text:
Signs of toxic behavior in my peer group
I've been experiencing a phenomenon for a couple of months now that I cannot understand. I'm a first year phd student and I'm working on a problem that my advisor has suggested. I've made some progress, but nothing publishable yet. My advisor however says that I shouldn't worry and that I'm making good progress.
There are other students in my peer group with other advisors. Some are in their 2nd year and they are much more successful than me. They have publications, pre-prints, collaborations, they have given many talks etc.
Even though these students are friendly towards me, I have the impression that I'm being considered a "lower class" member of the group by them. I cannot help but notice that when we are discussing about our subject, they are not even looking at me, as if I'm not part of the conversation. Whenever I mention something, I feel like they try to make it clear to me that this is something obvious to them.
I've also noticed that they will very often make negative comments about my advisor (who is a leading expert in our field), they say e.g. that my advisor is extremely strict, that they will keep a grudge against someone if they miss a few seminars, that they are very difficult when it comes to handling funding, or they tell me gossip they've heard about my advisor for petty things that happened many years ago which I don't even know how much truth they contain. I personally have never had a negative experience with my advisor: they have been nothing but kind, understanding and helpful towards me so far, so I don't know what to make of these comments.
I have wondered many times if this behavior towards me is just my impression, since it is only based on minor observations. But still, the outcome of this is that I feel inferior towards these people. I started to doubt my advisor (whom I trust a lot), my potential and even myself because of this situation. I've always believed in myself but lately I find myself comparing to these students and thinking that I will never know as much as they do, progress in my research as they do, get involved in collaborations as they do and give talks as they do. When I first joined this department I felt so motivated and inspired, I felt very confident that such a renowned scientist such as my advisor selected me as their student, but the above situation is affecting my psychology greatly.
Has any of you had any similar experience? Does anyone have any tips or advice in handling such situations?

Welcome to Academia.SE! You're in the right place, but our format is strictly Q&A -- can you clarify what the question is?

Are there other first year students? What is their experience?

@cag51 I will edit my post and add my question, sorry

@Buffy Unfortunately I'm the only first year student in the group. Another student that started about 9 months ago is kind of keeping a safety distance, or at least that's what how I see it.

Sorry, but I can't find a "hook" on which to hang an answer. Some places are cliquish, some people don't accept others that are "different" in some way. But your relationship with the advisor is the most important thing.

If somebody posts an answer saying it's just your imagination, I'll be very disappointed in them.  This question may be related https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11765/how-to-effectively-deal-with-imposter-syndrome-and-feelings-of-inadequacy-ive

I think what you feel is the gang behavior of young adults. Unfortunately it is dominated by alpha-person setting the behavoir for everyone. I have seen such a behavior, and it is very uncomfortable. Yes, so uncomfortable that may become toxic. I have no concrete advise, the other first year student maybe is keeping the safety distance exactly for the impression you have. Ignore them, focus on your work, find a social group outside of these older colleagues. Final (cautionary) note: trust the science of your advisor, not your advisor.

@EarlGrey Thanks. All these make sense and have started happening naturally in my life. About the last note, I mean that I trust my advisor as my guide through the phd, I trust his judgement and his advice on how to proceed with my topic

@isotonicsyrup the good side of the story is that all the collaboration and success you see in them is 99% merit of your supervisor, because there is no way that a pack of 2nd-3rd year PhDs is succesful in research because they are a cohese gang, absolutely not. Do not feel like you have to eat s**t and befriend them to be succesful. They are most likely very capable (a renowed scientist saw potential in them and took them in) and they are being provided the conditions to develop their potential. The same renowed scientist that saw some potential in you and is advising you to develop it :) !

You say these students are in your “group” but they have other advisors. Do you mean they are others in your PhD program “group” or in your lab “group”?

@Dawn We are in the same workgroup let's say, i.e. we are in the same field but they are specializing on slightly different things than what I am (although there are tight connections between the topics)

In many situations, I've found that a simple "Sorry, I don't want to hear bad things about someone behind their backs" can go a long way.

@isotonicsyrup What country you are based in?

''I felt very confident that such a renowned scientist such as my advisor selected me as their student'' Being good at research does not necessarily mean they are good at supervising students.

Re "...that they will keep a grudge against someone if they miss a few seminars": It is not clear what "they" refer to. For example, two different things or the same thing? Is the first "they" a singular "they"? Can you make it clearer? (But without "Edit:", "Update:", or similar - the question should appear as if it was written today.)

This is a difficult situation for anyone; I'm sorry it's happening to you.
First, data is king. You have specific observations about your advisor; if they are good, trust them. Gossip of any kind is not data and it doesn't help anyone. Ever. Period. Furthermore, even if the information were true, people can change over time, so whatever your advisor did 10 years ago (or however long it was) doesn't matter to you now. As far as that stuff goes, try to ignore it the best you can. If you want to stand up for your advisor, you might say something like, "That's not how [he/she] has treated me." However, I think it's best not to start something like that. Focus on work-related topics.
I think it's terrible when students make others feel bad. In most cases, it's because they themselves are insecure. With respect to this situation, I would advise you that it doesn't do you any good to compare yourself to these students who are further along in the program than you. They are taking different classes, working on different problems (likely in different subfields), so it doesn't make any sense to compare their publication records, etc. to yours. It's like comparing apples and smokestacks.
If there are any other first-year students, stick with them. You're likely taking the same courses, the same prelim exams, etc., so if they are friendly, you've found your crowd.
Only you know your heart and only you know your mind. Don't let others make you doubt yourself.

Thank you, I needed to hear this.

I think when I was an MSc student I spoke to a teacher and said that I knew the answer to a problem on a problem sheet but another student confused me, she said ''Don't let other people confuse you''.

I'm a scientist, so I think you should believe that your observations about your advisor are the truth, and other people's claims are less reliable.
If your colleagues are engaging in gossiping or stereotyping or rumor spreading, you don't need to address it directly.  You're not their supervisor or underling.  Instead, lead by example.  Behave professionally yourself.
Now, if the behavior worsens and becomes harassment of yourself or others, then you might want to speak to your supervisor, a department chair, an omsbudsperson, or a student union.  Who you should contact would depend on who did what and how your university is organized.

Thanks for your comments. I guess ignoring this and avoiding this as long as it doesn't become a proper harassment is the best move here.

There is definitely toxic behaviour there, especially disregarding you and making you feel inferior. They have no right to do that.
However, about the advisor: there are advisors who are very kind to those who are new in a group (kind of grooming), but they become less reliable and kind if they realize that the student is burning out, does not perform always on 120%, not keeping up a good picture of the supervisor, etc. - and they just discard them for the next 'fresh' student whom they support again.
I really hope you are not in this situation (I had been, it was terrible, and I am still in therapy after such a PI). The new students mostly admired him, the leaving/graduating ones were just sitting silently and grumpily, trying to get out ASAP... If that is not the case in your group then great, but look out for such behaviour.

When reading the question I was exactly wondering about this scenario. What are the students gaining from bad mouthing the prof? It usually happens when a students throws a blame for their bad progress on their supervisor. I sincerely hope it is not the scenario you are in!

Yes, unfortunately I had this experience.
I think they reached their goal, because you wrote 'they are much more successful than me'. Firstly, don't think like this way.
Of course, nobody has to give you a very friendly working environment, but they don't have any right to make you feel sad, or don't make you think you are in a lower class.
Please, make some prediction about these students. Why are they doing this? E.g., maybe they want to get a postdoc position from the your advisor. Probably, they don't want to have another competitor.
I always wonder that if someone is bad, why they are working with him?
Don't let anyone show you as an aggressive person in the group. But, you should talk about everything that hurt you to your advisor, maybe in the lunch time. I did, and now I am very pleasant.
And in my personal experience, I have never seen a successful person who is making someone annoying. Be confident, focus on your studies, never gossip about your advisor, and always stay close to the advisor.

I don’t think bringing this to ones advisor is a good idea.

yes, of course it depends, I had a proof in my case.

well "talk about everyhing that hurt you to your advisor" may have different meanings, I think one does not need to bring the gossiping to the advisor, but something more nuanced like saying to the advisor "I do not share the camraderie my peer PhDs students share among them, we have different personalities" ... the advisor will understand and will tune the collaboration between OP and the peers.
There is even the possibility that the advisor may welcome sending OP for brief periods to other universities abroad, to make up for the missing interactions with peers.


text:
Is it common for a journal to reject (or accept) a paper before all reviewers have submitted their reports?
Suppose that a paper is submitted to a journal and that the editor decides to sent it out to two reviewers. Each reviewer agrees to return the report in X months; however, it turns out that one of them is much faster than the other. The editor thus receives the first report, which firmly recommends rejection. The editor does not wait for the second report and rejects the paper.
How common is this scenario? For what is worth, my field of interest is mathematics.

See the canonical question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/55665/75368

No, it is not common, but a strong reject for reasons that cannot be resolved in the eyes of the editor is sometimes sufficient.  Ultimately, the referee that is most important is the editor and their vote is the "loudest". They don't have to take the average of the referees and can override it.
It is important to look at what the reviewer has said. It is likely the commentary is highlighting serious errors, either mathematical, conceptual, or in presentation.  The editor appears to have agreed and no longer can spend reviewer time in good faith.

Why do you say "not common"? Any evidence?

I say it is "not common" - it is not the majority of the time that reviewers are overridden or their input is dismissed by editors.  You could argue it's an important but common minority, but it's absolutely not the norm.

I have certainly done that, and I think it is totally reasonable: If the first reviewer gives good reasons why the paper should be rejected, then it is quite unlikely that anything the second reviewer can possibly say would make me change my mind. That first reviewer might have been the world expert on the topic (which the editor would know), so what good would it do to wait for the second reviewer other than (i) artificially prolong the process, (ii) waste the second reviewer's time.
So while this might not happen in a large number of cases, good editors do it and do so for good reason.

In particular, reviewers sometimes identify a fundamental problem with a paper that the editor can easily verify: maybe "This paper is a verbatim copy of Jones et al (1973)" or "By substituting the authors' expression into the original ODE, it is straightforward to see that the results presented here are incorrect."

Confidential comments can also doom a submission without needing to wait for all reviews.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How can I do my master thesis if I don't have an proposal and don't I like this research area?
My advisor invited me to do my master's thesis in his research area (of course I was happy about the invitation, but today I wish I had the discernment to choose an area based on my tastes). From the beginning, the objective/proposal of the thesis was never defined, which always left me unsure. I have tried to find a way to contribute to the body of knowledge in this area, but I cannot do this, perhaps because I do not have enough knowledge in this area (which is completely new to me).  Also, this area has not stimulated my interest very much. I recently informed my advisor of this situation, but he told me to read more about the area to find motivation. He gives me the freedom to do whatever I want within this area, but I can't do this on my own. I feel like a fraud in my academic path, which up to now I have always been enthusiastic about and where I have produced good results. For the first time, I feel really depressed about my life and I don't know what to do.
Any advice?
EDIT: My master's degree is in computer science engineering and the research area proposed by my advisor is DLT/Blockchain.

Your description of the MSc sounds way too broad. I also agree with the supervisor's assessment. You say you "always were enthusiastic about your academic path" - what about? If you find some things interesting, why not read more about them until you encounter open problems? Posting it as a comment because it is more of a request for clarification than a suggestion. Also, just in case, consider merging accounts if that's what's happened.

Thanks for the comment!
I'm not sure what you meant by "Your description of the MSc sounds way broad. I also agree with the supervisor's assessment." What evaluation?
My academic background has always intrigued me, yet I never had contact with the DLT/Blockchain area proposed by my supervisor. I feel regretful that I did not choose an area that met my interests. And I feel that although it is my advisor's area, he doesn't guide me.

What I meant was that "computer science engineering" is as broad as it gets: maybe I am just not knowledgeable enough, but I do not see how blockchain/DLT would not fit in or at least overlap with it. Ergo, "this area has not stimulated my interest very much" and "I did not choose an area that met my interests" were a bit confusing. Could you please give a somewhat specific example of what does interest you on a level where DLT/blockchain would not fit in? I will address what I stated about the advisor's assessment and guidance momentarily, largely going by your last phrase in this comment.

Given what you have said about that overwhelming feeling of the lack of guidance, I am very tempted to categorize it as a rather common problem of a poor fit in terms of personality.
You see, advisors exist on a certain spectrum of how much independence they want or expect from a student. This is a subject to a whole lot of influences ranging from the lab needs at a specific moment in time to personality quirks. Few researchers are good managers. A good manager would be able to be very flexible about their approach and treating the student the way that is the most efficient for that student. For some advisors it does comes naturally, for others it is a lot of effort. The latter is more common by far.
Students are also very different: some need at least an initial spark to get going, others prefer something more free-form. Some are more productive with fixed office hours and have a hard time working from home, others detest having more external control over them than absolutely necessary to get the job done. The list goes on.
This variety in approaches can (and often does) culminate in complaints from both sides. Either the student is unhappy with being micromanaged or the advisor does not get how (perceived) micromanaging could make someone happy and fulfilled. Yours seems to be the latter case - you want more input and the advisor might be thinking that approach is a dead end.
The above is reading way too much into your situation and probably being overly dramatic, but I reckon this is the gist of it - the advisor wants you to be more independent than you are ready to be. That is not necessarily a bad thing, some professional growth opportunities are lurking nearby, but you do seem to have communication issues.
You do need solid footing to begin with, and your advisor suggests finding something that excites you. I wholeheartedly agree. Given that you struggle with soul-searching and navigating this new field, find something that does work for you and express that in communication. Even with all the experience and wisdom in the world, a closed stance of "I do not like this and that too much" is not a lot to act or advise upon. Exploring something you liked in another field, possibly finding connections or describing what was so great about these things would be a great start. You have to confide in your advisor a little more about your desired academic path... Or find a new one, it would seem. Alternatively, it is possible to finish your MSc a bit miserably and move on to something else, but as long as there are other options, explore them first.
TL;DR: Find something actionable for your advisor - at very least a detailed example of an input that would work for you and a description of what exactly is lacking from their existing guidance. You are increasingly pressed for time - it is prudent to make more open moves. If you are in the midst of a slow boiling conflict, it is better to bring it up now and buy yourself some time to navigate it than to slowly suffocate and still have that conflict shortly before the thesis deadline.

Actually, one can move away from the 'area' to the methodology to analyze the data from said area.
If you are interested in robust statistical methods, say relating to fitting a line from available data based on a proposed model and explaining results, or robust correlation coefficients some of which have interesting interpretations which may place a new perspective on the literature.
There is also a curious statistical method related to ratings (as in the performance of judges deciding which is the best wine) or in rating expected performance.
Also, discriminate analysis where you develop/fit a rule equation to assign elements to the correct group (predicting who will perform/win...and the contrary).
More advanced studies include probability failure laws (time to an event) or hazard analysis are possibilities.
So, my advice first generally acquaint yourself with the noted tools I listed as a basis for analysis and review the literature in the proposed area and apply the tool.
It is not too likely that your professor is acquainted with the analysis and will find the results and associated discussion at least novel and interesting.

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


text:
What should I do with a year left in PhD?
I'm a phd student in mathematics in US. Basically, I worked hard throughout the first two years because of the qualifying exam. After that, I kind of lost steam when I was supposed to start doing actual research and slacked off for my 3rd year (I was also dealing with anxiety and depression issues at the time). I finally managed to pull myself together after my 4th year and the first semester mostly goes to learning just the introductory literature---I'm in algebraic geometry so the learning curve is deep. I had almost nothing going on in terms of original research. At this point, I have technically a year left before I need to submit my thesis for graduation. My program does not allow extension beyond the 5th year and due to my visa status it is not possible for me to pause my study.
My advisor has always been hands-off to the point where we rarely talks. Last week, when I finally saw him, he told me he has no suitable problem for me at this point given my level of study. Instead, he referred me to a couple papers to read first. I can't even understand the main problem those papers are studying and I feel it may take me years to read them. So I brought up the time constraint to my advisor. His answer is basically that he's not sure what I should do and said it is up to me if I want to try to finish.  So it comes down to finishing my phd in a year, or drop out outright. Do you have experience with similar situation? What should I do.

Is the 5-year time limit an absolute limit?  Is it a limit imposed on your assistantship?  It wouldn't be uncommon for a student to take more than 5 years, assuming that the department was willing to fund the student.

@Brian Borchers Indeed, a 5-year limit seems strange.  Limits of funding are common as money is usually a finite resource.

@BrianBorchers It seems quite possible to me that the university does not extend funding for more than 5 years (or only under exceptional circumstances and for short periods of time). OPs visa status can be based on them being a graduate student at the university. So the university wouldn't mind if OP stays on longer than 5 years without funding but his visa status wouldn't allow that.

"it is up to me if I want to try to finish" Do you want to try?

I don't think there is an easy answer to this. I thought US PhDs could drag on forever. I know professors who took 8 years to finish the PhD - one of them is a Nobel Prize winner.
First, you need to check with someone like the graduate adviser or whoever is in charge of the PhD math program, if you could extend you PhD duration. This has to be done first.
If not, you should start thinking of other options. You could cut your losses and get a masters degree. That can be finished in one year. Most universities would allow if you don't already have one from them.
You could also try to transfer your credits to another or to another program at the same university. Having already passed the qualifier will come in handy. I'm not going to say this is a good advise, because you sign up for another 5 years of the same thing, only with a wiser you.
Whatever you do, try not to think of it as a do or die situation. Your mental health will take a big hit if you do and you'll go back to anxiety and depression. Think of it as a setback. Also, I don't know where you're from, if getting back home is trivial, or not. In my case, it was the last thing I wanted, but, in the end, I had to live with it, since my folks never wanted to move to US.
If you end up deciding to quit without a degree don't do it immediately. Better focus your efforts in preparing your next step: getting back to the job market or moving to a different school.

I would say that it is important to have lots of conversations at this point, not just the one with your advisor. I am not in math, so perhaps this idea doesn’t hold in the same way as in my discipline (economics) but consider that you are trolling for ideas here, so put as many lines in as possible (to use a fishing metaphor).
Talk to every faculty member whose work is tangential to yours. Talk to any PhD students who went to industry… what would they have worked on next from their PhD if they didn’t go that route? Talk to visiting faculty (even if they are visiting via zoom) about where the interesting problems are. Heck, talk to your advisor again in a week when they have a chance to come at the question “fresh” or perhaps with a different prompt by you based on something from one of those papers. (Even if you don’t follow everything, can you see something interesting there?)

Not really an answer, but this was getting too long for a comment.
In addition to what @Magicsowon's just posted answer suggested, you might also try find a topic that requires relatively little background study and has a strong potential for a lot of low-hanging fruit, without worrying about how significant or respected the topic is, as long as it's sufficient to get you your degree in the time you have. Unfortunately algebraic geometry is probably one of the least likely subjects (at the current time) to find such a topic.
Examples of what I'm talking about are topic 1 (although it's been getting "milked dry" quickly in recent years) and topic 2 (in the 1970s) and topic 3 (in the late 1960s to early 1970s) and topic 4 (especially 1990s, but still might work today). However, none of these are remotely connected to algebraic geometry, and I only used them as examples because I know next to nothing about algebraic geometry other than what I said above about not having much low-hanging fruit. Well, there might be some pathological behavior in algebraic geometry that you could use the "topic 1" hammer on, I don't know.

My advice would be to find a new advisor as quickly as possible.  It doesn't sound like you have much actual time invested in algebraic geometry, so feel free to switch fields.
To find a new advisor I recommend attending lots of talks by professors.  Attend seminars.  Somewhere in one of these talks there will be a problem which is intelligible to you, interesting, and has the ability for you to start computing examples immediately.  Approach the professor about writing your thesis on this problem.  Your thesis will consist of whatever progress you can make on the problem (perhaps solving it in a special case).

I think it's too late to get a new advisor at this stage, unless they can somehow get extension for several more years.

Maybe some kind of co-supervision (even informal) with a much, much more hands-on faculty member would be an option.

@Tom Honestly, the entire degree is at risk right now.  I do not think that continuing with an advisor who has no investment, in an area which requires a ton of background learning to gain any foothold, is a wise plan.   OP needs something they can start playing with immediately.

The correct and long answers are "ask your supervisor", "do what needs to be done", and so on.
But there is a short and almost ubiquitous, generic answer. It is especially suitable for the last PhD year. Maybe not in your case, but in may others. What should you do in your last PhD year?
Write.

How is this answer relevant given the OP's situation?

It might not help OP, but it might help others, who also ask what to do in their last PhD year.

-1 It seems that the OP has no original research to write about yet (hence their question about what they should do), so this isn't very helpful.

This answer fits OP question title: What should I do with a year left in PhD?. It however doesn't speak to OP dilemma and poser: Do you have experience with similar situation? What should I do.. OP needs context-aware practical solutions


text:
My name was omitted from a paper I (mostly) authored - what should I do?
I was recently asked to be tangentially involved in writing a review paper as part of a research group I am involved in. Originally, I was just supposed to review some sections I have particular expertise in once they had been written.
With the time of year, many people moved positions and I was asked to write said paragraphs. With some sickness absences, etc., I ended up writing the entire paper. Recently, a draft was sent to me to review, with only minor changes made from the version I had written from scratch but without my name on it.
This has obviously upset me as I feel that my name should at least be mentioned on a paper I wrote entirely. From a purely ethical standpoint I think that is quite clear. What am I wondering is, is this commonly accepted practice? Or is this something I can take issue with?
For context, I am an undergraduate student working in a research group. I have been part of this group for quite a time, and the people in it have done a lot for my career to date. This is the field I want to pursue after graduation and I am apprehensive of causing a fuss and hurting my career, but at the same time I feel this is a complete abuse of my time and effort.

Did they remove your name, or is it possible that they just forgot to add it because they were only looking at the content of the paper?

Do you have all the drafts and communication with your supervisor about the review saved? In case it gets dirty, the better and more detailed proof you have that you done the work with the acknowledgment of your prof, the better your chances.

When you say "write paragraphs", does that mean that you produced all the content in the paragraph as well, or that you just formulated out the content which was already there as a bullet point list or similar?

What was your role in the production of the content of the article? Did you just typeset the handwritten text given to you? Or was the content something you created from scratch? Something in-between? Talk with your immediate supervisor 1-on-1, and ask for their opinion as to whether you should be included. They can explain their views.

Just to clarify - in the version you had written from scratch - did you list yourself as an author?

Who provided the facts and interpretations for the paper's contents? Were any of those demonstrably your own contributions?

did you contribute to the actual research? if not you do not really have any claim to the paper. Papers list the authors research contribution even if it is assumed not labour. A company might of say manufactured the project that does not mean they will get anything more than an acknowledgement. Same goes with writing. I know this is not what you'd like to hear and I do not necessarily agree with your treatment it's just my experience has been thus even though I researched at a world leading university. ...

...Usually authorship is agreed in advance and even then a certain amount of bitching can occur as to the order of names. It is especially infuriating when companies sponsor research - 10 people that did nothing usually are listed as authors.

Based on your account, it sounds clear that you have a very strong claim for co-authorship; I would recommend asserting it tactfully but firmly.
As ever, when there’s a halfway-plausible good-faith interpretation, I recommend assuming that in your initial approach.  You could write something like

Dear A, B, and C, Thank you for the review copy; I’ll follow up with detailed comments shortly.  May I just check upfront before continuing — is it intentional that I’m not listed as an author, or just an oversight?  When I was asked to write the section on XYZ, I understood this as an invitation to join as a co-author, and had been working with that understanding — especially considering the amount of the present version that I ended up writing.

Whether or not the omission was actually accidental (which seems unlikely but not impossible), this gives an easy and face-saving way for the other authors to accept your claim and add you as co-author.  By not accusing anyone, you lower the chance of anyone getting defensive and confrontational, and maximise the chances of settling it amicably with all relationships intact and no feathers ruffled. And if someone does choose to push back, then they have to set out their own case explicitly, and it’s clearer to others that that person is actively excluding you.
Your claim here sounds strong enough that if the other authors don’t accept it, you have good grounds to take the matter to an higher authority — depending on your setting that could be a head of department, a university ombudsman, or similar (and you can contact the editor of any journal they submit to).  And before that, of course, you can tell the other authors that you intend to do this, and hope that they may back down to this “threat”.  But taking it to this level will burn bridges with people whose support can be helpful for your career — so I’d consider this as a worst-case fallback scenario, and hope to avoid it if possible.

Making errors in the author list is a common accident.  I almost sent out a paper with my own name misspelled.  I told a coauthor one what the author order would be then put it in the other way.  This happens to me when fiddling with latex errors and getting distracted from the content.  In any case, this is a solid answer and it may lead to a resolution where everyone saves face.

@Terry "Making errors in the author list is a common accident" - "errors" like "typos", or "errors" like "forgetting one out of four authors" (and not one of a few hundred)? I don't think I've ever heard about the latter.

I have completely inadvertently cut (rather than copied) a coauthor's name while editing. I did fix it ASAP though. Sorry again, Spiros!

If the author section of the document was written months, or a year, ago, it might not be a case of "forgetting an author", but just "no-one went back and edited it", and you can get "page blind" to that stuff at the start of the document. I've submitted a paper that still said "Author Name" at the top, which was checked by myself and the two other authors.

@ChrisJefferson: I had that too, the paper was from insert author here and insert author here. It was for a conference and the organizers said that this is a very unusual name that  the authors share :)

@user151413 I think there is some reason to believe this was in fact an accident, in that the paper was sent to OP for them to review; it sounds like they're treating OP like an author, except for not having their name on it. Possibly a "too many cooks"-type situation where everyone assumes someone else has drafted the author list and ensured it is correct.

@BryanKrause The original title talked about being "removed" from the author list ... apparently that got changed. (I wonder if that implies that the OP might also be too emotional about other aspects.)

@user151413 No, the original title was a vague "am I being naive"; the "removed" title was added by someone besides OP, and since edited while awaiting clarification from OP.

@BryanKrause Indeed, I had a look at the edit history and realized; apologies to the OP (who never claimed that, as it seems). Very misleading edit ...

If it's a matter of "no-one went back and edited it" as Chris suggests, then the OP could even address it by apologizing for forgetting to add his own name to the authors list.

I agree with the first point of @PLL's answer, and would take it even a bit further:

You are a co-author of the paper.
I would recommend asserting this tactfully but firmly.

However, I disagree with his concrete suggestion on two points:

Don't ask why your name was removed. Assume it was a mistake, and when returning the draft, put your name back, and mention – not even at the top of the email – that your name had been removed by mistake. Otherwise you are recognizing in advance that it is conceivable that you should not be listed as an author, which is not the case.

Before sending out an email, consider talking to a more senior researcher involved with the paper informally. That's when I would consider mentioning the fact that your name was removed, and seeing how s/he reacts. That's because email is a medium of record, especially if there are multiple recipients; so it might be better to maximize the amount of information you have before you "commit" to a response.

I prefer this approach to the other answers. There is one remaining issue - "put your name back" assumes that OP's name was there before, and it's nit clear to me if that is really the case. If not, then an additional question becomes in which position OP should put their name.

@RafG: I thought that was clearly implied, by fair comment I suppose.

+1 for assuming incompetence before assuming malice.

@Alexis: That is just a pleasant side-effect of self-entitelement I guess :-)

author
/ˈɔːθə/
noun
a writer of a book, article, or document.

If you wrote the paper you almost by definition should be listed as an author. So yes, it's something you can take issue with, and you can/should tell the principal investigator that you want to be listed as an author.

Agree though some tact in how you talk to the principal investigator rather than just telling them

@Ben: Agreed, this sounds absolutely unethical.  But the tact isn’t to protect the bigshot’s feelings — it’s to maximise chances of OP getting the best outcome possible (fair credit on the paper, continuing good relationships with as many people as possible, etc).

@PLL based on word choicer, it's quite possible that Ben isn't familiar with the goal of "getting the best outcome possible" or if they are, it's not their top priority :-)

In my view, the top priority and best outcome in this situation is reform, which is achieved by proceeding directly to an ethics complaint.  Good relationships may be restored when the other party apologises for their unethical conduct and has a misconduct process against them come to its natural conclusion.

@Ben Once you've made sure it wasn't a typo, sure. I've taken out entire paragraphs before because I leant my hand on the touchpad and selected half the document, then pressed a letter. If it was deliberate, it's attempted misconduct. If it was an accident that gets corrected, it's of nearly no consequence.

It sounds like you are essentially the primary author of the paper, in which case the person who removed your name from the draft is acting in a highly unethical manner.  That is really bad.  You can certainly raise it as an issue.  Start by raising it with the PI and then consider your options.  In my view that behaviour would even warrant proceeding to a formal complaint to the ethics board at your university (and then watching the person quirm as they try to pass off the removal of your authorship as an error).  Such action would most likely breach academic honesty requirements for faculty and could be considered misconduct.
Whilst it is not reasonable to remove your name from the paper when you are the primary author, in future you should always negotiate authorship prior to beginning work on a project, and you should renegotiate if the scope of your work increases.

It looks like you were initially asked just to proofread and/or review the paper, which is not enough to list you as author. Later, the circumstances changed and you were tricked into ghostwriting the entire paper -- well, too bad, but that's on you. Now, you technically can argue about having your name on the paper, but I'd advise against it because that would be at least a bit arrogant because writing the whole paper was not what you were officially asked for. Therefore, you should not be officially featured as a co-author.

I feel this is a complete abuse of my time and effort.

Negative mentality. What you did was a favor: you helped your friends and therefore strengthened the network of allies who would, in turn, help you if you face any problem in the future. Well, as far as I understand they technically were not yet your friends, just your acquaintances from a research group -- but they are surely closer to being your actual friends now than before you have helped them. Who knows: maybe due to some unforeseen circumstances you run short on time some day, and your friends will end up writing the whole paper for you!

If you already wrote a piece, there is nothing you can do about it. My advice would be to not push about your authorship. It would not give you anything except making powerful and idiotic enemies. There is nothing worse then Fools and Power combined together, and most probably you just stepped onto such exemplar in your life. You won't change anything. If your desire is to become scientist, you cannot waste your life on morons. Just remember - science is full of morons, and it won't be your last time.
PS. Copypaste your parts and send it to few other respectable scientists, saying you wrote it yourself and asking opinions. It will be your protection in a chance in future something will go wrong.
PPS. Get yourself familiar with encryption for adding signatures to emails etc. It won't be the last time. Emails can be modified to fake your incompetence.
Afterword. Cut off your pride, there is no other way. Physicists in poor countries are digging electronic garbage for parts. You are not alone, bro! I am not saying, that science is permanent struggle, but surely it is for people who are unlucky enough. And you can't let luck to influence your outcomes.

If you really only modified the paper, you’re not supposed to be listed as a co-author. If you created (added new ideas that were used in the research project,) your name should be listed.
However, being that you worked a lot on the paper and, this is the field you’d like to pursue in the future, even if you were not part of the “real authors” you could ask the head of the group if by any chance, is there a way to “include or mention your help in the paper” to be able to use it in the future as part of your resume.
It might help you to get your name listed. If it doesn’t work, remember that your effort won’t be forgotten. You can always mention it when writing an application or use that experience to open doors for other projects.
Another recommendation is to ask the main author if he/she would be oK to recommend you in the future when you apply for xxx ( your chosen field,) etc.

"If you really only modified the paper, you’re not supposed to be listed as a co-author." Nope.

I ended up writing the entire paper.

This issue is not something specific to academia. If your responsibilities are about to change, you should negotiate new conditions before plunging into work.
To put it more directly, you should not "end up" doing something like "writing the entire paper". Your role had changed de-facto halfway through the project, so you should have discussed this change with the rest of the team right away. Just hoping for the best outcome is not a good plan.
If I were you, I'd express your disappointment, but it might or might not work.

Seems a little like blaming a victim for being exploited. How should an undergraduate expect to know the normal procedures to follow.

Well, now the OP knows the normal procedures to follow, and this is the point to take from my answer.

@rg_software: Sometimes life happens and responsibilities change without anyone finding the right moment to re-negotiate — and in most reasonably fair environments, some kind of credit can still be given afterwards.  If OP was asking for extra pay, say, then I’d agree with you — that’s unlikely to be re-negotiable after the fact.  But co-authorship is a completely reasonable expectation here, and in any academic setting I know, it would be unethical for the other authors to exclude OP (if their account is accurate).

@PLL, I agree with that, and that's I said "I'd express your disappointment" -- so I support the OP's wish to renegotiate. However, the OPs might recognize that from the other party's view there was no plan to offer an authorship, and this kind of complaint might turn up to be a surprise for them, too. In any case, I advise the same as most other people here: negotiate in advance, not afterwards.


text:
I might be rediscovering someone else's result. What should I do?
I am writing a paper presenting a mathematical theorem I recently proved. However, while reading one of the papers that I am citing, I found out that the same result (or something very similar) might be present in the author's Ph.D. thesis.
To be more precise, the author only alludes to the existence of such result, adding a reference to his thesis. The problem is that such thesis is not available online and is written in Russian; moreover, it appears that the author has left academia, given that his last publication dates back to year 2000.
In this context, I am not sure what to do. To be honest, I am tempted to simply ignore the author's claim, as I have no means of verifying it,  omitting any mention of it in my paper. Could this be considered unethical or harm my reputation in any way?

Would this be your main result in the paper or not?

"I am writing a paper" what is the function of paper, is it like an academic paper for journal or term paper? what is your job: phd, post-doc, faculty?

I had a similar problem with my thesis. When I tried to publish a paper, the main result was rejected on the basis that it was a well known old result. On examination of the literature I found that a related but incomplete result had been published. My supervisor said that I should not worry too much because everyone does things their own way. My paper as a whole was my own work. On the other hand, it took an international flight and visiting the other academics institute to chat with them for a week before they agreed to back off and even became a reviewer for my thesis.

You can add a section at the end of your article entitled "Note added" and include an honest summary of the above descriptions that you wrote. I have seen some people receive positive feedback by doing this.

As the Tom Lehrer song goes: "And Nicolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky is his name! Oi!"

Do you have a Russian speaking colleague in your Department? Can you ask them to translate a relevant part for you?

dude, of course you mention this other person's work, especially now since there is public record of the fact you know better. how is this even a struggle? do not ruin your reputation over an ethical violation.

You do have means of verifying it - for example write to the author and ask him for more information or a copy of his thesis, contact any coauthors on the paper you have read, find someone who speaks Russian who can help you, contact the library of his university to get the thesis, ask your university or national library if they can help you.
If you try those things and still cannot find or verify his proof, then you can publish your paper, but you should mention that the other person alluded to an earlier proof of it and explain that you were unable to find or verify it.

You can also write to the department of the university in which the person worked.

I'd add that some librarians are a) freakishly good at tracking things down and b) really enjoy doing it. If you know one, ask!

This does not answer if ignoring the earlier result "could this be considered unethical" so is really incomplete.

@Terry Loring  The 2nd paragraph hints at an answer to that. But for a straight answer and other very useful information, please see the answer by Kostya_I.

I remember Andrew Wiles saying the first thing he did was to write to Pierre de Fermat and upon not receiving any answer, he went ahead and published his theorem.

@gib  Indeed.  My eye jumped over that.

@Matt It always amazes me when academics have to point out librarians.  It's like if people had free access to plumbers but still stubbornly tried to fix their own pipes with chewing gum and cello-tape, only to have an occasional lonely voice break through the miasma to remind us how freakishly good a professional plumber is at fixing a broken pipe.... why is this news to anyone conducting research?!

What you are contemplating is a major ethical violation.
First, it's unclear why you mention that the thesis is in Russian; it's completely irrelevant. The obligation to acknowledge prior work and give due credit exists independently of its language. As an author, you must honestly figure out and explain what new you are adding to the literature, if any. If your result is not new, you cannot publish it in a journal of original research, at least not as the only/main content of the paper. In this case, you may consider putting your paper on arXiv, making it completely clear that it is an exposition of known results.
To be honest, in the age of Google translate, with a math paper, and being an expert on the topic (so more-or-less expecting what's there), it's not so difficult either.
Second, as soon as a published work is concerned, its availability is your problem - and most certainly, non-availability online does not nullify any of the above-mentioned obligations. But in practice, most Russian dissertations are not so hard to obtain. First, every dissertation has a 20p. summary, called "автореферат", that is published in about 100 copies and in many cases can be freely downloaded from the website of the Russian State Library. If that is not enough for your purpose, Russian state library also has a physical copy of every dissertation, and there are services that will scan it and send you a copy for about 10 euro. Disclaimer: the legality of this service seems to be OK, at least in practical terms, but I cannot vouch.
On top of that, there are obvious solutions, such as contacting the author or e.g. their department/collaborators in Russia for a copy of the dissertation or the "автореферат".

In many cases, verifying that a certain theorem exists in another language is not so hard as symbols and formulas tend to look the same in any language.

@TerryLoring It depends on the type of math you do. I would say that most theorems in my area tend to be written more often in plain words than in symbols and formulas...

This is a bit over the top. The fact that it's only appeared in Russian is relevant - it means it's much more useful for it to be published once more but this time in English. And the fact that the result has already appeared isn't a show-stopper. The original proof may be cumbersome, make slightly different assumptions, be wrong! etc etc or be in different setting, making the significance of the result less clear etc etc

@innisfree, what you are arguing with? I agree with all your points. I suggested myself that it would be very useful of OP to put their paper on arXiv, even if its only added value is English. In my experience, a reputable journal would not consider such a paper for publication. As you suggest, there may be more of added value, in which case a journal will try to assess it, but that would be independent of the language of the original. That said, nothing is wrong with trying to publish as long as the contribution is accurately described.

@innisfree It's relevant to those things, but it's not relevant to the question of whether the thesis potentially containing the result should be located, understood and if necessary, cited as the original source of the result.

Does anyone here who doesn't speak Russian have any experience with reading Russian math papers translated into English via google translate? Would you recommend that method?

@Stef, why not try yourself? mathnet.ru contains tons of articles in Russian free to download, for many of which a human translation into English exists, if you want to compare (e.d., "Алгебра и Анализ" is translated cover-to-cover as "St. Petersburg math journal".).

@Kostya_I Because I already spend a large amount of my time reading research papers without google translate!

It was getting too big in the comments, so I recast this as an answer.
Mention the other claimed proof, and offer your own proof.
I had a similar problem with my thesis. When I tried to publish a paper, the main result was rejected on the basis that it was a well known old result. On examination of the literature I found that a related but incomplete result had been published.
My supervisor said that I should not worry too much because everyone does things their own way. If you honestly did it yourself, the chances are that you will have something new to say.
My paper as a whole was my own work. On the other hand, it took an international flight and visiting the other academics institute to chat with them for a week before they agreed to back off. It was a successful trip as they even became a reviewer for my thesis.
If you did not copy the result, if it was genuinely your own work, then I do not see that you are committing any moral outrage. If the result happens to be well published and you can add nothing new, then the paper should be rejected for lack of originality.
The moral problem would be if you read the person's work, copied the idea, and claimed it yourself.
But, you should definitely note that you became aware of a CLAIM that there is a proof - a claim that you tried to but failed to validate.
At the very least, the result appears not to be well known in the literature. And that is important. Bringing attention to something not well known is useful, as is (potentially) giving a new proof.
The moral problem here is that now that you know that someone claims an earlier proof - as much as you might be tempted - you should not ignore that you now know. You might wish that you never found out. But, that is not for us to decide. What is for us to decide is what shall we do with that information.

+1 Always be honest. If you suspect that there might be proof somewhere in literature, which is not readily available, just say so and proceed. There is no guarantee, that you work has not been done already by somebody else.

The final lines here sound an awful lot like Gandalf’s advice to Frodo.  :)

@Wildcard

Yes, concealing information from the reader in order to make your work appear more novel or to avoid doing more work is unethical. Whether it would harm your reputation depends on whether readers of your paper will be able to deduce that you did this on purpose, which is anyone's guess.
In any case, just because a proof of some result exists in some obscure, hard to access Russian source doesn't mean that you cannot publish the theorem. It merely means that you cannot claim priority.
Ideally, you should invest a reasonable effort into trying to find this proof (to establish your priority or lack thereof) and if it exists, to compare it to your own (to determine whether the merit of your proof lies only in being more accessible to the reader, or if the proof is substantially different).
A less ideal but somewhat understandable course of action would be to state that, in effect, a proof might exist but you didn't feel like investing the effort into digging up an obscure Russian thesis and having it translated into English.

I think instead of "some obscure, inaccessible Russian source" it would be better to say "a Russian source that is not online"

@gib Why would "online" be the decisive criterion? According to this, any thesis older than about 25 years would not be a source. Talk to librarian! - they might well be able to get you a copy of the thesis (not sure if this is the case for a thesis in Russia, but it certainly will work for a thesis in your country). The answer rightfully uses "inaccessible", and this is indeed the point. Suggesting to take non-availablility online, and the need to talk to a librarian to get hold of a copy, as a reason to ignore it is a rather lousy excuse!

@gib I changed it to "hard to access", which seems like a fair summary of the situation to me . As you and Buffy point out, it sounds like one needs to either contact the author or the department.

I don't think it's that easy. First, one cannot publish (in a journal) a proof that is already in the literature, at least as the main content of an original article. Second,  publishing an exposition will likely lead to people citing the exposition in lieu of the original work. Therefore, if you really have no new content to add, an appropriate course of action is to publish a translation instead. A translator, justifiably, receives less credit, in particular, they are not listed as an author.

Lots of things used to be hard to access, and we did our best using letters, librarians, and any other connections we could try. "I can't find it with Google in less than 5 minutes" is not a good excuse.

@JonCuster I don't think we are in disagreement. I am, quite explicitly, not suggesting it as the prefered course of action, but simply as something that's infinitely preferable to lying by omission. Being a lazy but honest researcher (and hoping that the referees won't call me on it) is much less serious than being a dishonest researcher.

@Kostya_I I disagree that, outside of the very top journals, one cannot publish as a main result a proof of a theorem that has already been proved by someone else. This depends entirely on the value that the paper brings to the mathematical community, which it can do in various ways. Here it's clear what the value would be, namely making a proof of the theorem easily accessible to the English-speaking reader. Unless this is done in a dishonest way, I fail to see the problem with this.

@Kostya_I Re your second point, surely translating is not a realistic option here? The OP is hardly going to translate the thesis into English and the idea that they are going to convince someone else to do this strikes me as pure science fiction, unless the result is a major breakthrough. (And if they did, the result would be what – a pdf sitting on the OP's webpage somewhere?) Who benefits from the idea that publishing further proofs is now verboten? Certainly not the original author – their choices are between the result staying obscure or gaining further attention thanks to a new paper.

@AdamPřenosil, I agree with the practical side, but still I've never seen a paper in a reputable math journal saying "our main result was proven in X, the goal of this paper is to provide an English source.". I feel it would be frowned upon, since if the goal of your paper can be achieved by translation, it sets a benchmark on how much credit you can claim. And if the result is not important enough for anyone to translate, why it would it be important enough to publish as an original contribution with a different author?

@AdamPřenosil - we are in complete agreement, and I should have worded that better.

@Kostya_l Fair enough about the first point – one would hope for some added value beyond that. On the other hand, very few researchers are going to spend their time translating a result which is (let us assume) perfectly publishable but average simply out of charity. That doesn't mean that they would not like to read about the result. I don't know about you, but my bar for papers which I'd be willing to spend my time translating is much, much higher than the bar for papers I'd recommend to accept as a referee (as evidenced by the fact that I haven't translated any).

In addition to what has been mentioned in other answers:
You may find that your proof is substantially different from the existing proof.  If so, this is still a potentially valuable contribution to the literature.  This is especially true if your proof contains a "new idea" which could be applied in other situations.  Comparing and contrasting your approach with the other approach should be part of your paper.

Other answers describe how you can find more information on the thesis in question. I agree with others that you should mention the possible predecessor. However, Russian theses are considered unpublished (at least that was the situation in the past), although the requirement was that main results of a Russian thesis had to be published. On the other hand, if the predecessor quotes his thesis and nothing else, maybe the result was only in the thesis and thus unpublished. This may be a basis for you to publish the result and its proof.
I was in your situation some time ago. I derived a pretty important result and found a similar claim in a book. I issued an arxiv preprint quoting their claim and mentioning that I had not been able to find the proof. After that I contacted the authors of the book. It was not easy to sort out, but eventually they explained that they had in mind something quite different from what I derived.
EDIT (Feb 14, 2022): By the way, I find it amusing that, technically, Wiles was in a situation similar to that of the OP, as Fermat had claimed having a proof of his Last Theorem :-)

But let's not forget that that plagiarism is  shoeing someone else's ideas as your own. It does not matter where exactly they were published. It can happen in published research, it can hapoen in homeworks, it can happen in belletry. If you dfound this idea in an existing thesis, you have to cite it and clearly say that it already appeared there.

@VladimirF Finding out that someone else had the same idea before is not plagarism, nor to be honest are "ideas" worth much. The proof matters the notion that a proof exists does not.

@JackAidley What is plagiarism is taking someone else's ideas and saying they are yours. I never said that independent discovery was plagiarism. But finding an "unpublished" proof in a thesis and publishing it as your proof is 100% plagiarism. Publishing a proof that you re-discovered but staying silent on the issue that you did find out it has been discovered before is unethical in my books. It is not straight-out plagiarism, but it is deliberate priority usurping.

@VladimirF Then we are in agreement.

@VladimirF : But I specifically noted that the OP should mention the possible predecessor and thus acknowledge his claim. If the OP finds the thesis and the proof, they should acknowledge the proof. But until the OP finds the earlier proof, publishing the OP's proof is not plagiarism. See also my EDIT.

Talk to your library. They usually have a service to scout things which are difficult to find (long distance lending), also some of the better libraries have a translation service; but usually a professor needs to sign off on that request.

It’s a rough situation to be in.
My honest opinion: Is it Unethical? Yes. Very unethical to ignore the Russian author’s claims. Think if the situation was reversed and, you were the first author..
Plus, you were able to find the truth. Count on others being capable of finding out. You don’t want to risk ruining your career for it.
I agree with others, try your best to contact the author or Department via a library and on your own.
If not possible to contact, make a note explaining that you found x and y information tried to get a hold of it via ABCD methods, but you couldn’t verify or review it in depth. For this reason you decided to continue your research project.
Good luck!

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
How to follow up with a prospective supervisor in such condition?
This question is an extension of my previous question:How many days should I wait for e-mail of Prospective Supervisor in this condition
I e-mailed a prof in France on Jan 10 asking if he is interested in discussing PhD research opportunities( I am interested in his research work and want to do PhD under his supervision) and he replied me on Jan 24 to send him my master's thesis and CV, which I sent him the same day.  He also wrote in the same e-mail :Thank you for writing and please apologize the long delay, which was not related to your CV or skill.
He didn't  replied till Feb 7 and as user Buffy suggested in this question: How many days should I wait for e-mail of Prospective Supervisor in this condition ,
after 2 weeks I wrote following short mail to him:
Dear Dr. X,
I just wanted to ask if you have any additional guidance based on my CV and Master’s Thesis sent to you and what further steps it is appropriate for me to take now.
Y
2 weeks are about to pass and I still got no reply.

What steps I should take now as I really want to work with this Prof. and he has not replied to my previous e-mail till now?

I think I should send him a remainder e-mail but how should I frame it.
Thanks!

Your meaning is unclear. Did he reply on Feb 7 or not at all?

@Buffy he didn't replied on Feb 7.On jan 24 he asked me to send him my master's thesis and CV and on Feb7, I wrote him the short e-mail.

I understand your pain. But if the Prof. is interested they will come back to you. Looks unlikely. Do not pester. Look for other Profs.

Please update https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182494/how-to-follow-up-with-a-prospective-supervisor-in-such-condition

If things are not moving, you should try to move them a bit.
However, you should be proactive, not just "pestering" with reminders, follow-up mails and other request for attention/time.
There are two possibilities:

the professor did not yet read your CV / thesis;
the professor read your CV / thesis;

Either way, the professor did not yet make a choice, although if they read your CV/thesis, it is likely there is no interest in you as a future PhD student (otherwise you would have been contacted, no professor leaves interesting profiles. i.e. cheap and smart workforce, falling through). Additionally, there is no explicit funding available for the PhD poistion that you would like to have, so for the professor there are two tasks:

evaluate your profile;
evaluate fundings for the PhD position that would be created (and filled by you);

Therefore you can still improve your situation, convincing them you are a motivated and competent PhD candidate: try to get your own funding.
Have a look at the answers given here. If you find a relevant funding source XYZ for you, you can write the professor that you are interested in applying for XYZ grant. This way you will force the hand, because the professor will either be supportive (which means your profile was interesting) or not.

please note: although professors are interested in smart and competent candidates, they are still human and their evaluation of "smartness" of a certain person is absolutely subjective and therefore should not be taken at a personal level, but simply in the framework of the application itself.

@tensors_are_4_engineers yes, thanks, I did not want to imply that professor have the holy power of judging people.

If they haven't replied at all then they are probably not interested. You can follow up or not, but don't expect anything from them.
Your recent follow up with them seems about right, asking for guidance and what further steps you might take. The tone of that is about right.
However, their lack of response is an indication that they might not be very helpful even if they did accept you as a student. Look for other options.
There are a lot of possible reasons for a delay. Many of them are valid. But if the professor isn't sick or away from the office, then a reply within two weeks should be expected.
The person can, of course, be very busy, but they can also just not have a real need or desire to take on another student at the moment. Busy professors may not be the most helpful in advising you.
And you need to be realistic about their desire to work with you. For many reasons they might not be all that excited. Perhaps they don't see a match of interests as you do.
There is no reason why you can't keep following up, and perhaps you can get something positive to happen, but I strongly suggest that you follow up on all viable alternatives. It won't happen just because you want it to happen.

I have made some edits to make the question more clear. Kindly have a look.

They replied to my 1st e-mail where they asked for my master's thesis and CV.

"Moreover, it is an indication that they might not be very helpful even if they did accept you as a student", I think it is too early to say this.

Perhaps, but a bit of a warning sign.

It is possible that the professor is very busy. In that case, all you can do is to patiently wait.
It is also possible that the professor lost interest in you after they read your CV and thesis. In that case, sending another e-mail is probably useless.
There is another possibility that you probably didn't think of. What if the professor is infected with Omicron Covid-19 virus? They are probably rest at home until recovered. In that case, don't bother them. Patiently wait until they are okay.
The bottom line, don't send too many e-mails. Just wait.
P.S. This answer is based on the assumption that you "really want to work with this prof".

As a master's student myself, I have faced this issue as well. Do not worry as it seems to happen quite often that it appears.
The professors are busy with many tasks and have limited time. It also can mean that Professor might be looking for a different experience than you currently have. I am sorry sometimes it happens.
The case with most of the people I know including my seniors who did their Master Thesis faced this issue. One of the tips my senior mentioned is that if it is really important then in the subject it can be mentioned Urgent. Then type the issues in the mail clearly and with a good structure for ex: in points. This worked for me.
Second, most people I know mail the professor each day/alternative day. I know it sounds bad, I would not do it myself if it was not absolutely necessary.
If it was me, I would frame it this way :

Dear XXX,
I hope you are doing well.
I was hoping to hear from you regarding so and so.
*Add your questions *
I would really appreciate it if we can arrange a meeting and discuss
this further in person.

Make sure they can still access your documents and emails which you have sent before in the same thread so that it would be convenient for them to have a look.
One more tip: Make sure to ask for a one-to-one meeting next time in an email. It provides a better understanding. It can be just 15 min call.
I must say, start looking for another Professor. Do not put all hopes in this one person. They might not be so much into the same field as you would like but you can meet somewhere in the middle.


text:
About quality of research in Pure mathematics in Chinese universities and conditions for Foreign students to thrive there
I am a resident of Asia and I have done my master's in mathematics last year(2021) from a university ranked 400 in mathematics in the world. and I am applying for PhD positions in Europe. I didn't applied to USA because instead of preparing for GRE and TOEFL , I wanted to spent that time self-studying more specialized courses in mathematics.
But, as I applied to UK, I came to know that unlike USA, UK has very less funding for international students. I had also planned to apply to Germany, France, Sweden, Australia but quite a number of professors whose interests align with mine are not taking PhD students for the next year.
Now, I thought that maybe I should write to professors in China as in QS ranking there are about 10-15 universities in top 100 universities in math. I am thinking of applying if I can get admission in top 50-100 universities and will only apply to universities in the range 50-100.
I don't have any knowledge of Chinese( spoken or written) but I am good in English. I don't want to do a PhD in India because research and teaching quality is not good in my country.
I did my masters in India from a prestigious university of the country and was involved in a couple of internships in India at other prestigious institutes. It seemed that instead of even guiding and spending time teaching their courses with quality a lot of Prof. were interested in their own research and flattering with bosses, not even keeping with what they promised while agreeing to supervise for a project/ internship. Some of the profs were bullies.
My question: I know China is communist and authoritarian but that certainly doesn't matter to me because I am an introvert person who was never interested in politics and making new friends or co-curricular activities. I don't speak Chinese or can write in it but if selected I can learn it as much as I can, before joining the course.

What matter to me the most is that  the research quality of Chinese Universities and is the environment good enough to for a foreign students to thrive? and what is the commitment of the Prof's to students? Although, a lot of Chinese universities excel in QS ranking but not so much information is available regarding above of my question on Internet. So, can you please let me know about it, if you are aware of it?

Before applying I thought to ask here as although I have searched on Internet a lot regarding it, but still I don't have enough  information and I will spent my 4-5 very important years in PhD. So, I don't want to be at a place where I can't thrive in research as I already know how it feels due to some experiences in my country.
Certainly, one of my prof. suggested me to apply to Europe and he doesn't knows anything about china as looking at his CV I can see he never collaborated with anyone in China or gave any talk in china.
Thank you very much!

Closely related: Postdoc in China. Looking on advice about culture shock and pursuing a career in industry

@cag51 Looked at it and also at 2 posts of the user Scientist.

Very busy lately, will try to answer later. But in short: there is a lot of opportunity in China, yet there are numerous pitfalls. Taking a PhD there will teach you a lot and pave your way into local openings... if you can take it. I recommend the experience if you're brave and hardheaded, but it will be surely hard in unexpected ways. Perhaps a good local girlfriend/wife would help, which is a challenge in itself.

@Scientist I understand, academia is very busy. Thank you very much for your comments. Kindly answer whenever you have spare time as I am sure that this question will help a lot of other people as china is a large and rapidly developing country. Thanks!

Which programs are you considering? The quality of research of the C9 (from what I heard) are of course quite decent and mostly rigorous, and I am sure that you can have a fruitful PhD there if you choose a good advisor just like everywhere else that is decent. Also even though you might not have any interest in the politics, you must face the cultural differences. Learning a new language and surviving without knowing the language can be mentally hard.

@runeblaze I am only considering universities in 50-100 bracket in math

Sorry I missed that part in your main post. I see Zhejiang University in that bracket so they will be solid choices. I will leave my answer as an actual answer now.

This is only losely related, but it might still be relevant since you wrote that "[in] Germany [among other European countries] [...] quite a number of professors are not taking PhD students for the next year". In Germany, the limiting factor for taking PhD students is often the funding. There are not many structured PhD programs, and thus, PhD students are typically funded by professors either from their budget or from grants - or the PhD students have somekind of scholarship. [...]

[...] For students from various countries, a number of PhD scholarships in Germany are funded by DAAD ("Deutscher Adakemischer Austauschdienst", which is German for "German academic exchange service"). So that might be an option for you. [...]

[...] In case that you consider applying for such a scholarship, please beware that there is a deadline for applications each year and that applications typically need to be supported by a potential PhD advisor - so it is important to contact potential advisors well in advance and suggest to them that you would be interested in applying for a DAAD scholarship.

@JochenGlueck Ok. Thank you very much.

@JochenGlueck I looked at website of DAAD. Unfortunately, all deadlines have passed. Anyway, thank you.

This might not work, but I know some Indians who did their postdoc in China and who seemed to do fine. If you could find someone who is at the department who is Indian, I suggest contacting them via e-mail and see what they think.

I have worked in China as a postdoc some years ago. I am not very familiar with the field of Mathematics.
Mainly, my advice is that you should consider going to China, but know it will be a life-changing experience, in several ways. China is thriving, and they have a tradition at students being good with crunching numbers. It is fairly easy to find jobs and opportunity in China, if you know how to play their games. Learning their language and culture is bound to help you in the future.
Now, it will not be easy. Chinese culture is complex and very unique. I understand Indian culture is also profound. I think there may be many incompatibilities you will have to bridge. Also, not many Indians around in China, though I think Pakistani are more common and fairly familiar. There are some growing political disputes. Nobody knows how academia could be affected in the advent of war, hot or cold.
Personal advices if you take the leap of faith. Arrange beforehand how you can transfer money between countries. Get along with the Chinese, invest in relationships. Find who you can trust, and always show respect. Appreciate the food, find a hobby, don't let them get to you.
Good luck, be brave.

I will give a positive answer as to if it is possible for you to thrive in a Chinese university studying PhD level pure maths -- China's graduate-level mathematics education, while often considered to be inferior to that of Japan, is "good enough", and certainly people learn to become good maths researchers at the likes of USTC or Zhejiang University. Some people will even argue that you get an excellent mathematical education at Peking University (the hiring bar for new faculty is on par with UCSB last time I heard). You can encounter bad advisors, but I am sure that with strategic choosing they are avoidable. For the quality of education, I do not think you have that much to worry about, but of course I do not know the academic culture of India, and your baseline of bad advisors.
Now, I vaguely fear that you have much more to worry about than what you wrote on cultural differences. I don't know how much experience you have studying abroad, but learning a new language is hard, and you might just find that time for learning Chinese more worthwhile in actually padding your research experience and reapply next year to Europe. Living in a new country is also hard -- cultural differences show much before political differences. You might have no interest in blending in with the society or making any friends, and that might be entirely fine for your PhD years, but it might also end up being very damaging to your mental health. This is more so for China than for Europe in my opinion. American college kids that are on short exchange programs who have to be "rescued" back to the states due to mental health are not rare occurrences, just to really exaggerate the point. I personally do not know how difficult the logistics of applying are, but you might want to also factor that in.
Finally, while your advisor might not have any experiences with China, there might be someone relatively close to you from India who actually went to China for their graduate education. I really think that you will benefit from an exchange with them who had experienced both sides.


text:
How do Funding Opportunities in France work for Foreign PhD candidates?
I completed my masters in mathematics in 2021 and took a break to study more topics in Math before applying for PhD positions.
In december, I wrote to a prof of pure math at the Aix-Marseille University whose interests align with mine asking if he has an open PhD position available.
His reply was the following:

Dear X,
In Marseilles the chances of obtaining a fellowship from the local institute (ED 184) are very small due to local situation.
Being funded is a compulsory requirement for doing a PhD here.
The CNRS periodically has funding for collaboration with specific countries, but there currently no call involving India that I could find.
Some information can be found on the websites:https://campusbourses.campusfrance.org/#/catalog,https://www.inde.campusfrance.org/
but I haven't been able to find any relevant projects.
Best regards,
Y

Edit 1: He also asked me to send him my master's thesis and CV in the same above e-mail.
I checked the two websites mentioned in the mail again in detail but I couldn't find a fellowship call that would help me.
So, can you please tell how exactly funding opportunities work for foreign students for PhD fellowships in France?
From a charitable institute in India (Inlaks Foundation), a certain number of fellowships exist, but competition is very high for them.
Also, Cofund math in Paris has some funding but it's not for Aix- Marsaille University (it's only for universities in Paris).

Does this answer your question? How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in Country X?

I wonder if the France-oriented answer of this community wiki question about admissions would be helpful to you https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/181162/4249

It is oriented toward Computer Science, and discuss INRIA (which is a bit like CNRS, but more oriented toward Computer Science), but you can find reading Xavier Leroy's explanations useful.

Here’s the bad news upfront: it is unlikely that you will be able to start a PhD in that particular lab, at least before September. By far, the most common way of funding a PhD in France is that the lab secures funding before the student is found. If the professor thinks it is not possible, they probably are right. EDIT: this might be domain-dependent. That is the case at least in physics, see comments.
I believe there is no specific funding for Indian students in mathematics. That belief is based from my quick search on that website, but I have not read carefully all the hits for the relevant filters (Indian nationality, PhD level, mathematics). Campus France is the PR agency / embassy of FR higher ed for foreign students, so their website is probably the best place to start any search.
The rest of the answer is more about generalities for the way PhDs are funded in France.
Legal rules
In STEM at least, École Doctorales (aka ED, the administrative structures in charge of PhD students) require a proof of funding for three years before they register a PhD student. The exact minimum level of funding required varies across EDs, but it is typically around €1000/month - for ED184, it is €800/month as of February 2022.
Therefore, grants that cover only one year of study, or only some minimal costs, are insufficient, unless you can stack enough of them.
Timeline
You need to decide at which point of time you would accept to start your PhD. Most PhD positions are filled between September and December (September is in sync with the school calendar of finishing master’s students, but having interviews and finding the good candidate etc. can delay a bit). Asking in December usually means most of the spots are already taken.
If you are OK with a start in September 2022, and you did not mention that in your initial email, you should probably follow-up on your email with that information, asking the professor if they expect some funding to pop up by then. (Even if they answer positively, the usual job-search advice applies - keep looking for positions until you actually have one, do not fixate on getting a position in this particular lab; certainly do not waste six months of job-hunting just waiting to see if that position gets funded.)
The "local situation" part seems intentionally vague, so I would not press on what that situation exactly is.
Funding: the most common scheme
EDIT: a large part of this section comes from my experience, which may not be representative of all STEM fields. In particular, the assertion that >90% of position open before the candidate is sought is probably incorrect in non-physics fields.
Usually, the lab secures funding prior to the PhD student arrival. This funding can come from a plethora of sources, but how strong you are as a candidate has zero influence over whether the lab can get them.
In contrast, there are many funding sources that are reserved to specific applicants, or require a joint application from the lab and prospective student. Those are rare, and usually very specific (students from some particular schools, military personnel, CNRS technician staff etc.). I would say those are <10% of PhD positions, probably <5%, though I could not find actual figures.
Of the pre-funded positions, some are filled from the master’s student pool from internship/classes, the rest are advertised and filled similarly to a non-academia job. I would think most of the positions that are advertised on the internet are actually open, because there is no requirement (that I know of) to publicize those (OTOH, tenured jobs must be publicized due to "open competition" rules, but will often be pre-filled by a local candidate, in which case applying is a waste of time). The job posting will have a fairly detailed outline of the research program (bibliographies and figures are not uncommon).
Unfortunately, I am not aware of an exhaustive central repository of open PhD positions (or open positions in math). Campus France has some, but it does not contain all positions. An exhaustive search requires to look for those on the university/lab websites, one by one - for instance, here are the postings at the place I did mine.
I am not sure every university website has English postings, and even among those that do, I would not trust every English translation to be correct, so I would advise to browse in French if you can and/or retranslate via machine tools the French original of whatever English posting seems interesting to you.
Impact of funding source on your day-to-day duties
I would not care much about the funding source while searching, but you may want to ask questions before accepting an offer. A few generalities from my limited experience:

university/ED contracts usually mean significant teaching duties (might be a positive or a negative depending on how you see it); if you need a couple more months to finish the PhD beyond the official 3 years there is a decent chance to extend the contract in some fashion
grant contracts (ERC or ANR [agence nationale de la recherche]) usually mean less or no teaching, but (from what I heard) are more red-tape-heavy
CIFRE contracts (university/industry collab) usually mean better salary (compared to university contracts) and little to no teaching duties, but often entail rigid adherence to the research program (at the university, your professor cares that you publish good-quality science, but they will not care much if the topic is entirely different from what they thought it would be).

Thank you very much for such a detailed answer.

This reads like a great and detailed answer. It's quite different from my experiences in many aspects -- I wonder if you'd consider contributing what you wrote here to this community wiki answer about the PhD admissions process in France, would be great to have your perspective too https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/181162/4249

@penelope May I ask the general topic of your PhD? Mine was 2015-2018 (roughly the same as you) in physics (combustion science, but I kept in touch with many classmates in other areas of physics). Advisors may advertise potential PhD topics on their institutional web pages before any funding has been secured runs certainly contrary to the experience that I or my classmates had (assuming that "institutional web pages" means the "open PhD positions" page rather than "professor X’s page"). I will at the very least edit my answer here since it may paint a partial picture.

Unless you are strong in French, I suggest you to skip completely the funding through the french system and look elsewhere.
Since France is in the European Union, you will have better luck looking into european fundings, for example https://erc.europa.eu/news/new-agreement-india or even ask the consulate and similar institutions (for example https://www.inde.campusfrance.org/scholarships-for-indian-students#:~:text=The%20Embassy%20of%20France%20in%20India%20offers%20a%20scholarship%20for,France%2C%20medical%20insurance%20coverage%20etc. ).
If you want to have success in working with said professor and you are keen to get a compromise, I really suggest you to try to get funding to pursue a PhD in any european country, keep this professor from Marseille as reference for your project, once you get in Europe you will have the chance to work with him, even when based somewhere else, with a visa from an EU country you will get some freedom of movement (and possibly access to additional fundings).
Final note: please remember that to external world, mathemathics is a minuscule world, so try to draw your situation as much abstract as possible, look for scholarships/fundings affiliated with technology (STEM and even applied engineering).
Good luck!

funny note: there is a ridicolous "MAKE OUR PLANET GREAT AGAIN" https://www.inde.campusfrance.org/mopga program.

It is for people who already have a doctoral degree

@Jimmy that makes it even more ridicolous!

Unless you are strong in French, I suggest you to skip completely the funding through the french system and look elsewhere. Why is that? I know plenty of PhD students who didn't speak a word of French before starting their PhD here. keep this professor from Marseille as reference for your project Why would you keep as a reference someone whose only interaction with you is a clear rejection?

@EarlGrey I have same question "why should I skip completely the funding through the french system and look elsewhere"?

@N.I. It is not clear rejection, I didn't wrote in Question ( But edited now to write that ) that in the same e-mail he asked me send him my CV and copy of my master's thesis.

I know plenty of (former) PhD students in France that successfully completed their PhDs without mastering the language (myself included).

@penelope did you take care of obtaining the funding for your PhD in first place? this seems the point of the answer here. I know people that obtained their PhD in the US without mastering english, but there is no way they would have mastered the proposal submissions ...

@Tensors_are_4_engineers yes, I had to apply for funding together with my potential supervisors. Had to go out in front of a board of 12 researchers (from a variety of fields) and present my PhD project. Did it all in English, "promised" to learn French. Got full funding, courtesy of the French gvt.

@Jimmy because the learning curve of "mastering the french funding system" is very tough, the professor did not reject you but is not going to spend a tremendous effort on helping you either, likely because your situation requires additional complications in terms of visa&so on [1], with respect to other presenting their experiences here, so my best advice is follow the least resistance path, look for european funds.
[1] it is not like the professor is lazy, it is just that even committing a lot of time to a perspective PhD student, the student may disappear half-way due to another offer.