies.
For this reason I would like to know if there is a long-term archival policy for arXiv articles: are there backups or continuity plans in place to ensure that the articles are preserved if arXiv is unable to continue operation?
Also, is there publicly available information about this? I could not find anything in the FAQ or in the help about long-term preservation.

I got the following reply one day later:

Thank you for reaching out. We are committed to permanently archiving the content that is submitted to and hosted by arXiv and operate under policies designed to ensure long-term access to the scholarly record. However, at this time, arXiv is not engaged in formal preservation activities. We hope to implement a preservation strategy in the future.

So the answer seems to be that arXiv does not currently have any long-term preservation strategy.
That said, in practice, in addition to the current bulk data access options, it looks like there is a downloadable copy of the data here https://archive.org/details/arxiv-bulk (though it was apparently last updated in 2020).

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


text:
If one wants to generate several papers from a single research project, what is a reasonable way to do so?
As a follow-up to "Whether to publish one big paper or many smaller papers for a given research project?":
Suppose one wants to generate a number of publications from a single research idea or project, because other things being equal, more publications is better. What is a reasonable way to do so; one that does not dilute or compromise the quality of ones papers?

Have a project that generates multiple significant results that would not comfortably fit into a single publication?

@JeffE: I guess that is the good situation. The previous question seemed to be suggesting a case whether one was artificially dividing up work into multiple publications to increase the publication count. So, I was just following that.

In the previous comment, "whether" should have been "where".

There is one trend that I see around me, which is in some cases to split a piece of work in two pieces: a high-impact letter, and follow-up full paper with all the details.
There are many reasons why this might be a good idea. Increase in number of publication is one of them, but there are others:

If you work in a rapidly developing and highly competitive field (i.e. you risk being scooped if you wait 3 more months to publish your idea), this allows you a fast publication of the idea and first results (proof of concept, if you will). Also, letters tend to be reviewed more rapidly, which also decreases publication time. Then, you will publish all the details, influence of method parameters, etc.
If your work would be interesting to a wider community, it allows you to deliver two different messages (or at least, the same message at two different levels) to two communities. This increases the overall impact of your research.

This is essentially the standard computer science publication model, only we call them "conference papers" instead of "letters".

These types of publications may also be called "communications" or other things depending on the field.

This will probably vary from field to field, but I've seen instances of publishing different analyses in different papers. One rich data set can yield many different analyses which may be largely unconnected with each other.
By way of example, a single longitudinal study of depression may collect data on a number of fronts; information about the participants (gender, age, location, etc), their depressive episodes, family history, genomics, neuroimaging, etc. Each of these can result in a different set of analyses, many of which would be of interest to completely different fields. A neuroscientist interested in activity patterns in the brain would not necessarily be interested in a study examining instances of suicide in high-SES vs. low-SES populations.
By thinking carefully about study design before collecting data, you can position yourself to examine questions in many different fields, leading to numerous publications.
As a final point, I'll just briefly mention that cross-disciplinary collaboration is a wonderful thing, and is very relevant to this discussion.

Of course it depends how narrow or wide you define what a "project" is.
I'm chemometrician working with vibrational spectra of biological samples.
So there are:

Applications (e.g. a particular biological/medical question)
We write papers about medical diagnostics or biochemical characterization of samples or biochemical changes that occur with some disease, ...
Even within this "application" topic, there may be distinct subtopics. E.g. basic research about a disease is different from developing a diagnostic method.
As chemometrician, I develop data analysis methods (often triggered by the application).
We write methods/theory papers.
We also develop instrumentation to measure our samples.
We write papers about that as well

These separations are sensible to me:
A reader who wants to learn about a particular disease may not want to dive into chemometric theory development but instead wants to see biochemical findings. Another reader may be interested in the chemometric details but not in the particular disease. Readers looking into instrumentation details may not care about the disease or the particular statistical model applied to our data.

If you have a specific research question/problem, and devised a technique, method, algorithm or system, to address it, then I think it makes more sense to showcase that method in a way that seems natural, in a single self-contained publication, to the extent that it is possible within space limits, rather than artificially breaking it up across multiple publications solely to increase the number of publications. This will, first, annoy readers, who don't care about your publication rate. It will likely also make editors/reviewers unhappy. Of course, if the method naturally breaks up into more than one paper, than that is fine.
To generate multiple publications around a single method, I think a good way to go would be to write additional papers that supplement and possibly enhance a single major publication. For example, suppose you were to devise a new technique to analyse some data set(s). Then additional publications could be, for example, an extension of that technique to analyze additional, different, data sets. Also, you could have a separate publication which just describes the details of the software implementation. This would not fit well into a (say) statistical research paper, but could be a perfectly viable publication on its own.

I'm confused. are you answering your own question ?

@Suresh: Yes, see the first para of the question. Hint - it wasn't my idea.

@Suresh: See the following SE blog post: It’s OK to Ask and Answer Your Own Questions

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Should I cite photos in my thesis?
If I use photos in my thesis that I found on Internet, should I cite them? If so, how should the photos be cited? Should I write something like "In Figure 4.5 [9]" or should I cite it in the Appendix? Or should I add the source in the caption?

The problem with "found" photos is you don't know how reliable they are, and you can't always get hold of enough information about them to cite them properly anyway.

Also see this question on copyright concerns related to reusing images.

This is specifically a question about a thesis, where the position is different regarding "publication" to a journal paper, and at least in some places the fair use or equivalent works differently.

related: What is the difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement?

@ChrisH I'm not sure there is any difference between a thesis and a journal paper, actually, except that the journal paper is more widely distributed. Including an unlicensed copyrighted photograph in a thesis is still unauthorized distribution of the work, which is illegal unless covered by an appropriate fair use exemption. (Note also that the US has a rather broader definition of "fair use" than most jurisdictions; the asker is in Turkey.)

@DavidRicherby I didn't look at the OP's location - and I'm considering UK thesis guidance compared with US and UK journal guidance.  I didn't mean to give the impression that the related link wasn't useful, just that it wasn't 100% relevant either.

You must cite them!
Failure to cite photographs and figures is just as much plagiarism as stealing quotations. To some extent, it is tougher to use pictures from other sources, because you need to make sure you have the permissions to use them.
You should add the citation in the caption, as well as the requisite acknowledgments required by the author or publisher.

If I take the pictures by myself, should I also tell this to readers?

Any photos without attribution will be assumed to be yours - which is why it's so important to cite other people's as you don't want to give that impression.  So just like text you wrote or figures you drew, nothing is needed beyond the upfront declaration that it's your own work except where stated.  I would however cite results/methods etc that you have published, even as lead/sole author - for a  different reason - published work carries more weight.

here's usa library of congress copyright source:
http://www.copyright.gov/
for using other's copyrighted photos you need reproduction rights permissions.
for using your own photos, you should protect your own copyright with the three-part copyright notice mentioned at loc - copyright symbol or word, date, name - on or near the photo.  otherwise you have put your photo into public.

While this is true, the question was about citation (i.e. attributing sources), which is an orthogonal concern from copyright.

@ff524 The second part is also not true. US law doesn't require a copyright notice, and neither do any of the other nations that are parties to the Berne Convention (pretty much everywhere).

@Hotchips And, even more strongly, there are places where you cannot voluntarily place your work in the public domain. In the UK, for example, you can assign your copyright to somebody else, or you can choose not to enforce your rights (e.g., by giving it a very liberal license) but the only way to actually place something in the public domain is to die and wait 75 years.

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


text:
Which term is correct for a work submitted for a master's degree: paper, thesis or dissertation?
What is the difference among the terms paper, thesis and dissertation?  Which one should I use, for instance if I am completing a master's degree? Are they interchangeable ?

Use for what (e.g., in a CV or when talking to family)?

I like this Wikipedia quote.

A paper usually refers to a published article but can also mean a shorter written essay, for example as in term-paper. The thesis and dissertation is basically equivalent, at least in its use. Originally a thesis is more than the written work, it is the thought or thinking coupled to the problem as the original meaning of the word indicates. From this perspective the word dissertation is used for the written work that comes out of your degree work.
So for a master degree, you will see masters thesis and masters dissertation used interchangeably. I would suggest checking what is used in your department or university and use whatever is customary.

If I get your question right:

A paper usually refers to an article published either in a journal or presented at a conference. It is rather small in comparison to a thesis or dissertation.
A thesis generally refers to the final written work that leads to an academical degree, like a bachelor or a master thesis.
A dissertation is usually a general piece of written scientific work submitted for the requirements of a doctoral degree.

Depending on the language and on the user and on the context, the last two (thesis / dissertation) are sometimes interchangable. A paper is actually something distinct, although a dissertation can consist of published papers ("thesis by publication").
The "name" of the work for your master's degree usually is "master thesis".

Outside the United States, "master's dissertation" seems to be fairly common too.


text:
Should I choose an tenured advisor good at research but bad at teaching or an untenured professor good at teaching?
I have a Phd option with two professors.
Professor A is tenured and is doing  very good in research .But many people have complained against him that they cannot understand his class. He has 2 Phd Students -one has been working on Phd for 5 years but still hasn't given his candidature. The other student joined his lab in 2012 as Masters Student and is planning to graduate from Phd in 2016. He closely works with corporate and is very well funded and pays his students very high stipends (like 3k+).These students regularly go for internships in these companies. But i see these students working very long hours on weekdays and weekends to complete their class and research projects.He was recently made an distinguished professor of research in my university.
Professor B has been in university for 3 years and has just graduated a PhD student(after 3 years). He is looking for tenure and is very prolific publisher. However he also published to some questionable open access journals  (one's included in Beall's List) to achieve his tenure requirements. There are  3 students in his lab -2 Master's and one 20 hr working CS student to help them out with programming. He has few projects to work on but not as big as tenured professor's. But people have high hopes on this professor as he worked in industry for 6 years prior to becoming an assistant professor.He is also very a good teacher .His Phd student could not get a job in his research field and is now working as a full time research software developer.
Which professor should i choose for an Phd and what should i look out for in each of them like pitfalls and advantages .

This question seems very localized. It's unlikely that it can be framed in a way that is generally useful.

I'm not sure why a professor's capabilities as a lecturer should have anything to do when considering her competencies as a mentor and research advisor. The two skill sets are almost completely separate from one another. Moreover, if part of your concern is that you want to become a teaching faculty member some day, then there's probably a chance to be a teaching assistant for another faculty member who is more qualified as a teacher (such as your Professor B).


text:
What's the difference in responsibilities between a committee member, a co-advisor and an advisor in an PhD committee?
What are the differences in responsibilities among them? Can anybody give me an example to elucidate that. Also why are non-tenured faculty more interested in a co-adviser role than a committee member role?

The advisor is the person who is formally recognized as the person most responsible for supervising the student's thesis research. A co-advisor is a person who also works with the doctoral candidate, but often in a secondary role (perhaps providing scientific but not financial support, for instance).
In my own case, for instance, I had two advisors who were fully equal in both supervising the research and supporting it financially. However, formally one of them had to be in charge of the thesis research—I believe they decided it by a coin flip.
The thesis committee is a body that convenes only sporadically (although sometimes on a regular schedule) to ensure that a doctoral candidate is progressing according to expectations. The committee—which usually includes the advisor and several other faculty members (or other advisors)—is also usually responsible for deciding when a candidate is ready to schedule a defense of the thesis and graduate.
As you can see, this is a very different role than a co-advisor, who takes on a much more active role in supervising and guiding the doctoral candidate's work. While a thesis committee member rarely is a co-author on a paper with the candidate, a co-advisor often will be. Consequently, it's much more useful for a faculty member to be a co-advisor than simply a committee member. (The latter role will not carry anywhere near as much "credit" toward a tenure case as being an advisor or a co-advisor.)

@aeiesmail ,i am just afraid my PhD advisor might think i am trying to promote my MS advisor by bringing her in  as an co-adviser.

My experience was similar, in that I had two supervisors who were equal in terms of input. Rather than forcing one of them to be a co-supervisor, the institution allows them to share the role, and share the credit, equally. Incidentally, my chair (our word for committee member) also occasionally acted as a third supervisor as his area of expertise was also helpful to my thesis.

@user14285: If you're only going to consult with your MS advisor sporadically, he need only be a thesis committee member. If he's going to be a co-author, then he should probably be a co-advisor as well.

This breakdown of the different roles comes from the University of Melbourne:

Principal supervisor (i.e. advisor)
An appropriately qualified person who takes primary responsibility for the academic supervision of a candidate’s research and candidature
Co-supervisor (co-advisor)
An appropriately qualified person designated to assist in the academic supervision of a candidate's research and candidature
Advisory committee chair (committee member)
A registered principal supervisor in the administrative department of the candidate who is neither a supervisor of the candidate nor associated with the research project and who is appointed to oversee the advisory committee

In committee meetings (12 month confirmation, 2 year review, etc.) the chair organises the paperwork, basically. They are also there if the candidate needs to confide about their supervisors and potentially make a complaint if one of the supervisors' actions is unethical, or if there is some kind of professional or personal issue between them and the candidate.
As to your second question, I would suggest that non-tenured staff/faculty would push to be a co-adviser rather than committee member, because it raises their supervisory profile whereas being a committee member is really just a bureaucratic position. When applying for tenure-track positions, employers will look at the theses that the person has supervised or co-supervised, in addition to a range of other things, obviously.


text:
Tuition cost over time
I am wondering if anybody knows of a datasource that makes available tuition cost over time (annually) for US institutions.  I am particularly interested in the cost of graduate school expense.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_330.50.asp Is this what you're looking for?

@Compass -- This is what I am needing.  Elevate your comment to an answer so I can give you credit.

The National Center for Educational Statistics publishes reports mostly yearly regarding tuition fees as part of its Digest of Educational Statistics.
Relevant Table for graduate admissions from the most recent report. Information appears to go back to the 80s even with the 1995 report. Earlier data might be available from the Department of Education itself on request.
Professional degree type 1988 to 2010 Of note is that most fields have ballooned in cost the past three decades.


text:
Can I submit the same article, which is written in two different languages, to two different journals simultaneously?
I have written an article in Persian and then translated it into English. Is it possible to send them to two different journals (one in Iran and the other one in Belgium)?

AFAIK, the language doesn't matter, it would still be "double" publishing or self-plagiarism. There are journals that accept it in that condition, but I do not think it is the rule...

Do not do it. Plain and simple. If this is a good publication, what will it offer you being published in Iranian? If it is not,  2 or 100 copies of the same paper will not do you any good.

This is plagiarism at worst, double submission at best: in any case it would be shady.

@Alexandros: maybe it will offer the possibility to Iranians that does not speak English well to understand the content of the article? Not everybody can speak English

@Taladris: that’s a good point, but it is served just as well by making the Persian version publicly available online in some other way (e.g. through the author’s website, or a preprint server).  Printed journals are no longer the only means of public dissemination, and in many fields, are no longer the main one.

@Taladris That is cause for submitting a translation and making it clear it is, not a simultaneous submission

what is the content of the work?  in some cases, the process of translation itself would alter the work somewhat -- i.e., certain ideas would not be identical in the two languages -- making double publication sensible.  and i agree with @Taladris that there is good reason for publishing even the exact same work in two languages.  however, in order to make that less shady, i think you should have a note in each publication mentioning that it has been published in the other language and giving the citation.

It is about ancient history.

Yes, this is a problem. You should not submit the same work to more than one journal at a time. This applies regardless of language - merely being in a different language does not make the actual work unique.
Further, consider some practical considerations - a simultaneous submission means that you'll have to go through peer-review for both papers and (assuming you don't get caught and summarily rejected) presumably have to make some changes. What if the changes don't align? Now you don't have two translations of the same paper, but two subtly different papers in two languages.
If you're genuinely interested in making your paper more accessible, either post a translation online, or wait until one paper is accepted and then approach a journal in the other language about posting a translation.

Could you cite the rule which includes the line "regardless of the language"?

@ÉbeIsaac An example: "The American Journal of Epidemiology considers manuscripts for which copyright has not been assigned, that do not essentially duplicate already published material, and are not being simultaneously considered for publication elsewhere." You will note no exception for language.

If no specification exists, how could you claim that it isn't allowed. There is proof that it is possible as historical articles of different languages have been published in various languages. Are they all guilty of plagiarism and double publication?

@ÉbeIsaac A translation of a published article is substantially different from a simultaneous submission, which is the question.

@ÉbeIsaac: By making simultaneous submissions as you describe, you are presenting both versions as independent original work — that’s the self-plagiarism/double publication.  If you publish one version, and afterwards submit the other, clearly described as a translation of the first, then this would be fine, and analogous to the examples you mention.

@PLL: True and that is what I've included in my answer too.

If you write an article in Persian, you have the legal right to translate it to English, as long as you haven't assigned the copyright to someone else (in which case, you have to obtain the right to create a derivative work from the copyright owner). Many journals require you to assign copyright when they publish an article, and require you to avow that you (still) have the right to assign that copyright. So if you have assigned the right to make copies (including translations) to one journal, you can't then truthfully vow to the other journal that you can assign the right to the derivative work in English.
Journals have two basic reasons for following a no double publishing rule. One is the aforementioned copyright problem, that it might put one journal in a bind with respect to copyright. If neither journal requires copyright assignment and only requires a non-exclusive license, then the second reason may also be applicable, which is that journals consider their space to be a valuable commodity, to be used only when there is sufficient justification. Basic academic quality is one reason, but novelty is another -- a journal's editor could well decide that it is not worthwhile to use journal space to publish a paper that has already been published.
Since this is a matter of editorial judgment, the solution is simply to ask each editor whether it is okay for you to also submit a version in the other language. If both editors agree (and assuming that you have stated the facts clearly enough), then there would be nothing problematic with submitting a version of a paper in Farsi to one journal and a version in English to another journal. Versions in French and English would be more problematic, because there is a reasonable expectation that scholars can read both languages, whereas there are relatively few areas where scholars are standardly expected to read both English and Farsi, and providing an English translation could be a significant contribution.
So, to repeat, ask the editors.

"because there is a reasonable expectation that scholars can read both languages"????

Yes, is that idea unfamiliar to you?

@user6726 They're contesting that French-English bilingualism is common enough for your expectation to be reasonable.

I don't claim that anyone expects bilingualism, just that (depending on the field) a reading knowledge of French, or German, is normal, and often a forma; requirement for graduation.

"Reasonable expectation" implies far more than just "sometimes this happens in some fields"

I think this is the correct answer. I've done exactly what's being suggested here. I had one paper in my native language accepted, and I got permission from the editor to publish the same article in English. I then asked the editors of a couple of international journals if they would accept an English translation of my article. One journal said no, the other said yes (incidentally the top journal in the field), as long as the article made it perfectly clear how it related to the other article. Case closed (the final version ended up being a new paper, but that's a different story).

This is a important experience and because of it I removed the acceptance tag from Fomite's answer.

@Sverre Again, submitting a translated version of an already accepted/published article is vastly different than a simultaneous submission of the two. The end result is the same, but process matters. For example, "as long as the article made it perfectly clear how it related to the other article" is impossible with simultaneous submissions.

I lied - the end result isn't even the same. See the edit to my answer re: peer review and revisions. Simultaneous submissions are just a bad idea.

Publishing the same manuscript in more than one journal at a time is technically double submission. But this wouldn't be so if you consider one as a translated version of the other after one is published as long as you make this explicitly clear in the second paper. It isn't ethically wrong to publish your research in different language as it increases the visibility of your research in the right sense.

In this case you shouldn't just cite the already published paper; you should make it absolutely clear that the second paper is a translation of the first (e.g. in a footnote on the first page).

Yes, that is my point, @PeteL.Clark.

I do not recommend it, for the following reasons:
Firstly, because the same ideas and results will appear on two different papers, and someone that wants to credit your findings (and reads both languages) doesn't know which paper to cite.
Secondly, if I would see your Iranian paper (in journal X) cited on paper Y but I would only know the English version of it (in journal Z), I would have to check that they are, in fact, the same scientific result.
Finally, in most journals publications are required to present new results. Pushing your case to the edge, I could write 2 papers in English: one in such a way that only a native speaker would understand, and another that my community would understand. This is not acceptable by most journals.
There are exceptions on which publishing the same results is acceptable, for instance, some journals do not require the results to be new. In this situation, I don't see the issue.


text:
Can I count on "future works" ideas in a paper to work?
Can I count on paper future work or not? in order to work on that for my master thesis. I have a paper and its implementation. and I work on that for some months.
This paper belong to 2013 and the author work on another fields on 2014. I track his publications and I am not sure he goes back to his 2013's paper future work.
I want to know and make sure if the idea will work or not? How can I make sure if it will work or not?

What do you mean by counting on it? That the idea will work? That it's publishable? That the author will or won't work on it themselves? Something else?

There's no way to know but to try it. Sometimes the ideas people say they'd like to try in their future work don't pan out. Also, you can be pretty sure that they are working on it. They don't have an enforceable claim on the area, but given the head start that they have, they might beat you to finishing the idea (if it's viable).

No, of course not!

@JeffE Do you have any ideas, please guide me, I need members experiences

I have no idea what you're asking for. There are only two ways to know whether an idea in the "Future work" section of someone else's paper will work: Try it yourself, or wait for someone else to show that it does. Figuring out which ideas work is the definition of "research"!

How to make sure if it will work or not?

The reason why it's in the "future work" section is that no-one knows because it hasn't yet been done (and it's easily possible the original authors never will try it). "Future work" ideas can range in feasibility from wild speculation to simple, almost-guaranteed-to-work extensions that just need a bit more manpower or computer power to finish.
This is a good topic to discuss with your supervisor as soon as possible. You should be asking questions such as:

How feasible might it be for these ideas to lead to some useful conclusions?
What if it doesn't work? How soon will we know, and what alternative paths are there?

Of course, some ideas are much easier and more feasible than others.  There's no way to know for sure but to try the idea yourself (after making sure that the problem is not already solved in later literature). Because dead-ends often go unpublished, it might even be worth contacting the relevant authors to ask if they attempted to follow up on their future ideas.
It's a courteous thing to do especially if theirs is a recent publication: if the original authors are still working on the problem, publishing the solution first might annoy the other researchers. Though whether to proceed anyway (and give them notice that you're working on the idea as well), stay silent, or offer to collaborate, is a dilemma that's off-topic for this question.


text:
How do you respond when people talk about the possibility of profiting from, rather than the exciement of, your research?
Let's say you are passionate, I mean really passionate, about your field.
However, whenever you try to share the pleasure induced by your findings or further understanding or even acknowledged works with those you love and who love you, could be your family members or lover or spouse, you always get a response such as "Oh yeah, that might make a lot of money."
What do you do if you are uncomfortable with such a response but do not know how to properly express yourself in this context without hurting them?
What would you do to make yourself more comfortable?

I have to admit that this question may not necessarily be proper in this S.E., and I am not sure of that. Please just let me know if it is indeed so.

I think this may be off-topic because it is about personal relations outside academia.

Yeah, that is also my concern :) I just feel that maybe not a few senior researchers are experienced in such a situation and may have wise ideas.

One way to think about it is that they aren't trying to disparage your passion, but rather are approaching things from another perspective.  In a way, it's a positive message: they are agreeing that they value your field, and adding an additional reason to do so (beyond what matters most to you).  It would be nice if they could understand/appreciate your passion more directly, and perhaps they will start to do so over time, but at least you all have a positive view.  Their perspective is complementary to yours, rather than in opposition.

@AnonymousMathematician: Much appreciated; I think, yes, I unintentionally get astray...

@silvado I think that it is on topic, because it is a challenge that many in academia face, not unlike imposter syndrome.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but in a passive roundabout way, the other person may just be trying to talk about their unmet need for money or security. So I wouldn't take this as complete diss of what you were talking about, but more as an awkward way of trying to broach the subject of money, future employability, and possible future income with you.

If you are really that passionate about your work, why do you need others' approval or praise about it?

I don't think this problem is specific to academia (people in a wide range of fields experience this), and the answers are not different for people in academia vs people in other fields. So I agree that it is off topic here.

Hmm - I can actually relate a lot to this question as a researcher. I do a bit of work in machine learning and I met jerks all the time with their own interests to profit from either me or my research; it's actually gets a bit annoying.

@Alexandros: I am afraid your comment assumes that I SIMPLY need others' praise. But this is not the case. :) I was annoyed NOT because I depend my self-value on others' approv or derog, but mainly because, perhaps, I implicitly subconsciously respectfully require their minds to concern more than money. Of course, we are currently not lacking in money.

@Alexandros: Sometimes, I have got a weird feeling that I would rather they are against my research, instead of for my research by looking at what physical interests may be thus induced...

@Alexandros: Incidentally, my comments left elsewhere in this question may make you assume what you have assumed. To this point I have to say that I left some responses because those comments or answers somehow give me inspirations, not necessarily reflecting what really concerns me exactly. :)

Let's pretend that it's not an academic field that you are passionate about, but instead something like train spotting or fantasy football or competitive button collecting.  Seriously, pretend that when you are talking with non-practitioners, that every technical word that comes out of your mouth is replaced with something like "'Jaques Israel' Pink Latticino Swirl" or "1820 Georgian British Livery button."
Would you feel upset by their disinterest then? Depending on the answer to this question, I think that there are two ways to approach the issue:

If you would still feel upset, then it's not so much that you want the people close to you to be button enthusiasts too, but that you want them to be excited for you and supportive of your enthusiasm. A way that you can address this in your relationships is by talking less about the subject that you care about, and more about your little triumphs and setbacks in pursuing it.  For example, if you are elated because you have just figured out a difficult problem, tell about your struggle and your joy, or about how it can affect your relationship with your fellow button collectors, but don't try to explain the problem or the solution.
If you would not still feel upset, then it seems that you feel there is something important about your field that means that non-practitioners should care about what is going on in it.  In this case, you again need to drop the technical vocabulary, but instead talk about how the ideas that you encounter may come to affect the world that we all live in or our understanding of it.  A personal example: some of my synthetic biology work focuses on the study of translational regulation of Sindbis replicons via calibrated flow cytometry ("1851 Goodyear Patriotic Lady Liberty Button"), but I talk about it with non-practitioners in terms of the ways it could make vaccination easier, safer, and more accessible.

I either case, in my personal experience, the core of the solution is to drop the technical language and talk about whichever human dimensions it is that you really want the other person to engage with.

How about this - taken from Donald Schön (.. on top of the o) Reflective Practitioner
The response you are getting surprises you.  It is often in the nature of skilled professional work that circumstances surprise us. And at that moment, we begin to work.
Stop yourself. Brake.  And ask yourself, "What surprises me? and what would I like to know more about?"
If you can understand and articulate what surprises you in their response and how you can learn more, then you move from being irritated (and closing down) to being curious and opening out.
Does this help?

Thanks very much for answering and introducing the book; I have never heard of the book. Yes, I think to brake is a good idea, after all being irritated is (to me) a waste of time :)

Some things you could try:

Get really good at selling your work, and develop an elevator pitch that most laymen would find interesting and relevant.
If your topic is very esoteric, you could try selling your field as a whole before moving to your specific research topic (answering the question "what is math?" rather than "what is algebraic number theory?").  This will generally be easier for laymen to relate to, and if you give them a good introduction, you may be able to steer the conversation towards the specific things that you find interesting about your field (rather than "it could make money").  As a bonus, this will remind you of the broader impact of your work, and the things that make your problems fundamentally interesting to other people.
If that fails, you can find different people to talk to about your research.


text:
Normal length of time taken to arrive at a phd admission decision?
I would like to know, if possible, how long it takes on the average to reach a first admission decision for doctoral programs?
Let us say a doctoral program promises to inform the applicants of the outcome three months after the deadline for submitting application packages. Does this really mean that to reach a decision requires exactly three months?

I am not quite sure what you are uncertain about. I do not see any way the quoted statement could mean what you ask. They just promise not to spend longer than that.

Downvote for what? My question is clear. That my motivation is unclear does not constitute a reason for downvoting, by the rules here.

@TobiasKildetoft I am afraid you asked a wrong question. That you cannot tell why something causes a question does not mean that the question is not a question. My question is clear in itself.

In my experience it's common for academic departments to have a graduate admissions committee that meets periodically to make admissions decisions and decisions on financial aid.  Sometimes decisions on financial aid are made separately from decisions on admission.
In our department we review applications as they come in and typically respond with a decision on admission within a few weeks.  However, decisions on financial aid are made only a few times per year.  For example, we'll meet in early April to decide on assistantship awards for the fall semester.
Under this system, if you applied for admission now, we'd review your application and reach an admissions decision by the end of January, and you'd either be told "no", or "you've been admitted but we'll make decisions about financial aid in early April."
I've seen other institutions where all of the applications are held until one meeting where both admissions and financial aid decisions are made at the same time.  Under that system, you probably wouldn't hear anything at all until the committee met and made its decisions.
A couple of other comments:

Applications are often sent to a central office ("graduate studies" or something similar)  and then distributed to the departments to make admissions decisisons.  In my experience, there are many incomplete applications received by our graduate office.  We don't see them in the department until and unless all of the required materials have been submitted.  You can and probably should check with the office where you sent your application to make sure that the complete application has been received.
Christmas (December 25) and New Year's Day (January 1) are important holidays in the US.  Traditionally, fall semester classes end before Christmas and spring semester classes don't start until after New Year's Day.  Many colleges and universities are effectively closed for a few weeks around these holidays.  You shouldn't expect to hear anything from any university in the US until after New Year's Day because of these holidays.

I am assuming that you are referring to programs that offer rolling admissions—that is, programs where you can submit an application at any time of the year.
The key words in your question are on average. If you consider all of the applications received by the committee, it will take the committee approximately three months to reach a final decision on a randomly chosen application. However, that is definitely not an exact number—in clear-cut cases, they could reach an answer much sooner. Similarly, applications received during "peak" periods or during the summer—when many faculty are on travel and therefore not as readily available to meet for such decisions—it may take a bit longer.
Part of the reason for this is that several layers of decision are usually involved: first the applications need to be reviewed, and individual members of the admissions committee will have a chance to weigh in. Then, if needed or part of the program's process, interviews will be conducted. After that, the application will still need to be approved by the entire admissions committee, and possibly departmental-level approval will also be required.
If you have not heard anything after three (or better, three and a half) months, then a politely worded email to the admissions office to ask about the status of your application would be appropriate.
On the other hand, if there is a single admissions cycle per year, the decision-making schedule is usually more or less the same each year. Thus, regardless of when you actually submit the forms, notification of the decision comes at the same time for everyone.

Thank you very much for the answer :) In fact, I am not referring to the rolling admissions! I am referring to the normal admissions: One admission for one year. To this case, does the answer still apply or situations might be different? Thanks!

The situation is more or less the same. The issue is that when you submit the application relative to the deadline has less of an effect. The decision will be made for everybody as a group, not just on an individual basis.


text:
How do I find a PhD research area that will be commercially viable?
I want to find a PhD position which will guarantee my ability to obtain a job in industry as a researcher.
I need some ideas how to find a research field which companies will want to invest in and hire researchers in.
How do I find an area that will be commercially viable?

If you want a job in industry, do not do a PHD. Operating tools like openstack is not research. You can learn such tools on your own.

People mainly do a PHD because they love doing research. No piece of paper (including a PHD) can guarantee that you will get the ideal job you want.

I don't think there is a specific PhD position that will guarantee your ability to land an industry research position. What will guarantee you hire-ability will be your own skills and drive for an area of research. Yea most companies require that shiny piece of paper, but what they really want out of that is the abilities gained and refined during the process of earning that paper.  Show you have the ability for good research no matter what the topic and you will have more opportunities.

@scrappedcola most companies require that shiny piece of paper Nope.

i'll adjust to many who are looking for researchers require it, though I haven't seen a single technical research position that lacks that in the requirements.

Pick something with a lot of software engineering/scientific computing.  Those are very portable skills.

@user2379888, thanks please expand the answer I am looking for some thing like that.

First, there are no guarantees when it comes to degrees and job prospects. I assume you mean "improve my chances" or "give me a high probability" of getting a job in industry.
Here's a procedure you use:

Identify the industries that hire a high number of PhDs. These data
can be found at US Department of Labor and similar.  If you can't find
any, start with Finance, Health Care (Drugs, Biotech), Chemicals, Oil & Gas,
Information Services, and Government.
Identify the largest employers in each of these industries.
Likewise, identify the top employers of PhDs -- e.g. the National Labs.  This used to include Bell Labs, IBM, HP Labs, Microsoft Research, but all (but the last) have been decimated in the last 20 years.
Go to their web sites, find "Careers", and search on "PhD" keyword or criteria.  Read the job descriptions and find out what is common among them -- discipline, skills, experience, etc.

I think you'll find the common denominator is that the organizations that hire PhDs have a way to covert PhD skills and knowledge into money (i.e. via competitive advantage, marketable innovation, etc.)  If your #1 goal in getting a PhD is to get a job in industry for big $$, then you had better become an expert on how your PhD skills and knowledge will get converted to money.  This should lead you to study your target industry in great detail -- history, economics, strategy, and recent trends.


text:
Is there value in posting a video of my paper presentation online?
I am a PhD student in computer science and I have a paper accepted in a conference. One of my friends will record me presenting the paper during the conference and I was wondering if there are any benefits of uploading that video recording online for example on YouTube?

Does your conference allow you to record presentations? All that I have attended prohibit it.

@RichardErickson I am not 100% sure, but I think I saw people doing it in previous installments of the same conference.

Many IEEE conferences these days record talks themselves and put it on youtube (and embed it on the paper download page). Presumably they are seeing some value in it, but I have to admit I haven't yet watched any of the talks when downloading a paper.

The greatest value most likely will come from watching your own performance - perhaps with your advisor or someone whose presentation style you admire - to look for ways to improve your skills. But unless you intend to share the link with specific people of groups of people, it is unlikely that your talk will be "found" by anyone. What audience would you hope to reach?

@RichardErickson Without an explicit transfer of performance rights (in addition to transferring copyright to the paper), do conferences have any legal standing whatsoever to prohibit speakers from recording their own talks and distributing them however they like?

@JeffE Meeting may limit attendee's behavior. For example, see SETAC's policy: _No attendee at a SETAC annual meeting may record, film, tape, photograph, interview or use any such media during any presentation, poster display or exhibit without the express, advance approval of the executive director of SETAC North America. This policy applies to all SETAC members, nonmembers, guests and exhibitors as well as members of the print, online or broadcast media._The page I linked to also has a link about copyright.

@RichardErickson  Fair enough. So if you want to record your SETAC talk, do it at home or in your hotel room, not at the conference proper.

@JeffE I agree. However, other life science meetings have similar guideline: Ecological Society of America. I would suggest the OP read the details for her or his conference.

You need to be sure that you are allowed to record presentations—as one of the comments indicated, many conferences prohibit such behavior.
If you are allowed to do so, it's usually for personal purposes, and public postings may be limited.
On the other hand, it may be possible for you to create your own version of a "podcast" with the talk using screen capture software. You can talk through your slides in greater detail than is possible in a typical conference presentation.
That said, I don't think there will be a huge demand for such a presentation.

I like your answer. Please feel free to include these two citations for examples of meetings banning recording talks without approval: Ecological Society of America http://esa.org/ftlauderdale/social-media/ and SETAC https://msp.setac.org/general-info/meeting-policies/


text:
Statement of purpose: how important is correctness of grammar and punctuation?
English is not my first language, and I am concerned that my statement of purpose might contain some grammatical and punctuation mistakes that neither Microsoft word nor I can see. What is the best way to overcome this problem, and to what degree does this affect the admissions committee decision putting into consideration that English isn't my first language?
P.S. I don't have any native English-speaking friends and I don't trust companies or online sites to see my statement of purpose to check its correctness.

Okay, so basically I will need the help of an English language expert, but how can I make sure that my work will not be taken advantage of?

professionals, by definition, will consider any material submitted to them as confidential… I think you're worrying way too much about this, as the commercial value of your document is probably close to zero

A statement of purpose has no commercial value except for someone who would be applying to the same grad school at the same time. You're not writing a research proposal.

@aeismail and with the same background… if your statement of purpose could fit anyone, there is something wrong with it :)

@F'x♦ My statement of purpose can be modified and with the removal of two paragraphs, then it could fit a large pool of prospective graduate international students who might want to continue their highr education in the US

@aeismail so basically my statement of purpose currently (since I am applying to universities now) is valuable!

No, that's a sign that your statement of purpose is improperly written. A statement of purpose should be specific to you, in that it describes your experiences and motivations, and outlines what kinds of problems you want to solve. It also talks about the department in which you want to enroll, and how your interests dovetail with their research. If, as F'x says, your document can fit anybody, then it's not a very good statement of purpose!

If you are at a university, there might be centers on campus which specialize in such things (in case you are more willing to trust an on-campus center than a company or website).

If the written question above is a genuine reflection of your English spelling and grammar abilities, then I strongly suggest you seek professional services to assist if you are in any way concerned about your abilities having an adverse impact on your application.
This application is clearly a very important step in determining your future, and if it is so important and you have concerns, it is not worth leaving it to chance. If you have no suitable friends, use a professional service. Plenty of other native-English speaking applicants who are competing for spaces with you will have done so.
I can't say for certain how a selection committee will factor your English as a second language. It is likely to depend on the institution and the course you are applying for.

can you please explain you first sentence in your answer, does my question show any English grammatical errors?!

Wow, native English speakers really use professional editing services?  Seems like a gray area to me...

@TheHiary - Yes, your question contains a number of errors, albeit minor, but errors nonetheless. Some of these errors, in fact, Microsoft Word would probably pick up and offer to correct for you. Your reply above also contains errors. Please don't take it too critically, but if I'm not mistaken, you'd like your application to be as close to perfect as possible, wouldn't you. If you can't trust a professional editing service, who do this type of thing by the hundreds for a living, how will you ever trust the institutions you are applying to?

@DnuorgSpu - You'd better believe it!

@long if the institution I am applying to offers this kind of service I will be more than happy to ask them for help, anyhow thank you for your answer

@TheHiary - That you are seeking advice from the outset is a great sign of your enthusiasm and drive. I sincerely wish you the best with your applications.

English not being your first language should not be an excuse. No one is perfect and making a mistake is acceptable, surely if  you're not a native speaker. But it makes you look less interested if there are a lot of mistakes in your text.
A native English speaker would be advised - since they might be able to phrase something better than someone who's just "good".


text:
Is excluding a co-author from a proposal considered academic misconduct or just an ethical issue?
I worked on a proposal together with a coworker. The idea for the proposals came from industry and we all discussed this. There were 2 project and we all have inputs.  My project was accepted and his was not.  We all contributed ideas back and forth with the 2 projects.
I did put his name on the first draft proposal but left his name off the final version and put myself as sole PI.  I did ask him for further corrections but his reply was that there was none.  I simply forgot and left his name off without asking his permission.  It was an oversight.
Now he saw this proposal and wants to report me for misconduct.
Is he right that he can report me for academic misconduct?  Is this an ethical issue and not academic misconduct?

You started the question with 'Is it wrong for me to take a coworker's name off a proposal' and ended with 'I simply forgot and left his name off'.  Those are too radically different things.

I'm interested in the notion that "Academic misconduct" and "an ethical issue" are two separate things.

@mandysmith Please do not remove the content of the question.

Your question as I understand it is: is it considered misconduct to exclude a co-author from a proposal, or is it some other ethical issue?
Certainly "research misconduct" can broadly be defined as "ethically problematic behaviors in research" - in which case there is no difference. However, let us assume a narrower definition of "misconduct."
The specific definition of "misconduct" may depend on where you are. In the United States, the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) defines "research misconduct" as follows:

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.

and "plagiarism" is further defined as

the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

(Individual institutions may, and often do, extend this definition as a matter of internal policy. However, the ORI policy represents the least inclusive definition of misconduct in the United States.)
According to this definition, it seems that using your coworker's ideas, processes, results, or words in your research proposal without giving him credit is academic misconduct.
Having said that, the ORI also says this on plagiarism:

Many allegations of plagiarism involve disputes among former collaborators who participated jointly in the development or conduct of a research project, but who subsequently went their separate ways and made independent use of the jointly developed concepts, methods, descriptive language, or other product of the joint effort. The ownership of the intellectual property in many such situations is seldom clear, and the collaborative history among the scientists often supports a presumption of implied consent to use the products of the collaboration by any of the former collaborators.
For this reason, ORI considers many such disputes to be authorship or credit disputes rather than plagiarism. Such disputes are referred to PHS agencies and extramural institutions for resolution.

From your description, however, it seems that this is not the case in your scenario - you and your coworker did not "go separate ways." There is no "implied consent" to use his ideas. He fully expected to be a co-author, and you yourself admit that he should have been a co-author, except that you somehow left him off.
(Even if this is considered an "authorship dispute" and not "plagiarism," it's not up to you to make that determination - it's up to the investigative body, who will look into the matter if your coworker chooses to report this.)
Finally, "honest error" is not considered misconduct according to the ORI. However, your coworker is not required to take your word for it that your exclusion of him from the proposal was an honest error. This is a determination that a third-party investigative body will typically make.
In summary: Your coworker is well within his rights to report you for misconduct. If he does so, you are free to try and persuade the investigators that this was an honest mistake.


text:
Should I notify people I mention in the acknowledgements section?
I recently finished a paper in which I received valuable feedback from two professors (neither supervisors nor coauthors) at some specific points, which ultimately leaded to localized significant improvements. I highly appreciated it and of course I added explicit mentions in the acknowledgements section stating their suggestions.
My question now is: I hardly will see again these professors for a long time. I thought about sending an email to them commenting on their inclusion on the acknowledgements... But then I thought that it should be something understood as obvious, without too much interest for them or even spammy. So, shall I communicate their inclusion in the acknowledgements section? If so, what will be the correct etiquette for such an email?
EDIT: As @StephanKolassa comments, another important and highly related issue is what is the best timing for communication, if this is considered adequate:

First submission
Acceptance
Publication (early access or traditional)

Good question, +1. Looking forward to answers. I'd also be interested at what people believe the best point in time would be for such an email: at the first submission, at acceptance, or on (early online) publication?

Thanks @StephanKolassa. Indeed that is a question I would have in the future! I edited the question to incorporate it.

I have seen journals require this. Example from the manuscript preparation instructions of many BMC journals: "Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgements section."

shall I communicate their inclusion in the acknowledgements section?

Yes, why not? It helps at building connections and improving relationships. Besides, if the acknowledged people are from a different field than yours, they might never know you've acknowledged them otherwise.

what will be the correct etiquette for such an email?

I don't think there is any need to be overly formal. Typically I would write something simple, along the lines of (names and facts have been changed to protect the innocent):

Dear John,
thank you very much for helping me with the problem of packing holes. I've included an
  acknowledgment in a paper I recently wrote on the topic.
The paper is titled "Packing the unpackable and stacking the
  unstackable" and has been submitted to the Transactions on Painstaking
  Stacking. You can find a preprint of the paper at the address (link to, e.g.,
  arXiv).
Kind regards/Sincerely/Cheers,
Massimo

The above example is meant to be sent just after the first submission. In more critical cases, when I'm not sure whether the acknowledgment would be well-received or not, or if I think I might have written a wrong detail (e.g., the affiliation), I typically send a copy of the paper before the submission, asking for feedback.

IMHO, definitely before first submission. It would be a nice idea to send them a "Thank You" email and let them know that you've finished the paper and in order to show your appreciation you've included their names in the acknowledgements section. So If they do not feel comfortable with this they could tell you even before the paper is submitted.

+1, but you should also probably send them a note when the paper is accepted and a final copy with any revisions when it is published (or available online, or whatever).

I was not considering acceptance or rejection of the paper; Instead I wanted to make sure the professors are happy with their names mentioned in the acknowledgements regardless of the peer-review result.

Agreed, thus the +1. I think it's polite to let them know at submission, with a copy, and at acceptance and publication (with a final copy), too. It helps to foster the relationship in the future.

In math at least, you do not usually explicitly inform people that you have included them in the acknowledgements.  You should of course thank them for their help, and it is common to send them a copy of the paper when you have a more-or-less final version (often this is the version you submit--in math the refereeing process takes a long time, plus your acknowledge-ees (sp?) may have additional comments/suggestions), or notify them when you post it on the arXiv.  (This is regardless of whether they have seen a preliminary version or not.)
To add a little more on the question in the edit:  sometimes I will send a pre-submission version if I really want to see if anyone has comments before I submit (students probably at least want to get comments from advisors before submitting), but usually I send out copies of the paper/post on the arXiv about the same time I submit.  I don't typically actively notify acknowledge-ees when a paper has been accepted or published (though I will update the arXiv), unless the final version ends up being significantly different in a way that would be of interest to them.  However, sometimes I see colleagues I have acknowledged, they will inquire about the status of the paper.

What if it's not a paper, but a dissertation? I'm not sure that everyone would appreciate receiving a 200+ pages document. Would providing a link to it be an appropriate alternative?

In this context I assume that "send" means "send a link to the URL where the paper can be found. I don't think I've ever received a PDF attachment in this context; it's simply less convenient for the recipient.

@TomChurch Once upon a time, I sent physical copies.  But in my circles, people often attach pdfs in email or send a link.  I personally prefer giving links also--I usually give an arXiv link when possible, though occasionally I will email the pdf if I haven't yet posted the paper anywhere.

@AleksandrBlekh Yes, a link is fine.  See also my previous comment addressed to Tom Church.

My advice (coming from physical science experience) is yes, you should. Massimo's format for the communication makes sense.  In addition to the courtesy, there is also an aspect of letting them know their name is running around there.  99.9% of the time they will be happy but if they are not, at least you surface it.  [Note, this is notification, not permission, though.]  Also if there is any chance they are going to kerfuffle about wanting coauther status versus attaboy, at least it gives them a chance to say it earlier.  Again, though this is just informational, not a permission.
But in general, it will just make them happy.  It may also open their eyes to some application of their work or apparatus or the like that they don't normally think of.  For instance, if I acknowledged a physics prof for an insight in a chemistry paper, he would probably appreciate knowing that some ideas of his have meaning outside the tuff Bessel function loving world of physics and in the more applied materials space.


text:
If a professor is not offering funding to a PhD applicant, does it mean that he doesn't really want to be his advisor?
In some countries, it is required for students to contact a professor and find an advisor before they start their application for that university. I have heard from some of my friends who are studying PhD that if a professor is eager to advise a student who has contacted him (because of his outstanding vita, publication, etc.), he will help that student to find a good scholarship or even offers some scholarships from funding providers he knows (maybe from industry, research institutes, etc.).
I am asking this because after I heard this comment, I feel that if a professor does not show support for scholarships, or if he says in emails

I will be happy to advise you on your PhD, please go to admissions webpage, also visit scholarships webpage and apply for one you are eligible for receiving.

it means that this professor is not strongly interested in advising me.
I mean, if the professor really wanted to have me in his research group as a PhD student, he would try to help me finding scholarships. If he is not helping and is not talking about it, he is not really interested in having me as a PhD student. He believes that I am not a strong student and I will not find any scholarships. So, this is a way to politely and automatically reject a PhD student. Is this really true?

Just a note: I understand what you meant, but "PhD candidate" usually means a PhD student that has passed some sort of mid-way exams. I can't think of a better word, though.

@Davidmh Prospective PhD student? PhD Prospect?

Related: Implications of being accepted without funding?

@Davidmh I mean a student who is on the applying process to enter a PhD program.

What country is this professor in?  What field?  Funding practices differ widely among both.

@NateEldredge I had similar responses from professors at Australia and in civil engineering field.

I don't think there can be a yes or no answer to this question. It has been my experience that it's up to the student to secure funding rather than the advisor holding the student's hand throughout the process.  However, it's also been my experience that in applied sciences there is usually research funding available for PhD students and thus scholarships are not needed.

It could be, as is usually the case in the UK, that the Professor has no direct influence on the awarding of scholarship money. It would, therefore, be irresponsible of him to mislead you about your chances of obtaining funding. I certainly wouldn't take it as a sign that he doesn't wish to supervise you.

That could be the reason, but I can think of a few alternatives.

He may have a deadline for a paper next week, or has heavy teaching, or any other very time consuming task.
He hasn't had a new PhD student lately, so he is not really updated in the funding sources available.
You know your eligibility much more than he does. For example, you might state in your CV that your were born in Colombia, so he knows you have that nationality, but you may also have a Spanish passport, and thus be eligible for funding for EU citizens.

I would guess that these applications require you to submit some sort of research plan; that should be done with your future supervisor. Once you found a suitable funding possibility, ask for help to write the proposal.


text:
Minimum thereshold for scholarship
I emailed a professor in Australia for a PhD program. In the response, and as a part of that, he told me "For scholarships, you need to be at least 85% and over". What does it mean? Is this refer to GPA or something else?

Probably, but he's the one who has the ability to clarify, so why not ask him?

It may be GPA. It may be rank in your class. It may be your percentile on the graduate exams. I agree with @GrotesqueSI: The answer is to email the professor again and request clarification.

Typically Australian universities would use Honors 1 equivalence for allocating scholarships both to locals and international students. So the 85 would be that of an equivalent mark. I have found one document from QUT that explains this, you should search something similar for the university you are applying for.
https://cms.qut.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/275477/honours-equivalence-research-applications.pdf
In my experience that would be the minimum and without things adding to it, you would be less likely to be competitive for a scholarship.

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


text:
How do I add an article that is already in Google Scholar to my profile?
I have authored some publications that are already present in Google Scholar and have citations listed for them, but I see no way to add them to my profile. I see how to add an article with all of the same information manually, but this creates what appears to be an independent (duplicate?) entry for the article, with no citations or links associated. I also see how to get a list of suggested additions, but the articles I'm looking for are not among them.
How do I add an article that is already in Google Scholar to my profile?

Have you changed your name or institutional affiliation?

@BrianBorchers: No, but some of the missing papers have (correctly) a slightly different name for me (e.g. initials vs. full first name).

Has someone else with the same initial/name already claimed the article?

Sign In to Google Scholar.
Click on My Profile.
Click on the + button above the article list
Click on Add articles in the context menu

Tried that. It doesn't work: "I see how to add an article with all of the same information manually", and the articles are (obviously) not among the list of articles that appear automatically.

You can add them manually. Google Scholar will probably eventually notice that the two areticles are the same, and suggest combining them. If it's a new article, you can also just wait. I have found that articles usually appear in Google Scholar a few days earlier than they are suggested as additions to my profile.

May not be what the OP wanted, but this answers my question and the question in the title. Thanks.

follow the instructions above, then, when offered a search box, enter the title of your article. Then you click on the checkbox next to the identified article and click on the validation button (top-right corner).

Sign in to Google Scholar.
Find the article in Google Scholar that you would like to add to your profile.
Select the star (Save) under the article.
Click on my library (Top right)
Select the article and click the Edit icon (pencil icon on top)
You will see the details of the article, copy it as is in Add articles manually. (instructions mentioned above!)

In direct answer to the OP's question...
Do what was mentioned earlier about getting to the Details of the article.
Then copy the entire author row (not just your name).
Go back to the Add Articles "+" button above your article list.
In the search bar where your name is, paste that author row you searched for. You should be able to find it now.

This worked for me immediately. Great answer!

The answer is not self-contained (Do what was mentioned earlier)