text:
How to paraphrase and cite correctly a large thesis section with only one or two textbook sources?
Context
I have developed a program, which relies on a pretty common and well studied statistical method. It seems sensible to provide an extensive summary on the mathematical basis of this algorithm (intuitive introduction, general case, proof of convergence, ...), before going into the details of my actual work, were i have applied it on a specific problem. The focus of the work was the code development and analysis of the results.
I mainly used two textbooks for learning the theory. I believe they do a really good job in explaining the things, although I also use some other sources to get a different view on things, they practically contain everything I need for my section. There is basically a complete overlap in the concepts they explain, but with a different touch; for instance: (slightly) different notation, order and language.
With the reader of my thesis in mind, I want the best possible summary of the theory, therefore i´m trying to pick the best parts of both textbooks, and throw in some additional explanations or views, which i would have found helpful. "Sadly" the books are relatively concise, i.e. they use a bunch of technical terms which i´m more or less forced to "copy", and the explanations they provide are also of high quality. It is very hard for me to paraphrase them without making it worse.
Problems

How to paraphrase their contents without making it worse, while
citing them correctly.

Current situation:

Occasionally i can throw in my personal intuitive explanations, but apart from that, it´s basically just a bunch of technical terms glued together by normal words to guide the reader through equations. I don´t think that it would be sufficient to insert some synonyms and structure the sentences differently, but that´s more or less my current approach.
I wrote at the beginning of the section that the following is an excerpt of those two textbooks. Some minor occassional statements (one sentence) from other sources get quoted inside the text.

The current citation strategy has been motivated by this related question. The main difference I have is that I can hardly justify calling my text a "summary".
Additional Context:

Direct quotation is basically out of question, because that would be a citation bigger than 5 pages.
English is not my first language.
Physics/Electrical Engineering background


text:
How do I cite multiple papers from a single book in the oxford humanities style?
I am trying to cite multiple papers from each of several collections of papers, published as books (mostly as 'in memoriam' collections). They are not cited at the same point, in most cases. For instance, one of the collections has both a paper on building materials in medieval Syria, and one on the crossover of architectural styles in the Alhambara. I am wanting to cite these two papers in different portions of my paper. Do I cite each of the twelve papers from three books as entirely separate citations? Or is there some other thing I am supposed to do. It would be extremely confusing to cite the whole book and 12+ authors when I am only ever indicating a single paper and author at a time.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What are some of the research styles and research routines of successful researchers?
I am Phd student in CS with less than 15 published papers from which none is at a top journal or conference.
My typical research routine comprises of reading papers with potentially improvable results that published at journals/conferences that are categorized by certain sites as Q2/A, thinking about alternative solutions to these results for a few days and if I make any progress on discovering alternative improved solutions then I check if there are any newer papers citing the basis paper with similar results, if there aren't I continue investigating for a few weeks after which I usually have some publishable results.
The preparation of the paper takes significantly longer and I usually involve one more author in this step.
I generally avoid trying to read and improve results published at top journals or conferences mainly for the following reasons:

The papers containing these results tend to require more
diverse knowledge in order to be read fluently than results
of lesser publication venues.

These results generally receive much attention so they are more
likely to have more able people trying to extend or improve them and
thus it's more likely for someone else to publish results essentially
the same as mine earlier than me

The published papers there tend to have a lot of authors from top
institutions which makes it somewhat intimidating for me to try
doing further research on their results

Some of the papers there seem to have been written by people who
have worked on a very specific area of research for a very long time
and thus have developed numerous techniques and advanced intuition which give
then significant advantage in these areas.

I would define successful researchers as those who publish, on average, at least 3 papers every 2 years in top conferences or journals.
My question is as follows:
What are some the research styles of research routines of successful researchers?

Please mention your decipline or subject of research so that the specific experts in that subject can give you some hints

"I am Phd student in CS with less than 15 published papers" If your number of papers is anywhere close to 15, we should be asking you this question. Its rare to finish a PhD with more than 5 publications, I would say.  I had 3 I think.

@AnderBiguri - well, my impression is the OP is tying up a few loose ends here and there on, well, topics of secondary (or less) importance.

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


text:
How much of a disadvantage would it be to pursue admission into a graduate program in education as a math undergrad?
As a junior math undergraduate student in Hong Kong, I am currently completing my degree and have a strong desire to pursue further studies in the United States. My ultimate goal is to become a professor or researcher in the faculties of education at a university. I am deeply intrigued by the field of education and have already published several papers on career planning and readiness, as well as conducted research on mathematics education in collaboration with fellow students and professors in my institution's education department. I am concerned about the potential disadvantage of not having taken any education-related courses when applying for graduate schools in the United States.

It would be a disadvantage. But you have other advantages, like having published papers, which likely outweigh the negatives.  No one is perfect

Note that in the US it is quite common for people to change fields between undergraduate and graduate school. If you are interested in a career in academia focused on math education then an undergrad degree in math with some (even a little) experience in the educational issues will probably be sufficient for admission. Having done collaborative research, even in a minor way, at this point is also a plus.
I'd judge you to be a good candidate, though you need to also be aware that there is a lot of competition. Moreover, it is common to go from an undergraduate degree directly to a doctoral program without needing a masters first. Don't neglect that fact.

I randomly checked two programs in my state and both required  a master's degree but those might be more focused on K-12 education and people who are already working in the field.

@mkennedy, yes, there aren't very many universals in the US education system. But requiring a masters to begin a doctorate is much more common in Europe and maybe elsewhere.


text:
From mathematics to neuroscience?
I'm a second-year mathematics undergraduate, and I am really interested in neuroscience and medicine. I would like to pursue a career in research or applications in the above mentioned field. I have heard of mathematics majors getting into theoretical and computational neuroscience, but I am more interested in biological neuroscience. I know that I would have to take courses in biology and neuroscience, but my school doesn't allow me take these courses, considering my major. I am already taking online courses in biology and neuroscience on YouTube and the likes, but I'm afraid that it won't be able to demonstrate proficiency in the subjects if I were to apply for a graduate degree.
So my question is, does anyone know of any paths I could follow, ultimately ending up in a career working in neuroscience and medicine (computational or biological, although biological is preferred)?
Thank you.

"my school doesn't allow me take these courses" It's only your second year. You can re-enter the university to study biology or neuroscience if you are really interested in them. Watching online courses is useless. You need to have lab experience. It's up to you to sacrifice two years to fulfill your dream. You'll need the two year math training for studying  any STEM fields in the future anyway.

Have you considered doing a master’s in Neuroscience / Cognitive Neuroscience after your undergraduate studies? They can be quite multidisciplinary and will help bring you up to speed on the needed topics.
Are you planning to pursue a career in academia (and if so, do a PhD)?
In many European countries you need a master’s anyway to start a PhD.
Which country are you in?

@leonos A masters degree program in neuroscience is going to assume fundamental knowledge in biology chemistry and physics.

@BryanKrause in general yes, but perhaps OP has some pre-university knowledge and validation of those topics. Also, there are exceptions, like this master’s in Cognitive sciences in Paris, which would be an ideal fit for a multidisciplinary candidate: https://cogmaster.ens.psl.eu/en/application/admissions-13494

@leonos The expectations for a masters program are likely to go well beyond pre-university knowledge. Probably at least 2 semesters of university physics, 4 of chemistry (general and organic, also biochem), and upper-division courses (not to mention their prereqs) in cell biology and genetics.

@BryanKrause I don't think it'll be plausible for me to start over considering the circumstances. But I think an interdisciplinary approach would be best, would most likely get into computational neuroscience.

@Abdulrahman Good luck; it seems your university or country does not really support an interdisciplinary approach if they limit the courses you're able to take so much.

If you have an interdisciplinary program in your school, you should take it, why ask us ?

@Nobody My school doesn't have the interdisciplinary program, I'd have to make the opportunity myself. And I asked primarily about transitioning into the more biological field of neuroscience. You don't have to comment if all you're going to do is complain. I didn't force you to.

I don't know where you are studying, but, given what you say, I'd guess that your shortest path to a career focusing on biological research is to start over and abandon the math degree (mathematician writing here, actually). In the US it is quite common for people to change fields between undergraduate and graduate study, but it seems a reach even here for this jump. I couldn't have done it (though long ago). I was required to take science in my math degree but it was all physics; no biology or chemistry. No graduate program in a biological field would likely consider me though I was at or near the top of my class then. Smart enough, but no background on which to move forward. All of the other students would be far ahead of me in the fundamentals.
Perhaps some of the coursework you have taken will apply in a new program (and would in the US), but it would likely save you only about a year in a new program.
Talk to an academic counsellor at your institution or a faculty member or two in math and in biology about where you are and where you want to go. It might even require changing institutions for the best path. Good luck.

(Non-biological) neuroscientist here. I would agree, as only a second-year (just started their second year?) math major, the best path forward would be switching wholesale to neuroscience

Thanks for the answer @Buffy. Seems like starting over is a popular opinion.

But I think I'll follow a more interdisciplinary approach since starting over isn't an option for me.


text:
Duration of article citations to appear in web of science
My articles were cited in a web of science (wos) journal. My citations appeared in google academic. But these citations still do not appear in wos.
Is there a certain period of time required for the citations of an article to appear in wos?

The time lag until the citing papers are indexed is presumably a lower bound, but I have no idea how tight of a bound it is.


text:
Mathematics courses in computer science
What are some typical mathematics courses in an undergraduate mathematics (pure and applied) curriculum that are highly translational to computer science?

What do you mean by translational?

@usul Courses in mathematics that are often heavily used in computer science.

Undergrad-level courses? Pretty much all of them, depending on the sub-area of CS...

@MarcGlisse What sub-area of CS would be served by Galois theory? Or algebraic or analytic number theory? How about algebraic or differential geometry? I'd dare say that beyond the most elementary introductory courses in a first semester, there are very few courses in a typical mathematics undergraduate programme that are of any use in CS.

Regarding CS and Galois theory...

Sigh another clearly off topic question getting a pass because it’s about math/CS

@LeeMosher There is no Galois theory in the document you link. It just happens to refer to finite fields as 'Galois fields', and does some elementary arithmetic in them.

Theoretical computer science rests on quite a large body of mathematical work that goes quite deeply into foundational territory.  Here are some mathematical subjects that are fundamental to a good understanding of theoretical computer science:

Logic and set theory: This is a foundational area in mathematics but it is also a core subject for understanding the mathematics of computer science.  Typical coverage of courses in this field would include propositional logic, predicate logic, modal logic (perhaps), sets, set operations and cardinality, and functions.   Advance courses might also cover axiomatic set theory and delve more deeply into the foundations of mathematics, though these are not absoutely necessary.

Discrete Mathematics: This is a field that covers the study of mathematical structures that are discrete (i.e., coming from finite or countable sets).  Typical coverage of courses in this field could include sequences and series, discrete sets and functions, combinatorics, graph theory, and algorithms.  Though not always covered in computer science contexts, it might also be useful to cover discrete calculus and discrete optimisation.

Automata theory: This field examines the mathematical description and study of "abstract machines" including finite-state machines, pushdown automata, Turing machines and other variants of abstract machines.  It is closely related to the theory of formal languages and the latter can also be included in the field if needed.  This field falls directly in the area of theoretical computer science and is used mostly for computing and linguistics.

Complexity theory: This field examines the computational complexity of problems and algorithms.  Typical coverage of courses in this field would include asymptotic complexity measures (e.g., big-o, little-o notation), evaluation of complexity classes for the time and space needed for computations, and hierarchies of complexity classes.  This field ties in with automata theory because complexity is sometimes evaluated by looking at whether particular problems can be computed with different types of abstract machines.

These are the main areas that I would consider to be directly within the scope of theoretical computer science.  However, it is also useful for theoretical computer scientists to have a broader understanding of other areas of mathematics, including linear algebra, calculus, real analysis, complex analysis, probability, statistics, optimisation, etc.

Nice. Thanks for the post. Really what I was looking for.

I also want to ask, in what context is complex analysis applied in computer science?

I teach in an applied curriculum, and we cover areas 1, 2 and 4, but not 3. Areas 1 and 2 are "translational" in the sense that you apply its concepts already writing easy code. Area 4 comes later in the curriculum and requires a solid understanding of 1 & 2. Students who dodge those, struggle a lot with area 4.

While the OP seems happy with your answer, I don't think mathematics students typically study automata or complexity theory.  Even logic and set theory is probably not really studied by most math students.  I only saw things like predicate logic, complexity theory and automata in CS courses in undergrad, not Math courses (I was a dual-major).

@Kimball: Yes, that's true.  Students would probably have to seek out courses on automata/complexity rather than having them in standard curriculum.  I'm more concerned here with giving the student good suggestions for areas of study, rather than worrying too much about standard curricula.  I am also premising this answer on the idea that students have some reasonable latitude to search out courses; possibly even related courses from other faculties.

You mentioned real and complex analysis in your last sentence. I question their applicability to computer science, but they were by far the most nutritious brain food I had at university. A warning to those in the audience who are choosing math courses to take: many will find these courses extremely difficult.

The main reason I mention complex analysis as an applicable field is because it is useful for understanding various things that crop up in computer science.  Even something as basic as a proper understaning of polynomials requires complex analysis.  I wouldn't think that a CS person would need much complex analysis, but absence of basic knowledge would be a hindrance.

There are several. Probably the most useful are a course in formal logic and a course in discrete (finite) math. Statistics is useful for lots of things also. Statistics usually (and should) requires Calculus and maybe discrete math.
Beyond that, the "mathematical way of thinking" is useful for anyone in CS. Analysis of problems and synthesis of solutions appear in both fields in important ways. Likewise the precision required in both fields is quite similar.

Note: This isn't intended to be a comprehensive list. But, as a PhD mathematician and a professor of CS, these are the ones I've found most relevant in general. Other courses may be required for some specialties, of course.

Calculus, Linear Algebra, Real Analysis are prereqs for Machine Learning, Data Analysis and even Complexity Theory...

Calculus and linear algebra are also prerequisites for 2D and 3D graphics, as well as physical simulations

Also abstract algebra - very useful in cryptography but also helps underpin more advanced linear algebra.

Nice for you to share this perspective.

@whoisit: May I add probability and statistics? To be honest, while calculus and analysis is important if you want to create a new ML algorithm, you won't be using it if you "just" want to apply ML. In contrast, probability and statistics (and linear algebra) are hugely important in both creating and applying. I am working in ML, and the utter inability of many CS experts wrap their heads around probability and stats baffles me. (And makes for many very frustrating questions at CrossValidated.)

ABET's Computing Accreditation Commission says, for programs named Computer Science:

At least 15 semester credit hours (or equivalent) that must include
discrete mathematics and must have mathematical rigor at least
equivalent to introductory calculus. The additional mathematics might
include course work in areas such as calculus, linear algebra,
numerical methods, probability, statistics, or number theory.

Thanks mate for the answer.

@Abdulrahman You're welcome! The other answers are more comprehensive, but I thought this was a relevant piece of information.


text:
What does “ awaiting assessment “ mean within the context of a ScholarOne submission system?
I submitted a paper to New Phytologist journal that uses the ScholarOne submission system. The manuscript status has changed to “awaiting assessment “, What does this mean?


text:
Usefulness of prior PhD experience in USA PhD application
Suppose John is currently a first year PhD student applying to a US PhD program. I wonder if John's previous experience will be regarded as negative signal or a positive one in the eye of adcom.

Absent other indicators, probably neutral. People change programs for lots of reasons, even if somewhat infrequently. But John will ned to provide any official transcript records for that year.
People successfully change programs even after a negative experience in their first go. In the US, lots of things are considered in the application process.


text:
Can I publish a paper based on already published dataset?
I published a dataset for an experiment on a data repository. The dataset is available online and includes all the authors' names. Can I still send a research paper to a peer-reviewed journal based on this dataset?

Short answer: you absolutely can and should do so, that is pretty much the whole point of public data repositories. Many disciplines like machine learning or forecasting rely on a few very well-known datasets. (Sometimes to an unhealthy degree, because the real world is much messier than data that everyone has been studying and commenting on for many years.)


text:
"Awaiting Referee Assignment" Does that mean my submission passed the first decision?
I submitted a paper yesterday to a SAGE journal, and it went very quickly from with journal administrator (or something like that) to Awaiting Referee Assignment. There is an editor attached to it as well. My question is whether my paper got the first decision. I know we should not idle our days in front of the screen stalking the submission process, but I sort of need to know due to an administrative issue (it matters if the paper is on its way to being "under review").
Thanks!


text:
No phD 2nd interview response
I had appeared in PhD 2nd interview almost 16 days before. After interview professor told me to contact soon.I wrote 2 follow up emails but they did not answer. Even after ist interview i wrote them follow up emails and they did not reply and after 16 days of first interview they emailed me for 2nd interview. I am very anxious, what should I do now.


text:
What are the implications for my PhD applications if I previously was offered a position but declined last-minute due to family health reasons?
I work as a teaching and research associate at a university in Pakistan. I applied for PhD (Management) programs at 5 universities in the US last year. I was rejected by 1, wait listed by 2, almost accepted (had 2 interviews with 4 professors) by 1 and accepted by 1. The university that accepted me also gave me a full tuition scholarship, a stipend to cover the cost of living and health insurance. I was able to get my F1 visa.
Unfortunately, my father's health deteriorated just a few weeks before I was to leave. He has had long-term health problems and my family needed support at that time. I requested deferral but the university said that won’t be possible. I did not travel and my I20 was cancelled.
I would still like to pursue my doctoral education in the US and plan to apply again in Fall 2024. Therefore, I would like to get advice on what the implications of this situation will be for my future PhD applications. Will it significantly lower my probability of being accepted? And are there any visa implications?

I don't think it matters how many times you applied. If anything, the fact that you got already accepted once after sending out only 5 application is great!
If I were you, I would discuss the situation with the university that has accepted you and see if you can start later, or maybe, if possible, arrange some sort of collaboration between them and a uni in your hometown. You still may use the time to read up on the topic anyways, right. Just make sure that visa won't be an issue later on.

@minahilawais I suggest you update the question with the additional information you mentioned in this comment.

@leonos Done. Thanks for the suggestion.

@Artifact123 How can I make sure that obtaining my F1 visa again won’t be an issue? And should I discuss (in my personal statement) this situation with the universities I will apply to in the future?

Regarding the visa, in my experience obtaining a visa and having it cancelled for external reasons (in my case, travel restrictions due to the Covid pandemic) did not prevent me from obtaining the same visa again later.
Regarding the PhD position, in theory it shouldn’t be a problem either. Mention it in the statement if you feel like it would support your application.
Lastly, if you apply in fall 24 then almost a year will pass. What you do in that year might influence your chances: try to do something that would strengthen your application, for example publishing papers or learning techniques relevant to the future PhD.

Thanks for answering! I will try to learn a software program relevant to my PhD research and present a study I have worked on at a conference.


text:
Can you be disciplined for 'intention' to cheat but didn't?
I have an grad sch exam where I can bring in a single textbook of choice for reference. I borrowed one from the sch library and find that multiple books have evidence of previous students writing notes. I am ashamed to admit that I considered doing it too, just as a fail-safe as I have studied very hard for this but its still a hard module so I'm still worried. And the only reason why I 'woke up' from it is that I was talking about it in a public train with a friend not from this course, and realized that someone could have overheard me and report it to my uni. I'm paranoid about being overheard and reported because it was very obvious that I had the intention to consider it at least. I know its bad that that was the reason that I 'woke up' from but I have reflected on my train of thought leading to my decision to consider it, which a very small part of me is grateful for because I did not realize how big my anxiety about doing well for this had snowballed into.

You can relax - nobody is going to try to initiate disciplinary measures over a snippet of conversation overheard on a train. We all occasionally think about doing things we know we shouldn't, so you don't need to feel guilty for thinking about it - you didn't do it, after all.
What kind of "notes" are being written in the textbooks? Unless these are answers to exam or homework questions, I can't fathom why anyone would care that students were writing in the textbooks, and if they ARE answers to exam/homework questions, you could consider bringing it to your professors' attention that answers to their homeworks and exams are floating around out there.
In general, an academic institution is only going to take action if they actually think that you cheated. They may take evidence of "intention" to cheat as reason to open such an investigation, but if there's no actual evidence someone cheated they're likely to drop it.

True, I just live in a very small country/community that anyone could have easily find me by searching my uni n the title of the book I was holding so I kind of got paranoid if I just happened to meet a really angry person. We have access to limited past year papers by uni so you can kind of predict the pattern of questions lol.

You really can relax about this, and it is not as big a deal as you're worried about. This would require someone on the train to 1) notice you conversation, 2) know what textbook you're using, 3) lookup your university based on that textbook, and finally 4) go to the trouble of reporting it to the institution. There is no chance anyone on the train cared enough to do all that. There is also very little chance that anyone in the university is interested in opening an investigation based on "well, I heard one of your students talking about how there was writing in their textbook on the train."

Alright, thanks you make sense and I'm bring sort of overly worried about it. Also I realized that the rules technically did not say you can't write in it but that you can't bring other printed material.


text:
How may the budget to recruit an assistant professor be a challenge (for a university) after all interviews at the decision-making time?
I've been involved in a recruitment process of a Danish institute for an STEM-based tenure-track position. I was invited to a first, a second, and a third interview in the span of only 10 days. At the end of the third interview, I was told that I would hear about the final decision within days, but to no avail. After a week, I followed up with the search committee head (telling him I have another offer whose deadline is in just 48 hours, and if their decision regarding my candidacy is negative, even an "unofficial no" would be appreciated), and he didn't reply but 10 days later, saying I am of high priority for them, and he has been negotiating and dealing with some challenges related to the position's budget. While asking me to be a little bit more patient, he said he would have two related meetings in that week, and he will get back to me soon. It is now over a week after those two meetings of him, and I still have no decision. Overall, I've been waiting for a month, from the day of the third interview, for their decision.
One thing that I don't understand is the claimed budget issue. As far as I know, when a position is supposed to be announced, a tone of planning has to be done including its budget, meaning, if the budget is not secured, no position will be announced, let alone thinking about the budget after all interviews and logistics. Moreover, this position supports no start-up package. Thus, there is nothing for them to worry about except the position's salary. I am wondering how one can interpret this. One viewpoint is that I am not the top applicant. They have already offered the position to someone else. But they also find my case pretty promising. So, they are trying to open a new position on-the-fly for which such a budget issue has to be managed.
Does anyone, potentially aware of the mechanics of tenure-track recruitment in Denmark, know whether there is any other explanation for this budget issue at this point?

Did you discuss how much you would expect for salary or start-up costs or anything else like that during your interviews?

@mkennedy: According to what they said during interviews, nothing is negotiable about this position, meaning salary is fixed and (as stated in the question above) there is no start-up cost that they cover.

I don't know anything about Denmark, specifically, so not an answer. But finances evolve all the time. Maybe the latest quarterly update is more pessimistic about upcoming student numbers. Maybe the roof of the physics department has just started leaking. Suddenly everyone is told they need to trim 5% from their budget. And the easiest person to cut is always the person who hasn't been hired yet.

@avid: While understanding your overall point, Re. student numbers, Danish universities are free for all Danish and EU students which include almost all of its student population.  So, fluctuation in their numbers may not be terribly influential that much; Re. department finance, the hosting department (CS) is quite rich according to their partially-public revenue reports.

@User No matter how much money is available theoretically, it's likely that people who have influence on spending it do not share identical thoughts about how it should be spent. Any money spent on one thing can't be spent on others.

@BryanKrause: Maybe it is a common theme in your department to announce a position, spend a lot of time and resources to go through all rounds of interviews, and suddenly figure out that people "do not share identical thoughts about how [the money] should be spent."!

@User As a public research university in the US, a more likely scenario would be "politicians in state government do not share the same thoughts about how the money is spent". Those people don't have any involvement in the posting of a position, interviews, etc, but do have the power to suddenly force money to be spent differently than previously planned by those liberal elite ivory tower academics. I can't say I know much about how this plays out in Denmark, though I think something like this is more likely than them lying directly to you for fun.

@BryanKrause: I never said they are lying to me. You assume that either your interpretation (which may be only the case in the US at best) is correct, or they are lying. There might be something more subtle here. Anyway, thanks for your comment.

@User Your OP suggests that perhaps they are lying to you that they are working on the budget of the announced position and instead are trying to fund a new position. Another possibility is there is no budget problem at all which would be another lie. The only possibility if they are not lying is that in fact they are working out the budget of the position, because that's what they told you.

People screw up, and it's possible that this institution screwed up, too.

Over the course of a hiring process, things can change. Expected funding might disappear. Even promised funding.

Run away from this inept administration/department, regardless of whose fault it is there. Unless you really want to live in the location and are willing to sacrifice job quality. That being said, there are random factors at play which means your experience is not representative of the work environment there.

I have found the wheels turning slower in Europe than the US. I once had an offer for a position in Germany; the details of the negotiation are with someone in central administration, and I was told that he did not have any availability to discuss the details of the job that was offered to me within the next four months! So if your contact was hoping to resolve the situation soon, I am willing to believe that that can take weeks (and may be pushed back at short notice) and that the fact that you had a different deadline was not going to make a difference to them.
As for reasons for things not being settled: Money is not something a department or a university prints. It is subject to legislative provision, and if the Danish or state parliament on short notice finds that it has different priorities, then whether a position has been advertised or not is not going to make a difference -- the money might simply not be there, and a department cannot do anything about that. In fact, at least in Germany, the legislature approves positions, not money for these, and so if the legislature eliminates the position, it doesn't even matter whether the department has the money or not -- nobody can be hired because there is no line available.

Thanks for sharing your very relevant experience. (That 4-month delay part is quite scary!)

Large organizations are terrible at financial planning.  This has nothing to do with academia, Denmark, or this particular university.
A common scenario is:

Somebody decides they want to hire a professor.
They ask somebody else to approve it.
The approver waits months and then does some financial modeling before approving the hiring.
The job is advertised.
After several months, a candidate is selected.
The approver goes over the financial modeling again and realizes the model was totally wrong.
The hiring is cancelled.
The entire process is repeated.

Private companies do the same thing, but usually a bit faster.


text:
Unhealthy PI behavior
What is your opinion on a situation where a PI informs a postdoc that their presence is attributed to the PI's efforts and salary funding, thereby implying certain behavioral expectations? Do you believe it's acceptable for the PI to subsequently ignore the postdoc, cease communication, or withhold opportunities related to the postdoc's work, especially after the postdoc raises concerns about an imbalance between administrative duties and research responsibilities? What would you recommend the post-doc to do in this situation?

I think it would be better to directly state one problem here as a question, rather than as an oblique solicitation of opinion like "yeah that sucks!". For example, the first sentence doesn't seem to have any relationship at all to ceasing communication with a trainee which doesn't have any relationship to an imbalance between administrative and research responsibilities. What's the actual question you have where answers to the question would help your situation?

In that case, it would be sufficient to address the second part of the question:Do you believe it's acceptable for the PI to subsequently ignore the postdoc, cease communication, or withhold opportunities related to the postdoc's work, especially after the postdoc raises concerns about an imbalance between administrative duties and research responsibilities? What would you recommend the post-doc to do in this situation?

What does your university's ombudsperson/HR (or equivalent confidential resource) think?

No, it's not acceptable for any supervisor to cease all communication with one of their employees or trainees; do you need to go further with that? Does that answer help you achieve anything to change the situation? I'm guessing not. I don't know what the post doc has already done (or what actual behaviors they're describing; what does it mean to ignore or cease communication e.g. how much time has elapsed? what's the evidence this is connected to a complaint and not, say, the professor's health?), so I don't know how to advise them.

The HR department appears to be highly inefficient in this situation. When I initially approached the PI regarding my need to focus on research and allocate time for drafting a publication, they redirected me to the department chair. Subsequently, I've been engaged in meetings with both the chair and the PI, who present themselves as a united front.

When I established a structured work plan for the ethnography, outlining the time required for each task, I was informed that there would be no additional time allocated for drafting publications or conducting literature reviews. They insisted that I had only four months to conduct approximately 90 semi-structured interviews lasting about an hour each, in addition to field observations. Furthermore, I was asked to manage various other tasks, such as writing reports, reviewing reports, organizing workshops, and facilitating knowledge transfer between work packages, all concurrently.

I informed them that I had already been involved in organizing workshops, drafting three reports, and reviewing others. I emphasized my urgent need for dedicated time to focus on my research and allocate time for drafting articles. However, following this discussion, the PI began to exhibit troubling behavior. They stopped communicating with me, ceased answering my questions, and started ignoring me during meetings. Whenever I approached the PI with inquiries or requests, they either abruptly left or requested that I leave, claiming that I was intruding on their time.

That’s not normal behaviour. Make sure to read your contract and see what reasons they could invoke to end it earlier than planned. Start looking for other positions if you haven’t already. That being said, it is true that unless you have your own funding, your PI is your boss and you should do what they ask, within reason.

I am employed in a country with stringent termination regulations based on an employee's circumstances. Additionally, the law mandates that postdoctoral researchers must allocate their contractual time to activities aimed at facilitating their progression to an associate professorship. Furthermore, there exists a Career Development Plan that places a strong emphasis on publications, grant applications, and teaching opportunities, which must be adhered to and respected. Yet, they have not even signed under my Career Development Plan.

Don't we need to know what precipitated these statements and actions before we can say whether it's a reasonable approach or not??  Yo described the end of a situation, and asked us for opinions.  We need to know the beginning and middle, too.

Well, I told it. I spent months working on non-research related admin tasks. When I finally raised the issue of needing dedicated time for research and publication, the PI brought the department chair into the conversation, and our communication came to a halt. We've had meetings with the chair. The PI expects me to undertake a significant amount of non-research work while I am keen to concentrate on research. In the meantime, the PI stopped talking to me at all etc. -above-mentioned behaviour.

Without knowing the full situation, it reads to me like this:
Your postdoc position was likely created to help run certain tasks on a project or body of projects. As you noted the PI pointed out that the postdoc position exists due to their efforts/funding, etc... That is correct. Postdoc positions emerge out of some funding scheme, usually federal or private for which the PI applied and was rewarded, or via some internal University-level scheme, which again is typically competitive and requires the PI to put in some effort to justify need, and usually some downstream ROI that makes it worthwhile.
It seems to me you were expecting a role which had more leeway for professional development, CV building, etc (which is the norm but not the rule for postdoc positions). Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case for you, which is completely disappointing, and you have my sympathies.
Your PI obviously has/had expectations that you are not meeting, and vice-versa. Trying to diagnose the way they are dealing with this, referring to it as troubling, and so forth, is not really productive. Nor is bringing HR into the issue. Sure, it is not professional behavior, but you don't know the underlying issues of your PI which have led them to this form of expression.
The truth is not all postdocs work out, and not all professional and interpersonal relationships work out either. My suggestion is wrap up what you are doing and start applying for positions which clearly meet your desires for personal and professional growth.
What you may find down the line is that all of these administrative tasks will help you tremendously in your professional career. As faculty, I do about as much admin as I do writing papers or thinking about science (sad, I know). Unfortunately while I was trained very well to do science, I went into my independent career with no admin experience which made me less efficient in my early years. So take the positives and move on.

Thank you for your response. I've already initiated a search for another position. I've come to realize that the definition of "research" here, which involves fieldwork, data collection, and analysis, differs significantly from my own standards. Furthermore, my mentor has conveyed to me that they are merely expecting mediocrity, whereas I have higher aspirations for my work.

I feel that I am not fully realizing my potential in my current position, and I'm growing increasingly skeptical about the potential for publications. Despite promises of co-authorship and authorship, it appears that other individuals within the project are and will continue to be the primary co-authors with the PI.

@Klmnr I don't know why you'd expect to take authorship away from people already working on a project.

I'm not seeking to displace anyone from authorship. I wholeheartedly support the Vancouver recommendations, and I never claim authorship for anything I haven't personally written. What I'm referring to is the -promised- potential to be actively engaged in co-writing for future publications, which was a topic we had previously discussed within the work package. It appears that there are now limited prospects for such involvement, as our standards and expectations diverge and I am effectively excluded from opportunities that would contribute to my career development in this regard.

@Klmnr Then why even mention "other individuals within the project are and will continue to be the primary co-authors"? Of course they will, they're working on the project. If you have a quarrel that you won't have anything to author, then focus on that, not the other people.

I am concerned about the prospect of not having substantial research outcomes to author, primarily due to the lack of dedicated time for rigorous research. The PI does not give me time for that. Additionally, I am uncertain about being invited to collaborate as a co-author with others. It is in the humanities and social sciences field. It's important to note that our field adheres to distinct conventions of publication and research practices.

"I've come to realize that the definition of "research" here, which involves fieldwork, data collection, and analysis, differs significantly from my own standards." I am really curious to here what your definition of research would then be.

My understanding of research of course encompasses literature review, data collection and data analysis, I mean how they define it and what they mean by those terms differ from the best practices I adhere to. For instance, I am informed that ethnographical field observation for them simply means conducting interviews on site and not online or on phone. That is unacceptable and simply wrong in my opinion.

@Klmnr I'm having a hard time reading your comment as anything but "They think you need to go out in the field for research but I want to do it all from home" which makes it sound like you're not willing to put in the work rather than not being granted the opportunity.

Having read all the comments on this question and its answers, the core disconnect that strikes me is that you expect to focus on your research but feel that you are not given the time for it -- while at the same time, there is no acknowledgment that the institution you're at pays your salary and will have expectations in turn.
It is of course entirely possible (perhaps likely) that the university's expectations of your time are unrealistic and not in line with what they promised you up front. But at the same time, seeing no acknowledgment on your side that some work for the university other than the research you want to do is not unreasonable, you come over as wanting to have your cake and eat it too. This is not typically how this works, and any compromise one would hope for you to find with your employer will have to start at a mutual acknowledgment that the other side has a point at least in principle.

I am currently involved in two projects (that pay my salary), and my job description outlines the following responsibilities: a) data collection and analysis, b) authoring and co-authoring scientific articles, and c) workshop organization. Throughout the interview process and initial interactions, it was emphasized that my primary responsibility would be fieldwork (research) for one of the projects. I also explicitly stated that I had primarily undertaken administrative tasks for approximately five months.

However, I must clarify that I was not informed about the specific breakdown of research versus administrative work (percentage-wise) during the job interviews. I now request this information from the university. In your view, what would be a suitable distribution between administrative and research tasks for a postdoc, taking into account the job description provided? It's important to emphasize that in my country, the law defines a postdoctoral position as a preparation for associate professorship, focusing on three key areas: teaching, grant writing, and publications.

I think that very much depends on the position, where the money comes from, etc. But I think it is not unreasonable to expect that you spend 50% or more of your time on work that is not for you (e.g., teaching and administration).


text:
Does Adding Curriculum Vitae to Personal Webpage Breach Double-Blind Peer Review?
Recently, I nearly made a mistake: I was building my personal webpage, and I added a paper which we submitted to CVPR (a conference) in "publications", marking it as "submitted to CVPR". Fortunately my supervisor/co-author pointed out the oversight before I shared the website link with anyone else.
This got me thinking: I have not attached my CV to the website yet. I know that writing about a conference submission on a CV is not against the double blind rules, but by attaching my CV, I am, in fact, telling everyone who has the link about my submission.
Does adding a CV with info of a conference submission to my personal webpagebreach double-blind peer review?

Hi. I don't understand your question, how the situation you described in the first paragraph, which you acknowledged as a breach, differs from the second? For me it's the same thing.

@TheDoctor The difference is that my CV, even when publicly accessible, might not be a form of medium, while a website is.

This would generally not breach the rules regarding double-blind reviews. I am not aware of any conferences that would forbid mentioning the paper on your CV, although I did not check every individual conference.
The double-blindness of reviews always depends on some level of cooperation from the reviewers. A reviewer can usually get a pretty good idea of the identity of the authors already if they search for it. Putting the paper on your CV which you then post on your website will make de-anonymizing your paper slightly easier, but only slightly.
I could not find any specific rules regarding double-blind reviews in the CVPR call for papers. I did check some other conferences, however. For example, this is the relevant paragraph in the Submission Instructions for AAMAS2023:

Reviewing for AAMAS is double-blind. This means that reviewers should not be aware of the identity of the authors of the papers they review. As an author you must make a reasonable effort to ensure that this is possible. Specifically, please replace your name and affiliation on the first page with the paper tracking number and do not include any acknowledgements in your submission. Cite your own prior work where appropriate, but do so in the third rather than the first person (that is, write, for instance, “X et al. [42] showed …” rather than “We showed … [42]”).

Other conferences may have different rules, but I believe that the AAMAS rules are pretty typical.
[EDIT: I found the releveant instructions on the CVPR site. They too clearly do not forbid you mentioning the paper on your website.]

CVPR reviewing is double blind, in that authors do not know the names of the area chairs or reviewers for their papers, and the area chairs/reviewers cannot, beyond a reasonable doubt, infer the names of the authors from the submission and the additional material. Do not provide information that may identify the authors in the acknowledgments (e.g., co-workers and grant IDs) and in the supplementary material (e.g., titles in the movies, or attached papers). Also do not provide links to websites that identify the authors. Violation of any of these guidelines may lead to rejection without review. If you need to cite any of your own papers that are being submitted concurrently to CVPR or another venue, you should (1) include anonymized versions of those papers in the supplementary material; (2) cite these anonymized papers; and (3) argue in the body of your paper why your CVPR submission is non-trivially different from these concurrent submissions.

While not explicitly against the double blind policy mentioned above, CVPR specifically does say it's very much on the line of breaching the anonymity component, and while reviewers shouldn't search for the paper, if the paper is found on a personal website, it'll probably get desk rejected, or removed from proceedings, depending on when it got identified. (https://cvpr.thecvf.com/Conferences/2024/AuthorGuidelines: Section 3.2 The anonymity policy and its interpretation - accessed 20th December, 2023 @ 1535 UTC) goes into more detail on this)

They consider a preprint on a personal website breaches the anonymity requirements, but a preprint on arXiv doesn't?  Isn't that just really really silly?

@DanielHatton I'm guessing it's a case of ideality bowing to practicality, but only to the extent necessary. They'd prefer the paper not be released anywhere, ever, until officially published, but preprint servers are so important these days, if they didn't carve out a specific exemption the rule would be so onerous they wouldn't get any submissions. So they begrudge arXiv, but apply the ideal rule elsewhere, even if the two don't make sense in combination.

@qechua The policy is unfortunately not very clear, but I believe (based on policies of previous iterations and similar conferences) the restriction is on mentioning that the paper has been submitted to CVPR, not for listing the paper as a preprint or uploading to a personal website while not mentioning that it is under review at CVPR. See under "Dual submissions": "Under the above definition, arXiv preprints and university technical reports are not considered as publications.".

Since reviews in double blind review are expected to deal with the paper as it is and not search for possible authors, I'd say that it is fine. Many papers have been seen by people other than the authors (collaboration circles, say) prior to submission.
If a reviewer somehow knows the author(s) they should inform the editor of the fact, but that is on them, not on the authors.
Double blind doesn't mean super secret. It is an attempt to get independent opinions on the value of a work, unaffected by external factors.


text:
How can a new corresponding author upload a manuscript using the same portal?
I submitted an article to IEEE access and during all the process I was the corresponding author. The paper was finally accepted, but in order to secure funding for the APC I need to make my professor the corresponding author. However, the journal coordinators told me that if I am to change the corresponding author, then the final files will also need to be uploaded by the new corresponding author.
I am using my login details and the manuscript appears in my login spac,e how is my professor going to upload the manuscript? Even if i share my login details with my Professor how is it going to make a difference?

I am guessing the professor would need t create their own account and upload through there? As a corresponding author you have to provide an email adress for the professor to IEEE, so they probably expect an account with this very email adress to upload the files?


text:
How thoroughly does the application committee go through applications to graduate school?
In my mind, I imagine the committee, after evaluating hundreds of applications, simply skimming through the transcript to check if the student is an A student (as opposed to checking the quality of the courses taken, for example), judging the CV by the number of publications (as opposed to checking if they were first author, for example), and flipping to the keywords in a long letter of recommendation. I would hope, of course, that this doesn't occur (I would be surprised if it did).
Just how thorough is the process? Does the thoroughness of, e.g., the review of transcripts depend on the committee member, or is established in some manner how carefully it should be evaluated? And does this thoroughness persist after going through many applications?


text:
Why don't math departments use Mathjobs for postgraduate admissions?
It is common practice for mathematics department hiring to use Mathjobs (especially in the US).  This is very convenient for recommendation letter writers, as we can just upload one letter that the applicant can send to all the the different schools.
However, very few mathematics departments use mathjobs for postgraduate admissions (exceptions include the University of Oklahoma which uses Mathjobs for PhD applications). So for students applying for math masters/phd programmes, recommendation letter writers have to spend lots of time navigating each university's individual admissions website.
I was wondering why so many departments are willing to use Mathjobs for postdoc/assistant professor level hiring, but so few use it for PhD/Masters admission?

I suspect that the proposed duplicate answers your question: on PhD/MSc level, there are just so many candidates, and so frequent searches, that it makes sense for the university to centralize the process. You hire far fewer postdocs and professors, so the university might be happy with humoring the mathematicians and their special requests.


text:
Can you include changes based on referee's feedback in a preprint?
I have recently submitted a paper to a journal. The reviewer came back with some very constructive feedback and requested some additional results to be added to the paper. Eventually, the paper was accepted but it has not appeared yet. So, I have three versions of the paper:

Version 1: This is the version that I submitted to the journal initially.
Version 2: I have added additional results based on the referee's feedback.
Version 3: This one was made by the journal. It is basically version 2 formatted using the Journal's template.

My understanding is that I cannot publish version 3 on Arxiv since I signed the publishing agreement, and I can publish version 1 freely. My question is: Can I publish version 2 on Arxiv?

Edit: This is an Elsevier journal, the policy says the following:

I may post the accepted manuscript in my institutional repository and make this public after an embargo period. To ensure the sustainability of peer-reviewed research in journal publications, I may not share the final article publicly, for example on ResearchGate or Academia.edu.

Based on information provided the embargo period/end date is 24 months.

What do the journal's policies say?

I have included the policy above, it included a link, which only made me more confused.

Yes, that link is not very helpful. Elsevier's general policy on sharing accepted manuscripts is available here, but perhaps individual journals restrict authors more.

Elsevier is explicit that the answer is yes, you may update the material (but not the formatting) of your preprint to match the accepted version of an article, provided that you follow some minimal conditions (such as linking to the doi for the published version when that becomes available):

Accepted manuscript
Authors can share their accepted manuscript:
Immediately:
● Via their non-commercial personal homepage or blog
● By updating a preprint in arXiv or RePEc with the accepted manuscript
● Via their research institute or institutional repository for internal institutional uses, or as part of an invitation-only research collaboration work group
● Directly by providing copies to their students or to research collaborators for their personal use
● For private scholarly sharing as part of an invitation-only work group on commercial sites with which Elsevier has an agreement
...
In all cases accepted manuscripts should:
● Link to the formal publication via its DOI.
● Bear a CC-BY-NC-ND license — this is easy to do
● If aggregated with other manuscripts, for example, in a repository or other site, be shared in alignment with our hosting policy
● Not be added to or enhanced in any way to appear more like, or to substitute for, the published journal article

However, the page you link warns that this does not apply to all Elsevier journals: "Some society-owned titles and journals that operate double-anonymized peer review have different preprint policies — please check the journals' Guide for Authors for further information"

@DanielHatton That caveat is part of an earlier section, and does not appear to apply to the section I quoted.  In particular, the part about "journals that operate double-anonymized peer review" is clearly related to the possibility that such journals may not want authors to publicize their work prior to peer review, since that could break the double blinding procedure.

Can you explain why you think newly posting something is the same as updating? Nowhere in the question does it say anything about having published the article already.

As Anyon suggests, this entirely depends on your agreement with the journal and nothing else.
I've seen policies that explicitly say you can, policies that explicitly say you can't, and policies that are ambiguous. If after you read more closely any agreements you've signed you find the policy is still ambiguous, your options are:

go ahead and update your preprint because you see benefit to yourself or the public in doing so and either think there is unlikely to be a dispute over it with the journal or that the ambiguity will be in your favor if there is

not take the risk of a dispute for the marginal benefit of having the updated manuscript available to the world as a preprint in addition to the journal publication, or

ask for clarification.

It's possible if you ask for clarification that the journal will say "no" even though the agreement you signed with them would permit you to do so if you were to take it to court. You could get a lawyer's opinion instead, but if so you should expect to pay the lawyer for their time and you'll have to decide if that's worth it.

edit: You post the policy that:

I may post the accepted manuscript in my institutional repository and make this public after an embargo period. To ensure the sustainability of peer-reviewed research in journal publications, I may not share the final article publicly, for example on ResearchGate or Academia.edu. Based on information provided the embargo period/end date is 24 months.

To interpret this, you need to know what an accepted manuscript is. From this link, Elsevier seems to interpret this as:

An accepted manuscript is the manuscript of an article that has been accepted for publication and which typically includes author-incorporated changes suggested during submission, peer review and editor-author communications. They do not include other publisher value-added contributions such as copy-editing, formatting, technical enhancements and, if relevant, pagination.

That seems to me to say "version 2" is an "accepted manuscript" and you can post it in your "institutional repository" which is not ResearchGate or Academia.edu after 2 years. If they have a more relaxed policy for "preprint servers" like arxiv rather than an "institutional repository" you would have to find that language.