text:
Can an undergraduate be advised by a professor who is very far away?
Lately I have been developing a good relationship with Prof. Wright.
She has clearly* gone out of her way a few times to help me, having a very pleasant, generous, and kind personality. Prof. Wright is searching for students (in her university of course, undergraduate, Master, or PhD). I really like her research and would love to work in her area. However, there's no researcher working in the field anywhere near** the university I study at.
This brings the reason for this question: I have been thinking about
asking her if she could advise me.

Is this unreasonable?
If not, how unlikely is it for her to accept? (To make this practical: what would you do if you were in her shoes?)
Is there a chance of this ruining our relationship? If yes, what can I do to make sure it won't ruin it?
Finally, if I'm going to ask her to be my advisor, it won't (of course and unfortunately) be in person, which means email. What can I do to enhance my chances here?

A few remarks which are (probably) important:

Of course such a setting should benefit both people! I would like to contribute to her research, in a way that is useful to her too;
My field is in Mathematics, being purely theoretical and not requiring lab/field work;
I am moderately independent when it comes to research. More details (in view of comments/answers on this point):
3a. In terms of learning: I've been learning graduate topics by myself for the past two years (I also learned the prerequisites for them in the same way). In particular, I'm used to approaching new topics and learning them by myself.
3b. In terms of producing: I believe*** I would be capable of producing a review article on recent (<10 years) research on certain topics in my field by myself. On the other hand, I can't produce original research. This means I'm used to academic writing, somewhat used to reading original research papers and slightly used to asking original research questions (i.e. can this work be extended for such and such case, what are the main problems this would entail, etc.), but have zero experience with actually producing new research.
I can't move to (anywhere near) her university for now.
(In view of anon's answer) I really don't mind if this won't count for my degree, or that I will be working unpaid.
On the other hand, I will have to do coursework next year, and
would like to know if (assuming Prof. Wright accepts me as her student) carrying another project while working with her would be a     problem either to her, or to my local, next year, advisor, provided that I can handle these two projects concurrently. (In this case, I would choose a not project with my local advisor sufficiently undemanding (yet not "pointless") for this to work.)

This question is heavily lacking some specific details. I can't provide those, for Prof. Wright is in the SE network too (and these might identify myself).

*To prevent against any kind of bias I may have in making this judgment, I have explained my situation to a few people, who agreed this is indeed a(n unusually) good relationship.
**Near here means less than 2000 km (probably even more).
***I have been doing something similar recently.

What are you doing at your current university?

Can you move???

You might want to clarify if you are an undergraduate looking for research experience, or a graduate student seeking to complete a thesis or dissertation as a required part of your program, or a graduate student looking to expand your network of collaborators.

@AzorAhai, JeffE I can't move, as her university is in another continent. (At least for now, while I am an undergraduate. On the other hand, I want to apply to there when I go to graduate school; I'm also keeping an eye on opportunities for international study near her university)

@alerera I am an undergraduate. (I have however been preparing to do research for the past few years, so hopefully I may be able to do original research with her, for this arrangement to benefit her too.)

My brother just finished his PhD under the supervision of Dr. Ross Parry. He was in Hungary, Dr. Parry in Leicester. It can work. After the graduation ceremony, he gave my brother's small children UoL pens, saying he hopes they will write their PhD with those. It was a fantastic moment.

About "which means email": Don't forget that there's also Skype. I've found it useful for collaborations (though I still work more with email).

It's probably not impossible, but distance isn't the only impediment. If you want her to be your formal advisor then you may need permission from both universities and they may need to work out some compensation, depending on the rules. This will be especially the case if she needs to formally approve (perhaps sign) your dissertation.
Distance is a problem of course, but with today's communication options it can be overcome in such a case. But you should also consider the possibility, even the necessity, of working face to face on occasion. One way to do this is through attendance at a conference with an extra day or so to work after or before the conference itself. There are other options, of course, including trying to get a small grant from somewhere to cover travel - either yours or hers.
But asking is certainly appropriate if you are willing to also work to obtain the necessary permissions and deal with the distance issue.
If she is to be only a secondary advisor it is a bit simpler, but needs the buy-in from your main advisor at your current place. This is easiest if the two know one another and are comfortable working together. But there may still be permission and compensation issues to deal with.
Make sure you know at the start everyone's expectations about joint authorship of anything you produce, of course.

Thank you very much for your advice! I'm really glad this has a chance of happening. Even if it's unlikely, it's great that the idea isn't completely unreasonable!

Since you have now added that you're an undergraduate, I think it's actually pretty unlikely she will agree.
A few issues:

Advising people is hard; advising undergraduates is even harder; and doing that long-distance is basically impossible. Although, you haven't stated your field. Maybe it's easier in your field than mine, or in theory. Still, personally, I would never accept to tele-mentor someone, especially someone I hadn't met in person.
In principle, she has a commitment to undergraduates at her university first, before those a continent away. If her department requires research credit (called "499" or "independent study" at my university), that's taking a slot away from one of their majors.
If you are required to have a mentor in your department, they most likely won't accept an off-campus one.

Asking won't ruin your relationship, although it might make you seem a little out of touch with what's required from such a relationship.
I think your best bet is to find faculty at your current university who can be your mentor on paper (and can actually contribute!) but is open to working with the distant professor. Maybe you can ask her if she knows anyone in your department.
Collaborating with her now will certainly help you get into her group in graduate school! I'm sure she's happy to have someone excited about her work and wanting to work with her, but I think it's pretty unlikely she can/will do anything official for you.
(Like I said, I don't know your field, but I'm not sure if "but can write an introduction to this area" is "moderately independent.")

“[advising undergraduates] long-distance is basically impossible”: this is a major overstatement, at least in some fields.  I know undergraduates who’ve done very successful projects with remote supervisors.  That said, I agree with the basic point: long-distance supervision has significant drawbacks that one mustn’t underestimate.

@PLL Like you pointed out, it depends on the field, which the OP hasn't said and on how advanced the undergrad is. From their description, they still sound fairly new and might need more mentorship than a more advanced student.

Thank you for your advice! I have added more details to the question, relating both on research independence and on your third point. (Regarding details, I'm being really careful on the writing of this question and of these comments, since Prof. Wright is also on the SE network. In particular, I can't specify my area, but I would estimate it (hopefully not too off) as somewhere about third year in graduate school (for instance a prerequisite for it is currently being offered as a second year graduate course at the university I study at)).

@A.P. Thanks for the added detail, although really the most important thing is your field; at least overarching. Math? CS? Linguistics? As for you estimating yourself to be around the third year of a graduate program: The point of a PhD program is to teach you how to do independent research. Maybe it's a difference in our fields, but I would hope a third-year PhD student to be beyond "somewhat used to reading original research papers and slightly used to asking original research questions." It's not necessarily the topics that are hard.

Why I'm harping on this is because research is one of the harder things to mentor an undergraduate in. While you sound like an excellent candidate for undergraduate research, I fear your request will be unsuccessful because of the challenges of teaching the research part remotely.

@AzorAhai Thank you for your reply; my field is in math. Regarding the estimate, I really apologize, I meant the "~third year" as in topics covered, not skill. While I have been studying some topics around third year, my research skill is certainly nowhere near that of a third year graduate student.                 Follow-up question: What about an arrangement involving a local advisor and Prof. Wright? (I find it unlikely because of the difference in specializations, but it could help remediate the problems involved on teaching the research part.)

I have done my Master's thesis project with a supervisor who was ~700km away, so I can kind of relate to your situation. I will address your questions one after the other:

I think it is absolutely reasonable to ask her. Nobody's getting hurt by a kind and polite request for a collaboration / advisory project.
Most researchers love to work with motivated students and sometimes it is really hard to find them (especially in niche research areas). Thus, if she is not drowning in other projects or has any formal obligations at her institute that could prevent her from advising external students, your chances should be rather high.
yes, there is chance that asking her can ruin your relationship. This could happen, if you ask in a way that seems rather demanding. You have to see it as really asking for a favour and that she has every right to decline even without any reasoning. However, if she is a kind and intelligent person, she probably won't simply decline without any additional information.
Your last question is, I think, the most important one. From my experience, the most challenging thing with long distance advisory relationships is to set a clear structure. Things can go in the wrong direction much faster, and it is much more difficult to realize that one has gone astray. Especially if you are an undergraduate student, this is a big issue. Probably, if she declines your request, this will be the most relevant reason.

You can a priori address these problems when making your request by:

proposing a thoroughly planned proposal structure for your research project. This does not need to be perfect, but should show that you are able to work independently and in a structured manner.
offering that you will be available for video chat meetings (Skype calls, Google Hangout or whatever) e.g. once a week.
offering that you will try to meet in person something like once a month. If you cannot offer to come to her in person at all, my guess is that this collaboration won't happen.
suggesting someone from your university who will be a co-advisor, so that she does not have to work into any of the special formal requirements that your university is demanding (most likely, your university will require you to have one "local" advisor, anyway)

Further, be prepared, that if she agrees to advise you, you will have to work harder and much more independently than if you had a supervisor next door. You should be 100% motivated and absolutely keen to working on this project.
As a last comment, even if it may be true that there is no one in your area who is doing research in this very particular niche, most likely there are other, closely related fields where people nearby are doing great research. As an undergraduate it is somtimes hard to get an overview which topics are closely related and who is working on what topics. When I was starting one of my research projects as a student, I thought there were only handful of people working in this niche research area - as I continued doing my research and have attended a few conferences and presented my research, I figured that alone in my country there are dozens of researchers working on it. One of them is actually working just around the corner from my original faculty where I started my research!
Hence, asking the professors from your faculty whether they know somebody can be really helpful. And you can still ask your Prof. Wright, whether she'd like to support you.

Thank you for your advice! I have confirmed with a few professors (and also thoroughly searched) on whether there are nearby researchers on this particular field (or on not too distant areas). However, there are researchers on the university I study at who work on somewhat distant fields that I would be interested in working with. But I'm really (really) passionate about this field, and would love to work in it, which is why I'm pursuing the possibility of working with Prof. Wright instead of trying to find an advisor nearby.

I'm also somewhat worried about how to approach contacting her when it comes to details: on the one hand, I'm worried about being too detailed, for it might sound demanding (not to mention arrogant, for it could mean, depending on writing and how much is "too much detail", that I'd be assuming she was going to accept it). On the other hand, giving too little detail won't adress the problems involved in such an arrangement, such as the ones you've pointed. Do you have some advice on balancing these?

It's a good question and hard to answer. I would usually prefer personal communication over detailed writing. Basically I wrote an email saying "Dear Prof Wright, I am very curious about research area X and especially niche area Y. I attended courses bla and bla closely related to X at my University in Disneyland. I found the papers by J.Doe (2014) and Wright(2015) highly interesting and I would love to learn more about it during a thesis project, that's why I am writing you this mail. If that sounds interesting to you, I would be more than happy to meet with you via Skype." worked for me :-)

That's an amazing suggestion! Thank you!

You should establish in what capacity you are hoping for the professor to "advise me". You mention that you are open to collaborating on a project to mutual benefit; that can encompass a lot of things, including not-for-degree-credit and/or unpaid. You should consider what parameters you would find acceptable in your present circumstances. You should also consider how you can show the professor (briefly) what you have to offer.
If you are seeking for the professor to be involved in advising you for credit-bearing work at your own institution in a formal capacity, you should ask your course convenor or administrator about the procedures for appointing an external advisor/supervisor. It may not be a routine occurrence, but it does happen sometimes, for the reasons you have given, so explain that you have already corresponded with a professor about a specialist subject not covered at your own institution, and that you intend to approach her about acting as an external advisor/supervisor. Having ascertained your institution's procedures, you can then write to the professor asking if she would have the time to act as an external advisor/supervisor, giving a very brief outline of the credit requirements at your institution and its procedures for appointing an external advisor/supervisor.
You have already made clear that, quite reasonably, you are not prepared/able to travel to another continent at this time. However, it is possible that the professor has plans to visit your continent, so an in-person meeting may still be a possibility (although do not bank on this -- a professor is likely to have a busy schedule when travelling overseas, and may not be able to make time to see an undergraduate).
In order to avoid sounding demanding, I would include something to the effect of:

Your feedback to date has been very useful to me, and I am hoping to pursue a project in interrogating postnihilism, as part of my final-year coursework for my degree of Bachelor of Arts in Futile Studies. Unfortunately, there are no specialists in postnihilism at my institution, so I am in the process of looking for an external advisor/supervisor. The degree requirements are quite flexible, so it could be a collaborative project with the advisor/supervisor. Is that something you might be able to do, or, if not, do you know any other postnihilists who might be up for a remote collaboration with a very junior research assistant? Ideally, I would like to work with you, but I realise you may be too busy, and you have, of course, already been enormously generous and helpful with your responses to my various research enquiries to date.

Thank you for your advice! I really don't mind if this won't count for my degree, or about working unpaid. I also truly appreciate your suggestion on how to not sound demanding! Thank you!

I want to add an answer here that is as encouraging as possible, especially for undergraduates just initiating a (hopefully enduring) research career.
Yes, you can be advised by a professor who is far away. Yes, skype-style videoconferences and other online collaboration tools make this easier than ever. Sure, it will be more challenging in many ways than setting up the typical weekly research meeting with someone on your own campus, but if the topic area is one where you are really passionate and the professor is willing to commit to make it work, then you should absolutely give it a go!
Many senior researchers in non-lab STEM fields collaborate this way with colleagues for the entirety of their careers, and it is very rewarding and has led to important results in my field for sure. If possible, see if you can plan a trip or two in advance when you can meet together live. Lots of progress is often made on these trips, and they provide helpful deadlines that can be motivating!

Thank you very much for your kind words! If she accepts me as her student, I'll be sure to keep an eye on opportunities for meeting together, such as travel funding for conferences (as suggested by Buffy) or becoming an international student in some university near her's. Really, thank you!


text:
Can a single co-authored paper be part of two stapled dissertations (by two people)?
Two friends of mine, Alice and Bob, enrolled in two different Ph.D. programs, have been collaborating in a research project and writing a paper together.  They have submitted the abstract to a certain conference and hope to publish the paper in the future (the conference allows this).  Alice, expecting to graduate sooner than Bob will, asked Bob by email if she could include the paper into her "staple" dissertation.  Bob is completely fine with that, but he is confused at the same time, since her email was lengthy for the seemingly simple favor.  He thinks that perhaps the favor would have consequences according to some customs in the academia; he is worried that the decision might make it impossible to use the paper as part of his own dissertation.
Question: Can a single co-authored paper be part of two stapled dissertations (by two people)?
(Alice is in the Netherlands, and Bob is in the U.S.  They both are enrolled in interdisciplinary programs, but the closest fields include mathematics and theoretical computer science.)

I think both Alice and Bob should consult the relevant authorities at their institutions. What is and what is not allowed in staple dissertations is (at least in the U.S.) governed by the university's rules.

Bob should make sure Alice is not really asking if she can be first author.

Every university should have guidelines around how publications can be incorporated into a PhD thesis. The correct advice (as @Andreas notes) is to consult these guidelines. Furthermore, it seems that PhD by publication is becoming more popular and guidelines are evolving.
I'm familiar with various models of "PhD by publication". At my institution in Australia, the PhD student is expected to be first author on any major publication that forms part of a PhD by publication submission. They also need to attach a form for each publication outlining their contribution and the contribution of the other authors. The form needs to be signed by the other authors. Non-first-author publications can be included but they are intended more as supplementary contributions. Exactly what this means is a little open to interpretation.
By way of a concrete example, here is an example of such a policy (the policy at your university may differ):

It is expected that the student will be the first author on the papers, as per 1 above; the number of co-authors is limitless. Students may be second or later authors on additional papers.

Thus, to answer your specific question, at my institution, a paper could be included in more than one PhD. However, the student who is first author would have a stronger inherent case for it being seen as an integral part of their thesis. Furthermore, the contributions of all authors would have to be explained.
You may want to consider practical alternatives such as thinking about how the work could form two papers where you each drive one paper as reflected in being first-author on that paper.

And all bets are off for co-first author papers.

Depends on the (formal) rules of the university in question. At my University, rules state clearly that every PhD candidate needs at least one SCI indexed paper, authored as first author (!) to be eligible to submit his thesis, so the scenario you describes would not fly, only the author who is first, would be able to submit the thesis, based on that paper.
For a "stapled" dissertations, at my Uni, all papers (usually no less than three SCI indexed journal papers) have to be authored by the thesis author as the first author. Situation is further complicated by the fact that they are at different universities, so Bob should really take care that he won't slam shut his own door to dissertation by allowing incorporation of his paper into someone other's thesis (in case Bob is the first author).
Consider the following scenario which may end disastrously for Bob: Alice submits her dissertation with Bob's (first-authored) paper and she is granted PhD, based on her Uni rules. Later, Bob tries to do the same, but is rebuffed by the thesis examiner, who finds the paper to be already part of some other dissertation, and the Bob's uni rules do not allow for that...

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Formatting citations for a research statement in a job application
I am applying for a job (a North American TT job in mathematics) with a requirement of a 1-page research statement.  There is no clear direction whether the references are counted toward the limit.
Since the limit is so tight, I am inclined to do what is suggested in an answer to a previous question on page limits in a grant application: to use a feature of word-processing software (or in my case PDF viewers) displays pop-ups with bibliography information.
Obviously, that doesn't work if the hiring committee prints my submission, but there is no indication whether that will be the case.  I don't know whether their seeing that there are references invisible due to the technology they're using hurts my application, either.
Of the following, what is the best I can do?

Assume that the page count does not apply to the references, and produce a research statement with a one-page body and extra pages for references
Use PDF annotations for the bibliography in a 1-page research statement
Work hard to produce a one-page research statement with printed bibliography (Ideally I'd like to avoid this)

#1 seems the most likely to me, but there's a natural option #4: contact the search committee chair and ask for clarification.

I would just make the "citations" as brief as possible without detail: "Following the work of Fluffy and Buffy [1992] I've shown that optimization of ... This work continues.".
End the statement with "Full citations provided on request". If the readers are familiar with the authors named then all is well. If they need more they can ask. Rather than the authors, you could substitute the title of a paper.
Also, it might be enough to specify a subfield or even that you work in a subfield of a specific subfield.
Spend the words on that page to detail your own work, rather than that of others, briefly saying that it is extensions of earlier work so that plagiarism doesn't become an issue.

One-page limits are there to make life easier for the people reading applications and prevent them from feeling compelled to read longer applications, as well as setting a clear guideline for applicants so there is not a tension between people who try to be kind to the readers by writing short and people who try to demonstrate the deepest research statement by writing long.
I would recommend against trying to circumvent this sort of limit in any way. I don't think a research statement should be heavy on references; use them where necessary and stick to one page.

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


text:
Applying for the virtually similar position, but it involves interaction with existing faculty
There are many questions here on applying for the same position again, but my situation is a bit interesting.
I applied for a Lecturer position in the UK half a year ago, and I was not even shortlisted (or "longlisted").  Now a call virtually the same as before has been announced.
I am thinking of re-applying following the general advice here (in addition to me being desperate and having had a publication in the top venue).  The advertisement encourages the applicants to informally write to existing faculty (one from each subdiscipline).  Last time, the idea was that each representative of the subdiscipline would select an applicant (or more?) before they are brought to the department-wide committee.
Now I feel extremely awkward about writing to the contact of my area,  the same person as before.  I was not deemed even good enough last time, and I do not want to appear that I waste his time.  At the same time, I might want to solicit his help in improving my application.
How should I contact this person?

First, the previous posting is irrelevant. You applied with your then-CV, and were not even interviewed. Without inside information on the process you can only speculate on why, and such speculation is where your self-doubt is coming in. Perhaps they wanted an expert in X, and you are seen as being an expert in Y. If they hired an expert in X, well, they are no longer looking for an expert in X, so the reason for not being interviewed last time no longer applies. If they hired nobody, those that made the short list came up short (you don't know why, speculating is fruitless). This is a new search.
Second, if the posting says you should contact a range of people in the department, well, their people will be expecting to be contacted. So contact them about the position. Quite likely they will be open about areas of expertise they are looking for in this search. Perhaps they will remember your application from before, but again this is a new search with new goals. If your main contact from before does remember you, then it would be reasonable to ask if you fall in their main search area or not.
Either way, you should apply with your current CV, and talk to people across the subdisciplines as requested.

Exactly. Don't read entrails, that's not the applicants job.

@CaptainEmacs "I will consult the bones. The bones tell me... nothing"

At least with a Magic 8-Ball you always get an answer, even if it doesn't help...

@JonCuster "I see great opportunities in your next decision." "Important events are looming ahead." "You are uncertain about the future, but it will develop as it has to."

@DanielHatton or, by the time HR have got their hands on the job adverts, they've become so vague that they all sound the same. I've certainly seen that with postdoc positions in the UK

@DanielHatton - fair enough, but the result is the same - if all the previous short list candidates failed to get enough support then not being short listed before has no bearing. I added a bit to cover that.

The applicant pool changes each time, so just because you were not the preferred applicant last time (and maybe not even close) does not mean you will not be the preferred applicant this time.  In particular, bear in mind that they would have already selected their best applicant last time so this person is now probably out of the pool of applicants.  I recommend you follow the instructions to contact relevant faculty and apply again --- you've got to be in it to win it.

Apply again. Contact the person again. Not only are you a different applicant with your new publication, but your competition is also different. Who knows if Dr. Wonderful applied last year and got the job, but turned out to be a nutcase. They now swear to give the job to a different type of applicant, and ta-da, your now-perfect CV shows up in their inbox. You gotta throw a line for the fish to bite.

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


text:
Introducing myself to researchers from my dream school
I am applying to a PhD program in a few weeks, and I am also going to give a presentation at an upcoming international academic conference. I heard that a group of researchers from my dream school is also going to present their work at the conference, and at least one of the researchers might be a member of the admissions panel. I would like to introduce myself to them, but I don't want them to think that I am trying to win their favor just to increase my chances of getting accepted.
I recently had an informal Skype meeting with a potential PhD advisor, and she agreed to supervise my research if I get officially accepted. She does not belong to the research group and she is probably not attending the conference.
Could you give me some advice on how to talk to them in an ethical and appropriate way? Would it be fine to let them know that one professor is already willing to accept me to their program? (The conference will take place before the deadline of the application.)
[EDIT]
Thank you @ReinstateMonica for your answer. As (s)he pointed out, there was inconsistency in what I wrote. My potential advisor is willing to take me in, but she is not the one who will make the final admission decision. (My understanding is that my application will be assessed by her and one or more other professors.)

That is called networking and it is about getting to know people and people getting to know you. It will increase your chances and that's exactly the point.
There is absolutely nothing wrong, immoral, or illegal with it, by the way, it is a necessary skill for all professional careers. Conferences usually have intermissions for that exact purpose, with snacks, refreshments, etc.
The "standard" way of doing that would be to walk over, politely introduce yourself (don't go all formal), from which school you are and briefly, very briefly, what you are working on. Don't be pushy, don't force the conversation. It is easier if a common acquaintance introduces you (for instance, another researcher that knows you and them). Bonus points if you are familiar with their work/field.
It's easier after they see your presentation, but that's not entirely necessary. The most 'busy' researchers don't usually attend the whole conference, so don't waste chances.
More importantly: forget dream, don't be starstruck. They are just people, it is a school, just like countless others. Something I saw people do wrong: don't get stuck talking shop, especially if you have more time (as in the formal dinner some conferences have). Again, professors/researchers are people, they do more with their lives than just research and certainly have some other interests.

I would add: attend their presentation if it isn't at the same time as yours, and afterwards or when you spot them at a reception or in the lobby you can say that you thought it was interesting.

@FábioDias Thank you for your advice. May I ask you a follow-up question? If I introduce myself to them (or any other conference attendees) saying that I am a second-year master's student, they might ask me about my future academic plans. In that case, would it be fine to let them know I want to apply to their PhD program, or should I just say I still don't know where to pursue my doctoral studies? This is the first time I attend an academic conference so any advice is highly appreciated.

The truth is usually a good policy: you can/should say you applied to their school, even that you contacted professor X that agreed to supervise you, but you also applied to Y and Z (if true). Don't overthink it, and don't be pushy, that's all.

Would it be fine to let them know that one professor is already willing to accept me to their program?

I see no ethical issue with your general desire to network with potential advisors and make a good impression.  However, be very careful that you do not misrepresent what you have been told by that professor.  In your previous sentence you say that "she agreed to supervise my research if I get officially accepted".  That is not the same thing as saying she is willing to accept you into the program.  Now, maybe you did not describe what she said properly the first time, but if you are changing the content like this, it may mean that you are not exactly clear on what she actually represented to you, and you should be very careful in recounting it to others.
There are certainly some ethical issues here, but the main practical issue is not to piss-off your potential advisors by misrepresenting conversations you have had with them.  If you go to other staff and tell them that this professor has promised to accept you to the program, they will then go and ask that professor, and that professor will say, "No, that is not what I said", and then she will probably get the shits with you.  That is just the kind of thing that could sink a promising PhD application.
So, be careful when you describe any assurance given to you by a potential supervisor --- make sure you do not accidentally misrepresent what you were promised.


text:
How to regrade an exam that was too difficult?
Our multiple choice exam was clearly too difficult.

N questions.
N + 10 total duration (in minutes).
All questions have the same value (100 / N).
Wrong answers have a penalty of 25% (25 / N).
Only one correct answer per question.

What strategies do you recommend to consider reviewing the grades?
What we though of:

Remove the penalty for wrong answers.
For each student, increase the value of each correct answer.
Add X (e.g. 10 points) to each final result.
Add X% (e.g. 10%) to each final result.
Remove the questions with worst performance.

We can combine options and each one has advantages and drawbacks. Note that we use absolute grading (not grading on the curve).
What is your experience?
Follow-up: Thank you all for the feedback. In the end, we decided to review each question. In some cases (four in total), we decided to consider as correct some of the incorrect options that were not 100% clear (and had a significant number of students choosing them). Plus, we added a bonus of +1 points to all students. We kept the penalty for wrong answers since it would be unfair to remove it.

Please add more detail. Was the duration the problem (did many students not have enough time to finish?) (See What can a professor do about an exam that was too long for the allotted time, after the students have completed it? if so.)  Were there specific questions that many students got wrong, suggesting that the question may have been unclear? Were there specific topics that students seemed to have a weaker grasp on? Something else that gives you insight into what went wrong?

Just for clarification: Is "Add 10%" supposed to be absolute or relative? That is, do you mean "60% is turned into 70%" or "60% is turned into 66%"?

The only thing that's fair to everybody is removing the questions nobody answered correctly. So that should be the first thing to do. From there on it depends ....

@Uwe "Add 10%" is relative. 60% would be 66%.

@Karl That would be a good option but there are no questions with all answers wrong. All questions have at least one correct answer.

Then the exam can't have been so hard after all. ;-)

Are there questions where there are no more correct answers than would be expected by random chance?

I have no idea what "we use absolute grading (not grading on the curve)" means when one of the options is to add 10% to everyone's grade.

To the follow-up: how is giving bonus points any different from curving?

There isn't enough information here to really give good advice. You suggest the exam was too difficult. It may also be that it was invalid.  It may be that some of the questions were stated in such a way as to be misleading. There are measures of the validity of such exams, by the way. They measure the validity of a question by the proportion of students who answered it incorrectly compared to how those same students did overall. Some questions are negatively correlated with overall performance.
Another issue is what your institution permits. Some have very strict rules about this. They are IMO unwarranted and counterproductive, but they may bind you.
But absent such rules, you should care more about fairness than you do about numbers. To achieve fairness you may need to drop the exam or give an alternate. You may even want to rethink your overall grading scheme.
One simple modification overall is to give course grades based on the, say, 8 best of 10 assignments/exams/whatever. Then the question of a poorly designed quiz never arises. Another way is to have quizzes every day so that no individual quiz is determinative of much of anything.
However, some of the things that you might try will leave some students unsatisfied; especially the best students who worked the hardest. You can be kind to the strugglers, but not at the expense of the superstars. The situation is worst if the system itself puts the students in competition with one another for grades. Strict curve grading is IMO immoral as it makes it into a zero sum game where I can only advance at someone else's expense. If the system doesn't permit top marks for everyone (assuming it is deserved) then it is fatally flawed.
Your purpose, I hope, is teaching, not grading. Use the exam as a teaching moment. Even have a class discussion about the questions that caused difficulty. Try to learn why people did poorly. Even permit different students to have different sorts of adjustments as needed.
I used to have fairly strict rules about such things, but the understanding was always "This is the standard and you will do no worse than X if you do Y". And I always tried to make it an advantage to learn something even if was after the deadline or the exam. Make people want to learn, not just want to maximize points.

Thank you for your advice. I fully agree with "fairness is the most important issue now". We are quite confident that the exam hadn't design issues. Some of the questions were problematic (i.e. hard to understand, required very specific knowledge, etc). But removing them is not fair for some students.

My goal was to discuss 'when everything fails and you have no alternatives, what is the fairest way to re-grade the exam'?

@AnonymousProfessor when everything fails implies the exam instrument itself is worthless (e.g., you gave your Arabic language class a test on the Mandarin language).  You should discard it and create a new one.

You're overanalyzing this.  You just need to curve the results.  Decide what you think was an A performance (perhaps a really low score if the exam was that tough) and what was a C and then interpolate.  Problem solved.

Thanks but we use absolute grading (not grading on the curve), thus this is not possible.

That was dumb.  Now you know why most instructors don't do that.  But you should have mentioned that constraint in your question.

To be fair, OP is talking about giving everyone free points because the average exam score was low -- thus, the class is "effectively" curved after all

Why call it 'dumb'? Absolute grading is the norm here. And while both approaches have advantages and drawbacks, that it not the issue being discussed here.

If your university/department has a policy of absolute grading, I suspect the only course of action consistent with that policy is to drop the exam entirely, or perhaps to make the next exam significantly easier. (Question 1. Spell the word “bacon”.)

What universities have policies requiring absolute grading?  I suppose it's possible there are places where this is the common, but required by "policy"?  Academia is a place where instructors usually get wide latitude to conduct their classes any way they like,  So, I find this claim of "policy" to be pretty suspect.

@AnonymousProfessor  Absolute grading is a dumb policy for exactly the reason you observed:  There are a lot more students than instructors so it's lot more likely that one class will have the same mix of abilities and performance as the the next than that instructors will always create equally difficult exams.  It's basic statistical sampling theory.

What we though of:

(1) Remove the penalty for wrong answers.
(2) For each student, increase the value of each correct answer.
(3) Add X (e.g. 10 points) to each final result.
(4) Add X% (e.g. 10%) to each final result.
(5) Remove the questions with worst performance.

In my view, you must avoid any alteration that changes the relative value of questions or answers from the marks listed on the exam.  This rules out options (1), (2) and (5) in the above list.  If you were to use any of these options, it would disadvantage students who did well on the questions whose relative marks are reduced, or students who declined to answer a question based on the relative penalty for a wrong answer compared to a correct answer.  Such alterations are unfair to those students and would be grounds for legitimate complaint and appeal of marks.
The only fair way to "regrade" an exam that was excessively difficult is to scale all the marks up with a simple positive affine scaling of the marks.  This could entail a flat increase in the mark of each student, or a percentage increase, or any transformation of marks according to a positive affine function.  This method of scaling preserves the relative value of all questions and answers in the exam, and preserves the relative marks of the students.

"This could entail a flat increase in the mark of each student, or a percentage increase"  Well, no.  A linear scaling is always proportional.  A "flat increase" is a violation of linearity.  I suspect you meant to recommend an affine transformation (y=mx+b) not a linear one (y=cx).

I'm not sure why the scaling needs to be linear (or affine).

Agree. Students will have strategized the use of their resources to meet the stated marking scheme. What OP describes is already sub-optimal: very hard exams tend to penalize students who know the material but aren't good at doing this strategizing. But changing the stated marking scheme after the fact also penalizes those who did do a good job strategizing. Concrete example: students who didn't answer questions to avoid the wrong-answer penalty will be enraged if you don't impose such a penalty -- they could have gotten "free points" by just guessing randomly, but you misled them about this.

If you simply reduce the total points, say grade as a percentage of 80 rather than out of 100, it essentially converts whatever questions they want into a potential 20 bonus points. Personally I like this better than free points, as it increasingly rewards students that do better, rather than being a freebie for all which compresses the scores together.
Dropping questions completely is a bad idea as others noted. But you can convert them to bonus questions. If questions are ambiguous though, you have little choice but to accept multiple answers. That's a separate issue.
As for my experience, if you seem to be too flexible on grading, you may encourage a lot of begging and whining. Pick how you want to curve them and present this as the law.

+1 for the last paragraph in particular: students react well to free points, even though linear transformations rarely affect outcomes in classes that are curved (or effectively curved), but react poorly to uncertainty

As a clarification: Were unanswered questions exempt  from the penalty? If so, it becomes unfair to remove the penalty, as people leaving blank questions might be a conscient choice.
Removing questions with worst performance might also be unfair to students who actually knew how to answer them, unless these questions were really ambiguous ir flawed (such that there isn't actually a right answer).
The mathematically complex, but for all other aspects lazy method is to curve all grades.
You compute the mean grade (let's say 30) and their standard deviation (let's say 10). Then you pick a new mean and a new deviation that suits your taste (lets say 55 and 15). I.e. pick higher mean to have more students passing, pick higher deviation to have more discrepancy between notes.
For each student (start with the lowest grade), re-compute the grade by matching a gaussian cumulative distribution function, in excel see this reference, the new grade would be given by:
NORM.INV( NORMDIST(old_grade,30,10,True), 55,  15)

Where I've already replaced the numbers with my example. Or without replacement:
NORM.INV( NORMDIST(old_grade,old_mean,old_deviation,True), new_mean,  new_deviation)

Check if the lowest grade was increased or decreased by this process. You don't want it to decrease.
The idea of this method is that any test can be as difficult or as easy as the professor wants it to  be (if the professor is good enough in designing tests). Hence, it's like you wanted students to get low grades on the test, but marked them with average grades in the end. The ranking of grades remains the same. You can fail a given percentage of the students if you want (let's say you knew that getting a 30 was difficult, but a student who got 10 actually knew nothing), you can also let everyone get a passing grade.
I strongly suggest not to abuse this system, and most of all not to use it to lower student's grades. Do it only if a test was very poorly designed.

Yes, unanswered questions are exempt from the penalty. Thus, I agree that it wouldn't be fair to all students to remove it.

In general, any change made to the grading system would affect some people positively and others negatively. Usually, I simulate all the ideas before committing to a new grading scheme. Although, in case of multiple choice exams, I would be more cautious as some of your exams rules influence how people answer questions (e.g., when I was a student, to avoid the penalty I usually refrained from answering questions, which I was unsure about their correct answer). If I was in your shoes, I would consider the following options (sorted by my preference):

Give an optional alternate exam for those who are not satisfied with their grade (this would be forbidden in some cases, in particular for the case of the final exam).
Give parts of this exam weight to a future one.

"any change made to the grading system would affect some people positively and others negatively" - although this may be true for a zero-sum game where students are viewed as in competition with each other, it would also be straightforward to assign a grade max(MethodA, MethodB, MethodC) for each grading scheme, which would be especially appropriate if some questions are excluded from some exams but other students got them correct.

@bryan-krause: I don't see the situation as a zero-sum game. Let's assume that the instructor decides to go with omitting some of the hardest questions (based on the number of wrong answers). In this case, students who have put time and effort into those questions and got them right, would not benefit and even suffer from it. Regarding your suggestion, I agree as it could solve the problem I mentioned.

If we give X extra points to all students, it doesn't seem to affect negatively any of them.

@Ehsan: In some environments, GPA means nothing and class rank is everything.  Those are always zero-sum games no matter how careful you are with grade transformations.


text:
Should I join a different group
I am in my 4rth year and finished my candidacy recently. I am very interested in my research and it is going forward at a decent pace. However, my advisor is giving me some trouble.
He is usually absent at the weekly research meetings which along with me includes a post-doc, a graduate student in his 6th year, and an associate professor from a different university. Even in the meetings he attends he hardly gives any suggestions or talks about any new ideas. He even fails to respond to some emails that I send asking him questions or general help.
I previously thought all this might be because he is the head of the experiment that we are working on, so he has little time to spare. But, now that I finished my candidacy I expect him to get more involved in my research. It's been a month since my candidacy and that has not been the case.
I think it is not too late for me to change gears and join a different group in the same field. Is this a fair thing to do? What other things should I consider before I confirm to switch.

No one here can make the decision for you, of course, and we have only a little information on which to give any advice. So, you need to answer the top line question yourself with the knowledge you have and your other desires and constraints.
However, there are some things you should consider. I worry that you will have a set back if you change and it will probably add to your total time. You may consider that worthwhile or not.
But you aren't necessarily alone in your research even if your nominal advisor gives you little help. Some people can do the work with no advice at all and they wind up teaching their advisor in the research at hand. You may be such a student or not. What you need is final approval of your work from your advisor, but that may be enough, provided that you also get good letters of recommendation.
But the other members of your group are probably also available to give you advice if you need it. They are likely in the same position with this advisor/leader that you are and are having to struggle along. Make it a group struggle, perhaps.
But, if you make decisions independent of your advisor, with advice and help from your group, try to get your advisor to agree that you are making good decisions. If you can get at least that much, then you may be able to continue without any setback.
One way to get buy-in from the advisor on joint decisions of the other members is to send, say, weekly updates on decisions made and progress achieved. The advisor is kept in the loop and can redirect as needed. This is most useful if everyone in the group is working on the same task generally.
But the situation is complex. Only you know it best.

You gave a good suggestion. I will ask my group, so that we can collectively ask my advisor to get more involved.

Yes, you can ask that. Best if your most senior member does the asking. But you can also work together even if the advisor can't comply with your wish.


text:
How do I choose research project topics for the project requirements in graduate classes?
Most graduate classes include a research project component in the grading scheme. I am taking such a class now and I need to complete a research project.
The instructor has presented us with 4-5 areas of applicability of the course material and asked that we choose our topics. We have to do a research project in the range of 75 hours and write a paper on the findings.
This is the first time I am taking a course such as this. I like the idea and I want to build my research skills; the challenge I am not clear at all on how I should best approach this task. The course is an introductory course and as such I am not familiar at all with the material. The research is about addressing some engineering problem and it needs to have some originality but can be based off of other work.
That is the extent of the information the instructor was able to give me and also said that his time is limited and as such I cannot rely on him for help with this part.
This is fine, but I need to understand how to go about finding a problem, make sure it's a problem I can solve, and make sure it's going to be in the 75 hours of effort ballpark in a field I am not familiar with.
What's my strategy here? How could I possibly ensure these aspects?

What are the specific requirements for the project? Do you have to write a paper? Is there a presentation involved?

There is no presentation involved. A paper in IEEE format will summarize the project. As to the other requirements, there are none. The description of the project is very open-ended: students should look at a particular practical problem in an engineered system and approach it using tools from game theory.

Much of your approach will depend on the requirements for this specific project, but there are some generic guidelines that one should follow when beginning a new research project.

You should choose something interesting to you. This seems obvious, but some people fall into the trap of choosing what seems easier or less work and end up losing motivation because they do not enjoy what they are researching. If your instructor gave you 5 areas of applicability to choose from, the first thing to do is find what interests you most. I would strongly caution you against picking something that seems like the quickest option just because you have a time limit.
Become familiar with the area. If all of this material is new to you, do some cursory research wherever you can find it (all the way from a reputable book to Wikipedia). You do not need to become an expert for this class project (since it’s not your thesis), but you need to have a working knowledge and basic familiarity with the topics.
Read/write a literature review. A literature review will tell you what work has been done in a research area. You should read literature reviews that have already been written, but a good researcher will write their own too (even if it is just a smaller section in the paper). By assessing the work being done in your specific area, you will be able to narrow your topic and find gaps in the current research where you can add your own. This is one of the most critical steps to conducting new research. Note: This part of your research should focus on peer-reviewed material (like books and journal articles), not the aforementioned cursory material.
Narrow your topic as much as possible. If it seems daunting to become an “expert” in your area, you are probably thinking too broadly. Your instructor is not expecting earth-shattering research, so do not worry about your contribution being small.

If you follow these guidelines, you should naturally be able to find a problem to work with that is within your skill level, is interesting to you, and meets the requirements for the course. It is difficult to assess how many hours of work this would take, but if the instructor has not indicated this otherwise, I would use the time as a guideline for how detailed your project should be.


text:
Slides for a brief presentation at a PhD Interview
I am soon attending a PhD Interview (Condensed matter Theory). The interview is divided in two steps: a first interview with a selection comitee, where I have to prepeare a presentation 6 minutes long, and a second, 1.30 hours long interview with possible PIs.
The short (6' - 5 slides) presentation is supposed to deal with:

Academic Background
Previous Research Experience
Presentation of Master Project/Thesis
Motivations for this application
Career goals in your future

Slides are explicitly required.
My questions are:

I do not feel confident prepearing a slide on "Motivations for pursuing a PhD" or even future goals. I have very strong reasons, but writing those down seem... childish/stupid to me. Should I just not make slides about those things, but nevertheless talk about them? (The field use a very flexible framework that can be applied to many other problems. This means that even if I focus on one problem I can always talk about much more... I was a RA for the last 6 months and lived with other PhD students, so I know a bit already what it is like...)
I want to do 1 slide on my B.Sc. Thesis and one on my M.Sc. thesis. Of course I will be briefly presenting the kind of work I did, and tools I used, but what should I put along a short list in the slide? The fancy graphic from my thesis that I'll have no time to explain? The hamiltonian that I was studying? Or a nice drawing giving a divulgative, simplistic picture of the process I was studying? Or make them smaller and all of those 3? (they would fit)

About 2.: Since I will have almost no time to explain much about the details of my previous work, intuition tells me I would be better dropping drawings/graphs out. Yet, since I am trying to "sell myself" to the comitee, those things might be fancy and nice to add.
Any suggestion would be very welcome.

If asked for specific things by people who can do something for you, provide those specific things in a way that makes them identifiable as such. You were given five slide headings; use them!

1) Remember working on a PhD is a commitment and there will be times when you will want to give up so the question is "What will keep you going?"
Motivation is a key factor in whether or not we stick to a task. This is the reason why they are asking you for this slide in particular. As an interviewer, I would like to know first if your motivation is intrinsic or extrinsic and then what specifically moves you to progress through a task or pursue this field.
2) Presenting in front of an audience when "something is at stake" can be nerve-racking. Your slides should be a way to quickly remind you what you need to discuss in case you block out. However, for the viewer the slides must be engaging and informative but not overwhelming. Even your thesis slides don't need to be overly technical because the interviewers are interested in whether you can present your findings to both technical and non-technical audiences, alike. I would recommend providing a high level overview first sprinkled with some technical terms but no details then as time permits elaborate increasing the technical level and vocabulary as you progress.

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


text:
Colleague claiming first co-autorhip of my work
Some time ago I started my Ph.D. and my project was to attempt again to investigate a problem that a colleague (a senior Ph.D.) had failed to investigate because he lacked numerical/coding skills to attack the problem. Essentially our advisor put me to work on a line of research that senior phd had abandoned, and I started from his (few) old results, spent 9 months writing code and running the simulations, and finally obtained some interesting results. Senior PhD, though he mostly contributed with discussions and one plot, casually claimed co-first-authorhip by asking to our advisor when I was not there, but the request was refused.
For the last 6 months we worked on a natural continuation of the previous research. Senior phd insisted to collaborate intensely at the beginning and for the first month we surely did, but later he was caught by other things (writing 2 other papers, writing the PhD dissertation..) and I continued my work alone with a PostDoc. SeniorPhd always attended discussions.
It is now time to start writing the paper, and he said he would write it, as he has alredy written part of those results in his dissertation and because he writes faster than me (so we can publish before other groups) . I politely refused during the meeting, so he offered to co-write the results with me.
Our advisor ignored the issues and pushed to move onto other topics.
After that meeting, senior Ph.D. started to ask me to explain a few things that he still did not get about the method, and I explained him. He then proceeded to make a few very quick simulations to produce the first 2 figures of the paper and presented those to the PostDoc a few hours after I was done explaining him.
I felt as if he is trying to force himself as first author/coauthor by simply starting to write a research in which he did not do the majority of the work.
All the data is in a shared drive, so in principle, he could write everything up.
How can I confront the issue without looking like an asshole who refuses to be helped by a very kind collegue?

get it off the shared drive quickly... he can't borrow / steal if it is not there, that should give you time to get this sorted.... Or password all the files...

First, I know the struggle is real. One of my three wishes would certainly be for us to somehow separate career and prestige from the collective pursuit of knowledge.
There's an expression I recall from redneck NASCAR culture that seems relevant here: "Rubbing is racing." There will always be some pushing and shoving concerning who did what, particularly as scholars are trying to jump from fledgling academics to something tenured. If it's a little irritating, I'd just keep pursuing knowledge.
If it's more than a little and you feel as though you are not being treated fairly, then I encourage you to not care about how others perceive your bringing it up. The higher we climb, the less accurately we seem to predict how supervisors will respond. So why worry about that? If he's getting undue credit, speak up; if he kind of deserves some credit, why split hairs?


text:
How I do politely indicate that I am expecting my name to be added to the paper
I am composing this question on behalf of someone but as a first person. I am a postdoc at a top university in the US. I had recently been requested by my PI to help with setting up experiments and getting data for the latter part of a research that was to be submitted as a paper.
I spent 3 months aggressively working on it along side my own work towards other projects. The first author went ahead and submitted incomplete work without notifying any of us and without my name in it.
I had, thereafter, spoken to my PI and it looks like he is defensive of her submitting the paper because 'she was in stress and had to graduate. Not in the right frame of mind.' Between the two of us he said that he's going to insist on adding my name when they submit the revision (the paper already, as I expected, has request for data/corrections).
EDIT - I have indications that he is giving excuses and is currently passing the buck/lying to get the work done. Personally I have had no papers since I started this postdoc and I am afraid if I sound reluctant the PI will take away my work in my projects. This stresses me, but I also am not getting credit for where I worked. This is like a lose-lose situation for me.
The first author agrees to send the paper and review comments but doesn't. They expect real time work as though this is my only project. I am happy to spend time with some urgency if I at least get my recognition in the paper.
How do I word my emails or communications or speak to them and politely, yet clearly establish that this work from me has to be recognized in the form of addition to the paper?

Sounds too much like your PI is too weak - and you will do the work for nothing.

If there's more work needed from you to complete the revisions, you can insist that the authorship issue be resolved before you work on it.

I'm unclear about whether there is now more work that they're expecting you to do for this paper? If so, that is your only negotiating leverage. You should use it.

If the situation is as you indicate and the original manuscript was submitted without the consent of all authors, then you have a case with the editor, although you should do your utmost to resolve this first with the thesis director.

From what you say, the PI is on board with adding your name. Work with and through him to get it done. Presumably he has some authority.
But you may need to be careful with personal issues if the first author is under a lot of stress. That isn't a reason to back off, but just to handle it gently if possible. What is right is right. But let the PI say that.

Thanks @Buffy - to be clear (and I will edit my post to make it clear) that was a verbal communication between PI and me. I have a feeling he is soft and is not asserting. I don't see the PI stepping in and clarifying confusion when needed.
To me there are indications that this is just their (PI) way of lying to get work done. To my credit I did put the work in but it was not recognized.

Maybe you need to arrange a face-to-face with everyone present.

I thought about that, but how do I make sure I am asserting without sounding rude? I am looking for what to say/write and how to address the individuals. In a normal world it is fair to expect to be compensated appropriately for work but if I say it that way, won't it sound dramatic? Not sure if I made sense.

In the end you will need to be able to trust the PI. You could try to firm up their support before the all-hands meeting. Make sure he agrees. You also need to consider whether it is necessary to maintain a good relationship to this PI in the future. But the bottom line is "we worked together, we should succeed together".

I had recently been requested by my PI to help with setting up experiments and getting data for the latter part of a research that was to be submitted as a paper.  I spent 3 months aggressively working on it along side my own work towards other projects.  ...  I had, thereafter, spoken to my PI...

Oops --- you have made the rookie mistake of beginning work on a research project prior to discussing authorship with the leader of the research group.  That kind of mistake always has the potential to blow up in your face like this.  There are a few things you should do here:

Begin by looking up documentary standards on academic authorship.  There are a few of these floating around, and they give general principles for when a person should (or should not) be included as a co-author on a research paper.
Have a think about how far you are willing to take this matter in the event that the PI is unwilling to back you up.  If you decide you want to do so, you can make a complaint within your university, seeking for a review of the conduct of the PI and the other researcher, and seeking to be added as a co-author to the paper.  You could also write to the journal if you wishes, and claim that you are a co-author of the paper.  These things are obviously escalations to a more formal mechanism of complaint, so you will need to consider whether you want to do those things, or whether you are willing to just lose out on authorship.
Armed with the above knowledge and consideration, have another talk to your PI, and the other researcher, about authorship of the paper.  Remind the PI that he had promised to insist on your addition to the paper when the revisions came in.  If you are willing to escalate the matter to a university complaint, or to a complaint to the journal, let them know that this is your next step, and tell them that you would like to resolve the matter amicably without resort to a formal complaint.  Try your best to be as amicable as you can, but be firm about what you expect, and your next steps if you are not included as a co-author.
Whatever the outcome of the present dispute, most importantly, resolve never to get yourself into this situation again.  Whenever you are invited to work on a research project, the first thing you should do ---before starting work on the project--- is to have a conversation with the other researchers about expectations for authorship, and make a clear agreement on what work you will do, and whether you will be recognised as a co-author on the paper.  An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.


text:
The Zentralblatt asked me to review a worthless paper, what to do?
I am an amateur mathematician who at age 64 finally became published in January.  As a result, review requests started coming in.
The first two were from two different journals.  Both papers were well within my subject area so I accepted.  I spent a bunch of time carefully reviewing each and gave the authors extensive feedback (this was explicitly acknowledged in both papers).  After multiple revisions (in each case), I recommended both papers be published.
The third request was from zbMath about a month ago.  Not familiar enough with the subject, I declined.
The fourth request was from zbMath several days ago.  I could tell right away this paper would be easy to understand, so I accepted.
When I looked closer however, I discovered it's too easy to understand!  It's like a grade school homework assignment!  It has no research value whatsoever.  It mystifies me how it ever made it into a Springer publication (it's a chapter in the 2023 book Advances in Topology and Their Interdisciplinary Applications).
Should I contact zbMath to express my opinion it doesn't deserve a review, or instead just move forward and write a very scathing one?  I'm leaning towards the latter option because it seems like a golden opportunity: when will I ever see a paper this bad again?

Somewhat relevant is How to write a good MathSciNet review? (mathoverflow). See also "MR Folklore: Unflattering Reviews" on p. 332 of Chinese Acrobatics, an Old-Time Brewery, and the “Much Needed Gap”: The Life of Mathematical Reviews by Allyn Jackson [Notices of the American Mathematical Society 44 #3, March 1997, pp. 330-337].

I skimmed the book's table of contents and none of the titles suggest "grade school homework". Not all papers make a major contribution: the vast majority of papers make small incremental advancements in the field. Publications such as reviews, surveys, tutorials and opinion papers don't make any advancement and present a topic in an easy-to-understand manner. As an amateur, it sounds like your inexperience, and "finally becoming published" is getting to your head and causing unrealistic expectations.

Although https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24325/ is about Math Reviews rather than Zentralblatt, it might still be useful here.

@user71659 The title is a con job. For example "T_0" appears in it (and several theorems) without ever being used once in a proof.

There is far far too much mathematical detail here. Please make this a generalizable question

I wonder why you assume that chapters in Springer books undergo a peer review process? This is not my general experience.

@JFabianMeier if the paper didn't undergo a peer review process then the authors thanking the "anonymous reviewers for their useful comments" was a lie (I wouldn't put it past them), but the book does name an editor (Santanu Acharjee) who presumably doesn't just rubber stamp.  I wasn't even aware collections like this exist.  I thought they were always from conferences.

Maybe the point of the chapter was not the math, but the "Interdisciplinary Application" of it.

@mathematrucker I know conferences from my personal experience in which every speaker was allowed to publish something in the resulting Springer book. There may be some kind of "review" by the editors and their staff in which they suggest improvements, but without the possibility to reject the paper.

In looking at the math detail you gave in an earlier edit (an edit I only just now realized existed), maybe you could include something like the following: It is unclear how the results apply to [insert whatever other subject the results are supposed to have a connection with], but the theorem statements could usefully serve as "prove or give a counterexample" exercises early in a general topology course in which students are also asked to identify any unnecessary assumptions (if they exist) in those cases where the theorem statements are true.

@GEdgar thanks, I know who you are and appreciate your feedback.  I thought of that possibility and read some of Koblitz's work for guidance.  The math in this paper is at least math, unlike what the 80s NAS controversy was about, but the inferiority of this content looks very similar to me.

@DaveLRenfro yes the theorems do have that one redeeming quality.  Errors in textbooks can make good exercises to spot too.  My being asked to review such a paper has presented me with a sort of exercise that I hope to learn from.  The reason I'm devoting so much time to it is I like to do things right.

with a sort of exercise that I hope to learn from --- This is the case for many papers I have by someone whose papers I once described as follows: [X]'s papers tend to be short, not very deep, often appear in fairly obscure journals, are quite weak in informing the reader of related work, and tend to be overly pedantic. Nonetheless, many of them in my opinion would serve quite well as advanced undergraduate or beginning graduate student seminar topics. Excerpt from this 20 Sep 2000 sci.math post.

@DaveLRenfro Abian's Wikipedia page mentions another eccentricity: he favored destroying the Moon.  I'd never heard of this idea before.  The page says he firmly believed it would end natural disasters.  Sort of reminds me of Linus Pauling and vitamin C.

Regarding Abian and the moon, I first heard about this from a 24 June 1991 article, which I cited and gave an excerpt from in the 20 September 2000 sci.math post I cited in my previous comment. In fact, that sci.math thread was started by Erland Gadde who heard Abian's name mentioned on TV in connection with the moon, and Erland Gadde wondered if this is the same person who had been a somewhat regular sci.math poster (yes). FYI, this 28 July 1999 sci.math post begins a thread where Abian's death was announced.

Zentralblatt as you know is a repository of short reviews used as a way to find articles. As a mathematician, you are supposed to scan the Zentralblatt (or reviews) to identify papers in your field. Not reviewing because of bad quality is not an option. If you are sure that this is not a good paper, you are supposed to tell, so that no-one starts spending money on access to the paper.
I assume that you have made sure that you are not overlooking something.
Reviews along the lines: "No new results are presented." have been published before. It happens. My Ph.D. advisor had to review a paper that was based on an elementary misunderstanding and got by the reviewer. The paper was completely false. He struggled with what to do until a visitor showed him a review along the lines: "All the definitions are well known. All results that are not trivial are false." My advisor ended up sending a warning to the author who was a young Mathematician just starting out and wrote a review that said that unfortunately, the results are wrong and why.
You can of course ask the Zentralblatt to check your review, but you should not fudge the issue. The mistake was made by the editor of the collection, not by you. You just state that the contents are worthless because of the reasons in a succinct manner.

Perhaps a less inflammatory word than "worthless" could be used.

You can write a negative review without being unkind.

I have often had to write highly negative reviews and I try to give them as much care as positive ones. Try to stick to objective language and to explain clearly what is wrong (are the results trivial or are they unoriginal or are they false, and if so why?)

Conversely to Deee's excellent comment, if you can't/won't, or don't know how to write a negative review without being unkind (always consider your own reaction to receiving a review that you write, as if it were from someone else), it would be best, perhaps, to ask for advice from a colleague or advisor, however you stated you are an amateur?

@ScottSeidman Stick with facts for "bad news" is a good idea. "Worthless" can be seen as subjective, but the suggested phrase "All the definitions are well known. All results that are not trivial are false." is factual. More factual details can be provided that isn't just "I feel it is so".

Of course, we all write negative reviews now and again.  When I do (for papers -- grants are another story), the message, as clearly as I can give it, goes into "confidential to editor".  For every other field, my habit is to use language that I would use when talking face-to-face to the authors.

@CGCampbell yes I am an amateur.  My goal is to write a professional-looking review.  Here is a possible first sentence: "Do a few applications of the equation $|A\cup B| = |A| + |B| - |A\cap B|$
justify $15$ references on the inclusion-exclusion principle and adding it to the title?"

IMO the best way to write a scathing review is to just stick to the facts. A author that submits a paper this trivial may just misunderstand your rhetorical question as a genuine one, or as snarky, neither of which is what you want. Perhaps try: equations (1), (2), .. are trivial and known since antiquity (insert reference to Archimedes).

@Johan: And now i'm wondering how to cite prehistoric sources :D Include a scan of the stone tablet ?

@Johan snarky isn't necessarily bad, especially given my relative freedom as an amateur.  I plan to read some of Neal Koblitz's work for guidance on how to proceed.  I've never met him but I lived next door to him in Seattle during the summer of 1982 (one of my housemates, a "get to know the neighbors" kind of guy, was acquainted with him).

As a rule of thumb, I recommend to write the paper as if you will later meet the author in person, and in such a way that you can defend this in their face.


text:
Funding for an Undergraduate Conference
I'm currently an undergraduate international summer research student in Canada and I'm interested in attending a five-day long undergraduate (math) conference, which is being held at a location that is 4-5 hours away by flight (also in Canada, though.) My advisor is able to fund only a part of my travel and accommodation expenses. Is there any other way to get funding for such conferences, especially as an undergrad?
Thanks for any input! I am certain that this conference will be a valuable addition to my mathematical experiences this summer.

Your department, school, or the conference may have scholarships available for such things.

If the funding for your visit to Canada came from a source other than those listed by @JonCuster (for example NSERC or some organization in your home country), then that source might also help fund your conference participation.

@AndreasBlass NSERC does not pay students directly for conference participation.  Travel is reimbursed through the supervisor’s Discovery Grants or other various programs inaccessible to summer students (especially international).   If the student is on a Mitacs internship, the internship does not include funds for conferences.

@ZeroTheHero Good guess, it's Mitacs!

Two possible ways: (1) "CrowdFunding" or (2) "GoFundMe".

It is possible although I would not get my hopes up.  As a summer intern, you cannot so easily go to the local student union or the Dean and ask for support.
Step 0 is to figure out if “local” (i.e. Canadian) undergraduate students have all their expenses paid when they attend an event as participants rather than giving a talk or presenting a poster.
Now… you may ask the conference organizers if they can provide you with some help, maybe in the form of a discount on registration or maybe the event has student funding (not clear if that would apply to international students but no harm in asking).
If the event is held at a big shop, like PIMS or Fields or CRM, then maybe ask the institute directly.
(Disclaimer: I have no idea how this works for students attending math conferences in Canada, so I may send you on wild goose chases.)


text:
Does it matter which email I use to write to professors?
I'm a fourth-year undergrad math major. Consider two universities X and Y. X is my home university, while I've been doing summer research (sort of an REU) at Y. Y is (much) more reputed than X is, especially for mathematics, i.e., my field of research.
I plan to apply to math PhD programs in the US soon, before which I'd want to reach out to some professors, let them know I'm applying, and perhaps ask a couple of relevant questions. Does it matter whether I use my university email from X or Y?
Keeping in mind the large volume of emails that professors get, I thought it might make more sense to use an email address that's affiliated with a more reputed institution, but that could just be my bias as well. I'd love to know your thoughts!
Note: Yes, I do get to keep the email from Y even after the summer ends, even though I shall not be present at Y in person anymore.

I'm tempted to say "use the politest emails of the ones you have lying around". Maybe I'm a nitpick, but what you are asking about is an email account or an email address.

Note that many email clients will show the sender's name in the inbox, and their email address is only visible after opening the email.  Many recipients won't even notice which address you're sending from.

As a non-math guy I appreciated "Consider two universities X and Y".

@HorseHair Studying mathematics killed my diction too...

I suggest your home university as it minimizes the possibility of any foul-ups in communication. I think the potential "advantage" of having an email from a more prestigious institution is so small as to be meaningless compared to the things that matter in any application. You will, of course, note your summer work at Y somewhere in your application, which is enough to make the connection.
And, blind emails are often disregarded, even from fancy email addresses. And note that in the US, you normally apply to a department, not an individual professor, in any case using a defined application process.
Most US professors won't have much to say to an out of band email other than "I encourage you to apply via the standard process." In particular, they are unlikely to be involved in the application/approval process unless they happen to be on that committee. If you get accepted into the program then you have time to talk to professors about advisement.

I disagree that most US professors won't have much  to say depending on the field. Sure  a committee decides who gets admitted but often a supervisor is required and needs to chose which of the many applicants gets to work with them.

@Behacad what you wrote does not reflect how things work in math, which is what the OP is writing about. It is completely standard in the US for applicants to math grad schools to be admitted without having to commit to a specific PhD advisor or even a specific area of math. Of course applicants may say they are interested in a specific area or even some specific faculty, but they will not be required to commit to that if they accept an offer.

Your REU account was assigned to make it easier to communicate with you during the REU, not to help you impress people. Use the account from your home institution.

why? OP has passed some kind of selection/filtering and OP is now doing some meaningful work at Y. Accoridng to your principle, a student from the university of Kabul that just started a PhD at Stanford/MIT/Cambridge should not use the email from Stanford/MIT/Cambridge ... for how long?

@EarlGrey I don't follow your logic.  That said, my guess is the reason the REU account was assigned was to give REU students university access (library, computers, etc) at the REU institution, more than for communication during the REU.

@Kimball the logic is: behind the email there is a person, is this person writing something interesting? it does not matter if the email is -at-harvard.edu or -at-hotmail.com . Time is a scarce resource, but even scarcier are people worthwhile of collaborating: it is up to the recipent to wisely read the incoming mail, especially if it is a professor, to apply a better filter than "oh look the domain of this email ..."

@EarlGrey I implied nothing of the sort. The institution where you are enrolled as a PhD student is your home institution.

Why is your home institution so important? To be part of that home you either passed some evaluaiton, or you paid some hefty tuition fees, so I see nothing wrong in using your temporary summer home institution ,as long as you passed some evaluation or paid some tuition fees to be part of it ...

The prestige of the university your email account is associated with is of minimal importance. Instead, I would suggest you consider the following desiderata.

Use an email address that you can reliably receive email at. If you REU account is going to be shut down in a month, then don't use it.
Use an email address that won't be sent to spam. Usually this shouldn't be an issue, but sometimes university IT departments haven't properly secured their mail servers and network, so email from the institutional addresses gets flagged as suspicious. (In some cases, gmail is better than an institutional email!) If you or you friends have had bad experiences with your university's mail system, don't use it.
Use an email address that appropriately reflects who you are. If you send email from a harvard.edu address, but your CV says you're at the University of Statesville, that seems a bit odd. It won't impress people; it will just confuse them.

The account at my home university X won't be available after I graduate, but the one I have from Y is supposedly available for an indefinitely long period of time (although they just replace the "student" with "alum" in their domain name. That being said, I can reliably receive email at Y for longer. I believe (3) is the real issue here, though!

@heroic-harmonic I wouldn't count on a mail sent to heroic-harmonic@student.uniY.edu to be forwarded to heroic-harmonic@alum.uniY.edu, at least not "for an indefinitely long period of time".

@heroic-harmonic you are not an official student at Y earning a degree there, but only at Y for the summer program.  (And you are not an alumnus of Y just for having spent a summer there.) Do not count on really having access to Y's email system after the summer. You wrote that the access is "supposedly available", so it looks like you also are not absolutely certain of post-summer access.  Perhaps you misunderstood how it will work. And the IT group at Y could decide at any time to close the "alum" email accounts to people who are not real alumni.

It's an odd guess to make that .edu addresses are more likely to be flagged than @gmail.com.

@AzorAhai-him-: It's not that odd; if an IT department at one university has a problem that allows spammers to abuse it, other admins (especially of non-universities) will often be willing to block incoming mail from the whole domain temporarily, especially if it happens via an automated blacklist.  But gmail is huge and so widely used that it's probably "too big to blacklist" for most blacklist maintainers and server admins.  Also, probably has faster-reacting admins and more oversight, so spam sent via gmail's own servers is from actual accounts, not some pwned machine on a uni network.

Always use a professional one with your name and a web provider. I would discourage you from using a university account unless it is clear that you are just a student there (we make our students use a student. domain).
I delete emails that come from masteroftheuniverse or sweetchick or seeyainhell without reading them.

Note that OP is asking about which of their university e-mail addresses to use; I don't see any indication in the question that they are considering unprofessional or non-university e-mail addresses.

@cag51 - sure, but future folks will come seeing the title question, and this answers the more general one implied. And, since many university emails disappear after graduation, is good advice in general - use one that is permanent.

Let's put it differently: yes, it matters, and do the reverse of what you think to save yourself a lot of future problems, it will be clearer in 3-4 paragraphs.
You are a student and you are trying to "engage a conversation" with a professor. Said professor should be interested in your work and should engage because your questions. If they do not engage, it simply mean they had no time, you have no political power, so your email ends up in the pile "interesting, to be answered in a couple of weeks".
Unfortunately, a couple of weeks = never, life is hard, don't take it personally and move on.
However, the professor H may notice that you are writing from the well known universitY and the professor may have an interest in getting their power extended to said universitY. You may even be so (un)lucky your work at the universitY is appearing on some internet pages captured by google as done with the famous professor G at universitY. Said professor H may do a quick Google search and find that. You will be very relevant, because you may be an extremely useful pawn.
Professor H may then became your PhD advisor because of some machination. They will then discover you did not pay the huge fees at universitY, you are not part of the alumni of universitY and you have no good contact with famous professor G. They will be an awful supervisor. No way that such a big ego (there are many in academia) can be a good advisor.
The issue is not really if you should/will use the email from universitY, the issue is what kind of professor is giving "more points" to a student because the student is writing from the email from universitY instead than from X.
Ps: on a brighter note, locally it may be helpful to arrange a visit to a good dentist or to arrange a room to rent (or even a job) to use the email from universitY. Ethical? well, you are doing something at universitY, the issue is the receiving person and the bias they have towards people from the universitY instead of using their mail .mx ...

Better, use your email address that you will keep for long duration. Better to have academic email id (say .edu).
However, specifically for your purpose of doing this:

let them know I'm applying, and perhaps ask a couple of relevant questions

Follow the academic department procedure.
Go to symposiums/conferences were this professor would be usually and directly interact.
Use any special drive from the university to interact with faculty for your prospective application/interest.


text:
Is it a good idea to include future research interests in CV for PhD admissions?
I am planning to apply for a PhD position in Physics in the US.
I have worked in several areas in physics (let's say, A, B and C), but there are also areas D and E, which highly interest me, but I have not performed any research in these topics. I have written in my SOP that I am interested to work in D and E (also, interested to further explore A, B and C).
Many people include "Research Interests" in their CV. I plan to make a section like the following.
Research Interests

A
B
C

I have also mentioned my projects and publications related to A, B, C in another section of the CV.
I wonder whether it is a good idea to include D and E in the list of "Research Interests" in the CV, as it is among the topics which I am interested to work on, but I have no research experience in it.
I saw the answer to this question, which says If you state that something is one of your top interests but this topic does not appear anywhere else in your CV this looks suspicious. Does that mean I should now include D and E in this list in the CV?

This question is more about multidisciplinary research interests. My question is about what not to include in CV.

Why not omit the research interests section?  This would avoid the problem.  (Note: I am not in physics so I can't say how important it is to list those on a CV, but presumably you already list the projects you've worked on somewhere.)

I admit I don't know how PhD recruitment works in the USA. I comment only to suggest that the CV and any accompanying letter could be tailored on the characteristics of the group or institution one applies to. There can be the case where manifesting an interest leads a supervisor to think s/he has nothing to offer on that. This won't be the base for not being enrolled, but it could favour another candidate whose interests fit more the environment.

Unless you are already working in an area, in which case the CV has a "Work in Progress" section, the place for such things is the Statement of Purpose, not the CV.
The CV is about the past. Things you've already done, or are currently in progress but unfinished. The SoP is about the future plans and how you expect to achieve them.

I completely agree. I'll add that you can use your CV to emphasize your research interests by focusing on the most relevant aspects past experience (sometimes even loosely connected experience) but always stick to what you've actually done / are currently doing.


text:
How to make a small correction in an equation in a manuscript after acceptance but before publication?
Recently one of my papers was accepted in Physical Review B.
I found that one of the equations (say, A) has some typo. This equation is not a new result, and is a standard formula in the field.
I obtained another equation (B) from the correct form of equation A (the typo in equation A occurred only while typing the manuscript), and derived new results using equation B.
If I fix the typo in Equation A, none of the other equations/texts need to be altered.
Now that the paper is just accepted, but not yet published, how do I fix the typo? I am yet to send the editors a .tex file for the manuscript.
Do we have to go through the lengthy review process once again? Or should I just let it go?
The paper was accepted for publication without any revision.

At some point after acceptance, the journal will send you so-called "proofs" which include copyediting & typesetting changes. That is your chance to make changes. If they send you the source files you can make the changes yourself, otherwise just reply to the employee of the publisher and tell them what to change.
No peer review should be necessary.

I initially submitted a pdf to the journal, and now I need to send them a .tex file. Can I make the change right now before sending it?

@ArchismanPanigrahi Go ahead, and tell them that you've made the change.

Just make necessary changes and send it. They may not notice minor changes like this. Even if they noticed, you can always justify there was a typo and you corrected it. If they want to review it before publishing it, that should be fine. Even if they check for such minor typos, there is a high chance that your paper won't be rejected since it was accepted without revision.

Do tell them you made the change.  If the editor starts to think you're trying to sneak things past, it will only cause trouble.