text:
What is Summa cum Laude and how do you get it? (USA)
What is Summa cum Laude and how do you get it (USA)? Is this equivalent to First Class Honors in Australia? What is the equivalent of an Australian University medal in the USA?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_honors

The institute I'll be attending requires a 3.85 GPA  (less than a handful in this school have gotten a 4.0, so you can imagine how little people get this distinction) for this distinction. YMMV.

Disagree with the close votes, Latin honors also apply to graduate degrees.

@CapeCode I agree.  In addition an Australian honours is a graduate degree, and may be obtained by research.

Disagree with the close vote.  Honors are part of university administration/curriculum design and are therefore firmly on topic.

The typical Latin honors are "cum laude" ("with honor"), "magna cum laude" ("with great honor"), and "summa cum laude" ("with highest honor"). These are essentially a coarse form of ranking within the graduate class, telling you something about GPA or relative rank.
They are widely but not universally used in the USA, depending on the philosophy of the individual institution: for example, MIT does not use Latin honors or provide any sort of ranking information on its students because it wishes them to be judged individually. As with many other aspects of formal academic organization the US, however, there is no central authority or shared definition, and organizations vary rather wildly in how they actually determine Latin honors, if they even use them.  Thus, the only way to know precisely what it really means is to look it up for the individual institution---and even then, they might shift their policies over time.
Bottom line: a Latin honor on a degree means that a student went to an institution that uses Latin honors and they ranked roughly "good", "better", or "best" in their performance there.

Each university can define summa cum laude and magna cum laude as it choses.  Honours/honors/medals cannot be considered directly comparable between American and Australian universities.  Keep in mind that American universities do not have to adhere to national regulations or standards.  They are much more variable than Australian universities and also far more numerous.

There might not be an exact comparison between the Latin honours system in US universities and the letter-grade honours system in Australian universities, but there are effectively three classes of each, so this indicates that there might be a rough correspondence.  In most Australian universities, the classes of honours are:

1st Class Honours (a High-Distinction average);
Upper 2nd Class Honours (a Distinction average);
Lower 2nd Class Honours (a Credit average);
3rd Class Honours (a Pass average). *

Unless some more reliable information arises (e.g., some data on GPA conversions, etc.), I would suggest the following rough correspondence:

1st Class Honours       = summa cum laude
Upper 2nd Class Honours = magna cum laude
Lower 2nd Class Honours = cum laude

* The case of 3rd Class Honours generally only occurs if a student is selected into an honours year, but then receives only a Pass average in that year.  This is usually considered to be similar to not getting honours.


text:
Are special degrees just an advertisement?
My university offers some special degrees; for example

Bachelor of Engineering (Scholar) (Honors)
Bachelor of Mathematics Advanced

If you want to get into any of these degrees, you will need to have an Australian Tertiary Admission Rank of 95 or above.
The normal version of these degrees are

Bachelor of Engineering (Honors)
Bachelor of Mathematics

If you want to get into any of these normal degrees, you will need to have an Australian Tertiary Admission Rank of 80 or above.
From my comparison both the special and normal degrees are the same with the exception that the special degrees have one or two subjects where students have chances of doing undergraduate research and other benefits:

Access to a wider range of subjects
$500 study grants to buy textbooks each year for the minimum duration of the degree
Being paid as research assistants in summer

Are the special degrees just an advertisement? What difference would doing a Bachelor of Engineering (Scholar) (Honors) make when you apply for PhD in USA? Will the admission committee really care if you did this degree or just a normal degree?

Not sure what you mean with "advertisement", but it sounds like the advantages that you list are fairly real and well-defined.

When applying for a PhD, the admissions committee are interested in your potential to perform good research. You can demonstrate such potential regardless of your degree title.

When applying to the US you'll certainly need to explain the meaning if it is important to your application. Honors means one thing in the US (usually under 'Honors and Awards', where it's most often a competitive award given for some specific scholarly reason), something else in the UK, and clearly something else entirely in Australia.

I will answer this part of the question:  "when you apply for PhD in USA?"
Faculty in the USA know very little about Australian degrees and Australian universities.  They will only appreciate the difference between degrees if you explain it to them in your application.
To be eligible for an American PhD program, someone with an Australian Bachelors will need an honours or a masters, because three year degrees are not sufficient.  Expect to need to explain what an honours is, and that it is not like a UK honours.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Does having developed a local (La)TeX system help in graduate admission?
Suppose that a person was born in country A and the language of country A was his mother language (non-English); he then immigrates to country B (English speaking), is a citizen of country B and has done his undergraduate entirely in country B. This person had no need to typeset anything in his own native language but devoted a lot of time and developed an open-source (La)TeX system for country A; the localized (TeX)LaTeX system that he has developed is now extensively used in country A in academia for typesetting books, theses , ... . He is also a well-known person in country A for his TeX work. His TeX work for country A was very significant that improved the quality of the academic publishing in country A a lot and academics in country A can even write a letter to confirm this.
Now if this person applies for graduate school in electrical engineering (USA), does his TeX work for country A help him in his graduate admission? is there any need to mention his TeX work or will not the admission committee really care?
Note: USA is neither country A nor country B

Yes, absolutely.  The degree may vary depending on how closely the TeX work relates to your desired studies, but even if it's entirely unrelated, that's still an accomplishment that shows a lot of desirable traits I think.

Like all "extracurricular" activities, it will help, but maybe not as much as you would like. I agree with Jeff that it's an "accomplishment that shows a lot of desirable traits", but fundamentally, if the rest of your application is not sound, this is not going to win them over.
I think it is best to think of this as a tie-breaker - if the rest of your academic achievements are as good as the ones of the next best candidate, this is going to be an unique characteristic that will make you stand out and be more memorable. However, if other candidates have better letters, more research experience, or vastly better grades, the fact that you did something very useful in a fundamentally different area is not going to be valued highly enough.

The question is:

I carried out a large, successful open source project that made a big splash in certain circles.  Will mentioning it strengthen my application to grad school in another field?

Yes, as long as you have all or almost all the prerequisites needed for the degree program you want to apply for.
I would suggest getting a letter of recommendation from some reasonably well-known name in Country A who can describe the project and the impact it has had in academia in Country A.
(I say "or almost all" because you might get conditional acceptance with instructions to take one or two specific courses over the summer before beginning the grad program.)

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


text:
Is undergrad research experience related to the undergrad field preferred, or can I do research on the area I plan to study in grad school instead?
Is undergrad research experience related to the undergrad field preferred, or can I do research on the area I plan to study in grad school instead?

Is undergrad research experience related to the undergrad field preferred, or can I do research on the area I plan to study in grad school instead?

It's actually just the opposite: research in the area you plan to study in grad school is preferred, because it sheds more light on your talent and preparation in this field and it demonstrates that you understand what's involved in this work.  If your undergraduate research is not in the field you plan to study, then there's a risk that you won't do as well in that field or won't enjoy it.

What if you want to research in one field in graduate school but your home university (undergraduate) does not offer research in that field? your answer does not address this issue.

@user62977 The answer does not address this because this is a fairly different question than what has been asked. Here at SE the general policy is to ask one question per post only.

This is a strange answer.  The OP has not even started undergraduate and it is highly unlikely he/she has really discovered what he/she is passionate for.  The OP should focus in undergraduate studies, choose undergraduates courses with a  open mind and decide in his/her last year what is the most interesting field for her/him.

@ZeroTheHero: Your advice for the OP about how to approach college is good, but it doesn't contradict my answer.  Graduate admissions committees will treat undergraduate research in their field as more meaningful and significant than research in another field.  This is certainly inconvenient for undergraduates, who might not have discovered their long-term interests yet, but it makes sense.  (It's easier to gauge someone's potential in neuroscience based on prior neuroscience research than based on prior CS research.)

Research in computer science reflects your field of "origin."
Research on the brain reflects your "destination" field.
It's easier for you to "prove" yourself in your field of "origin" (computer science).
But if you feel that your grades, test scores and other activities have already proved your capabilities, you may wish to get a "head start" on your graduate program by doing your research in your "target" field of neuroscience.
Most graduate programs would appreciate and understand this, because your interest is actually more believable this way.

Keeping in mind that although you feel sure right now of exactly what kind of master's you are going to do, that might change, nevertheless, I will go along with what you have planned, as a working hypothesis for now.
To succeed in interdisciplinary work, you need to get some very good intuition about the area of application, which in this case is neuroscience.  In the bulk of your coursework, you will be doing a lot of programming and computer science.  Doing hands on work in a neuroscience lab would be a great way of complementing that.  However, you would need to make sure you have taken enough coursework in neuroscience to be comfortable in the lab.  That might be a tall order.  Also, you might find that the nitty gritty lab work is not your cup of tea.  After all, presumably there are reasons you are not doing neuroscience for your Bachelor's!
So, those are my thoughts, coming from another interdisciplinary field, mathematical biology.
At this early stage, it might be wise to keep both options open.

I would love to do Neuroscience for my Bachelor's.But there are no such courses in my country and for abroad i would have go through a long procedure which will be requiring additional 2 years of formalities. Due to various reasons i already had my 2 years wasted so i do not want to waste more time in it.

@ManishYadav - I'm starting to get it.  Okay, the answer is, you do not need to confine your undergraduate research involvement to computer science.

If you are hoping to get into a new area in grad school, doing research on that area while you are in undergrad will give you new perspective, and it will be better for you in the long term, since you have an idea whether or not you really want to do this field, or maybe even what you have originally been doing in undergrad, come grad school.

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


text:
Switching from physics Masters to machine learning PhD
I am doing a Masters in theoretical physics. It's been half a year since I've begun my Masters.
Recently, I find myself intrigued by machine learning and would like to do a PhD in machine learning after I finish my Masters in theoretical physics.
I am rather afraid to break it to my supervisor that I plan to move into machine learning after my Masters. I am also afraid how he might react if he finds out that I am taking courses in the Computer Science department. I plan to work with machine learning profs to get two recommendation letters, but I guess I must have a third letter from my physics supervisor. I am afraid that he will not write me a good letter for PhD admission into machine learning.
What should I do?

Just a thought, but can you shift your physics research to focus on machine learning?  A physics PhD would be highly competitive in this field and showing that you can apply ML to a different field would be great.

What would a PhD in machine learning allow you to do is the real question. I would highly recommend you find ways to integrate machine learning into a field of study and not the other way around. Machine learning is after all, common knowledge at this point, it is a bandwagon, but physics at the PhD level is rare, even rarer are people who find use of ML in physics related applications

The machine learning is also an issue in theoretical physics, for example in quantum setting

I would suggest that you make as smooth and timely a transition as you can. The more dramatic a change you make, the more damage you risk doing to your network of relationships. Tell your advisor about your interests while making clear that you remain committed to the program you're in.
Now, there are some advantageous tactics for studying several fields at once. First, modulate your commitments -- if half your courseload is in another department, that might be too much. Second, combine them wherever you can. Certainly you could train a neural network on solid models to recognize favorable heat dissipation, say.

Well, my supervisor's on sabbatical, so I'm planning to ask him for permission by email if, this semester, I could take a course or two in machine learning in the computer science department to pursue my interest in machine learning in my free time. I plan to talk to him in detail about my desire to switch to machine learning during summer when he comes back to campus. What do you think?

Also, I plan to tell him in the summer that I intend to work with machine learning profs in my free time to get a paper published to help with my admission to a reputable PhD program in machine learning. In the meantime, I plan to work on my supervisor's project in physics and get a paper published because that's what he would like. I plan to get two letters of recommendation from the machine learning profs I intend to work with. Do I have to get a letter of recommendation from my physics supervisor for PhD admission in machine learning?

@failexam - How many physics courses do you plan to enroll in for spring semester?  Two non-physics courses in one semester seems like a lot. // One machine learning letter may be enough; yes, it would be helpful to have a letter from your physics supervisor; are you finding your physics studies and research sufficiently rewarding to make finishing out your master's worthwhile? // Your fear of alienating your physics supervisor makes me wonder whether you are thinking of him in the wrong way.  I can imagine someone's father reacting badly to news of a planned switch...

of fields, but an advisor/mentor would normally have more detachment than a family member. But I don't know your supervisor. Maybe he is not sufficiently detached.... // Once you have your game plan, you may want to ask for a phone or Skype conference and discuss your plan with him live rather than by email.  If he asks for the topic or reason for the phone appointment, keep the plan veiled (e.g. say, "I'd like to talk over my spring course choices with you"; if he says, "Nay, let's do it by email," tell him you'd prefer a phone or Skype conference, if he would be so kind; repeat as needed).

You might also want to check in with the dean of graduate studies in the two departments before and after the phone call.  Note, getting the spring ratio of ML courses to physics courses right is an important part of getting your game plan ready before you speak with your supervisor.


text:
What can I to improve my grades in MS in computer science and engineering, when they are poor because of inadequate background in math?
I am studying Graduate MSc in CSE. Due to inadequate knowledge in Statistics/Calculus, my grades are getting bad.
What would be the best way to save my grades?
I am considering, skipping this program, getting a diploma in Math and then coming back again.
Can you suggest any better option?

Buy a used copy of Thomas's Calculus from someplace like eBay.  Start at chapter one.

Tutoring might also come in handy.

Perhaps you need to make a more careful selection of computer science classes to take, that will fit your talents and disposition better.  Many computer scientists never use any knowledge of calculus.


text:
If I start in an area I don't feel too excited about, is it possible for me to eventually return to what I truly like?
I am a second year PhD student, and I still don't have an advisor. I chose this school because it has a ton of people working in the sub-field I am interested in (Mathematical Optimization). I tried lab rotations with three of the 'stars' here, but they didn't work out - two were busy during the quarter and didn't give me a problem to work on, the third one, though so far sufficiently satisfied by my work, has almost a year-long 'testing period' before taking on students, which is too long for me (I only got to know this mid-way through the last quarter).
So I relaxed my constraints and talked to professors working in a slightly different field (Control Theory), and they are willing to take me, but this means I might be doing something a bit different than what I had imagined when I came here.
Before coming to school, I was working in the industry for three years, earning a decent amount of money. I already had a Master's before that. I came back to grad school only because I wanted to work on Optimization problems and do algorithm analysis for them. Now I might have to do modeling of problems in Control Theory. The mathematics at the heart of the two fields is quite different, and I already spent a whole year taking hardcore Optimization and Convex Analysis classes (which I now feel will be a waste).
All this is making me depressed. Quitting is absolutely not an option for me.
My question is this - do people do one thing and then end up getting back on track doing what they really want to do? Is this even possible? Especially if what you really want to do is math-intensive.
EDIT, March 2017 : In case some other PhD student comes in reading this, I can imagine what you are going through with all your 'failed' rotations. Just wanted to say, I tried a rotation with a 'star' in my field of interest (Optimization) one last (fourth) time. And he has now agreed to be my advisor! :) :) :) :) :) :) :) I won't have to compromise after all, and I am so, so, so happy.

Quitting is absolutely not an option for me. -- What about moving?

@JeffE I don't think I would be competitive at all against students applying to top places. I am currently in a top-20 program but no admissions committee from a higher ranked school would be impressed with my one and a half years of unfinished projects. Also, this was the best offer I had got two years ago when I first applied; if they rejected me then, my app would not be stronger now to be accepted. And also, I am 27. I already feel like I have wasted two years chasing the (so far) elusive dream of doing optimization. Applying to other schools would for sure increase the sunk cost.

Are you sure that there is no application for the math you learned in the other subfield? I would not be so sure - I usually find that unexpected usages of mathematics/mathematical methods (i am a physicist) exist.

As Sascha stated above, there is a large sub-field in "Control Theory" closely interconnected with "Optimization". It is called "Optimal Control" where you essentially solve optimization problems under the constraint posed by the system dynamics. Various sub-branches with significant research activity belong therein such as Model Predictive Control (MPC) (also called receding horizon control), dynamic programming, reinforcement learning etc

Let's see if your department can get its act together to do right by you.  Here's what I would suggest:

Write up your specific efforts to start working with a professor on a research project in your area.  Keep it all very factual and neutral in tone, and keep it to one page maximum.  Then make a cheat sheet (outline) that will help you present your information in a conversation.  Make an appointment to speak with some department administrator, maybe you have a dean of graduate studies, for the purposes of asking for advice.  Explain your problem, glancing at your cheat sheet as needed, and then leave the long version with him or her to refer to after you leave.  Ask the dean when would be a good time to meet again for follow-up.
If s/he gives you specific suggestions, try not to let your frustrations show at the beginning, and even if you know the suggestions are a waste of time, do make a good faith attempt to follow them; then report back.

If, after this, your department doesn't solve the problem, then you'll need to take some initiative.

(a) Apply elsewhere.  Apply to at least one "stretch" school.  Even a school that is not top of the line should handle this better than your current program has been doing.  Make sure that the departments you apply to have at least three people who do the right kind of work.

(b) Look for a mentor to work with from a distance.  Here's how you find one: read some papers, write to an author with a question about a paper you read.  When you get a friendly, encouraging response from someone, then you can explain the quandary you are in and hopefully start getting some guidance.

I suggest you send some applications right away just in case.  In other words, it would be wise to start with 2a because we're already in January.  Then comes 1.  While you are waiting for things to percolate, you can start working on #2b.
I studied math programming at UW-Madison (a long time ago).  You should not have to switch streams just because your department can't get its act together.

If you really want to do convex optimization and you are really unsure that control theory is something that would interest you, then I would strongly encourage you to

continue in your project with the optimization "star" in the hopes that it will transition into an advisor/advisee relationship,
research more into control theory to see if it is acceptable for you, or
apply elsewhere.

Having said the above, my answers to your questions are below.

do people do one thing and then end up getting back on track doing what they really want to do?

It depends on how closely related those things happen to be.
In your case, you are really interested in convex optimization (reading over your other posts, I assume you are in EE), you have not had much luck getting anyone in the convex optimization area to take you on, but you have gotten some interest going among some potential advisors in control theory. The question is: how closely related are convex optimization and control theory?
There are two comments above that attempt to make the case that control theory and convex optimization are close enough to make it work: I happen to disagree. These two subfields of EE do not overlap in any useful way, except that they both require some mathematical maturity, which is one thing you seem to care about.
So, where do we stand?
In the best-case scenario (according to the two commenters above), your experiences in control theory will help you in your quest to eventually do what you want to do (convex optimization), and, in the worst-case scenario (my view), you will, at the very least, attain some level of much-needed mathematical maturity from control theory to maybe do convex optimization research in the future. You certainly have some things to think about going forward.

Is this even possible?

Sure. Here's one way I could see this working out for you:
After you finish your PhD, say, in control theory, you would transition to a postdoc in convex optimization. Again, taking the optimistic view of the two commenters above, you should be able to transition smoothly into a postdoc in your desired area. In my "pessimistic" opinion, I would strongly encourage you to have a side project (or three) in your target area while you are doing your PhD studies in control theory. This way, you will be able to talk with experts in convex optimization, have intelligent conversations and discuss how you can get involved in a project as a postdoc, rather than just hoping they give you a chance.


text:
What is meant by the term "research interest", when asked to provide a brief description of research interests on an application?
My potential supervisor has mailed me the following:

If you would like to be considered for admission, please email the
  following (please send only pdf documents)

copies of all previous transcripts, including undergraduate
English language test scores
a list of publications and the abstract of M.Sc. thesis (for Ph.D. applicants)
a concise description (not exceeding one page) of your research interests as a graduate student (what is expected is not a statement
  of purpose).

I am confused about the term research interest here.
What should be in this document?

Trivially, your research interests refer to what you are interested in doing research on should you be admitted to grad school. For instance, in computer science, your interests might be in the human aspects of software engineering, in applying machine learning to the optimization of business processes, or in finding a polynomial-time algorithm for the travelling salesman problem (although I don't recommend the latter).
Note that your instructions specifically say that this is not the same as your statement of purpose. That is, "I want to do research to better mankind" is not a research interest, and neither is "I will do whatever my advisor wants me to do" or "I will do research that is publishable at top venues". The question here really is that you tell the admission committee what research content you want  to work on, why you think it is relevant and interesting, and what in your previous studies enables you to do that kind of research.
If you already have a potential advisor in mind, you want to look at what kind of research her or his current students are working on, and draft your research statement along similar lines (of course taking your own interests into account, but if your interests and the interests of your prospective advisor don't match, you should keep on looking anyway). It generally pays to be as specific as you can - even if you end up not doing exactly what you wrote in your research statement (most people don't), providing concrete details will indicate that you know and understand the work that your future advisor is doing, and that you have thought extensively about how you will fit into it.

I am working on Image Processing.

..."and what in your previous studies enables you to do that kind of research" - this is so important that I would love to see that in bold. Everyone can write "I am interested in reticulating spline research" in their application, but only by backing this up by experience, such a statement become the needed credibility that the committee can build on.

@anonymous So in your research statement you would describe that, and what exactly you can imagine working on in image processing.


text:
When should an author disclaim historical knowledge?

Gilbert Sheldon was born at Ashbourne in Derbyshire on July 19, 1598. Very little is known of his family background.

It drives me crazy to read about some historical figure that "not much is known of her early life," or "no-one knows why she made the decision." These seem to be a stock way to deflect anticipated criticism over a lack of detail.
Of course, the absence of information is impossible to cite or verify, unless it has itself been studied and reported on. The claims also leave unclear whether the author is reflecting the consensus of a group of scholars that the information does not exist, or in fact oblivious to information that does exist.
Is a disclaimer for missing historical background ever useful and appropriate?

I'm not a historian but I suppose that the lack of information is part of the "data" of the work. Do you suggest it shouldn't be mentioned at all?

Even the one fact given in your quote appears to be wrong, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Sheldon. That would annoy me a lot more than a statement that "little was known about his early life."

Can you please explain exactly what you mean by "disclaim"? Do you mean "state that no information exists" or actually "deny some presented information".

@problemofficer I want to know not about the denial of a stated claim, but about a denial that claims can be made. To what degree is an author describing their own failed search? Are they foreclosing or incentivizing further primary research on the matter?

Without some statement regarding the early life of the subject of the biography, it is impossible to tell whether the author looked hard and found nothing or just didn't bother.
By writing that little is known, it indicates that the author (or others whose work the biography draws on) has made efforts towards finding such information but that it is not available.
Pointing out the explicit difference helps readers who either wish to learn more or would wonder (as you seem to have done) at the lack of detail.

I do like the idea of a declaration about the information available, but I have a problem with the question of whether the author "looked hard". If the author is an historian writing a work of original research, they know how to make an explicit claim, like "archives X and Y contain no letters by subject Z". If the author is a lazy student, they probably just copied the claim from somewhere else, or failed to do the research that would answer the question. I'm reluctant to believe it when an author says "trust me"; even the professionals can and do miss source documents.

@AaronBrick in scientific fields the standard formulation is "to the best of our knowledge [this is the first time the geometry of potatoes has been studied]".

@Davidmh That's great for science, but less useful for history, where the chance discovery of a single document can change the whole story. Whether other people have looked at all is distinct from whether they have looked well, and of course the latter criterion is subjective.


text:
Is it rude to use tracking softwares for the emails that you send to potential advisors?
A considerable portion of emails that I send to professors abroad to see if they have any position available remains unanswered. Not receiving a response, I can not imagine if they didn't attract to my CV or they simply forgot to open my email. In this way, I am wondering if it is normal(not rude) in academia to use email tracking softwares that inform you when the receiver opened your email. Actually, It is not very hard for them to check if the sender has used such software specially if they block the images in their received emails.

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

The OP explains, there are a variety of services using this technique [that embed an] image in in your email, to which the community explains that this doesn't work (from chat). @CoderInNetwork, what do you think to this?

My sense is that the vast majority would not notice one way or another but that some potential advisors might and would find it intrusive and and inappropriate. In many other cases, (like myself) professors use text-based email clients or systems that that block this kind of tracking. In these cases, folks won't think you're rude but you still won't know if I've read it. For that matter, I may have opened an email but not read it carefully. In some cases, people will notice and and think it is rude or unethical.
Critically though, I can't see why knowing whether your email was opened will help.
The reality is that many professors receive between dozens and thousands (really!) of emails from prospective students. This has been discussed at length. Many answers on this site explain why it's just not possible for everybody to reply to every email and there are many reasons why people do not. They might not reply because they are overwhelmed by teaching. They might not reply because it's simply not a good match. They might not reply because they don't have funding to take on new students this year.
My advice is to pick a small number of perfect potential supervisors. Read their papers. Write emails that make it clear that you're not just mass-emailing anybody you can find but that you want to work with them. Send an email. If you want, send a follow-up after a week or so. In either case, I don't see how knowing that the email has been opened helps.

I absolutely assure you that I would notice, and then I'd delete the email unread.

@BobBrown: The second half of the first sentence tries to say that. If you think that's an understatement, feel free to edit to make this point more clear.

Also, in theory, a security scanner may strip the tracker, or the tracker might be tripped by said security scanner. Both false positives and false negatives are possible, so it's not even worth the effort.

Don't forget that we have the option to decline to send the acknowledgement. When we open the email, the client tells us that the requester has asked for a receipt and do we want to send it. We can always decline.

@Mawg "email tracking software" doesn't seem to refer to the old-fashioned requests for acknowledgements (didn't these die when most major webmail providers decided to not support them?), but rather the use of a small piece of code, stealthily embedded in the email (in this case, in a small image), which will call back home when it is evaluated. So it is somewhat more invasive.

I understand now. My thoughts were coulded by being forced to use MS Outlook. In that case, if I caught anyone using a tracking pixel on me, that would be a very black mark. The OP should track manually who responds to him.

I find this to be excellent advice, but I don't think one email potentially followed up by another is adequate when you are competing with dozens or perhaps thousands of other emails. If you think the match is good enough to call it "perfect", you should go to greater lengths to make sure you establish a channel of communication.

+1 for the comment about text-based editors. Many professors in the current generation started using computers earlier than the general population, and fell in love with the text-based email clients (particularly people in STEM, and especially in CS). About half the professors in my graduate department did not use HTML email.

I'm not a professor, but I still use Alpine.

I don't see how knowing that the email has been opened helps – it can solve the fear of being rejected. If you know they have read it but haven't received their reply yet for a long time, you can be sure that they have ignored you, and move on to another one. The tracking link is to have a realistic expectation when your mind is clouded in fear

I guess the underlying assumption is that the sender is entitled to consideration and/or an answer, and so OP is trying to enforce this entitlement.
In email correspondence (academic or not), this assumption is usually wrong unless there is an established relationship (eg within a company), and trying to force it is indeed considered rude - or even intrusive/threatening.

I guess most people won't care about or notice the tracking (after all, we are OK that virtually every website tells Google about each web page we open), but if your e-mail happens to trigger an alert in their mailer or anti-virus, it won't do you any good.
It should be noted that e-mail tracking techniques are spectacularly bad at their primary purpose: reporting whether an e-mail has been read. Some people (like myself) configure their mail clients to never fetch online content, so you'll never see the notification. Other configurations may result in images being automatically downloaded, so you'll see a false positive.

I had used them since I began the applying process, however, today, in a telegram group that guys who are applying to Canadian universities exchange their experiences, several people said after they decided to stop using these kinds of trackers they have better responses. One guy said that his emails sent to spam inbox and another one copied an email from a professor who said: "I figured out that you use email tracker and suggest to unable this before contacting other faculties. Most of the professors find it an invasion of their privacy, and we never accept a student who uses such a program." As a student who has used this way for months, I don't suggest you apply trackers either. They are useless. It will not help you to find out if a professor has read your mail or not. Furthermore, you can never be sure because many professors use blockers. It isn't worth to use to even one potential supervisor by using these trackers.

A considerable portion of emails that I send to professors abroad to
  see if they have any position available remains unanswered. Not
  receiving a response, I can not imagine if they didn't attract to my
  CV or they simply forgot to open my email.

What difference does that make to you? Do you react an differently to the two? If so, please specify how, and we maybe be able to help you better.
My advice is simply to keep your own records, manually.  That way, you will probably get a more exact record (it will certainly be in exactly the format which you prefer), and you do not risk offending anyone.

Not the OP, but for me, it can solve the fear of being rejected. If you know they have read it but haven't received their reply yet for a long time, you can be sure that they have ignored you, and move on to another one. The tracking link is to have a realistic expectation when your mind is clouded in fear

Suppose, that I (total stranger to you), would hack into your computer, circumvait your protection measures, spy on you, all before I would presentr myself to you and then I would ask you to get even better access to your environment.
Would you protect yourself up to applicable law, or would you accept it and put me in your friends and grant me better access to you? (And if you would just out desparation from longliness, would you do, even if you would be target of such approach daily, while occupied over your head with existing real relations?)
That is (from my point of view) exactly what are you asking about.
(If tracking would hit, than it would be when the email is opened, before adressee is able to read first line - and cannot find, if the email was actually read, most it can do is tell if it was opened. And it nearly make sure you will be ignored and emeail deleted without reading at the best, (if it is discovered), more probabelly resulting in some worse case, from automatic rejection, maybe blacklisting, maybe contacting your school/employer, up to some official actions))
Not that such approach would work against myself, as I have all emails sorted first to apropriate directories (Family, Friends, lists/ConferenceA, lists/ConferenceB, ... Partners/A, Partners/B,... reports/A, reports/B ... reports/unimportant/A,reports/unimportant/B, ... Spam ...) and what is left (not met by any crieria) in Inbox I consider possible spam more than anything else.
And I did set my email client to not automatically confirm delivery nor opening email.  And to shouw only plain text (if email is only in HTML or other format, then it is presented as empty and usually deleted under assumption of being spam/malware/virus anyway without any attempt to see the content - except for a few manually explicitely named exceptions). And even if I open HTML attachement, it is not allowed to access internet (no images/css/flash ...) and of course all flash/(java)scripts/similar are baned from being run. And I would not run/install any program from email.
I reported back to authorities a lot of such emails as being unwanted and offensive. Some of such actions indirectly helped to the court and fine for the sender.

If you want to get positive answer from me, then I suggest (as other stated here) make your email as simple to deside on as possible.

use short, but descriptive subject
start with short (like one line/sentence/ short paragraph) summary in neutral tone ( I look for position as XXX, have this school/grade, I participated on YYY, more in email and on my website htpp://my.web.site/folder)
then write the "full official" body with addressing/greating, describing why you are sending this (read about free position there, wanted to participate on this, interested on that field ...), what you archived yet (if you have something related) etc, etc - just the letter you wanted to send.
if you send Curriculum Vitae, documents and such it is possible to include them as attachements, if they are short and important (and you can mention them in the email too)(longer document should be saved on web and provided by links to them - nobody wants have its email filled with multimegabytes messages from strangers), it is better, if the name is descriptive for the receiver (my_name_CV.doc, my_name_awards.html ...) then just common(CV.doc), as the professor probabelly have tons of CVs. Surely do not name it from your point of view (CV_for_proffesor_this_and_that.doc), even if you store it with such name on your comp (still is better to make directory on your computer named by this professor and store it there with your name on this, in case he/she would later ask you about 3. paragraf in my_name_CV.doc, then you can simply find, which CV it is and what exactly was there. The same, if you are later asked to resend that, maybe because it was accidentally deleted)
end the letter with your full name, email address and any other contact informations you want to share (including the website about yourself) - it is better, if the message is printed, saved/resend, that all contacts to you are included (as email headers can be stripped, or your email would be resend many times and finding, who is the author is difficult/impossible)

All other rules of proper coresponding also applies, but you surely know that.

Suppose, that I (total stranger to you), would hack into your computer, circumvait your protection measures, spy on you, all before I would presentr myself to you and then I would ask you to get even better access to your environment. As a computer engineer, I consider the use of the software the OP describes to be a tad less... severe than your description here suggests. If I'm not mistaken, numerous well-known companies use this type of software to track whether or not you open their email advertisements. Invasion of privacy? Perhaps. Hacking? Certainly not.

I also think, that mentioned "tracking software" is not some sofisticated hacking tool, but I was talking more like about ethical principles, then technical. The OP mentioned, that it is not so hard to block it. But still it is similar principle, where the OP tries to invade privacy and overcome the will of target to not provide some information. Arguing, that it is possible to defend yourself from some attack, does not render the attack polite (not rude). Just it says "if you do not spend enought resources on defence, you had it comming". Which is rude and amoral.

So I made the analogy/rewording from "I just want to know if ..." on one side to "There was attempt to hack my defence and invade my privacy" on the other side. If OP care, how the target sees it, than it is more like that persective (somebody tried attack my privacy and was caught redhanded, I should be carfull, better safe than sorry), then the OPs (maybe they just think I forgot to properly manage their request and want to help me by reminding me about my responsibility towards them, I should thank them for being so considerable and take them to my lab)


text:
What are some side jobs with which a mathematician in a postdoc or non-tenure-track position can make ends meet?
Like many others, I did not get a tenure-track position right out of grad school. I have been moving from university to university across the US for the past few years, sometimes in the capacity of a postdoc, and sometimes in a junior (non-tenure-track) faculty position. (Many of these universities have top math departments, at varying levels; some in the top 10.)
Alas, as I move from one university to the next, my spouse is finding it harder and harder to get a full-time position each time we move. I am currently earning well, but not enough to support a spouse and kids. We're seeing our savings not-so-slowly disappear.
My question is -- what sort of "odd jobs" can someone in my position do to earn money on the side, while my spouse finds his or her bearings (yet again!) in the new location? Note that it is important that these be jobs that are sufficiently flexible that I would be able to do them while still functioning in my current university. I have excellent research (though not sufficient to have gotten a tenure-track position by now), and excellent teaching skills. While I do research in abstract Mathematics, I am also reasonably proficient in statistics and programming.
Are there natural answers to this questions that I have not thought about? Ones that are specific to people in our community? How should one go about getting these odd jobs?

I sympathize and understand your wanting to post your question "How do I solve..." in this forum.  However, academia.stackexchange would be a better place than here.  (It might be reasonable and possibly useful, to ask instead "How have people creatively solved..".). Gerhard "Also Looking For Creative Solutions" Paseman, 2017.01.08.

"I am also reasonably proficient in statistics and programming": The markets in both Stats/Data Science, and Computer Science, are such that schools cannot hire enough qualified teachers. You might consider exploiting this (likely temporary) situation.

Related (not a duplicate): Non academic career options for PhD in Math

Universities (especially if they're large R1 universities, almost certainly if they're in top 10) usually ask its department members whether they are willing to teach a calculus/lower-level math courses in the summer for extra pay. These are often accelerated and they are over in a couple of months. Teaching one class, in my estimate, should earn you an extra 5-10k, depending on your institution. You can easily pick up two of these classes over the summer. If there is more than one university in your area, you could also try teaching at the other universities.
You could also tutor students. This is admittedly a little awkward when you are a faculty member, but as long as you are not teaching them, there shouldn't be any problems. This works especially well in an affluent area; I'm told that some people, given good credentials, can support themselves completely on tutoring students.
Sometimes, websites dedicated to math education, such as Art of Problem Solving, hires online graders. The flexibility of the job means that you can pick it up on top of being a postdoc.
Lastly, remember that you're on a 9-month salary contract. This means that you could be an intern at some large company using your statistics/programming skills during the other three months, and earn a huge paycheck.
These are not really "odd jobs", but probably the easiest to get given your situations. Of course, you should keep in mind that these will take away from your research time, which might make finding a tenure-track job more difficult (I totally sympathize with you; the system that we have is far from perfect, and it puts so many people in your position. But this is the reality and you should be aware of it when you're contemplating taking up another job on top of your postdoc position, which is already more than a full-time job).

There are plently of online jobs in big data, market research (statistical), etc. you can lookup the following links and chose according to your strength.
and all the best.
https://www.freelancer.in/jobs/Statistics/1/
https://www.google.co.in/search?q=online+jobs+for+statisticians&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=hTpzWK-2Osjk8Aeng7j4CA


text:
Should I be 100% truthful while writing my Personal Statement for Graduate application?
Let us think about this question in my online application.

Personal Statement:
Please describe your specific area of academic interest, and explain what motivated you to choose this area.

In my case 100% true answer would be the following,

I am interested in Image Processing.
When I was searching for a supervisor, I met one of the most prominent research professors of the XYZ University Prof. xyz who works in the area of Image Processing, Computer Vision, Graphics and so on. I was interested in Computer Graphics and proposed his a topic. He told me that topic was not fit for MSc thesis to be completed in 4 months. That would actually take more time may be up to a year. Since, I didn't have any other topic in my mind, I requested him to propose a topic for me. He then proposed a topic related to Image Processing. I found that topic very interesting and saw a huge opportunity to learn about the area of Image Processing from the inside.

Is that a good answer?

You can be truthful with less detail.  "My master's advisor suggested a topic in image processing and I ..."

Upon more careful reading (sorry!) I see that it was a "prominent researcher" and not your advisor.  That will change the words, but not the idea.  Um, and be sure to use standard capitalization when you write your statement of purpose.

Yes, the Bob version of your paragraph is a good start.  But if you want to make an impact on the admissions committee, you're going to have to find out a lot more about your topic, so that you can speak about it in more detail.

You should always tell the truth. But you are not in a court of law. You don't have to tell the whole truth, all the time.
Your area of academic interest is image processing. So: Explain why you are interested in that. Right now you are telling a story about how you got a thesis topic. Once you have told that story, you can explain how you are happy to have found a professor who provided you with a thesis topic related to your area of academic interest, but with a scope matching a Masters thesis.


text:
Expectations for a research student at a Japanese university
I have recently decided to enter a grad school in one of the Japanese universities (namely, TiTech). It seems that the general recommendation is to start as a non-degree research student first and prepare for entrance exam while being a research student. After reading this question, I still don't understand what is expected from a research student. On one hand, it is a first step before doing a masters degree, on the other - I find the explanation very confusing. After all, the word "reasearch" in "research student" is there for a reason, right?
My question is - do I have to come up with a research proposal before contacting my potential academic supervisor? I have found a professor doing a research in field I am interested in (inductive and abductive logic programming in AI), but the problem is that this is not something you can get experience with in undergraduate studies. It doesn't come up in an undergraduate curriculum, so I have only a general understanding of the topic. Starting a novel research (if that's what research student should do) without some background will be very hard. Yet I cannot get this background unless I get at least an Ms in AI first.
This is especially worrying given my background. I graduated from my university 10 years ago and was employed all this time as a software engineer. I have a good GPA (4.99 out of 5), and I lived and worked in Japan for 6 years and got a JLPT N2 certificate. However my bachelor thesis was about image processing, not about AI, and in any case it is not particularly relevant after so many years in industry.

Maybe visit your potential supervisor.

I was a research student at the University of Tokyo for one year.
As the answer to the other question states, a research student has literally no responsibilities whatsoever. The apparent point is to allow foreign students time to study for the entrance examination for the formal graduate program. They might give you as little as four months (roughly) or as much as a year before the exam is held.
Your advisor may or may not recommend that you sit in on classes and learn how the university works. If you are in the sciences, there's a good chance that you will be assigned to a research team in preparation for entering the college. If you are in the humanities, it's likely that your only responsibility will be to try to pass the examination. If you are already familiar with your field, you will have an extreme amount of free time.
"Research student" is actually kind of a misnomer. During my pre-acceptance year I did independent research on my own initiative (mostly because I was bored) and had two papers accepted for publication, but my advisor did not ask what I was doing, and my office did not know I had published papers until after I was accepted as a masters student.

"The apparent point is to allow foreign students time to study for the entrance examination for the formal graduate program." That is only one of many reasons why people do it. I'm quite puzzled by how difficult it seems to be for some people to understand: the point is whatever you and your supervisor want it to be.

@fkraiem as I said, I received no guidance from my supervisor during this time.

I would say the "misnomer" bit is due to the difference between the English "research" and Japanese 研究.

It seems that the general recommendation is to start as a non-degree research student first and prepare for entrance exam while being a research student.

This recommendation is for people who go to Japan on a Japanese government scholarship, and is due to the fact that the scholarship only covers your airfare when you go to Japan after having been admitted to your desired program. Thus, if you want to directly enroll in a masters (or doctoral) program, when you go to Japan to take the entrance exam you do so at your own expense, whereas if you start as a research student there is normally no need to go to Japan beforehand.
In your case, since you're probably not going to Japan on a government scholarship, coming as a research student first does not seem really necessary, unless you really need some time to prepare for the entrance exam to your desired masters program. Keep in mind however that without a scholarship, enrolling as a research student does cost money.
As I said in the linked question, all the details of what you will do as a research student are to be agreed with your supervisor. Of course, no reasonable supervisor would expect you to be able to do original research straight out of undergrad...


text:
Is it polite or annoying to send a professor a short "Thanks" email?
After asking a professor a question through e-mail and receiving an answer, is it polite that a student send a short e-mail simply saying "Thanks" as an acknowledgment that the answer was received and appreciated? I'm thinking of sending this but am not sure if it might be considered annoying or unnecessary  (as I'm not sure how busy the professor is, or how many emails he/she has to sort through every day.)
Is there some widely agreed-upon etiquette for this?

You're over-thinking it, just express your gratitude that is appropriate with the professor's effort and move on. General practice in the US is if you've to make a choice, lean towards the more formal one. However, I have yet heard of any colleague complaining to me about someone never sent thank you e-mail nor someone always sent thank you e-mail.