text:
I'm affiliated with two universities: do I need ethics approval from both?
Currently I'm affiliated with two universities: Nankai University in China (postdoc) and Monash University in Melbourne (adjunct).  I'm attempting to apply for ethics approval for a research project involving personal data that people post online.  I'm completely new to this.
Q: Do I need ethics approval from both universities?
It would be substantially easier for me to get approval from Monash, simply because the forms are in English and the people I'd need to discuss it with speak English.

What actually happened: I applied for ethics approval from Monash.  They were fairly patient with me, being new to the process, and it took a bit of back and forth.  Nankai University matched the conditions and dates by Monash, so I didn't have to bother with filling in paperwork in Chinese.  (And the paper was subsequently published here.)

Where do those online posters come from? And can those data potentially reveal the poster's identity? Aka, will you get names, IP, address, etc.? And finally, which one are you primarily affiliated to?

Are you going to list both affliations on the publications? Are you afraid of getting sued?

The data are user comments to news articles.  Sometimes it uses their real name, and links to their Facebook page (which can give you a lot of personal information, even without being friends); no IP addresses.  It may be that some of these comments are by minors.  I'm primarily with Nankai University.  I'm not afraid of being sued (there's nothing sue-worthy), I'm afraid of my paper not being reviewed by a journal if I don't get approval.

Almost certainly you have to at least ask each one whether you need their approval. If it turns out their policies say that you do, and you went ahead without it, telling them "someone on the Internet said I didn't need your approval" will not save your job.

The problem is that it's not straightforward for me to ask; my Chinese is not that good yet.  I don't know where to go to ask, and even if I did, I wouldn't know how to ask.  My English-speaking colleagues don't really know either (as they're in computer science and their research doesn't need approval).

@RebeccaJ.Stones We do not and cannot know the answer to your question because it depends completely on your universities' policies. You must figure out how to ask them.

The purpose of IRB approval is for four things. The first is to make sure research is being done ethically and responsibly. Except when used in a circular definition, research does not need IRB approval to be conducted in an ethical manner. It definitely does not need multiple IRBs to approve it. The second is funders may not fund research that is not approved. They would only want approval from the institution where the funding is being given to. To publish research, it general needs IRB approval, but again, they do not care where it comes from. From both the publisher and funder point of view, IRB approval is their proof that the research was conducted in an ethical manner.
The final reason is so you are not liable. IRB approval, at least at the universities I am familiar with, means that the university takes on the liability  as long as the protocol is approved. As place that may get sued,more any place that you will want help from if you get sued, will likely need to approve the research. Many IRBs have a light touch review for studies that have been reviewed by another university's IRB.

This is good: it answers the general question.  In my case then, I think it would be reasonable to get IRB approval from Monash alone.  There's no real chance of suing, and the research is effectively unfunded.

@RebeccaJ.Stones Whether or not you get sued has nothing at all to do with whether or not you are funded. Also, why only the concern with getting sued? You could lose your job if you don't get proper clearance.

You are NEVER not liable if a subject gets hurt.  The ethics review process and informed consent has little to do with liability.  A good informed consent design can make it very difficult to claim that a subject was not made aware of their risks, or at least anticipated risks.  If a subject gets hurt from an unanticipated risks, though, or from a violation of the protocol, all bets are off.  I suggest removing the bit about liability.

Generally, the answer will depend on the laws and practices of both your employing countries and employing institutions.  It is not simply a matter of funding, as I have had to do IRBs for multiple universities for unfunded pilot projects.  (US)  It would not be wise to neglect checking with your Chinese university's ethics board.  I suggest editing this answer to remove the reference to not needing multiple IRBs.  Also, the liability portion is potentially misleading.  Some new device research for some universities can require assumption of liability by the researcher, even if passed by IRB.

Yes.
Or at the very least, check with both Universities' ethics boards.
I know of one instance of a post graduate student who in a similar situation got clearance from one university, but not the other, and was forced to discard their results.

+1 - The only people who can answer this definitively is those ethics boards.

In the US, you generally need the approval of an Institutional Review Board (IRB) if your work was funded by the federal government, and you would have to demonstrate that approval to publish in any venue that required it. There are probably many other institutions and laws in the US that require IRB approval for this kind of research, but most of the issue is driven by the federal government's attachment of the process to its research funding. If this were happening here, either one should be sufficient. That being said, if the work is mostly related to your postdoc, I would be most concerned about the requirements of the funding agency or university that funds it. An adjunct position in the US would imply mostly a teaching role to me which would be less concerned about your research work. Your situation may be different.

You first need to know the laws of the country where you "are". In the US, as long as you're not engaged in directly-regulated research (such as medicine), IRB approval is imposed on you via a contractual / employment relationship with an institution. Therefore, in the US, you are required to do what your employer requires of you. An institution may require that all research conducted using institution resources undergo IRB scrutiny. In the US, the institution would have no power to limit your independent research activities, but such assumptions of individual liberty may not hold elsewhere. Other countries may have other laws; if you're actually in China, you have to do what Chinese law requires of you, even if you're only occasionally in China. It does not matter, from the legal-enforcement perspective, whether it is difficult for you to pursue this question in Chinese, following prevailing cultural norms. You should therefore find someone who can give you honest and expert advice about IRB law (civil or criminal) in China. And just as it is in the US, you need to inquire of your employer what they require you to do (where the consequences of violating their rules could be getting sacked).
If you are only concerned with publication issues, you should inquire directly of relevant journals what their specific requirements are. Some journals do not raise the question at all (I only know by rumor that it's required in psychology). If a journal requires you to warranty something about IRB approval, you need to know in advance exactly what is required. While I assume that approval from Monash would suffice, you really should verify that that is the prevailing policy for journals in your field. In the worst case, if some journal requires IRB approval from each institution where you are employed while conducting the research, they just don't submit your work to that journal.


text:
Whats the average salary (inclusively) in china? How expensive it is for a single postdoctoral life?
I'm going to join one of the top university in China. I have been offered 130000 to 180000 RMB per year (including the basic performance and housing subsidy) on invitation letter although it's less than what was committed with me in the mail. How expensive is Bejeing? This is my third postdoc. I am afraid if it will be lower than the average postdoc. How is the working condition in Tsinghua and Peking University in Engineering Science?

This Q & A may help: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/108041/72855

Please, consider focusing on a single question at a time.

Not a duplicate -- he's asking other questions as well, in a different scenario. Furthermore, the other question is largely outdated.

I was a postdoc in China for the latest two years. Mainly at the south of China but have also spent several month in Beijing with CAS. I was hired with a salary promise of annual 180000 rmb which wasn't paid correctly. So actually my first piece of advice is, take salary promises with two grains of salt, and perhaps consider just going elsewhere.
Now, answering your questions directly. I have been told that a Chinese postdoc gets around 9-10k rmb per month in Beijing, and I was offered another postdoc for annual 240k rmb (some special offer for foreigners I refused). This is probably the range you will find. Housing costs in Beijing are extremely expensive (at least 2.5k per month, above 4k if you want to be comfortable) however ordinary life costs are not bad. If you're not provided a place to live, don't accept anything below annual 150k rmb. Make sure you're provided decent healthcare coverage, because that'd also very expensive and unfriendly to foreigners.
Finally, you say this is your 3rd postdoc. Meaning you're probably hoping to get a permanent job soon, and possibly heard promises of a fixed position "in case things go well". Don't fall for that, this is usually bait. From asking several colleagues, they were all promised "something else" when in reality it's all about them distributing around authorships and impact factors until they get fed up.
A tip: Chinese academia generally likes US citizenships and top-prestigious journal authorships. If you don't have any of such to show, don't expect the best treatment.
My main advice remains, consider going elsewhere. Hong Kong is already better if you're into Asia, perhaps Taiwan.
Best of luck.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
After successfully publishing papers during my Post-Doc, why am I now having trouble publishing as a tenure track academic?
I have had my PhD in mathematics for four and a half years now, completed two postdocs and found a tenure track job at a mostly teaching university. While I provide substantial background information below, my real, general question is:

How can I identify the causes of a decline in acceptance rate of my papers?

Background
I had a fairly good research program in geometry and topology, with 5 papers in relatively good journals and an undergraduate research paper published over the course of two postdocs.
I then took a tenure track job with 33 teaching credits a year. While I have little time for new research, I had several papers ready for submission.
These new papers are better than previous papers of mine published in the same journals; not only do I (subjectively) consider them better, but they have received citations in preprint form, and I was invited to a give a talk based on a stranger reading one of them, neither of which happened with my earlier papers.
Possible reasons
I can think of a few possible reasons why these papers are not being published:

They are just not up to shape, because I don't have the time to focus on polishing them.
The referees hate me. This may seem silly, but I am in a very specialized field, with only 3-4 people who have published more than one paper on the subject. One of these people have retired, and another openly said that he had been my referee before on more than one occasion, had rejected my largest paper, and said that he didn't like the direction I was going with the research.

Also, I had a toxic relationship with my postdoc advisor, to the point where it came down to personal insults. They said that they were furious at my past letter of reference writer for recommending me, knowing I was a 'bad egg'. Though we have since made up, I have heard reports from others about this advisor talking about me in a negative way. Also, none of the jobs I applied to with their letter of recommendation wrote me back, while 30-50% of the applications without his letter were replied to favorably, including my current job.

Chance. The reviewers of the first papers happened to be interested in those topics, and the reviewers of the current papers have not been interested.

Conclusion
How do I tell what is really the issue? A few notes:

It's very hard to do research with 33 credits of teaching, but all the work was done before I accepted this job.
The main paper (that was rejected by that referee) went through 5 revisions with the aid of an advisor before submission. I have revised and submitted to 3 or 4 other journals, one after another, incorporating each journals feedback into the new version and trying a weaker journal each time.

My goal is to just get these papers published; at my current institution, the publication of these two papers alone would be enough to satisfy all of the research requirement for tenure.

Whether they are up to shape, only you can answer. You seem to think, yes. 2. You have had trouble with your fellow scientists in a small field where everyone knows everyone. 3. Random bad luck. - It seems you have answered your question yourself. That being said, I do not think that the job of a referee is to tell you that they do not like the direction. That's for history to decide, not them. They can make a statement about quality, soundness and originality; how many antagonistic relations do you have? If it's not more than 2-3, you might ask the editor to exclude them.

Another possible reason: the institution you are teaching at now is not as "prestigious" as where you did your postdoc / PhD.

And another: maybe you are submitting the papers to more prestigious journals?

What did the referee reports say? Did they give you any reason to suspect that the papers were being rejected for reasons unrelated to their merit?

Another possible reason, but what's the overall interest in the area like? Has it waned any since your earlier papers?

@CaptainEmacs -- I think "relevance" is a fair criterion for reviewers to judge, but you don't list it in your comment. It's of course speculation that the reviewer meant "relevance" when he said "don't like the direction", but if so, then I think that's a legitimate part of review.

@WolfgangBangerth I know that it is considered a fair criticism to make. I am not a particular friend of that, because it is much more subjective than the others and have seen it more often than not used to exclude papers which did not fit the reviewer's agenda, interest (or worse). I can accept when arguments are made how much ground a paper breaks, but "relevance" is a very woolly term. Of course, sincere lack of relevance may have been the motive here, but...

@CaptainEmacs -- I suspect that it is one of the divides between pure and applied math. I do believe that in applied math, it is fair to point out that a proposed method is completely pointless even if it is possible to prove something about it. I will agree that there is an element of subjectivity to it, but at the same time I see so many papers published that propose methods for problems for which there are (i) there are already methods, and (ii) these existing methods are far better than what is being proposed. In such cases, it's fair to ask "so what?".

@MadJack really? That would be incredibly unethical if reviewers gave so much weight to a name.

@user4050 Yes, of course, it is unethical. Shall we restrict the possibilities to only those which are ethical?

@MadJack: I think this is an excellent point which deserves an answer.  And it isn't necessarily intentional discrimination based on affiliation, but subconscious bias could play a significant role.  A related point is that OP may be less "visible" in their new job, having less time/funding to attend conferences and network with other researchers, including potential reviewers.  There could certainly be subconscious biases related to whether the author is someone the reviewer knows and recognizes as an active researcher.

@NateEldredge I agree, and your comment addresses the point quite well. (If you turned your comment into an answer, I'd upvote it.)

@NateEldredge I think you managed to formulate the "correct" version of what Mad Jack said. Namely, I found his original comment quite implausible, since I have a very hard time imagining anyone holding an authors institution against them (or for that matter letting it be in their favor, especially if they are only a postdoc there). On the other hand, when it comes to deciding whether a research direction has promise, I can easily see people being more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to someone with a proven track record of finding good directions.

@MadJack than OP could submit to journals that offer double blinded review process, if any is available in the field of course.

@user4050 I have never heard of a reputable math journal offering that. It would simply not work, as the overwhelming chance is that any chosen reviewer will already know who the author of the paper is (having seen it on arXiv).

I feel for you.  I have been in the (pure math) game for a lot longer than you, and sometimes my work is still treated shabbily by editors and referees in a way that is hard to figure out.  I feel that the publication process has gotten more opaque in the dozen or so years I've been involved with it: at the beginning of my career, whenever a paper got rejected, I would come away with a clear reason for why.  I have had some truly head-scratching rejections in recent years...along with acceptances in prestigious journals, which is good for me but even more confusing in this regard.
I think that the best advice I can give to you is to find a trusted senior mentor -- someone who understands the content of your work and the sociology of your field -- and really go over your situation with them in minute detail.  I would certainly go over all of the referee reports in detail.  If any one rejection feels especially unexplained to you, please realize that you certainly can ask the editor for more information, if you do so extremely politely and while making clear in advance that you are not arguing but rather asking for more information.  (I have experienced the wildest of extremes in response to such inquiries: I have gotten no response at all, and I have also gotten "I'm so sorry, your paper was rejected by mistake!  Would you like to resubmit it?" Seriously.)
Without this specific information, we can just guess on top of your guesses.  But that's interesting to me, so I'll play along.  First, here is one piece of information that probably should have come before the end of your question:

My goal is to just get these papers published; at my current institution, the publication of these two papers alone would be enough to satisfy all of the research requirement for tenure.

This is pretty key.  Before I read it, I was going to respond to your worries that you are publishing work in a very narrow field that is (perhaps!) being viewed by the same small set of people as unpublishable by suggesting that you make an effort to branch out a bit in your work.  This is what everyone eventually does anyway.  But if your goal really is to only publish the work you've already written up, that's quite different.  In particular you talk about how you have a very high teaching load (33 credits per year = more than five courses per semester?!?  I hope I got that calculation wrong) and thus don't have time to do research.  Well, you may have zero time for research during the academic year, but if you need two publications for tenure you can spend entire summers working on publishing these papers...and you probably should, if you think your tenure depends on it.  I note though that you said you needed only these two publications; you didn't say that you wanted to stop writing and publishing papers after that.
Okay, now to examine your reasons:

They are just not up to shape, because I don't have the time to focus on polishing them.

As I said, I think you should make the time, but that doesn't invalidate the suggestion that a lack of polish is why the papers haven't been accepted as yet.  This is where you should get help from mentors and colleagues and look at the referee reports.  Based on the information given, this explanation sounds a bit unlikely to me: you've already published five papers in a very similar field, so you know what you're doing here.  Math research papers really should not be rejected for lack of polish; they should be rejected when the writing is so bad that the referees can't make sense of them, or when the writing is bad and the results are also not up to snuff.

The referees hate me. This may seem silly, but...

Actually you sold that explanation pretty well to me: if you had a terrible falling out with a key person in a tiny field and one other known past referee has told you that you're going in a wrong direction (to weigh in on comments about that: yeah, I think that's a nasty thing to say to someone), then it may well be that your work is getting evaluated by the same small number of people again and again and they just don't like it.  If that is the case, I would again recommend branching out a bit...perhaps even without starting a new project.  Most mathematical work can be cast in various ways and in order to appeal to various people.  I find it hard to believe that there are really on the order of 4 people in the world who are interested, but even if that's true your job is then to interest other people.  You could try for instance rewriting one of your papers to be a lot more explanatory and appeal to a much more general mathematical audience, and then send it to a not-too-exalted generalist journal.  If you do this, there's a very good chance that an editor who is "out of the loop" is not going to send the paper to the same small, sour group of people.

Chance. The reviewers of the first papers happened to be interested in those topics, and the reviewers of the current papers have not been interested.

Yes, it certainly could just be chance, and in my experience chance plays a distressingly large role in contemporary mathematical publishing.  However, even if it is just chance, you can still probably improve the situation by changing it in some way.
Good luck.

Do your tenure requirements list specific journals you have to publish in?
It would seem reasonable to submit to the "least prestigeous" journals that still satisfy the requirements.
Also, some journals allow you to exclude potential referees. Maybe it helps to take the two suspects out of the picture?

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

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


text:
Do you have to accept a postdoctoral position if the university has paid for accommodation and international flights for you to come and present?
I have been invited to give a seminar related to applying for a postdoctoral position. The professor has been very kind and seems  like a very nice person. He also helped me look for a postdoctoral position for my girlfriend. Now I have received the tickets to travel to the university with first class accommodation and luxury amenities. The trip involves  international travel and also that I have been talking with other professors to see my best options.
Does this force me to accept the position or is it common that researchers give these nice invitations?
Do I need to mention  to the professor that I am exploring other options?

Be gracious, enjoy the stay, give a relaxed (but not complacent) seminar. They treat you well, because they want you in a good mood. But this does not buy you. Whatever they offer, give yourself time to think, even if this is the best offer ever, and even if it is just (just as example, it's not realistic) one day of thinking. If they don't give you the time, they have something to hide. Go ahead, do your best and enjoy. But don't let your decision be coloured just by that. Make yourself a list of must haves/nice to haves that you would expect from an offer.

If you are getting excellent treatment, that likely means they are fairly keen to hire you.  They are working to recruit you.  Accepting nice accommodations and amenities from them during the hiring process places no obligation on you--none at all.  That being said, this sounds like it might be a really good place for you.  Use your judgement about what will be optimal for yourself.

In addition to this, you might be impressed by the quality of the accommodation / travel, but this might be quite standard for the university. At my current institution, every visitor is put in the same hotel, taken to dinner in the same place and travels as every other prof that visits (1st class train, economy flights within Europe). If you're not used to this, it might feel quite luxurious while it's actually standard.

It is quite common for universities to invite candidates for a visit and to offer a high-standard accommodation and make your stay as pleasant as it can be. Afterall, if they find you to be a good fit for them, they would also like you to feel the same. This does not indicate that you will be offered the job. If you are offered the job, you are under no obligations to accept the offer because of the nice treatment you get.

I am not completely certain I am interpreting your question correctly, because your English isn't completely standard.  I think you're saying that you have been invited to give a job talk, with your travel expenses paid, and that the job you are interviewing for is a post-doc position.  I will answer based on that understanding.
Only go if you are seriously interested in the job.
(Side note: keep in mind that you may have to pay income tax next April on the travel costs paid by the university that invited you.)

The tax comment refers to which country? Also, what is the rationale to have to pay tax for travel costs of an invitation? It is money that the speaker would otherwise have spent to give a talk somewhere, which is part of their job.

I do not agree, though, with the "Only go if absolutely interested" part. If it makes sense to give the seminar to that audience, the candidate could/should go.

This response doesn't answer the question. The question isn't about whether they should go, it's about how normal this kind of situation is, and about whether they have any obligations following the interview. And your tax comment is incorrect, at least in the US - job search expenses are, in general, tax-deductible.

@rturnbull - Tax deductibility is great -- and thanks for pointing that out.  Note that it doesn't always get you back the full additional tax liability.  My point is that it is good to know ahead of time that those dollars, that the candidate never saw, may turn up looking like income, on the W-2s next January.  Also, even if it does get you back the full additional tax liability, it only does so if you know that you can do that.

@CaptainEmacs - "Absolutely interested" and "seriously interested" sound a bit different to me.  "Absolutely" to me means that I would take this job over all other offers, without giving it a moment's thought. What I'm trying to say is that if I know ahead of time that I would not take a job in Ames, Iowa, no matter how good the offer, that means I am not seriously interested in a job in Ames, Iowa, and it would be unethical to go on an all-expenses-paid luxury recruitment junket for two in Ames, Iowa.  In my opinion.  Ethics questions are, after all, quite subjective.

@aparente001 It may be a learning experience, and, also, don't underestimate the possibility (also for them) to create contacts, even if you do not end up accepting the job.

@CaptainEmacs - If the OP is actually considering taking the job, then it is fine to accept the all-expenses paid trip with luxury amenities.  If not, he should not waste their time and money.  The question is not "Can I get away with this" -- it is "Is it ethical".

@aparente001 It's not about "get away with this", of course; this goes without saying. But people do change opinion and a generous invitation has a chance of doing just that, even if they didn't originally plan to go. Frankly, I've seen worse - you invite and host people, they signal all along that they want to come, they agree to come, they go through all the paperwork, you've already sent other applicants away (to be nice to them), only for your favourite applicant to whom you rolled out the red carpet to then decline on some very minor point in the very last moment. That's unpleasant.

@CaptainEmacs - Bummer.

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


text:
How can I confirm that the format of the paper is correct?
I am a new PhD student. I have been in school for more than a year. But I basically never met my mentor. I can only find a way to post the paper. Now, I am preparing to submit a paper to a conference. But I haven't submitted a paper before. I want to know if I use the Latex template given by the conference party to write a paper, how can I confirm that the format is correct. For example, the requirements of the paper are:

This is the requirement of this conference. Its Latex template can be found here. https://www.microarch.org/micro54/
Initially, I thought that this template should have all the relevant parameters set, but it is not.
For example, Space between columns 0.25in. When I compared the pdf file generated by the template with the papers of previous years, I found that this parameter in the template was not set.
I didn’t find the font and margin settings in this template. What should I do?

Reviewing will be double blind (no author list); therefore, please do
not include any author names on any submitted documents except in the
space provided on the submission form.

Declare all the authors of the paper upfront

The above two paragraphs are all requirements given in the template. Does this require the author to be written in front of the paper or is it forbidden to write?
Thanks

"But I basically never met my mentor." - I hope this is corona related and you have regular contact via email, videocall, etc?

No, he is mainly in charge of administrative duties and basically no longer instructs students. So I don’t even have anyone to discuss and inquire.

that's a red flag and probably worth another question, or have a look at related questions. You need supervision and guidance, especially as a beginning master or PhD student.

Yes, I am trying to contact other tutors for guidance! thank you.

The double blind refereeing instructions mean that the text of the paper should have nothing in the LaTeX \author{} macro. All the authors should be listed only on the web form you fill out when you submit the paper.
For help setting the proper margins and other formatting constants, ask at tex.stackexchange.com.
Although you have never "met" your mentor, they should probably know about this submission and should be able to help you with it.

As long as your paper more or less follows the guidelines, you should be fine. They most likely won't reject a paper because the distance between some columns is 10% larger or smaller than instructed. Word counts should be followed strictly though. If something isn't specified, just make sure it's readable and consistent.
Regarding naming authors: You should not mention the author, institutes or any other connection that gives a clue to who the author(s) are in the main document. However, you should add all names and affiliations in the submission system (you will most likely see it when you start the submission).
A good way to get started is to open the submission system and have a look. Usually you can cancel or save your progress, but this gives you an idea of what to expect.

thank you! But that system is not yet open for submission. So I can't see these yet.

I see. Then relax, and just make sure that you don't mention names and affiliations in the main part of your text, as this will be more difficult to change later. For now (in your working document) list all information that you will need, such as names and affiliations (and give your co-authors a chance to correct them, if needed)

Thank you. But What is the working document?

The document where you prepare your paper (i.e. write your paper) until it reaches it's final form. Usually a messy word document or something like that.

Ok, I konw. I will try. Thank you!

The page you linked implies heavily that conference organisers think the template is set properly. They also provide a sample. Compile the sample, and if it gives better results than the template, use the sample as your template.
In any case, don't add additional settings to the template without a consultation with the organisers. It is a lot of work to track and undo such changes if they were uncalled for. If the template was indeed faulty, it's also their responsibility, not yours. Besides, the reason you have different resulting document may arise from different internal settings of your TeX distribution, or a program you use.


text:
Can I improve the idea of the paper on arxiv and publish it again?
I have an idea, and I did experiments and then wrote a paper. But the conference I want to submit does not start until a month later. I want to upload it to arxiv first. But I found a description of the shortcomings of arxiv on Google. Others may scoop papers by improving the papers uploaded to arxiv.
If others see my results. Then immediately embark on the same experiment. Then change the description method (note that the ideas in some papers are very new, but once thought of it, it is easy to reproduce). Or they use the same idea to do some other evaluations (such as changing the background). If this is the case, won't my efforts be wasted?

Authors are not barred from uploading their papers to arxiv and
similar sites. But please note that such ef- forts may compromise the
double-blind review process, so please exercise care when discussing
your submission in public forums. On a related note, unrefereed
on-line pre-prints are not assumed to constitute “prior work” – in
other words, reviewers cannot penalize an HPCA submission because it
does not cite a pre-print with lim- ited visibility.

This is a passage from the conference where I want to contribute. It can be seen that he is not opposed to uploading the paper to arxiv.
But what does the last paragraph of it mean?

On a related note, unrefereed on-line pre-prints are not assumed to
constitute “prior work” – in other words, reviewers cannot penalize an
HPCA submission because it does not cite a pre-print with limited
visibility.

Does this sentence mean that it doesn't matter if you plagiarize a paper on arxiv. Because they don’t think arxiv is “prior work”.

arXiv is a public repository/a preprint server for research papers (that are either under review or currently being worked on. There are other such servers hosted by publishing houses as well like Elsevier's SSRN or MDPI's preprints.
In accordance with your question to the following paragraph:

On a related note, unrefereed on-line pre-prints are not assumed to constitute “prior work” – in other words, reviewers cannot penalize an HPCA submission because it does not cite a pre-print with limited visibility.

What they are trying to convey is that, if a paper (an online pre-print i.e., present on any of the public repos/databases) is somewhat relevant to the topic you're targeting in your paper and you don't cite the paper in the related work/prior work section you won't be penalized for it or asked to do so. The reason they don't consider arXiv prior work is clear that the PC is strictly adhering to papers that are rigorously peer-reviewed and published by a journal.
Also, it clearly does not indicate that you can plagiarize anyone's work.

Perhaps a bit more stress on your last sentence. Nothing gives anyone permission to plagiarize. Ever. For any reason. If you treat the ideas of others as your own, then you are plagiarizing. Full. Stop.

@Buffy Absolutely and Undoubtedly! :)

Thank you!  But if they use the same idea to do some other evaluations (such as changing the background).  Or make a simple improvement, will they be considered plagiarism?


text:
What is institutional open access fees?
There is such a paragraph in the conference introduction that I want to submit. What does institutional open access fees refer to here? Thank you!

ACM uses the corresponding author during the publication process for
accepted submissions. For example, institutional open access fees will
be charged to the corresponding author’s institution.

Probably the same as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_processing_charge


text:
How much does topic and supervisor matter for honours in computer science when the aim is ultimately to do a PhD?
I am about to go in to my honours year in computer science.
If I intend to apply for a PhD at another university when I finish, how much does it matter who my honours supervisor is? Will this make any difference when being assessed for entry at another university?
And as a general rule am I better choosing a pure (mathematical) or applied (programming/engineering) topic?

All things being equal, a well-known and respected individual in your field who can write an excellent letter of recommendation for you is better than a person who is not nearly so well known who can write a similar letter.
However, you should not choose a famous name just to have that person write you a letter of recommendation if you are not actively interested in that person's research. The obvious reason for this is that hunting for a letter of a recommendation is likely not to work as well as doing a project you're truly interested in, because the motivation to work on it won't be nearly as strong.
As for topic, if possible, I would recommend picking a topic in the general area you wish to pursue as a PhD student. Note that it doesn't need to be the same topic—but if you want to do, for instance, theoretical CS, it's probably better to do a theoretical CS project than something more applied.


text:
How to answer the question "tell me about yourself" in a Masters degree interview?
A good friend of mine had an interview for a psychology Masters degree. The interviewer asked my friend: "Tell me about yourself".

How should one approach such a question?
What do the admission committee expect to hear?

Vote to close as "primarily opinion-based". You could have all kinds of answers to your questions.

@scaaahu Actually, there are some expectations from the candidates. I've found that candidate should not tell about the past events: the committee already know them. So, the story is more complicated and for sure not "opinion based" as you suppose.

Where have you found that? Also, note that if they hear what they want to hear, they may cross you out for not being sincere (specially if they are trained psychologists).

@Davidmh in "The Rules of Work" bestseller... I suppose it is related

If they want you to tell you about your, say, future, they will ask you directly. If you follow advice from a bestseller, they are probably familiar with it, and will recognise if you are not honest.

@JeromyAnglim Why edit the question no one wants to answer?

@Ilan I think the question is ultimately worth answering. I thought the edit might make it slightly more appealing to people. I tried to make the title a little more self-contained and generally easier to consume and read.

@JeromyAnglim Thanks for that. Actually, millions of people asked this question and don't really know what to answer. I don't understand why in this community it is not not welcomed....

I dont think we should downvote the question, it is very common and valid.

@scaaahu I've found this video. This Q still actual for me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW-yxxPMtro

In this occasion, the interviewers want to know your background and your motivation of further study in this particular subject. They want to give the opportunity to the right person.
For example, I was once involved in the admission interview (although I didn't have the final say in the decision making). Based on my observation, those who had strong motivation but average GPA won over those with weak motivation and high GPA.

How should one approach such a question?

By telling them about yourself.

What do the admission committee expect to hear?

Something about yourself.
Relax.  It's not a trick question.  (Or if it is a trick question, you don't want to go there.)

Actually, you gave a superficial answer. Searching the web and collecting pieces of information I should say that this question has a solid background and the candidate should prepare to answer it.

No, my answer is neither superficial nor easy. If they want something more specific, they can bloody well ask you something more specific. Playing mind games with candidates is unacceptable, even (especially?) in a psychology department.

You might be amazed at the mind games that go on even (and maybe sometimes especially) in psychology departments...and yes, your answer is superficial.

Don't walk, etc.

@NickStauner if this answer is superficial, then I think the question should belong to cognitive science SE, not here.

@scaaahu: there is nothing about this question that is unique to psychology departmental interviews. Surely it's not unfamiliar to people in other fields. Regardless, this answer is nearly as useless as, "I am a cat person," would be in an interview when asked this question. At best one could hope for the same amused reaction this answer received through glib dismissal. (Nothing personal implied JeffE; strictly referring to the answer). I've offered my own answer to argue that there is a trick to answering this question. It's a wild card; be prepared to take the lead and make the most of it.

@JeffE There are many things that you could say about yourself, so even if it is not a trick question, it is not so simple.  Should one say about their hobbies, or places they travel, or should it be about their interests in research.  Is your answer specific to academics, where it should not be perceived as the same answer while interviewing at a company?

I would recommend approaching it as your opportunity to guide the interview in the direction you want it to go. As a professional psychologist, you would often have to introduce yourself and your work to others. What any given committee expects to hear is anyone's guess, but maybe the average committee would at least be happy to see you present a clear, succinct, professional summary of your interests and experiences.
Contrary to some implications that are starting to appear between the lines of responses here, psychologists are not necessarily more conscious of or trained in interviewing than others. Some of us specialize in interviewing, self-report, projective assessment methodology, psychoanalysis, and other forms of open-ended, qualitative research, but many (maybe most) of us do not. In defense of the extremely general, almost meaningless prompt, "Tell me about yourself," it is useful as a way of forcing the interviewee to initiate conversation on the topics of personal relevance, and may elicit those topics that an interviewee identifies with most strongly in a more direct way than other questions. Even if one were to ask questions based on prominent items from an applicant's CV, one could not be certain that those items weren't placed there after strategic deliberation or in capitulation to hiring committees' expectations. Asking a question like this that might easily be answered by glancing at an applicant's CV may catch an interviewee off-guard, forcing some on-the-spot self-reassessment in the underprepared, or giving hints of a person's true identity and interests without all the dressing and polish people usually apply to their CV entries.
Still, psychologists aren't necessarily more aware of these uses of the question than hirers of different backgrounds, and expecting these tactics to be deliberate may give too much credit to some interviewers who engage in them unwittingly. In some cases, it may just be a way of forcing the interviewee to guide the interview for lack of personal will to do so, or for lack of having had the time or desire to review an applicant's credentials directly beforehand. Either way, consider it a challenge, and come prepared to rise to the occasion on any open-ended question. Can you introduce yourself in a way that's impressive, professional, interesting, and not overwrought or revealing of personal weaknesses? Can you handle ill-formulated questions and vague statements of interest in a constructive manner when put on the spot and given an opportunity to demonstrate your expertise? The answer to these questions had better be "yes", because you'd certainly have to perform these functions as a psychologist.

I am answering your comment here. The last sentence "because you'd certainly have to perform these functions as a psychologist." seems to imply that this answer is more applicable to psychologists rather than academics in general.

@scaaahu: touché, but that implication is not intended very strongly. I'm speaking with more certainty about psychology because I happen to be a psychologist, but again, I would be very surprised if people in other fields didn't also have to perform those functions. Again, they are no more unique to psychology than the question in question and its ilk.

This is your chance to take the ball and run with it.  I like to give some background that shows my history as it relates to why I am the right candidate.  Glib or short answers will make you less likable, and going off topic or ranting opens you up to other judgement that may not be favorable.  I would start from the timeline of whatever moment started the trajectory which ultimately ends up with you being in this interview, giving more weight/time to the things that you are most proud of.  For example, I have always been interested in X, ever since my father brought me to see that Y in '92.  for the last year, I have been exploring the inner workings of Z, and have contributed my time to some projects that seek to improve upon ... I am hoping to continue my efforts here, and am particularly interested in working on P.

*How should one approach such a question?
What do the admission committee expect to hear?*

If I were you I would approach this question like you were writing a cover letter for a regular job. Everything you talk about should always relate to why you want/qualified to be apart of this program. And you should talk about what your goals are after you have require this degree. Also,do your research on the culture of the program as well. If possible talk to a student who attended the university.
I am not an expert but this is my two cents in this matter.
Good Luck

I remember seeing this question on interview preparation articles or most asked question lists, and I must say this question makes no sense. The question seems so simple yet very hard to answer. I don't recommend replying with "Could you be more specific?" because it may seem like you are incapable of answering a simple! question. This is more likely to be the first question if you ever face it, sort of to break the ice, and you can simply introduce yourself and mention your professional interests and your purpose, very briefly. After this question, they will move to the specific questions that actually make sense.


text:
How to get second chance at pursuing honours/PhD if your undergraduate grades are poor in Australia?
I recently completed a 3 year bachelor degree in Computer Science at an Australian university. I graduated with a GPA which is roughly the equivalent of a “C” in the US. I only blame the grades on my poor work ethic and wasting time studying content unrelated to my course. The pathway to a PhD in Australia is to do a 3 year Bachelors degree and then complete an honours year which involves a significant research component.
I emailed the honours coordinator and unsurprisingly, they replied that with my transcript I stand no chance. The only post I found online by someone with similar transcript got the advice that they shouldn’t even be thinking about doing honours and that it is sad enough that people with such low grades get degrees. I have tried to give up my desire to do research (in Machine Learning) because it is naive to think about doing an honours program, let alone harbour any delusions of doing a PhD.
I know at some point I’ll just have to accept the truth. But before I give up I want to fail one more time - only this time I want to give it my 100%. Is there any way to get a “second chance”? No matter what I do I feel that my transcript will forever haunt me. Even if I somehow found an honours program which would accept me (unlikely) and I managed to get straight A’s, my past grades mean that my average GPA would still be very low.  My fate is sealed, and a criminal record would be less of a burden. I want to work hard but with a best case scenario so grim I don’t know what to do.
Should I do a second bachelors degree?
Try to gain research experience (with problematic marks)?
Or just get a library membership and call it a day?

Can you enrol for a Master's degree?

Yes, but the admission requirements are similar to the honours year.

There are many universities around.   Don't let what is officially stated stop you.  Just apply.

You seem to have an interest for Machine Learning. Have you started studying it, maybe experimenting with it on your own? This could be your way in, if you can prove your motivation (and preferably some experience) for this specific goal. Depending on the specific system of admission, dedication and focus on a specific field might matter more than general grades. As an alternative, you could consider starting working in industry, acquire skills and experience and come back for a PhD a few years later: at this stage your professional profile will matter more than your grades.

In general only your Honours GPA "counts" for PhD admissions, though they'll still see the rest of the transcript and it will raise some significant red flags. It's the Honours admission (and performance there) that's more of an issue.

Regarding your hypothetical argument about getting accepted to honours and good grades there not mattering: if you did get accepted and get great grades in the so-called honours program, It would almost certainly help you far more than by just averaging up your GPA. Universities will notice the upward trend and some will be willing to believe you have turned things around.
More generally, no matter what you do next, poor grades say two things, both of which you need to overcome:

You have poor study habits, hence you'd probably fail out of grad school by doing more of the same, because a "C" average isn't acceptable in grad school.
You didn't learn as much of the material as you should have, and are now behind everyone else who got better grades. And now you will be in over your head in graduate courses which build on those undergraduate courses.

You can address #1 by showing a pattern of improvement in taking new classes and doing well. For #2 you will need to basically learn the material in a second try. If you had non-existant study habits in school with all the support and pressure on you, I don't have too much hope for self-study. I'd suggest finding a way to retake some key classes.
I'd also note that machine learning may be very different than what you expect coming from a computer science background. It is a heavily mathematical subject, where the programming is the easy part. So you may be gaining some edge by focusing on a topic that is more interesting, but you're also doubling-down on what is likely the hardest component of your studies.

This advice is not helpful since the asker is ineligible for honours.  Also, many honours courses have little coursework.  It is a research degree.

@AnonymousPhysicist That part of my answer was responding to the asker's hypothetical argument which presupposed both of those conditions: getting accepted and taking courses in honours. The rest of my answer was not specific to this scenario anymore. I will edit so others aren't similarly confused.

For computer science honours in Australia I believe it is often half or more coursework, however there is often few courses specifically aimed for PhD students (similar for maths and physics). Other science honours courses can often be entirely research (plus attending seminars). Though you'd still need to understand the material

This begs the question: what were you "wasting time studying content unrelated to my course" on?
If it was your boy/girl friend, well that wont help much.
However was it something you could call academic or even something like playing xbox?
Well then I would look at doing a 'Graduate Diploma' in a different but related field.
(In NZ) a Graduate Diploma consists of (the equivalent points of) one year of final year Undergrad papers (300-400 level)
Personal Story: I graduated with a Bachelor of Applied Science (Medical Imaging), but found the real world work (taking X-rays) unsatisfying. So after a year taking X-rays (where I did get some interesting work stories*) I went back and undertook a G.Dip Sci (Computer Science) at a different University. I have never looked back*.
So if you under took a G.Dip in say Game Development. You could use that opportunity to get better grades and still be able to move back towards Higher level, Machine Learning (As AI is a part of game design) qualification.
For this to work you will need to:

Find a side step G.Dip you are going to find interesting
Apply your self and get good grades
Figure out what your end game is going to be

At the end of the day getting a Degree (etc) is about getting a job (for the most part). Even if that job is teaching at a university.
So once you have Honors or a PhD what are you going to do?
Remember Grades are only important to move from Student life to your first 'proper' job. Then how you apply yourself to work and self improvement (which is not graded) is what is important.
* When you are at a bar and some one asks how was your week, Saying you solved a tricky race condition bug, is way less impressive than 'Oh I had to tape down a dead guy in the morgue at work to day'. Still beats doing the shift work.

Why would playing xbox be impressive?

@user111388 I didn't say it was impressive. What I mean is find a positive spin on whatever it was you were doing and run with that. So even if it was something, generally considered as a waste of time, like XBox then look into channeling that experience into getting good at game development.

I think with that logic, "wasting time on boyfriend/girlfriend" can also be frame positively;)

This answer is based on Australian observations.
Most Phd students at a university are selected from  honours students within the same department, and sometimes the honours students are accepted with the hope they will prove to be a good Phd candidate.
I have seen one average undergraduate student accepted for honours - but they had a high grade in the one subject that was especially relevant and that they were really interested in.

You should get a job in machine learning.  You are fortunate that there are many job opportunities in that area right now.  Get a few years relevant work experience, and then your ability to succeed in a PhD will seem more credible.
Edit:  This won't work in Australia.  Australian universities have hard grade/mark cutoffs for graduate study and don't consider your work experience.  It will work in other countries that have more sensible policies.

A friend of mine dropped out of college after failing general chemistry twice in a row. He was going through a lot at the time that contributed to his lack of motivation and clear thinking. After his life situation improved, he started fresh with a different major at a different university and did well. If you have the financial means AND you are confident that you would succeed given another chance, then a second Bachelor's degree is a viable option. Be honest with yourself in evaluating the probability of success with this option if your situation has not changed.
You should absolutely try to gain research experience and self-teach machine learning. I successfully applied for financial aid to take a machine learning course on Coursera. The course was useful and enjoyable, and I now display the certificate on my Curriculum Vitae as evidence of my basic knowledge of machine learning. Furthering your education like this has multiple benefits: 1) demonstrates your interest and ability to academic programs and employers, 2) lets you advance your knowledge in a field of interest, and 3) lets you find out if you're actually as interested in the material as you think you are.
In addition, heed @Prof. Santa Claus' advice. There are a lot of programs out there. Apply around and see what sort of feedback you receive. You may be surprised by the extent to which some programs will look past sub-par academics if you can demonstrate your aptitude and interest in other ways (see self-teaching above). Lastly, the options you're considering are not mutually exclusive. The best strategy will likely combine applying around, furthering your knowledge on your own, and considering options outside of academia to get relevant work/research experience. Hope this helps.

"He does not include his earlier attempt at a degree on any application materials" - in the US this would not be an option without committing fraud (and grounds for expulsion from the program if discovered later), as pretty much every program requires transcripts from all previously attended institutions. Is this not the case in Australia?

He is from the US, but went into the private sector - not academia. So probably not fraud in the case of my friend, but your point is well-taken with regards to the OP. I had not considered that it could be construed as fraud. I do not know the legality in Australia, so I'll remove the passage in case. Thanks.

Research is not about getting good grades, and grades are not necessarily strongly correlated with research skills. Don't be put off by your abysmal grades - really nobody cares about them later!
I'm not familiar of how this works in Australia. In Europe I would try to:
a) volunteer for a small research project with a friendly group leader. Knock doors and asks nicely. If you offer free (and hard) work, there is always stuff to do. Don't try to hide your grades. Whatever content unrelated to course work you studied, maybe it's useful for getting a project, too.
b) Try to identify the topic that is most crucial for what you want to do/are doing right now (i.e. the research project). It might be programming or some aspect of theory - pick something manageable. Study it such way that you know how to apply it (particularly in research), before picking the next topic. That's a long-term strategy for acquiring new and relevant skills.
Of course, for above strategies you need a bit of time, as you won't earn money directly.
Don't be put off. You're having a bit a bumpy start now, but in the long run enthusiasm, genuine interest, focus, and creativity matter more.
So no, don't get a second bachelors degree. Yes, try to gain research experience (with problematic marks)!

In Australia, unfortunately, grade cutoffs are hard cutoffs and there is no getting around them.  "Nobody cares" will not get you into honors or PhD if you have low grades.


text:
What are the pros and cons of doing a PhD in a small research group compared to a large research group?
I have chosen to work under a associate professor as my PhD advisor. He has a small research group -a group of 3 graduate students and some Undergraduates. I see colleagues of my advisor have groups of 10-12 students with 3 postdocs.
Am I missing something- research wise ??

The individuals involved are more important than the size of the group.  Different faculty have different management styles.

This will of course vary between advisors and research groups, but I can discuss the differences I’ve seen in general between large and small labs.  There are some differences which will be an advantage or disadvantage based on your personal preferences/working style, and others that can have a direct impact on research.
As a PhD student I was a part of a large academic lab, where we had approximately 20 people including Masters, PhDs, and post-docs plus an additional array of more temporary undergrads.  As a large group, we had a variety of projects ongoing, with some involving small teams working on the same or similar topic.  Being in a small team suited me, personally, quite well.  The multiple ongoing research directions allowed me to also expand my knowledge base through informal discussions and during lab meetings, in addition to providing easy opportunities for collaborative research in smaller side projects through my degree.  Older/more advanced students and post-docs were also a font of knowledge and advice for my own research problems.  As a large group, we had a good amount of resources, monetary and otherwise, which was a definite bonus.
However, as a manager of a large lab, my advisor had little time for much personal attention or anything besides general direction.  As such, it was much more difficult finding my research ‘footing’. After the first few difficult years, though, I flourished with the relative research freedom. From discussions with friends in much smaller labs, the involvement of their advisors was much higher and ranged from, in the beginning, weekly specialized task lists, to working side-by-side in the lab.
Once again, this will be heavily dependent on the people involved, but it is difficult to expect the same amount of interaction from an advisor who must split their attention n times more ways.  I know a few who had co-advisors (where one was more established, one newer) to balance the issues I discussed (particularly the lack of funding/resources with the latter), but each option has their own advantages and disadvantages.  Being co-advised is definitely no exception; getting them to agree to go in the same research direction can be simultaneously frustrating and terrifying.
With a small lab you may indeed be missing something research-wise, but your training in the ability to do research and your knowledge in your particular subject may benefit.

I have chosen to work under a assosciate professor as my PhD advisor.
  He has a small research group -a group of 3 graduate students and some
  Undergraduates. I see colleagues of my advisor have groups of 10-12
  students with 3 postdocs. Am I missing something- research wise ??

I've worked in a number of different sized research groups, from the very small (PI, me, and another student working on a different project) to a very large group (dozen or so faculty members, legions of graduate students, handful of postdocs).
The answer is no, you're not necessarily "missing something". What you're getting is a different sort of something. A large group can do some things a smaller group can't - things that require just a massive input of raw man-hours. They likely have more publications coming out in aggregate, etc. These are all really cool things.
On the other hand, small groups have less inertia. It's probably easier for a small group to "pivot" to pursue something new and interesting. And it's easier for something to be "yours" - for large groups, with each graduate student making up a component part, it's somewhat harder to boost the visibility of each individual.
There are plusses and minuses to each, but they're very much just different styles of working. Good science can, and has, been done under each model.

It is probably because your supervisor is an associate professor and he has just started expanding his research group. As per my knowledge when professors are in this stage, they engage in more research activities to develop their career. And also they get enough time to spend for their students. I think there is no reason to worry. Probably it is for the best.

Really? I find it hard to imagine any assistant professor thinking "I'll want until after tenure to start expanding my group" instead of expanding their group now to improve their chances for tenure.

@JeffE may be not true for all the cases. My supervisor was engaged in research when he was an asso.Professor than now. I meant he spent alot of time with students and was more dedicated towards research/publications and getting grants. Now he kinda achieved what he wants (I assume, as he is a full professor, supervises so many PhD, masters, undergrad students). Eventhough still  the research is his main thing, he has less time to spend with his students (with other administrative work). That was what I meant. Anyway you are a professor, so you know better than me :)

@JeffE It may be a function of time-until-funded-R01, rather than tenure.


text:
How to get funding as a third year PhD student for conferences and thesis write-up?
I am a third year PhD student in sustainability assessment on energy sector.
I am looking to obtain private funding from either a company (preferably) or an organisation to finish my PhD, and hopefully be employed by the sponsor after my completion. My supervisor has not been as helpful in providing advice.
I am also looking for funding to support conference attendance.

Does anyone have any experience on how to get funding at this stage?
Where shall I look for, and how shall I approach my potential sponsors?

Everyone wants funding. This is not something you can just decide you want and achieve it within a few weeks. It is extremely competitive.
Generally, at least in the US and portions of Europe, professors obtain the funding and they pay the student. If your advisor or department doesn't want to fund you, you should strongly consider finding another one.
I have never heard of a student obtaining industry funding without substantial evidence of their success (and usually near the end of their PhD) and even then, it is in the form of a fellowship (e.g., IBM Fellowship). You could certainly apply to these but from what I have seen, you usually need to have done internships there and have a strong internal recommendation.
On the other hand, I have known a few students that drop to part-time near the end of their PhD and they start a full-time job somewhere. Then their company reimburses them for their tuition until they finish.
If you look at it from the perspective of a company, why would they want to fund a random student full-time? They are usually looking for late-stage students who are already successful and that they can trust, or they are looking for collaborations with faculty members.
Note: I was funded by a large tech company after a successful internship, however, the money went to my advisor rather than me directly because they said it was "too risky" to interact with a student directly, and preferred to work with a professor (and thus all the benefits and accountability of a universities's research support and legal team).


text:
How should a student defend his 1st authorship in front of his advisor politely and effectively?
Inspired this good question, I think posting this question will surely benefit the next generations of students, albeit this does not happen to myself.
The research students will publish several papers along the research road under someone's supervision. When it comes to the issue of the author order, the student and the advisor may not always reach an agreement. i.e. Sometimes the student thinks he or she deserves the 1st author, but the advisor doesn't.
In such cases, the students are usually very worried and upset. Having been working on that topic for such a long time, the student feels very disappointed to be listed as the non-first author. Being the weak party, the student may not even dare to argue with his advisor. After all, the advisor is kind of "in control of" his remaining PhD life.
Simply put:
How should a student defend his or her 1st authorship in front of the advisor politely and effectively?

Authorship questions inevitably end up having two threads: what should be and what happens. The "what should be" is that the amount of intellectual work (as described in the Vancouver Protocol)
1.  Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data
    AND
2.  Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content
    AND
3.  Final approval of the version to be published.

that each author has put into the work. As with most agreements, it is best to discuss this in advance and agree on how to evaluate the work done. Usually the first author is in charge of writing and the other author(s) provide feedback and contribute to the writing. If everyone follows these rules then the argument is fairly "straightforward".
In reality, we have to also deal with different types of personalities and other situations that affect judgement. It is not uncommon for persons to want first authorship if they are up for promotion or if they see that something they did not fully think was great actually is. The list could be made long. Straightening these cases out is sometimes (if not often) really tough.
Being pragmatic, I often think about if the situation will hurt me and evaluate if the fight is worth it. In the case of a PhD student, having ones advisor as first author is not necessarily a bad thing since, hopefully, the advisor is well-known and respected. Hence some of that rubs off on the co-author. As a PhD student I think a valid argument is that you need first authorship on some of the work in your thesis. This is a particularly good argument if the "switch" occurs repeatedly.
Arguing against irratianal excuses for first authorships will be hard or near impossible to win so I am a little pessimistic when it comes to such cases. You need to evaluate the situation yourself, gather objective arguments for your claim and possibly asking other faculty for advice and support.

In addition to Peter's answer, one should also keep in mind the accepted practices in one's field of study. For instance, in some fields, such as economics and parts of mathematics, alphabetical order is the default; in other areas, such as organic chemistry, the principal investigator of the lab—not the primary author of the paper—has traditionally been given the first spot in the list.
If you are in a field where the order is somewhat preordained, it's going to be very difficult to change that tradition, for many reasons. In such cases, you should optimize your placement within the "available" options.

Also noteworthy is that in fields where authorship is preordained like this (especially alphabetical), people are aware of this and therefore place much less emphasis on your position within the author list.

What does first authorship really mean?


text:
How can I find out how often my publications have been cited?
Is there a special database somewhere where you can see how often other scholars have cited you or your publications in their scholarly works?
My professor is always saying, "No one has cited me on this..."
Is that just his general assessment or does he know this from a verified source?

What field are you in?  In addition to the excellent general-level databases referenced in the answers below, there are some discipline-specific databases (ADS for astronomy and astrophysics, for instance, and some other examples are in some of the answers below).

Google scholar works pretty well, though with all of these things there are edges cases that cause problems (non unique names, random poster presentations showing up counting as citations, etc.)
I find that ResearchGate tends to be pretty good. People can comment, annotate, and more generally fix up the metadata issues on this site in a social media style, and so it tends to be pretty accurate. However, since it's still quite new most papers are missing from its databases (though it still tends to count citations correctly?).

Nice answer. I would add scopus to your answer too.

For this particular question: The errors/problems in Google Scholar mostly give too many citations, so for a little-cited paper you can count by hand how many "real" citations it has, no matter what you consider "real".

In mathematics there is the extremely reliable database MathSciNet. The drawbacks are that it's not freely available and it takes some years for papers and citations to appear there correctly. However, it really is accurate (they have staff to handle difficult cases with similar author names, authors changing names and stuff).

If you're in high-energy physics, look at your author profile or paper on inspire.


text:
Should I accept invitation to be an external examiner for a PhD?
I have been invited to be an external examiner for a Ph.D. in electronic engineering at a UK University.
I work in the Electronics industry in a research role, regularly competing for external research funding with academics and sometimes collaborating with them too (including 2 or 3 of the academics in the department from which I have received the invitation).
I have not studied for a Ph.D., but feel I keep up to date with research on the topics in question.  I review papers for IEEE journals and have some professional recognition.
The Ph.D. has been sponsored by my employer and I believe that a colleague has been the industrial supervisor.  I have not met the candidate.  I don't feel that any of this creates a conflict of interest.
Am I qualified to take this role?  How much work will it involve?

Since you do not have a PhD degree, you should check to see if the university's regulations will allow you to serve. The University of Nottingham's regulations state:

However, it will be appropriate in some cases for Schools to nominate individuals from other suitable environments provided that those individuals are experts in the field of the student's topic of research and hold a professional status which is equivalent to a University Professor, Reader, Lecturer or teacher.

You should check if your experience allows you to serve as a reader. You wouldn't want to get involved and then find out it doesn't count for procedural reasons.
Otherwise, if you'd like to do it, there's no reason why you shouldn't!

I'd assume that usually someone at the university in question will have checked their regulations, and in case of doubt discuss things with the potential examiner, on their own initiative. Also, there should not be any real work required before a formal invitation to examine.

@silvado: I was once asked to chair a thesis defense before I was allowed to do so in my own department. They may be assuming “Mikado has published papers and therefore has a PhD.” Better to ask before accepting.

Agreed, in case one does not have a PhD degree it would be safe to inform about that directly, because that may easily be assumed without being checked.

Are you qualified? Yes.  Even if you lack knowledge, you can read the dissertation thoughtfully and give useful input.
How much work?  Rough estimate:  Twice the work it takes to review a IEEE paper.
Also:  I think you'll find the experience rewarding.

I'd add to this that it's just fine to ask what the roles of the external examiner are. You may also need to attend an in-person defense, for example (I have no idea if this is typical for EE in the UK or not), as well as reviewing the written thesis.

I have been invited to be an external examiner for a Ph.D. [...] The Ph.D. has been sponsored by my employer and I believe that a colleague has been the industrial supervisor.

This could be perceived as a conflict of interest, since your employer and colleague would presumably benefit from the candidate's success. It is irrelevant whether there's a real conflict. If anyone perceives a conflict, then the candidate, your employer, your colleague, and you could all be harmed. Do not accept the invitation.
Beyond the conflict, there's an issue of whether you are qualified, which is addressed by another answer.


text:
What is the difference between minor, moderate, and major revisions?
What is the difference between "a moderate revision" and "a major revision"? How much chances in percent increase if you research paper gets moderate revision rather than a major revision?

I have never seen the term "moderate revision", only "minor revision".
The exact semantics of major or minor revisions will depend on the journal - at some journals, a minor revision will not be externally reviewed any more, while a major revision will. At others, the difference is less clear-cut and may simply reflect the editor's feeling of how many additional rounds of review may be necessary.
Similarly, the differences in the probabilities for acceptance between different types of revisions will vary between journals. At some journals, even a major revision is almost certain to be finally accepted, even if it may still take multiple rounds of review, barring rare cases.

Thankyou Stephan. I recently had a moderate revision on one of my manuscript. It is new for me as well.


text:
What suffix should you use when you are a PhD Scholar filling out membership form for IEEE Xplore?
I was filling IEEE Xplore membership form. In the form, there was a field "Suffix", the values for this field are I, II, III, IV, Jr., M.D., P. Eng, PE, PhD, Sr., V.
Which one does best describe me? Currently I am a Research/PhD scholar in a department of information technology.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about academia.

When you say "PhD Scholar", you mean you are currently completing your PhD? i.e., you don't have a PhD?

Names are complicated, and some people are very touchy about getting theirs exactly as they want it. In English-based naming, this can often include prefixes (e.g., "Sir" in "Sir Walter Scott") and suffixes (e.g., "Jr." as in "Martin Luther King, Jr.").
This form is making things more complicated and confusing by combining two orthogonal categories of suffix:

Generational suffixes:  I, II, III, IV, Jr., Sr., V.
Academic suffixes:  M.D., P. Eng, PE, PhD

And what should you do? Just leave this field blank.
If your name had a generational suffix, you wouldn't be asking this question.
From your comment, you don't have an academic suffix yet.
Even if you did have an academic suffix, you might not want to add it anyway. In many parts of American scientific or professional society, for example, people do not bother to use their academic titles (it's always a little weird to me to be addressed as "Dr. Beal", and I would never ask somebody to call me "Jacob Beal, Ph.D.").  In many parts of Europe, on the other hand, such titles are used much more commonly and comfortably.

P.Eng and PE are technically professional suffixes.

Do you have one of these titles?
More specifically, as a 'PhD scholar', are you still working towards your PhD or have you already defended?
Is your name 'snowbell', 'snowbell the third', or 'snowbell junior'?
If the former, leave the field empty.

I am working towards my PhD...It has been only 6 months that I have joined the PhD program

If the other conditions mentioned don't apply, leave the field empty.


text:
Is it acceptable to require a student to use the supervisor's preferred software/tools?
I'm about to supervise my first bachelor student and I'm not quite sure what is acceptable and what is not.
The thesis will contain math formulas, illustrations, images, graphs and tables - like any other paper / thesis in physics. The question is, shall I force my student to use (and learn how to use) certain SW tools (LaTeX, Matlab,...) instead of commonly used office packages (Word, Excel, PowerPoint,...)?
Is it acceptable to provide source files of my thesis and/or Matlab functions/scripts to the student? Note that the field of research is not connected to typography nor data analysis.
Edit considering JeffE's answer:

Yes, it is perfectly acceptable to require students to use the software tools that are standard in your field when they begin working in your field, even as undergraduates.

There aren't defined standard, or mandatory, tools to use. Just only vague rules how the thesis shoud look like.
Tools for specialized work, say microhardness measurements and analysis, are set and there can't be any doubts and discussions.

You can introduce the said tools to your students. Like this, and only if they are interested, they will go deeper in learning how to use them. But forcing your students to use a specific tool is, IMHO, the best way to get the opposite results.

Say that "If you won't do it you can say good-bye to your thesis" is far too extreme. Right now, I've sent him several theses to show how accepted theses look like.

I forgot to say that I HATE how office work with images (including, positioning,...) and math (mouse abuse) and sometimes I turn mad about that easily.

@Crowley Correct me if I am wrong, but most of times, you can (almost) achieve with Word what LaTeX can produce, it will just take you a hell lot more time and patience to do so. Don't get me wrong however, I can't stand the Office suite either.

You're right, but LaTeX seems to me more fool-proof. But don't fall into LaTeX vs. Office flamewar, same problem would be when chosing between M$ Paint and Gimp for bitmaps.

If you want to teach someone software tools, don't forget version control.

I would like to answer this question for the best interest of the student's, not yours.
You are supervising bachelor students. They may go to academia or industry after graduation.
If the student will pursue academic career after he graduates, then you should tell him to use the tools that are widely used in academia because it's for his best interest. I think force is a too strong word. To convince him is what you would do.
However, if he will go to industry, why waste his time to learn something he probably will never use for the rest of his life?
If the student doesn't know what he wants to do after he graduates, it's time for him to think about it now. Isn't it?
Here is my personal experience while I was in industry. I had to produce some document which contained math equations. I wanted to use LaTex. MS word was the tool I was told to use because of maintainability issue (no one else in my department knew how to use Latex). I had to follow the order. Matlab is another story. It's also used in industry.

with regard to LaTeX, I highly recommend LaTeXiT. it enables you to create mathematical formulas in latex without having to learn any other typesetting. and, you can copy and paste the formulas into word, powerpoint, etc.

@Tom I am already retired. It's not my problem anymore. Your suggestion probably won't work if the math formulas need to be updated after the document was produced. To the LaTex users like you and me, creating math stuff using LaTex is easy. It's hard to the non-users. I tried to train somebody to do it. It took him one week to fix two lines which had some errors. The management had to call for quit and we went back to MS Word. I am not sure it was because of LaTex or just that person, or the math was hard for him. As far as I know, industry still don't like use LaTex.

I think your answer is great. My advice was directed not to you specifically, but to anyone who needs to create mathematical formulas. I was not suggesting that it's easy, but it is much easier than learning to write a whole document in LaTeX. The formulas are copied as text, not pictures, so they are still editable after being pasted into MS Word. Still, as you suggest, I wouldn't recommend it for everyone.

Clearly define what are your goals and constraints, and work from there. What are the things that they need to learn in order to progress further in the field (and someday find a job)? What are constraints imposed by the research project you will be working on?

Goals — if learning a specific piece of software is required to become a professional in your field, then it is a de facto standard and they need to learn it. In this, a specific piece of software is just like a particular experimental or mathematical technique.
Constraints — there are cases where you need to restrict the choice of software to interoperate with others. For example, the student might not be able to choose his favorite programming language for a specific project because he has to use a specific advanced library, which only exists in e.g. Python. Or the project actually is to implement a specific functionality in an existing C++ framework. Or one of the goals of the thesis might be to produce technical documentation to be published in a given format.
Other than that, leave them free to choose whatever works for them. Be clear and upfront about what you advise them to use, and what you are willing to teach them (and what you cannot teach them). For example:

The choice is yours, as long as your are able to efficiently produce and edit a professional-looking 200-page document with many figures, tables, references and subdivisions, and it adheres to the university guidelines. I myself use LaTeX for writing articles and theses, as many colleagues, and I advise you to do the same. I have little experience with word processors. I can help you if you run into problems with the first one, but will not be able to help if you choose a word processor.

I once had a student who mastered MS Word to a level that I had never seen, and did a superb job in an efficient matter. It wouldn't have been bright of me to require him to use LaTeX when he knew another tool.

It wouldn't have been bright of me to require him to use LaTeX when he knew another tool. — That's just, like, your opinion, man.

@JeffE yeah, like most of the things I say, it is my opinion… I'm not quoting it as an International Standard on Word Processor Use in Academia :)  To be clearer: I understand that there are some fields where LaTeX would be covered by my point #1 (i.e., it's a de facto standard), and not knowing how to use it would put you at a disadvantage. It happens not to be the case in my field (physical chemistry).

I think it is useful to expose new students, even undergraduates, to the tools of the field. It's beneficial for them to know what some of this "looks like", it's easier for you to help them if they don't have to bring you up to speed on what they're using, etc.
You say there might not be "standard" tools, but are there some tools that are commonly used? Your two examples, LaTeX and Matlab, are both fairly ubiquitous in "applied math-y" fields, so why they might not have to use them in the future, there's a good chance they'll encounter it, or something like it.
The one caveat is that I would have a discussion with the student about their goals and objectives, and make sure the tools you're making them use are tools they will use in the future. As a somewhat personal example, despite the inclinations of some of my collaborators it would have been useless to make me learn how to lay out papers in LaTeX, as the standard for my field is not that, and all that would have accomplished was adding an extra step in before I converted everything to Word files.

Yes, it is perfectly acceptable to require students to use the software tools that are standard in your field when they begin working in your field, even as undergraduates.

Unless there are no standard tools defined nor recomended. They are just accessible (student licences, public PC labs, etc.) but not emhasized at all.

Nonsense.  LaTeX is the standard tool for writing research papers in mathematics, in many branches of computer science, and in most branches of physics.  Similarly, Matlab is the standard tool for certain types of visualization.  The question is not whether the tools are standard to students, but rather if they are standard for researchers.

I disagree. My colleague was submitting an article and was told to send it as MS Word document with strictly specified rules (font type, font sizes,...).

@Crowley (shrug) Every field has its weirdos.

A certain amount of "tool agnosticism" is a healthy attitude to have, since many people will want to use tools with which they are already familiar. I would be loathe to interrupt someone's already-functional workflow without a strong reason.
However, among those reasons are interoperability and reproducibility. If a student is doing research in your group, then their tools should be compatible with the ones you're already using. More importantly, you should still be able to use the work that they've produced even after they've left the group. So something that would require you to purchase an external license, or may not be well-supported within your group, is probably a bad idea. An "alternate" tool that is public domain, open-source, or otherwise "standard" in your field is probably not such a big deal. (What this means in your field is, of course, for you to decide!)

Without going into many details. I think of this as a chance for the student to learn not only Math, but things related to research and Academia. You as a supervisor should be able to prioritize. So start by asking him to work with fully professional tools such as Matlab and LaTeX for example, but if you find out that this holds him back from the main purpose of his thesis, then you should be lenient.

Should I force my student to use certain tools such as LaTeX and
  Matlab?

I think it would be hard to force a student to do so anyway, so do not force them simply suggest it to them. The examples you gave of LaTeX and MATLAB are not particularly difficult to learn. As a Computer Science undergrad I learnt them in my 4th year and it only took a very short time to be productive with them. In fact I was eager to learn and use them, you may find this to be true with your student, so do not assume that your student will resist the idea.
You should also explain why you use such tools and hopefully they will realise and come to appreciate them. Explain that not using the same tools will create more work for the both the student and yourself. My final recommendation is to set them some small trivial tasks at first to build familiarity, which is what my supervisor did. It worked on me.

I just recently graduated with my Bachelor's degree and for couple of my classes, I was required to use Latex and Matlab. I am glad the professor told me to use those because it helped me a lot in other classes too and helped me to gain a valuable skill.

Fred Brooks says in The Mythical Man-Month

"A good craftsman is known by his tools"

So if the student has the time, and skill you should force him to use the tools of the trade. You are his trainner, his teacher he doesn't know what he doesn't know, so if the tool is important then he should learn it.
Obviously use judgment the goal is for him to write the thesis not to master tools, so if the deadline is approaching then focus on the product not the tools.


text:
Do authors usually receive a copy of the whole journal issue when they publish a paper?
I've recently published my first paper.
Do journals usually send authors a copy of the issue in which their paper was published? Does Science magazine do that?

As for what's usual nowadays, in math at least: at most a free eprint, though occasionally an actual offprint--very rarely a copy of the whole issue.  Though Science is far from a typical research journal.

There are thousands of different journals, with many different policies. This question is too broad to answer. In the case of your particular paper, the journal should have made you aware of its policies before agreeing to accept the paper.

@DavidRicherby "Should have" --- maybe.  "Did" --- often not.

Science do not offer a copy of the issue.

I am in your exact same situation: first paper, and in Science. Did you finally receive a copy of the issue? I want to frame it!

Did you just say you published you first journal paper? and it was in Science? Congratulations!

Some journals do, and some journals don't.  In my experience, it seems pretty random which do and don't. Off the top of my head, I am not certain whether Science does.

I got a dozen or so separate copies (in the format of the journal) of my papers when I published in some IEEE transaction a while back. Just the paper, not the whole issue. From other journals I got a copy of the issue, sometimes just a letter of confirmation that it was published, or not even that.

No, Science does not give paper copies to authors, I was in your same situation. You can buy a separate issue if you request it, and it’s cheaper when yours is the current issue.

There are far too many journals to make a single, authoritative statement on the issue, beyond "Not always".
In my experience, and in my field (biomedical) it's quite rate. Of the papers I've published, only the single paper I've gotten in Lancet Infectious Diseases provided full copies of the print journal. All other papers I have where I have a physical copy I either ordered, or happened to subscribe to the print journal already.


text:
Applying for a job with former PhD supervisor - what to do about references?
It looks like I'm about to apply for a postdoc position to go back to my former PhD supervisor, with only one PI in between.
Normally as a Postdoc going for a 2nd (or 3rd depending on how you count it) position, the PhD supervisor would be a good person to ask for a reference (one of 3 in this case).  My supervisor was also the last person I worked for before my current PI - again, last but 1 boss would be a sensible reference.
But what if the position being applied for is working for the former PhD supervisor?  It seems obvious to me that you can't ask someone to for a reference when they're the one hiring. In this case everyone I'd ask for a reference from my PhD days is on the hiring committee.  Is the only course of action to not have any references from the PhD period?

In this case I'm on good terms with everyone, but have a fairly limited network (partly because of the geographic limitations that are why I'm applying to go back there); I'm moving on because of funding running out so my PI knows I'm applying for stuff (and I've actually asked them pretty much this question).

You just finished a postdoc with someone, and now you're applying for another postdoc with the PI who supervised your PhD? Just clarifying.

@AzorAhai-him- not quite finished, but that's right. I'll re-read my Q because having just written essentially the same in an email I might have missed a key point

In the end, on advice from my current boss and with limited time, I put the former supervisor down as one of 3 referees. I haven't had any complaints, and I would expect to have done by now.

I would just drop your former supervisor an informal email - he will know what to do.
And honestly, given that he knows you most likely very well the whole interview process might only be a formal procedure while the actual decision if it hires you again or not takes place in the moment he knows that you apply.
One other thought that you should keep in mind is that doing a post-doc in your former PhD supervisor's lab  might not be the best choice for your career as the aim of a postdoc is to show independence from the former supervisor.

Your extra thought is noted, and had occurred to me.  I'm geographically restricted so really have to try for everything academic within commuting range (which luckily covers a few cities), otherwise it's back to industry for me

That informal contact would be a good approach, but in this case I found the job listing only a few hours before the deadline.  I'd only just started looking broadly