text:
Should we compete for tenure positions at top universities or be happy at second tier universities?
I am PostDoc at one of leading Universities. It was not that hard to get there for a PostDoc, yet it seems  really hard to stay for permanent position, I see the competition is big.
I also see that the working conditions are not competitive (both in terms of salaries, costs of living and rent in a small university town, and motivation bonuses on top of your salary).
On the other hand, having renowned Uni in my CV, working as a PostDoc for ERC grant (I am not PI), I have mailbox full of tenure offers at ... say, second tier universities (ca. 100-300 positions at Uni rankings).
They offer me freedom, fixed position, competitive salary, lower costs of living.
On top of that, top Universities do not really care if you win regular grant, or top competitive (e.g. ERC), your salary is the same. While bringing back ERC or comparable grant to second tier University - you are the man. They praise you, you are respected and you have high chances to getting bonus that may even double your base salary (forget about it in top tier Universities).
So in my case, where my field just needs bunch of laptops and computation cloud and not costly lab. Is there really a point in competing for tenure at top tier University? Anyhow I already have a name to be accepted for renowned conferences and  Q1 journals from the field.
Honestly, I do not see the point, I already collected Hoodies with some nice Uni logos on this, I do not really care about brands anymore.
So what are actual and maybe overlooked by me pros and cons of choosing on one hand: a permanent position at lower ranked university, and on other keep on pursuing highly competitive and uncertain positions at high ranked university.

Better universities have a more competitive atmosphere and - sometimes - better and more ambitious students. A self-motivated academic, however, can do well in a 2nd tier place, but expect it to be harder to get published in top journals (yes, ranking does have an effect on getting published, even if theoretically it shouldn't) or get proposals accepted. The important part is the atmosphere - you have to create your own ambition at lower-ranked institutions.

Everyone has different priorities in life. There advantages and disadvantages working at leading universities, as there are anywhere. If you find somewhere where you like the culture, work-life balance, etc then that's great you should work there. There is no one answer that applies for everyone.

Hmmm. Double your salary? Somehow I doubt it.

@Buffy they do. Many Universities apply competitive bonusing scheme, where your base salary is low, but there are multiple ways to pump it up (publications, grants, organizing conferences, etc.) . That is how they  encourage competition without having brand. And that is how you can make your salary even comparable to collegues from industry.

As I am sure you expected, this is a highly personal decision that nobody can make for you. Since you seem to be based in Europe (you are talking about ERC), I will frame my answer in the context of applying in Europe:

Your point that "you are the man" at a lower-ranked university when you bring in a high-reputation grant may be accurate, but you also need to ask yourself the question why people don't routinely bring in such grants in these institutions. Do they not support applying for grants in the same way? Do you not get enough time to develop an excellent research program? Do you not have access to sufficiently qualified students? Are the grant agencies biased in their evaluation? As a rule of thumb, it's typically harder to develop an internationally excellent research program at a lower-ranked university than at a top one, for a combination of different reasons.
Especially, ensure that the lower-ranked university that you are looking at actually values the same things you do. Many lower-tier universities "officially" want to compete for top grants and improve their research profile, but not at the expense of what they already do. In practice, this may mean that you have to compete for top-level grants while doing more teaching or service for your institution.
The "label" of working at a top university can help you in various ways, including easier access to valuable companies and excellent students.
There are challenges with being a "big fish in a small pond" - the small fish around you may not be thrilled, there may be little to no chances to collaborate or get inspired, and it's much easier to have large impact if you are not just one faculty standing alone.

With all that said, there are certainly advantages to being at a lower-tier university:

It can be easier to have a reasonable work-life balance at a lower-tier university. However, again, do be mindful of teaching and service responsibility - I have certainly seen people at smaller teaching universities that are considerably more busy than I am, because they have to teach an awful lot more than me.
As you say, it's easier to get a job at a lower-tier university, and a faculty job now may be better than getting, maybe, a faculty job at a top university in 3 years (or not).
Salary-wise, there will initially be little difference between excellent and lesser universities. I doubt that top universities pay less than weaker ones. However, you are right that if you actually end up as the big fish in your small pond, you have a good basis for negotiation - but that feels like something that you should not rely on in your career planning.


text:
Is copying an algorithm plagiarism?
My question is very similar to this one, but I'm curious about algorithms. The accepted answer states that:

Mathematical equations are not normally considered subject to plagiarism ...

I am wondering if the same would apply to algorithms. I think they are very similar to equations, except for the use of sentences (in the case of pseudo code). If it is made clear where the algorithm came from, would it be ok to copy?

If it is made clear where the algorithm came from ...so...you mean citing your source?

Yes. That is what I mean. I guess to rephrase the question: Is it plagiarism to cite the source of an algorithm and include it verbatim in a paper?

My understanding is that if you're (properly) citing your source (the original author of the algorithm) and not claiming the algorithm as your own, you're not plagiarizing. I don't see why this would be any different than citing any other idea that's not your own. That said, hang out for a bit and see if anyone else has advice too.

I think that depends on the novelty and length/complexity of the algorithm, just as it would for prose.  Writing out all four lines of selection sort verbatim isn't plagiarism; that's like quoting a fact everyone knows.  Writing out a 25-line algorithm verbatim would be like quoting verbatim an entire paragraph of text; acceptable, but only in moderation. Writing out a verbatim description of an algorithm that takes 10 pages to explain properly is like copying out an whole chapter of Harry Potter --- maybe not plagiarism, but probably a copyright violation.  (Yes, there are such algorithms.)

Plagiarism is passing someone else's work as your own. If the source is referenced, then there is no plagiarism.
Quoting the whole algorithm verbatim may be considered as bad writing style, may be against a particular journal's rules, or may simply demonstrate a certain lack of creativity. However, this is not a plagiarism, as long as the source is cited.

In addition, copying a whole algorithm might also be a copyright violation, even if the source is attributed.

@lighthousekeeper:  The algorithm shouldn't be copyrightable, although a specific description of it (in words, in code, pseudocode, or whatever) could be subject to copyright.

@DmitrySavostyanov is right in that what matters is that you reference where you got the algorithm from. If you do so, then copying it verbatim is in essence a quote, not plagiarism.
I disagree with him, though, on whether it is good or bad style to copy algorithms verbatim. Algorithms -- especially when giving in short "pseudo-algorithm" form, are concise, technical statements in much the same way as formulas are. There is typically no literary component to it. As such, there is little leeway in rephrasing something to make it your own, other than the gratuitous use of different variable or function names. The latter, however, is not helpful, but rather only serves to confuse readers trying to compare papers. Consequently, I'm all for copying verbatim, as long as it is clear where it comes from.
So, say something like "The problem above is easily solvers by the algorithm of Miller and Smith [13], which is reproduced in the following: [...]".

Algorithms...are concise, technical statements — Not necessarily concise, no.

Well, but they're intended to, at least. If they're not, they're poorly written.

Not even close!  Some algorithms are just inherently complicated.  Even Ikea instructions sometimes run to dozens of pages, not because they're poorly written, but because they have to.

But then we're talking about different meanings of the word "concise". Wiktionary says "brief, yet including all important information" where I take "brief" as "as short as necessary", not "short in absolute terms".

It may not be plagiarism, but you would be called to task to justify why you are doing it in most cases. My experience has been that you don't need to show an documented algorithm so much as say why you are using it and where someone can find more information on it. So if I'm working on a paper I may say something like,

In order to explore the transmission of memes through the social network, we first assumed that they arrived at highly influential (i.e. well connected) nodes using the shortest path from the source. These paths were identified using Dijkstra's algorithm for finding shortest paths between nodes in a graph (Dijkstra, 1959).

At which point nothing more really needs to be said on the algorithm itself. In fact, depending on the audience, I may have said too much.
Generally writing out the algorithm in full usually means that it's being explained in depth (i.e. a textbook approach), there isn't an expectation that your audience would be familiar with it in any way, or you are doing so to demonstrate a fundamental that needs to be deconstructed as part of a proof. Even then, about the only time you are really going to want to write the algorithm out in full is if you are developing a textbook or teaching materials on it.

First, we should discuss the issue concerning mathematical equations. It is general accepted that mathematical equations must be treated as a dense text. Hence, it should be very clear that these equations, definitions, theorems, come from a source, and the source have to be cited before using the text.
For algorithms, the situation is almost the same. A sufficiently small algorithm may be treated similar to a large equation. You may include it if you make it clear that the algorithm text is not yours, by using the quotes or the italic style, depending on citation style. However, for large algorithms, there is a difference because of copyright of the journal. Hence, a large algorithm should be treated like a figure. You need to get permission from the author and from the publisher. Furthermore, because an algorithm is so large, it will look like you are padding your paper and reviewers don’t like this. You should think twice about including a large algorithm from someone else.

Do you mean the algorithm, or the description of the algorithm?  The two are very different for intellectual property purposes.

The algorithm, of course.

The algorithm itself is not subject to the kind if intellectual property protections you suggest.

Copying a large part of a published paper is limited by the copyright.

Copyright covers the expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves.  The algorithm itself is an idea.  If the descriptions of the algorithm is reworded, it can be copied freely without copyright restrictions.  As a procedure, an agorithm could be eligible for patent protection, but that's very different.  There is also the necessity of giving proper credit, but again, that has nothing to do with copyright.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Re-apply to a PhD position that is re-posted after being rejected?
My application to a specific PhD position was rejected. I was informed about it last week and I wasn't even invited to an interview. The information was a standard email telling me that "despite your evident qualifications, there were better candidates". Now, I see that the institution re-posted a job ad for the exact same position, and only changed the starting date to a later one.
I'm a bit puzzled by this situation and don't know what to do:

Should I re-write a better motivation letter and apply again, or does the early rejection means I have no chances at all?
Should I contact the thesis supervisor and ask him what could improve my chances, like this answer to a similar situation suggests?
Or should I wait a bit, get other experiences as research staff/assistant or something similar and apply for another position later?

My biggest worry is that I might appear too "pushy" and that my future applications in this institution will be automatically rejected, even if I have more experience. On the other hand, having a feedback from the supervisor could be useful for future applications.
I am aware that similar questions have bee posted already, like this one. However, my situation is slightly different, as I would apply to the same position without any new experience (against what is advised there). The cultural setting is German-speaking Europe.

Have you spoken to the supervisor in the past and would he/she be open to discussing why your application wasn't short-listed? Others may have a different opinion, but I don't think you should mention the re-advertised position and ask how you can improve your chances if you apply again. It would sound like you're catering to his/her requirements rather than presenting what you have to offer.

I am sure it that it is the same position because the job ad is exactly the same (the texts are identical) and the job is precisely described, so it is unlikely that this position is a different than the previous one.

And I haven't talked to the supervisor, I only sent him a short email to ask about a detail of the application procedure, so he doesn't know me so far (sorry for the double comment, I cannot edit my previous one).

First of all, can you be sure it is exactly the same position? The same professor might have just gotten another grant which can fund another PhD position; it is then possible that they announced the second position with an (almost) identical ad. If that is the case, you can still have a chance of being accepted if you apply. If not and it's indeed the same position, it'll be much more difficult.
If it's a second position with the same professor, it means that the search for a suitable candidate starts anew. Being rejected with the previous application then isn't really a problem—it just means there was at least one candidate better than you. With a new hiring process, the selection starts from a beginning and it can happen that you'll be the best candidate this time. If, on the other hand, it's the same position, none of the candidates was a good fit for the job; and that doesn't change now unless you can change a part of your application (like your cover letter).
In my opinion, you cannot go wrong by sending a brief, polite email to the professor and asking about the new ad and potentially for a short feedback on your application. The worst that can happen is that you'll get no response at all, and then it's probably not a good idea to apply.

From an outsider's point of view what is the difference between "the second position with an (almost) identical ad" and exactly the same position?

@emory thanks for the remark, I expanded the answer to discuss the difference.

@Ondřej That doesn't really address emory's question: how does the OP, as an outsider and without knowing any of the internal dynamics, tell whether the second opening is for the same position or not?

@E.P.: I suppose they could ask. Other than that, I cannot fathom.

I explained why I think it is the same position in the comment to the questions. It's true that one can never know without asking, but in this case it seems obvious, unless the new ad isn't the one they wanted to post, as CCTO's answer could suggest.

I wouldn't worry about "appearing pushy". The biggest risk here is that you will waste your time and mental energy. It is true that if you simply repeat your application the chances of getting admitted this time round are small (though not 0%). It's worth making the call you suggest for two reasons: one you gain experience on what was wrong with your application, two your rejection may have been due to a misunderstanding, and you could clear that up. Your supervisor may even be very enthusiastic about your application after this is cleared and addressed in your application.
However, there is another angle to consider. A PhD is no trivial endeavour. It is physically, but mostly mentally demanding, and will push you to your psychology's limits. Many people who embark on one regret it, or drop out, or are worse-off professionally at the end than they were when they started. So if you got rejected from a PhD course without even an interview invite, you really need to consider if this is the kind of PhD program and / or kind of environment you're willing to spend the next 3-7 years in. A PhD is extremely challenging at the best of times when there aren't politics etc to worry about. If they rejected you outright, then maybe that's a red flag that you don't want to be applying for that particular course / department in the first place. So at the very least, weigh the reasons for this particular course very carefully; don't go blindly into a PhD / environment that isn't right for you.

If it were a second (similar) position which became available unexpectedly (funding granted or someone quit), almost all organizations would draw on the pool of applicants which they'd just finished vetting, and reach out to the applicant who was, effectively, their second choice.
This really sounds like they just didn't like any of the applicants they received, and want to throw their hook back in the water. Bit of a shame they chose to tell you they went with another applicant, if they didn't actually do so. Possibly they did make an offer to the only one they found acceptable, and that applicant declined.
If I were on the inside, I'd probably re-word the description to stress whatever qualities the prior applicants didn't have. Also I'd probably give it a little more time.n But academics can be remarkably clumsy managers and their relationship with their institution's HR department can be horrible. (As with their IT department, etc etc.)
So this could indicate a dysfunctional hiring process. Which describes far more of them than you want to imagine. It probably can't hurt to clean up your application and send it back in, but frankly I'd write them off. Some job postings are just plain vapourware.

Good points here. But remember that choosing when to hire someone might be problematic if the funding is available for a specific time window only so it might not always be possible to wait after an unsuccessful call.

What do you mean by "a dysfunctional hiring process describes far more of them than you want to imagine"? Do you mean that a dysfunctional hiring process means a poor supervision? And if the problem is at the HR level, how will it impact me once I start my thesis there?

For new job seekers it's easy to imagine that the recruiting process is all very logical and well-planned. In fact, having been a hiring manager for a while, I can say that it's often remarkably disorganized. Criteria may not be well thought-out, corporate/institutional processes may not be followed, people who review the resumes may have preferences that aren't exactly aligned with the criteria as posted, and the hiring mangager--especially, I'd say, if they're a technical or academic person--may really dislike the whole thing. So the resulting decision can be very non-deterministic.

So let's assume that the hiring process is as chaotic as you describe. What does that tell me about the position after the process is finished?

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


text:
How to query multiple fields in an academic database that only lets one query the fields separately?
PubMed's [tiab] (citation's title, collection title, abstract, other abstract and author keywords) or WoS's TS (Title, Abstract, Author Keywords, Keywords Plus®) field codes are very useful but I couldn't find anything about how to perform similar queries on other databases such as EBSCOHost, ProQuest, Wiley Online Library etc. which only lets one query the fields separately.
For example, I want to find papers that contain both "titanium" and "parkinson*" in the combined text of their titles, abstracts, and keywords. How can I do that?

Hi. Each of these platforms are independent and unique, so I don't think you will find a one-fits-all solution. However, if any of these provide API access I'd bet that you can do your search through it. Maybe you should make your question more focused.

Go find your friendly, often forgotten, local research librarian to help you learn the tools available at your institution. They are experts in finding things - use their expertise.

I recommend you to write your comment as an answer, even if it only applies to only one platform. People can build up upon your answer and it can be useful for others.

I think I found the answer by a little bit of tinkering. Let's say I want to search two terms across three fields, then the logic is:
(field_code_1 (term_1) OR field_code_2 (term_1) OR field_code_3 (term_1))
AND
(field_code_1 (term_2) OR field_code_2 (term_2) OR field_code_3 (term_2))

This gives both terms the freedom to be anywhere in the specified field codes, then joins both conditions with the AND operator. Therefore, following our example, if I want to find papers that contain both "titanium" and "parkinson*" in the combined text of their titles, abstracts, and keywords/subject terms, I can query EBSCOHost with a string like below:
(TI(titanium) OR AB(titanium) OR SU(titanium)) AND (TI(parkinson*) OR AB(parkinson*) OR SU(parkinson*))

Note: For this approach to work, the interface must have properly functioning Boolean operators, parentheses, and field codes.
I also validated this logic by comparing the results of these queries and seeing that they are the exact same:
Web of Science:

(TI=(titanium) OR AB=(titanium) OR AK=(titanium) OR KP=(titanium)) AND (TI=(parkinson*) OR AB=(parkinson*) OR AK=(parkinson*) OR KP=(parkinson*))

TS=(titanium AND parkinson*)

Scopus:

TITLE(titanium) OR ABS(titanium) OR KEY(titanium) AND TITLE(parkinson*) OR ABS(parkinson*) OR KEY(parkinson*)

TITLE-ABS-KEY(titanium AND parkinson*)

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


text:
how to read papers for writing a literature review article
After following a rigorous literature selection, inclusion and exclusion criteria, I have finalized (around 200) research articles for my review paper. However, now I don't know how to read those papers. I tried to read a couple of articles sequentially (which obviously seems a naive approach), but I still don't know what to capture from them. I believe there should exist a systematic approach or framework to follow.
PS: CS Major

If you don't know what you want from the selected papers, how did you actually select them? You clearly have some criteria which must have some indication of what you are trying to accomplish, no?

I do believe it is only possible to read sequentially. Did you mean chronologically?

This question cannot be answered without more information about the purpose of your review. You do not have to reveal the precise subject here, but you should at least describe it genericly. For example:

review different algorithms or approaches for solving X class of problems; * review the relative performance of various algorithms for X class of problems; * critique assumptions that have been misunderstood by scholars in treating X class of problems which do not correspond to real-world concerns. These are examples, but my point is that they would involve different review approaches.

You probably have some structure in mind for the review. Maybe you're doing a time-based review, wherein you start discussing work done in the 90s(say), then proceed to the next decade and so on. Or maybe your review separately addresses different aspects of the topic you're studying (say, hardware aspects, software aspects, etc.)
(There could be several other structures, based on your goals and the field.)
Once you have selected the structure, you could make folders for each of those divisions, go through the abstracts of each paper, and put then into the respective folder(s). Next, maybe you would like subdivisions within your article. Define the criteria for classifying those subdivisions, and repeat the process for each literature folder.
Once you've done this enough, you should have a fairly granular arrangement that will make your reading streamlined.

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


text:
Google Scholar stopped indexing PDFs on GitHub/GitLab Pages
I self-archive my papers on a personal homepage hosted using GitHub Pages (sulir.github.io). Some time after the page was published, I had my papers properly indexed and displayed in Google Scholar. Next to each article, there was a link named [PDF] pointing to the file hosted on my site, or after clicking "All versions", I could see a link to the PDF on my website.
A few months ago, I noticed that all these mentioned PDF links disappeared. Furthermore, papers which were published only on my website disappeared completely from the search results.
Note that this problem is not specific to my site. I tried to search for other researchers' papers hosted on GitHub/GitLab and found out that Google Scholar do not display PDF links for them. I suppose it affects all files hosted on GitHub Pages and GitLab Pages (or at least that not using a custom domain).
To support this claim: I know the "site:" operator on Google Scholar is quite limited (only primary versions are returned), but anyway:
filetype:pdf site:github.io - 0 results
filetype:pdf site:gitlab.io - 0 results
Is Google actively blocking such platforms? Or is it related to technical details how these pages are served? I also tried contacting scholar-support@google.com, but I did not get any response.
Edit: I also checked for a robots.txt file - it is not present. Furthermore, traditional Google search can find these files, so this problem is specific to Google Scholar.
Edit 2: Suppose Google Scholar intentionally excluded the whole github.io and gitlab.io domains from indexing. What options do I have to have my PDF files indexed?

Presumably Google Scholar no longer considers GitHub a reliable source for research papers, which seems reasonable, albeit annoying for you. Maybe Google made this decision because its web crawlers were generating erroneous citations from GitHub. Perhaps you can host your papers on an institutional website.

This question has now been marked off-topic. I presume this is because only Google can provide a definitive answer. (GitHub might be able to speculate on the latter.) Maybe the OP can revise the question so that it is on-topic.

I added a reformulated question.

@user2768 like when it was credible?

@SSimon My use of "reliable source" is perhaps misleading; I don't know whether Google ever considered GitHub reliable. Its perhaps better to write: Presumably Google Scholar has blacklisted GitHub as a source for research papers.

In response to "edit 2," you can get your PDFs indexed by hosting them elsewhere, e.g., on an institutional website or on a personal (not GitHub hosted) website. (I suspect the former will result in faster indexing, because Google will no doubt crawl institutional websites more frequently than a personal website, especially if that personal website hasn't been crawled previously.)

robots.txt? You mean you checked both the robots.txt and the sitemap.xml files. By the way, from which country are you doing the browsing from? Have you published your paper with other publications? Do you still have the right to publish your own papers?


text:
Does the length of an IPCC Scientific report imply anything about credibility or thoroughness?
Background
In a question about the Green New Deal, I posted a comment to an answer that asserted the Green New Deal was not based in any science:

It's not a surprise that such a report [sic: read resolution] is lacking in science.

In context, his statement is referring to the Green New Deal itself, not the IPCC Special Report. In my comment, I mention that the resolution cites the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 ºC. The fact that that the Green New Deal does cite the IPCC report means that it is not utterly lacking in science (i.e. as opposed to citing nothing).  While United States legislation does not have requirements for rigor, my question is about traits pertaining specifically to the special report.
With regard to the IPCC Special Report, I mention its page length:

It does include science. The whole resolution is premised on the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5C which is over 600 pages in full length. I was just curious about an omission of a detail.

My implicit assumption was that the longer the length of a peer reviewed IPCC report the higher its credibility. I am not referring to the Green New Deal; I know united states resolutions do not have any research standard.
That said, given the following comment, I am now questioning the assumption of length in relation to credibility:

Why is the length of that report relevant?

This comment is what lead me to ask...
Question
Does the length of a peer reviewed scientific report, in this case the IPCC Special Report, imply in any way that it is more credible or thorough in its results?

There are several problems with this post. First, you assume policy documents are the same as peer reviewed scientific documents. They are not. Second, you appear to assume policy documents are peer reviewed. Most are not. Last, your question reads as a rant because the background has nothing to do with your question. If you were to delete your background, your question, might fit into the scope of this site, but it is largely opinion based.

Only slightly related as these are Math papers, but still: https://paperpile.com/blog/shortest-papers/

Please do not vote "opinion based" when the answer is obviously "no."  If you don't like the question, use the downvote button.

When you say "special report" and "scientific report" are you referring to the same document? The IPCC report you link? That's not clear

@Chris H Correct.  "special report" and "scientific report" refer to the exact same IPCC report. I have updated my question appropriately.

You've used a couple of terms that can be used by almost anyone to describe almost anything.  What;s more important to your question body is that's its an IPCC special report; Your title sounds like it refers to a paper in the journal "Scientific Reports", in which case the answer would still be "no"

@ChrisH I have edited the question and text to specify where appropriate that I am specifcally talking about an IPCC report.

If I showed you a book that was 300 pages long and one that was 600 pages long and asked you to say which is better without reading either, would you be confident in your answer? This is basically the same question

In the case of the IPCC reports, it is not their length that gives them credibility - it is the input of hundreds (thousands?) of respected scientists, the fact that the Summary for Policymakers has been agreed line-by-line by all the countries concerned, and most of all that everything in the report is referenced back to peer-reviewed primary research.

Very hard to say in general.   A 600-page report could be 600 pages of garbage.  Obviously a super-short report couldn't be very thorough, or contain very much detail/depth.
If someone said "I have here a 600-page scientific report: is it any good?"  I would have no way to know.
If you want to make a claim for the credibility of IPCC reports specifically, I would quote the Union of Concerned Scientists:

The IPCC’s technical reports derive their credibility principally from an extensive, transparent, and iterative peer review process that, as mentioned above, is considered far more exhaustive than that associated with a single peer-reviewed publication in a scientific journal. This is due to the number of reviewers, the breadth of their disciplinary backgrounds and scientific perspectives, and the inclusion of independent “review editors” who certify that all comments have been fairly considered and appropriately resolved by the authors.

Recursively, you would then have to support the credibility of UCS, which Wikipedia (which attempts to be neutral) calls a "nonprofit science advocacy organization".

In other words, there are much better ways to estimate the credibility of the IPCC reports than word length alone.

Does the length of a peer reviewed scientific report imply in any way that it is more credible or thorough in its results?

No.
There may be a (relatively small) correlation between length and trustworthiness, but there are many very short but important scientific reports and a whole lot of very long useless ones. A bad scientific experiment does not become better if you explain every little detail about it.

This depends on the field. In mathematics, a significant paper can be short or long, as can a lesser paper.
In the sciences, it would depend on how much needs to be said about methodology. A significant paper could, in theory, be written without saying much about methodology as long as it is fairly standard. But it would get longer if the methodology is novel and needs significant exposition.
I'd say, therefore, that in general, length is a poor indicator of quality. It is what is said, not how many words it takes to say it.

John Nash's PhD dissertation was only 28 pages long. It earned him a Nobel prize in Economic Sciences. This at least proves that a report does not need to be long to be considered extremely good.

Does the length of a peer reviewed scientific report, in this case the IPCC Special Report, imply in any way that it is more credible or thorough in its results?

In regards to thorough, certainly.
I work at the national labs. On some projects, part of our job is trying to take years of research and boil everything down to one page (!!!) that can be given to policy makers to help inform their decisions. We do our best to cram the most important take-away messages into that one page, but clearly there will some bits of information lost in the process.
Note that this is particularly relevant to the current question in hand; the IPCC reports are not about producing original research, but rather assessing research and informing policy makers:

The IPCC developed from an international scientific body, the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases set up in 1985 by the International Council of Scientific Unions, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to provide recommendations based on current research.[...] The IPCC does not conduct its own original research. It produces comprehensive assessments, reports on special topics, and methodologies [...] The IPCC was tasked with reviewing peer-reviewed scientific literature and other relevant publications to provide information on the state of knowledge about climate change.

-Wikipedia article on IPCC
Clearly, a report that is 600 pages has more freedom to include details than a one page report.

No.
In physics, traditionally the best science is reported in a paper that is about four pages long.  Other papers are nearly always longer.  So I would say that in physics credibility has a negative correlation with length, but that nobody should use length to predict credibility.

I'm guessing this four page number comes from the likes of PRL, in which case it's important to note that the papers published there are often summaries of research that's also described in more detail elsewhere.

@ndpl I agree with you.  I'm not sure why you think we disagree.  It's a tradition, not something actually relevant to the quality.


text:
Should I send an updated CV if I was informed about the acceptance of a paper in a top-tier journal shortly after applying for a postdoc position?
Last week I applied for two postdoc positions (one in the US, one in Germany). The deadline for both was 10 December. A few days ago, I got the acceptance letter for a paper (JCR Q1). I have two more Q1 articles in my CV (which is quite positive in my field).
Would it be necessary or appropriate to send an updated CV?

Although you did not do any mistake in your application, this question would receive the same answers as this question [Mistakes in applications for PhD in CS]
(https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/178860/mistakes-in-applications-for-phd-in-cs)

@EarlGrey The post you mention refers to correcting mistakes in the CV. In this case, I do not consider this to be a mistake issue, but an update after receiving an acceptance for an article after applying for the postdoc.

I see your point, but, if you abstract yourself from the factual reasons behind the discrepancies in the CV at time t=t0 and at time t=t0+delta_time, you will realize that it is exactly the same thing, i.e. "I submitted a CV at the application time, but now I have a different one and I want to correct it, how should I proceed?"

@EarlGrey This question is not about a correction, but about an update.

Are these automated online application systems where you can just update files in your application on your end?

@Kimball The application consisted of sending documents (CV, cover letter, research statement) by email to the institute/department heads

@lighthousekeeper I am sure that one implicitly sign some kind of agreement when filling a form, or sending an email to whatever HR/selction commitee mail system, stating that the informations provided are corrected and complete. So for all the formal purposes, this update is equivalent to a correction.
If, on the other hand, the application is a direct communication to the professor with the opening ... the answer still applies: do not clog the email of someone that should evaluate you.

@EarlGrey Obviously, when one signs an (implicit) agreement like that, the implied statement is that the information is correct at the time of the submission.

@lighthousekeeper exactly, then there is no practical difference between updating and correcting.

@EarlGrey The practical difference is that a correction means that one messed up (which has different implications for how a correction may be perceived)

If you are permitted any updates at all to an application, then an alternative to sending a new CV is just to inform whoever that you had a paper accepted in that journal.
This actually makes it stand out a bit more than making an additional entry in a new CV, which might be overlooked.
You can also, in such a communication, offer to send an updated CV.
But it seems sub-optimal to just "hide" the information.

I agree with the reasoning. OP: Just post in twitter, or in Linkedin or researchgate or wherever you are active online with your name. The selection comitee searching OP's name in the web will notice his/hers very fresh post.

@EarlGrey, I wouldn't expect the committee to search, actually. Two reasons. First it might be improper to do so, using external information. Second, people are busy. Some might do it, of course, but you can't depend on it anyway.

Agree with this answer. I'd expand a bit: Email the head of the search committee.

@JoshuaZ, yes, they would be the most appropriate someone, but I don't know what is possible.

@Buffy I agree with your ideal expecations, unfortunately every academic younger than 40y will look for the candidates name online. It is something like everyone using wikipedia for quick reference ...
Yes, I am in an idealist in favour of double blind peer-review, as well as in favour of CVs without name/gender/photo...

I would save this for future reference. Double-check if they accept update letters. If they do accept them, you can send them an update after your interview or if it has been too long since your last communication with them.
This way it comes across as something new that you would like to share with them. Keeps you fresh in their minds. Hope that helps.


text:
What indicators might point to a successful research stay?
I will be going to Norway in January for a 3-month predoc research stay. I would like to hear your opinion on what aspects you would consider successful in a research stay.
Making contacts, advancing research, publishing articles could be some indicators, what others would you add?

Do you mean to ask "how should I invest my energy?" ?

@paul garrett My question is rather aimed at what characteristics a successful stay should ideally have in your opinion (i.e. on what criteria would you base the success of a research stay)?

You may be "over-thinking" this opportunity. There is no need, and little served, I think, by trying to measure it... It is an opportunity, not a test.

Unless your field is radically different than mine, publishing anything in three months is definitely not an indicator


text:
Applying to math graduate schools. Should I submit a letter of recommendation from a physics professor?
For starts, I'm a math major and physics minor.
TLDR:
I'm applying to math graduate schools. Should I submit a letter of recommendation from a physics professor?
Longer version:
I'm applying to math graduate schools. More specifically, I'm applying to math programs that do research in the realm of mathematical physics (e.g., string theory & algebraic geometric, TQFT, ect.). As typical, every school I'm applying to wants three letters of recommendation (LOR). I currently have two strong LORs from math professors. I could get a third LOR from math professors, but admittedly it will not be strong (i.e., it would be the standard "he made an A", "was a good student", and since I wrote lecture notes for the course they would perhaps mention this).
On the other hand, I took a physics course (Lagrange mechanics), and always scored around 40 points higher than the class average. The professor commented on my scores a number of times. So, I'm curious, would it be worth submitting a LOR from this physics professor, or should I just get another LOC from a math professor? Also, it seems to make sense to show the graduate schools I do well in physics, since I'm interested in mathematical physics.

and always scored around 40 points higher than the class average --- As a side issue (important for what a letter writer should say), probably more relevant is how how you compare with the top two or three students in the class, not with the average student in the class. That said, when I was applying similarly to mathematical physics programs (Fall 1980), I included a physics professor as one of my letter writers.

@DaveLRenfro: Thanks for the comment. I agree with what you say.

Sincere congratulations for putting yourself in a situation where you have four very good letter-writers to have to choose three from!

@GregMartin: Thank you for the nice comment!

You should pick references who know you best and can report observations of your performance in greatest detail in support of their recommendations.  An LOR from a physics professor who knows you well and can describe your performance in a course in Lagrange mechanics is perfectly appropriate for someone interested in graduate work in mathematical physics. Good luck.

Thank you for your input.

You want letters of recommendation that say the most about what you will bring to the program. In this case it seems clear to me that a strong physics letter for a program in mathematical physics is (much) better than a ho-hum good third math recommendation.

Thanks. It seems yours, together with other comments and answers, have swayed me to get the LOR from the physics professor.


text:
Can a maths undergraduate apply for a physics PhD?
Can a maths undergraduate apply for a physics PhD without going into masters program? Given that during his undergraduate course he published a couple of papers on physics in respectable physics journals

In my country that's possible if you have some research experience (eg. publications in peer reviewed journals).

This might be highly country dependent. Flagging as unclear.

My undergraduate degree is in physics and my Ph.D. is in mathematics.  I don't see any reason why the reverse direction wouldn't be possible as well.

It's hard to give a general rule as policies will vary between institutions and countries, but this would probably depend on the specific Physics related content of your course.
From my own experience (UK universities for undergraduate masters Physics and Astronomy and then PhD Astrophysics), it is not common but definitely acceptable to get a place on a PhD course straight from a Bachelor's. Exceptional candidates (eg. having multiple publications before graduation) would definitely be considered.
In terms of switching subjects, you would need to show that you have the background knowledge and appropriate skills (numerical, computational, logical problem solving) for the PhD you are applying to, but if your Maths degree covers this then it should not be a problem. I imagine aiming for theoretical physics or highly mathematical fields such as cosmology would be quite easy to justify from a Maths course that included mathematical physics. A practical or astronomy related PhD may be harder to justify as you probably wouldn't have the broad background knowledge or lab skills. For computational projects such as gravitational waves or theoretical astronomy, you would need to have computing courses in your undergraduate degree, to an acceptable level, though the language you learned wouldn't matter too much as you can easily pick up a different language.


text:
Leadership Ph.D alternative
(asking for a friend) I'm currently teaching at an undergraduate institution with a Masters in leadership. However, for accreditation purposes (and making the higher-ups happy) they want me to get a Ph.D.. I'm not interested in getting one, and honestly it won't help my courses. In short, are there any post-graduate alternatives to a Ph.D. in leadership that would satisfy accreditation statistics?

Are there some related areas where your institution needs more faculty?  You could get a complementary PhD.

What do the accreditation bodies accept? The question should be asked them first.

I don't think you can get a definitive answer to this question without looking into your specific accreditor's policies, but in any case I think "making the higher-ups happy" may be crucial regardless of accreditation, thanks to widely discussed statistics like "percentage of faculty with terminal degrees".  If a Ph.D. is the terminal degree in leadership, then you might be stuck.

honestly it won't help my courses - How do you know?

There is a wide range of choices in managerial education, in general, and in leadership education, in particular. Most universities' business schools offer various executive education programs, which range from continuous education / professional development programs, such as (hereafter, I am using Harvard University just as an example for some types of programs) these smaler scale programs, to comprehensive executive leadership programs. Executive leadership programs can be general as well as industry-oriented, such this higher education-focused or this healthcare-focused. Other leadership education options include more lightweight alternatives, such as relevant MOOCs with certificates (either single courses, or thematic tracks), university certificate programs (such as this one at MIT) and relevant educational programs by think tanks (like ones by Aspen Institute), non-profits (like ones by Center for Creative Leadership) and similar organizations.

Are any of these options considered alternatives to a Ph.D.?

@Drecate: Absolutely. Those options are certainly not equal alternatives to a Ph.D. (which, by definition, can only be another Ph.D.). However, the OP did not ask about equal alternatives, but rather alternatives for the purposes of accreditation. If said accreditation would only accept Ph.D. credentials, the question would not make any sense at all. Therefore, I have mentioned options, all or, likely, some of which are assumed to be acceptable for accreditation purposes.


text:
Sharing MOOC forum data
I have the forum data for several MOOCs. Can I legally share it with someone else without going through IRBs or some other administrative process?
The data contain timestamp, post title, post body, and username. Since all data was publicly available by browsing the forum as a MOOC user, I would tend to believe I can legally share it.
I am located in the United States, if that matters.

Are you deliberately asking only about legal issues? Or are you interested in ethical issues as well?

@ff524 Yes only interested in legal issues.

The answer may depend on the MOOC platform. Based on a quick read of the TOS for a couple of the more popular MOOC platforms, I would say:

Coursera: Probably not. Coursera allows you to share your own postings, but not anyone else's.
edX: No. The TOS specifically calls out User Postings as content that you are forbidden to download in bulk. However, like Coursera and Udemy, edX allows you to retain rights to your own postings.
Udemy: Probably not. Udemy and you can share your postings, but you cannot share someone else's postings.

Coursera's Terms of Service, to which you agree when you register and use their service, state:

All students participating in the class must agree to abide by the following code:

I will not make solutions to homework, quizzes, exams, projects, and other assignments available to anyone else (except to the extent an assignment explicitly permits sharing solutions). This includes both solutions written by me, as well as any solutions provided by the course staff or others.

Also (boldface added):

The Services enable you to share your content, such as homework, quizzes, exams, projects, other assignments you submit, posts you make in the forums, and the like ("User Content"), with Coursera, instructors, and/or other users. You retain all intellectual property rights in, and are responsible for, the User Content you share.
...
Coursera respects the intellectual property rights of our users, Content Providers, and other third parties and expects our users to do the same when using the Services.

Finally:

You also aren't allowed to:

Reproduce, transfer, sell, resell, or otherwise misuse any content from our Services, unless specifically authorized to do so.

edX's Terms of Service:

[Y]ou agree not to scrape, or otherwise download in bulk, any edX Site content, including but not limited to a list or directory of users on the system, User Postings or user information, online textbooks, course materials, or trademarks and logos.

But also (boldface added):

By submitting or distributing your User Postings, you affirm, represent, and warrant (1) that you have the necessary rights, licenses, consents, and/or permissions to reproduce and publish the User Postings and to authorize edX and its users to reproduce, modify, publish, and otherwise use and distribute your User Postings in a manner consistent with the licenses granted by you below, and (2) that neither your submission of your User Postings nor the exercise of the licenses granted below will infringe or violate the rights of any third party. You, and not edX, are solely responsible for your User Postings and the consequences of posting or publishing them.

And:

By submitting or distributing your User Postings, you hereby grant to each user of the Site a non-exclusive license to access and use your User Postings in connection with their use of the Site for their own personal purposes.

Udemy's Terms:

The content you post as a student or instructor (including courses) remains yours. By posting courses and other content, you allow Udemy to reuse and share it but you do not lose any ownership rights you may have over your content.

Also:

When you post content, comments, questions, reviews, and when you submit to us ideas and suggestions for new features or improvements, you authorize Udemy to use and share this content with anyone, distribute it and promote it on any platform and in any media, and to make modifications or edits to it as we see fit.

Thanks. in the case of Coursera, isn't sharing forum data compatible with "[the students] retain all intellectual property rights [on their postings]", as long as we make sure this is clear when sharing the data?

No, because that statement is trying to say that "you" retain all intellectual property rights on your postings, not anyone else's.

Here is my instinctive answer: it depends on what you do with it. If you want to use it for research, you probably need IRB approval. This is really no different than using student exams for research. On the other hand, if you just want to make them available as a "blob of data", then the situation may be different.
The thing is this, though: If it turns out that you do need IRB approval after you have already used the data or made it available, you're in hot water. The pain associated with this situation is so large that you really don't want to get there. My recommendation therefore is: Make an appointment and walk over to your IRB office and discuss the situation with them. That'll cost you 30 minutes. If they say that you don't need IRB approval, that's a small investment. If they say that you do need IRB approval, you will want to know this before you do anything with the data, and in that case (given all the attendant CITI training, writing the IRB application, etc), the 30 minutes will still be a small investment.
Trying to avoid IRB review by asking a bunch of people on the internet via a 3-paragraph, 5-sentence question that leaves out all of the important information, is not a smart strategy.

What important information is missing from the question? I'd be glad to add it. 2. I find that putting knowledge in a public place is useful.

I agree that it is useful. But that's an opinion, and my opinion does not always agree with what the law says I can or cannot do.
What was missing from the question was, for example, whether user names are identifiable. Also whether the data contains any data that reveals anything about grades. Finally, how that data is going to be used makes a difference. The point really is: don't get yourself into a position where you might have to legally justify what you morally justified to yourself.


text:
How to encourage students to answers questions from other students posted in Q&A online places dedicated to the classroom (e.g. Piazza)
How can an instructor or teaching assistant encourage students to answers questions from other students posted in private Q&A online platforms dedicated to the classroom (e.g. Piazza), put aside from adding some percentage of the final grade based on such activities?

Why do you want a Q&A?

@AnonymousPhysicist Students sometimes ask questions, in the hope of having an answer.

Why online?  Why should students answer instead of faculty?

@AnonymousPhysicist Online for convenience. Answers from students reduce the load of the teaching staff while being educative for them.

I disagree with any efforts to reduce the involvement of faculty in education.

@AnonymousPhysicist They can make use of this gain of time by working on other parts of the course (e.g. improving lecture notes).

The answer to this question is "by explaining to them how this will help them achieve the learning objectives of this course," but the details of this explanation will vary depending on the course. If it doesn't help them achieve the learning objectives, then I'm with them on this one.

@AnonymousPhysicist Increasing student involvement does not imply decreasing faculty involvement.

I used Piazza in my undergraduate business and society course last year. Students were required to participate, but I found that if I myself commented on some of their posts and then brought up some of their arguments in class that this encouraged more active posts. In particular I made a point of highlighting debates between students during subsequent class periods.


text:
How to deal with non-cooperative team mate?
I just started a research position coming from the industry. I am supposed to work on an ongoing project and branch it out to a new direction.
There is one member of the research group that did quite a lot of work on what I am supposed to modify. So I asked him if he could share his work and code with me. He told me that it is still unpublished work and there is no way he is going to give me his code. He said this is the way he does research.
I'm sort of stumped and don't know what to do. He told me that I should go and do it on my own what he has done for about a year now. My supervisor agreed to my suggestion that I should work with this person, but when I told him that he wouldn't share the code with me, he was just laughing nervously and didn't say anything.
Is there a way that I can persuade this person to collaborate with me, or am I banging my head against a wall?

So just to clarify. My supervisor is (one of) the project lead. I first talked to the supervisor suggesting, then talked to the person who rejected, then to the supervisor again. This project has been going on for a year. There are about 5 people working on it in this lab. I joined the lab to extend on the work done here and to contribute in the final stages of the project. To my surprise, there is no shared code repository, but rather each person does their own thing and in meetings discuss it.
I told the person that I will not steal his code. He replied to me that he doesn't share the code because I will not understand it. I told him that it helps me understand the work by looking at the code. He told me that no.
So my plan is to read the draft papers again and try to understand it that way, then try again in a few days. I don't want to re implement the same thing he has done...

I was given access today to the research group server and I could view everyone's work (around 15 people) and all project material... except his directory and implementation which is permission denied. I talked to him again, and clearly he is afraid that I will steal his work and possibly has to put one more name on his paper if I find something interesting, thereby diluting his achievements. He kept telling me that this is his work, and he is the first person on the paper and I should do something else or re-implement the whole code on my own.

he doesn't share the code because I will not understand it... Does he feel that you're not smart enough to understand his code, or is his code of such low quality that nobody can understand it?

@Caleb: my guess would be the later, but I may be biased because I consider documention/comments and readability of code an aspect of code quality.

Is this person (the one who refuses to share the code) an employee of the university?  If so, then I would expect that the code is considered a work-for-hire and the copyright on it is owned by the university.  I'd try to get this accomplished by going through his supervisor so that, instead of you requesting his cooperation, the situation is transformed into one where his boss is giving him an order to perform a task (providing a copy of the source code) and refusal to do so would be insubordination.

The title of this question could have been: "How to deal with THE code sharing problem in computational sciences"

If all the other answers fail (which is unlikely), I have a short thought that may help you: maybe you don't really want to look at that code. If the code has been written by one person to be read by that person, it may be easier, faster and less frustrating to start from the algorithms, design or even abstract ideas rather than the code. When something cannot be seen I have the habit of asking myself whether it may not exist, whether the effects it seems to have could be caused by something else. If everything else fails, think about it ;)

I wonder if the colleague is posting http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/31484/11825 !

This attitude is very common in academia, as the academic environment is often highly competitive. That said, I've never seen someone do that within a team. I agree with seteropere that if this person is indeed on your team, you will likely have to raise this issue with your supervisor.
Still, there's likely a reason why he's unwilling to share, and if you can find the reason for that you may be able to convince him to be more of a team player. Is he worried that giving you access will hurt his publication chances? You can work with your supervisor to convince him that he will still get authorship even if the code is shared. Is he afraid you'll ruin the code? Suggest using some sort of versioning to keep track of changes. Is he just being a jerk about it? If so, then it just comes down to seteropere's answer, and you'll have to hope your boss has enough of a backbone to help you out.

"I am supposed to work on an ongoing project and branch it out to a new direction." sounds to me as if someone (supervisor) has decided that the OP should take over the others project. If that wasn't in agreement with the other, it's likely a very difficult situation (the project is "taken away", a greenhorn comes and is perceived as demanding, pert or possibly even arrogant), and competition who keeps the project may arise within the group.

"This attitude is very common in academia, as the academic environment is often highly competitive" Only at relatively low levels and with people coming from certain cultural backgrounds. Above a certain threshold, you get much more frustrated with the fact that you have to implement every your idea yourself because the few other people capable of it are in exactly the same position. I would just redo things from scratch. It often takes less time to write your own code than to figure out how to modify the existing code properly without any minimally clear documentation.

My supervisor agreed to my suggestion that I should work with this person,

Why you suggest someone who is not willing to collaborate with you?
Since you had the initiative and suggested his name, I think its clear that your mate is not motivated for your project so not giving the code is an expected behavior.
Your mate is either

Part of the project team. In this case, his role should be very clear. is he supposed to supply the code? if yes raise it to the supervisor and ask for help. If supplying the code is part of his project contribution, then the supervisor should play his role here and ask the student to do so.
Not Participating in the project. In this case, he's doing a favor if he supplied the code to you. You should do the implementation yourself but make sure not to include him in the project later on!.. or try to convince him that it is beneficial to him to supply the code (i.e. co-authorship in the resulted paper).

Either ways, it is the supervisor responsibility to scope/assign work to students in team projects.

It's not clear to me from the question that the person is also a student.

@SylvainPeyronnet well; at least the word my supervisor is there in the text

Exactly : "my supervisor" but maybe not "his" supervisor (his = the person that don't want to give the code).

Sylvain is correct. My supervisor is not his supervisor. My mate is motivated because he gets his funding from this project. My work is about the things that are mentioned under "Future Work" in the draft paper.

At this point I am a broken record: this is one of the situations I found myself in. None of my colleagues have been forthcoming, with techniques, code, documentation--nothing. One of the team members insists that he does not document code because it should be evident how his code works by reading it. This is patent nonsense--he has forgotten what his code does or else does not want to say. He absolutely refuses to provide a conceptual overview of his system--even the postdocs complained that he wastes their time with the minutia of command line options and stories about the old country instead of describing the main algorithms and the necessary configuration to get his model to work. I have been forced to reproduce or rewrite code. It turned out to the PI's surprise that my code was better, but I must say I intensely disliked being in this situation. The other comments suggest being optimistic in the face of intransigence. I myself decided (details are scattered around this site) to get out, for several reasons:

my colleagues were not forthcoming and preferred that I duplicate their work.
in the once case that I managed to persuade my teammates to share some work they did, they were gratuitously patronizing as they grudgingly handed it over, although it was completely obvious they should simply have shared the work
the work was essentially unpublishable and of low academic value
I was misled about my role within the research group
the pay was abysmal
it was pointless to continue working for little money without being included in any of the group's publications. I might as well work in industry for more money and no publications.

The first applies in your case--be prepared not to receive any cooperation from your team members.

Talk to the other person. Yes, talk not email. Find out what his or her concern is. Perhaps his or her concern is that you may just use his or her work and not give him or her credit. Assure the person that this would not be the case. This is the right and ethical thing to do. Prepare to put this in writing if it could save 1 year of your life.
I think it is important to acknowledge that there may be other people who could also assist you. Ask. This is part of the learning process.
If all fails, be pragmatic and modify your project scope if you can in consultation with your adviser. There is no point wasting your time in anticipation the cirumstances may change.

Well, my desk is right next to his, so I only talk to him in person.

As you said you sit next to him, I would suggest you to be patient with him and wait for some days...
Start your research work as you are supposed to do, and in the mean while try to be helpful and good in behavior with him. During your research if you would require some small help then surely consult him and he will answer you... I am quite sure after some days of being helpful + good behavior to him + asking and sharing some knowledge with him will surely change his attitude towards you!
I would avoid suggesting you to consult your supervisor for the same again and again because you will eventually bother him and spoil your impression. Handle things by yourself, Be cooperative. Be patient for few days and there is a chance to save one years effort.
Good luck.


text:
Does publishing a book while employed by an academic institution grant them legal claim on the royalties?
If I publish a book on my research topics while employed for an academic institution, can they claim part of the revenues I get from royalties ? My question is relative to Europe, but if someone knows also for other countries, I will welcome additional answers.

In general, no. (This is based on my experience in the US.) One's employing institution does not have any claim on royalties from books written while a student or faculty member. However, it's possible that there might be exceptions: for example, sometimes a university may help financially in the publication of a book, and this might be reflected in the publication contract. Of course, in such circumstances the book is not expected to make any money, which is why the university is helping out in the first place.
A related and very common phenomenon is for the publisher to hold the copyright on an academic title. My own book is like this. I am entitled to royalties, but the press holds the copyright for some defined period. Again, this is due to the terrible economics of publishing academic monographs.
There have been cases where universities have tried to assert very broad rights over the intellectual property of their faculty employees (e.g., lecture notes as well as books, etc), but I think these have generally failed. It does still happen: here's an example where the University of Louisiana is trying to broadly claim rights to scholarly output, including royalties from books. These sweeping assertions of rights have sometimes been motivated by the desire of administrators to claim a share of some of the genuinely lucrative things now produced by some university researchers, such as patentable biotechnologies, with books caught up in the net but not really directly targeted. Patents are an area with real money at stake, where the university's investment (in laboratory space and so on) is much higher, and where university claims on income from work done while employed are strongly and successfully asserted. Books, not so much.

The link directly to the Chronicle article leads to a paywall.  The article is viewable as a preview from one of the companies selling access:  http://chronicle.texterity.com/chronicle/20120224a?pg=22#pg22

I published a book myself, and know many collegues who published books, and the academic institution never claimed any part from the royalties. This is for sure the case in Germany, Hungary, Austria and Italy.

To the best of my knowledge, this is also the case in France.

Same here (Belgium).

Perhaps you should check with your own institution as some universities (at least in the UK) have a policy on this issue. Also your employment contract might already cover this. For example, in several UK universities the copyright of course notes and lecture notes lecturers create often belong to the institution, not the individual lecturer. And the same might apply to books they write unless individually negotiated.

Reiterating what others have said: there is danger here, but at "better" universities in the US, the venal impulses of university administrations have at least recognized that they'll not make gazillions of dollars on grabbing royalties on textbooks or monographs, ... so they just let it go.
One should pay attention to the local rules. Yes, the UK rules in the last few years are disturbing... Maybe they've changed.
In the US, the contractual idea is that if one does something "specified, under contract", that the product is owned by the "entity" that engaged one to produce the work. Universities have been a teensy-bit more ... fair... about this kind of thing, but one should look around.
But we should address the dangerous cases: yes, some colleges/universities will claim that whatever you write/produce/do is their property. (I can't help recommending that you send them stool samples... maybe daily...)
In summary, obviously, try to use common sense. Yet be alter to the (duh, human nature) problem that "things are more complicated on the ground".
The net is that novices are coerced to give up "rights". This is ill, but I cannot change it. Apparently we must all "cope". (Sorry I can't give better/happier advice" It is disturbing ...)


text:
How significant is a good personal website to advance standing in the academic world?
I happen to be close to a professor at my college that has the highest citations of all professors there.  However, his website looks like its from the 1990's.  I have some knowledge and motivation to help redesign his website.  However, given that he has an academic business background, and already has significant clout he will almost certainly ask about the value of an improved website.  Is there an article stating the significance of a website, or lack there of?

(Not exactly a 100% duplicate, maybe, but if reading that discussion does not answer your question I invite you to make it more specific).

@Federico Poloni It answers some of my question.  I'm more looking for statistics or an article that says "yes there is value" or "no its not significant"

It probably is from the 1990s, with only incremental updates since then.

Not really significant

I imagine this varies with field. The websites of STEM faculty, like their wardrobes, usually don't get updated once they leave grad school.


text:
Interested in Neuroscience programs but lack research experience & grades
About me:

I'm in my last year of undergraduate studies majoring in cognitive science at a very prestigious university.
I'm very interested in going to graduate school for neuroscience.

My concerns:

I lack research experience. I recently just learned about how wonderful neuroscience is so I have a very late start compared to my already-competent peers. I did apply to RA positions but was rejected to all of them. I will be graduating in one semester so I do not have enough time to build up my research experience. After graduating, what can I do to be more competent - research experience wise?
I have a mediocre GPA (3.077). I did not take any courses like chemistry, or physics. Many programs make these a requirement. I also did poorly in my math classes - as it is not my strength. But I did very well in psychology, cognitive neuroscience, biology psychology, philosophy, and sociology. Since I only have one semester left, I don't have enough time to take classes that programs want. Will GRE subject tests be able to compensate?
Is there any hope for someone in a situation like mine? I feel very lost and hopeful, to be honest. Any words of advice would be helpful.

My current plans:

Self-learn R, Matlab, Python, HTML, CSS, and Javascript.
Take on the habit of reading papers related to the field, in order to build knowledge.
Will apply to many RA positions.

Please do not take my comment offensive. You did not take chemistry, biology or physics. You did poorly in Math classes. Then what did you do in the school well? You have GPA 3.0. Something must be good.

I understand why you ask. I did very well in psychology, sociology, cognitive neuroscience, biology psychology and philosophy courses. My major is very interdisciplinary, but it doesn't require us to take courses like chemistry or physics. If I knew earlier that those classes would be useful, I would've taken them.

The only way to prove to your future advisor that you are capable of doing research is by doing research. Apply to be an RA (Research Assistant) in a neuroscience lab. This will give you enough experience and, importantly, will equip you with the general knowledge of the field. Being exposed to ongoing work will also allow you to start formulating your own research questions, which is an important skill that you'll definitely need in grad school.
Now, how to increase your chances of getting a good RA position?
(1) By applying early and demonstrating that you're serious about the job.
(2) By learning programming (as you mentioned). Technical skills are in very high demand!
Many people end up in grad school after working as RAs for 2+ years, so there is no rush. Take your time and make sure that graduate school is really what you want. Good luck :)


text:
Is it appropriate for department administrators to send political emails?
In my department, it has been fairly common to receive mass emails from our department chair about political developments.  These emails followed the election last winter, recent executive orders from our current president, as well has his failure to receive a dean appointment at our university.  In this question, I am not addressing the political issues themselves, but whether it is appropriate, or not, for an educational administrator to send politically driven emails en masse.
To be frank, though in my opinion, his emails have been very emotional and childish. For example, he sent a mass email about his loss as a candidate to become the dean of a college -it was an emotionally charged correspondence that had an air of whining in it.  Likewise, he has sent emails about his distaste with developments in Washington DC.  Emails have encouraged students to sign onto a petition.  I am a big fan of free speech, but I think this behavior shuts down people with differing opinions than his own; this fosters "group think" sentiments that could be detrimental to maintaining a diversity of ideas.  I never experienced this form of behavior in industrial companies/private sector

What sort of guidelines should an administrator follow concerning mass emails that are politically based?
If this behavior is inappropriate, would it be appropriate to address this form of behavior?
If I were to address it, which party or parties would be best to approach?

Done.  And good point.

Are you disturbed by political emails, or because you don't agree with the contents? For example if the dean comments on whether students or staff are at risk if they leave the USA, depending on their nationality, that's important and it's quite unavoidable that it is political.

No. This is part of a trend.  Its oddly frequent, hyperbolic, opinionated, and sometimes plagued with misinformation.  This never happened with my experience in the industrial private sector, which is why I have found it off-putting and unprofessional.

I personally think it's inappropriate. However, it does happen in my institution too, though to a lesser extent. Last year, an email went round saying how dreadful a particular political event was, thereby assuming that that was the only valid opinion worth upholding. It didn't recognise the fact that people could have had a different opinion. I find it best to just ignore such emails. There is enough political upheaval around presently without my encouraging it through a response.

Do you attend a public or private institution?

At our institution (large, public, U.S.), this is officially permitted by the faculty union contract. It is used in this way by only a small number of faculty. We had to endure a reactionary, right-wing "newsletter" every month for many years (until the faculty member in question deceased). This will surely vary by institution.

Personally.....I'd say it is unethical to do so, as it can seem like you are trying to advance your personal political beliefs.........but I have no clue as to legality of said actions.  Personally, I come to a college to learn certain subjects, not to listen to or read political viewpoints of professors.

In your question, I note two (different) items:

Sending political emails
Embedding an opinion

Sending political emails
I can certainly imagine that a department administrator needs to send political emails: there are often political situations that have a certain influence on a department/school or its students and staff (e.g. a new law or decree). In general, I believe that messages sent to mass email addresses should be used to provide information that is applicable to all who receive this message. As a guideline, therefore, I believe that such email should be without any opinion.
Embedding an opinion
I believe that personal opinions and emotions should be dealt with in personal circles, and not be shared with the general public over mass email addresses (there are public forums, but then viewers have a choice in reading or not reading). The sender does not know what these emotions brings about with the receivers: it can have significant consequences for people who have dealt with similar personal difficulties. And, strong opinions can cause strong reactions, again with possible negative consequences for the sender as well as other receivers.
As such, I think this behavior should be addressed. Many universities have an Student Ombuds Office, where any issue about university policy, bureaucracy, and conflicts can be discussed confidentially. If it bothers you, contact them, and then they can guide you further and inform you about the university staff member breaching university policies, for example.
Of course, an administrator may also have been asked to inform students and staff of the institutional opinion. This most likely means that a (board) meeting has resulted in a decision from the institution, which is then passed on to all involved in the institution. These messages describe the position of the institution on a certain question, but most certainly exclude emotional descriptors.
In short
The staff member's behavior could be against policies the university has set for mass email usage (using it for both political reasons as well as personal interest). Check the policy for this, and use the Ombuds Office for further advice and guidance on what can be done.

I think there is a third option to address, which I might call "institutional opinions"; where the administrator gives their professional (not personal) opinion as to whether the the political situation is good or bad for the institution or particular aspects of its mission, and whether the institution ought to support or oppose the situation on those grounds.  I think this sort of thing is appropriate in the scope of an administrator's duties.

I generally agree with the above answer.  I am not the only person in the department that finds these emails a bit strange and distracting.  For example, this department  chair actually describes how they feel in writing via email.  This is very different than just presenting some facts, concerns, and available resources (albeit with a little political spin).  Speaking, in email, how "sad" and "distraught" they are over federal policy changes is a bit immature for someone in a leadership position; it reflects poorly on the strength of the department.

@NateEldredge, I've modified my answer to include the institutional opinion aspect.

What you are describing sounds very unprofessional to me, and it is the kind of thing that detracts from the culture of a university department and fosters a culture of "groupthink".  It is legitimate for administrators to send mass-emails communicating changes (or proposed changes) in government policy that affect the university, but even here it is appropriate to communicate this in a politically neutral way that does not presume the political position of the email recipients.  Sometimes the high-level administrators at a university will develop an institutional position on the matter and communicate this position, but they should be aware that this position will not generally match the opinion of all academics on campus, and so it is not appropriate to communicate this institutional position in a way that pressures people to adopt that view.
There are plenty of channels for administrators and academics to form groups on campus that are interested in political discussions, where group emails on political topics would be appropriate.  It is legitimate for staff to form groups that want to discuss particular political topics, and don't mind getting politically-loaded emails.  It is different when an administrator sends mass-emails to a captured audience to proselytise their political position.
Aside from the basic issue of professionalism, if administrators insist on sending mass-emails proselytising a particular political view then they are inviting mass-email replies arguing those views, and they have no legitimate standing to complain if a dissenting academic (or other email recipient) writes back a mass-reply-email publicly challenging their views.  I suspect you will find that the kind of people who use their administrative positions for these purposes are also averse to being publicly challenged.  Live by the sword, die by the sword.


text:
Applying for assistant professor position, teaching statement required but I have no teaching experience
I'm going to apply for an assistant professor position in a European university's campus in China. The problem is that I do not have any formal, class-based teaching experience while the job specification says that I need to teach four courses. The university also asks for a teaching statement. What shall I put in that statement?
Please advise and thanks in advance.

Suppose you're offered the position, how are you going to teach the class?

Your question makes me wonder why you think you are ready to take on an assistant professor position, when you have no experience of a large part of the role.

@JessicaB: I believe it is not unusual in some fields/cultures for assistant professors to be hired without previous teaching experience.

@NateEldredge Indeed, this was essentially what happened to me. (Strictly speaking, I did teach a 30 hour class to 3 people during the last year of my PhD, but I think for practical application purposes that didn't really count.)

I do not have any formal, class-based teaching experience

The way you wrote this suggests that perhaps you have some informal teaching or tutoring experience.  If so, you can write about that.
You have years of experience observing teachers at work.  Think about what made the good ones effective, and what the bad ones did wrong.  You can use this analysis to create your draft teaching philosophy.

If you do not get this particular job, and you decide to continue applying for teaching jobs, then I suggest you get some teaching and tutoring experience under your belt as soon as possible.  It's okay to volunteer -- as long as you treat your volunteer teaching as seriously as you would treat a paid teaching or tutoring job.

It does not directly answers the question posed, namely: what shall s/he put now on such a teaching statement given that there is no (formal) teaching experience. I agree with the comments above: in such case describe your philosophy of teaching and how you want to achieve the learning goals, while being honest that you do not have actually tested this yet.

Most universities require a "teaching statement containing your teaching philosophy". Just because you have not taught does not mean that you do not have a teaching philosophy.
That being said, I see two serious problems with your question.

They will most likely ask for a teaching reference letter, and you do not have that since you have never taught. You can try to get a letter by offering to teach one of your colleagues' classes (with your colleague in attendance). He/she will observe your teaching, and they can write a letter based on this.
I find it shocking that the only reason you seem to want to apply to this position is because "it is good in terms of remuneration" (a statement that has since been deleted from your question). As a researcher myself I do not teach a whole lot, but if you are already of the mindset that you are teaching because of the money, I think that this attitude will come through at some place or another, and I am not so sure that this job is right for you (or that you are right for this job).

I don’t think it’s our place to judge people’s life choices. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to get proper compensation for doing your job.

-1 because of the judgmental tone on bullet 2.


text:
Cover letter for journal submission (math)
I'm preparing to submit a math paper to a good general-interest journal.  The page asks for a cover letter.  What should this include, beyond "here's a paper for consideration"?  Should there be, for example, a brief summary? Claims about why I think it's interesting?  Suggested reviewers? The first two of these of course appear in the article. The journal submission page gives no guidance.
This is a near-dupe of Are cover letters sent to referees and should you highlight the contribution of your paper in the cover letter?.  However, Googling around suggests that the answer is rather field-dependent, and this is not reflected in the answers there.  I am looking for information relevant to pure math, for which a search hasn't turned up anything.
In my previous submissions I've basically blown this off, per my adviser's advice.  It doesn't seem to have caused any problems, but I'm wondering if there's anything I can do to make the editor's life easier.

FYI: I have moved an answer regarding multidisciplinary journals that I previously posted here to the linked question.

Unless the journal asks for any specific pieces of information, then a "Here it is for your consideration" is all that's required. In the (math) journals I'm an editor of, that is essentially what the letters look like, and they almost never contain anything that is of importance to the editor or to reviewers.
I believe that this is very different in other areas, but then the submission guidelines will say so.

My impression is this often only gets asked because the submission system was set up for general journals.  I agree with Wolfgang's answer that  you do not need to include much in the way of content, but will add that one thing you can do is use this letter to suggest possible editors for your paper (sometimes there is no other place to put this).  It of course makes things easier for the editor if they get papers in areas they know well.


text:
Should an editor ask his own graduate (PhD) students to review papers in his journal?
If a professor is an editor of a journal, then should he ask his graduate students (PhD) to review articles? What do you think, good or bad on what points?
Different from "Is it common to review papers assigned to your supervisor?", where the professor is a reviewer and not the editor.

Of course. How else will you learn the skills involved with reviewing?

Duplicate http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5662/is-it-common-to-review-papers-assigned-to-your-supervisor

If prof gives papers to review to student to hone student's skills, then it is acceptable. But if prof is just forwarding student's review, Isn't that pushing prof's work to students?

@seteropere related but not duplicate in my opinion. This question asks from the point of view of the professor, him/her being an editor of the journal for which reviews are asked.

My main concern is the amount of time that it takes to do the review - if a graduate student is given too many of these "outside tasks", they may not be able to focus enough on their thesis. But a limited amount of refereeing is normal for PhD students in the later years of their studies.

I think jakebeal's answer is too restrictive. When I was a senior graduate student, and my PhD supervisor was a journal editor, he would occasionally ask me to do a review for his journal where it was clearly related to my work. It was clear that by this time in my graduate program that he considered me an independent researcher and thus eligible to review for his journal. His ethics and judgement on such matters were beyond question.
Just as she does when she accepts an article for publication, an editor has to make a judgement call when soliciting reviewers. Some graduate students are clearly capable of making independent evaluations of the work of others and can do so without compromising the peer review process. We wouldn't give PhDs to students if they weren't ready for that responsibility (among other things), and most graduate students are ready for it well before they actually finish writing and do their defense. All such students are eligible in my mind to do peer review.
Edited to add: It's been awhile, but I'm pretty sure I was asked to do my first journal article peer review not by my PhD supervisor, but by the first journal I submitted an article to as first author (while I was a student). I don't think my full credentials were known to the editor of that journal, but even if they were, the editor clearly thought the first author of an article was a sufficient peer to ask me to do reviewing for their journal. It's very common in my experience to be immediately asked to do a review by a journal editor upon submission of an article.

Same here, my supervisor would ask me to review stuff in the last year of my PhD. I had already been doing reviews for a couple of years by that time, for several independent journals. I saw no problem with it, and in fact these papers aligned with my areas of expertise much better than what I would normally get asked to review by someone who hasn't worked with me directly.

I think that there is a significant difference between a professor reviewer asking a student to be a sub-reviewer (as in the linked question) and an editor directly asking their students to be reviewers.
An important goal of peer review is for the editor / program chair to obtain additional independent perspectives on a manuscript.  If the editor requests a review from a student in their lab, whose review they will need to oversee and mentor, then they are losing the independent perspective and significantly compromising the peer review process.  Thus, I think that it is inappropriate.

whose review they will need to oversee - What? My advisor doesn't "oversee" reviews I write (unless I'm sub-reviewing for him).

@ff524 If you're far enough in your program that your advisor can trust you as an effective reviewer, there might not need to be any oversight.  I would still feel uneasy about the loss of independent perspective, though, as people in the same lab group will tend to have the same biases and blind spots.

My advisor has never been involved in reviews that I've personally been asked to write, at any point in my career - if someone asks me to write a review, it's because they believe I'm qualified to do so. And the point about people in the same lab group having similar biases seems weak - would you then say that professors should also not ask former students to review papers? Should all of my advisor's former students not ask me or anyone in my group to review?

@ff524 When inviting reviewers, I think it's important to get a good diversity of viewpoints.  I would not ask a student under my close supervision to do a review for a paper where I am the handling editor, because I would be concerned that I have too much of a day-to-day influence on their views.  Once a person is established as an independent researcher, the relationship becomes less of a concern over time, but diversity of reviewers is always important to give a fair review and avoid group-think.

There is nothing wrong with asking your peers, including graduate students, to do a review for a journal, as long as it is done along the same guidelines as any other review for the journal. It would, for example, be poor if an advisor asked a graduate student to review a paper and providing hints of the expected outcome, "here's a joke of a paper for you to review". Then, of course, the editor would not be fit to be an editor.
Doing reviews is a job that must be learned by experience and since graduate school is preparing students to become independent researchers, having experience to review is a good thing. I do not think it is god to ask first year graduate students to do reviews but late-stage students should be able to manage. An advisor, relative to any unrelated editor, can of course best judge where the student expertise lies and hence provide papers that falls within the core expertise of the student. In the case of graduate student-advisor relationships, it will be key that the roles of advisor-student and editor-reviewer are kept separate.

It may serve an educational purpose, i.e. teach the student how the review process works. In that case it would be worth thinking about asking an extra reviewer in case the review is sub-standard.
In many cases I know (I am from sociology) PhD students develop before finishing their dissertation into full (albeit junior) collegues with an own perspective and specialization different from the advisor. If the paper that needs reviewing fits the specialization of the PhD student, then I see no problem asking them for a review.

Generally, I don't think this is appropriate. Here are a few reasons:

Ability to provide a completely independent perspective may be compromised: how does one ensure that one's research group is not vulnerable to groupthink? Even if one feels they are free from such biases, others outside the group may not be convinced--what would happen if they find out?
Possible conflict of interest: while an editor may choose not to 'hint' to the student on what an 'acceptable outcome' should be, it may be difficult to convince others that this is not the case. As another example, how about a scenario whereby a student wants to put in some objection to the article, but does not do so because of the editor? What if the editor deliberately chose the student because the editor knows that the student holds a certain set of viewpoints on that area of research?
Possible consequences if this becomes a widespread practice: supposing you just have one editor who thinks its perfectly fine to provide such 'hints' to his students? It may just take one person to break the system and undermine the reputation of a journal (that took a long time to build up).

Note: on the other hand, if the editor has already sent out the article to the reviewer(s), as per the journal policy, and you are providing an independent point of reference, then perhaps that is more acceptable.

I have one additional negative to nathaniel's list:  student may feel compelled to perform a service (spend his valuable time) because of the control advisor has over student's Ph.D.  Student may feel it hard to say no.