text:
When Submitting Code To Publisher Must It All Be In The Same Language?
I might have the opportunity to submit a paper to an academic journal and also submit my code for it as well. However, I tend to do my projects across different coding languages because sometimes i'll be working in one language and then find a particular package available in another - so I work back and forth between languages.
I am just concerned that if I submit my paper and I am asked to supply code for replication purposes that it would be frowned upon that all the code is not central to one language. For example - I might do some of the project in Python and some in Matlab, and I would have to submit code for both languages.
Has anybody had experience with this?

Have you looked at some other papers in your target journal and looked at the languague(s) used?

The reason to ask for code is that the journal cares about reproducibility and quality of the science. The language of the code does not matter much, and normally it does not matter if two languages are used. A journal also accepts papers that use both fluorescence and mass spectroscopy, and there is no reason why they would refuse the use of two programming languages.
Of course it may be possible that your particular journal has additional requirements for code. If that is the case they probably say so in the author guidelines (you can check their website). If not, you can submit your code and they will let you know if something needs to be changed.

I think it would be foolish of a journal to require that all the code be in the same language. It would mean, in your case, submitting code that was not used to derive the results. Translating code from one language into another is fairly well automated, but the results obtained may not be identical, due to different libraries associated with the languages.
Moreover, if translations are done by hand, then errors may well be introduced.
Journals should be agnostic about these things. But it is possible that some journal would have a restriction. You could then decide to go along, or try to publish elsewhere. It would mean, of course, validating the new version of the code and rerunning all the simulations/experiments etc.

"Translating code from one language into another is fairly well automated" I'd have to disagree--this depends very heavily on which languages are used, and how heavily language-specific features are being used. In general, this is a far from easy problem to solve, and is not well automated.

@setholopolus, actually that's exactly what compilers do. First create an abstract rendering of a program (usually a tree) and then render that representation into some other language. It doesn't need to be machine language. There has been lots (and lots) of research into how to do it well.

I am well aware of what compilers do. From context I assumed you were talking about translating human readable high-level code in one language to human readable high-level code in another language.


text:
Am I responsible for that my PhD adviser does not have any fund or grant and as a result it really limited my research?
I'm a PhD student at my fifth semester in the US. From the beginning of my PhD program, I didn't have sponsored graduate research assistantship from NSF or NIH. I was just on my PhD adviser's startup grant for two semesters and after that I got a job in another department of our university. Right now, I don't take money from my PhD adviser for almost a year and half (so basically I'm a free PhD student for my adviser!). By the way I'm not the US citizen or permanent resident in order to apply for NSF or NIH funds directly by myself so my options regarding funding are really limited or even I would say I don't have any option to get a fund by myself.
As a result, I built my PhD research based on open source available softwares as well as data sets, which I found it initially just by my research without my PhD adviser help. Besides that we don't have any fund, also we don't collaborate with anyone which again limited our options. This relying on open source softwares and data sets is really limited my research, cause the amount of data that I could use for my research is limited to those open source datasets and I don't have access to any other datasets, which might be available in other research groups, because of the problems that I mentioned earlier. The type of data that I need for my PhD research is related to medical images, which is not available easily everywhere and as a result it's really hard to find it as a open source dataset (I was lucky that I found at least one open source dataset!).
Let's say, I processed all the currently open source available data out there and analyze them and answered my research questions. But the problem is: there are several people out there, which are famous people that they are emerged in the field that I'm working on for years and have a big project from NIH or NSF that give them an access to some private datasets that are 10 times bigger than mine. Of course this bigger datasets increase the accuracy of the model that we are trying to work on as my PhD project.
Recently, my PhD adviser compared my accomplishments to these research groups that are engaged in big projects from NIH and NSF for years and said: by using your current open source datasets, it's really hard to say something in this field. I think it's not a fair comparison. Even our recent results with smaller dataset size shows comparable and to some extent better performance than other available models out there. Also, we studied several aspects of our research questions, which did not even touched by other people. So my question is: Am I responsible for that my PhD adviser does not have any fund or grant and as a result it really limited my research? How can I deal with this situation?

You are responsible for your own progress, certainly. That is independent of any funding questions. You aren't responsible for things outside your control, of course. But this reads like a rant, not a serious question.

@Buffy But it seems to me that my PhD adviser thinks that I'm responsible for funding... Practically, I cannot go beyond my available tools right? But his opinion is that It's not a good excuse to say I'm limited to open source things that are available publicly. In fact he said: "If you need a more data, go ahead and get it". Sounds reasonable at the first place but practically it won't work for me cause the question is "how to get more data?!" Am I the one that is responsible for getting fund or initiate collaboration with other people? Of course not...

But you are, ultimately, responsible for the project that you choose to work on.  If you know you don't have, and can't get, the resources to achieve results that will stand up well in comparison to what others are doing, then it's your responsibility to switch to some other topic where you can be more successful with what you have.

In academia, you get judged on your results on an absolute scale, not relative to your resources.  Well-funded groups have their papers held to the same standard as poorly-funded groups (at least in principle).  You have to get used to this, and better to start now.  I think your advisor is just being honest with you.

@NateEldredge OK, practically speaking what are my options? I like my project and I put a lot of effort to make it work alone and I don’t wanna give it up. So, in your opinion based on my conditions what can I do to extend my research?

@NateEldredge I’m not saying you or anyone else here give me a specific solution. But I’m just saying based on my current conditions what are my practical options?

Talk to your advisor and/or other mentors who know your field well.  If you are sure that you can't get funding, and you can't get the data you want without funding, then explain to them why you are sure, and ask them to help you explore how your work can be successful without it.  Maybe there are aspects of your work that outperform the larger group, and you can adjust your research to demonstrate this convincingly.  Maybe you can find collaborators (it's not just your advisor's job to find collaborators for you!).

Or, maybe you really do need to drop this line of research and switch to something that has more potential for success.  This is something that happens a lot in research, and again, best to get used to it now.  The effort you've already put in is a sunk cost.

Research projects that are not resource-limited are either very rare or non-existent. The Manhattan Project may have come close. You are responsible for selecting research plans that fit with the available resources. At the worst, if it is not possible to produce publishable results with those resources, you may need to change direction and/or emphasis. Maybe the ideas you have been applying to medical images might also be applicable to another domain with more free images.
As suggested in comments, collaboration may increase resources. Ideally, your advisor would be helping. My advisor introduced me to many of his collaborators. One of them had a lead on a proprietary data set I could use for zero money given the right introduction.
There are things you can do even with neither funding nor help from your advisor. Go to open seminars both in your department and in related departments. Ask questions. Hang around afterwards if anyone is interested in talking. Take an interest in other researchers' projects. Refine a good elevator pitch so that you can use a few minutes attention to get someone interested in your research. If your department does any sort of poster day, prepare and present a poster describing your project. Take any opportunities to give talks. You have a job in another department. Take any opportunities to talk about your research and your data set problem with them. The more people you meet and who know about your research, the better the chances that one of them knows someone who knows someone who would be a good collaborator.

either very rare or non-existent — ...or in purely theoretical fields.

In general, this is bad form on the part of the advisor and your committee (shouldn't be approving thesis topics that are not viable if funding is not available). As a PhD student, you are in training and potential stumbling blocks should be made clear to you.
For example, for my PhD I worked in a lab where I wanted to do field work in another country, but my advisor didn't have funding for this. I decided to go ahead with this part of the project, partially using my own personal funds, as well as cobbling together several small research grants to cover these costs.
So I would recommend to you that you investigate research funds that might be available from your department, institution, scientific society, foundation, or other non-federal source. Funding begets funding and you absolutely have to be successful in getting grants to be a successful academic.
Additionally, it seems odd that an advisor could take on a student with no funding in the lab. That would not be allowed in my department (biology sub-field at a private, R1 university).
Finally, to your last question: I think you are correct and it is unreasonable to compare the contribution of a single graduate student with "famous" well-funded labs! The contribution to your field during your PhD can be modest- that's ok- but it has to be good science, so I would focus on how to make sure that you are doing the most rigorous and sound research with the resources you have available. And get to writing grant applications! Good luck.

Thanks for your encouraging answer but unfortunately the academia is much more aggressive than this to not compare my contribution as a single foreign graduate student to well-funded and emerged research labs. I mean you care and saying it's unfair cause probably you are student still or at least not too far from your graduation. But if I tell my story to professors I bet nobody really care about my stories... I searched a lot to find appropriate grants or fund sources that could be matched to my eligibility conditions but unfortunately pretty much all of them require US citizenship.

And that's because my field is related to high performance computing and accessing to medical images which in order to access to these kind of resources you need to go through a lot of processes which might not be the best option for me even if it does not need US citizenship or permanent residency requirement.

I'm definitely not a student and have been faculty and dean of students for several years, but I certainly concede that your field may be different that mine.

So you are too kind and I really appreciate your sympathy.

it is unreasonable to compare the contribution of a single graduate student with "famous" well-funded labs — I think this depends on the purpose of the comparison.  For the purpose of evaluating your progress as a graduate student, I agree that the comparison is unreasonable.  But for the purpose of evaluating whether your contributions should be published, the comparison is between the actual results, not between the environments that produced them.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Who should I talk to to request removing wrong information about me from website of my former PhD adviser?
I was a PhD candidate from September 2016 until May 2021 in an university in the US. After that I dropped my PhD studies and switched to master's degree and graduated this August. Now, it's a couple of months that I started my work in a company and work outside of academia.
You can find the long history of fights and conflicts between me and my former adviser in my previous posts.
Today, I became aware that still my former adviser has some information in his website about me. There are a couple of problems with this information:

My former adviser put he/him as my preferred pronoun. Well, I never used any preferred pronoun and we never talked about it. I don't want to use it. I have my own personal preference and I don't want it besides my name.
He put my degree as master's non-thesis. OK, I got a master's degree and yes it is non-thesis but I think it's not his business to showcase it. After I left his group, I passed a couple of courses and wrote a literature summary that was reviewed by another professor and I got my degree. In official diploma, it only says master's degree, so I'm not sure why he put it that way when he was not the professor that reviewed my literature summary and gave me a pass grade to receive my diploma. Long story short, I think it's not his business.
He incorrectly claims that the topic of my literature summary was something else in that piece of information while it had nothing to do with the topic that I worked during the time that I was a PhD candidate. In another word, it's simply wrong. My former adviser put the title of my literature summary as X while it is clearly Y and has nothing to do with him.

Overall, it makes me uncomfortable. On the other hand, I would move to west coast just within a month from east coast and I have a full time job, so I don't have much free time to waste talking with my former adviser. I want to report it somewhere in the university and get it removed as soon as possible with no interaction or argument with my former adviser. Any idea or suggestion is much appreciated.

"so I don't have much free time to waste talking with my former adviser" I can't imagine this would take more time than writing up this post?

Unfortunately, we can't help anyway. We don't know any better than you who maintains the website. I have been in various groups where the professor did themself, where someone who worked for them did, and where the dept did. We can't tell you whether to email your prof, their URA who makes the site, or the dept website coordinator. CV as individual factors.

You might consider talking with the university official responsible for FERPA compliance.  It's likely that you have the right to privacy with respect to some or all of this information under FERPA.

@AzorAhai-him- No, it doesn't depend on individual factors. There must be an official route for inquiring about information that are provided in the universities' websites by their staff or their faculty members. I think it's pretty sad if we accept that anybody, including faculty members, can disseminate non-sense without any accountability.

@MithridatestheGreat: Considering many faculty have moved their websites to non-university hosted services (more because of bad university IT than any policy reasons), it is within their free speech rights to disseminate any nonsense without any accountability beyond being the possibility of being sued for libel (if their statements are actually libelous).

@AlexanderWoo This one is hosted on university domain not a personal website.

@MithridatestheGreat: There's a long tradition in the academic world of universities hosting the personal websites of professors, at most with a disclaimer of some sort.  This dates back to the time when there was no commercial hosting and the university did this as a service to free speech.  No one thinks that a personal website hosted on a university server is actually a university website.

@MithridatestheGreat Yes, but we don't know what that route is, as it depends on your (individual) university.

@AlexanderWoo You'll note that the OP doesn't describe it as "personal website." There are plenty of "actual university websites" that represent individuals and labs. I hope that Mithridates gets the change they need, I just don't think we can tell them anything other that vagaries.

There should be something like contact or maintained by.....

If they're your former PhD advisor of 5 years, then I would expect you could contact them directly. Actually I'm astonished you could have a PhD advisor for 5 years who doesn't know your pronouns.

Odd as it sounds, there is one to missing in your question title (it should be "who should I talk to to request to remove wrong information", or perhaps "who should I talk to to request removing wrong information".

@kaya3 I read it as "I don't want my pronouns stated", not that the prof doesn't know the pronouns in question

@llama You're exactly right here.

Is it clear that he is not crediting you for the contribution of work during your PhD candidacy?

There are a couple of possibilities, though the first is more likely.
Some universities let faculty maintain their own web pages. In this case you have to contact the professor and ask for a change.
Some universities have a staff person maintain pages, possibly with input from the faculty member. In this case, you can contact them with a request.
But, I'd suggest that you just say you are uncomfortable with what the page says about you. But also supply what you would like it to say. Ideally, say this in detail making it easy to make a change. Use wording that is consistent with the rest of the page/site, for example.
But, don't complain about what you don't want to see, suggest what you do want said about you.
It is, as I said above, the most likely case that the professor has either direct control or a lot of influence over the site. If you don't get a reasonable response, you could then make a complaint to the superior of whoever is responsible.
And, even in the best case, expect the change to take a while.

I think it would be fair to ask for a complete removal of any personal data referring to OP. Name, actual master thesis title, any clue that could be traced back to OP.

@usr1234567 While that is certainly an option, it's also the one most likely to attract pushback from the professor. "You actually were a PhD student of mine, so why exactly do you think you shouldn't be listed under Former PhD Students? Are you perhaps trying to conceal your PhD on your CV? I'm not going to help with that."

I feel some "not" is missing somewhere in the fourth para, but not sure with the three "but"s across that para and the following para.

@usr1234567  There are many cases where a list of names is perfectly acceptable, I'm not convinced that accurate factual statements here are a problem. For example, one cannot be an official co-author of a paper, and then expect to have your name removed after it has been published.

Depending on the country you would have different legal options and rights.  If you're really bothered about this then perhaps look into that.
In general, however, start with a simple email to the individual politely requesting changes and see how that goes.  Go up the chain of authority if you are dissatisfied.
Your second issue is rather contentious and I don't recommend pursuing it - you are IMO incorrect in arguing that it's "not his business" as he was your advisor.  Your successes or failures do at least in some small way reflect on them.
Whatever you do, be polite - this may seem black and white to you, but other people involved may see it differently.

It's in the US.

@MithridatestheGreat Alas I am not familiar with US law on this subject.

@StephenG Basically, there is nothing the law says unless there are untrue statements. Essentially, the first point there is no legal option, but today's social climate can do a lot. Point 2 is the OP annoyed with semantics, nothing untrue as admitted by the OP. Point 3 has potential options, depending on the details. I would venture a guess to say that it is a disagreement on interpretation given the OP and adviser have a contentious history.

@DavidS About point 3: Well, it's not a disagreement. The title for my literature summary has nothing to do with my former PhD adviser or the topic that I was working on during my PhD candidacy, even tangentially. So, I'm surprised why he is putting the title of my literature summary completely wrong. It's like, someone put the information of a random student and claims his/her thesis topic was something else.

@MithridatestheGreat Ok, I may be misunderstanding something then. To be clear, you had a PhD thesis/project/candidacy work left unfinished when you exited the program. You then had an unrelated literature summary that was completed as part of your Masters. Your former advisor now decided to name the literature summary after the work associated with him?

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


text:
Conference paper with an ISBN
Is an ISBN a sign of prestigious publishing?
Will the conference paper with ISBN appea in Google scholar, ResearchGate and orcid?
Is ARICBET CONFFERENCE PRESTUGIOUS?

ISBN is for books, not papers. How would such a number be assigned?

No, ISBN is for identification purposes. It has no intrinsic value other than as a means of distinguishing (usually) books. It awards no "prestige". If a conference publishes its proceedings then the proceedings would likely have an ISBN and you can search for the volume by that alone. But the individual paper wouldn't have an individual ISBN.
Whether the paper appears in indexes is a completely separate matter, but conference papers in some fields often do.

Thank you for your answer. So , how should I add it in this case to google scholar or researchgate?

As its name suggests (International Standard Book Number) and Buffy also said, ISBN are normally used for books only. Journal papers and conference papers are usually given a DOI instead which serves the same purpose: providing the document in question with a unique digital ID that makes it easier to find.
As to the second part of your question: nothing gets added to Researchgate automatically, you (or one of the other authors) will have to add it to your account yourself. Orcid ususally (but not always!) updates automatically, if you provided the publisher / the conference with your orcid ID when submitting the paper. If you didn't, there is a high chance of having it to do yourself. Google scholar also mostly (but not always) updates automatically. In doubt, check and add manually if necessary.


text:
How should I "stress" words present in the glossary?
I am building the glossary of my master's thesis. To redirect readers to it when they come across a technical word, I stress them with a * at the end, like : preemption*
How should I deal with words appearing more than 50 or 100 times?
I thought about stressing the first one appearing in the paragraph, or maybe the section. What peoples do in general?

Where I have seen texts indicate terms that are included in a glossary (this is more common in textbooks than in documents like a thesis), it is done by putting the word in bold, with a note in the starting matter that this is the convention used. An asterisk breaks up the flow of text more and could lead to a lot more confusion with readers expecting footnotes.

Use a hyperlink.

I personally don't want them marked at all. But when I stumble over an acronym that I don't know or a peculiar word, then I consult the list of abbreviations and/or the glossary. If it is not explained, then the trouble starts. In any case, the people who will be reading your thesis will not need to have markings in the text as to which word is to be found there.
If you absolutely must, then as @Oliver882 says: First appearance only.

The sentence starting with Otherwise doesn't make sense

@Oliver882: I suspect “otherwise” was meant to be something like “furthermore”.  (I’ve seen this misuse of “otherwise” before, especially in Euro-English contexts, I guess from the influence of words like German “außerdem”.)

@PLL OK. Or perhaps "In any case"?

@Oliver882, right, that's a better term!

You are not stressing the words. You are marking that they are in the glossary.
Do it for the first appearance in the section.

Agreed with other posters. It is on your reader to look in the glossary you helpfully provide when they stumble on a word or term they're unfamiliar with. A word marked with an asterisk and "see glossary" would confuse me, personally. If you truly feel the need, I would mark it with a footnote that gives what page the term appears in your glossary.
If you're coining a new word/term in your thesis, you would explicitly define that in the text rather than direct a reader to the glossary.

I would say it depends on the field. In STEM, you will probably have definitions that should be clear on the first occurrence and used afterward. There you can emphasize the term you define, like

We call a number positive when it is greater than 0

so it is clear which term you're actually defining. If a glossary or list of definitions is present, it is helpful when it contains every emphasized term. The other direction may or may not be useful depending on if the glossary is meant to contain everything needed or only the essential terms defined through the text. In the example above, you could also have a definition for number in the glossary, but you wouldn't want to emphasize it in this sentence because it is only used in the sentence but not defined there.


text:
How to/Should I ask for more time to make a decision between Phd offers
I'm a Congolese grad student who has received two PhD scholarship offers.
I got the first quite a while ago but when I saw the call for the Irish program I applied because it fit everything I've been doing in my career like a glove, and at the time I was having second thoughts about the first offer and I got the offer as well, just last week.
After thinking hard about the housing situation in Ireland which every single student on the program complained about (some people sleep in labs), compared to the first, the stipend, the interdisciplinary nature of the program and how no one complained about anything of all the students I spoke to, and a bunch of other things I decided to go with the UK offer.
I have no issues with Irish immigration. I'm almost certain that I would get the visa since the program is funded, so I would like to hold off on making a decision.
How do I ask for some time before accepting or declining the Ireland offer so I have the opportunity to hear back regarding my UK student visa application?
Do I reject the second offer? Or ask for time while waiting to hear from the UK immigration? How do I politely ask for time?

Removing the names of the cities actually changes a question quite a bit -- as the cost of living in the UK is substantially different in smaller cities to the big ones or the capital. And it doesn't really remove your identifying information as it is still both preserved in the edit history and the answers -- you should flag the question for moderator attention if you find it important to remove that information for privacy reasons.

Considering the economics, if you compare cost of life in the two cities and the current exchange rate EUR-GBP, life in Dublin would be a nightmare in comparison with Nottingham.
And £18'500 per year in Nottingham is already a quite low salary.
I will let others chip in about the advisor. I do not know enough the UK and Irish systems to judge the importance of having a good advisor. The only thing I would consider, is that since you have a rather small scholarship, a good advisor may be preferrable because they may be proactive in finding funds for you to attend conferences/workshops/etcetc ...

Yes I think this makes sense. Already my would be supervisor at Ireland has shared with me the allowance for conferences and stuff like that and is generally more proactive but I've heard from students at the Nottingham program that the program is also generous and provides a grants for research though I don't know how much

To add to this answer, the PhD students in the UK do not actually receive a salary -- they get a bursary instead. The practical difference is that they do not pay tax on a bursary, so they actually get a bit more money in-hand than somebody on an equivalent salary. Still, the bursaries are quite low regardless.

@penelope thanks for the important detail, I checked and according to the tax rate, in the UK a salary is tax-free up to 12'570 £, then for the quotes here written you pay 20% on the remaining salary from 12571 to 18500 (if you have no deductions).
My point: it's a complex thing, a bursary may seem more money in hand for the "employee", but usually it is cheaper for the "employer" ---> the employee is losing some benefits (I don't know which one exaclty, maybe access to unemployment, free and inconditioned access to the NHS, retirement savings).

As far as I am aware, PhD studentships in the UK are not salaried positions, ever. PhD students are not employees of the Universities (except if they take up e.g. demonstrating duties or something -- but their PhD position is not employment). Of course there are more intricate differences between a salary and bursary - including (current and future) benefits. My point is: when it comes to PhD finances, the advertised number is what a student gets in hand, in full. As a side note, the NHS is free for all (legal?) UK residents regardless of employment status.

And another important thing to note would be that, in the UK, a fully-funded PhD position typically (always) means that it covers: tuition fees to the University, estates costs (i.e. you will be provided with a computer and a desk), provides a monthly bursary or stipend (gvt mandated so same for everybody), and has a budget for research activities such as conferences. For exceptional students/conferences, the department can sometimes cover the expenses if the budget is out before the end of PhD. But, students are not expected to pay for those from their bursaries ("living money").

I recommend you don't reject the second offer until you are certain that you can undertake the first (i.e., when you have sorted out all your visa requirements, etc.).  If you need more time for this, you can ask for it, but bear in mind that an unaccepted offer can be rescinded by an institution at any time.  If I were you, I would let the second program know that you are presently examining visa rules and eligibility and this this process is taking some time, so you need more time before accepting their offer.  While it is possible that the second offer might expire, or they might even rescind, I would think that they would be likely to have some patience.


text:
Is it possible to get second master while I already have one?
I am in a difficult situation and I am looking for some guidance. I have done my research and I have come to the conclusion that it is best for my mental health to take master and leave. Unfortunately, I already have a master's degree (in another field) and I am a 4th year PhD student and have only one year left to complete my PhD. Also, I am the first PhD student of my adviser. I realize that, I am extremely close to finishing and will probably be encouraged to continue. However, my mental health has been declining over the past several years.
Earlier this year my dog (who was everything to me) passed away from cancer and I never really had a chance to grieve and have been continuously working since then. His passing caused me to spiral into a much deeper depression than I was in before and in the past several weeks, I have been had episodes of de-personalization, where I have a memory of something that I have done in the past but I was proud of that. But, then that memory is not mine anymore. It seems it's a different person. I know this is related to the stress that I have been accumulating over the past few months and it is getting worse now. The only thing that alleviates my depression is that the thought of leaving academia and this town to move on with my life. I can honestly say that after finally deciding that getting master degree and leave out, is what I want to do now and I haven't been happier in years. Even though, it isn't finalized I think this is a good indication that I am making the right decision.
I have also realized that I don't want or need a PhD to get a job that I want. I really just want to go into forestry or be a greenhouse manager. I am burnt out, unhappy, unmotivated, and uninterested with my research because I can't get anything to work and don't expect to be able to complete my research in the next year. The main reason I feel I'm in grad school at this point is that I feel like I would disappoint my adviser. I know that's not a good reason to stay, especially since staying might be more detrimental for her chances for tenure than just finding another student to replace me on my project. I have decided to tell her that I am thinking about getting master degree and leave tomorrow to gauge her reaction. I need to have her approval before I do leave because I have been her student for 6 years now and need her reference. So if she is not on board with my plan to getting master degree and leave out, then I think I have to stay, but I know my work will suffer a lot in the next year and I doubt my ability to finish my research on time.
What I am wondering is whether or not I am justified in wanting to getting master degree and leave out, if it is bad to have two masters degrees? Will I still be able to find a job if I leave with a second masters?

To offer another option: Could you take a leave of absence to work on your mental health, and then return and finish the PhD?

I've thought extensively about that and I came to the conclusion that it would most likely not help my mental health because I would still feel the guilt for taking time off, which would ultimately lead to me just quitting and not finishing at all. I know that I would like something to come from the past 4 years, but I don't really want the PhD because it would be expected of me to use it for a job in academia or leading a lab in industry and I just don't feel competitive enough intellectually to spend the rest of my life competing with other scientists for money and recognition.

I can honestly say that after finally deciding that getting master degree and leave out, is what I want to do now and I haven't been happier in years. — Congratulations!!

Your own health is more important than any degree. You should attend to that. If you can do both, perhaps working with a therapist while deemphasizing your degree work for a while, then that might be an option. Stress and depression are very serious.
Your advisor seems to be invested in you, so you may have an option of a pause or a slower rate of progress. But a second masters won't impede your current goals so it doesn't sound (from here - which is far away) as a poor option.
However, if you can find a therapist who can help you with the health issues, he or she would be a better source of advice on your future plans than anything you will get here. In fact you may get advice of a complete different sort that neither you, your advisor, nor the community here could think of.
But for the direct question, I can't think of any downside to having more than one master's degree.

My close friend had some sort of similar situation like you. Except, that she wanted to continue the academia and get a PhD but she decided to take a master and leave and even change her field cause her adviser was awful. But she had a master degree in another country and get another one in the US. And right now, she's studying a new PhD again in the US with much much better adviser and I expect that she will get a really good job after her graduation. So it's not bad even it could be good for you to have two master degrees due to your mental issues and depression that you want to leave academia. Also, based on your desired job after graduation, I think a master degree will be fitted well to desired job's qualifications. So, do the right thing to make yourself happier cause taking PhD will not make you happy right now.

The answer is yes.  I have two MS degrees.  Take care of yourself and your health first.  Good luck with everything.

My sister has two master's.
I advise finishing since you are so close.  At least have a negotiation with the advisor.  Phrase it as a request for help to make it seem less adversarial...but it is really a negotiation.  He has some interest in you passing the goal.  Since you will bail anyways, might as well see what is absolute minimum needed to get you out with the sticker.  You can still go off and be a firewatcher in New Mexico or whatever, WITH the degree.  But keep your options open.  Push that ball over the goal.
I know academia can be a bummer trip, but I don't think crying for your dog is a reasonable reason to bail.  My Dad died when I was 19 and away in the military.  And I did my job.  Life comes at us all.  You will see plenty more deaths as you age.  It's part of life and part of growing up.  People expect you to keep on keeping on.


text:
Can my former PhD adviser force me to complete tasks after quitting his research group?
I quit my current research group after four and a half years. I am currently looking for other opportunities to join a new research group and finish my PhD.
Based on recent meetings with my former PhD adviser, our graduate coordinator, and our department chair, I was asked to sign and accept a Data Transfer Document to acknowledge that all the data, code, and intellectual property that were created during these four and a half years belong to my former PhD adviser, which I don't have any claim. I am willing to give up all the data, code, and intellectual property to him. I don't want to use anything created during these four and a half years for the rest of my life.
I received this Data Transfer Document today, and it contains some information that my former PhD adviser still recommends me to stay and continue my work with him. Still, I'm not going to do that. After that, a long list of data, code, implementations, and other created things during these four and a half years. In the end, there is a place that I need to sign and attest that I acknowledge that I transfer everything to him. It's OK, and I'm going to sign that.
This list of contributions gives me the impression that my former adviser expects me to complete all the incomplete tasks, and then I would turn them to him. My concern is that he hopes to do new work on the existing research materials and possibly bring them to a shape that he expects to see. My understanding of transferring all the data and research materials to the PI when somebody quits is like a freeze. Everything that was created and developed up to that moment should be transferred entirely to the PI in its current form. I don't think my former PI should expect that I'm going to do more work when I want to give up four and a half years and accept the pain of not getting a PhD for all the work I did during these years. If I wanted to continue to work on these research materials, I would stay, not leaving and abandoning all of my works.
It should be noted here that I never received any funding from my former PhD adviser. My funding comes from a different department entirely unrelated to my former PhD adviser.
In response to his list, I compiled another list that points out what data, results, or code is located where and how to access that. All the materials are stored within the university's storage and repositories. I don't want to have a lengthy discussion with my former adviser about why something is not complete in his opinion or if he expects me to do extra work on current research materials. I'm going to send him this list that I compiled and the signed Data Transfer Document and say whatever that is created during these four and a half years is entirely yours, and I don't have any claim. I wanted to know if he can force me to do extra or new work on the current research materials or not?
Update: I communicated my concerns to our graduate coordinator, and I received this response:

It is not in my competency to decide what should be in the Data Transfer Document.  It is created solely by your adviser.

You are not supposed to do extra research to satisfy this requirement.  My understanding is that you need to Transfer Data that is already existing.

About intellectual property issues, you might consult with appropriate IP persons prior signing the document. Also you might consult with them if there are any consequences of not signing this document.

So, even if item 2 might be correct, I'm not comfortable with the hostile language and how it is worded. My other impression from this response is that not signing this document is also not that important as long as I acknowledge the University's IP policy.
Further update/clarification: I originally did not have the confidence to refuse to sign the data transfer document. But after this discussion, I have now told my adviser that I am not comfortable signing.
Latest update: Following my question, it seems that I must sign the proposed document to be able to switch my research group inside our department. I have pasted the two parts of this document that I am not comfortable with. I kindly ask you to read these sentences and let me know if reading this content will affect any prospective adviser's decision. Please tell me if you get a bad impression from a student approaching you and not accept him/her after reading these sentences.

You have indicated that you wish to withdraw from your research course and abandon your dissertation research following an incomplete (I) grade that you did not resolve, resulting in a no pass (NP) grade for the semester. My recommendation remains for you to work with the graduate school to develop a plan to improve your research skills while recognizing the tenets of academic integrity. The sanctions imposed for previous violations of academic integrity remain binding. You should also be aware that according to the university regulations, all requirements for a doctoral degree must be completed within eight years from the date a student first matriculates into a doctoral degree program at this university.

The undersigned acknowledges Mr. Alone Programmer’s obligations outlined in this memo and enclosed documents and acknowledges Mr. Alone Programmer’s responsibility to resolve any pending issues of concern under University’s Graduate School Policies and Procedures.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment. We can only move comments to chat once. In particular, please avoid answers in comments and keep a respectful tone in the discussion, here or in chat.

What do you get in return for signing this document?

Do not sign any document you are not sure about.  Do not sign a document that assigns property to someone else unless you are getting fairly paid for it.
Your PhD advisor cannot force you to do anything unless you have agreed contractually to do it.
Very probably the work you did as a PhD student belongs to your university, and not to yourself or your advisor.  Consult your university's policies.
If you need detailed advice, consult your union (if any) or a lawyer.

The point about the university's ownership is an important one. OP may not be able to sign away these rights even if they wanted to do so. This feels all kinds of wrong, and is almost certainly covered by existing university policy and copyright/IP law.

Scratch the university, the works belong to the student. The student was not hired by the university to produce such works; they paid the university as part of this program. The university may have a royalty-free licence on the IP, but no self-respecting academic would accept that coursework/thesis research is somehow work-for-hire.

@obscurans If you check policies, you will that usually Dan is right.  Also, the question specifies that the student was funded, strongly implying they were paid.  Work for hire is not the only way rights can be transferred.

@obscurans Depending on country this advice can be very incorrect, and students can get in serious legal troubles. It is true that in many places universities has no clear policies nor IP observed, but that is not the universal standard.

If you sign a document in which you promise to complete unfinished projects, it will become much harder for you to refuse a request to do that, since you will be refusing to do something that you promised to do.
Now, whether what you signed constitutes a legally enforceable contract or not may be debatable, and may depend on whether you are receiving consideration, whether you had a reasonable option to refuse to sign, the precise legal jurisdiction, and many other details. Regardless, it is generally a good idea not to sign documents in which you make commitments you don’t think you should be asked to keep or which seem unfair. Even with a document that’s not legally enforceable in some hypothetical sense, people tend to put a lot of stock in a person’s signature on a piece of paper, and the former adviser may still have influence over your future career.
I suggest that you study the data transfer document some more to make sure you understand what it is asking you to do. If at that point you still have concerns, raise them with the department chair, before you sign the document. Good luck!
Edit: I see that other people are advising you to consult a lawyer. I didn’t suggest that at first because in my experience people tend to throw around such suggestions much more casually than they would follow such advice themselves. (For example, in my entire life I went to “consult a lawyer” about something exactly once, and that was regarding an issue involving a large amount of money.) Anyway, for what it’s worth, if consulting a lawyer is an option that’s available to you and within your budget, then yes, I agree that may be a good idea in the current situation, especially if you still have serious doubts about the data transfer document after studying its contents more and/or suspect the department isn’t looking out for your best interests.

Department chairs cannot always be trusted to protect students' interests.

@AnonymousPhysicist true. Does that mean you disagree with my advice? What would you suggest instead of raising the concerns with the department chair?

@Roland thanks, edited to discuss the lawyer suggestion.

Well, I really appreciate all the answers here. I doubt a lawyer could give a more useful insight even after getting a couple of hundreds of dollars. My current strategy is that to talk to our graduate coordinator that sent me this data transfer document compiled by former adviser and ask him some clarifications about the scope of this document and if I need to do extra work beyond what is already available and also honestly telling him that I'm not willing to take any extra responsibility beyond what is already defined in University IP policy and Graduate Manual.

One strange thing is that in that document they demand that I need to share this document with any new prospective adviser. I guess they are just making things up by themselves cause I asked several people that were in similar situation like me that changed their PhD adviser and none of them had something like this. I won't let them enforce something on me that doesn't have precedent before. Usually, people sign contract at the beginning of their work not when they want to depart...

In the US, many lawyers offer a "free first consultation".  I did this with one, and it profited me much.  (This lawyer-consult was otally unrelated to academia, but that's not my point.)   Also, there may be a free legal aid society in your area.  In any event, the document sounds like it shouldn't be signed, but you also do want to keep good relations with the former advisor, so this is a dilemma.  You could ask to make it clear that you are not expected to do any more work -- this seems minimal.

First off: You can't be forced to do anything in any situation where you are walking away (*).
This implies that when you are asked to sign a document, you can decline. You can also decide to sign it, but you should ask yourself (and the other party) what's in it for you if you do. It's a negotiation, and that means both sides should strive to get something meaningful out of it, and walk away if they don't. In a situation like this, that could mean that they support you for your future steps, give you good references etc (even if you don't see their benefit right now, you can insist on that). That basically means, there needs to be a benefit for you in that document and they will also need to put a signature under that.
In any case, take your time! This is nothing that should be done in haste, and there should be no urge from their side. You would be well-advised to consult a third party for legal advice, anyway. Sometimes there is an association of law students or something similar that might be willing to help you if you can't afford it.
(*) unless you have a contractual obligation from a previous contract, but then they wouldn't need you to sign anyway.
Don't sign before you are 100% sure of what you are doing!
On top of that, there seems to be a lot of confusion about the contents of the contract. What exactly are you giving away? An instruction on how to access the data/code? The exploitation rights (right to publish the codes etc.)? Removing you from the authorship lists (that would be wrong)? This should be clarified. Regarding the recommendation to continue your work, that may be just a CYA for you advisor to make sure that he did his due diligence that you are acknowledging before you put your career at risk. But if you feel like it could be seen as an obligation to do more work, then, again, don't sign (possibly negotiate the wording).
When you are making a disrupting decision, don't forget about future eventualities!
This is very important! You never know how everything will pan out in the future. There is a common pattern when people leave in grief that they want to close the chapter, and can't get rid of the emotional weight fast enough. Try to assess this calmly:

Are you giving up the work of 4.5 years (!!) just to be done with it?
You may need your past work in the future! For another PhD very likely! and even if not, you never know how it could be useful.
Can your relationship with your former advisor / faculty be salvaged so that everyone can leave saving their face?
Are they trying to help you, maybe, and can you benefit from that?
How can you build your future in a constructive way, and how do your current actions shape that future?
Can you aim for a solution where you can give a positive spin to it at some point in the future?

Take your time!

+10 You can't be forced to do anything in any situation where you are walking away

Counterexample: the US university patent agreements I've signed as a condition of employment all say I have an obligation to help them pursue and defend any patents in the future, which may mean signing documents up to testifying in court. The patent system requires the actual inventors to make certain assertions and there's no way around it.

@user71659 true, that would fall under the (*) category (obligations from existing contracts). but OP does not mention any patent issues here, or that they were asked to adhere to any existing obligations.

Patents are extremely rare.  I've worked in technology all my life and never got one, and only been asked to look into getting one.  Still if you need to defend the patent you need to do that.

@user71659 But then the inventor can charge basically what they like on an hourly rate, surely?  This can't be an obligation to carry out indefinite amounts of unpaid work for an indefinite period in the future.  As a "condition of employment", that contract ceases when you cease to be employed, unless they continue paying you a retainer.

@user71659 it may just be that that provision in the contract isn't enforceable. For example, in California, late fees in an apartment lease are presumed invalid, but every apartment lease I've signed in CA includes one.

@Graham I looked one up and it says "I shall execute any documents and do all things necessary, at University’s expense..." so I suspect a judge would allow a fair labor rate, not $1 million an hour, see "good faith" in contract law.

@user71659 That's reasonable.  Your hourly rate does not necessarily have to be the rate for a general engineer though - if you're the only person who can do this, you have an argument that your specialist status matters more than the specific field you're working in.  In 2018, PwC charged out partners at £1315 an hour for specialist advice on tax. (See https://www.pwc.co.uk/business-recovery/administrations/assets/westbar_report_20190329.pdf)  So $1m an hour is unreasonable, but $1.5k an hour could be entirely justifiable.  Plus expenses, of course.

@user71659: I have circa 150 patents, and have signed at least half a dozen patent agreements related to employment. All talk about helping pursue and defend patents after leaving. I used to obsess and spend too much personal time reviewing such old company patents. Moreover, if you spend a lot of time, you should be compensated. Getting a patent may seem compensation enough, but after 100 you don’t care anymore unless it’s really important.

Don’t sign
At least until you have had some proper advice. I haven’t seen the document and IANAL but there is a difference between what the University or PI might assert is its IP and what actually is.
This matters because you say you still want to get a PhD and the work you have done in the last 4.5 years might be useful to you in that. You wouldn’t be the first person to have a dissertation that involved some disparate research conducted with different PIs in the interests of graduating and moving forward if that was what, after some time and reflection you decided to do. Certainly, waiving your rights to all of your work may create difficulties for you if the PI decides to be difficult.
It also matters potentially given your funding is from a firm. Again I don’t know the details but they may have some interest in the IP.
Finally, if it’s valuable to them, and you created it, they should pay you for it. If you prefer not to involve money you could release it via some type of open source license, assuming the status of the IP allowed.

You are being asked to sign a legal document.  You should seek legal advice from a lawyer, if you really are interested in protecting your own self-interest. Even with regard to IP, your name should still appear on any resulting copyrights or patents, as the producer of the IP.
You should not sign a document you are not comfortable with.
You should certainly check with a lawyer, but there may be no problem with communicating your concerns to your Chair and Graduate Coordinator, listing specifically the sentences in the document that preclude your signing it.  If you're willing to sign without those sentences, let them know that (but you should really talk to a lawyer before signing!)
There is substantial risk that not signing will be an obstacle to matching with another advisor -- though matching with another advisor even if you sign is certainly not a given.

This seems rather unfair to you, but let’s put that aside. It seems like the crux of the issue may be whether the word complete means “finished” or “total.” If I were to ask you to give over the “complete” data for a project, is that the finished data or all the data you have?
I am not a lawyer, but to the best of my knowledge the way to deal with this ambiguity is to add a clause to the document which spells out the meaning of the word complete. So here you would want to specify that complete refers to all items in your possession on a particular date. You could also specify that this agreement does not create any obligation for you to incrementally improve work after X date to achieve a more finished state.

Sure, but at least that moves it beyond — this isn’t done and you owe me more work.

What's going to happen if you don't sign?  If nothing much, then refer them back to the University's policy document on IP.
I'm wondering why they need this.  If it's not already covered by agreement then just say no.  Either they own the IP and rights or they don't.  If they don't then why do they think they have the right to demand it?   Why assign to a particular person?  That's fishy.
Watch out for what you're assigning.  For example, you might be happy giving title to 'stuff' but not the fact that you did the work.  You did a lot of work and should get, and keep, credit for doing it.
In the case of a falling-out with the powers that be, you also need to protect your reputation.  For example you wrote "black is not white" but then this was simply changed, yet still attributed to you, then what can you do?  You need to keep cover-your-arse copies because anything from malice to carelessness might blot your reputation.  Quite likely the funders will get a skewed story from the management and your work will be used to polish the reputation of people you don't like.

I would try to get out of it without signing anything. It doesn't matter if you don't expect to use what you did in the foreseeable future. Basically, when you enrolled in this PhD, everything you did was covered by some existing rules to which you agreed explicitly or implicitly when you entered the PhD program. Asking you to sign something now doesn't seem to make sense, unless they are trying to get from you something they are not entitled to. If they cannot force you to sign, like implicitly blackmailing you by making you understand you will never be able to enroll in something else in the same university (supposing it's something you want), then don't sign. It doesn't matter if you don't value what you are giving them when signing such a document.

Your immediate question concerns whether to sign a Data Transfer Document and/or to add a clause or substitute a different document.  My advice is to take a step back and sleep on the paperwork and if possible show everything to a good friend who is COMPLETELY UNINVOLVED.  Get some outside perspective and bear in mind what YOUR best interest is.  Earlier answers have good advice about who legally owns what but consider also how your former advisor can help or ignore or be an obstacle to your career in future.  It seems likely you are not getting along with your advisor and I'd be the first to acknowledge that Ph.D. students are a modern day form of indentured servants, but your overriding goal should be to leave on friendly or at least neutral terms.  The best would be if your former advisor were to (publicly) say that you'll be welcome back in 6 months or a year if things don't work out.
It's not necessarily fair but wherever you go they are going to expect a reference from your former advisor.   They may give you an opportunity to explain it and they may discount it but it will always be there.  You spent 4.5 years or about 10% of your work career working for or with this person.  You will notice that I don't regard this as "school" but rather "work" even if your advisor didn't fund you.  And FWIW these situations frequently arise in the work world where you are employed by one organization but spend long periods working for another.  Once I got 2 different annual reviews but mostly I got collaborative reviews where the manager I was actually working for day to day provided feedback to my "owning" manager.  The reality is that any person you move to will want to assess both your skills and your teamwork.  Many times people leave good jobs because of personality differences and new bosses are fine with that if they are reassured that you will fit well with their team.  Try hard to lay the groundwork now for such a determination in future.
Best of luck to you.  And always remember, friends come and go but enemies accumulate.

The best uninvolved good friend given the circumstances is probably a lawyer who you pay if necessary.

You wrote:"My fund comes from a different department completely unrelated to my former PhD adviser."
When you accepted this funding, you probably signed a document with a lot of fine print. Check this fine print. I wouldnt be surprised if all your code and IP might actually belong to them already. It is rare that you receive funding from a department not wanting something in exchange. (Scholarships can be different).

There is one general clause that says everything is under University IP policy. Fine, I don't have any problem with that. Also, the work I'm doing under my contract for receiving my fund has nothing to do with my PhD research.

@AloneProgrammer I do not know for the US, but in my country it can very well be that even the IP you didnt do under the contract is covered by such a contract, even the stuff done in your free time.

You have a say in the wording of the doc. In my experience, there is a bit of back and forth about what these docs say pursuant of a signature. I'm with most of the people above, I'm not sure walking away from 4.5 years of work when you are trying to build a future is sound but only you know the circumstances. Short of hiring a lawyer, I'd simply go through the document and modify it to fit your comfort level and counter offer an agreement that outlines specifically, that you WILL NOT be obligated to future work for or with the advisor or the project and the information being released to them will be "as-is"... You can word-smith it but you get the jist.

I'm just repeating here what others have said already, mostly, but I will add it again to be sure. Don't sign anything.
Not that the legal implications are terribly important anyway; but it will be an important psychological step to snap out of the strange state of mind you are in.
You are not a serf beholden to some job you worked at for a few years. You don't owe these people anything. No signatures, no additional work, no excuses.
There is a whole world out there outside of academia. I get the distinct impression it isn't making you happy. Walk away from it. Get a job washing dishes if you must; anything to snap you out of this PhD-induced-psychosis (I don't mean that literally, but whatever) and remind yourself that there is a whole world out there.

It is not in my competency to decide what should be in the Data Transfer Document. It is created solely by your advisor.

If the advisor solely invented a document for you to sign then really you should not sign it and wait for an official document to come in (I heavily doubt it will come someday).

If there is someone you are on speaking terms with (dept head?  grad chair? student rep? union?) you could explain your concern about signing up for more work though you do not object to handing over existing data as is.

If understood correctly, you are not finishing the PhD and will not continue the work with that PI.
Then he has no claim to even ask for you to do any extra work whatsoever.
As for what was done before he left, and if that solely belongs to him etc, that’s more of a legal question and I saw you asked a graduate coordinator. Great! Ask within the institute or university wherever you were based and if you don’t get answers that are fully understandable and acceptable to you. Climb up the ladder to that persons boss and ask them. Keep doing that until you legally know exactly what is that you should or shouldn’t do.
Good luck


text:
Is it called research misconduct when someone publish his own work under the name of other people?
One of my friends has a lot of research works, but he is kinda of lazy in the publishing process. As a result, he has a lot of unpublished research materials. Right now, he is realized that he needs citation count to be able to get some benefits which I don't want to disclose here but I could just tell it's not academic benefit but it is heavily related to only citation count and not even the number of publications (ridiculous yeah? but sadly true!). Also, if he publishes those research materials under his own name and cite himself it will be counted as self-citation and again it is worthless to be qualified for that benefit. This matter leads him to publish his research works under the name of his other friends and in those papers he cite himself just for sake of citation count. The research materials are not questionable and in my opinion even they're remarkable. But he is reluctant to publish it under his own name because he thinks he will miss that benefit and he does not have such a long time to publish his researches under his own name and wait at least a couple of years to accumulate citation counts. This is a really complicated problem and I'm wondering is it a real research misconduct or not? More generally, it really hurts me that some good researchers will be judged solely based on some numbers like citation count, which leads people to these kind of activities. Any idea or suggestion is appreciated.

to publish his research works under the name of his other friends Are those friends aware that he uses their names?

@Marzipanherz Yes, they're OK with this because they trust him. As I said the research content is not questionable and the only thing is that he does not want to publish them under his own name just for sake of citation count and avoiding self-citation. Sounds crazy but sadly true!

I don't understand why you devalue so much citation count. For researchers with a good ethic, its a nice way to measure the impact of research. But that's not the question anyway and good answers are already provided.

@Emilie I'm not devaluing the citation count. I'm saying sometimes judging someone based on some numbers is not good and could lead to these kind of activities. Also, I know a lot of people, which I could give their Google Scholar here if I were allowed, that has a good citation count but believe me they don't have any idea about the research they're trying to do cause they just got that citation count because of friendship with an author to put them as the fourth or fifth author in an article and luckily that article received huge attention. I'm pointing to these kind of situations.

Yes. It is misconduct.

This does not sound ethical at all. I would say that both your friend and the people who are willing to take credit for his work are lying and misrepresenting their accomplishments.
Furthermore, what your friend is doing is extremely short-sighted. If the material in his publications is remarkable as you state, then he will gain far more citations in the long term by having his name on all of them, rather than trying to artificially inflate his citation count for short-term gains.

Now the question is how can I convince him to stop these activities? If he stops he will miss that benefit 90% sure and it will change his life in a really serious direction and may impact his future career.

It can be tricky when it is your friend that is doing the misconduct, because not wanting to lose a friendship. If you are a student at the same institution, then you might be required to report any instances of misconduct that you have witnessed. If I were you, I would carefully review your institution's academic / research misconduct rules to see what your obligations are. Then bring it up with your friend, maybe say that you'll let the past instances slide, but your integrity disallows you from ignoring future violations.

Also, if he doesn't qualify for the "benefit" that you're referencing, then it is arguably justified that he doesn't receive that benefit.

I have obligations to report that but the situation is more complex than that... Also, a lot of other people got qualified for that benefit with the same trick or similar procedures and some of them even don't have 1% knowledge of my friend cause I know them personally, which makes arguing against these kind of activities really difficult.

It sucks to be in your situation, but misconduct rules exist for a reason. There is no valid argument in support of these misconduct activities. There are many arguments against these activities, with individual integrity probably being the most important. As long as no one is ever reported, then the misconduct will abound. If the misconduct is a prevalent as you imply, then I would distance myself from that group as much as possible, since it could come back to bite everyone in the group / department, not just the irresponsible individuals.

Your original question is whether that activity is research misconduct, and yes, it is. I applaud your willingness to try to convince your friend to not do it. You have to figure out if you are willing to report it. If you are willing to report it, tell your friend first.

If I understand your post correctly, "Bob" writes a paper but names "Alice" as the author - with her permission. This is a clear misconduct, because Alice did not do the work attributed to her.
Alice might get in serious trouble when anyone figures out, for example if

someone contacts her to ask more details or
someone realizes that these papers do not fit to Alice's other publications (or even her education, if she is from a different field)
etc

In the aftermath of these troubles, she will be in need to admit that she the actual work was done by Bob, thus, he will be in trouble as well.

I would say the second point is not applicable in this situation cause "Alice" and "Bob" works in a same field. Also "Bob" is always there and "Alice" could redirect any possible question to "Bob" and "Bob" will answer that. Other than those hypothetical troubles, is there any other potential problem?

I just tried to give you examples, how the whole situation might get public (and even if Alice could re-direct mails to Bob, she can't answer when contacted in person, e.g. on a conference). And I tried to show, that not only Bob, but  also Alice might have to deal with the consequences.


text:
How to reference a pilot study in an academic paper written in a foreign language?
I presented a paper at a conference and later the conference published it in the (non-academic) conference journal. It was done in a foreign language. Afterwards, I used the same idea but a different data set, different references, expanded the methodology and wrote a separate paper (in English). I want to submit this paper to an academic journal but I am puzzled about how should I reference it while keeping the anonymity of the paper. If I cite it like any other paper, it would be clear who the author is as it would be the only non-English reference.

Are you the only author appearing in the non-academic jounral?

Are you sure the academic journal you would like to submit to has a double-blind review?

I did it together with my professor (I am PhD student), and yes, the academic journal uses a double-anonymized review system.

You can simply anonymize the source (omit it and replace with a comment along the lines of "this reference was omitted in the review version to maintain the integrity of the double blind review process") and once peer review is over but before publication, you put it back in.
Drop a note to the editor if you want to explain what you did with the reference, but this is quite common and won't surprise them. See the related questions about anonymizing papers for peer review, or have at look at these journal instructions.


text:
About the GRE Mathematics Subject Exam and its scoring
I want to apply to a Ph.D. in Mathematics in the United States. Therefore I'm about to take the GRE Mathematics Subject exam. I have some confusion about the grading procedure and the interpretation of the grades.
In the official practice book from the GRE website they write:

GRE Mathematics Test total scores are reported
on a 200 to 990 score scale in ten-point increments.

However, the conversion in page 63 shows a maximal grade of 910. I also found this unofficial table from 2019, which states that 63-66 in the practice test (GR1768) is indeed equivalent to 910 in the real test, but in the real test it is possible to score up to 970.
So what is the maximal score when I take the test? And does it mean that the practice test is easier than the real test? I mean, it is the only source offered by the GRE website for preparation, so that shouldn't be right.

As you may expect, GRE and the likes are just obxnious crap to categorize people in a quick and dirty way.
Every decent university (or business school, the most common users of such "indicators") will set a minimum GRE requirement, so it is not relevant how much you score as long as you score >600 (or other threshold)

Maybe I should have mentioned that I want to apply to Ph.D. in mathematics

Luckily some university are phasing out the GRE test.
https://mathematics.uchicago.edu/graduate/mathematics-phd-program/how-to-apply/
Good luck anyway!

and another more comprehensive list https://mathalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Canada-Math-PhD-Programs-GRE-requirements-and-Qualifying-Exams.pdf

Note that the GRE is becoming required in fewer places, especially since the onset of COVID, but also a realization of its limitations.
Don't worry too much about the score. It will be what it will be, but I'll offer a warning if you take it. At the end of the exam you will feel terrible, as if you are sure you "failed" it. But that is because it is extremely broad (or was when I took it more than a half century ago). There were some questions for which I'd never seen the terminology, though I was a top math student.
But then, the scores came in and I found I'd done quite (very?) well. Much better than my expectations.
Furthermore note that in US evaluation of doctoral admissions is very broad with more emphasis put on letters of recommendation than some other places. Committee members (and it is usually a committee) are looking for predictions of success in doctoral study and thereafter. A Statement of Purpose can be very important if it is asked for. So, the GRE, even if required is usually given less weight, though there are some places that might use it as a gate, so an especially low number might be an issue in some top institutions.
Note however, that even a low GRE can be overcome by good letters from trusted faculty. I once had a case in which one of my "top" undergraduates in CS had low GRE scores that might have prevented further consideration. But my support of him at the time was seen by the dean (who I knew) and he was admitted and succeeded. The dean later wrote me to tell me all the above. That person succeeded at this (top) place and he is now a full professor at another top place.
In my personal case, my acceptance to doctoral study was much more influenced by recommendations and support of trusted professors than by anything else. I actually have some evidence of this.
So, for the GRE, do what you can do and don't worry about it. Get good letters of recommendation and make a broad search for a position.

Yes, I realize that the above advice doesn't answer the question about "how it is graded". Assume fairly, but also "fairly strictly". I've never been a grader. Answer a lot of questions assuming that you are pretty sure you have an answer before you start. Ignore questions for which you have no background on the first pass.


text:
My wife got some serious issues with her PhD advisor: how should I get involved in the situation?
I am an assistant professor in an engineering field, and my wife is a PhD student in a physics-related field. We live in an eastern European country and work in different institutes. I am quite happy with my colleagues and boss, and I really enjoy working with them. They are very friendly, and we come along pretty well.
My wife, however, has some serious issues with her supervisor, and honestly, I have no idea how I should get involved and the handle the situation. Her supervisor is a (around 40 years old) guy who is willing to get habilitation. Since he does not have enough publications, recently he has been trying hard to have some papers published.
Two years ago, he published his first paper with my wife, and he put himself as the first author. This was understandable, because, as my wife told me, he had the major contribution. Without disclosing it to my wife, he then continued working on the topic, which is supposed to be my wife's PhD dissertation, and published a single-author paper. He thanked my wife in the acknowledgment, as a way to keep her silent. My wife was totally mad about this and even asked the guy to remove her from the acknowledgment, but he refused and justified his action.
This year, my wife worked pretty hard on a paper, and when the first draft of the paper was ready, she sent it to him to work on it and supply his contribution. He did so, but also put his name as the first author. Therefore, they had a big argument, and he rationalized this by saying that his contribution is more important, he has devoted his familty-time to this. and he needs to be the first author because he has to get habilitation, etc.
So, my question is: how I should handle this situation? She is very frustrated now and this is seriously influencing our life. Since she is in her last year of PhD, I don't want her to take a wrong action and jeopardize her PhD. On the other hand, this guy has to know that he is not allowed to abuse others to compensate his years without publication.
Clarification 1: My wife has not asked me to handle the situation, neither I have no intention of making a direct interference.
Clarification 2: Habilitation is a high scientific degree (before professorship) in some European countries that allows one to be the supervisor of a PhD candidate.
Clarification 3: The question is not "how to make my wife feels better?" rather "how, as a spouse, advise her to do the right thing in this difficult situation?"

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

Clarification 1: My wife has not asked me to handle the situation, neither I have no intention of making a direct interference.

Well, there you go. Do not get involved.
Feel free to support your wife in personal ways, as you would for any issue that a partner is going through.
But this is not your concern to place yourself in. It’s not even clear what you believe “handling this situation” looks like from your position as an outside, uninvolved third party.

Thanks for the answer. Actually, if I knew what "handling the situation" should look like, I wouldn't posting this here.

Examples: do household things that your wife normally takes charge of, propose activities your wife likes to do even if they aren't your favorite, listen and let her vent and validate what she says/feels without questioning or judgment or debate, use words of encouragement and support that remind her of her value as a scientist and human, give a gift of something that will make her feel special (particularly something that takes effort/thought to obtain besides just money). None of this is at all specific to academia.

You should know your wife and the acts of kindness and support that she would value more than us random strangers on the internet, but Bryan’s list is a fine, generic start. The point of my answer is that this is the only way you should handle the situation. You should not place yourself in between her and her advisor/institution, not as her husband and not as an outside assistant professor. Neither would be appropriate.

I think it would not be wildly out of line to mention to her (once and gently even so), that this is not at all customary and she should talk to a trusted colleague in her department.

Firstly, I see no reason why your wife should not deal with this issue directly, rather than acting through her husband.  When a student has a problem with their supervisor there are actions they can take, either through direct discussion or by elevating disputes to the Head of School.  Having an aggrieved spouse come in to "handle the situation" is unusual and it begs the question of what exactly your role in that process would be.  (It sounds faintly menacing, but maybe I'm reading more into it than is intended.)
Now to the substance of the problem.  As a general rule, disagreements over authorship can be lessened substantially by negotiating authorship arrangements prior to commencing research.  In cases where there are repeated disputes over authorship there should be some prior agreement made for future work or your wife should seek to change supervisors --- she should certainly avoid sharing any more research with him without a prior agreement on authorship of that research.  If your description is accurate then it does indeed sound like this academic is using irrelevant issues to claim greater authorship than is warranted (i.e., his need for habilitation, his family time, etc.).  This sounds like it could arguably amount to an abuse of the supervisory process.  Since your wife has not had any success discussing this directly with her supervisor, she could raise this with the Head of School and seek a resolution there.  She could ask to have an independent senior academic review the existing authorship dispute(s) and offer a binding resolution, and she could also ask to have a process put in place for future work, to ensure that she is not "gazumped" in her research project by her own supervisor.
In regard to your own involvement, I recommend that you encourage your wife to take actions on these matters directly.  At most you might be included as a "support person" in relevant meetings, and you could give her advice and help behind the scenes, but it would be unusual to involve yourself beyond that.  Professionals operating in academia are expected to be able to manage workplace disputes like adults, without calling parents/spouses to act for them.

If his direct involvement sounds possibly menacing to others here, it may sound menacing to others there.  That seems like a door that it is not wise to open.

There is one option which is that your wife can change supervisors. Even changing to another institution.
The reasons can be many and I have seen it done by several friends. One moved country, institution and supervisor. The new supervisor was really helpful.
While it may not be easy for your wife, it may well cause many more issues for her current supervisor.

to OP's question: how I should handle this situation? ... here there is a little hint at the two bodies' problem, get ready before the problem is ready and baked for the two you :/

Clarification 3: The question is not "how to make my wife feels
better?" rather "how, as a spouse, advise her to do the right thing in
this difficult situation?"

Please define the right thing. Or better, let your wife define the right thing to do.
What do you know?
You are a male and you are already assistant professor.
It should be clear to you how difficult is getting "up" there, how much support you need and how powerful is statistic.
Given all these premises, the right thing to do is doing nothing(*), apart from giving her unconditional support. Even if tomorrow they say "screw the PhD, I take a job as a gardener 30 km from the city".
(*) disclaimer, ethics may vary, so take what I say with a pinch of salt...

I made a minor edit; let us avoid assumptions and incendiary remarks.

@cag51 thanks, I just wanted to remark that the laws in a certain country are just the formal consolidation of ethics in that country, leading to absurd (in my humble and arrogant opinion) definitions such as
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uae-wife-beating-ok-just-dont-leave-any-marks/
Demography of power in academia is relevant, OP does not define themselves but they are probably in the lucky top subgroup: https://medium.com/the-faculty/white-academia-do-better-fa96cede1fc5 (I do not agree with the wordings, but with the underlying message)

Why does everything have to be made about sexism or racism? The fact that OP is male is totally irrelevant to the question.

I agree that they are probably a male, but do you have any reason to think that they cannot be female, for instance? Just having a wife isn't determinative.

I am going to say

Invest some time on the issue together
2.remain calm, even when she is not.
Make sure she is comfortable with you showing up to her education department since I doubt you would want him over your house.
Answer any questions that he might have about the situation fair and moderate any changes that may have happened since their last talk
Have him and her notice that the situation bothers you and it a issue at home.
Trust that the issue will remain identified as a problem not as a here and now issue.
Exchange any information that may be handled by your prospective as a directive doctor
Don't yell or make a issue out of hand and keep your inside voice at all times.


text:
Mistake on resume for grad school application
So, I noticed a small typo in my resume two weeks after submitting it. In my professional summary, I accidentally put "counselling" instead of "counseling". Are small typos overlooked or detrimental? I didn't notice anything else but I also don't want to keep looking and then cause my anxiety to increase more.
I ended up finding two typos. The end bullet said "task included" instead of "tasks included". Ugh. :(

Are you using American English or British English throughout your resume?

American. I had my uncle help with my resume so I'm assuming he changed it and it took me a while to notice.

@Allure, thank you! It just concerns me since some say it's a big deal and others say we're all human and mistakes happen.

Don't panic. It will be fine.

No, it won't be a problem and might not even be noticed. Relax.
However, applying to only once school is probably suboptimal. Competition can be pretty fierce and most places get high quality applicants. Cast a broader net if you can.
And get a spell checker for the long term. The one here fixes lots of my typos (blush).

Thank you! I was thinking about applying to one more but the problem is I really want to be on campus somewhere and since my husband and I own a house, we can't just up and move so my only other options are online. Online just doesn't seem as appealing to me. :(

This is absolutely not a problem! I screen loads of applications and can assure you that a) no one will notice and b) if they do they won't care. If your application is littered with errors that's a different matter, but a typo is fine.

I just noticed one more at the very bottom where it said "task include" instead of "tasks include". With both of them being on there, will I still have a chance? I honestly read over that bottom part so many times and never caught that either. :( I'm hoping these are things that they won't notice?

I had to read that comment twice even to spot the typo you were talking about. It really will not matter. The person reading it probably has 100 applications to get through. They are not looking for typos!


text:
Asking Advisor to Augment Stipend to a Livable Wage
The company I work for is funding a project led by a professor at an engineering department in a US university. I was recently accepted by the university and they offered me a departmental fellowship for my first semester with subsequent semesters being funded by the advisor's grant money (which includes a stipend and full tuition). Also, my employer put me on a scholarship that covers my tuition and a very low stipend for the duration of the PhD even though they are also paying the advisor grant money for the project. I am currently in my first year in the PhD program working under the advisor on the project. I realized that the stipend I receive from my employer's scholarship is barely enough to pay for the rent and all the other students working on the same project are being paid an RA departmental standard stipend which is double that of my scholarship stipend. I brought this up indirectly to my advisor in the hopes that he will offer me an RA that at least augment my scholarship stipend to a livable wage similar to my peers (which is the department's policy) however he would give me vague answers and then complains that my company still hasn't paid their grant installment for this year/or how other students are having a hard time finding affordable housing..etc. I just feel like I am being treated like a bargaining chip, even though I am a student and bringing outside money that pays my tuition in full and half the departmental standard stipend.  Should I be upfront with my advisor and ask/email him to augment my stipend and hire me as an RA just like my peers who are working on the same project? What if he refuses? To whom should I talk? I don't want to take out loans to compensate for the low stipend since I live in a high cost of living area.
I also checked the grant contract written by my company, it mentions no restriction in me receiving a stipend. I don't want to bring this up to my company management and make things sour between me and my advisor since we get along well and his advising style checks all my preferences.
Edit: The admission letter that I signed and accepted states the following:
"in view of your superior academic achievement and credentials, the **** Engineering department is pleased to offer you financial support for your graduate studies, contingent upon continued satisfactory academic performance. Our standard support package includes a minimum annual stipend of $*** (double my current stipend) plus the payment of tuition and fees, including the graduate student health insurance plan."
Then the letter goes on say that" the department supports students for the first semester ,followed by support in the form of a Research Assistantship from the contracts/grants of the student’s advisor."

The key point here is: are you paid what you were promised?  If yes, then you don’t have much of a complaint, however unfair the situation may appear.  After all, you agreed to start under these unfair co

@ZeroTheHero I just updated my post. It seems to me that my advisor is exploiting a gray area to avoid paying me. I contacted the grant officer at my department, and they told me that if an advisor is not paying you a stipend is usually a soft rejection and they would put student into TA until they find another advisor or else master out.

" Our standard support package includes a minimum annual stipend of $*** (double my current stipend)" is this difference due to taxes (i.e. the double is the gross salary, what you get is after tax)?

@EarlGrey No, the after-tax stipend is double the stipend I receive from my scholarship.

I am not clear that this is your advisors doing- there may be some administrative mix-up in the department…

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9946/can-departmental-funding-combine-with-fellowships-grants?rq=1

I don't see any right to be paid similarly to your peers financed by different programs.
I did my PhD with a scholarship and my colleagues were paid way much higher because they applied for more competitive positions and had to work hard to accomplish other tasks assigned to these positions. I did not apply for those positions because I prefer to focus on my PhD. It is just fair!
If you want to have the same wage, simply apply for these positions (or what you called RA departmental standard stipend).
Of course, it is completely legitimate to ask your company/professor to raise the stipend but without claiming this right which is based on an unfair comparison.

The department policy is that all students are paid a minimum stipend which is very common in lab-based programs in the US. This is what I meant by standard stipend; I am being paid below the minimum!

Whether other students are having a hard time finding affordable housing has nothing to do with your financial situation. You need to make it clear that this is about your ability to sustain yourself in the program.
Possibly, there are other means to finance your PhD. Can you do some teaching and get extra funding from the department?
Also, why hasn't the company paid the instalment? Is your professor not asking them to pay?

I would approach the department financial admin or the director of graduate studies for clarification on your situation. It seems there has been some oversight and you are not being paid the correct stipend.
Your advisor may be vague because he doesn’t have a good grasp on the situation. Many advisors have only a vague understanding about policies for students who have multiple streams of money (here, it seems to be company stipend+department tuition remission+something from advisor funds but that seems unclear). You need to speak to others who may have a clearer idea. To be politic, I would probably mention to the advisor that there seems to be an issue with your stipend not meeting the department minimum, and you are going to investigate where the confusion lies.
One hypothesis might be that you are actually receiving the correct amount from all university sources including your advisor, but since your company has not paid their installment you are not receiving the company scholarship and this may need to be paid to you in a lump sum once the funds come through.

Adding: the grant officer may not be the right person in this case. Their knowledge will depend quite a bit on their background and where they fall on the department org chart.