date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2013/08/18 | 577 | 2,456 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently passed the M.Sc.
While I was reviewing a paper I found it interesting and potentially useful. I am planning to adopt the analyses that are utilized at that paper in my area of interest. The applications are quite different.
Is it feasible, usual and professional to propose that paper's first author (he is a post-doc student) to participate in my future work?
How about the contribution, to be more exact, the order of names?
How I can politely ask him for his contribution?<issue_comment>username_1: **How I can politely ask him for his contribution?**
Just sent him/her an email with a brief summary of the ideas you are interested in and ask him/her if he/she is interested on the project, it has worked for me. Otherwise, try to attend one of his/her talks and approach him/her and the end of the talk, if possible.
**How about the contribution, to be more exact, the order of names?**
Perhaps it is too early to discuss about this ("Before one brings home the bacon one must kill the pig"). Who knows whether he/she is going to generalise or improve the ideas you propose or he/she would barely be involved in the project (you will come across all sorts of characters while doing research). A safe option is to use the alphabetical order. It helps to avoid many ego-fights. Start with a document without the name of the authors. If you end-up with something worthy of publication, put the cards on the table and ask directly "what order would you be more comfortable with?" or "would you be happy with the order '**ME** and *John Doe*'? ".
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **How I can politely ask him for his contribution?**
Say, "I read your paper... It gave me the following idea... Would you be interested in working on it with me?"
**How about the contribution, to be more exact, the order of names?**
Because you are initiating the research, chances are good that you will be the main contributor. If you are sure that you will or want to be first author/main contributor, write your name first in the list of authors in the drafts. If you are not sure, write the names in alphabetical order, and in parentheses "temporarily in alphabetical order". As soon as it becomes clear that one or two people are contributing more than you, suggest to them that their names should appear before yours (unless you know things will change later). Just keep the discussion open.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/19 | 914 | 3,814 | <issue_start>username_0: At undergrad level I was short-listed for the most prestigious award at my university (best graduate of that year). I however did not receive it. I did not get any paper or other evidence stating that I was short-listed. I only know this because my personal tutor told me. She also mentions it in her reference letter for me. Should I include this in my CV? Such as: Shortlisted for award X?<issue_comment>username_1: A CV is a living document that changes over time. early in one's career, there is not much one can put into it but hopefully this changes over time. I argue that one can put anything into a CV which strengthens ones profile at the stage at which one is at the moment. In other words, it sounds perfectly in line to add your short-listing now. At some point later such an item will probably not be worth keeping but that is a judgement call to be made depending on where you are in your career and what else is in the CV. Another factor to keep in mind is that CV content will vary depending on for what you need it.
So if you think something will positively reflect on your capacity in the light of for what you need the CV, add it!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I will contradict Peter's answer: the CV is a living document, but it's one that needs to be supported by documentation. Something that cannot be proven should **not** be listed on a CV. If you only received a verbal confirmation that you were on the "short list" for an award, then you really don't have any documentation that you can provide, if called on to do so by a future employer.
Therefore, as much as it would be helpful to list such an award, I don't think it's a good idea to do so here.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: While username_2 and Peter's answers are both quite good, it strikes me as a very complicated issue. It does seem that you have *some* documentation that you got it and I agree with Peter that earlier in your career your CV can look quite empty so having anything to put on it can help show yourself in a better light.
On one hand, someone nominated for an academy award would certainly be referred to as 'Oscar Nominated.' On the other hand, to say you were short-listed for an award such as this (since from the title it is not clear how students are compared to each other) may come across as *trying too hard*.
I do think it would be acceptable and that you have *some* (albeit weak) evidence. However, were I in your shoes, I would not include it out of concern of looking too desperate to find good things to say about myself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes you can, but you need to put contextual information next to the nomination. Writing the contextual information will help you decide whether being nominated for the award is an impressive achievement, and whether it is relevant to whatever you are applying for. For example I was a finalist for a "Faculty of Science Award" at my school for research excellence [I'm a postdoc]. I initially thought I wouldn't put it on my CV, because I didn't win. But then I had the idea to email the faculty of science to ask how many academic staff were eligible for the award and how many nominations they received, after hearing the answer I decided to add it to my CV. I now say
* **Finalist for X Award [3 finalists selected from 29 nominations, out of 349 eligible academic staff]**
However, if they told me only 5 people were nominated and there were only 20 eligible people who could have potentially received the award. I wouldn't have added it. If you can't briefly explain the nomination in an impressive way using verifiable facts then don't include it [note that the email directly from the head of Faculty of Science makes the facts verifiable if anyone asks for proof].
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/19 | 1,115 | 4,213 | <issue_start>username_0: While reading a series of blog posts on a sub-field in TCS (theoretical CS), I came across a paper recently published by a group of students/faculty that has literally copy-pasted large sections of [a blog post](http://geomblog.blogspot.com/2007/09/voronoi-trick.html), and made it into a [journal paper thats available online](http://www.ijcst.com/vol31/5/a587.pdf). My question(s) are about what I should do about it:
1. Do I point it out to the author of the blog, and leave it to him
about how to handle the issue?
2. Contact the journal in question - but since its not my work, I'm hesitant that whether I have a case
3. Leave it alone, finish reading the blog posts, and add the journal to my private list of journals to completely ignore?
The third option is most hassle-free for me, but I wondered if it'd be ethical to know about plagiarism and not point it out!<issue_comment>username_1: Ignoring the journal in question is probably an overreaction.
However, the best route to take is the first one—the author of the copyrighted material is the one that has the most responsibility to assert her rights. Your duty is to notify the person whose work has been infringed upon that the violation has taken place. Once you've done that, you've achieved what's ethically required of you. You are not obligated to take the matter up directly with the journal. (However, you may do so if you so choose.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: 
That being said, personally, I would contact the journal in question and inform them of the suspected plagarism. They may not be aware of the issue, as it's hard to be on top of all possible literature on a topic. The post may have been guest-posted from the original authors on the blog in question. There may be actual plagarism, and it would have to be dealt with. However, any solution relies on the journal being made aware of the problem. To paraphrase a famous quote, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by lack of effort."
If you are for some reason worried about your being identified as the "whistleblower", so to speak, use an anonymous email address when you contact the journal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I would start with option 4 (loosely based on [Matt. 18:15-17](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2018:15-17&version=ESV), a principle of giving maximal opportunity for people to correct their own goofs):
* Privately contact the apparent plagiarist(s) and point the problem out to them. Most likely, knowing that the plagiarism has been discovered, they will want to fix it ASAP before it becomes public knowledge. It's always conceivable that there has been an honest mistake, at least honest on the part of some of the group of faculty and students. And in that case it would be best to let those in the group address the problem. That's how I would want to be treated if I were in that group (whether I was guilty or not).
* If they don't listen (e.g. if they make excuses) - contact their department or employer.
* If they don't correct the situation, contact the journal, since they've published the material, and have a responsibility toward the copyright holder even if the plagiarists won't do the right thing.
* I would contact the copyright holder only as a last resort, if the plagiarists and the journal both ignore the problem. Or, you could contact the copyright holder after the problem has been addressed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This is very common among obscure journals. I have come across papers copy-pasting entire paragraphs from my papers and not even getting a citation.
It is possible [to do something](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/11165/8239) about it, but it is usually worthless since many of these journals even accept [randomly generated papers](http://thatsmathematics.com/mathgen/) ([see](http://thatsmathematics.com/blog/archives/102)).
In this case, I would go for **1.**, the second option might be too risky. Recall:
>
> The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
>
>
>
The third one might not give you peace of mind.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/19 | 545 | 2,302 | <issue_start>username_0: With the desire to obtain a master's degree in Management Information Systems, IT Management, or Computer Science, how do you proceed writing a personal statement when your bachelors degree is unrelated?
With minimal previous technical experience (basic knowledge on programming, some collegiate participation in software club), is it possible to be considered seriously? What can be added to the statement to strengthen your impression?
I ask because a lot of the [graduate ambassadors](http://www.cdm.depaul.edu/Prospective%20Students/Pages/Graduate-Ambassadors.aspx) at DePaul have bachelors in different fields.
Related: [How does one change to engineering for graduate school after undergrad in a science field?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3153/how-does-one-change-fields-between-undergrad-and-grad-school)<issue_comment>username_1: I was recently accepted to a MS program that is different from my undergrad and graduate training. In my personal statement I tried to relate my experience to the field I was pursuing. I had field research experience in public health, but I was applying for a MS in biology. I still used my research experience, but I focused on the general research skills that I developed, things that would be useful in the lab. I mentioned things that are universal to all research.
I think if you convey passion and direction for the new field, you'll be alright. It can be an advantage too. Think of ways you can incorporate your previous field if possible. If not, show them your maturity and passion. It seems like admissions committees can tell who is going through the motions and who is genuine. Make your voice heard.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Recently I applied for an MS in electrical engineering. I wrote my sop on my own.
Firstly you have to mention how you got interested in this field. Then you mention all about your academics and activities from your schooling to present day. Then you mention about your area of interest and your academic projects and internship(s). At last why you want to do graduation in the area you prefer to and conclude.
Regarding your projects you have to give brief explanation about the project and the things that you used in the project .
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/08/20 | 1,261 | 5,017 | <issue_start>username_0: I just graduated from one of the older IITs (Indian Institute of Technology), majoring in EE and have a GPA of about 7.8 / 10. I want to pursue a masters degree in computer science from a top 20 university in the US. I have a paper published in an international conference on machine learning and have good test scores(GRE / TOEFL) but I'm worried that my grades could affect my chances. I have some experience in competitive programming, my team finished among the top 10 among 300+ teams in the ACM ICPC regionals and I have a decent Topcoder rating. Not sure if this matters though. I have also made contributions to open source projects and have open sourced some of my projects, some of which have been downloaded thousands of times.
I've seen people from unknown colleges with higher GPAs getting in to places like Stanford, UIUC, Cornell, CMU etc. Realistically, do I have any chance of getting admitted in a top 10 or 20 program. If not, what can I do to improve my chances within a year?
UPDATE: Well, I guess grades do matter, I didn't get into any of the good schools I applied to. I'll have to give up my hopes of grad school now.<issue_comment>username_1: While your question is not a duplicate of [Maximizing opportunities to be admitted in top schools](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1034/maximizing-opportunities-to-be-admitted-in-top-schools) or [How do you get a bad transcript past Ph.D. admissions?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/324/how-do-you-get-a-bad-transcript-past-ph-d-admissions/325#325), since in general MS admissions is different from PhD admissions, they may be helpful.
As I said in another [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1900/929), your approach is wrong and will be a hindrance in maximizing your chances for acceptance. No school wants to accept someone who only wants to go to their school because of its ranking. You need to tailor your application to demonstrate why you want to go to the particular school.
If the MS programs you are interested in have a research component, you need to identified some potential supervisors, ideally one of your recommendation writers can introduce you. You then need to build on that relationship. Talk to them about how your work fits in with their past and current work. As your relationship with the potential supervisors builds, figure out how they fit into the department. They will likely have the inside knowledge needed for writing a really good application.
For purely taught programs you need to identify what it is about the courses they offer that make the program unique and a good fit for you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Realistically, do I have any chance of getting admitted in a top 10 or 20 program.
>
>
>
With a publication in an international conference? Definitely!
Of course, I'm assuming that you mean a **good** publication in an **internationally recognized** conference (not just a conference with papers from more than one country), ideally indexed in [DBLP](http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/) and available over the web. I'm also assuming that you will have strong recommendation letters describing your contributions to the paper, in specific, personal, and credible detail, as evidence of your research potential. Ideally, your letters will make direct comparisons with other IIT graduates who have succeeded in strong graduate programs.
I'm also assuming that you have a compelling [statement](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1555/65) describing your research experience and interests, written in flawless English, and that those interests are a good fit for the faculty at your target departments. Be sure to describe your ongoing open-source projects. (The contest stuff? Meh.) As Daniel suggests, focus on the **work** you want to do, not the ranking of the department.
And of course, I do mean you have a **chance**, not that you have a sure thing. Graduate admissions is a random process; you have some influence on the distribution, but someone else rolls the dice. Machine learning is a particularly competitive area, so if you want to continue in that direction, you should apply broadly. In particular, you should *not* limit yourself only to programs that appear at the top of some list in some stupid magazine. Rather, aim yourself at departments whose faculty and students have similar research interests to your own.
(I regularly serve on the CS grad admissions committee at UIUC.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You don't have a chance of getting into a top 20 university because you don't have enough GPA for that. Top 20 universities are for students getting GPA of above 9.5. But in your case, excluding the GPA you have a great chance of being accepted to top 40 universities like University of Virginia but Cornell, Stanford and all ... You can't just dream of that. So please try for the university which you can afford mentally, academically and financialy.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/08/20 | 2,120 | 8,627 | <issue_start>username_0: This fall I will be an senior mathematics major at a small public liberal arts university. I'm trying to finalize the list of schools to which I will apply (to PhD programs in pure math), but I am finding it somewhat difficult. I know that I am not a candidate for admission at top-tier universities. My school is relatively unknown outside of its state, and the professors who will write my recommendation letters aren't very well-known either (although they do publish somewhat frequently in their respective fields). I have taken two semesters of abstract algebra, one semester of real analysis, and two semesters of topology, and received an A in all. By the time I graduate I'll have taken another semester in real analysis and a course in complex analysis, plus several other applied and discrete math classes. I haven't taken any graduate courses since my school doesn't offer them, but I have completed a research project with one of my professors in the area of math which I hope to study in grad school. My GPA is around 3.85.
I think (and please correct me if I am wrong) that I should focus on applying to "mid-tier" programs, but I find it very difficult to determine which programs are at this level. I know that one student from my school was accepted at a program ranked in the 40's by the U.S. News math grad school rankings.
Essentially, my question is this: Do the U.S. News rankings accurately reflect the selectivity of programs, and if so, is there some point in the rankings at which schools become "mid-tier" or at which I would be competitive for admission?<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes**, the rankings (roughly) reflect the selectivity of the program, as far as I know. Your choice to focus on mid-tier programs makes sense. (I think defining mid-tier as starting in the 40s is plausible, though I suspect you'll get conflicting answers from different people.) **However**
1. **Don't confuse the quality of the program *overall* with the quality of their specialty that you hope to study.** Their specialty program could be much better or worse than the program overall. In math departments (as opposed to, say, some computer science departments), students are typically admitted *to the department*, rather than to a professor's research group or a specialty area. Taking advantage of this could get you into a specialty program that's rated higher than you "deserve".
2. **Don't exclude a school just because it's too highly rated.** It's good to **apply to a wide range** of schools, some "reach" schools that you think it unlikely you'll be admitted to, and some "safety" schools that you would be quite surprised *not* to be admitted to. All sorts of factors influence how likely it is you'll be admitted to a given school in a given year, many of them completely unknowable to you. For example, maybe a new faculty member will be coming and looking for students (or maybe one will be leaving). Maybe the program has all their TA positions tied up with current students who haven't finished yet, or maybe not. Maybe a dean wants to grow the program, etc. Many of these things you just can't know. Most likely, you won't get into MIT, Harvard, Princeton, or Stanford. But once you get into the 20s, 30s and below, the outlook is less clear.
3. **Focus on *fit*, rather than solely on *ranking***. Think about where the school is located. If you plan to live there for 5 or 6 years, you don't want to hate the place. This can include proximity to your family or friends, climate, scenery, nightlife, etc. If you know what specialty you want to study, the school should have at least 1, but hopefully 2 or 3 folks that you would potentially like as an adviser.
4. **Focus on aspects of your application that you can still change**. With a transcript no stronger than yours, I got into a top-25 school. The cool part is that for the specialty I chose, they were top-10. At this point, most of your transcript (and much of your application in total) is fixed. But you didn't mention your GRE scores. (The surprising thing about the GRE is that you can do pretty well if you're just really good at Calculus (through multivariable), Dif. Eq., and Linear Algebra.) I think my subject test was something like 65th percentile. That's not terribly good, but I think it was enough to convince the admissions committee that even though I was coming from a small LAC that no one had heard of, I did know something. The other thing I did, which I highly recommend you try, is get a letter of recommendation from a faculty member at *that school* (where I was admitted). I wrote code for him for 3 or 4 weeks (about 30 hours/week, I think) during Christmas break of my senior year. In exchange, he wrote a recommendation for me. I'm sure it didn't say that I was a math wunderkind, but whatever it said added just enough to my application to get me in.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: username_1's answer is great, and I just want to echo some points and add a few things to it.
First, I'm not sure why you've decided you're not a candidate for a "top-teir" school. It sounds like you've been successful in your coursework, and you can likely get strong letters of recommendation. If you don't bomb the GRE, you can certainly get into a "highly-ranked" school! I went to a college just like the one you describe, and my friends and I all did fine when it came to grad school admissions -- one of my friends got into a "top ten" department, and we all got accepted by schools in the top twenty or thirty. So don't count yourself out simply because your school is small and relatively unknown. And, most importantly, if you do get into a prestigious program, be sure to base your decision to enroll on more than the US News rankings!
(I've used the quotation marks above because the rankings are all a bit questionable, and one should really consider the strength of a department in your field of interest, like username_1 said.)
Regarding the professors who will be writing your letters of recommendation: They may not be heavyweights in their fields, but chances are they know some people of influence. Take a look at some departments, get a feel for what you'd like to study, and possibly with whom, and then talk to your letter writers. It may happen, when you mention your interest in working with Professor X, that your letter writer was roommates with Professor X in grad school. These little personal connections won't get you admitted, but they will help ensure that your application gets a fair evaluation despite your school's relative obscurity.
Good luck! Aim high.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll just note that my credentials weren't so different from yours when I graduated from college (obscure liberal arts college with little track record, etc.) and I got in to Berkeley, Michigan and Northwestern. Of course, I can't actually compare our cases (and this was a decade ago), but I don't think you should hesitate to apply to, say, Wisconsin, or UT Austin or Rutgers (depending on your regional preferences). If you doubt it, you can always contact the graduate coordinator and ask if they think you're a plausible candidate.
As Dan says, a good range is the best approach; apply at least one place you can't quite believe you'll get in, and at least one place where you feel absolutely confident, and a few in between. This stuff is indeed incredibly unpredictable, but there are a lot of slots in reasonable graduate programs, and fewer good candidates than you might think.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'll only address the question of deciding what "mid-tier" means. There's one coarse classification that could be helpful to you.
There are 48 math departments considered as [Group I](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/group_i) under the AMS classification (the older one, deprecated as of last year but the most useful one in my opinion). There's obviously a lot of variation within this group, but I think it's safe to assume that the programs at these 48 schools are stronger than the 56 math departments in [Group II](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/group_ii). (The bottom of Group I is probably not separated from the top of Group II by *too* much, however, so don't stress too much about the cutoff.) However I have a lot less confidence in the division between the bottom of Group II and the top of Group III; in this region the AMS's case for switching to the [new groupings](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/groups) seems quite strong to me.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/20 | 1,939 | 6,642 | <issue_start>username_0: While writing [an answer to that question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11988/2700), I realized I don't really have a good list of resources that could be useful to first-time authors, like MSc or PhD students who write their first paper. I often direct my own students to these two papers:
* <NAME>, [“Whiteside's group: writing a paper”](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adma.200400767/abstract), *Adv. Mater.* **2004**, *16*, 1375–1377 ([PDF](http://www.ee.ucr.edu/~rlake/Whitesides_writing_res_paper.pdf)).
* <NAME>, [“Ten simple rules for getting published”](http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.0010057), *PLOS Computational Biology* **2005**, *1*, 0341.
I also make sure that they read the journal's editorial policy and authors guidelines.
What are other sources of good information for students and first-time academic authors?<issue_comment>username_1: A book or paper on writing is a good introduction but can usually not solve everything. Reading a book does not mean you can reproduce what it teaches, particularly with writing since it is something that needs lots of practise. One problem is that writing is a question of both knowing how to structure the science but also a question of building and formulating the text, the latter being a language issue. So it is usually relatively easy to teach students how the technical side works and provide explanations for why. Teaching students how to be concise and precise is another question and without lots of practise it is quite difficult to get anywhere. During a thesis much of the language issues are ironed out by constant revisions sugested by the advisor. I also point out to all my students that writing is a life-long learning process and thatit is never to late to develop and change your writing.
However, I have some sources I fall back to:
>
> <NAME>. From research to manuscript. A guide to scientific writing. Springer
>
>
> <NAME>. and <NAME>., How to write and publish a scientific paper. Cambridge
>
>
>
The [Purdue Online Writing Laboratory](https://owl.english.purdue.edu/) OWL is also very useful.
For language (English) I have (aside of Strunk & White) found
>
> <NAME>. Science research writing for non-native speakers of English
>
>
>
of use.
There are of course lots of books around but all are definitely not good.
A final gem is a short paper on abstracts
>
> <NAME>., [A scrutiny of the abstract](http://www.aapg.org/bulletin/abstract_scrutiny.pdf). Bulletin Of The American Association Of Petroleum Geologists. 50 (9), 1992-1999.
>
>
>
Which provides an excellent description of the abstract.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Specifically for mathematics, good resources are N. Higham's very comprehensive *[Handbook of writing for the mathematical sciences](http://www.siam.org/books/ot63/)* and (for non-native speakers) a nice booklet by <NAME>, *[Writing mathematical papers in English](http://utvle.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/1995-ems-trzeciak-writing_mathematical_papers_in_english__a_practical_guide.pdf)*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A nice article for writing your first mathematics paper is [How to Write Your First Paper](http://www.ams.org/notices/200711/tx071101507p.pdf) by <NAME> in the December 2007 *Notices of the AMS*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A resource for writing a paper in natural sciences can be
>
> [Scientific Writing: My Approach and Irreverent Opinions](http://www.scripps.edu/milligan/em-journal/pdf/Scientific_Writing.pdf)
>
>
> <NAME>
>
>
>
It has several good resources listed in the bibliography, which I haven't gone through but looks promising!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **Computer Science**
For CS, there's a pretty well-written book that addresses the art of writing for a CS conference/journal.
>
> [Writing For Computer Science](http://www.justinzobel.com/)
>
>
> <NAME>
>
>
>
I'm reading through it now, and its really an eye-opener for me - as it quotes examples from actual published papers to illustrate its points, which are quite succinct and easy to incorporate once you've read the book! I would enthusiastically recommend it to any CS grad student!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I wish I read this book before writing my first paper: [The Minto Pyramid Principle: Logic in Writing, Thinking, & Problem Solving](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0960191038). It explains how to better organize and articulate ideas.
Also it is always worth re-reading [On Writing Well](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0060891548).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: A blog entry, written by <NAME>, specific for mathematics but with some points that can be used in other scientific branches:
[On writing](https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/)
Another reference, by <NAME>,
[How to write mathematics](http://alpha.math.uga.edu/%7Eazoff/courses/halmos.pdf)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: <NAME> has a short, accessible piece on writing articles (in psychology). He gives concrete examples of good and bad choices in writing, often using the paper itself to illustrate his points.
>
> [Writing the Empirical Journal Article](http://dbem.ws/WritingArticle.pdf)
>
>
> <NAME>
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: ***How to write an academic paper for the first time?***
By reading different papers in your field. Pick one good paper which you know very well, Look how the authors organised their ideas into set of pages. How the contribution flows from one section to another in the paper.
Once you are about to write your first paper, try to list the key messages (i.e. contribution) you want to deliver. Start by writing the key messages as sections in your paper. Fill-in these sections. Read it over and over and ask yourself: is this easily understandable to the reader? should I add additional sections/subsections? can I better organize the paper?
Give yourself one or two days break and then ask yourself the same questions. Hand it to your supervisor. Let him/her comment on it and start again the cycle.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Your best start is probably either [*A Manual for Writers*](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0226823377) or [*The Elements of Style*](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/020530902X).
I regularly look into those books. Either to refresh my knowledge or just for the pleasure of reading *The Elements of Style*.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/20 | 647 | 2,936 | <issue_start>username_0: How understanding are American Top-10 universities of different expectations abroad? In the UK, nearly nobody publishes anything before they start their PhD. The master courses are much shorter and usually include mostly courses instead of research. We are not expected to do any teaching. I am therefore wondering whether all of this will count against a UK student applying to the US. Personally, I have a very good profile for a UK student (Top of my class in undergrad and masters), but I only have 2 research internships outside of my courses. Is it expected of UK students to achieve the same things as US students applying to the same universities?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are literally talking Top-10, you will be on equal footing with American applicants, especially with your research internships.
Below that threshold you may well surpass American applicants, as you haven't spent any of your time minoring in side subjects since school.
This may not relate to how well your applications fare, but the larger universities will be well versed in taking on Eurasian applications, and you should expect fair judgement on UKish criteria.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: This may vary by field; my experience is in mathematics.
Most US students start a PhD program immediately after finishing their bachelor's degree, so they apply during the last year of their undergraduate program. It is less common to complete a separate master's first, especially in the sciences where PhD students are funded and masters students are typically not. The first couple of years of a PhD program are usually coursework similar to a masters program (you would probably be able to skip some or most of these courses, if they are comparable to what you have taken).
Therefore, the US students with whom you are competing are mainly undergraduates in the last year of their bachelors program. At this level a few of them may have published papers, but most will not. They may have research experience from summer projects, summer internships, independent study or lab work, but it is not usually comparable to graduate research. Very few of them will have any formal teaching experience; at most they may have worked as teaching assistants, which usually means grading homework. Some of them may have taken a few graduate-level courses at their undergraduate university, but not to the full extent of a masters degree.
So I don't think you need to be concerned about your level of preparation or experience in comparison with US applicants. If anything, you should be ahead.
As mentioned in comments, at a major US research department there should be people who have either come from UK universities or have experience with them. If they are not already on the graduate admissions committee, the committee members will consult with them if they have questions.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/20 | 1,973 | 8,371 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a beginning doctoral student in the field of Machine Learning and I've been given several contradicting opinions on whether a PhD is worth it or not. I don't want to spend the rest of my life in front of a desk doing research, but I would like to deepen my understanding on my field. I am interested for a career on industry. Some people say I'm wasting my time for doing the PhD and some people say it is worth it. My plan at the moment is to finish PhD as fast as possible and then continue my career in industry when I'm still young. Any opinions or recommendations on what I should do? :)
P.S.
I want to add to this that I have already 2,5 years of work experience on industry (IT) already. For example I designed and implemented an online language skill tester for my university and have worked as a software engineer. So I wouldn't be entirely newbie in programming after I finish my PhD...
My subject is about applying the techniques of Machine Learning on Big Data.
Thank you for any suggestions and guidelines :)<issue_comment>username_1: This is not an 'official' answer, but one of a revelation of sorts I have had recently.
One thing that occurred to me as I complete my PhD (submit in the next fortnight), is that my PhD is a very practical and successful application of existing technology into very specific scientific functions that the technology was not designed to do. This, and the community benefit aspects have formed the basis of the papers that I have been able to get published. If you can make a focus on practical applications *alongside* the theoretical constructs - then the PhD *may* be of benefit of both you and a future employer.
However, this varies from discipline to discipline (as the answers in my other thread linked in the comments suggest).
You have got to look at what benefits are there for you in pursuing a PhD, both in the short and long term.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You haven't really defined what you mean by "...when considering your career" in the subject of this post. On the one hand, you say,
>
> I would like to deepen my understanding on my field.
>
>
>
If your goal is to deepen your understanding, one way to do that is to get a PhD. You can also do this on your own, without getting a PhD, but you'll find a more structured path and (possibly) more resources if you go down the PhD route.
On the other hand, you say,
>
> I am interested for a career on industry.
>
>
>
Are you interested in industry because of the money? If that is the case, you're most likely better off earning a full income and "moving up the ladder" during the time you would spend in graduate school, which means you should forego getting a PhD to concentrate on the money.
If you're interested in a career in industry because of reasons outside of financial considerations, then you have to think about what kinds of jobs you're looking to take in industry. If you're satisfied that your current skills and educational level will make you competitive for the jobs you want, you should probably reconsider the PhD, and to "deepen your understanding" in a different way. Then again, a certain percentage of people want to get a PhD for the challenge and for strictly personal reasons, removed from the job details themselves.
If the jobs you want to get are generally given to PhDs, then you have your answer already -- get the PhD to make yourself competitive for those positions.
I suggest writing down all of your long-term goals, and then weighing them against the time and cost (and opportunity costs) of getting your PhD. If after all that you still don't have a good answer, you might consider continuing with your program for another year and just postponing the decision until then. Eventually, either you will get your PhD, or you will be convinced that it is better off that you stop the program (but the decision may get harder the closer you are to finishing).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It is impossible to answer your question unless you tell in which country you intend to work in the industry.
In France, for example, a PhD is not very highly considered by industry, where the one important criteria is which engineering school you did. This is slowly evolving.
I heard that in Germany, a PhD is highly valued in industry, even if its content has nothing to do with the job.
I have little knowledge for other countries.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I completed my PhD recently and I am currently working in the industry. Mine is a PhD in CS and my thesis was on development of newer techniques for real time prediction. Before PhD, I had 5 years of work experience in the analytics sector. Personally, I found the entire experience of the PhD to be intellectually satisfying and worth the effort. Yes, I had to forgo 4 years of income or earning opportunities and survived on an adequate stipend. But I believe PhD in a technical field like Machine Learning will always be in demand in the industry. Post PhD, I got the job as a data scientist with the largest online retailer. I think it varies from individual to individual and one should find their own way. In my country, PhD is not that highly valued in the industry. But I guess one should do a PhD in an area for which they have some passion so that they can develop the skill sets that will make them competitive in the job market.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: If you have an opportunity to finish your Phd then do so. Failing to continue with a Phd is something that is difficult to change your mind on later in life. In the big scheme of things what you see yourself doing just after graduating is so different from what you may find yourself doing in 10, 20, 30 or 40 years later.
You will never regret having a Phd. You may regret not having a Phd when you could have completed it!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In my opinion, the **key defining feature of Ph.D. research is to understand a subject in its most fundamental aspects and push the boundary of collective human understanding and knowledge.** There are some things that you only get to explore while going through a Ph.D. degree and some results you only get to publish in academia.
Consider what you have said in your post:
>
> I don't want to spend the rest of my life in front of a desk doing
> research, but I would like to deepen my understanding on my field.
>
>
>
The question is what do you mean by deepening your understanding of your field. If by deepening your understanding, you mean, deepening your understanding of the technologies that are used in machine learning, then industry could be a good option. But if you mean that deepening your understanding of how and why things work, then perhaps the industry is not a good place for that.
>
> My plan at the moment is to finish Ph.D. as fast as possible and then
> continue my career in the industry when I'm still young.
>
>
>
I think you should examine whether you want to get a Ph.D. solely to satisfy some requirement on a job application, and perhaps to get a higher starting salary, or do you want to create something that lasts and make a name for yourself in the research community. The key question is: "will the impact of my thesis be felt long after I finish the Ph.D. degree"? And if your Ph.D. research cannot provide a satisfactory answer to this question, then it is better to go into industry.
I have observed that there seems to be a collective rush to finish Ph.D. in machine learning and computer science departments. In my opinion, this collective habit has greatly cheaped the value of their degrees, and this can be reflected in the quality of their thesis, which consists nothing more than a few equations, some hand-wavy explanation as to why their new equations are better, and some simulations with highly controlled experiments.
I have seen the statistics; nobody cares about their research at all (view count less than some double digit number, years after publishing thesis), because everybody else is also putting up a few equations and doing their own simulation and hoping to get into industry asap - the level of toxicity is high, nobody is building upon or examining each other's work. This kind of research is unsustainable in the long run.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/20 | 1,109 | 4,801 | <issue_start>username_0: About a year ago I noticed that my PhD supervisor has listed on his faculty page that he co-authored a conference presentation together with me. The problem is, he didn't-- the research itself was entirely mine, and I wrote and gave the presentation alone. (This is in the social sciences, not the hard sciences). He never talked to me before claiming co-authorship on his faculty profile, and in fact, has never mentioned it to me-- nor have I mentioned it to him.
I can understand that he may have felt he needed the "extra credit" to beef up his publications last year while he was trying to get tenure. Now that he's got his tenure, though, and now that I've finished my PhD and am applying for jobs, I am worried that, should my potential employers google the items on my résumé and come across his co-authorship claim, it will contradict my résumé's claim that I was the sole author... making *me* look like the liar.
I'm really reluctant to "give in" and credit him as co-author for the presentation on my résumé too, because (a) it doesn't feel fair and (b) I don't have many publications/presentations to begin with... so including him as co-author could dilute what little power my résumé has.
However, I am also embarrassed to ask him to take this "publication" down from his faculty page, because I am worried that he may get defensive, which could ruin our relationship-- which would be a problem, because I still depend on him for references as I look for a job.
Any ideas/perspective on how to handle this?? Thanks!!<issue_comment>username_1: To be fair, if your advisor had no intellectual involvement in the presentation, then he does not have the right to list it on his CV. However, getting him to agree to take it off is a different matter altogether.
Perhaps the way to begin this conversation is to ask your advisor why the paper is listed on his web page. Don't make it a demand, but instead probe the reasons for doing it, and perhaps drop a few suggestions. For instance, as you mentioned above, you could ask: "Won't having a single-author credit on my CV be helpful?" as part of the conversation.
However, I think if you make it more of a "mutually arrived at decision" rather than a demand that he take the publication off the CV, you'll get a more favorable response.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In a number of fields it's standard for the supervisor to be listed as the last author on papers or presentations that their students produce. This is because the supervisor helps in a number of ways, some of them indirectly: they get grant money, they train you to use the lab, they train you to do statistics... or they might make suggestions for the research design, the main theoretical focus of the presentation/manuscript, etc. If I wouldn't list my supervisor on a conference presentation, the only possible reason would be that it slipped my mind to add his name.
I would therefore ask other PhD students in your department what the standard is in this case, because your supervisor might not think that he's doing something wrong.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: If there is an archival record of the conference presentations then the authors are whoever the authors are. If the conference doesn't have any type of archival record of the presentations, then you are in a grey area. Who is going to be authors when the work is eventually published? It sounds like the adviser expects to be an author. Presumably you have not talked about authorship with your adviser. I cannot stress this enough, **prior to starting any project discuss authorship and funding with your collaborators and advisers**
Given that a project has already begun without prior discussions of authorship, you need to work it out ASAP. I would hope that your adviser was not simply claiming credit to "beef up" his CV (if he was you have some serious problems). My guess is that he thinks he made an intellectual contribution to the work. You need to have a civil conversation with him to understand what his expectations are about the minimum contributions needed to warrant authorship. If you strongly disagree with this view, you need to consult other colleagues to determine who is being reasonable/unreasonable. Once the authorship parameters are laid out, you need to understand what he believes are his contributions. These then need to be compared to the criteria for authorship.
Do not suggest that your adviser has taken credit he doesn't deserve unless he is substantially below the authorship bar. It is an unfortunate situation but a co-authored paper and a reference is generally much more valuable than a single author paper and no reference. If he is clearly below the authorship bar then you have a **MAJOR issue**.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/20 | 1,173 | 5,152 | <issue_start>username_0: What steps are taken to evaluate an applicant's coursework?
* Are graduate-level courses weighted higher?
* Is this a significant part of the decision process (outside the major
components of research experience, personal statement, and LORs)?
I'm interested in what adcoms look for as good signs, red flags, etc.
Any information, particularly for CS PhD programs, is appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: This is more of a general answer.
Graduate-level coursework should carry additional weight in a graduate school application, because it normally suggests that you are capable of doing work at a higher level than the standard undergraduate curriculum. However, it should be pointed out that more weight will be given to a full graduate-level course than a "shared" course that regularly offers both undergraduate and graduate enrollment.
The primary red flag would be poor performance in one or more "core" courses in your discipline, while encouraging signs are taking more or harder classes and doing well in those.
As for the relative importance of this in an application, I'd put coursework in general somewhat behind the letters of recommendation and research experience. However, this is something that may vary from school to school, and even department to department.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: ```
Are graduate-level courses weighted higher?
```
Relative to your core undergraduate courses, I'd imagine so. Taking advanced graduate courses (preferably, more advanced versions of your core classes, since this will look like an upward trend if you didn't so hot in your core ones), and doing well in them, implies one can do potentially good research in grad school. Courses at this level will tend to expose you to current research that you may work on in the future. Aside from LOR and conference/journal publications, this would be the next best indicator of your potential success in grad school. Which leads to the next question. . .
```
Is this a significant part of the decision process?
```
I wouldn't say that it's significant (consider that some liberal art colleges may not have available graduate courses to undergraduates, as compared to a research university) but it's still important, if the resources are there. Graduate admissions are aware of that, but they key is to stretch your intellectual vitality as far as possible. Remember that there aren't too many indicators of whether or not an undergraduate can do well in grad school (after all, the "research frontier", depending on the discipline, may simply be inaccessible, even to an exceptional undergraduate). This applies to other fields like mathematics, but three factors will always be taken into account by any respectable institution (LOR, statement of purpose, research experience), and you've already mentioned them.
Aside from that (and GPA, which is really more of a "cut-off" tool), if all else is taken into account, it will probably come down to best fit; whether or not your research interests coincide with the faculty of your chosen area. If you wanted to do research in artificial intelligence, it wouldn't make sense to apply to a program that (hypothetically) only specializes in mathematical optimization, so you would probably be passed over to someone who does want to do research in AI.
username_1 had a nice answer so I will not add much more regarding "red flags" (I would say that even if you did terrible, say, your freshman year, the best thing to do would be to show an upward trend in your grades). However, remember that the **main question** admission committees want to answer is "Can this person succeed in our program?" (i.e can this person do research?), so you have to persuade them to say yes. Your application will be scrutinized by professors who want to see if you're worthy. Coursework is important, but demonstrating your research potential in ways that are not just related to coursework is **essential**.
The best thing to do would be to create a check-list of what they expect to see in your application, and meet all of the requirements, then go above the call of duty (whether it's in the form of a publishable senior thesis, which I would argue is always better than chugging coursework, or presenting your work at a conference, or getting an awesome research-based LOR from a professor who knows you well and can vouch for your potential, or all of the above).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I am part of an admissions committee in the field of applied math. Since there are very few undergraduate programs in applied math, our applicants have a wide variety of backgrounds -- mathematics, engineering, physics, and others. My main interest when looking at the transcript is:
* First, do you have good grades in the most relevant courses?
* Second, how well-prepared are you in terms of course coverage? It's typical for students from outside math to have one or two gaps.
Also, we interview promising applicants, so I look at the transcript to see what the student **should** know, and quiz them on typical course material.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/20 | 647 | 2,847 | <issue_start>username_0: I am invited to an online interview for a PhD position.
Actually, it is my first time.
What are the contents of the interview?
What issues are usually discussed in these interviews?
Am I supposed to represent a proposal in the context of research, at that time?
Which parameters can increase the acceptance chance?<issue_comment>username_1: In my case (machine learning), background knowledge of the field and previous publications are the most important parts. My supervisor enumerated the names of the sub-fields and asked whether I know about them. I need to give different level of introductions or explanations according to my familiarity. As for the publications, I have little publications so I had to explain my thesis at great detail. Actually my supervisor was not satisfied and I had to write several pages of "abstract" later. At last, my supervisor asked me to the read the xxx page of his paper and derive the differential of a complex function right away. I made some minor errors but finally got myself through.
**UPDATE**: In my case I don't think my supervisor was "quizzing" me, but try to obtain a rough impression of my background. For me, the point was to articulate what I have known and not to boast on what I don't know. And I was also asked about the ability of English communication and teamwork.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I work in a program for [computational science](http://scicomp.stackexchange.com), and we do online interviews with all of the qualified candidates for both our dual-degree (master's-PhD) and doctoral programs.
Because we are a rather broad program, we tend not to favor "quizzes" that test knowledge. Instead, we are looking for things like:
* Ability to communicate in English
* Enthusiasm for computational science (many people think we're a computer science program, instead of a computational science program!)
* Match for the research interests of one or more of our institute members (particularly for dual-degree candidates)
* Previous experience in computational science
* Evidence of teamwork and ability to fit our program
There's no real way to "game" the system, at least in my interview, unless you want to invent an entirely new personality for yourself. That's because most of my questions are free-form after the first few, and will try to explore the answers you've given in greater depth. For instance, if a candidate expresses an interest in fluid mechanics, I'll ask what they've done, what makes it interesting, what they'd like to do in the future. If someone happens to express interest in my area (computational materials), things will go in yet another direction altogether.
The best advice is be yourself. If you try to come off as someone you're not, that will likely show up during the interview.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/20 | 1,034 | 4,684 | <issue_start>username_0: This question is motivated by the fact that my last research internship was unsatisfactory in my relation with my supervisor. Partly because of me, I may have tried to be too much autonomous, rarely coming to him or sharing what I was doing or reading and never asking feedback. We didn't produce much and by the end he shared with me his disappointment, which strangely was a bit surprising to me, I was blind to the situation and our lack of exchange.
Now, I'm about to start my PhD with a totally new supervisor, and I'd like to learn from this mistake. I'm deeply convinced that the experience will be much more fulfilling for both sides if we maintain stimulating exchanges.
I was thinking about having from the beginning a long discussion about his expectation from me on short, mid and long term, his availability and the way he would like to supervise and push me.
Is this irrelevant or too much? Have you already had similar discussions? Have you tried something else?<issue_comment>username_1: Having a discussion about the PhD project specifically and expectations in general is always a good idea. If there is a clear project lined up it will be useful to discuss the details, possible directions, publications etc. In some cases (systems/programs/traditions) it is useful (in fact mandatory) to write a research plan or to write a review of the field as part of reading up on it. It is necessary that both you and the advisor has the same view of what should be achieved to the extent the specific program allows.
Apart from the science it is useful to discuss expectations so that you can agree on how work should proceed. Should you meet regularly? if so how often? How much feedback should you expect? Well the questions are many but having such a discussion is useful, particularly if you can also note what you agree upon on a piece of paper. In my country, one actually signs an individual study plan that is followed up annually showing progress in terms of course work and research. having such a plan is actually constructive in that it makes it possible to see if you are on track and also identify if and when your plan needs revisions and goals may deviate from the originally proposed. But, of course, all this is something which to some extent is dictated by the traditions in the specific program.
So do take the opportunity to have a good talk about the future collaboration. you will robably sense if the discussion is received well by the advisor and adapt accordingly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Just to add to Peter's answer, another that needs to be made clear are practicalities, including any other commitments that you have (e.g. work, volunteer work, family etc). I found having this discussion in the early part of my PhD program has meant that we have been able to adapt deadlines and meetings around my (full time) work schedule. This is also important if you are required to travel or conduct experiments.
Other logistical practicalities include medical conditions, financial constraints - these kind of thing do not need to be divulged in detail, but as they may affect the research (in a practical sense) - just to make the supervisor aware.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To echo some of the other comments here, I *strongly* recommend touching on topics beyond just science - your supervisor is going to be a very important figure in your life for several years if all goes according to plan, so in addition to things like the details of the project you're working on, I'd make sure to touch on the following:
* Any "lab policies" they have, written or unwritten. For example, some folks really prefer if their people work with a particular programming language, operating system, etc. Some people could care less if you work remotely as long as they see you now and again, and some people want geographic proximity, and seeing your face in the office.
* Working preferences. Are they a night owl, or a 9-to-5 type? Will they read drafts the weekend before a conference deadline, or do you need to get them weeks in advance? Do they want progress reports, or will they be happy/prefer with a finished product simply manifesting itself after weeks of silence?
* Authorship policies - how much do they want you writing your own papers, taking ownership of your projects, etc.
* How stable is your funding?
* Teaching expectations, if there are any. Are there courses they think you should take?
Slightly later on, once you've clarified your own goals, I'd also suggest a talk with your supervisor about where you'd like to end up when you're done. Teaching? Research? Industry?
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/21 | 502 | 2,008 | <issue_start>username_0: When would someone marking papers (lecturer, etc.) bump a student from just below pass up to the pass line? Do teachers consider things like attendance?
Regardless of the consideration (attendance, participation, etc.) for giving a student a better grade than they deserve, what is the justification?<issue_comment>username_1: There are a myriad of reasons why a student could have barely passing grades and good attendance. Not everyone is able to grasp the concepts as quickly and as well as others. They may have a learning difficulty, or they are taking on something to extend their knowledge and skills.
An example, my short term memory is no good under pressure, such as in an exam - I barely passed, and had conceded passes twice - does that make me less deserving? I'll let the fact that I am now just finishing my PhD *in the same topic area* answer that question.
Good attendance is an indicator, albeit, not conclusive of effort, but more conclusive if they had not attended at all.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One of the things I like about teaching is that while we draw fine lines at numbers such as 65.0 and 89.5, teachers also get the final word on putting grades into the system, and the ability to look at a student's performance holistically to include non-tangible paper marks such as attendance (in class and office hours), intrinsic motivation, and future goals justifies "bumping" grades for particular students.
I don't do it often, but if a student is on the line and showed me high motivation but didn't quite get to the higher grade, I will consider bumping up the grade (but I won't do it because of [grade-grubbing](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9014/what-to-do-about-grade-grubbers)). Sometimes, it comes down to when I'm entering the final grade into the system, and I think, "You know, that 89.3% for Alice really should be an A-." I don't lose sleep over it, and it really is relatively rare.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/21 | 1,868 | 8,397 | <issue_start>username_0: In this [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/12007/929) it is claimed that authorship is given away for "free" in some fields (e.g., obtaining the funding). The comments to the answer suggest that this is field dependent. I am looking for documentation from a field that suggests that authorship can be given away for "free". For example, the ICMJE has authorship [guidelines](http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html) that put a pretty high bar on authorship. Is there any documentation that suggests that supervising a student or getting funding is enough to warrant authorship?<issue_comment>username_1: I would argue that the Vancouver Protocol is something most people understand but traditions, peer pressure etc. is what makes co-authorship a sometimes fuzzy decision. So as for documentation, I doubt any exists that is accepted by all. That said, I know that in large consortias such as in physics, for example, accelerator work, one signs a contract that automatically adds your name to all papers produced within a given time frame depedning on your time period involved in the project. Such consortia-authorships usually use the consortia name as author with a separate listing of individuals. The consortia-authorship is something I do not think the writers of the Vancouver Protocol had in mind.
EDIT:
Here is an example from from [CERN](https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/Main/ATLASAuthorshipPolicy).
In the case of large research groups this type of "contract" (specific in each case) could be a way to officially outline the policy accepted by participants.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is going to depend on the field. For most fields, the norm is that an author has made "intellectual contributions" to the work. ICMJE updates this requirement to "substantive" intellectual contributions, but most conferences and journals have a written or implied cut-off for how substantive an intellectual contribution is. Many journals and conferences now ask for detailed list of contributions by the authors to combat vanity authorships.
In some fields, for example my own field of Chemistry, the norm is that the individual who has secured the funding has written one or more grant proposals specific to this project. These proposals may have been written with or without the assistance of the students working on the project. They may have even been written before the student joined the project. In chemistry, the proposal needs to be pretty specific about what types of problems will be examined and what methods will be used. Writing the proposal to get the funding is a substantive intellectual contribution counting as "substantial contributions to conception and design" as far as the ICMJE is concerned.
Funding does not necessarily happen this way in every field. As username_1 suggests, a National Lab, consortium, or other funded research center or institute may have a budget process that is separate from the conception and design of experiments. In such a case, the director of the center, whose duties likely include making sure the center is funded, is probably not an author.
Normal behavior for whether the supervisor is an author has been established in every field. Ask your colleagues. Consult your journals/conferences. For example, the American Chemical Society has the following description in their [Publication Ethics (Page 3)](http://pubs.acs.org/userimages/ContentEditor/1218054468605/ethics.pdf) (emphasis mine):
>
> The co-authors of a paper should be all those persons who have made **significant scientific contributions to the work reported and who share responsibility and accountability for the results**. Authors should appropriately recognize the contributions of technical staff and data professionals. Other contributions should be indicated in a footnote or an “Acknowledgments” section. An administrative relationship to the investigation does not of itself qualify a person for co - authorship (but occasionally it may be appropriate to acknowledge major administrative assistance). Deceased persons who meet the criterion for inclusion as co-authors should be so included, with a footnote reporting date of death. No fictitious name should be listed as an author or coauthor. The author who submits a manuscript for publication accepts the responsibility of having included as co-authors all persons appropriate and none inappropriate. The submitting author should have sent each living co-author a draft copy of the manuscript and have obtained the co-author’s assent to co-authorship of it.
>
>
>
To the ACS, the individual who takes responsibility for the validity of the data and the work (usually the student's supervisor in chemistry) is an author, even if that person did not design the experiments, collect the data, interpret the results, or write the manuscript. The supervisor has a more permanent position than the student and is likely to be easier to reach with questions five years from now than the student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Short answer: free authorship, also known as **gift authorship**, is a clear violation of research and publication ethics. The limit between “small contribution” and “no contribution” is not, however, easily defined; different fields put it at different levels.
---
I don't think the answer actually states that. It lists a series of contributions that are, in some field, considered important enough to warrant (in some combinations) authorship on resulting papers:
>
> *they get grant money, they train you to use the lab, they train you to do statistics... or they might make suggestions for the research design, the main theoretical focus of the presentation / manuscript*
>
>
>
All journals (or publishers) have **policies or guidelines on how authorship should be determined. In all cases, it involves significant scientific or technical contributions** to the work published. Authorship determination has to be weighted **in each individual case**, as no two situations are identical (and not simple rule of thumb can encompass all possible situations, as username_1 highlights).
**There are so many ways in which people can contribute to an intellectual work**, such as a research project and academic papers. It happens that **different fields** of research have different habits in authorship determination, **giving more or less weight to different types of contributions**. My own background is in physics and chemistry, where authorship tend to be more generous that, say, computer science or mathematics. I'll thus argue two examples of what you (and some fields) may consider dubious basis for authorship, but which in my field would be considered fairly standard:
* **Getting funding**. In this age, getting funding most often requires writing a grant proposal for a specific research program, with good and novel ideas, and convincing a tough crowd of other scientists (in a competitive environment) that your program is a good use of taxpayers' money. Thus, in most cases, **the person who provides the funding also provides a clear scientific contribution**: they identified an important problem to be solved, and provided a general framework for solving it. That's an important part of research! Identifying the right question to ask yourself is half of the job, *it is known. (Yeah, I'm trying my hand at Dothraki style in academic context. By the way, thank you for reading so far down my answer.)*
* **Supervising**. Whether or not the supervisor actually provided the student with the research project in the first place, **supervision implies guidance** of the student, which is definitely a scientific contribution. The supervisor will, in many cases, provide a broader view of the field and ideas for related problems relevant to the research, scientific background, and advice on how to use one's research time most efficiently. All of that is highly valuable, and contributes to the publication.
*(I've read somewhere “but the supervisor is paid for this, it's his job, so he shouldn't be awarded authorship” — that's plain stupid, pretty much everyone gets paid to do research, thus by that argument most papers would be authorless.)*
In both cases, funding and supervising imply scientific contributions, which are the reason for authorship.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/21 | 998 | 4,390 | <issue_start>username_0: **tl;dr** I think my supervisor has a severe lack of knowledge, does too many things instead of focusing heavily on just a few things and hence I can't really focus on my research project.
**Long Story** I started my PhD a few months back and was hired specifically to work on a certain project. We have a few very outstanding research groups as collaborating teams but all in different research areas.
After a few weeks into my PhD, I was hit by all the different side projects my supervisor tries to kick off. They are extremely time consuming and not research related at all. Besides, I noticed that my supervisor has a severe lack of knowledge in one of our core research areas. As a consequence, I can't discuss any of my ideas with him. As the other PhD students feel the same way, we have mentioned the lack of time quite a few times in our group meetings. And although he agreed that we need more time on proper research, things didn't really change yet. As a consequence, my motivation for the project starts to decline, although I continue to be extremely passionate about the project's overall goals!
So my question is, how I should cope with this situation? I thought about leaving his group, but I'm kind of stuck in a dilemma: I'd love to work on the project, and I don't want to let my collaborating teams down.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. It's your project, not your advisor's. Your lack of progress/motivation and supposed lack of time have nothing to do with him.
2. Nevertheless, you *must* sit down with your advisor and have a serious talk about both of your expectations. Be honest about your lack of motivation, be honest about your disappointment, be honest about your intellectual loneliness. Ask for suggestions. Listen.
3. You have other senior collaborators that you can work with, so if you need senior collaborators, work with them. Ask your advisor to fly them out to visit you, or to fly you out to visit them. Schedule regular Skype/Gchat meetings. Similarly, get to know other faculty in your department, who might serve as more experienced mentors/advisors, if not collaborators.
4. You're surrounded by colleagues who are excited enough about their research to want to draw you in, and you turn them away because you feel stupid? **What a wasted opportunity!** *Of course* you feel stupid. *Everybody* feels stupid listening to other people talk about their ongoing research, because *by definition*, they're talking about stuff that nobody understands (yet). You're simultaneously complaining about intellectual loneliness and turning away potential collaborators. So what if they're not working on *your* project?
5. *Of course* you're constantly forgetting important things you once knew well. It is totally unrealistic to think that you can keep everything you've ever learned/read fresh in your mind. Don't even try. Write things down. Maintain a library of papers, or at least a close personal friendship with Google Scholar. Let yourself forget details, confident in the knowledge that they'll come back amazingly quickly when you read them again.
6. Since your feeling is shared by other students in your group, it sounds like your advisor is a bit overexcited and has bitten off more than he can chew. All the more reason to sit down and talk with him directly, and to develop mentoring relationships with other faculty in your department and elsewhere. Also, start looking into other potential advisors, even if it means moving to another university.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I see only two possibly justified complaints here: "supervisor incompetence" and "overloading with routine work". Unfortunately, without knowing both the supervisor and the subject in question, I cannot really tell you anything about the first (beyond the general statement that it may or may not be true and that if it is, nothing short of changing the adviser will cure it). The second can and should be discussed directly with your adviser, or, if it doesn't help, with the department chairman. Remember however that if the load you are talking about is a common rule for all PhD students in the department, you cannot request an exception for yourself without a really good reason laid out in a very convincing way.
I believe username_1 said everything else there is to be said here already.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/21 | 2,008 | 8,585 | <issue_start>username_0: I assign my undergraduate students assignments from a workbook as homework. The homework amounts to about 30-minutes per day.
It is impractical for me to collect these workbooks at each lesson, or even weekly, as any days when I am checking the work are days when the students don't have their workbooks in hand. Furthermore, I cannot constantly collect, carry, and redistribute hundreds of workbooks each week.
As such, I've limited my collections of these to twice per term. The results, however, have not been good. A great many students save many weeks of work until the last minute, only to discover then that the task is far more difficult than they anticipated.
How can I motivate my students to complete work daily when it is impractical for me to frequently assess it?<issue_comment>username_1: Some ideas:
* [reward] Give some exam bonus to volunteers who will correct the homework on the board
* [threat] Randomly pick a student to correct the homework on the board and give him/her malus if he/she has not done it
* [threat ++] Make an exam (each week first, then each two weeks or randomly) in class on the given exercises, collect and evaluate the work
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **Intrinsic motivation** is always a better motor than threats and coercion. They are, after all, adults. So, try to make them understand that doing this is important for their progress, and thus completion of the course. Also, be open to suggestions from them on how to make it less cumbersome (for example, by skipping a week if they are really hard-worked at that particular time).
You can, however, combine this with **extrinsic motivation** forces, in order to help them see very concretely how the benefits of doing the homework regularly. For example, collect 5 of them at random every week. Another idea would be to tell them in advance that 50% of the final exam will be on problems taken from the workbook: they will understand very easily that, if they have done the homework correctly, it will really help them secure a good grade.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The other answers are excellent. Without knowing your field or the nature of the workbook assignments, I'll give the following answer:
I have become a big fan of automated online homework systems (although I know some students hate them). If you happen to be in a field where these systems exist (e.g., Physics, Math, Chemistry--WebAssign, MyMathLab, etc.), consider this for a future semester.
The reason I bring up these systems is that (1) they provide a forcing function for the students to do the work, (2) the grading is automatic and immediate, (3) the better systems provide guidance on problem solving, and (4) the math-related problems can be randomized so students can't copy of another student's work (as easily...).
---
Ideas for your current system:
1. Do a cursory check of the books every week. By cursory, I mean "check that there is writing on the required pages," and give a check or not. This doesn't preclude them from not putting in much work, but at least they will see that you've got eyes on them each week.
2. Give them a daily 1-question quiz that is straight from the homework (if it is the kind of work that has "correct answers").
3. Reassess why it matters that they do the work, and lay it out to them plainly. Do the students who procrastinate on the homework really do more poorly with the material? If the answer isn't an emphatic "yes," then why do you care? If the answer is "yes," then lay this out to them on the first day of class: "I assign the workbook material because it helps you get a better grade in the class. It's up to you to do the work, and your grade will almost certainly reflect the amount of work you put into the workbooks. I don't collect it because I expect you to do it on your own, and it's your grade that matters." In the end, your job is to give them the tools to learn the material, and their job is to use those tools. At the collegiate level, you can expect them to take their education seriously. I.e., "You can lead a horse to water..."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I usually give short quizzes based on the homework assignments. You do not need to include the exact homework questions there (though you can do it too) but they should satisfy the condition that whoever can do the current homework problems should be expected to pass them and whoever who can not should be expected to fail. I find this system more encouraging and revealing than grading a random subset. For completely routine things (like basic arithmetic, trigonometry, etc.) various automatic online systems are really good. You need to be very careful with how you set up the questions there and it can take a full day for one course but you can do it just once and never think about it again until the time to print out the student scores comes. Just don't forget to make those scores a noticeable portion of the grade. The other advantage here is that you may (but aren't obliged to) allow the students several attempts before they fail an online test, so they can really learn in the process, not just be evaluated.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I had a prof who marked us on completion. He taught 3rd year quantum physics for chemistry and would give out a page of reasonably easy questions that he marked, then several pages of really hard questions he wouldn't, but if you brought him each sheet completed he added 1 to your total grade. So whereas before you were out of 100, now you are out of 101. (Roughly, his marking system was out of more then 100 I think).
You could also complete previous years worksheets for the same thing, or textbook questions, anything like that. One page of questions (not answers) was one mark, or one of his old worksheets was one mark (Since the solutions were online).
This sounds like a lot, but someone worked it out that the first one you did added 0.4% to your final grade or something like that, but each one you did after that added less and less. The class perfectionist misunderstood the system and did 40 pages of textbook questions, and managed to raise her final mark by something like 4%. I just did all the old worksheet questions and got a percent or two, which really isn't much, but damn, did having done all those worksheets really help on the final.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Ask the students to photocopy or photograph their completed work from the workbook each week and email them to you as PDFs/JPEGs. (You may want a dedicated email to receive such files.)
Even if you don't grade the electronic copies, you can make submission a portion of the homework grade, e.g. 10-20%, depending on what your rules are about later changes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Although there are other answers here which get to this point, I would look at making required things required. If you need the students to do it every week, then make them do it by tying their grade to submitting it every week.
The problem is that you don't have time to assess their work every week. I think everyone here can appreciate that. However, you need to at least partially solve that issue. One key for that is the proper use of technology. Either a Virtual Learning Environment, email, or other online homework systems.
If you cannot assess all of the students, then a random assessment might get what you need. After all, as a teacher, you should be providing feedback to your students. So, have them submit their work electronically (yes, this requires a change from a paper workbook approach) and each week randomly select a few for assessment. If you see some are stars, skip their assessments for several weeks. If you see some are struggling then assess them more often. The students don't know who will be assessed but their grade might not be based on the assessment of the homework, just that they attempted it for that, you can simply scan a list of submissions. Again, you could do this with email if you have no other solution.
Ideally, the students would be intrinsically motivated and you would not have to do any prodding but in my experience some students do need a little prodding to get them to overcome the inertia of laziness. For that, submission might be enough. However, in the end, you will need to assess some. You should assess as much as you can but you have to balance this with your other needs. There's a lot more to teaching that assessment but assessment is a pretty important aspect of what we do.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/21 | 1,451 | 5,942 | <issue_start>username_0: I am doing a MS thesis in an engineering lab and I am fully funded by my advisor (tuition waiver plus stipend). We are a small lab and my professor is aiming for tenure. I am ahead of schedule and almost done with my thesis.I am good at programming and completed the project in 3 weeks (my professor thought it would take at least 3 months). Now, my professor is asking me to work on other things which involve developing apps for her other projects. I have protested by saying I am an GRA and I should only be concerned with my thesis project and my work in all other large projects in the lab should be at my discretion.
My advisor replied that I am pretty lucky to work for her since other professors have graduate students who work on 5 projects simultaneously (which of course is load of crap, I have other friends working in other labs who only work on their thesis). The other time I protested, my advisor said that since I am supposed to work 40 hours a week in lab, the project should be completed within 2 weeks easily. (These projects which my advisor wants me to do require some 80 hours of programming sometimes since I first need to learn the language and then write code for it). It's not that I don't want to develop apps, but I am more interested in writing journal papers for IEEE with deadlines in November, and I need all the time I can for that endeavor. I raised this issue but my advisor said that getting accepted in IEEE is remote, so I should concentrate on writing apps since there is a very good chance for her to get funded if I develop them.
I know that even if I refuse development, my advisor might throw a fit but my GRA will be intact because no advisor fires a student who is about to complete thesis. Also, I had asked my advisor if she would be interested in helping me with getting a PhD after thesis and she flatly said no. The advisor said I should probably go back to industry and work for 3-4 years and then decide on PhD. It seemed more like an excuse to make me get out of the lab. So it's pretty obvious there is no chance of a long-term relationship with my advisor.
>
> I am trying to understand what are the other job responsibilities of
> an MS student doing thesis? There is no chance of working with my
> advisor after MS, so why should i work on her projects? I can very
> well try to get some journals papers published as it might help in
> getting a PhD admit elsewhere, or should I just develop her apps
> because I work in her lab?
>
>
>
Edit: There are 3 people in my lab now (2 MS students and one PhD student), but I am the only programmer.<issue_comment>username_1: **tl;dr** Your adviser is not wrong. There are plenty of additional responsibilities and duties of maintaining a matured lab affiliation even as a MS student.
I think you went about it a wrong way. A little hill out of a molehill has been created.
Being a GRA in a lab does not mean that the buck stops with your thesis research. I am a member in a medium sized lab based in a ECE department. Typically, we have 4-6 graduate students, 1-2 post docs and a gaggle of undergraduate and masters students at most given times.
**My Responsibilities:**
1. Thesis research. This is primary and takes up most of my time.
2. Collaborative research with another graduate student. This is my secondary project and takes up a little bit of my time.
3. Giving talks in the lab about our works in progress.
4. Guest lecturing for my adviser in his courses when he is away.
5. Mentoring REU (Research Experience for Undergraduates) students when they come in summer.
6. Mentoring undergraduate and masters students from my own university in their own and lab projects.
7. Helping other lab members out with analysis - typically quantitative and some qualitative.
8. Reviewing articles written by other lab members.
9. Social engaging with lab members and lab visitors.
10. Designing presentations for lab funding reports and reviewing said reports.
I am sure I have forgotten a few more "responsibilities" but I can assure you that my work **does not** begin and end with just my own thesis research. It sounds like a lot but I can assure you that it really isn't and the situation is quite typical for my university and department. I have an excellent work-life balance. Now, I am a PhD student but once upon a time, I was a MS student and I had similar responsibilities.
The situation you describe is **not** atypical. I have seen folks in labs (which develop apps as a stepping stone to doing research) spend a lot of time actually developing the app. You are right. It takes time. Being a member of the lab means contributing to projects which are not just your own. It is a team effort.
Your adviser has actually given you a sanity check in terms of getting a PhD admit and in terms of what other graduate students usually do. Getting a paper accepted in a prestigious IEEE transaction is quite a considerable effort and takes a long time. It seems to me that your adviser does not feel that your research will be accepted into such a venue. I also think you hit a nerve somewhere when you argued about quantum of hours and projects to be worked upon according to your GRA deal. It doesn't work like that. You are not a unionized worker.
**Research takes as long as it takes.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The way that I view my GRA position is that the university is paying your tuition and stipend. There is expectation is that you will provide labor that will contribute to their projects. It's a pretty good deal- you get an education with a mentor in exchange for work that hopefully you are interested in. I would expect them to think of you as an employee. At this stage, you work for someone and they tell you what they need and you do it. It takes time and effort to mentor you, make sure you contribute everything that you can while you are there.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/22 | 1,389 | 5,704 | <issue_start>username_0: I work as an instructor at a university. I am not a graduate student there and my responsibilities end at teaching. Recently, a supervisor from another department asked me to prepare an article for their department to use, for some extra pay. The subject aligned well with my background and recent research.
When I finished the article, which involved additional research and several weeks of work, I put my name as author, as I would any other paper. After I finished, the supervisor requested that I completely remove my name, as he wished to submit it to the leader of his department, assembled together with some students' work.
Is that at all unusual that someone would request that I remove my name from a paper?<issue_comment>username_1: This seems to be a blatant attempt to take credit for your work - as far as I know, this is both not common, nor acceptable. To quote @JeffE *"hell, no"*, or a polite variant, is the only response.
I would, politely but firmly, state that as you have done the research and the write-up, then you are the first author, perhaps offer to have them as a co-author, only if they have contributed something.
I would also consider having a quiet word with the head of the department about this.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a "slam-dunk" case, *provided you have a paper trail.*
If you have both done research for the paper as well as wrote the first draft, then your colleague is *required* to give you co-authorship on the paper. (In fact, there's a strong case that *you* should be the first author, not your colleague.)
So I would agree with Damien that you should "politely but firmly" make your case to your colleague. If he refuses, then speak to the "leader of the department" and present your evidence.
I would also make sure not to work with this colleague again in the future!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: My answer assumes the worst case, namely that said supervisor indeed attempts to claim authorship for your work. As [LarsH justly pointed out](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12056/is-it-common-practice-to-remove-an-authors-name-from-a-paper#comment22313_12056), you might first want to clarify this is not a severe misunderstanding by having a talk with said supervisor, i.e. why would he want you to do such a thing (and please don't go down the path of asking "ok, assuming I did, what's in it for me?"). There may be a sensible argument, but personally I doubt it, thus let's assume he basically wants to publish your work as his:
Not only is this unusual and unethical, it is against all scientific conduct and might even be a felony to press charges against. This would warrant said supervisor to face severe consequences like being fired or having their PhD/tenure disavowed. Do however not attempt something stupid like blackmailing them - instead, assuming you have sufficient prove of this, expose them immediately since this is intolerable misconduct. (If you don't have prove, treat carefully though, since this might backfire into you ending up being "that jerk jealous of the "real"\* scientists")
\* No offence meant, but unfortunately in the event of doubt rank all too often outranks common sense
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If someone wants to steal your research for whatever purpose, he is a thief. It is not acceptable in academic world to do such thing, but as far as I know, such things can happen quite often in comparison how unethical it is. You have to resist and you have to change or expel your supervisor as soon as possible. If he use your work without your name, you can / and you have to use it against him, (with help of 3rd party, who will "accidentally" find this) so such thing will not repeat in the future and you will have no strikes back. Academic world should be (and unfortunately it is not) free of parasites.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: An episode I personally witnessed:
A married grad student at a top university in a semi-experimental field told one of her two PhD advisers that she was pregnant 3 months before the dissertation defence (the baby was due 5 months after the defence). He replied *"congratulations, I suppose"* and sent **her** an e-mail (the same day) telling her that he was removing her from the author list in one of their joint papers. To say that she was shocked is an understatement. After much agonizing she replied to him **and** *all the other paper authors*, listing her contribution to the paper and expressing a surprize that this does not merit her being one of the authors. The advisor apologized and her authorship was reinstated.
In short: *never surrender*.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: Just to round up the discussion, there are situations where you *want* to have your name removed -- when you are not satisfied with the quality of the work in the paper. I am a statistician, and I have heard of cases when a group of substantive researchers would ask a statistician for initial guidance, do the (wrong) analysis on their own, and stick the statistician's name into the list of authors to make their paper more credible. I have also heard of really weird situations when statisticians from pharma industry did not want their names on solid papers so as not to signal to their competitors that their firm is working on this new type of a drug. In either case, the initiative of having the name removed comes from the co-author themselves, not from the lead author.
Other than that, I have +1ed most answers here. As most others, from your description the situation appears to be that of plagiarism and a blatant violation of your authorship rights.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/22 | 1,955 | 8,124 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a masters degree in electronics engineering. When I was pursuing my B.Tech (Electronics and Communication) I had a nervous breakdown (to be specific BPAD) which was treated. After successful treatment I was able to succeed satisfactorily in my career. I have had to follow strict medications from then and sleep of 8 hours was must and the doctor warned me not to be in tense situations. I qualified the entrance exam for M.Tech with a 97 percentile and I have a severe love towards research now. I have started to fall in love with subjects like signal processing, linear algebra, statistics and probability, machine learning etc, but one professor from a premier institute of engineering and science warned me not to do a PhD, because competition is so heavy nowadays and people like me may have a second nervous breakdown.
I am currently working as an lecturer at a private engineering college. The management people are bothering me which is creating great tensions. I will give you an example: The vice principal was asking for an explanation letter and apology along with lot of scolding for a malpractice done by a student in an exam where I invigilated. They are also compelling us to do a lot of office works and not allowing us to focus teaching itself. What my argument is that since I can tolerate these humiliations and tensions, couldn't I join for a Phd programme and advance my career?
I have tried comparing myself with my teachers in engineering college and to my colleagues (who are certainly healthier than me). One instant I can explain: I had a teacher who when I asked a doubt on optical communication answered me that a teacher hadn't taught that....meaning they were not willing to take a look to the reference text. I am far better than my colleagues here. I regularly clear most doubts in the department.
As a human being who has the right to exist in this world and to support my poor family, and to do justice to myself, let me ask that couldn't I do a PhD in this present world?
---
**Update:** I submitted my Ph.D. thesis in January 2020. Of course, there were tough times. But I survived. I got a postdoc position too. :)<issue_comment>username_1: I'd love to tell you to pursue your dream, but it's not as easy. As Daniel said, a PhD (almost?) always leads to some tense situations. However, I wouldn't be as pessimistic (or at least as definite) as he was.
First, Jack's comment is right on spot: we cannot give medical advices. IMO, you should discuss this with your doctor. How much stress can you take? For how long would it be O.K. for you to lose sleep? As your PhD draws nearer to the end, the stress will rise, whether you want it or not, and you will get at least few sleepless nights. Is there some medication that can help you with that? A doctor should now that, as well as the risks.
Second, you should look for a potential advisor and talk to him/her. Explain your situation, see if there is something to be done (i.e., give you much looser deadlines), maybe even arrange to meet with both your doctor and your potential advisor together to discuss this. An advisor can point out the potential problems, and a doctor can address them.
Third, what would you do after getting a PhD? In many countries, a PhD is the first real step towards the research career. Such career, while relaxing in some aspects (flexible working hours, for example), is quite stressful in others (paper/conference deadlines, looking for grants, fighting for university positions, your own PhD students, problems in getting results and/or being unable to solve some problem,...). At that phase, you will not be able to have the world adapt to your needs. A journal will not postpone its next issue to wait for your paper, a conference will not be postponed for you, grants will not be just handed to you,... Is this the life you can handle? This is also to be discussed with your doctor (if possible, have someone with such experience along). If not, what does PhD give you and is it worth going for it?
Not to end in such grim tones, there might be alternatives. You can go for a "normal" (i.e., non-research) career, but talk to some researcher(s) and see if you can cooperate (see it as a hobby at first), so that you do some research, but without all the pressure. And, if that works out well, you can always discuss doing those additional steps.
But, do remember: communication is everything. Without consulting your doctor and at least one academic, I don't think you should go for a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll start with the basics: doing a PhD usually implies a lot of stress, and the process is both very competitive and tense. However, it depends a lot on the environment around the student. Therefore, without knowing your specific medical situation (and not being a medical expert, even if I knew all about you), you may not get a more useful answer than: **yes, it is possible**, but you have to be very careful about **ensuring that this is done in an environment compatible with your condition**, and be prepared to **quit if you have to choose between your health and your job** (recognize early on that failure is always an option). It will be hard, but I don't think it's impossible.
If you are to enroll in a PhD (or graduate program, I don't know the details of India’s graduate-level education system), it has to meet certain conditions:
* Make sure that the people taking you on as advisor and department head know of your condition, and wholeheartedly embrace the idea of you having special needs
* Discuss it with the doctor that follows you regularly. Also bring into the discussion your future institution's resident doctor, because he is (in most countries, by law) the person who will mediate between you and your institution if problems arise.
* Realize that if you love research, it's not only a PhD, but already think of your career ahead.
A last note of hope: in many countries, **people with disabilities are allowed by law to obtain work adjustments from their employers**. This is more commonly done for people with physical disabilities, but I know at least one person who successfully obtained very specific (and very large) adjustments to his PhD program because of his mental health (this is in France, if it makes any difference).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The bad news
------------
Your doctor has warned you not to be in tense situations.
**Listen to your doctor.**
Like somewhere around 10-25% of the population, you have challenges to your mental health. Those are challenges you have to live with and work with. For that, you will benefit from medical support.
So listen to your doctor.
**Doing a PhD is a lot of stress. A *lot* of stress.**
From what you've written, according to your doctor, you are not in a position to take on that stress. So don't.
---
The good news
-------------
There are lots of ways forward from here. There's lots of good evidence-based psychology going on, in India (for example at the CARE Institute of Behavioural Sciences, Chennai) and elsewhere, that may be able to help you develop your own early intervention toolkit to help prevent any recurrence of your former ill health. Such a toolkit might conceivably give you the tools you need to take on a PhD in the future, and to deal with the other challenges that life offers.
---
Final caveat
------------
And life will throw enough stress-inducing events at you anyway: there's no need to go seeking out additional ones, until you've got the tools you need to handle them, so don't.
Just listen to your doctor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Is it possible to do a PhD at part time status? It usually seems like PhD's in the US work on campus and these usually require being enrolled in a certain amount of hours. I'm not sure what India is like.
I really wish you luck with your condition. Hopefully, over the years, you've learned different ways to stay balanced and handle stress. Exercise and meditation are essential to keep me in balance.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/22 | 513 | 2,109 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a new immigrant and my question is about norms in American universities. I have MSc degree from abroad and in order to improve my chances for admission to a decent PhD program I would like to get published. I would appreciate your answers about the following questions:
1. Is it acceptable for *someone outside a department/university* to contact a professor and ask him/her for a research project (as a non-student)?
2. I do not have journal publications. What else can make them convinced?
3. Finally, what would be an ideal etiquette/strategy for contacting professors with a plan for making such a request, if it is sensible at all.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. It is acceptable, but not the best strategy. Getting the attention of a top professor is like fishing a very picky fish: you need a good bait. In my experience, it is easier to approach them by offering something rather than by asking for something. Also, the approach should be genuine. This is, you approach them because you want to work on something that might fit his/her research interests not just because you want to see his/her name tied to yours in a paper.
2. **IDEAS**: Professors salivate when they see an interesting idea.
3. Just follow all the etiquette rules. Be polite and respectful as you would be with any other person. Also, try to be precise, they are busy people.
More importantly: Publications are not strictly necessary to be admitted to a decent PhD.
If you have some project in mind, write it and send it to the Professor in question. Tell him/her that you are interested in working on such project and that given his/her research interests, you think that the project would be greatly benefited with his/her ideas and that you would appreciate collaborating with him/her on it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: @username_1's advice is good, but you will probably get turned down. I get many such requests and none has worked out yet.
The best way for you to get to work with a professor is to first be admitted as a PhD student in his/her program.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/22 | 826 | 3,606 | <issue_start>username_0: If one is extending work previously published in conference proceedings, what must be changed?
Specifically, does one need to change the Introduction, Background Work, or similar sections that are not actually the new material being presented?
I understand that some journals use a plagiarism detection system that would throw serious red flags if sections were untouched; so, how do editors view this?
It seems reasonable to not have to modify every sentence, especially where the material has not changed.
Thoughts?
Edit: Typically, 25-30% new material should be presented, but does this have to come at the cost of rewriting some portions of the work that remain the same?<issue_comment>username_1: There is no good reason to simply copy large portions of an existing publication to make a new. By rewriting everything, you have the opportunity to rephrase your thoughts and most likely produce a better paper, at least from a writing point of view. Some journals definietly look at plagiarism and in this case self-plagiarism and the only way to avoid it is to rewrite. I think the benefits of rewriting clearly outweighs the possible time-saving by just copy-pasting.
Just to provide an example. I have written tens of papers about the same natural physical object that I have studied. In each paper, I have to provide a descritpion of the locality and characteristics and not once have this been copied. It is in fact interesting to see how many dofferent ways the same (dull) information can be conveyed.
As for a percentage of new material, I really would advice against relying on a numbr. It is possible this is a silent understanding in some fields but in general, only new insights and conclusion should warrant a new publication. Another year of data or something similar to that is in itself not enough. The paper might be published but such publication strategies are not looked upon favourably in the long term.
So, I strongly recomend rewriting each paper and not rely on copy-pasting. I am convinced you will develop as an author and also generate better papers by doing so. consider each paper a separate new entity.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with @username_1, and I believe there is significant reason to rewrite the paper. That said, some of it is simply tedious!
I'm just going to add an answer here that I received after reaching out to an editor about this question.
Summary of their response:
>
> Good question! I will give you my point-of-view as an editor:
>
>
> * The delta will be evaluated **semantically** not textually.
> * There is no definitive need to rewrite sections; however, since you are not subject to the same limitations as a conference paper,
> detailed explanations are highly welcomed, specifically in unclear or
> shortened sections.
> * Also, since an extended paper contains something new, it is unlikely that Intro and Conclusions will be the same, and changes
> should be made accordingly.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Quite likely, when you were writing the conference version of the paper, you found yourself having to compress and cut here and there, ultimately telling a different story than the one you would have liked to tell. These cut will have occurred throughout the entire paper. When writing the journal version of the paper, you will have the chance to expand on those previously compressed sections. Indeed, you probably have better ways of explaining things or new insights. Now is the time to give those explanations and insights.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/23 | 948 | 4,038 | <issue_start>username_0: I see a lot of questions about grad school prospects with poor grades and/or gre but what about the prospects of getting into a funded PhD program with no research experience or professor connections but good grades and gre quant (3.9 and 165 respectively)?
I graduate in December (BS CompEng from 2nd tier US college) and don't really have time to get interested in undergrad research (though i'd love to but I can't afford to quit my job). If I just blanket applied to the top 20 CS PhD programs do I have a good chance at picking up decent funding (say $18k+)?
Also is there an online resource to profile what kind of applicants get accepted to which schools?
Edit: I received some good advice but no one has responded to my original question: can I get into a decent funded cs PhD program with good grades and gre while lacking research experience. I can certainly ask my professors to write letters of recommendation and 'top 20' is a somewhat arbitrary number. I would really be happy in any school that is actively outputting interesting machine learning or combinatorial optimization research.<issue_comment>username_1: Your big challenge—and this would be true regardless of the field—is that you have no "professor connections." This is a major challenge for you, because one of the most important parts of a graduate application is the letters of recommendation. If you don't have people who know you and can vouch for your capability to be a successful graduate student, you're going to have a tough time getting admitted to a graduate school, and especially top-20 programs.
The good news is that in most science and engineering graduate programs, if you do get into a reputable program, you should be able to get a guarantee of funding (either as an RA or TA) for the length of your graduate career (assuming you make "normal progress" and are a good departmental citizen, etc.). I would be leery of accepting an offer from a school that doesn't make such a commitment!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Can I get into a decent funded CS PhD program with good grades and GRE while lacking research experience.
>
>
>
Yes
>
> *Will* I get into a decent funded CS PhD program with good grades and GRE while lacking research experience.
>
>
>
Apply and find out.
Graduate school applications at the highest level are strongly biased random processes. For the good programs, there are *always* many more qualified applicants than available positions. Many times it boils down to which professors are looking for candidates who are strong in certain subfields, and that changes on a yearly basis.
If you want to go to graduate school in your field, put together the best application package you can (great letters of recommendation, well-written research statement, etc.), and apply to a range of schools that meet your criteria for "school[s] that [are] actively outputting interesting machine learning or combinatorial optimization research." Don't be silly and apply to only the top schools (*no one* is guaranteed acceptance), but don't feel shy about applying with excellent grades, scores, and letters.
If you're concerned that you'll be throwing money away by applying, there are times in life where you do have to take risks in order to proceed, and spending application money may be one of those times. However, this: "If I just blanket applied to the top 20 CS PhD programs" is a bad idea and almost certainly a waste of money.
If your concern is more "should I spend another semester/year getting some research experience to be more competitive," well, that's a bit more nuanced. It can't hurt, especially if you do well in that research (either publish something, and/or demonstrate to a professor that you have good research potential). Are you the perfect candidate now? No. Will you be competing against other students who don't have research experience? Yes. Do students with quality research experience have a better chance of being accepted? Yes.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/23 | 680 | 2,883 | <issue_start>username_0: I have come across the [International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications(IJACSA)](http://thesai.org/Publications/IJACSA). The [copyright section](http://thesai.org/Publications/Guidelines) says that "*Authors retain the right to publish their material elsewhere, providing the original publication is acknowledged.*"
Can the same paper be sent to somewhere else as well. Given that I have seen that mostly conferences/journals require unpublished material, what does this clause exactly mean ? Is it normal clause in Open Access Journals ?<issue_comment>username_1: That means that IJACSA will not try to stop you from publishing your work elsewhere. (They'd have little reason to do so, as they are not profiting from it.) It is common for open-access journals to let the author retain the publication rights.
However, no reputable journal will publish an article that has already appeared somewhere else.
You could "publish" it on your web page, or on arXiv, or as part of a book (though again, a reputable book publisher will probably balk if the content is just recopied).
Note: IJACSA is published by The Science and Information Organization, which is on [Beall's List of Predatory Open-Access Publishers](http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/). Its website makes the journal look very dubious, especially the ridiculously broad scope and the promise to complete peer review within 15 days. I wouldn't publish there ([or would I?](http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/)).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think the more specific meaning of this statement should be that you have the right to:
* publish your work in alternate formats (on-line repositories, your website, internal technical reports, etc.)
* re-use *excerpts* from your work in alternate venues
The latter would be, for instance, to reprint a figure that you used in one publication in a second publication you've written, but simply citing that it came from the original figure.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's very important to understand the difference between **copyright law** and **academic ethics**. They give you permission, waiving the normal copyright assignment process, to retain the copyright of the work you produced. You can thus republish it, in full or in part. While doing so in another journal, even with appropriate citation, would be unethical (journals require *original* content), there actually are some ethical ways in which this could happen:
* republishing as a chapter in a book, with a clear notice;
* republishing parts of it in course material;
* republishing “as is” in a more prestigious journal 20 years from now, if it so happens that your paper spawned an entire new field of research and is now revered as such
* reformatting it and putting it on your blog (which *is* a publication).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/23 | 1,080 | 4,168 | <issue_start>username_0: I have recently come across this journal [International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications(IJACSA)](http://thesai.org/Publications/CallForPaper?code=IJACSA)
The journal provides acceptance notification within 15 days. This raised red flags, but then I performed a [Scholar Search for thesai.org](http://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?hl=en&q=thesai.org&btnG=) and seems that most of their papers have decent citations. So, how reliable is scholar search when evaluating the quality of a journal or how to interpret the results from scholar search ?
EDIT: As pointed out by [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010/nate-eldredge) in [Publishing again acknowledging the original publication of oneself](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12099/publishing-again-acknowledging-the-original-publication-of-oneself/12103?noredirect=1#12103)
this journal is on [Beall's List of Predatory Open-Access Publishers](http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/). But this again raises the question how reliable is scholar search then or what are ways to search reliably for a research papers.<issue_comment>username_1: Even in case you generally accept numerical measures such as citation counts or the h-index as a measure of quality, Google Scholar seems to be rather unreliable in them. In the case of evaluating individual authors, let me cite the [Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Scholar) on Google Scholar:
>
> Vulnerability to spam — Google Scholar is vulnerable to spam.[26] Researchers from the University of California, Berkeley and Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg demonstrated that citation counts on Google Scholar can be manipulated and complete non-sense articles created with SCIgen were indexed from Google Scholar.[27] They concluded that citation counts from Google Scholar should only be used with care especially when used to calculate performance metrics such as the h-index or impact factor. Google Scholar started computing an h-index in 2012 with the advent of individual Scholar pages. Several downstream packages like Harzing's Publish or Perish also use its data.[28] The practicality of manipulating h-index calculators by spoofing Google Scholar was demonstrated in 2010 by <NAME> from Joseph Fourier University, who managed to rank "<NAME>" ahead of <NAME> by means of a large set of SCIgen-produced documents citing each other (effectively an academic link farm).[29]
>
>
>
I'm not aware of a case where this has been exploited by a predatory journal, but if a publisher wants to do that, it doesn't seem to be too difficult.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: By "decent citations" I assume you are referring to quantity. Attempting to determine the significance of a journal by the number of citations is a very bad idea; see for instance [this paper showing that such things can be very misleading](http://arxiv.org/pdf/1010.0278v4.pdf).
Just ask any experienced researcher in your field; if they're not familiar with the journal, you should probably stay away.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: IJACSA has been accepted for indexing in the Thomson Reuters Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), a new edition of Web of Science launching in 2015. and its not indexed in SCI or SCIE. If you are looking for journal indexed in SCI or SCIE, IJACSA is not the journal.
<https://www.researchgate.net/journal/2158-107X_International_Journal_of_Advanced_Computer_Science_and_Applications>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: The reputation of certain journal depends on the fact that who are the peoples who publish their work in that journal. If they are reputable peoples then off course the journal is reputable and hence is reliable. Now how could one guess about the reputation of peoples publishing in that journal?? Well that is the real thing that comes from years of research experience and your supervisor can help you on that.
The citation metric are not only sufficient. I have seen math journal with impact factor in fractions are much superior to journal with 3+ impact factor.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/23 | 1,357 | 5,776 | <issue_start>username_0: I plan to submit part of my current work to conference A. I then wish to submit my whole work to a more prestigious conference B. As for the part submitted to A, there is no point of repeating it again. So I will just cite my submission to A in my submission to B.
But the problem is that the submission deadlines for A and B are roughly the same. So actually the moment I submit the work to B, my partial work submitted to A has not been published yet. I have not even been notified of its acceptance.
**Can I still cite it?** My concern is that even if I can cite it, one will find nothing online.<issue_comment>username_1: You are allowed to cite works in submission as part of your ongoing research; this is something I've had to do on a number of instances for publications I wrote both in graduate school and as a post-doc.
The key here is that you *must* cite the work only as "Submitted to Conference A" rather than a standard reference to a work published in the proceedings. You would then, if possible, provide the conference paper A as an appendix or supporting information for the referees.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In principle you can cite other, submitted work in a research paper. Just give the authors, paper title, and either "Submitted." or "Submitted to [venue]." in the reference list.
However, both as a reviewer and reader, I usually find this disappointing. I already came across several cases where I wasn't able to find the cited paper even years after publication of the paper with the citation. It is well possible that the cited paper is rejected, and maybe someone just doesn't follow up to really get it published. As a better alternative, check whether you can put a preprint version of the paper you want to cite online (e.g. on arxiv), and just cite that.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Citing something that is not published will prevent reviewers from doing their job, so it's a big no-no if you want to improve your chances of being accepted. The best way to go is to be patient and submit to B next year, having had the chance to improve using the reviews from A.
If this is not at all possible, you may be able publish A right now as a technical report from your lab/department an cite it as such. You'll have to check the guidelines of both conferences, namely if A accepts material previously published as a TR (in CS at least this is very common) and if B accepts citing TRs (usually also true in CS as long as it is easily available online).
Most importantly, when citing from a non-refereed source like a TR, you have to be very prudent in the way you characterize the work. Remember that it was only accepted in your department as an interesting document, not properly validated using the scientific contribution standards of your community. If I read a claim that something was "proven", or "shown", or "demonstrated" by a tech report, I'll probably reject the paper.
In any case, do not just cite A unless it is tangential (and in that case, why cite it all?). If it's actually important, give it an overview in your B submission, sufficient for a reviewer to keep on reading.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I believe that there a few issues that need to be addressed in this situation:
1. You believe that part A is based on fundamentally sound methodology and the findings will be accepted within the community of your discipline.
2. Can you cite works in submission?
3. Works in submission are not available to the public.
Whether of not Part A is widely accepted you can site it as a work in submission, the answer to the second concern is: you can also cite it as an unpublished work. For proper format check with the manual of style for your discipline.
An example of an unpublished work not submitted for publication using APA Manual of Style:
<NAME>. (1863). *The principles of human equality*.. Unpublished manuscript.
An example of a work in progress or submitted but not yet accepted using APA Manual of Style:
<NAME>. (1863). *Gettysburg Address: The principles of human equality*.. Manuscript submitted for publication (copy on file with author).
As far as the third concern goes, I have reviewed numerous submissions to everything from small local up to international conferences and the equivalent array of professional publications and journals, personally I prefer that a brief description of the "Part A" methods and finding be given in a manuscript. However, when it comes to an abstract and space limitations a simple "previously we (I) found...; therefore, we furthered the body of knowledge with..." was always sufficient for my standards.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Agreed with @username_1♦, I just find a solution that indicated in IEEE conference paper template as follows:
"Papers that have not been published, even if they have been submitted for publication, should be cited as “**unpublished**”.
e.g. <NAME>, “Title of paper if known,” unpublished."
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I usually don't like to have many public versions of the same paper. I prefer releasing papers on arXiv only after receiving reviews and addressing relevant comments.
To address this issue, a solution I have been thinking about is to share the preprint I want to cite privately, i.e. only accessible for people reviewing the submission. This could be done by protecting paper access with a password that is given in the citation:
e.g., <NAME>, “Title of the paper”, unpublished, available at "URL", password:XXX.
The citation can then be fixed once the cited papers is actually released.
Anyone has some comments about why this might be a bad idea? I don't see any problem so far.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/23 | 903 | 3,656 | <issue_start>username_0: My faculty is starting a mentorship initiative where they match undergrad students with alumni from the same program. I was contacted by one of my old professors, and asked whether or not I could be a mentor.
Now I have been in mentorship programs before; and I currently have a mentor myself, but I have always been the *mentee*, never the mentor. I have to say I never considered what the mentors have to gain in these programs. Is it mostly charity, in the sense that you selflessly help/guide the mentee, or are the intellectual/practical benefits to mentoring, particularly within academia?<issue_comment>username_1: I view this as "paying it forward": someone who has received good mentoring advice should pass this onwards to others.
In addition, it's a way of encouraging promising young talent, and making sure they make their way through a challenging transition (from high school to college graduate is a big change!), and prepare them for their careers in the future.
It is also possible to gain new insights and experiences by working with students of varying backgrounds. Helping them has actually helped me to develop closer connections both within the administration of my university, as well as with colleagues at other universities.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> What can a mentor gain from the mentor/mentee relationship?
>
>
>
**Altruistic answers:**
1. Passing on learned knowledge and lessons is a hallmark of a society. What you learned as a student, employee, employer, *citizen*, etc. is important so that once your brain and the brains of others in your generation are pushing up daisies, the knowledge isn't lost, and repeating mistakes can be avoided. Many people consider this a satisfying endeavor.
2. As a role model, you can demonstrate moral, ethical, compassionate, etc. strategies for using the education you got from the school. Knowing that you've led someone down an ethical path is a good feeling.
3. You can act as a sounding board for your mentee's questions about your field, and for the types of questions that don't routinely come up in class. There is a certain satisfaction in being able to answer questions based on your experience.
4. There might be new ideas that your mentee knows about your field that you can learn from. While you pass on your wisdom, you also have the opportunity to learn some of the new ideas that are being taught today.
**Less altruistic answers:**
1. Depending on your field, having been a mentor looks good on a resume or in an interview.
2. In your case, you'll gain points with your former professor, who might be more inclined to write you a good letter of recommendation some day.
**Decidedly bad answers:**
1. Steer the kid in the wrong direction, and that's one less competitor!
2. You might get your lab cleaned because "it builds character."
3. In academia, if your mentee has good ideas, you can steal them and publish the results yourself.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: From the mentor point of view, I think one important practical benefits of mentoring/tutoring is that it gives you access to a pool of students (your *mentees*, as you put it), from which you may find future interns/grad students/post-docs. This access can be used to try and recruit them, either for yourself, or within your network (or your field in general).
Also, it gives you privileged (yet indirect) access to the students currently enrolled in the program: if you wish to circulate, e.g., a job or internship offer, it will look more attractive coming from a classmate than sent to them from a stranger.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/23 | 1,322 | 5,735 | <issue_start>username_0: Please see [this question of mine](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11031/importance-of-research-in-other-areas-of-study-within-mathematics) first.
My question is: Does the admissions committee in grad school consider publications in places like [arxiv.org](http://arxiv.org/) as a significant achievement given the student has only completed bachelors?
I am asking this question because I have seen many math papers in arxiv.org that have not made new contribution to the field. In other words, those papers have not made new discoveries or solutions of the unsolved problems. This makes me wonder whether publishing at arxiv is considered a big achievement.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to your question is not really. This is because the people in Grad schools see if your publication has been submitted to a known conference or journal, or at least that they are peer reviewed. In arxiv.org anybody can publish their own work, being more like a big database of not or pre peer reviewed papers. I mention you this because I usually put my articles, the drafts that has been accepted in conferences, in arxiv.org, but there are some people that put only its ideas and even some articles that do not contribute too much to the developing of an specific field of science.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: "Publishing" on the arXiv is not a big achievement; actually, it's not an achievement at all. In terms of how prestigious it is, it's not really any different from putting an article on your own personal website. The arXiv isn't a publishing venue, it's a preprint server---it's purpose is to serve as a public repository for potential articles. It has various benefits (it's probably more reliable than your own website, it gives credible evidence about when an article was posted and modified, which is sometimes desirable), but it achieves those in part by *not* refereeing the articles on it.
However, *writing* an article as an undergrad is certainly a meaningful achievement, and given that it can take a while for a paper to make its way to being in print, an appropriate unpublished article is still a positive for an applicant. Of course, the admissions committee wants to distinguish a good article from a bad one, and since posting on the arXiv isn't a good proxy for quality, the committee will look for others (recommendation letters, for instance, or possibly just reading the article themselves).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **It depends on the paper.**
If you post a **good** paper to arXiv, it will definitely be valued by admissions committees, especially if you (and your references) make a compelling case to read it in your statement (and their letters). On the other hand, if you post a **bad** paper to arXiv — poorly written, making no new contribution, or both — it will also be valued by the committee, but as an easy excuse to reject your application.
In other words, it's exactly like any other publication.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Putting papers on arXiv is publication, but it is not a referred publication. People use it for various reason but most importantly to timestamp their work and communicate their works with others earlier.
That being said, publishing on arXiv itself is useless, since no one has read on your paper yet. I bet that the admission committee won't read your paper at all. There are hundreds of applications, why do they want to waste time to go to arXiv and read a newbie's paper.
However, situation could be different if you can show your work already "reviewed" in other way. For example, it is discussed by journals like Science/Nature, or very well known website like arxivblog before the referred publication. Or, the arXiv version is already cited by independent research groups. Remember to mention that if you have.
In any case, you should put it in your CV if your papers are good. If possible, you can a try to attach a short excerpt from your paper such as abstract or the first page. It might be useful to show your work in progress and support your research interest in your application. In particular, if you already have at least one referred publication, the extra arXiv papers should sound much better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with username_3's answer.
One of the things the admission commitee look for is your **research potential** when they review the application.
You need to show that you do have the potential to do research. How do you show that? A well-written paper on arXiv is the evidence. Whoever writes your recommendation letter can use that to say it. You can mention that paper in your application. If the commitee has any doubt in your research potential, they can look at the paper and draw the conclusion themselves.
As long as the quality of the paper is good, I believe it's achivement. Whether or not the achievement is big depends on the quality of your paper. Of course, you may kill your chance to be admitted if the quality of the paper is bad.
In order to improve the quality of the paper, I would suggest you to let somebody (your prof/advisor) review the paper before you put it on arXiv.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I think it is important to highlight one exception to the different answers given above. There are a few subdomains of research, mainly in physics, in which repositories such as arXiv are the primary means of communication. (This applies to topics such as string theory, and I believe some high-energy areas as well.) If you happen to work in one of these areas, then an arXiv publication will carry much more weight. Otherwise, the warnings given above do apply.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/24 | 577 | 2,526 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently, I noticed that some of the papers actually had their author names listed in the alphabetical order.
Say Mr. Smith contributed more than Mr. Black. Then without noticing the tiny footnote, one will simply take <NAME> as the first author.
I am wondering whether there exists some certain such scenarios where the authors have to be listed as such. Will it be unfair for the first-author-should-be?
Update:
I am talking about EECS field. I see most of the papers list the authors according to the contributions. But only occasionally, I see alphabetically-listed authors.<issue_comment>username_1: In my field (Atmospheric Physics) it does not happen - the principal researcher is first author, then the list is in order of contributions.
According to [this section of a Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_authorship#Order_of_authors_in_a_list), it really depends on the field of research, and these seem to be relatively well established within those fields, so I would imagine that there would be very little feelings of unfairness (though I would imagine that such conflict would still occur). It would get trickier in interdisciplinary studies, where this would have to be negotiated, once again depending on the policies of the journal.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In mathematics authors are almost always listed in alphabetical order. This works, among other reasons, because work groups are organized less by a lab structure so you get more rhetoric of equality between all authors.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **It happens when the authors chose to do so!**
Journals do not impose the order of authors in the authors list. They usually give guidelines (or policies) on authorship standards, i.e. who should be co-author and who should not, but they leave the ordering up to the authors themselves.
Now, different fields have different customs. In physics and chemistry, alphabetical ordering is very rare (used for example in consortium publications), while in mathematics alphabetical ordering is more commonly, but not exclusively, used. **Unless there is a footnote clarifying the authors’ respective contributions, you cannot definitely tell which system they used.**
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: In CS, it varies by subfield. Theoretical Computer Science follows the math tradition and (almost) always uses alphabetical ordering. Many other subareas use some form of order-by-contribution.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/24 | 454 | 2,018 | <issue_start>username_0: Imagine a case where I wish to apply for MIT. I happened to work with a young assistant professor who finished her PhD in MIT. How much will her good words weigh in recommending me to MIT PhD program?
I am asking this because I am facing a choice in asking for recommendations:
* A recommendation letter from a more experienced full professor OR
* One from a young assistant professor who just came back from MIT?
I understand that what matters most is whether the professor knows me well or not. But for them two, I think they understand me roughly the same.<issue_comment>username_1: As both the academics know you the same, I would obtain a reference from the more experienced full professor for your application and a reference from the new assistant professor for your records/supplementary notes.
I have found that you can never have to many references/recommendation letters, but strategically use them for what you are applying for wisely. However, use the recommendation letter only if their specialisations are the same or are similar to what you are applying for.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I disagree with Damien's answer for the specific case of your question. A graduate of the department, who knows you very well and can write a good letter of recommendation, is worth just as much as the "big name," because she is familiar with the department as it is currently operating, and would be able to place your work in context of people also known in the department. So, for the specific case of applying to a school that is someone else's alma mater, I would say go for it, with a caveat.
That caveat is that if a person is not able of writing a good letter of recommendation, then you shouldn't use it. A bad letter will not help you at all. If you have a career services office or academic counselor who can help you sort through which letters are most suitable for graduate school applications, that will help you make the decision.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/24 | 1,737 | 7,593 | <issue_start>username_0: I submitted to a journal a couple of months ago. The editorial flow is somehow quick and very transparent. I receive notifications for all events happening to the manuscript.
Unfortunately, the managing editor contacted me three weeks ago. They informed me that the assigned editor could not commit to the job and left. Another editor was immediately assigned.
However, I was contacted today by the new assigned editor. I was informed that all the contacted reviewers so far either refused to review the manuscript or did not respond to the invitation. They are now looking for other reviewers.
Despite the bad luck surrounding the manuscript, all of this happened in a reasonable time and I am satisfied with how quickly they react.
Nevertheless, these events made me reflect. Even if an editorial board possesses a fair network of reviewers, there is still a little risk that all the contacted reviewers either refuse or do not reply.
What happens if no reviewers could be found for a submitted manuscript? Is the journal going to reject the manuscript because of a lack of reviewers?<issue_comment>username_1: Short answer: the editor will continue to try and find other suitable reviewers, sending them invitations and waiting for replies. At some point, they may come back to you and ask you to suggest names (additional names, if you had already given some when you originally submitted the paper).
---
It can happen that an editor has a hard time finding suitable reviewers that accept to review a manuscript. There are a few factors in play, such as:
* the journal is not well-know;
* the editor is new, or not well-know in the field, or does not have a very good network;
* the research reported is atypical, in a very narrow subfield, or joins different areas (so that no one reviewer feels confident in accepting)
* the elements sent by the editor (title and abstract) are rather boring or tend to confuse the potential reviewers
Note that most of these factors do not reflect badly on the manuscript, so there is no need to feel bad about it. The editor is likely to continue his search of reviewers. I see two other options that the editor could choose from, but I judge them as rather unlikely:
1. Evaluate the manuscript himself, and make a decision based on his own review. After all, it's his job, and the reviewers' role is only to help the editor reach a decision.
2. Refer the manuscript to another editor, or to the editorial board, so they can make a decision on it.
Finally, note that it may take quite some time to find suitable (and willing) reviewers. In the case of one paper of mine, it took the editor 3 months to find adequate reviewers, and that was actually for a prestigious journal. However, the paper was atypical enough (and the research was quite novel) that many potential reviewers did not feel able to review it adequately. *(And in case you wonder, it was accepted on the first try, once the editor found reviewers.)*
---
Edit (regarding your comment): my advice is **don't retract your submission**, unless you think it's the journal's fault (unwilling editor or unknown journal). I know it's tempting! But especially if your work is multidisciplinary, it will take time to find reviewers, even if you submit it to another journal. Thus, better let the current submission process go to its end.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: F'x's answer looks right to me, but since this actually happened to me once, I'll add some extra commentary which doesn't sound like it applies to your situation, but might apply to similar ones.
Many journals (at least in math) have a de facto policy that every paper which even plausibly might get published has to go to a referee before a decision can be made. Therefore an article which has problems which make it very unlikely to get accepted---being difficult to read, or highly specialized, or involving multiple areas with few potential referees---but which doesn't have obvious flaws which make it an easy rejection might have trouble getting through the process. The editor keeps asking people to review it, and it looks like a hard job, and the paper isn't so interesting to be worth it, so they keep turning it down. An editor can eventually break this loop by asking a reviewer in a way which implies that the reviewer has permission to give a more cursory rejection for the reasons the editor has identified (perhaps based on comments made by other people when turning down the review).
Once an editor has decided to start nudging potential reviewers in this direction, it becomes faster for everyone if the editor politely suggests that the paper should just be withdrawn.
This (I think---I can't say for sure what the editor was thinking) is what happened to me. I submitted a paper involving two different areas to a journal specializing in one of them. After several months I got back a letter from the editor stating that several people had turned down the paper with negative impressions; the editor offered to look for more referees, but before doing so, wanted to know if I would like to withdraw the paper rather than continue to wait when it wasn't clear the paper would be accepted. I (and people I consulted with) interpreted this as a polite indication that at this point the editor would primarily be looking for an excuse to reject the paper, and therefore that it would speed things up for me if I withdrew it. (And, indeed, the next journal accepted it.)
So a notification that the editor can't find reviewers *could* be a hint that the editor wants you to withdraw it, but isn't necessarily.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It happened to me once that the editor sent my submitted paper to 5 reviewers (all of them were in my references) and all of them rejected the invitation to review the paper. The editor took this as a sign that my paper was not suitable for publication in that journal and rejected the paper. So, yes, a rejection can actually happen but it is not the rule. As usual, publshing is a combination of good content, a bit of politics, and luck.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In my experience, as long as one tries long enough, hard enough, one can always find reviewers. It's just a question of how long it takes. After all, performing literature reviews is standard Masters-level work, and it's a small step from that to finding researchers working in the area. In other words, if the first few sets of invited reviewers decline to review or do not respond, one of these things happen:
* The authors lose patience and withdraw the manuscript.
* The editor loses patience and rejects the paper due to "unable to find reviewers".
* Nothing, and the editor keeps trying to find reviewers.
It takes a motivated editor to keep trying, though. Even if the editor doesn't lose patience, it's possible he'll decide the paper can't be very good because otherwise reviewers would be jumping at the chance to review it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Well, this happened to me recently. After 2.5 months of reviewer hunting, the editor-in-chief failed to find any reviewer and rejected my manuscript. The funny thing is that during this last 2.5 months, I inquired about the status of the manuscript thrice through the manuscript submission system and also emailed the editor-in-chief at his persona email. I never got back any reply from him. Finally, I emailed Elsevier complaining about lack of enthusiasm of the editor-in-chief and voila, after few days the paper was rejected!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/24 | 443 | 1,899 | <issue_start>username_0: For instance, my field is Information Technology and I would like to know if it is okay to submit to management and environmental science publication. Of course, it's not purely I.T. but this is a paper on how I.T. can help preserve the environment, specifically on reducing consumption of resources.
What are your thoughts on this?<issue_comment>username_1: There isn't anything wrong with submitting to a conference that might not be a perfect fit. I would urge you to ensure that the fit is decent enough that you won't be wasting anyone's time, but cross-polination can be great for both fields.
When I was a graduate student and was helping my advisor review papers for a prominent conference, I read an outstanding paper that I didn't believe was on-topic for the conference, and I suggested to my advisor that it should be rejected it even though it had a novel (and cool) contribution. When I discussed it with her, she said that for really excellent papers, program committees will sometimes be flexible. If I was convinced it was that good, she said, I should give it a positive review and let the committee sort it out. In the end they accepted the paper. It was very well-received at the conference, and the authors were excited to get the paper into the competitive conference, where it would undoubtedly be seen by a lot of people.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think if your work is either *interdisciplinary* (i.e. has impact in two different fields), or at the border of two fields (e.g., physical chemistry or molecular biology), you *should* publish in journals and conferences in a way to address both communities. We usually have a lot to learn by outsiders coming into a given field of research, as they bring a new view, new ideas, concepts and methods. Your case sounds exactly like that, so I'd say go ahead!
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/24 | 2,312 | 9,823 | <issue_start>username_0: So my student and I are writing a paper, my question is: Among `<EMAIL>` vs `<EMAIL>`
which sounds more professional?
I personally submitted a paper back when I was a bachelor student using my gmail address, although I had a similar student account like the one above. But my supervisor back then advised me *not* to use an `@student` account
In [this related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/164/changing-mailing-and-e-mail-addresses-as-corresponding-author-which-to-include), a reviewer mentioned that he tends to have a negative a-priori when he sees an author of a paper with a gmail address (he admits that it should mainly be about the quality of the work, but he can't help it)<issue_comment>username_1: From personal experience, I have used my gmail account in the papers I have had published, without any hassles (in journals of impact factor 2+). I use the gmail account as it is one I still will be using when I complete my PhD, thus no longer have my university account.
Like with many things, it is dependent on the journal's policies - best to read up on what they expect, if in doubt, write and ask them. They may allow it, but it may be due to email addresses like gmail going to their spam folder.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends on many things, which I tried to order by descending priority:
* Possible journal policy: in most cases, they don't have one
* Possible employer policy: my own institution forbids the use of `gmail.com` addresses in lieu of our professional ones, because of a national policy forbidding use of commercial email providers for state-paid positions (prohibitions which my institution extends to students)
* Which email address you'll keep longer: students email is temporary, but `gmail.com` may also be (it may not be hard to imagine that, in some near future, you become infuriated by Google's (or any company's) behavior and close your account). On that note: if you graduated from some institution, you may get a permanent alumni email redirection, which may last longer than all those individual accounts.
* Which email looks more professional: `<EMAIL>` sure doesn't do any good for your reputation.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In general, an institutional account looks more professional than a personal account. However, because of the transient nature of most student accounts, you may want to consider having your student open an account using `<EMAIL>` format, especially if their current gmail user-name happens to be something like `<EMAIL>`! This account should then be used for all academic/professional correspondence with individuals and institutions outside your university. (Obviously your student still needs to use the `@student.university` account within your university.)
Of course, also check the policy of the journal to which you are submitting. If they require an institutional email account, then this is a moot point.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Let me suggest a different direction (even though it doesn't directly answer your specific question):
>
> Don't put your email address on the paper.
>
>
>
(obviously, put whatever you want for the correspondence when submitting the paper).
When I was a grad student, my advisor forbid me to put an email address for us on any papers unless it was *required* by the formatting guidelines. We just left out email addresses altogether, for the following reason:
>
> If someone wants to find you, a *simple* Google search will turn up an email address that will be at least as current, if not more current, than the address on the paper.
>
>
>
"But what if my old website is still active with my old address?" you might complain. That's your own fault for not policing old websites. If you have switched institutions, your new website should quickly rise (or will eventually rise, anyway) above your previous sites, cached pages notwithstanding.
Will there be false hits because someone didn't find your up-to-date email? Sure. I'll argue that just as many times the email you put on the paper will be different than the one you currently use.
The fact is that email addresses change, and what you put on your paper may not matter in a year, or two, or twenty.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: A university email address that I had long used become unavailable in 2011, so I faced the decision of what to use for publications, and indeed what email addresses to use in other places.
My main criteria was that I wanted a permanent email address, and I wanted maximum control over the email address, including reducing the possibility that others are reading/storing my email, and the option to change my hosting if I was unhappy with it while not having to change my email. Changing email is a real drag, and I think it is a good idea to use a permanent address for publications if possible. If someone is contacting you regarding a paper, and it bounces, it is possible whoever it is will just give up. Your prospective correspondent may try to search for a more current address, but why make it difficult? If you have a common name, searching may be more difficult.
The main issue asked in the question is what is more professional. Personally, I think this is a minor issue. Maybe some journals care, but I don't see why they should. They should be more concerned, in my opinion, whether you will be contactable by this email long term. Unfortunately, in many cases it is not possible to update publication email addresses afterwards, even online, so that makes it doubly important. Email to my old address (which I stopped using in 2011) now bounces, which is unfortunate, but I can't do anything about it.
There are many choices available out there. They include:
1) Free corporate email addresses. Google's gmail is a popular example in this category.
PROS: They are free. It is permanent as long as the provider does not close up shop or close your account for some reason.
CONS: They are not university addresses.
Someone is probably going to read and possibly sell the contents of your email. Otherwise, why would they give away something free? Also, if the email hosting is hosted in the US, the NSA may store your email. As we know from recent news revelations, for gmail, we can assume that both Google and the NSA are going to be going through your email, or at least keeping it.
You have little or no control over the quality of the hosting. Even access may be problematic at times.
2) University address (possibly using alumni accounts)
PROS: University address, which is generally a good thing for academic publications. The NSA might still sniff through the email, but it is unlikely the university will, though who knows these days?
CONS: Little control over the quality of the hosting or other parameters like the amount of storage allowed. If you want to change to another host, you will have to change the email. Possibly not permanent (for non-alumni addresses). If you don't work at the university any more, they will probably eventually shut down that email address (again, for non-alumni addresses).
3) Create a custom email, including buying ones own domain, and paying for custom email hosting for email addresses of the form [email protected].
PROS: Complete control over the email hosting. If you don't like the hosting, you can change it. One hopes a paid hosting company will not sniff through the email, though again who knows? For US hosts, the NSA is still a concern. It is a permanent address as long as you own the domain. You can make the email address easy to remember and to tell someone over the phone. Mine is extremely easy. Also, you can use <EMAIL>\_you\_want@custom.<EMAIL>; i.e. you can choose whatever username you want.
CONS: Not a university address. You have to pay. However, the charge is not excessive; I pay $10.00 a month, and this is on the expensive side. There are cheaper options.
As you can guess, I went with option 3.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The problem of university addresses getting stale because the linked accounts are not available/active can also happen with other accounts. Gmail may be a bit more sensible than most, but I have suffered for using hotmail.com (Microsoft always knows best, including when to delete all your old saved mail wholesale without telling you).
If your student is a serious scholar, I recommend using an alias from a professional society (acm.org, ams.org, ieee.org, etc.) instead, which can be redirected to whatever actual account one currently uses. My old grad school address of <EMAIL> also has stayed for years, first as a pointer to my school e-mail account (now of course gone), and now as an alias for my work e-mail address that I use professionally. Your school may have some such option also, check with some local IT guru there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I am publishing at a conference this month, and was surprised to see instructions to authors say email addresses are required and specifically urging *industrial* authors to use a more permanent address, such as @acm.org. ACM is a CS professional organization and I do agree that it looks better somehow than, say, gmail. I *don't* think that applies only to nonacademics, and of course a change in address is especially likely for students.
I agree with other answers saying email addresses have no place. The right info to include is an **orcid** to permanently disambiguate each author and provide a link to their current contact information. This looks ugly in a printed paper but should be on the site where it is published.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/25 | 659 | 3,037 | <issue_start>username_0: **Question: What to write in a hypothesis that can't claim statistical results of any kind -- only those of engineering nature.**
**Explanation:**
In thesis writing, hypothesis is claimed to be one of the most important aspects. I'm not arguing with that but in some cases, it seems a little over-priced. I am currently writing a thesis that deals with enhancing an existing security model. I can't give out the exact idea obviously but please let me explain with the help of an example.
Let's say, I have a security problem that the existing "role-based access control" of MS-Windows does not solve some problems -- so, I come up with time-based constraints for the model used and incorporate them in a new "enhanced" model. In the thesis explaining this contribution, what do I write in the thesis? I can't claim an "N%" increase in security or any other statistic that I can think of.
So, what's the hypothesis in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: Effectively, what you are doing is *development* of existing research, rather than designing something *de novo*. The notion of a research hypothesis is therefore somewhat inappropriate to such work, and you wouldn't write a paper describing this work specifying a definitive "hypothesis."
Instead, you'd write the paper emphasizing that your model does something "better," "faster," "more securely," or specifying whatever other accomplishments advance your work from the previous state of affairs. Your thesis should then show how that is accomplished, and give some evidence thereof.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The hypothesis-model is good for research where you want to understand how something works, but I think it is ill-suited for capturing the full scope of engineering research. After all, in engineering, you're primary goal is not to learn something about how the world works, but rather to **change how the world works**! So, instead of a hypothesis on how something works, I'd put up existing gaps in the ability to do something as a working basis. That will then put a focus on your research result as an extension of technical capabilities. In order to evaluate your research results, you would then have to show that your results actually close the existing gap.
Of course, also engineering research needs to understand something about how existing things work in order to be able to create something new. Hypotheses **are suitable** in engineering to clarify these preliminary things. In your case, you state that *"the existing 'role-based access control' of MS-Windows does not solve some problems"* - that sounds like a perfect hypothesis to test for. But verifying this hypothesis is certainly not the key step in your research, and maybe it has already been done previously. That's why I'd recommend not to focus on a hypothesis as the basis for engineering research (though one might use them to clarify preliminaries), but focus on **identified gaps in current technical abilities**.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/25 | 792 | 3,411 | <issue_start>username_0: In my dissertation, I have felt the need to illustrate some ideas with the help of figures and illustrations which I have found available in existing literature. I have borrowed a number of them and I give proper citations and everything. My question is:
Will it be considered a negative point to have multiple borrowed figures from existing publications?
Also, in two cases, I found it hard to rephrase the captions for the images and I just quoted the captions(the proper way).
Does that look like I am being lazy?<issue_comment>username_1: The issue here is not "laziness"; the real issue with reusing figures from the literature is that, without appropriate permissions, you **do not have the right to do so.**
If you reuse a figure in the literature without the appropriate permission from the rights-holders, you are effectively stealing their work, which is not allowed. Therefore, you need to make sure that you have gotten the right to use the figures, and have the proof to back it up if challenged. Normally, for scholarly works such as theses, such rights are routinely granted and cost-free. However, you *need* to check with the publisher (or author of the paper, if she holds publication rights) *before* using the figure. Then, next to the figure you are reproducing, you'll need to have a statement such as "Figure reprinted by permission of *X*," where *X* is the person or institution authorized to grant reproduction rights.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The legal aspects are fuzzy and varies from country to
country. The American Fair Use doctrine may make borrowing
figures (with appropriate citations) permissible in American
copyright law. There may or may not be fair use equivalents in
other jurisdictions.
However, that is not what the question is about.
The question is whether it will be considered "negative" or not. And
the answer is a resounding no. Few authors would mind you borrowing
their figures, *if you appropriately cite them*. Even fewer thesis
readers would care wheter you drew the figures or someone else did
(again, *if you appropriately cite the authors*).
IANAL, this is not legal advice, just my experience with academics.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As the other answers indicate, permission for re-use is of paramount importance.
So much so that my university's graduate college (separate from the academic department where I did my research) had strict established procedures **AND TIMELINES** relative to graduation dates for demonstrating compliance. They were somewhat involved. Without that documentation, the dissertation would simply not be accepted. The committee had no discretion.
I will note that "fair use" was not an adequate defense *at my particular university*. Truly open licenses such as Creative Commons were, but still required documentation (although the burden was much lower.)
I strongly urge you to find out if similar guidelines and procedures exist at your institution. If they do, they will tell exactly what you need to do.
I realize this is not your primary question, but it is important.
As to your primary question: Dissertations necessarily build on the work that came before it. We cite papers regularly, and there is no shame or laziness in using some well-designed figures from other sources, provided you have permission. Likewise captions.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/25 | 717 | 3,064 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently asked two professors by email if I could do an independent study with them. Both of them responded, saying that they can sponsor me for the study. As soon as I received the first professor's response, I replied, saying that I wanted to work with him and scheduling a face-to-face meeting.
Now that both professors have responded, though, I think I would enjoy working with the second professor more. Would it be appropriate for me to tell the first professor that I changed my mind, or would it be wrong to take back the commitment I already gave him? If it would be appropriate to change my mind, how can I handle the situation tactfully?
Although I would prefer to work with the second professor, I know that I would enjoy working with either of them, so I'll be fine if it's too late to change my mind.
---
**Edit:** Here is some more information about my specific situation.
I am planning on doing the same project with either professor. I am currently writing the music for a video game, and I would be working with the professors to produce the music and create a graded portfolio. I haven't worked out any specific details with either professor.
Both professors are music professors who have specific knowledge about music technology. The reason I would prefer working with the second professor is because I know he has expert knowledge of the software I'm using to produce the music. In addition, he is skilled with the genres of music I'm producing as well as writing film scores. I'm not sure how much the first professor knows about these specific topics.<issue_comment>username_1: It's a good situation to have to be interested in two projects, and be equally happy to work on either of them.
However, if you have given a commitment to one of the professors, then you really should honor that commitment. Reneging on your commitment will look bad to the first professor, and if the second professor finds out, that could leave a bad impression on his mind, as well.
You could tactfully tell the second professor, "I would really love to work for you, but Professor X gave me an offer first, and I accepted before I received your offer. I am sorry to have to decline, but perhaps we can work together in the future."
I don't think there's a tactful way to say the same thing to a professor after you've made a commitment; you'll come across as very opportunistic instead (note: that's not a good thing!).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Do you have a project already lined up ? it sounds like your meeting with the first professor would be to discuss topics for the study. In any case, if no financial agreement has been reached, I see no harm in talking with both professors and then making a decision based on what happens in those meetings. I disagree with @username_1 that you've given a formal commitment at this stage.
You didn't say though why you'd prefer to work with the second professor prior to having a meeting ? is it the subject matter ? general rapport ?
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/26 | 1,232 | 4,991 | <issue_start>username_0: My advisor recently received a pretty major award in our field for a set of four papers that he wrote, and I was a co-author on one of these. He and I both agree that I should receive some sort of credit for this award because my contribution was significant (the nomination for this award was done by someone else, so there is no wrongdoing on his part). What would be the right way, if any, for me to include this on a CV? What should I tell people? I was thinking of saying, "Paper so-and-so that we wrote together received the such-and-such prize"<issue_comment>username_1: The problem is that you were only the coauthor of one of those papers, it would be nice to know how much was your contribution to the paper you co-authored.
For what I see your advisor is a very humble person (thing that you should learn, and not asking that you deserve extra credit for the work you have done); and he just feels that you deserve credit for the award. Only problem is that maybe he is saying that because he wants to be polite.
The paper that you co-authored if it deserves good credit and reputation, that will come with the number of citations you will receive. I think, personally, that is of very bad taste that you want to pull the strings so hard to get a recognition for a work that was not even 50% of your contribution.
Keep the good work and you will see that next time maybe you will get an award for your hard work.
Remember stay a little bit humble and you will be respected and learn more.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I will take a slightly different view from username_1.
I agree that you *personally* cannot list your advisor's award under *your* list of awards. However, you would list an award that a paper won as part of the listing of a paper, or a "best talk" or "best poster" award, or indicate that a lecture was invited.
Therefore, if the award is expressly given to the winner for a set of papers, and this paper has been cited as one of the papers in the collection that is being recognized, then there would be nothing wrong or misleading about designating the paper in question as "(a Prize X-winning paper)," or a similar formulation which expresses the same intent. (That is, that the paper is one of a set of papers so awarded, and that you specifically are not the one being recognized). Also, this designation should appear alongside the paper, not in your "awards and honors" section of the CV.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I would just write it down exactly as it is: "I co-authored one paper in the series of four papers for which my adviser got PRIZE\_NAME prize". Then I would read it aloud and wouldn't find it impressive enough, so I would abstain from putting it in the CV at all, though you are welcome to make your own judgement here.
In short: Nothing that doesn't sound good in plain, crude English will fly with people who have brains (and most hiring committee members are no fools). The very first thing I do when I evaluate a CV is to translate every sentence into plain language and cross out all buzz words. The second thing is to verify all easily verifiable statements. So, either say it plainly, clearly, and precisely, or don't say it at all.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Recommendation letters would be the natural place for your advisor to address this.
You trying to claim part of an award given to another *person* seems tacky and gauche. Even if it’s actually true, it won’t initially look like it. Searching for the award will show it went to J. Random Advisor rather than you, and it might take some detective work and assumptions for someone to determine that you were deeply involved in the work as well. However, your advisor can certainly—and credibly—say that you were responsible for his apparent success. Something like this would certainly put you in good stead for future jobs and awards:
>
> From 2020-2022, Kirk and I worked together to investigate [*topic*], culminating in our coauthored *J. Awesome* paper. Kirk invented the approach we used and did [*impressive research things*], which I integrated with the framework previously developed by our group. This paper was very well received; in fact, according to the committee, it formed the backbone of my 2023 award of the Big Name Prize. Kirk has identified several exciting future directions for this work and I look forward to seeing the results.
>
>
>
The situation might be a bit different if the award were somehow explicitly tied to your paper. There, you could potentially write something like “Cited in Dr. X’s award for [whatever].” This looks *less* like a bald faced attempt to claim credit, but I’d still be wary that it looks a bit like one. You need to balance the prestige of the award versus that possibility. For example, a postdoc using an undergrad coauthor’s “best poster” award as evidence of research prowess would be ridiculous; save that for a teaching statement.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/26 | 1,437 | 6,398 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in the process of writing my Ph.D. thesis and struggling with the introduction chapter, what to cover, and what not. This is a technical thesis. The broad area is molecular simulation in statistical mechanics.
There are lots of tips available on the Internet, but those are very general often. I have found a few theses also searching on Google. All those tips and theses vary in style and content and it is difficult to decide which one to follow. Please provide tips on how can I write a good introduction chapter with high academic standards.
EDIT: After reading your valuable input, I am adding here a few more points. (Thanks everybody). Your comments on these points are highly appreciated.
1. I have seen theses where people include background theories. On this matter, I have read that the theory should not be something that others know. Now, this is difficult to predict what to include as background theory, and what not. I have seen people include theories that are widely available in textbooks.
2. Chapter 2 is dedicated to the literature review. It is also important to briefly mention the background and relevant research works. Here I have found people are giving a little elaborate technical detail.<issue_comment>username_1: I am in a slightly different field to you (atmospheric physics), but have had my PhD thesis approved for submission. Your university should have a style guide available to you - take that advice first.
My introduction comprised the following sections (this was also used successfully for my MSc):
* Rationale - this comprises an overview of the background knowledge in the field (and was expanded on in the Literature Review that was written after the Introduction). Make sure all variables are explained in detail here (dependent, independent and controlled).
* Hypothesis - what exactly is the predicted result of the entire project.
* Objectives - The main outcomes of the research (these related to the main papers that have been written and published along the way).
* Thesis structure - how the thesis is organised.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My thesis, which does happen to be in the area you are writing about, took a somewhat different approach for the introductory chapter:
* Motivations—why is this particular problem important
* Related efforts—in what context was the work done
* A short summary of the main development of the thesis (without a formal hypothesis statement)
* An outline of the remainder of the thesis
The following chapter, which was also an "introductory" chapter, but more of a "preliminaries" chapter, defines all the major concepts, tools, and ideas used in the remainder of the thesis (which were derived from my published papers, and therefore somewhat briefer than what is needed for a thesis).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The introduction of a thesis is a good place to give a **bird’s eye view of the problem you face**, its importance, relevance to major challenges in the field, and possible applications (including in related fields). You can very briefly explain what others have done to approach it, but I would **definitely not include there a full review of the literature**. You want the introduction to give the readers (and demonstrate to your committee) that you have a high-level understanding of the context and problem at hand.
Then, you can include a section giving a full review of the state of the art in the field (i.e., what others have done so far) later in the manuscript, either as its own chapter or as part of a “methods” chapter that is structured as such:
>
> **Methods**
>
> 1. Foundations of molecular simulation
>
> 2. State-of-the-art for your specific problem
>
> 3. Methods you have developed
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In my opinion, all the other answers omit a very important purpose of the Introduction: You should introduce not only the thesis but **the results of other people** in the Introduction.
A good introduction cites quite a handful of works by other people. Basically, a reader, after reading the Introduction, should have a good idea as to what the thesis is going to be about, and in what wider concept of science it fits, and this cannot be done without citing other people. This shows that you are not doing some rubbish that nobody is interested in.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: An introduction is a funnel into your work, be it a paper or a thesis. The basic idea is to start by providing the wider scope within which your work resides. You then focus in on your part of the field or research question through a few steps.
The wider perspective of the beginning should also be the perspective in which you will later put your own results, to show how they feed back into some more general perspective. This part should allow the reader to focus in on relevant research and obtain a firm background of the current knowledge in the field. Once you have established the background you should identify for the reader the gap of knowledge which you have tackled. you then finish off by stating your plan for solving the problem so that your choices of methods etc. can be seen from the perspective of knowns and remaining problems to be solved. We can summarize the text as
>
> Background
>
>
> Gap
>
>
> Your approach to a solution
>
>
>
Writing a thesis and a paper can mean this approach can be accomplished in several ways. In a research paper, all of this usually goes into a single heading "Introduction". When you write a thesis the introduction may be many pages long and it is not uncommon to either have the list above as subheadings under the introduction or to outline this part slightly differently.
When you have a lengthy introduction, you may start out by having a chapter called introduction, which does what has been outlined above but cuts out the background details and only summarizes what is known and identifies gaps, almost like a summary of the whole introduction. You then follow up with a detailed background in a separate chapter and likewise for identifying gaps and providing the outline of your research.
The point is that there are many ways to format or partition an introduction but the general idea is still there regardless of what form of publication you are writing: research paper or thesis.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/26 | 644 | 2,931 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm looking at a job application that asks for the following:
* C.V. (required)
* Statement of Interests (required)
* Cover letter (optional)
* Statement of Research (optional)
* Statement of Teaching (optional)
I find this confusing because I don't understand what a "Statement of Interests" is supposed to be, relative to the others. Does anyone know what's expected in a document of this kind? I'm a bit shy to ask the institution in question just yet, for fear that it's something well-known.<issue_comment>username_1: That is a rather confusing request, actually. However, what I think the job offer is looking for in a "statement of interests" is a description of the research areas you are interested in, while the "statement of research" would be a listing of projects you'd plan to start if you were hired.
However, in many job postings, those two items would potentially be conflated into a single statement. So I'd recommend that you contact the department. I'd recommend doing this by phone, if possible—that way, you don't have to give as much identifying information.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Since I assume it is an academic job you apply for the letters will cover aspects of that type of work. The job profile could possibly also reveal how to interpret the requested information. My general advice concerning the confusion is to contact the employer to get additional information (they may also keep such information on a web-page). It seems the instructions are sub-par in this case, which is annoying.
View the CV as the back-bone and the statements as an opportunity to provide some meat.
username_1 has already covered two of the letters/statements well. How the research statement should be interpreted is less clear, but posdef's comment is good because it may concern what you have already done. If it is then it is common to go through previosu research and highlight what you consider are your major contributions out of your production and how you consider your work original and contributing to development in the field(s) of concern. I would strongly advice asking about the focus for this letter.
The statement of teaching is usually detailing your views on teaching. The purpose is to get a sense of your ideas and understanding of pedagogical aspects of the work. This may nclude techniques/methods you have already used or ideas on such that you wish to develop. It could also include ideas on courses you would like to develop (if you have a sense of your possible coming mandate at the place at which yo apply. If your position is not concerning teaching, such a statement may not be necessary (I assume you received a form letter?). But, if you are pplying for a position which includes teaching then such a statement may be quite important and provide the job committee with a firm picture of your teaching philosophy.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/26 | 986 | 4,085 | <issue_start>username_0: This has recently happened to an acquaintance of mine. A bit of background, in Australia, we do not 'defend' the thesis, we submit it to be examined by, usually, 3 academics (in the country or overseas).
The situation is, the thesis was approved by the advisor, after several drafts and some feedback. However, when it has come back from the examiners, it has come back as 'failed'. Some of the errors detected are ones that the advisor should have picked up on (as they are within their field of research).
Asides from the appeals procedure (dependent on the policies of the University), what are some practical options? Should they start again? Take her research elsewhere?
Edit for clarification:
* This has **not** happened to me, it has happened to an acquaintance (as said above).
* My acquaintance submitted her thesis well within time and underwent several drafts (as said above).
* The advisor is young/new to the academic scene.<issue_comment>username_1: It is difficult to answer the question without also judging the supervision and other aspects of the student-advisor "relationship". I have been involved in a case which also resulted in a fail. I, being non-Australian) got the impression the thesis was done either by meeting a time deadline or by the student "deciding" so. I cannot imagine any advisor would recommend the thesis as completed in the shape it was. I could not, as examiner, figure out what rules made the thesis judged as competed, it would simply not go in my own system.
In my case we bring in an examination committee from other universities and mostly from abroad. The thesis must stand an international scrutiny. This also means the advisors and students are aware of this requirement. In your case, as well as the one I experienced, I ask myself what sort of system is in palce to safekeep the general scientific standard?
As you can see there are many open questions which makes a simple answer difficult to provide. In some cases it might be possible to use the feedback to improve a thesis. In the US system it is common that a thesis is given revisions to complete. In my system (Sweden) all this quality work has to be made before time, there is no recouperation after a fail. Hence, the options depend on what is possible within the Australian system. If it is possible to revise and re-defend? then that is one way. Tpo take the work elsewhere might be possible but if the work does not stand international scrutiny then that option does not look bright. If there are deeper misunderstandings that lead to the verdict then it might be possible to claim a "mistrial" but failinga PhD thesis is not a good thing under any circumstances. I am just left wondering why it happened, not so much to put blaim but it seems something(s) must have failed in the process and finding out the reasons may provide a better view of possibilities to go forward.
finally, start again? another 3-5 years ona different project will require both a strong interest and financing (I would presume). It is possible but usually, I do not think anyone would subject themselves to another PhD period lightheartedly.
EDIT:
An [example](http://www.sydsvenskan.se/lund/disputation-avlyst-i-sista-stund/) that just occurred.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This type of thing is one reason that many graduate colleges or departments will not allow an assistant professor (or other non-tenured new academic regardless of formal title) to be the sole/primary advisor for a Ph.D. student.
Other than the obvious ill effects on the poor doctoral candidate, this also reflects extremely badly on, and could hurt, the advisor also (e.g., during tenure review), and even shows the department in poor light. I hope your friend is able to salvage things, but in my opinion this is at least as much the advisor's and department's problem as the candidate's, and they should be actively working to find a proper solution. If they're not, then I regard that as a bigger problem than the thesis rejection itself.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/26 | 1,212 | 3,933 | <issue_start>username_0: In a discussion on why subsubsections are evil, egreg [comments](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/118478/why-are-beamer-subsubsections-evil#comment263534_118478):
>
> If you have subsubsections, you must have at least two of them in a subsection; you must have at least two subsections and, of course, at least two sections. Draw the tree and you'll understand.
>
>
>
When I'm writing long texts, such as for my thesis, I might have sections that contain only one subsection. For example:
```
5.3 Topic X
... bla intro bla ...
5.3.1 Special Case in Topic X
... bla detail bla ...
```
Is it considered bad style to have `5.3.1`, but no `5.3.2`? Should I rather put the `bla intro bla` in a `5.3.1 Introduction` and have the special case in `5.3.2`? What are the general approaches here, what is considered good or bad style, and why?<issue_comment>username_1: IMHO, it is a bad style in most contexts, and I will try to explain why, on your example:
>
> 5.3 Topic X
>
> blabla
>
>
> 5.3.1 Special Case in Topic X
>
> bleble
>
>
>
---
If you write a long work (like a thesis or a chapter of a book), you have to use sub-sectioning, still you should keep a good structure. In your case, I would use
>
> 5.3 Topic X
>
>
> 5.3.1 General Approach [or a similar title]
>
> blabla
>
>
> 5.3.2 Special Case [and not "Special Case in Topic X", that's redundant]
>
> bleble
>
>
>
One of the reasonable measures whether you have a good structure of your work is the Table of Contents. Just look at it: If it looks good and truly helps in using the text, then the structure is good.
---
If you write an article and this would likely be the only subsection in it, just make it a section:
>
> 5 Topic X
>
> blabla
>
>
> 6 Special Case in Topic X
>
> bleble
>
>
>
If it's too short to deserve a section, it's quite likely too short to deserve a subsection, in the case you don't use subsections to keep some general structure of the works.
---
*(Needed to say, I speak as a mathematician and as a typesetter of a tech journal. I've seen solitaire subsections a lot. Unfortunately it is out of my privileges to remove these in the articles I typeset.)*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Having a section with a single subsection is usually considered bad style: **most style guides, academic or not, advise against it**. In particular, [the *Chicago Manual of Style* advises against it](http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/Subheads.html?old=Subheads01.html).
Regarding the reasons why this is considered bad practice, I'll quote [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help%3aWikipedia%3a_The_Missing_Manual/Formatting_and_Illustrating_Articles/Article_Sections_and_Tables_of_Contents#Single_Subsections):
>
> **Single Subsections**
>
> Just as your English teacher told you, if section 2 has a subsection 2.1, there'd better be a section 2.2 as well. If you see a section with a single subsection, you have three choices:
>
>
> * If there's a lot of text in the section, followed by the subsection, you ought to be able to carve out a good subsection from the initial material, or even two, to create multiple subsections.
> * If most of the section's material is in the subsection, you may not need a subsection. Just combine the two.
> * If the content of at the top of the section is short and substantially different from what's in the subsection, you might be able to promote the subsection (for example, change the heading from level 3 to level 2). On other hand, if the subsection covers something relatively unimportant, then don't promote it to a level 2 (top-level) heading.
>
>
>
Other sources, both style guides and writing advice, say the same thing: [1](http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~pattrsn/talks/writingtips.html), [2](http://writing.engr.psu.edu/other/chap2.html), …
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/26 | 1,217 | 5,521 | <issue_start>username_0: I've found a mistake in a published paper, and am unsure what to do now.
I was looking at all cited articles from a paper over 10 years old, and found one that is citing the paper in error.
A variant of a certain protein and a fusion protein made of 2 proteins have been confused, that is the citation points to a paper on a protein which shares an abbreviation but is entirely different - this is a pretty big mistake and suggests they haven't actually read the paper they referenced!
The Elsevier journal published this in 2013 and I don't know how to report it, or what the etiquette is here. I can't see contacting the authors to be of much use as it is already printed, and they could very easily delete my email and forget about the error, whereas an editor or some such person would surely be able to take reasonable steps to address it.
For the record I'm an undergrad and have no professional link/competition/other conflict of interest with this researcher or department!<issue_comment>username_1: I think it would be wise to bring the matter up with a researcher who may have the insights you have and beyond. You (two) can then discuss if something should be done and if so what. The error you describe sounds like it is significant but it could also be a typo or have less impact than what appears because of other factors. So getting someone to backing up your observations could be good.
What can be done? Depending on the severity of the problem, it may be necessary for the journal to retract a paper (if the problem negates the results). More commonly you and the researcher you pair up with could write a "Letter to the Editor" pointing out the problem and perhaps detailing the ramafications of the mistake. This letter could lead to a correction being made or lead to a discussion where the author will have to explain how the problem is not one.
So there are several possible outcomes. As an undegraduate you need the support of a more senior scientist since it is unlikely journal will accept letters from persons who are not considered experts in a field (which is what a PhD can signifiy). That does not reduce the merits of your observation but will ensure the observation gets the attention it may deserve.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: **Small errors that do not affect the results or conclusions of the paper are normally handled through publication of a correction (or erratum)**. This is handled by the journal editor, who will be in contact with the authors for confirmation that they agree as to it being an error, and provide for the exact correction to be published.
The journal that published paper should have a policy on corrections, check it out! *Physical Review Letters*’s editorial policies and practices state, for example:
>
> Errata.— The Errata section contains notices regarding errors or omissions in papers previously published. Besides the standard Erratum, several special categories of documents may appear in this section. In the online journal, each of these documents involve bidirectional links between the original article and the document in the Errata section. The category of the corrective document is indicated in its title and in the link from the original article.
>
>
> The standard Erratum is a statement by the authors of the original paper that briefly describes the correction(s) and, where appropriate, any effects on the conclusions of the paper.
>
>
>
Thus, what you should do is:
1. Make double sure it is actually an error.
2. Then ask someone else to double check it again. Preferably someone more senior, i.e. with some experience of academic publication.
3. Write to the corresponding author, pointing out the error. Be nice, and make real sure not to assume to worst.
You say *“this is a pretty big mistake and suggests they haven't actually read the paper they referenced”*: depending on context, it could actually be something minor like a copy-paste mistake (pasting the wrong reference, when they meant another paper)
4. If you do not obtain a response, or they respond but don't intend to correct the error, then consider contacting the editor.
I can understand why, as an undergrad, you would consider contacting the editor directly without writing to the authors first. However, as long as you remain professional in your correspondence with them, I think it's best to contact the authors first. It's more polite, and they may actually be able to provide you with some explanation you haven't thought of. Contacting the editor before the authors is somewhat overdoing it…
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Sometime last year, a colleague of mine and I were writing a paper on scientometrics and reading associated articles. We were closely following a certain paper on preferential attachment in networks and realized that the numbers in the published tables do not add up.
We double checked with each other and then asked our faculty adviser to double check. Upon confirmation, we emailed the corresponding author about this error. The author immediately wrote back with a note of thanks. The major conclusions of the paper were not affected by this error - it was merely a calculation error which should have been caught during the reviewing process but sometimes isn't due to so many numbers floating around in a paper.
Since then, I have always assumed that contacting the corresponding author with a note of caution is always the best way to go.
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/08/26 | 538 | 2,268 | <issue_start>username_0: I would like to do a Ph.D. in CS and I will start doing research as an undergraduate student soon, and I will be applying next year (December 2014) at good (say top 15) US universities. My problem is that I have interest in many areas and I don't know which one to choose. At first, I thought that would like to do research in Machine Learning, but then I realized that there are many undergraduate students doing research in that area so it will be more difficult for me to get in a good school by having research experience at that area, as I am not coming from a highly ranked program.
In addition I am an international student, currently studying Computer Engineering and not Computer Science and this may affect my application as well. So I am thinking about doing research in another area that may be a little less competitive and choose my field of interest (it may be the same) after I got into graduate school.
So **my question** is:
* Will it be better to choose something that is less competitive (*that still interests me*) as a research area for my undergraduate thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: Put simply: **No.**
Your undergraduate thesis work need not have any connection with your graduate research. Certainly, staying in the same area lets you have more of a "running start," but there's always the chance that you find a new research project as a graduate student that grabs your attention and doesn't let go.
So don't worry too much about doing research work in a less competitive area unless you want to do that research anyway. It's better to do work that excites and motivates you, because the end product will almost certainly be better than taking a project that doesn't.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest you to have a look at this doc written by a professor of the admission committee of Carnegie Mellon University
<http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~harchol/gradschooltalk.pdf>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: At this point I would choose to do research that pushes you or challenges you most. The admissions panel at any school are looking for skills and evidence of excellence, if you do research that challenges you, you are better able to show that off further along the line.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/27 | 897 | 3,808 | <issue_start>username_0: I just start writing a paper. This is also my first time doing so.
I have a problem describing the pros and cons of the related literature. **I am not sure where I should place them.**
1. Some of the papers address the pros and cons of related work in `INTRODUCTION` section so that they can claim why their research is superior. e.g. after pointing out the cons of the related work, one may claim that they work has fixed this and thus superior. So it is like the research motivation and work desctiption come directly after the pros and cons. They are all in `INTRODUCTION`.
2. The second style I have seen is writing them in `RELATED WORK` section.
Both ways seem fine to me. And I am even confused with these two sections! **I notice that there is usually some related work described in both `INTRODUCTION` and `RELATED WORK`.**
So where should I put them? `INTRODUCTION` or `RELATED WORK`?
FYI, I am in EECS field. But any generic advice is welcomed.<issue_comment>username_1: One criterion is how important these comparisons are for understanding your work. At one extreme, you may be writing a paper whose sole purpose is to address a gap in the literature by doing something in a better way than other papers or using different hypotheses. In that case, nobody can really understand your paper and its purpose without an explanation of how it relates to these other papers, so you would need to discuss this in the introduction. At the other extreme, you may be mentioning related work only for completeness or because it might interest the reader, with no necessity at all for understanding your paper. In that case, you might as well not clutter up the introduction with it. Most papers are somewhere in between these extremes, in which case you'll have to make a judgment call (and may end up with a compromise, such as discussing some related work in the introduction and other papers in a section of their own).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In my field (business management) this is always done in the literature review which normally follows the introduction.
>
> **Introduction** This paper will show that the key to motivation within a team is.....
>
>
> **Literature review** Jones (2012) believes that money had no influence on individual performance but this paper will show evidence
> which directly contradicts his claims. The fundamentals of his theory
> are quite strong and informed this current research; however, there
> were a few points that he did not seem to fully consider...
>
>
> Fuller (2010) had a very thorough study of motivation and which
> covered interpersonal interaction quite well, however, ...
>
>
> **Methodology**
> ....
>
>
>
I've also see some papers where people put the literature review at the end of the paper but it seems less common.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I've seen a variety of styles used in Computer Science. One that I personally like a lot is where the Introduction has a succinct summary of the pros and cons of related work, with a more leisurely and detailed "Related Work" section towards the end of the paper. The idea is as follows:
1. You want to set the stage for a quick summary of the specific contributions of your own work. To do this, you need to briefly summarize the related work in the Introduction -- in particular, pointing out the problems that your work addresses.
2. The reader's time and attention is precious, and you want to start discussing your own contributions soon instead of meandering about talking about other people's work. The initial summary is therefore necessarily brief (I'd suggest aiming to get to your research by page 2 of the paper). If necessary, include a forward pointer to the Related Work section later in the paper.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/27 | 683 | 2,811 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to apply to PhD programs in English Literature this December. I have pretty good stats from a good liberal arts college + summa thesis, but I majored in Russian Lit. I took a couple of English classes in college but I probably won't do very well on the GRE subject test in British/American lit. Is it possible to get into a PhD program with a good all-around application but bad subject test scores? Should I address my lack of canon-knowledge in the personal statement or leave it be?<issue_comment>username_1: Just like in the sciences, the GRE is not particularly important for admissions to humanities PhD programs. That said, the GRE can be used as a tool to decide who gets the limited funding and the most desirable TA positions. As for the personal statement, you need to address why you want to switch from Russian Lit to English Lit. In fact this should probably be the core focus of the personal statement.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The OP is asking about the GRE *subject* test in English, not the GRE general exam. The verbal score for the general exam is arguably relevant, and I can say for certain that the subject test score is definitely important.
This question was asked a year ago as I write this, but for those who see it in the future, I would recommend using a test prep book or similar to do some crash studying for the subject test. I took it twice, myself. The first time, with no such preparation, I got a 530. The second time, after reading the Princeton Review book, I scored a 680 (above the 90% mark, in percentile terms, which is more important than raw score). Both scores were reported to the schools I applied to. Someone at the one I ended up going to told me they were impressed by how quickly I was able to increase my score. I was impressed by how little this test must actually mean if I could just flip through a study guide and practically nail it. This was in 2001, by the way. Things may have changed. But I doubt much.
I should add that I was, in fact, an English major. But I didn't have broad exposure to all periods and studied very little theory as an undergrad, so I was in the dark in that respect. The Princeton Review guide was very good at getting me up to speed on material likely to be on the test (as well as offering a useful test-taking philosophy). It's better and more efficient than reading the entire Norton Anthology, that's for sure.
You have to realize that the top programs in English receive in excess of 300 applications a year, maybe more, for annual classes of a dozen or so students. To say that the GRE isn't important is suggesting that overworked members of admissions committees aren't looking for any excuse to trim the pile, which in fact they are. Everything is important.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/27 | 953 | 3,572 | <issue_start>username_0: I searched on the internet about this but found no convincing answer. I have to submit a paper to a conference where they are also asking for an Industrial Case Study. I contacted the conference chair about this, they replied:
>
> If there is a pragmatic solution to a problem or there is an innovative application developed then an Industrial Case Study is required. For more details you may search for case study submissions for similar conferences.
>
>
>
The domain is KDD (Knowledge Discovery in Databases). I did search but did not find any good stuff.
Could anyone help me out with this?<issue_comment>username_1: I could not find a specific definition; however, I found a few Industrial Case Study examples from your and similar fields that may be useful analogs for you to model your case study off:
["An Industrial Case Study of Immediate Benefits of
Requirements Engineering Process Improvement at
the Australian Center for Unisys Software"](http://alarcos.esi.uclm.es/doc/metotecinfinf/articulos/4-damian-casestudy-ese-2004.pdf) (Damian et al. 2004).
["http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA446147"](http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA446147) (Cook and Wolf)
["Process Monitoring using a Combination of Data driven Techniques
and Model based Data Validation"](http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/2268/4182/1/Extended_T3-245.pdf) (Duchesne et al. 2007)
["Signed Directed Graph Based Modeling and its Validation from Process Knowledge and Process Data"](http://matwbn.icm.edu.pl/ksiazki/amc/amc22/amc2213.pdf) (Yang et al. 2012)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I contacted one the authors on the papers UV-D mentioned and according to the author:
>
> "Industrial Case Study" means the results presented have been validated in actual plant operation, they are not only based on theoretical considerations.
>
>
>
I even asked this question on Google+'s Machine Learning username_1. You can have a look at the converstaion [here](https://plus.google.com/117281960538042233493/posts/JxxxvbNsXom).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: An industrial case study is when you take your solutions or your processes, apply it to some situation in industry, and then report on the results. You might use the [Case Study Method research method](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1452242569) if what you propose can be appropriately investigated using a qualitative case study. This is appropriate if you're in management sciences, human-computer interaction, and software engineering (which is what the Damian paper referenced above is about). Note that industrial case studies of this type are VERY difficult to do and take an extremely long time to write up and report on, so I actually doubt the conference is looking for this kind of case study.
Alternatively, in the field of Knowledge Discovery of Databases, an industrial case study may simply be applying your algorithm to a database that is used in industry to discover something novel or meaningful. This is more common for analytical fields in general and simply requires you to acquire a database or some other data source that was generated through industrial activity.
The reason for "industrial case studies" is because a lot of people create methods and techniques and test it only with "fake laboratory data" that they happen to create or acquire. This fake laboratory data doesn't reflect very accurately the real world and people want to see that techniques in fact work on, affect and influence the real world.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/27 | 2,563 | 10,505 | <issue_start>username_0: I start my graduate program next week, which includes spending some of my time as a Teaching Assistant. It is my least favorite part of job, and I do not want to teach in my career after that. I don't want to become professor but get a job in a company.
Nobody told me how to teach and I don't even know what classes I have. I have little time to prepare, and probably don't know the professor (professors?) well. So what can I do to prepare, until I know what courses I have and can go over the material? I'm quite scared right now.<issue_comment>username_1: You are off to the right start - ask questions. Next step is read... a lot.
I have some books I've recommended [here before](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5236/how-to-improve-myself-as-a-lecturer/5261#5261). They will give you a good beginning.
Sadly, university teachers are rarely prized for their teaching abilities. Often they are just thrown in as long as they understand the subject(s). Tertiary teaching is, more often than not, learned on the job. So, read all the posts here about teaching. If you have a chance, practice. Usually a university teacher's first semester is the worst. It gets much better (and easier) as you go on.
One other course I would recommend is [The Art of Teaching](http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/course_detail.aspx?cid=2044). It is really well done and covers so very many things you should be thinking about.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: One part of your question I can offer very concrete advice for. You say you don't know what classes you have then go into the main office of your department and ask where to get trained on the course registration software. You say you don't know the professors that you are assisting well or at all, make appointments to go meet them and ask them what they want you to do. What they tell you will be the best starting point for your preparation.
When you go into industry you will occasionally be asked to complete tasks that may not be to your taste. For you it sounds like teaching while in grad school is the same situation and this is ok. Treat these two situations similarly, put in enough time and effort to do it well and it should work out fine for everybody.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Be honest and be yourself. Students will latch on to your discomfort and will use it as an excuse for their performance. I have found that if you are honest with them with a statement along the lines of "I am new to teaching, so please be patient while I work out my teaching style and get more comfortable. If you have any concerns about how class is going, please speak to me as soon as possible." they are much more forgiving of your mistakes which you are bound to make. There is nothing worse than students who feel they cannot pass the class due to your teaching, so allowing them to voice their opinions early can both help in your teaching (i.e., "You stand in front of the board too often." or "It would be more helpful if you spent a little more time going over X.") and in your students attitudes towards you. But be careful on this front, make no instantaneous decisions. I always will say something like "I will think about it and get back to you next class if the policy X needs to change." Always get back to them about it, even if it is a no.
Additionally, talk to other grad students and faculty if you are finding you are having problems with teaching. I would be surprised if your department or university had people did not staffed just for training of instructors for teaching duties. Talk to them and voice your nervousness, they are there to help. Even think about all your classes and what the professor did that you hated or liked and try to emulate the best attributes as best you can. But don't try to be these people, just be yourself.
The key here is talk to everyone, do your best, and be yourself.
Since you're just starting out, I don't believe that they would throw you in cold into a classroom and say "teach" without any forewarning or even knowledge of which class, but they might depending on where you are (and talk to other people about what to do quickly if possible). You will probably start out grading and/or doing recitations/review sections a few times a week until you are more capable/comfortable with maintain your own class.
Good luck in teaching and studies! I always think being able to explain what you know to other people is a true sign that you know it yourself.
Addendum: The books that username_1 suggested will always help. If you are in mathematics, I also suggest [How to Teach Mathematics](http://www.ams.org/bookstore-getitem/item=HTM-2) by <NAME>. Even though it is written for those teaching math, it is also a good read for almost any new instructor, particularly in the sciences.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Accept that the first day, and probably a few days following that, are likely to feel a bit 'emotional'. It happens to everyone. It will get better from there quite quickly, though will probably take at least a term before you really get into the swing of things.
If you haven't done so yet, try going to the admin department and seeing if they know what courses you'll be doing. They're useful people to know in general, and I've found them often to be much more on top of things like this than the faculty. The same applies to lab technicians and other staff (who will absolutely know a heck of a lot more about this stuff than you do, so stay on their good side).
If you're not already, get familiar with the way things are generally 'done' at your uni. With undergrad courses and practicals there's quite possibly a standard way all work is assigned and graded. Look in the undergraduate prospectus and/or any webpages set up for them to get an idea what they're being told, and hence their expectations. Also look up any rules your department has on plagiarism, dealing with late work, dealing with sick days and religious holidays, what constitutes appropriate and inappropriate behaviour towards them on your part, etc.
You will almost certainly need a calendar to keep track of when you're meant to be doing what. I've used a pocket book in the past, but these days would probably use my phone so I can sync it all online. Being organised, and *knowing* that you're organised, removes a lot of the stress.
Once you find out what course you're doing be sure to go through all of it. If there's a practical demonstration, do it yourself as soon as possible - and once you can do it, play with the equipment and find all the ways it can fail to work (your students will discover them all). If there's questions students will be expected to do, do them all yourself, no matter how easy they look - you need to know this material better than they do, so you can deal with the thousand and one bizarre errors they will make. This will be a bit of a time sink, but you've got to do it.
Be prepared to not be surprised if you start to find you're enjoying it. Even if teaching isn't your long term goal, seeing someone 'get' a problem thanks to your advice can be very rewarding.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Before every lecture I've taught, I hand out forms to the students. The questions on the form are very simple:
* *What went well?*
* *What could be improved?*
* *Do you have any other suggestions?*
I collect the forms at the end of the lecture. The feedback I get may be tremendously helpful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: A good number of universities (or departments) have a **TA Handbook**, or another sort of documentation which contains both high-level stuff (e.g., policies), but also very practical advice on being a teaching assistant. Ask around if your institution has one (ask the more senior students, or ask the administrative staff). Also, have a look at those institutions that put theirs on the web:
* [University of Nebraska Lincoln](http://www.unl.edu/gtahandbook/preparing-teach)
* [University of Pittsburgh](http://www.cidde.pitt.edu/teaching-support/ta-services/ta-handbook-teaching-assistant-experience)
* [UC Santa Cruz](http://graddiv.ucsc.edu/current-students/pdfs/ta-handbook.pdf)
* many others you can find with Google…
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: This is a very broad question and the best answer may heavily depend on the field you are in. Nevertheless I feel there are some general principles one can try to adhere to, to be a decent TA.
* Talk to the Professor of the course about the content. Furthermore try to schedule a weekly meeting with him or his assistants, where you can discuss problems and what happened in the course that week.
* Find out if there are other TAs, who you can discuss problems with. They may have more experience than you, which they can share. If you need to grade some work, it is very good to have a joint session with other TAs, since then the grading for the course will become more uniform. This is especially important if you have to grade an exam at the end.
* Prepare your sessions well, i.e. prepare some notes about what you think should be said and solve any exercises beforehand.
* Be aware that you are now "on the other side", but are still not quite faculty yet. A TA is often a buffer between students and professors. Many students are too shy to directly talk to professors, so they may turn to you instead. Make it clear that you are open for concerns and forward these concerns to the professor, even if you do not agree. If you do agree with some concerns, you should also at least try to stand up to the professor on behalf of the students.
* Stick to your scheduled time. Make it clear when your session starts and when it ends and do not go over time.
* Try to build a friendly, but professional climate in your session, where people are comfortable posing questions and admitting mistakes, this also applies to you.
* If you are faced with a difficult question you are not able to answer right away, write it down and prepare a good answer for the next session.
* There may be students who are smarter or more knowledgeable than you and which might seem to pose a "threat" to your authority. Make it clear that you are in charge, but try to include them into your teaching by letting them talk or answer other peoples questions. Sometimes these people are not trying to challenge your authority, but just want to be recognized by their peers.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/27 | 637 | 2,533 | <issue_start>username_0: Currently I use Mendeley. I have heard some stuff about ReadCube, but they don't have a Mendeley quick import tool, so… before I go through the hassle of resetting up my library with them, I wondered how it compared to Mendeley. What are its extra features? What is missing? How smooth is it to use, how widely adopted is it, that sort of things…<issue_comment>username_1: From a short comparison of the features listed on the website here is list of [Mendeley](http://www.mendeley.com/compare-mendeley/) features that [ReadCube](http://www.readcube.com/#features) doesnt have:
* In-text citation insertion and formation: Mendeley has Word and other plugins, ReadCube only exports to Endnote and "your favorite citation software"
* Sharing and collaboration features
* ReadCube is only a desktop app (no web app), and it doesn't work on Linux
* Mendeley has an open API to query its huge database
On the other hand:
* ReadCube is used as the online reader for a few publishers: Nature, Frontiers and Wiley.
* ReadCube suggests personalized article recommendations (dont know if they're good, though)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: So I'm a ReadCube user who was a Mendeley user -
ReadCube does have a citation tool for Word and their apps make articles interactive - things like references, authors, figures are clickable - which is pretty neat. Their recommendations are pretty good too if you have enough in your library - otherwise the results can be pretty generic. I guess that makes sense.
I personally prefer it to Mendeley - though I do miss Mendeley's web access part of it. ReadCube has a **much** better interface. It's like what you'd expect for mainstream tools - intuitive, slick, streamlined. I find the other tools in comparison "science functional" - they work - but look cludgy.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Note that when getting articles via Readcube from the journals that support it, you don't actually get a copy of the article. It seems Readcube is one way big publishers are trying to "contain" their copyrighted articles and prevent readers from having a true copy. This article explains some of that:
<http://rossmounce.co.uk/2015/03/19/how-to-block-readcube-and-why/>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As of now, one feature that has kept me in Mendeley is that, unlike ReadCube, Mendeley can can keep a bibtex file with all your library references. This file is updated automatically. Readcube requires manual export of selected references.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/27 | 633 | 2,702 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in the market for a (hopefully free!) grade book software and would like to see some suggestions. This would be used for a math class and I am planning for many grades (15+) per semester.
In particular, if a gradebook has any features that make it stand out from other gradebooks or spreadsheet solutions, I would appreciate knowing that information.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm guessing this question will get closed, but there are many options (as **earthling** highlighted in the comment). When I taught high school, I invested in [Easy Grade Pro](http://www.easygradepro.com/) and was happy with it. It is not free.
Lately, I've been using a home-made Excel spreadsheet, which has been pretty easy to do, although I have a fair amount of experience with Excel. As **F'x** said, OpenOffice has a spreadsheet and it is free, and Google Docs also provide a free spreadsheet solution. You can also find pre-made Excel spreadsheets for grading, which you can tweak for your own use.
Another option is to see if your school has a gradebook built-in to it's student-database system. This is a nice solution because you don't have to transfer grades from one system to another, and the students have easy access to grades along the way so they can explicitly track their own progress.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the solution has to be webbased, I think Google Docs (<https://drive.google.com/>) makes a lot of sense. At the very least, the learning curve is very easy and being a complete spreadsheet solution it has complete flexibility.
I can even imagine that if you create quizzes based on online forms (created from google docs) you could have grades going automatically into your form in some way.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I have found good results in using [Edmodo](https://www.edmodo.com/)'s grade book. Even if you do not wish to use the site's other features, such as on-line homework submission or on-line quizzes, you can still add grades to this from work that students submitted on paper.
Edmodo's grade book does not have a great deal of advanced grading features, however, the advantage of using this over software-based grade books is that students can log into their own accounts to check their grades as often as they like. After I began using this, I stopped getting weekly E-mails from students asking me to tell them their grade. Additionally, by providing such transparent access to grades, it gives students pressure to get their work in. If you want to compute adjustments to the grades once the grades are finished, you can export them to a CSV and analyze the figures in a spreadsheet.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/28 | 745 | 3,257 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently read a paper whose co-authors are found in the conference committee.
Although they are not in the executive committee, they are in organizing committee and all the committee people know each other well.
So I am wondering how this can happen? I mean, is there any regulation, either ethical or by law, that prohibits this type of thing? Or it's allowed?<issue_comment>username_1: In some of the communities I am in, the following processes ensure that bias is removed.
In one case, such papers would receive additional reviews and would be rejected if any of the reviews suggests rejection. In another case, there is an additional committee whose task in part is to review such papers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For any reputable conference, authors with a conflict of interest will recuse themselves from discussions about their paper. They won't have a vote on the paper, and if things are very well administered, other committee members won't even know that the paper is from that particular author, only that the author has a conflict of interest. Indeed, there are many reasons for a conflict of interest:
1. Current or prior colleague at the same university.
2. Current or prior collaboration or co-author on a paper or papers.
3. Current advisor / student relationship.
4. etc.
These guidelines are generally spelled out in the paper submission guidelines, too (if you are an author and have a conflict, you should list them). Also, in many program committee meetings, committee members go in and out of paper discussions based on whether they have a conflict for a particular paper or not.
>
> is there any regulation, either ethical or by law, that prohibits this type of thing?
>
>
>
Ethical: sure (see above).
Legal: no. I'm not sure why people think there are a lot of legal rules that dictate how independent, non-government conferences and journals are administered. I've seen this in a number of questions recently, and the bottom line is that a conference has its own rules to abide by, and that's about it. Conference organizers have a vested interest in making things fair to the extent that they don't want the conference to have a bad name, but they aren't in the position to be bound by any laws pertaining to the way the conference is administered (outside of normal law-abiding behavior).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It would be a strange situation if you were forbidden to publish something when you organize a meeting. What usually happens is that your paper is taken on (for editing or other scrutiny) by someone else in such a committee. I agree that it can become a little sensitive if you are the sole organizer handling the reviews and submitting a paper. In such a case ethics would hopefully make you think about a co-convener or to openly state that someone with more neutral standings will handle your paper specifically.
So this situation is common, very common, and in most if not all cases there are ways to avoid conflicts of interest. There may of course be cases where the intent is to circumvent objective handling but such cases are likely noticed in the community. In the end, I think it is bad judgement to avoid objective handling.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/28 | 840 | 3,334 | <issue_start>username_0: My name is <NAME> and I'm writing a paper. In the discussion of the existing literature, I cite quite a few papers from another team, including many whose first author was a <NAME>. I usually write this using heavily the “et al” style:
>
> Einstein et al. first established in 1976 a possible plan for eradicating world hunger by massive beet culture in Antartica,1 but it took 20 years before Wiles et al. clearly delineated the challenges of such a prospect.2 The earlier analyses, by Smith et al.,3–7 held the narrow view that climate3–5 and transportation issues6–7 would be the limiting factors, forgetting to address the marketing aspects and negative implications on consumer image of the brand. In this paper, we present …
>
>
>
(the journal style calls for superscript numbers for citations)
Now, it seems somewhat likely that the reader may think the Smith from “Smith et al.” may actually be me. How should I help avoid this?
1. Not worrying about it.
2. Use first name or initial, “<NAME> et al.” or “D. Smith et al.”
3. Choosing another author, like the last author, as in “Professor et al.”?
4. Some other formulation?<issue_comment>username_1: If your references clearly can be traced to a unique paper then the name is not (or should not be) confusing. Yes, someone may mistake you for someone else or *vice versa* but then their checking of sources is out of sub-par. You can safely continue referencing the (standard) way you do it.
If two publications exist as Smith yyyy (Smith et al. yyyy) then it is common to use letters so that the references become Smith yyyya and Smith yyyyb (Smith et al. yyyya; Smith et al. yyyyb). So not even in this case is it necessary to add initials. You may find that initials are used in older puiblications but by introducing the letters to distinguish several similar references initials have become obsolete.
It is also possible to add indicators in the text that allows the reader to understand where your work is referenced by using "we" or "I" (as the case may be) when discussing a particular reference/result, that is use an active voice instead of passive.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Working through your list:
1. Using just the standard "Smith et al." is the usual standard that I've seen in my fields (physics, materials science, chemical engineering).
2. If you feel the need to indicate explicitly that this is not your work, then you can choose to use a variant that includes the full initials of the author:
>
> "<NAME> *et al.* found. . . ."
>
>
>
3. Using a formulation "Professor *et al.*" is incorrect usage of *et al.*, which is normally used to designate in "actual" order the authors listed. The better formulation would be "Jones and colleagues" or "Jones and co-workers"; however, if the same first author is responsible for all of the papers, then using one of the other authors as the "focal point" is very misleading.
4. Other formulations, I believe, would be much less common than any of the other variants you've listed.
However, you could always try to just avoid mentioning Smith's name by referring to the contents of the work directly without saying "Smith et al. did X," by writing "X has been observed under conditions Y" or something similar.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/28 | 488 | 2,190 | <issue_start>username_0: These days I'm going to take the subject of my master. I'm wondering how to search about the subject and how to decide which master thesis I can take and work. The one option is to go to a professor and take anything that he gives me and work with if I like it. Is any other way to search about hot topics on my research area? So far, I have search on [google scholar](http://scholar.google.com) for related work on my area... Any other suggestion that I can do before decide for the subject is more than appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: My advice would be to go visit not one professor, but a few. **Don't ask them specifically for a thesis topic**, but tell them you are looking around and **ask them to talk to you about their research**. Ask about **weekly seminars** at your department, and go listen to a few of those. Get a broad view of the different topics that groups around you are working on, then decide on something.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should have a research methods teacher who will guide you through the process of identifying a good area of research for you.
Your thesis will take a significant amount of work and you need to consider many things. For example, what are you interested in? If you select a topic which you are not interested in then you will likely lose hope and go nowhere or do a poor job, receiving a poor mark.
Another consideration is access. This is a significant issue in research related to business management. For example, if you want to study how telecommunication companies do something specific with regards to recruitment, you need to make sure you actually have access to telecommunication company HR departments. Without that access even if you are interested, you will find yourself very frustrated, again turning in poor quality work receiving a poor mark.
Basically, you should have a teacher who will walk you through this. If you don't, you should have an adviser who can walk you through this. If you don't have that, then I would definitely take advice from @username_1 and ask **several** professors to get some ideas and narrow it down from there.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/28 | 1,338 | 5,719 | <issue_start>username_0: During college, I decided to use my free electives to pursue a second major I had an interest in (Sociology) besides my main focus on computer science.
I am contemplating applying to some phD programs that intersect both of these fields. However, I know these are new programs.
I have e-mailed a few departments but I get the vibe that they are more focused in getting people to apply to these new programs rather than necessarily being honest about prospects.
So my question is essentially, are there tenure track professorships that are interested in applicants with these kinds of backgrounds? And if so is it only a very small group of institutions?
Example of one of the programs I am referring to: [Ph.D Program in Computational Social Sciences](http://www.css.gmu.edu/?q=node/43)<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, if this is a relatively new cross-disciplinary area, this will start as a very small group of institutions. If it's a fruitful area, that number will grow quickly, and among the early adopters might well be some of the best universities.
And yes, to set up these programmes in the first place, does indeed require buy-in from professors and top-level university administrators, so there are tenure-track professorships interested in applicants with those sort of cross-disciplinary backgrounds
What is it like to study in a new cross-disciplinary area?
----------------------------------------------------------
There are a few things that make it different.
You might find yourself building the foundations. A lot of the work might be much more exploratory. It can be the wild west, with few established paths and no signposts; and you may end up making up the rules as you go along.
That is to say, established fields tend to have well-defined protocols for things like data collection; and a proven set of tools to work with. Whereas in a new cross-disciplinary area, you're more likely to be building the basic toolkit from scratch: writing your own protocols starting from bare bones. There will be things you can take from each of the disciplines that you span, but combining them will be untested ground.
Some of the papers you write may end up being foundational for the new cross-disciplinary area, and highly-cited for years to come. Even though the work they contain, might seem fairly basic to you.
It can be lonelier. Scarier. More exciting. Harder to get funding. Or easier to get funding. Your reading will be broader, as it will span journals across more than one discipline, and you won't find enough journals or conferences that are closely-enough targeted at your field. You might end up starting your own conference, just to help build the platform.
disclaimer: I do work in a new cross-disciplinary institute, but I do not work in computational social sciences (though one or two of my colleagues are indeed computational social scientists)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm in the CSS department at George Mason University, just starting my dissertation. Though I'm not primarily aimed at tenure-track academic jobs after graduating, I have some insights regarding the questions you have asked.
First, you should know that CSS at GMU (and most other places similar to it) are not solely focused on placing their graduates into academic jobs. There's a wide diversity of career paths, both prior to entering and after graduating. To me, that creates a looseness and openness among the students. This is in contrast to discipline-focused departments where *everyone* is expected to prepare for and compete for top academic jobs. In those situations, there seems to be a strong emphasis on things other than just learning and doing good research (competition, prizes/awards, getting into the 'in crowd', elitism, etc.)
Second, CSS would be a poor fit for many academic jobs (research or teaching) that really want depth and credentials in a single discipline -- Economics, Sociology, Business, or Computer Science.
Finally, there is significant growth in the number of departments and jobs (internationally and in the US) that specifically call for Computational Social Science or similar interdisciplinary degree. This is driven in part by funding agencies who have become very enthusiastic for CSS and similar types of programs and projects. It's also driven by market demand -- especially for social network analysis, Big Data in social science, and programmatic research (e.g. public health, international development, conflict studies, cyber security). While the number of these jobs may not be large in absolute terms, CSS graduates could be extremely well-qualified to fill them, compared to single-discipline graduates.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I lead the semantic technologies and cultural heritage research line at Incipit CSIC (www.incipit.csic.es) in Spain. We are right in the cross between software engineering, philosophy of language and cultural heritage.
To answer your question, we *desperately* seek people with a profile like yours. We just had a vacancy for a PhD position and it was (as usually is) extremely difficult to find suitable candidates. When we find them, we treat them with much care and respect, and our aim is to have tenured positions in the future for these people.
Having said that, I must admit that this is a quite uncommon situation. Most research institutes in Spainand Europe tend to align their research lines along more conventional paths, and recruit people with more conventional backgrounds.
I guess your will need to work hard to find a place that needs people with your hybrid profile. There are few, but you will be gold to them.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/28 | 915 | 3,827 | <issue_start>username_0: Inspired [this good question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10059/mentor-trying-to-be-first-author), I think posting this question will surely benefit the next generations of students, albeit this does not happen to myself.
The research students will publish several papers along the research road under someone's supervision. When it comes to the issue of **the author order**, the student and the advisor may **not always reach an agreement**. i.e. Sometimes the student thinks he or she deserves the 1st author, but the advisor doesn't.
In such cases, the students are usually very worried and upset. Having been working on that topic for such a long time, the student feels very disappointed to be listed as the non-first author. Being the **weak** party, the **student may not even dare** to argue with his advisor. After all, the advisor is kind of "in control of" his remaining PhD life.
Simply put:
**How should a student defend his or her 1st authorship in front of the advisor politely and effectively?**<issue_comment>username_1: Authorship questions inevitably end up having two threads: what should be and what happens. The "what should be" is that the amount of intellectual work (as described in the [Vancouver Protocol](http://www.research.mq.edu.au/about/research_@_macquarie/policies,_procedures_and_conduct/documents/Vancouver.pdf))
```
1. Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data
AND
2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content
AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
```
that each author has put into the work. As with most agreements, it is best to discuss this in advance and agree on how to evaluate the work done. Usually the first author is in charge of writing and the other author(s) provide feedback and contribute to the writing. If everyone follows these rules then the argument is fairly "straightforward".
In reality, we have to also deal with different types of personalities and other situations that affect judgement. It is not uncommon for persons to want first authorship if they are up for promotion or if they see that something they did not fully think was great actually is. The list could be made long. Straightening these cases out is sometimes (if not often) really tough.
Being pragmatic, I often think about if the situation will hurt me and evaluate if the fight is worth it. In the case of a PhD student, having ones advisor as first author is not necessarily a bad thing since, hopefully, the advisor is well-known and respected. Hence some of that rubs off on the co-author. As a PhD student I think a valid argument is that you need first authorship on some of the work in your thesis. This is a particularly good argument if the "switch" occurs repeatedly.
Arguing against irratianal excuses for first authorships will be hard or near impossible to win so I am a little pessimistic when it comes to such cases. You need to evaluate the situation yourself, gather objective arguments for your claim and possibly asking other faculty for advice and support.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In addition to Peter's answer, one should also keep in mind the accepted practices in one's field of study. For instance, in some fields, such as economics and parts of mathematics, alphabetical order is the default; in other areas, such as organic chemistry, the principal investigator of the lab—not the primary author of the paper—has traditionally been given the first spot in the list.
If you are in a field where the order is somewhat preordained, it's going to be very difficult to change that tradition, for many reasons. In such cases, you should optimize your placement within the "available" options.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/28 | 747 | 3,119 | <issue_start>username_0: 1. Can one be titled "Vising Student/Scholar" at a university if one is already graduated from another institute (with BSc/MSc) and is currently not affiliated with any university?
2. Does one have to pay registration fees, etc.?
3. In this case, can one be paid for as a TA/RA by the university?
Is it different in US and EU?<issue_comment>username_1: Authorship questions inevitably end up having two threads: what should be and what happens. The "what should be" is that the amount of intellectual work (as described in the [Vancouver Protocol](http://www.research.mq.edu.au/about/research_@_macquarie/policies,_procedures_and_conduct/documents/Vancouver.pdf))
```
1. Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data
AND
2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content
AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
```
that each author has put into the work. As with most agreements, it is best to discuss this in advance and agree on how to evaluate the work done. Usually the first author is in charge of writing and the other author(s) provide feedback and contribute to the writing. If everyone follows these rules then the argument is fairly "straightforward".
In reality, we have to also deal with different types of personalities and other situations that affect judgement. It is not uncommon for persons to want first authorship if they are up for promotion or if they see that something they did not fully think was great actually is. The list could be made long. Straightening these cases out is sometimes (if not often) really tough.
Being pragmatic, I often think about if the situation will hurt me and evaluate if the fight is worth it. In the case of a PhD student, having ones advisor as first author is not necessarily a bad thing since, hopefully, the advisor is well-known and respected. Hence some of that rubs off on the co-author. As a PhD student I think a valid argument is that you need first authorship on some of the work in your thesis. This is a particularly good argument if the "switch" occurs repeatedly.
Arguing against irratianal excuses for first authorships will be hard or near impossible to win so I am a little pessimistic when it comes to such cases. You need to evaluate the situation yourself, gather objective arguments for your claim and possibly asking other faculty for advice and support.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In addition to Peter's answer, one should also keep in mind the accepted practices in one's field of study. For instance, in some fields, such as economics and parts of mathematics, alphabetical order is the default; in other areas, such as organic chemistry, the principal investigator of the lab—not the primary author of the paper—has traditionally been given the first spot in the list.
If you are in a field where the order is somewhat preordained, it's going to be very difficult to change that tradition, for many reasons. In such cases, you should optimize your placement within the "available" options.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/29 | 2,501 | 10,414 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm asking what to expect after violence in my classroom, will I be fired, expelled? What is the procedure?
Hopefully this is the correct stack exchange for this, if not feel free to tell me where to move it where it would be more appropriate.
So I am a teaching assistant and masters student in the math dept. at a large state university. I was holding a discussion section this morning for the class I'm teaching and near the beginning some young man walks in with his shirt off acting verbally belligerent, he then comes up to the front of the room and just kind of stands there, not saying anything just kind of smiling in this creepy way and showing absolutely no signs of embarrassment or anything. After asking the class if anyone knew him (no one did), I told him he could either leave right now or I would get someone to remove him. I'm a small guy and he wasn't huge but he was certainly bigger than me.
He didn't leave upon request so I stepped out of the room to go get someone, although in retrospect I had no idea at the time who I would have gotten, but then as soon as I stepped out I realized that that probably wasn't a good idea since he could take my stuff or who knows what. So I walked back in and sure enough he's got my water bottle in his hand, so I grab it from him and say something to the effect of,
"!@#$ it, does anyone big want to help me get this guy out of class?"
And two guys stand up, and one of them is clearly super pissed at this guy disrupting class and goes straight over to the guy and BAM hits him in the face super hard and he goes down and then hits him again and then kicks him in the face all in the span of like 5 or 6 seconds, like a proper #$!%ing beat down, and there are girls screaming and I'm a bit in shock as I was expecting him to just kind of strong arm him out of the class, and one girl comes up and is like
"stop hitting him stop hitting him!"
and I don't exactly remember what happens right after but the guy who was disrupting must have left, and then somehow the assistant dean is like right there and I step outside and talk to her and explain quickly what happened but I don't say that the student hit the guy I just say he got him out of class, and she says later I will need to file a report, and then basically I hold the class which goes fine.
And then at the end of class I ask the student who hit the guy to wait for me so I can explain what the assistant dean said to me, and after dealing with other students who need something, I'm about to talk to him when the assistant dean comes back in. And basically I ask the assistant dean if she could step outside for a little bit while I talk to this student in private, since I'm not trying to incriminate him since I feel partially responsible since I asked for help and he did get the guy out. Well she gets super offended at this and tells me that "I shoo you, you don't shoo me, get this straight I'm your superior", and so I apologize but I think maybe the look on my face isn't sufficiently contrite and I look rather taken aback at her strong response. So she writes down my name.
So no one not my professor/student-teacher liaison, not my ombudsman, seems to know what I should expect from all this. I talked to the police and they did apprehend someone fitting the guys description, so I probably don't need to worry about that guy coming back. I am however morally conflicted about having to write a report to the dean's office or whoever I have to write it to, since I don't want to get the student in trouble, since he helped me when I requested it, although I certainly didn't expect him to start beating the guy up, I thought he would just strong arm him out or something.
I scheduled a meeting with the dean for a week from today (earliest availability), and now I'm super worried that I'm going to be fired or kicked out of my masters program. If I'm fired then whatever that's the way things go, but if I'm kicked out of the masters program that will completely screw up my life. Like I said no one (not my fellow TAs, not my professor/student-liaison, not my ombudsman) seems to know what to expect from all this, and if I should be worried about getting fired or kicked out of the program. Thus I'm turning to people here who maybe know what I should expect from all this.
**~~Update~~**
I found out that the guy who was disrupting class got arrested later that day and he was not a student. I also talked to several students who said that this is not the first time he has done this, and that several weeks ago in another class he walked in and lit a cigarette, and the professor took the cigarette out of his mouth, stomped on it, and then physically threw him out of class.<issue_comment>username_1: While not as serious as an infraction as what you are going through, I was just recently in a bit of trouble with my school (public consumption). I was able to get past it by doing the following things:
1. Spoke Nothing but the truth
2. Had people from my department advocate that beyond this infraction, I was an asset to the department and the school.
What you also need to do is:
* Explain that you were clearly in an unsafe environment, and that beyond the stranger's threat, you put your students in danger by asking for help. While you aren't much older than the students, I assume, You are responsible for them as a Teaching Assistant.
* Explain to them that, if you are fortunate enough to keep your job and stay in the program what you would do in similar situation, which is, call the police. Get on your phone and call Public Safety or the Police, that is their job.
* This may have legal ramifications, depending on the particulars.
* Find as many people as possible with stature to advocate for you. Does your advisor love you as a student? Time to find out.
Thats all I can really think of. I really wish you good luck, as you know this is super messy.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You should have called the campus security/police when the incident was happening.
Had you done that, you'd worry about nothing right now. How did you know that guy did not have a gun? Why did you ask the student to help you to get the guy out? It was the security/police officer's job. You put all the students' and your life in danger !
Now, what happened already happened, too late to change that. To answer your question, you should talk to your professor, the department chair and the assistant dean. File the report. Just tell them the truth. You can use this question as the draft of the report. Take out some improper words. Admit that you did not know the appropriate action to take when it happened and you learned a painful lesson. Ask them to provide security trainings so that you'll know what to do if this kind of thing ever happens again. They'll understand. I don't think you'll be kicked out. A reprehend action is probably unavoidable.
To answer the question directly: It really depends on your department and school. If they had established security procedure and provided training to all faculty, staff and students as how to deal with this kind of thing, then they should also have the procedure as how to deal with anyone who did not follow the procedure. If they never had the security procedure, It's time to have one now. You can put that in your report.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: You clearly found yourself in a very uncomfortable and unpredictable situation (I'm assuming the school never prepared you for this kind of situation). The fact that you are young and relatively inexperienced should help you.
You should definitely see the head of your department and ask for his/her help. The bottom line is that you were unsure of what to do, you felt threatened, you did something which seemed reasonable at the time (asked for help). Yes, the other student seems to have gone a bit too far but for his situation there are mitigating circumstances (his teacher felt he was in trouble and asked him to help).
Basically, there are mitigating circumstances all around. Even you shooing (really?) someone whom you should not have happened only because everyone was off balance.
Yes, it is not good but for everyone involved, any reasonable third party can clearly see that there are mitigating circumstances all around.
So, go to the department chair and ask him/her what to do. Don't hide anything.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Short: **Contact a local union representative, and ask them for information and advice**.
The advice given by others (*speak the truth*, *contact your department head and ask for his help*, etc.) is good, and if cool heads prevail, you shouldn't be in too much trouble, though the experience must have left you in bad shape. Also, on that note, **do not hesitate to contact the school's counsellor/shrink** if you need someone to talk to in confidence. Sometimes, some of the things we cannot say in official channels (*“I somehow feel responsible for the guy getting beaten, after all, I set students onto him”*, that sort of stuff) need to be spoken.
However, **even if things are probably going to be fine, you also need to prepare yourself in case things go wrong**. So, just in case serious or threatening administrative procedures are started, **get informed on what your rights are**, and get advice on what to say exactly. (Yes, you will speak the truth, but there are many ways to phrase it.) That's your union's job, and they can even help you further if things turn for the worse.
---
If you don't have a union, you could also get good advice from a lawyer… you may have access to a legal clinic or public-funded law consultations near you
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Everyone else is giving good answers about your specific question. I want to add one thing: you need to think about how to handle such situations going forward. Set up time with campus security to learn what their policies are. You might try taking a good self defense class - not sport martial arts, and not military-go-kill-someone martial arts, but something designed for citizens who truly want to protect themselves. If you do so, you'd be well advised to learn about the different types of violence, so you can recognize whether someone is likely to hurt you vs someone who just wants your money. <NAME> is a great starting place.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/29 | 2,488 | 9,914 | <issue_start>username_0: I have found that while many have some appreciation of the level of research in a PhD (usually by saying "that's way over my head" or something similar) and I have not really had a problem with [getting impatient describing my research](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/257/how-do-i-not-get-impatient-when-other-people-ask-me-to-describe-my-research).
Edit to add: this is reflective of my own experience, mostly studying/researching part time and working full time in an unrelated field.
The query here is how to convince people of the time required for completion of the PhD, and the continued dedication needed in order to get the intrinsic tasks complete. In some cases, it is not 'a 1000 word book report'.
For example, my PhD (now just submitted) was highly experimental, each set of observations were 3 hours each, and I had to do about 100-120 of them (usually on weekends as I work full time). After which, I would have to do 6-12 hours of coding/data analysis. So many did not seem to understand that time was required to do the work properly - and were perplexed when I tried to explain.
Edit to explain why I felt the need to explain, this reason I would imagine is true for many - friends and family, people that you respect, may wonder why am I seem to be ignoring them, why am I 'obsessing' over this project, why did I decline the invitation to wherever. They may worry that we are 'hiding' behind the study. They question why we spend so much time on our research, often not due to any jealousy, but not understanding the time commitment needed for research.
I am **not** after opinions, but are asking what are some strategies that can help educate people of the time required to perform PhD research, particularly for part time PhD students working in an unrelated field?<issue_comment>username_1: I often draw parallels to elite athletes since most people easily realize that athletes need to train and spend much time getting to where they are (and they usually also have some talent for their sport). The point is that to become good one has to spend lots of time and energy training. How easy it will be is unique to each person. Hence, it is also difficult to say how much time and effort each person needs to complete a PhD. Not that one has to be the best, but one has to be good enough to be at the top. Another aspect that I find useful in the parallel is that athletes usually love what they do, and it is an internal force that drives them. I sincerely believe that some such drive is necessary to complete a PhD without having to torment yourself too much.
When trying to explain the time perspective to prospective students the parallel might not be enough and it is usually difficult to make people realize the interest driven part. This is, in my case, due to the fact that people decide on trying to go for a Phd for many different reasons other than just a genuine interest in the subject. I will add that I do not mean such a drive is the only way through but it certainly helps.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Okay, I think I get it now. "Science" as it is actually practiced is not well understood by non-scientists. I.e., experiments and analysis takes a lot of time, and a lot of hard work that sometimes must happen in long, solitary periods. [Popular media](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AP5Cc3lm5Q) gets it wrong all the time, which doesn't help things. Science does not ([generally](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9769/can-one-excel-in-graduate-post-graduate-school-with-a-demanding-family-life/9776#9776)) follow a 9-5 work schedule, and if you're trying to shoe-horn your research activities into an already full schedule (be it another job, or family/friend considerations), you're even more prone to non-regular work hours.
There are a number of ways you could have a conversation with friends and family about the amount of work necessary for your studies and research. You could start by sending a draft of your 100+ page dissertation and saying, "Look what I've been working on!" After about three pages, their eyes will glaze over and they'll realize how intricate it is.
You could certainly invite someone into the lab (if one exists), but you might just end up boring them without the contextual background necessary to see what has to happen to get your research done. However, you can be honest by pointing out the number of hours you stared at and tweaked an experiment, or the number of hours it took you to analyze the data.
You could use other famous examples from science and engineering, starting with the scientists who spent many years working on ideas (Galileo, Newton, Einstein, etc.) before publishing them, and peppering the discussion with the standard epigrams:
>
> [In the fields of observation chance favors only the prepared mind.](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Louis_Pasteur)
>
>
> [Genius is one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration.](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison)
>
>
>
When a friend of mine was writing her PhD in history at Harvard, she had stacks and stacks and *stacks* of library books in her foyer (it was probably a fire hazard), and there was no doubt in anyone's mind that her long hours working were of necessity.
One thing you might also consider (esp. for friends and family) is to come at the issue from a different angle: be honest about your work, but also be honest that you want to spend time with everyone, and you'll do your best to work into their schedule. Set aside time that will be explicitly for them (and without work), and do your best to meet those obligations. The time you spend on your research won't get as much vitriol if you're willing to make some effort (even if it is minor) to spend time with others.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It doesn't have to be a Phd you are studying for. I had similar problems just doing an undergraduate degree. I'm what you call a mature student and my mother cannot for the life of her, understand why I wanted the education I wasn't able to get when younger.
She was not amused when it was explained that I had yet another essay to complete and couldn't just drop everything to attend something or other. So it is often not about you at all, its about them and their need of you. Some of the other students faced even more difficulties, especially the women with husbands and children. So, I fear you will just have to carry on and take it on the chin but for heavens sake, don't give it up. Good luck.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As noted in other answers, the general public simply does not understand the level of effort, over a substantial time period, necessary to produce new knowledge. Yes, the popular media have been very unhelpful, since it is more interesting to report on "geniuses" than on "hard work", obviously.
Of course, it is also completely unreasonable to imagine "(re-) educating" people about scientific/engineering processes. Rather, if one really wants to "reach" them, as is presumably the case with friends and family, some rhetorical devices seem necessary.
E.g., one can mention the thousands of people working over the last 100-200 years (or whatever timeframe you want to pick), especially the (figure out an impressive number) of documents produced in the last 20 years (or number of your choosing), and the necessity of \_catching\_up\_ and *adding* something to that.
Even though it is somewhat misleading, a recitation of the thousands of pages of pre-existing research reports and the difficulty of reading them gives a not-unreasonable "pop" idea of things.
That is, in contrast to the "pop" idea that "this one weird trick" [sic] solves problems, one must convey that extensive, time-consuming experimentation (even, truly, in "pure mathematics", where there is a tradition of pretending that we don't experiment... with ideas...?) is necessary to learn how to exclude plausible-but-failing possibilities. All the "worse" that other people have already looked at the first 1,000 more-accessible possibilities, so that a "newbie" is stuck with looking at far-less-obviously-accessible possibilities.
That is, in summary, an only-slightly-hyped-up description of "prior art", and the need to understand it before pretending to do something new and worthwhile, might "make an impression".
And, then, yes, "it's not a 9-to-5 job". E.g., it seems that a requirement for an academic scientist (and other academics) is a definite urge to work nearly to the exclusion of everything else, out of curiosity. If the academic topic is not one's "job", it'd seem that 80-hour work-weeks wouldn't be necessary... but the point is that most of the "prior art" was *produced* by such people, giving further (rhetorical, anecdotal) evidence to the idea that further progress will not be made "casually".
The conflict with "normal" human social activities is partly inescapable. It is truly unacceptable in various regards that one's "work" could conceivably have priority over social obligations. There's really no good way to explain how "it's ok" that one refuses invitations from family and friends, "to work". If it's your own choice, you've shown that you prefer work to friends and family. Whether or not that's the case (!), it's safer and less offensive to claim that external forces require you to spend the time... this, after the "complaint" that there's sooooo much to learn.
And, for perspective, we recall that very many people have unpleasant, pointless-seeming jobs, and no "second job/hobby" of any interest to turn to. Indeed, sometimes people take offense at one's enthusiasm or dedication to one's work (whether it's the paying job or the second one). An enviable luxury, etc.
So, no way around it, a tricky thing. White lies may be optimal on many occasions...
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/29 | 935 | 4,049 | <issue_start>username_0: In order to write a lit review from papers which I already have, should I read all those papers deeply and summarize them, or can I just skim and scan and just pick the information that I need to connect it with other information available in another paper?
**The main point that I want to understand**, do I have to understand the paper fully that I took some things to write from? For example, If I found a paragraph in a paper and it is good to include in one of the themes, then do I have to understand that paper fully?<issue_comment>username_1: If the paper you are reading is familiar material, it might be easy to assimilate the data from scanning. If it is news to you, you may have to go slower. The answer is, read as fast or slow as you have to in order to actually understand the material.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It really depends on your level of understanding in the specific topic you are researching. Having said that, it does not hurt (and more likely benefit) you to read each article carefully - taking notes of the important points, terminology, equations and any other relevant aspect of the paper.
One effective means that I have found (has worked well for me), is to paraphrase these key points as you go, [this resource about paraphrasing and summarising may be of help.](http://www.monash.edu.au/lls/llonline/writing/information-technology/sources/2.5.3.xml)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **Short answer** Probably not.
In order to write an effective literature review, you should definitely understand the material. So...
>
>
> >
> > [D]o I have to understand the paper fully that I took some things to write from? For example, If I found a paragraph in a paper and it is good in include in one of the themes, then do I have to understand that paper fully?
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
I would say that you may not need to understand the entire paper completely, **but** you should be sure that you understand the primary points well enough to be absolutely sure that you are **not taking the quote/paraphrase out of context.** Again, as other replies point out, whether you can determine this from skimming will depend on your current level of understanding of the subject. I assume you have already read these papers, and have a fair knowledge of the content; however, I would still advise you to read carefully anything you will be quoting--this will improve the quality of the lit review you are writing (and anyway it is never fun to be called out for having misrepresented someone's paper!). Bottom line, unless you know the subject--and the relevant papers--very well, you will probably be better off with reading thoroughly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I would add to the above answers that it also depends on what exactly you want to cite. Is it the description of methods, results, conclusions or general discussion or something else? I can think of a couple of scenarios that I came across:
1. I was writing about some algorithm on networks and cited a physics paper that used similar approach. I only skimmed the paper as just wanted to highlight that the method is widely used in various fields in various contexts.
2. I cited two papers that conducted similar studies but obtained opposing results. Here I read the papers thoroughly, especially methods section, to pick out the differences and try to understand what was the cause of such discrepancies.
3. I cited some general discussion and future hypotheses to test from one review paper. I liked the reasoning of the guy and I knew that he is one of the leading scientists in the field. I did not hesitate to cite his opinion because I had read a couple of his previous papers and knew his contribution to the field. I would probably be careful with citing opinions/conclusions from some obscure sources. If you don't know what brought the author to conclude something, you are risking that you cherry-pick nice sentences out of context (as already mentioned in previous answers).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/29 | 918 | 3,913 | <issue_start>username_0: I am noticing that many graduate applications require a "primary spoken language" and "other spoken language".
For the "other spoken language", do they mean you must be proficient in writing, speaking, and reading? What if you can only do one (and you may not even be great at it...)? Does that count?
**EDIT** What if I do not know any of the jargons used in my study in that language?<issue_comment>username_1: If the paper you are reading is familiar material, it might be easy to assimilate the data from scanning. If it is news to you, you may have to go slower. The answer is, read as fast or slow as you have to in order to actually understand the material.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It really depends on your level of understanding in the specific topic you are researching. Having said that, it does not hurt (and more likely benefit) you to read each article carefully - taking notes of the important points, terminology, equations and any other relevant aspect of the paper.
One effective means that I have found (has worked well for me), is to paraphrase these key points as you go, [this resource about paraphrasing and summarising may be of help.](http://www.monash.edu.au/lls/llonline/writing/information-technology/sources/2.5.3.xml)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **Short answer** Probably not.
In order to write an effective literature review, you should definitely understand the material. So...
>
>
> >
> > [D]o I have to understand the paper fully that I took some things to write from? For example, If I found a paragraph in a paper and it is good in include in one of the themes, then do I have to understand that paper fully?
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
I would say that you may not need to understand the entire paper completely, **but** you should be sure that you understand the primary points well enough to be absolutely sure that you are **not taking the quote/paraphrase out of context.** Again, as other replies point out, whether you can determine this from skimming will depend on your current level of understanding of the subject. I assume you have already read these papers, and have a fair knowledge of the content; however, I would still advise you to read carefully anything you will be quoting--this will improve the quality of the lit review you are writing (and anyway it is never fun to be called out for having misrepresented someone's paper!). Bottom line, unless you know the subject--and the relevant papers--very well, you will probably be better off with reading thoroughly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I would add to the above answers that it also depends on what exactly you want to cite. Is it the description of methods, results, conclusions or general discussion or something else? I can think of a couple of scenarios that I came across:
1. I was writing about some algorithm on networks and cited a physics paper that used similar approach. I only skimmed the paper as just wanted to highlight that the method is widely used in various fields in various contexts.
2. I cited two papers that conducted similar studies but obtained opposing results. Here I read the papers thoroughly, especially methods section, to pick out the differences and try to understand what was the cause of such discrepancies.
3. I cited some general discussion and future hypotheses to test from one review paper. I liked the reasoning of the guy and I knew that he is one of the leading scientists in the field. I did not hesitate to cite his opinion because I had read a couple of his previous papers and knew his contribution to the field. I would probably be careful with citing opinions/conclusions from some obscure sources. If you don't know what brought the author to conclude something, you are risking that you cherry-pick nice sentences out of context (as already mentioned in previous answers).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/30 | 554 | 2,478 | <issue_start>username_0: When a junior student is doing research independently (for example theoretical), does s/he need official permission to publish a research article? In the article, s/he needs to introduce his/her affiliation. Normally, this affiliation is connected with the research funding.
Does studentship qualify him/her to use the university name as his own official affiliation, even if this affiliation has no connection with this independent research project?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. First, check if your university has rules/policies/guidelines in place. If so, follow them.
2. Otherwise, use your university name as affiliation. No need to ask them. (Trust me, they are much more worried about people *forgetting* to use the affiliation, than the other way around!)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Basically affiliation is valid for employes to an organisation. Graduate students will belong to that category as well since their degree depends on producing publishable materials. Undergraduate students are not automatically entitled to use an affiliation. I do not think this introduces any majpor hurdles. You need to talk to the department chair or have some faculty member do so to get the permission to use the affiliation. I am assuming such affiliaiton will not need decisions higher up in the university bureaucracy; you need to find out, of course.
Affiliation will make publication easier than using a private address so getting to use an affiliation provides a stamp of approval with it which may work to your advantage. So, if I understand your final question right, there does not have to be any connection between the research you do and the affiliation. The affiliation simply means that the department/university supports your publication and thereby your efforts in research.
In [this example](http://policy.umn.edu/Policies/Operations/OPMisc/BRANDING.html) it is evident that there is a responsibility associated with using the university name (for example as affiliation). It is clear that the affiliation cannot be used "as you wish" without possible repercusions, hence asking for permission is a natural first step. Particularly when the work is not done at the university.
Universities have been very relaxed about "brandinG" but trust me, they are becoming increasingly watchful. This is evident by studying the visual identity and similar branding policies of many respectable universities.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/30 | 338 | 1,535 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose we design a prototype for a new product that is indeed novel.
Would writing a paper on such a thing be useful as mostly the papers talk about new algorithms or their upgrades or some new theory ?
I am talking about just a new product that does something better than the existing ones but uses old algorithms and research.<issue_comment>username_1: This is something that I have been doing. If I understand your question correctly, you are looking at a new product using existing algorithms and techniques. If this is the case, the answer is yes: many journals will welcome this, as I have found. I have also taken an existing technology, aspects of existing algorithms, based on existing research and developed a brand new technique.
A couple of caveats though:
* You will need to make the specific context to which it will be used crystal clear, this must be the focus.
* You must give full credit for the prior information and techniques.
* You must fully justify why such an altered technique is useful, what are the implications and benefits of such a product.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: So basically you are finding a new (and maybe promising) *application* to an existing technique **X**. If that's the case then yes. You are showing a new perspective of **X** applicability to real domains.
This is specially important when the applicability of **X** is questionable (i.e. **X** literature lacks real applications for it), then definitely this seems strong findings.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/30 | 542 | 2,357 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a first time faculty member straight out of grad school and I have been installed as a director for a "learning center". We hire undergraduate and graduate student "coaches" in the learning center to help students who have trouble understanding concepts in physics or math.
Now, I have interviewed students for the "coach" position and I have to have 10 of them sign a contract. How do I do this? I am assuming that I cannot have all of them sit in a circle and sign the contract? Should I ask them to come to my table one at a time and read and sign the contract with them?
I am unsure if this is really a "question" here and please feel free to re-assign it if it isn't.<issue_comment>username_1: As with any contract, especially with people who have likely never signed an employment contract before, the best thing is to to give them a copy (hard or soft) so they can review it with someone they trust. Then tell them to bring it back in on/by a certain date.
It is better if they sign in front of you. Then you sign and give them a copy immediately.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with username_1's answer and want to add to it.
Since you have ten of them signing the same contract, there is nothing wrong with first explaining the contract to them as a group. Then, they can ask questions and benefit from the questions each of them asks. Tell them that they have until X date and Y time to sign the contract, that they have to sign it in front of you, and that they should feel free to ask you additional questions in private in case they did not want to ask a sensitive question at the group setting.
Since these ten people will be presumably working together at the same job, there is nothing unethical about them all knowing that they have exactly the same contract.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If this is a big university, employment contracts should be administered through HR. There would very likely be a web app that is supposed to be used. Check with HR before you do anything. Ask them if it needs to be checked with university council. These are the people who will give you a hard time if something goes wrong.
You and the student workers should not be interested in the details of the contract and how it's signed. Use normal management skills.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/31 | 258 | 1,092 | <issue_start>username_0: Here is my case, before I studied my master´s degree I managed to write a research paper jointly with a Professor (not from my university) on databases. After that I pursue my master´s degree in CS, but on neural networks rather than databases. The thing is that I would like to do my PhD in databases with the professor I wrote the research paper with. Do you think that I can have problems with the admission committee? I would not like to go to study a PhD without any financial support at all.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see why there should be any problem with this whatsoever. It is quite common for students to move around topics, particularly if you are switching between programs or universities. If everybody agrees that you are a good candidate for the position in question, then it shouldn't really matter too much that the topic is not an exact match.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is possible. As long as your professor agrees. You have to work 4 years+ on the topic so it should be something that you are passionate about.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/31 | 1,907 | 7,895 | <issue_start>username_0: For all that is said about the *wealth* of information that is freely available on the internet, the fact is that most of it is incomplete, dumbed down, lacking in context or downright wrong.
Individuals spend the best part of 20 years completely oblivious to the existence of journals and the process of peer review and even then we'd be lucky if 10% of those with access to journals (usually through an institution) actually bother to invest in them.
Granted that some journals will be totally inaccessible to those without a solid background in some particular field but by and large exposure is a good thing and there are many areas of research where individuals will benefit directly from having read these.
**Where does this come from?**
I decided I wanted to read *Popular Politics in the Late Medieval City: York and Bruge* in The English Historical Review today, mainly because it looks interesting and I'm hoping to invest more time into learning about British and European History. Incidentally I also wouldn't mind tucking into *Super Stable Clocks*, Nature 500, 505 (29 August 2013) and a number of data analysis and big data journals in order to advance my career.
Now, not being affiliated with an institution that subscribes to these journals means that I would typically have to pay between £5 ($10) and £15 ($25) per article that I read... I could probably spend £100 just to pass an hour by.
**Question**
* What's being done to address the lockdown on 'higher' education material? I've noticed that the Directory of Open Access Journals publishes open articles and other firms are doing similar, mainly with journals in new fields?
* How could I, as an individual outside of an institution, gain journal access without it costing so much money?<issue_comment>username_1: As a preamble: maintaining a publishing system has a cost. You may shift it to the authors, or to the reader, or have it financed directly by governments or supranational organizations, but there will always be a cost. It's true that in the current system, with a mixture of private publishers and non-profit ones (academies, learned societies, some well-administered professional societies), some players may be making a bit more money than we wish. Academic publishing has not yet fully adapted to the digital age, and it will get leaner by doing so. However, we have to recognize that this will always have a cost.
Now, answering your first question: there is a growing trend to go towards **open access journals** (and open access options in many other journals), which shift the cost onto the authors. Moreover, some funding agencies (for example NIH) have a [**public access policy**](http://publicaccess.nih.gov), meaning that they ensure that publications stemming from research they fund are publicly accessible in some form (in the case of NIH, the final version of the preprint must be made available on PubMed). Now, different fields of research are moving toward this new paradigm at various speed (biology is faster, chemistry is not moving at all). In the current state of things, it must be noted that apart from a few renowned exceptions ([PLOS One](http://www.plosone.org), for example), most open access journals are far from prestigious.
In some fields, the publication system has hoped earlier on the digital bandwagon, and it is routine for authors to publish only preprints of their work (and publishers have copyright transfer terms allowing it). For example, in mathematics and physics, [arXiv.org](http://arxiv.org) is a very popular source of preprints. In some other fields, most journals don't allow preprints to be posted at all…
---
Regarding your second question, there are a few options for you to gain access to some paywalled journals:
* Public library: if you live in a big city, the local public library likely subscribes to a few major scientific journals: *Nature*, *Science*, things like that.
* Get a guest reader status at the closest university: some institutions allow access to outsiders in their library, either by not actually checking who gets in (as long as you behave), or in some cases by actually having an official “guest reader” status (which may require some paperwork or approval).
* Membership in a professional society: individual membership in the [American Chemical Society](http://www.acs.org) gives you access to their journals at a rather decent price.
* Writing to the authors: if you see a paper you don't have access to, just write to the authors asking for a PDF.
* [Reddit Scholar](http://www.reddit.com/r/Scholar) :)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me add a few point to @username_1's excellent answer.
I'm going to give country-specific points for **Germany**. However, you may find similar structures/possibilities in your country.
>
> What's being done to address the lockdown on 'higher' education material? I've noticed that the Directory of Open Access Journals publishes open articles and other firms are doing similar, mainly with journals in new fields?
>
>
>
* One thing that changes right now is that authors will retain a right for secondary publication after an embargo period of 1 year for work that was paid for mainly by public funding.
This will give additional freedom on the site of the authors to make their manuscripts available.
* The [DFG](http://dfg.de/) has a [program where they provide Germany-wide access to a number of journals](http://www.nationallizenzen.de/). This is available also for private persons (you need to be in Germany though).
>
> How could I, as an individual outside of an institution, gain journal access without it costing so much money?
>
>
>
* Sign up for the [DFG Nationallizenzen](http://www.nationallizenzen.de/)
* As universities here are usually owned by the state, their libraries are usually public. Terms for getting a library card vary (from everyone to you need to be either associated with the university or have your main residence in the respective Land).
* I found that libraries of research institutes often allow you to go there as guest reader.
* (Side note, the [electronic journal database](http://dispatch.opac.d-nb.de/DB=1.1/) allows you to check which libraries have the journal (year) in question. The data base covers also major research institutions like the Max-Planck/Fraunhofer/Leibniz institutes)
---
Update
* Typically, the publicly accessibe information about a paywalled paper includes contact information to the corresponding author. You can email them and nicely ask for the manuscript. In many legislations getting a copy for private use is covered by fair use (e.g. in Germany [§53 UrhG](http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/urhg/__53.html) says that you are allowed to copy or obtain a copy of journal articles for private use).
* Your local library may be able to obtain a copy for you through inter-library loan and/or document delivery services like [subito](http://www.subito-doc.de). You'll have to pay for this, but the fees are often substantially lower than the direct subscription fees you cite.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Free access to costly journals and their articles are championed by dedicated hacktivists like <NAME> and <NAME>.
As an individual outside an institution you can usually gain journal access through Alexandra's service.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Depending on the field, their may be a pre-print server available where authors upload their papers before submission. Authors will usually upload a copy either before the refereeing process starts or a final copy, with the changes made during the referee process but without the journal's final formatting. So they can be as good as the final version from a journal, but with the caveat that they may not have been fully peer reviewed yet (or at all).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/31 | 812 | 3,346 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm not native speaker and I'm doing a lit review at the moment. My Question is it normal to spend a whole day reading and writing about one paper? So I read the paper deeply and then write about it. The process takes more than 6 hours. Is that normal or should I try to double that?<issue_comment>username_1: Reading efficiently takes practise. I think it is reasonable to spend such time on a paper in the beginning. I am sure the speed will improve over time. that said, however, you probably need to check on how you read. It is normally not necessary to read every word in a paper. There are parts that you could skim to get an idea of what is going on and then focus on the stuff your really need to know. You should start making notes about the parts you skim so that you easily see if you have read it in detail later on, and if need be return to it at a later stage. In the end you will get more skilled in reading efficiently and the key lies in evaluating what is key and what is not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Just to expand on Peter's answer, there is a saying on the University of Canberra's [Academic Skills Centre: Reading and Remembering](http://www.canberra.edu.au/studyskills/learning/reading) regarding academic papers:
>
> Academic material is not meant to be read.
>
>
> It is meant to be ransacked and pillaged for essential content.
>
>
>
Particularly, some of their advice for reading academic texts may be of help in helping you with the time taken to read and summarise the texts that you have, specifically before you start reading, have a question already that you want answered and very importantly, to optimise your time in reading academic papers:
>
> If there is a summary, a conclusion, a set of sub-headings, or an abstract, read that first, because it will give you a map of what the text contains. You can then deal with the text structurally, looking for particular points, not just reading ‘blind’ and so easily getting lost.
>
>
>
I always have a subject-based dictionary on hand as well.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I disagree that academic papers are not meant to be read (although many are unfortunately written that way...). But usually not every part of every paper is equally relevant for *your* work.
So how long reading and digesting a paper does/should/can sensibly take depends on
* how familiar you are with the field
* how much/which parts of the paper are relevant for your research
* the kind of relevant information: is it a bunch of facts that you need (prevalence of disease X was fount to be Y in population P - here a day would be very long) or do you need to understand a method including what the idea is behind, what assumptions are made, what caveats exist, how it behaves, and so on (a day would be very fast)?
* (how familiar you are with the language).
As to the actual reading skills, I like to mark important parts, and that will later on also tell me what parts I read thoroughly and what parts I just skimmed. And, while I also go over abstract and conclusions first, I'm a bit wary of accepting statements from there *only*: often, the detailed discussion or the description of the experiments give (explicitly or implicitly) important limitations. So that may need double-checking.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/01 | 2,062 | 8,794 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a final year PhD in UK in a scientific discipline and I am writing my thesis. I have already published 2 journal papers and I have submitted 2 more papers for publications. My department does not allow a "publications-based" thesis so I need to write a thesis in the context of a book etc.
As I write my thesis in a couple of places, especially in the literature review, I tend to reuse sentences from my publications. I try to restate them a bit, maybe change some words for their synonyms etc. but it is practically me writing about what I wrote before. It goes without saying that I cite/quote me at the end of a passage if I say something non-obvious (I found that slightly funny. :) ). The problem is that occasionally I am just explaining for instance how a certain estimation technique works; in that case I cite the original authors and not myself. The syntax in those occasions though is practically the same as the original passage I used in my publication; as I have explained it once and was consider good, I find no reason to reinvent myself (I do a mild rewording as I mentioned but that is quite insignificant). Same things goes for listings. I do cite my paper in the beginning of a big list as the list's source but the list itself is almost identical as the one in "my" paper; in those cases I don't use quotations, just attribution "[]".
Is there an obvious guideline? The basic definition of plagiarism "*reproducing the work of another person's as your own*" is not (directly) applicable to me because I am the other person (almost \*); if I am using other people's work I do cite them but I don't cite myself, citing them, in quotation marks!
I am a bit "fuzzy" about how not to plagiarize myself in my thesis (I have had no problem regarding my journal publications).
(\* In all publications mentioned I am the first -but not sole- author.)<issue_comment>username_1: Even if your department does not allow a "stapler" thesis, it is entirely reasonable to expect that you should be able to freely use this material in a thesis. In general, I would expect that you would have to include a copyright statement similar in form to hose that would be used were you to copy the entire paper outright.
To cover against charges of plagiarism, I would simply acknowledge something like "Some passages have been quoted verbatim from the following sources," and list them. Also, when you reuse figures, I'd include the "reprinted with permission" tag.
Finally, ask your advisor or other members of your department for guidance! Since you're not the only person subject to this restriction, they've gone through this situation before, and can provide you with information on how former students have handled this.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The papers you have published and that my be under review in a journal require permission to rproduce. It is therefore necessary to write to the journals and ask for permission to reproduce the contents in a thesis. I have heard of journals that refuse but they are very few. What you should remember, however, is that the copyright usually covers the final product or versions of the manuscript that have been altered as a result of work done within the journal, in other words gone through or in some stage of review. It would therefore be safe to reproduce your original submitted manuscript. You will need to acknowledge the permissions in your thesis (e.g. if you include a list of published paers and manuscripts in prep.).
All this may seem complicated but I have not experienced any publisher that has refused reproduction (either of a reprint or the text itself) in a thesis. After all, publishers live off of scientists writing papers and a PhD candidate (and scientists involved with her/him) is another "customer" to put it bluntly. It would therefore potentially be pretty self-destructive to refuse use of materials for a thesis with very limited distrubution.
Under any circumstances, please contact publishersand tell them what you intend to do andaskfor permission. Also check on the copyrights (which you usually sign at some point during the publication process. It is "better safe that sorry" that applies. And, I repeat, I would be surprised if you are given a no.
EDIT: A good way to find out what "your" journal adheres to is ot use the [SHERPA/RoMEO site](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php?la=en&fIDnum=%7C&mode=simple) classification for self-archiving. They use a four part classification as follows:
>
> green - can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF
>
>
> blue - can archive post-print (i.e. final draft post-refereeing) or publisher's version/PDF
>
>
> yellow - can archive pre-print (i.e. pre-refereeing)
>
>
> white - archiving not formally supported
>
>
>
The level or archiving indcates what also falls under the copyright agreement of each journal and hence also what you may be free to reproduce in a thesis, and what you are not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I use sentences like "The results described in this chapter have been published as [xx]." or "This chapter gives the argumentation published in [yy]".
However, my primary reason for this is less concern about self-plagiarism (papes and thesis are in different languages) than pointing out that these findings/developments have passed peer-review during a publication process. But if you give the appropriate citations also to your paper, I think it is important to make it easy for the reader to see whether the citation is your contribution or not.
---
slightly off-topic: I even go one step further and at the very beginning (in a section about abbreviations, symbols and conventions) explain that papers [1 - x] were written in direct connection with the thesis, and are put to the front of the literature list to allow the reader to easily detect my contributions to the field. You could also solve this by giving reference lists "my contributions" and "other people's contributions" (similar to how some fields give primary literature lists and secondary literature lists).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The letter of the copyright law is extremely weird in such cases (formally you may need to request a permission from the journal editor to reproduce something, especially a picture, you made and submitted there yourself a few years ago, if you have assigned copyrights-some journals require copyright transfer, some do not). However, the spirit of the law is that you are free to use your own work several times *even if you assigned your copyright away* as long as you clearly state that it is not the first time you present (this is **not** required if you both retain all the rights and no originality expected) it and that the previous publications are such and such. To be on the safe side, write to the editors and request a permission to reprint (it is automatic unless the editor is an evil villain having personal grudge against you). However anyone trying to accuse you of using your own work without his permission will make such a fool of himself in the scientific world that his reputation there will plummet to negative infinity, so I don't think the chances of trouble are above those that some crank will accuse you of plagiarizing his work or that the outcome of the accusation, if it occurs, will be essentially different.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Are your papers really your own papers, or maybe you have some coauthors? That's when it becomes complicated. It will be hard to claim that the text you copied is *exclusively* your own work when the original paper is drafted and signed off by other people. On the other hand the thesis should be your own work exclusively.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: If you quote from your own paper, you may have to justify to the degrees committee how much of the paper was your work. If you are first author, it should be no problem, otherwise can you put a figure on what percentage was your own work ? Even if not all your own work, if the actual research was done by you, it should be possible to put a different slant on it. Having your ideas published already helps with the defence, as you can demonstrate successful peer review
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Talk to your advisor/sponsor of your thesis!!!
Read your school's and department's policy of plagiarism. Some will include "self-pgagiarism" some don't.
It is all up to the advisor and school. If they accept it, then it is fine. If they do not accept it, it is not fine.
If you are the copyright holder (or have rights), then there is no legal issue. Even if you aren't the holder, there are provisions in the law for academic references.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/01 | 1,547 | 5,973 | <issue_start>username_0: When writing letter to an academic professor (not necessarily from student to professor), what is the appropriate way to address his/her title?
I have seen in letters using
`Dear Prof. X` even when the addressee is not a full professor
`Dear Dr. X` though, knowing that the addressee is a full professor
`Dear Mr/Mrs X` though, knowing that s/he has an academic title<issue_comment>username_1: This depends on a number of factors, not limited to the country the professor is in, the actual title, the type of correspondence (formal/informal), and the professor's personal preference. In the U.S. in computer science, for instance, virtually everyone goes by first names, almost regardless of university affiliation or rank.
I would avoid Mr./Ms. if you know there is an academic title (and these days, unless you have demonstrable evidence that the person prefers it, *never* Mrs.). I happen to prefer people use my first name, but I have to admit that it does tweak me a little bit if someone who should know better calls me "Mr." instead of "Dr." (["I didn't spend six years in evil medical school to be called 'Mister', thank you very much!"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Evil)) I shake my head whenever I get an email from my PhD alma matter when they refer to me as "Mr." -- of all the places or people in the world that should get this right, they don't!
If you're in a country where it seems to matter (Germany comes to mind), call the person's office and ask explicitly (or figure it out by going to the professor's web site or the school site). Otherwise, I suggest that for a formal never-been-introduced letter you should use either "Dr." (if applicable) or "Professor" (for all ranks of professor), or if you're in a field where first names are standard, go with that. For unofficial correspondence, you will be safe with the formal titles, but shouldn't have a problem with a first name.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The appropriate way to address someone is with their proper title. In your question, it seems you know what the title should/should not be. If you know, use it. If you don't know, it's generally safer to err on the side of formality.
While I personally prefer (and request) everyone to refer to me by my given name, I do feel it a little strange when someone I do not know / have never met addresses me in writing by my given name. Perhaps I am old fashioned but I expect introductions to be formal (and better to be too formal than too familiar) and then quickly get to preferred ways of addressing (i.e., to use my given name).
When corresponding (in writing or electronically) I would look to the signature. If they wrote:
```
Dear <NAME>:
Blah blah blah
Sincerely,
John
-----
Dr. <NAME>
Agri-science Department
University of Whatchamacallit
```
Then I would write back
```
Dear John:
Thank you for your letter. Blah blah blah.
Sincerely,
Joe
```
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is a sticky question. Preferences for academic titles varies between countries, institutions and individuals.
In the US, any individual employed in an instructional capacity by an institution of higher education can be properly addressed as "Professor Smith", even if his or her official title is "Assistant Professor", "Lecturer", "Adjunct Instructor", etc. Moreover, any individual holding a doctoral degree can be addressed as "Dr. Smith".
Of course, these two cases often overlap, and you are left to decide whether to use "Professor" or "Dr.". The pattern I've observed is that at institutions where only some of the faculty have doctorates, those who do are more likely to prefer "Dr."; whereas at places where almost everyone has a doctorate, they will all prefer "Professor".
I think the safest default, and the one I most commonly see, is
>
> Dear Professor Smith,
>
>
>
I would not abbreviate "Professor" as "Prof.". It sounds too much like an annoying student saying "Hiya, prof!"
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Before writing be aware about: the context- formal vs informal (friend or someone you have been in touch long ago vs cover letter for a journal); In the latter context you always should address the person in cause by the academic position: Professor (be sure about his/her position- in the web - it is not difficult).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I will address Dr. X (if I know that my professor is holds a doctoral degree) and
I will address Professor X (if I am not sure that he is holding doctoral degree).
Not all professors hold doctoral degree I guess.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: I am from Russian culture where the word "professor" is only used with PhDs. Many years ago (in 1998), in USA, I was hired at a community college as an Adjunct Instructor to teach a class. I had only a Bachelor's degree at the time. Every time, when I had college correspondence where they addressed me "Professor", I felt that I did not deserve that title. Later, I knew that it was quite a common way to address college instructors.
Now, I have had Master's degree for 18 years. It still doesn't feel right if they call me Professor. I don't think it is a commonly used title anymore, though. When it is appropriate, in correspondence, I would put "M.Ed." after my name, like when writing to a university with an inquiry.
I am not very excited with being addressed Ms., however there is no other way, so it is as it is. When I address someone, and I know he or she has a PhD, I will always address them Dr. (last name). PhD is the highest educational degree and a big personal merit - it has to be recognized and observed in a title.
As for the "du/Sie" in German, or "ты/Вы" in Russian - there are no guesses, grey areas, or "maybe". You call du/ты only your husband, wife, close friend or a child. All other unknown people in formal environment, business people you call only the polite Sie/Вы.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/01 | 347 | 1,378 | <issue_start>username_0: As a PhD student who starts his last year, I will soon start to look for post-docs. In this process, I will update my Curriculum Vitae. But as a title of this CV should I put "PhD in XXXXXX" or "PhD Student in XXXXXX" ?<issue_comment>username_1: Until you have your PhD officially, your CV should list "PhD Candidate" or "PhD Student," depending on your proper status. In your education section, you should list the month you expect to graduate (and you should say "(expected)" or similar next to the date).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: (+1) to username_1's answer. In addition to that two points:
1. If you claimed to have a PhD (at the time of application) and you don't officially have the degree one can claim you are making a "false statement" and disbar you from the selection process.
2. [Assuming you want to finish your PhD first and then take up a job] You want your possible employer to consider you for a position after you finish your PhD. Saying you are a "PhD" already means you are ready for immediately employment. Furthermore you might want to have you employer know you might need a couple of days off for your viva, etc. Given that this might take place in the first couple of months of your employment and probably you are not allowed "vacation-time" yet, it is good to let them now early on.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/01 | 1,496 | 6,195 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a TA for a freshman calculus class, and I've just finished grading the first homework set.
It's fairly clear that there has been some collaboration going on, which is disallowed in my institution. For instance, a pair of students both put exactly the same (very) incorrect solution to a trig problem, and a group of four whose work is next to each other in the pile (i.e. they sat near each other in recitation) have all made the same (more common) errors.
The course started last week and this was the students' first ever assignment: it was set on the second day of class and due on the fourth day of class.
I'm aware of what I *"should"* do, i.e. report it to the instructor and let him follow the necessary disciplinary procedures. But is this necessarily the right course of action? It would probably be just as beneficial to these kids' academic integrity in the long run to tell them I'm onto them and never to do it again, as it would be to have them officially disciplined. It's likely that many of these people (should but) don't know the policy on collaboration.
Advice would be greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I personally follow the rule "once is nothing, twice is a habit". I think a warning would be a good way to start. I do, however, think that it is still a good idea to run this by the instructor. I assume he/she is responsible for the course and the decision is up to him/her. You can explain your point of view and perhaps get some feedback on the matter. In addition, by taking up the discussion the problem is in th eopen and it makes it easier to catch repeat offenders. If you keep it secret, the culprits, in the worst case, can get by repeated cheating for each new teacher they encounter.
Cheating is an abomination but I think people are allowed to make mistakes. I also think most people learn from mistakes and will not easily do it again. But, it is necessary to make sure they understand their attempt has put them under scrutiny, that is probably "punishment" enough.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The course instructor is the person ultimately responsible for all aspects of the class, including proper implementation of departmental and university policies. As a TA, it is not your role to decide which policies should be followed and which can be ignored. Therefore, regardless of your personal feelings, you should report any issues that arise to the instructor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As others have said, it's important that the instructor know about this. It is ultimately her responsibility to handle the situation, and your job is to make sure she has the information she needs.
Note, though, that just because you report it to the instructor doesn't necessarily mean that a formal disciplinary case will result. The instructor may decide to handle it informally, by having a talk with the students about appropriate and inappropriate collaboration, etc. Under the circumstances, I think that is what most people would do. Note that such a talk will probably have more of an impact on the students coming from the instructor instead of from you.
When you report the matter to the instructor, you can certainly point out that it is the students' first college assignment ever, and that you believe leniency is appropriate. But of course it is the instructor's decision in the end, and you will need to respect it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> there has been some collaboration going on, which is disallowed in my institution.
>
>
>
That's an inappropriate, and in fact somewhat preposterous, policy - as opposed to a "no copying other people's work" policy. Friends who study the same course will definitely collaborate, as in fact will be the case for random sets of people sitting around a desk in the library working on the same HW assignment.
>
> For instance, a pair of students both put exactly the same (very) incorrect solution to a trig problem,
>
>
>
If you believe one of them (never mind who) copied the other one's answer, I suggest (for lack of other policy):
1. Calling them both in.
2. Saying that you believe the answer was copied.
3. Offering them partial score for the problem - for a single person, to be divided between them as they see fit.
Be open to the possibility of them convincing you they didn't actually copy - that can happen (albeit rarely).
>
> And a group of four whose work is next to each other in the pile (i.e. they sat near each other in recitation) have all made the same (more common) errors.
>
>
>
If the wording of their submissions is not the same, I'd say I wouldn't lose sleep if I happened to convince myself they weren't really collaborating. If you know what I mean.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I believe that attempting to "handle this informally" (either by you or by the course instructor) is a bad idea.
Suppose a student does this offense in five different courses --- how can they be caught, if there is no communication between all the people involved? I believe that the proper course of action is to gather all irregularities in a single place and only then decide to be lenient and make first-time exceptions.
Letting them get off without reporting the issue only encourages them to do it again, because the next time the teacher will also think "it's their first offense, I'll just scold them and let them go".
Maybe in your university the disciplinary committee is seen as a last resource only for repeated offenders, but my opinion is that it should be the other way around. Strict teachers/TAs/invigilators and a lenient disciplinary committee is a strategy that works; lenient teachers/TAs/invigilators and a strict disciplinary committee is not.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Belt and suspenders.
1. (first) Talk to the kids and warn them.
-AND-
2. (second) Turn it in to the professor.
---
The reason being that schools are too LAX at investigating and prosecuting cheating, not too strong. By following course (1) in addition to course (2), you will at least have scared them a bit in case your prof wimps out on course 2.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/02 | 758 | 3,140 | <issue_start>username_0: When recruiting a student or post-doc to join my group, I trim down the list of applicants to a few names (3–5) by looking at CV's, research/teaching statements, existing publications, etc. Then, I will write to the mentors/professors/teachers/PhD advisors they listed in their list of references. I will also write to people who would be obvious choice as a reference, but aren't listed (fresh PhD who doesn't list his advisor, e.g.).
But **what do I ask these people?** My “standard” email would be something like:
>
> A former PhD student in your research group, Dr XXX, is applying for a position in my group. I wonder if you can give me a frank and confidential appraisal of his abilities and working style. How efficient is he, how quickly does he get things done? Is he able to communicate clearly, both in writing and orally, at a level you would expect from an good researcher? Does he interact well with other scientists, and work in a team?
>
>
>
At least one senior professor whom I sent such an email replied with a rather negative tone, saying *“Dr. XXX is a good scientist. I don't want to comment on your other questions.”* So, I am wondering: am I asking something I shouldn't? Or not in the right manner? **What should you ask of applicants' references?**<issue_comment>username_1: I can not see anything wrong with your questions at all. The professor who responded was probably pressed for time and felt that the quick summary would suffice (or they were having a bad day).
A couple of suggestions that I found were helpful when I was recruiting (albeit for a very different field) are:
* Write the questions so that they are a yes/no response.
* Set up a form where the response could just be selected.
Both of the above could have a box for optional additional comments.
This may help when they are pressed for time.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This may well depend on the country. In the US, being the litigious society that it is, there have been some people going after (legally and non-legally) people who give negative references. The candidate can have a stronger case if you are contacting someone they didn't approve. Now, there is freedom of speech and many, many other issues but simply put, some people in the US are scared to give candid assessments unless the assessment is positive.
So, I would tend to take the response you received as an *implied* negative but I would also have to keep an open mind that the referee simply did not want to answer and it might not reflect at all on the candidate.
As for the questions you ask, they seem quite standard and I don't believe anyone would be taken by surprise by them. However, they might not answer out of fear.
On a side note, when it comes to reference checking, you need to be sure you are getting are response from the proper person. Emails get hacked, fake accounts get created. I personally prefer doing my reference checking over the phone. This may also come across as a casual conversation without written evidence, making the referee more comfortable in being candid.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/02 | 853 | 4,002 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been working at an internship this past summer, and have applied a relatively standard technique (formal analysis of a security protocol) to a new (company internal) protocol. The company are pushing me to try and get the analysis published in an academic journal. The results do not highlight anything of particular note (a few caveats and gotchas but nothing with substantial security implications), but simply provide a rigorous mathematical underpinning for their security assertions.
Is this something publishable? I feel it isn't because the only new bit is the protocol which was simply given to me (and is being published in its own right). If not how do I make the results of the analysis available? Obviously the analysis needs to be made public and peer review is vital (because otherwise nobody would trust the security claims). Do I just put it on the company website and hope people in the know stumble across it? Can I email appropriate people and hope they look at it?<issue_comment>username_1: I would not recommend just putting it on the company's website or emailing it to anyone - if you sent it for publication, you would get:
* peer review and feedback of your algorithms, assumptions and conclusions.
* potentially, validation for your application of the underlying rigorous mathematics.
Potentially, you could publish as an internal company white-paper.
Unless this is proprietary information, I would suggest that if you have had the work verified internally, perhaps ask them to be a co-author.
Being published would bring it to the attention of those in the same field, potentially allowing more valuable feedback and allowing further development and research to be performed on the work you have completed.
Finally, why not get published recognition for your work.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You might consider sitting down with the people arguing for publication to try and understand why they consider it to be (potentially) publishable. It's possible, for example, that this new protocol addresses some issues not addressed by existing protocols; or addresses them more efficiently, or robustly, or is otherwise better in some way. In other words, it's possible that the protocol by itself (without your security analysis) is not publishable, and your security analysis by itself (without the novelties of the new protocol) is not publishable, but the two taken together may possibly be publishable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Obviously, without the details, I cannot say for sure, but I'd guess that *Yes, it is publishable*.
1. If more senior people think it is publishable (and it seems they have some experience with the scientific process even though this is an industry setting), then I tend to trust their judgement over yours. Often, when starting out, people tend to think that only major breakthroughs can be published; when it is very much not the case. This is a fairly common occurrence with young researchers: that they are too publication shy. (Others are too quick to think something is ready to be published).
2. It is obviously novel that this particular protocol has these properties even if the protocol itself has been published already (or is published separately) or the techniques to get to the result are also not novel. The question is whether it is interesting and non-obvious enough. If it is really a trivial thing, then it may not be worth publishing even if it novel. Alternatively, if the protocol itself is not very interesting or used, then it may be deemed *not interesting*, which is a different criterion from non-novel.
3. Given the above, the quality of the actual paper (as opposed to the raw analysis) will also need to be taken into account. It is more publishable if you can tie these particular results to a wider framework so as to locate it into a larger body of work. Again, it is hard to say for sure what this might be without knowing more details.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/02 | 2,384 | 9,891 | <issue_start>username_0: So I'm in the start of the process of applying to graduate school in Canada for a Masters in experimental physics, and am kind of overwhelmed and wondering about some things:
* I'm not from Canada and didn't study there, but have Canadian
citizenship. How much help, if any, will this be?
* I have somewhat bad overall grades in my undergrad degree (GPA just over 3/4 in a B.Sc(Hons) of 3 years normal undergrad + 1 year higher level courses & research, a high B+ in my uni's system, or 2nd class (1st division)), but am reasonably confident I can get a decent physics GRE score, having done okay on a practice test with no prep. How much would a good GRE score make up for poorish grades, and should I be limiting the schools I'm looking at to less respected ones based on this?
* Between 3rd and 4th years of my undergrad, I did a 10 week summer research project, as well as the whole year project in 4th year. Would this amount of research experience be typical for students from north American universities, or not?
I was looking primarily at the University of Toronto, U of Ottawa, and Simon Fraser University, and then just sort of started feeling like maybe I'm wasting my time & money even applying for them. Any help or suggestions are appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Let me address each of your questions.
* *How helpful is Canadian citizenship?* I'm guessing the answer is *maybe a little, but not a lot.* This is reasoning by analogy from the United States. I think typically applicants to grad schools in the U.S. are grouped by "where they went to undergrad" more than "where they have citizenship". I believe that often the standards for applicants from the U.S. may be at least *different* from those for internationals, but it's still a very competitive pool.
* *What about my GPA?* You're right that just over 3/4 is not great. In this case I would encourage you to take the GRE. Good GRE scores could help convince admissions committees that you know more than your grades show.
* *Does my research experience make me stand out?* Over the last 15 years or so, it's become much more common for grad school applicants in north america to have research experience. Over this time, we've seen a dramatic rise in the number of REUs (research experience for undergraduate). While it's by no means universal, I think you will *not stand out* for simply having a summer of research experience (or having completed a senior project). However, you could stand out based on what came out of that experience. Did you publish a paper? Give a presentation? Convince your mentor that you are the greatest thing since sliced bread? If so, then your application should highlight this aspect of your experience.
You asked about U of Toronto, SFU, and U of Ottawa. These schools are all pretty highly rated, especially the first two. I would guess that getting admitted to grad school there would be a stretch for you, but I don't say that to discourage you, just to encourage you to apply elsewhere, too. (Once you're putting together an application for one school, it's typically not too much work to apply to another school. You're right that it costs money, but it's a relatively small cost, when you consider the potential impact it could have on the rest of your life.) You may want to read an answer I wrote recently to the question: [How should I choose which graduate programs to apply to for the PhD?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11985/how-should-i-choose-which-graduate-programs-to-apply-to-for-the-phd/11987#11987)
Finally, let me comment on something you didn't ask about. **Your recommendation letter writers** can dramatically impact your chance of being admitted to a given school (and getting a desirable job later on). You should choose these people carefully, and do all you can to help them do their job well and on time. Remind them how they know you (whether it's through a class, or some extracurricular activity). Remind them of some of your accomplishments, and make sure to give them information about why you're applying. Speaking as someone who's written a number of recommendation letters, I am more comfortable writing a stronger letter when I feel like I know more about the students. Obviously, you have to have impressed me (or in your case, your letter writers) with your performance already. But that is only part of it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me start with the cheat code of Canadian admissions: in Canada, the professors in the department you apply to look at your application package and decide if they, personally, want to take you on as a student. This means that the decision is up to the professor: if they want you, you're in; if they don't, no GPA or GRE score can save you. So the secret is to decide who you want to work with at each school you're applying to, contact them, and convince them you would be an awesome student.
More specifically, for each university, look at its website to find out who works in the area you're interested in. Look for a list of research groups, such as [this one](http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/research) for Toronto. There will usually be a small number of professors per group; for each professor, get a list of their papers from their website. (If they don't have such a list, which sometimes happens, try Google Scholar, but make sure you're finding the right John Smith.) Pick the professor (or two) whose work seems most interesting to you and look at their papers in a little more depth. Don't worry if you don't fully understand them -- if you did, you wouldn't need to go to grad school -- but try to get the general idea of what the authors did and why. Then email the professor, briefly and politely covering the following points:
* Ask if they are accepting new students this year. (They may be low on grant money, going on sabbatical, etc.)
* Describe your research interests. If you wrote a paper or gave any talks about your research, mention it. Good communication skills are essential in research.
* Describe how your research interests fit with the professor's own interests (which you're familiar with from their papers).
* Reaffirm your interest in their work and show off your preparation by asking a question about one of their recent papers.
This is obviously time consuming, but it will greatly increase your chances of getting in. Most professors will be impressed by your interest and level of preparation. (I say "most" because there is one professor in my department who complains bitterly about getting emails from prospective students. You may encounter one of these, if you're unlucky, but the good news is that you wouldn't want to work with them anyway.) Use your institutional email address to minimize the chance of getting caught in spam filters.
One other point: in Canada, at least, many STEM fields have two kinds of master's degrees:
1. A terminal or coursework master's, which you get by taking a certain number of courses (8 in my department). You cannot enter a PhD program with this degree (hence *terminal*) and you usually don't get any funding. They can be often be completed in a year or sixteen months.
2. A non-terminal or thesis master's. These are intended to prepare you for a PhD, so you get the degree by taking a smaller number of courses (4 in my department) and writing a thesis. These are usually fully funded and take two years to complete.
Now, let me (finally) get to your actual questions.
* *How helpful is Canadian citizenship?* Somewhat helpful if you're applying for a non-terminal degree. I mentioned that these are usually funded, which means you get a stipend to cover your tuition and living expenses. However, the tuition you pay depends on your citizenship. Canadian universities are subsidized by the government, so citizens (taxpayers) are charged less than non-citizens. This in turn means that international students need a bigger stipend to cover their higher tuition. *All else being equal*, a professor will choose a cheaper citizen over an expensive international student. Being a citizen will also make it slightly easier to win scholarships, since many require citizenship or permanent residence.
* *How important are grades?* Most programs require a minimum undergraduate average of 78%/B+, so you're definitely borderline. Stay above the minimum if at all possible, and if there is an explanation for your grades (e.g. illness), include it in your application. If you did better in later years or courses that are core to your degree, mention that. Nobody cares if you failed underwater basket weaving, but if you failed calculus, you're in trouble. Finally, make contact with the professors you want to work with; if they want to accept you, grades will be much less of an issue.
* *How important are GRE scores?* Practically irrelevant. Students with a non-Canadian bachelor's are sometimes (not always) asked to submit scores for the general test, but as far as I know no program asks for scores on the subject tests.
* *How helpful is research experience?* All honours undergraduate programs in Canada require a thesis or a capstone project in the final year, so this isn't special. Fewer students do summer research, so that will help your application. The main issue is that "research experience" is a fairly meaningless term, so when you write your application letter, be as specific as possible about what you did and learned. "I have research experience" is not nearly as powerful as "I learned the standard technique for measuring XXX and applied it to a project exploring effect YYY. I then presented the results at conference ZZZ."
Final disclaimer: I'm in computer science at Waterloo. As far as I know, everything I said is true for physics departments and other universities, but I can't guarantee it.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/02 | 1,861 | 7,900 | <issue_start>username_0: Is the following common? An editor for a journal sends a paper out to, say, three or four referees. After getting the first two referee reports, the editor makes a decision and tells the third and fourth referees not to bother (so that they have potentially been wasting their time).
I can see this happening in some circumstances, e.g. if one referee finds a substantial error. However, I was asked to referee for one journal, and I get the impression (*which I have not yet confirmed*) that they typically send the paper out to lots of referees and take only the first couple of referee reports.
This practice, *if it is indeed what they are doing*, seems likely to produce quick turnaround times, but also seems disrespectful to referees who might be half-finished when they are told their reports are no longer needed.
Is this common? (In particular, in mathematics?)<issue_comment>username_1: An editor that cancels the review for a referee within the "normal" referee period will end up angering the referee and likely losing her as a reviewer for future papers. So this is a very unlikely practice.
Many journals will request multiple reviews (three is not uncommon for many of the journals I submit to), and will wait until the end of the standard review period to return any comments. If two of the three (or four) reviewers have returned reviews, and the others haven't, then the process can reasonably truncated at that point. (If you're behind schedule, you don't really have a right to complain in this case!)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this one will be very hard to answer with hard data. So, I'll just throw in some anecdotal evidence, along with a few things learnt from some editors that I know.
From a reviewer point of view, it has happened to me **exactly twice in a decade** (i.e. **very rarely**) to receive an editor's review saying “I've reached a decision based on input from other reviewers, and you do not need to review the manuscript”.
* The first time, the email came as my review was already overdue (a week or ten days), so I suppose the editor asked another reviewer when I didn't reply on time, and the new reviewer was fast to reply.
* The second time, it was sort of the other way around: I was asked to review a paper, then 5 days later the editor wrote, saying the reviewer who was uncommunicative had finally replied, and my review was no longer needed. He apologized profusely, and offered to actually wait for my review if I had started doing it and wanted to finish. (I was happy to let it go.)
I think for an editor, growing a list of trustworthy and willing reviewers is crucial. So, they simply cannot make them work for nothing! *(pun intended)*
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I know this question was asked and answered long ago, but I thought it might be useful to contribute some real data from an editor / program chair point of view.
Because reviewers *are* volunteer labor, they are unreliable. I personally find that I get about a 75% rate of return on useful reviews. For journals, pretty much every review that is actually returned is useful, but many do not return. For conferences, where the PC members have signed up in advance, the rate of return is much higher, but there are a significant number of essentially useless 1-sentence reviews that give a score but no justification.
At the same time, an important dirty secret of the reviewing process is that there is rarely a fixed number of reviews that are actually necessary. In the venues in which I am involved, typically 4 reviews is best practice, 3 is acceptable, and 2 is only supportable if there is very strong agreement on a clear accept or reject.
Moreover, when you are recruiting reviewers for a journal submission, the reviewers don't necessarily respond to the request to review immediately. Thus, I will typically significantly overbook the initial set of requests, asking 6-8 reviewers. Generally somewhere between 2 and 6 of those will accept, from which typically 3-4 will actually return reviews, giving me enough for a well-justified decision. If things go unusually well and end up with five reviews, that's just fine and will make the author feel we've taken them very seriously, but I'm not sure such an overabundance has ever actually happened to me.
If not enough reviewers accept, I have to send out additional batches of requests, all of which can lead to a significant skew in the times at which reviews arrive.
Moreover, it is an extremely rare reviewer who will return a review significantly in advance of the due date. So for me at least, overbooking isn't to get quick turnaround time, but to prevent excessively slow turnaround time that can happen when you need one more review and a reviewer drops out at the last minute, forcing you to start the clock all over again on a new reviewer.
Because it is all volunteer labor, however (and because I do my own turns as a reviewer in other venues as well), I am very mindful of the importance of not taking a reviewer for granted. If somebody has promised me a review, I want that review. It is only when they have become significantly late that I will send a question along the lines of: "I am currently only waiting on your review before I can send a decision to these authors; are you still able to provide a review?" The only time when I simply cancel a review request is when the reviewer has become repeatedly unresponsive, and then they get a black mark for unreliability in the appropriate set of organizational records.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Inviting more reviewers than is necessary is very common. In fact I'd be surprised if most editors didn't do this. The reason that you can't expect invited reviewers to always agree to review your article. Some of them will decline, some will wait a long time and then decline, and some will never respond.
Let's say your journal needs 2 reviews to make a decision, and you wait a week to hear back from your reviewer, and you start by inviting two reviewers. Suppose this happens:
1. You invite 2 reviewers (days past = 0)
2. After two days, one reviewer declines to say they have no time; the other doesn't respond. You invite one more reviewer. (days past = 2)
3. One week later, you invite one more reviewer, who also declines after a day saying they have no time. (days past = 8)
4. You invite two more reviewers, who don't respond. (days past = 15)
So it's two weeks after manuscript submission and the manuscript hasn't budged. You could argue that you have been respectful to your reviewers, but someone else could argue that you have been disrespectful to your authors.
What is not common is for journals to make a decision with reviews outstanding. Typically in this situation the journal will wait for the reviews, especially if it's only a short while till the outstanding reviews are due. Exceptions apply. For example, if after 30 days you have received two reviews, and then a reviewer who didn't respond suddenly accepts the invitation, with a review date 30 days into the future. In this scenario the journal could reasonably ask the reviewer to cancel.
Concerning this:
>
> referees who might be half-finished
>
>
>
This is much less common than one might think. See [source](https://www.aje.com/en/arc/peer-review-process-15-million-hours-lost-time/). The median amount of time spent per review is 5 hours. Unless the journal cancels exactly during these five hours, the reviews won't be half-finished; furthermore, if they do cancel exactly during these five hours and the referee says they are half-finished, the journal can probably wait an extra five hours before making a decision.
Granted, this might not apply to mathematics, where as far as I'm aware the time taken for review is measured in months, not hours.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/02 | 678 | 2,849 | <issue_start>username_0: This is a question that has plagued me for a couple of years now. Is it worth it to print a copy of the syllabus for each student? Or, is posting it on my course website good enough? My syllabus contains a good deal of information. I have the homework schedule, online video schedule, office hour info, etc. But, the class is close to 30 students. And printing that many three page syllabuses seems extreme. To make the question more specific, has anyone noticed that printing the syllabus has had a greater effect than not?
EDIT: In response to the comment below, all the students have access to free printing of the syllabus in any number of computer labs.<issue_comment>username_1: First, you should check that your school doesn't have a policy that says instructors must hand out a paper copy of the syllabus to their classes (those policies exist...). Second, you have to think about whether there is anything they need that you can guarantee they've read been handed (e.g., some laboratory students have students sign that they've read the syllabus, for safety reasons). If you don't have to hand out the paper, you should feel confident these days that they can get the syllabus on your class web page.
My current strategy is to forego printing the syllabus for large classes, but to explicitly email the class with a link to the online version (along with a very short introduction). If you want to ensure they get the syllabus, attach it to the email.
For small classes (<20), I have printed out a 1-page "highlights" of the syllabus (my contact info, *address for the online version*, due dates for assignments, etc.). I may not even do that any more, as I just figure the students are perfectly able to get the information online.
One more thing: on the first day of class, I do go over the important parts of the syllabus, and I also put a copy on the projector as I go over it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I know some here will consider this too extreme but I never print my syllabus. If I were in an area where students really had no reliable access to the internet then I might consider it.
Better to get students used to keeping things electronically (and save the environment one page at a time). Of course, some students will want it printed and they can do that for themselves.
I do NOT find that giving a student a printed copy guarantees they have read everything on it. I have read recommendations that teachers should not talk too much about their syllabus in class in order to encourage students to go get a copy and read it. I don't find that to be a good idea either. If there is something you want to make sure they know, by all means put it in your syllabus but **actually discuss it in class**. However, try to minimize the printing. It really creates a lot of waste.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/02 | 610 | 2,623 | <issue_start>username_0: On my CV, I have a few talks listed where I was not the presenting author (though I am a co-author on the work).
I have left them on my CV because as a graduate student, my CV is pretty slim. However the work in question was recently published in a journal, which now appears on my CV.
Should I delete all the talks where I was not presenting author? I'm not sure adding length to my CV is really appropriate since the information is fairly redundant (all the same line of research and similar talk titles, just different conferences).<issue_comment>username_1: The simple answer is no. You should not list items that you have not performed. In this case it would be listed under "talks" (equivalent) and that would be wrong. On th eother hand it represents work that you have done and as such it can be listed but probably under a different heading. The important thing is that it represents what has actually happened. I can see a heading called, for example, "Other work presented at conferences" and then list the talk and state that you was part of the work but that it was presented by someone else. Again, the importance lies in formatting it so that the actual conditions are very clear.
When the CV is short, I think such additions may make sense, later in a career these posts will lose their importance relative to other headings.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with Peter: **unless you're at a very early stage in your career, don't list talks given by others**. It clutters your CV, and it looks like you're desperate to lengthen the list (at best), or you're claim credit for others' work (at worst).
However, in this age of scientometrics, **you need to keep a list of these things, separate from your CV**, as they may be required of you in the future (as I learnt to my misfortune): by your employer, by a funding agency, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In general **no**, but the main issue is that the information in your CV is transparent and accurate. Therefore, you must clearly separate talks where you were the presenting author from those where you were not, so that there is no ambiguity.
To add talks where you were not the presenting author would be largely redundant, especially if the work is included in published articles. However, on a short CV it can make sense, and (to me) it can also be reasonable if you e.g. contributed a lot to producing the actual presentation (writing, constructing graphs, poster layout etc). But as the previous answers state, adding these talks could also be seen as you trying to pad your CV
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/02 | 1,275 | 5,046 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm review the literature at the moment. Now I'm reading a paper that mention other studies. How can I reference them without reading the original papers?<issue_comment>username_1: Let us assume, for example, you read Doe (2011) and find Smith (1966) referenced therein. Technically, you can say something like "Smith (1966, cited in Doe, 2011)", or alternatively "(Smith 1966, cited in Doe, 2011)." The exact format depends on the format of the journal (it is also possible to phrase it "cited by" instead of "cited in").
That said, however, it is *very dangerous* to provide such quotes since you do not know if the person(s) citing the paper has understood it correctly. It is not unheard of that people cite for very odd reasons and not double-checking works cited may just propagate such errors.
So, it is possible but not recommended.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If it is relevant to your work, why wouldn't you read them? If they are not relevant, why would you cite them?
The only case I can think where it might make sense is if you are reading a review paper, and want to actually cite them as a collection rather than individually. Because there are a large number or for other reasons. Then you would write
>
> Doe et al. collected in their recent reviews a large number of earlier work in **(Doe, 2012 and references therein)**
>
>
>
or
>
> Doe et al. collected in their recent reviews a large number of earlier work in **(Doe, 2012 and references 15–73 therein)**
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I wrote a post on [writing literature reviews in psychology](http://jeromyanglim.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/how-to-write-literature-review-in.html).
Here's my advice:
>
> **Cited In**: Good literature reviews do not use "Cited in". Literature
> reviews which summarise Author B’s citation of Author A’s work write:
> "as Author A (1999) says as cited in Author B (2002) …" . However,
> good literature reviews, when they see that Author B cites Author A,
> go and get Author A’s article, read it , and draw conclusions about it
> directly.
>
>
>
So it is only in rare occasions that you need to indicate that an article was cited by another author. Just because you learnt about a study because it was cited somewhere is generally not relevant. Read the original so that you know enough about it to incorporate it into your literature review.
Of course, there are many less common exceptions where you may wish to indicate the relationship between two papers:
* You want to discuss how Paper 1 uses Paper 2. For example, you might want to draw attention to how various papers have mis-used a citation in order to justify some misguided methodological practice.
* You are performing a meta-analysis and you want to indicate that you used a previous study to find references.
There is also a potential plagiarism issue around over-reliance on a single paper to generate your literature review. If for example, you took 95% of your references from the one paper, this would be questionable in general, but at least by using "cited in" you are being honest. Of course, I think this strategy of reviewing the literature should be avoided in general.
More generally, finding literature by following the citation trail backwards (by looking at references) and forwards (using tools like Google Scholar) forms part of a general set of strategies for finding literature.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: As JeffE above said, "Don't". When you make assertions in your published work, they should be based on either
1. Something that you have demonstrated yourself in the work
2. Something that another person has demonstrated (so you cite them)
3. Something that is sufficiently well known to the intended audience that no citation should be necessary (you don't need to cite Newton for his law of gravitation for example)
To consider the bigger picture for a moment, something that is published does not suddenly become a part of scientific dogma, even if it's published in a top tier journal. The motto of the Royal Society is "Nullius in verba", that is, "take nobody's word for it". If you are relying on established results for your work, then reading these results is the very minimum you should do. In an ideal world where you would then proceed to replicate the results that you are depending on.
Of course, this is usually not practical because of constraints on your time but at the early stages of your studies you should at least consider replicating some results since:
1. It will give you a far greater familiarity with the domain
2. There's a very high chance that you will expose some misconception that you had held about the work you are citing
3. There's a reasonable chance that you will expose a deficiency in the original work
In closing, you should consider that every time you publish something, you have added to mankinds knowledge. Every time you cite a paper without reading it, you dilute that knowledge.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/03 | 2,010 | 7,476 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been composing the International journal for microbiology research. I learn that research journal should consist of active voice not passive, but I find that the previous researchers for related subject mainly used passive voice.
How should I consider?
* Examples:
1. This genus is characterized by two types of conidia called α–conidia (fusiform) and β–conidia (filiform). [I think it is valid. Please correct me if I could change it to active voice]
2. Diaporthe sp was reported causing dieback of rooibos (Aspalathus linearis) (Van Rensburg et al. 2006)
[Van R et al 2006 reported Diaporthe caused dieback of rooibos (Aspalathus l.)?]
3. A novel Phomopsis sp was reported as a weed (Carthamus lanatus) pathogen and may be used as a biocontrol agent (Ash et al. 2010).
[Ash et al. 2010 clarified that a novel Phomopsis sp as a weed (Carthamus lanatus) pathogen may be used as a biocontrol agent?]
\*\*\* Note - 9/4/2013:
Thank you so much, I appreciate the clarity from everyone.
[I also did online research](http://widstudio.wordpress.com/wid-writing-handbook-project/a-guide-to-writing-research-papers-for-introductory-microbiology/) and learn this (may it help those who have the similar problem):
>
> "Many writers are torn between whether ***they should write the paper
> in the active or passive voice***. In the former, the subject performs
> the action; in the latter, the subject receives the action. ***Too
> much use of the active voice has the tendency to make the text
> monotonous because of too many first-person references. On the other
> hand, overuse of the passive voice can cause the tone of the paper to
> be dry, boring and even pompous*.** To ensure that *the text is more
> lively and readable,* it is best to try and strike a balance. Consider
> the following example:
>
>
> *We used eosin-methylene blue agar plates for the preliminary isolation
> of P. aeruginosa. The bacteria were Gram-negative bacilli, and motile.
> The results for oxidase and catalase activities were negative.
> Additional experiments showed that the bacteria did not ferment
> glucose, galactose, maltose or lactose (Table 2). Based on these
> results, we concluded that the organism had an oxidative metabolism.*
>
>
> Try translating this in to an entirely passive or active tone.
> **You’ll notice that the creative mix of both voices makes this narrative not only lively and engaging but also states the results in
> a clear, confident and unambiguous manner**."
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: This is primarily a question about taste and tradition. The passive voice has largely been the norm but it has its obvious drawbacks, it is boring to read. Using the active voice is therefore recommended. Your need to get a sense of what is the "norm" in your field because you may encounter unnecessary resistance if your deviate. Unfortunately This problem May be larger for a younger less well known scientist.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **The choice between active and passive voice is mainly a matter of taste**. As a writer, you are entitled to a certain degree of liberty in your stylistic choices. Even within the generally tight constraints of scientific and academic writing, there is no established dogma on passive vs. active voice, and you will find people advocating (some very strongly) both for and against the use of the passive voice.
Duke’s Graduate School [Scientific Writing Resource](https://cgi.duke.edu/web/sciwriting/index.php?action=passive_voice) has a good summary of the pros and cons of passive and active voices. In particular, it lists the position advocated in some high-level style guides, editorials, and other essays of note.
I think the current trend is toward a diminution of use of the passive voice. The reasons are summed up nicely by <NAME> (*The American biology teacher*):
>
> Most scientists use passive voice either out of habit or to make themselves seem scholarly, objective or sophisticated. Scientists have not always written in passive voice. First-person pronouns such as *I* and *we* began to disappear from scientific writing in the United States in the 1920s when active voice was replaced by today's inflexible, impersonal and often boring style of scientific writing.
>
>
>
**The main argument used in favour of passive voice is that it promotes objective statements**, rather than focusing on the actor. However, removing the mention of the actor in the text does not actually prevent subjectivity in the experiments: even if I write *“the sample was smeared until it reached a thickness of 1 µm”*, somewhat actually *did* smear the sample (and could have screwed it by going too slow or too fast). So the counter-argument is that passive voice does not *promote* objectivity, but only the appearance of objectivity.
**The main argument in favour of active voice is that it makes for shorter, clearer, less boring text.**
---
I love that anecdote from [<NAME>](http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/education/ssr_activepassive.htm) (*School Science Review*):
>
> *“The test tube was carefully smelled.”* I was astonished to read this sentence in my 11-year-old son's science notebook. At primary school his science reports had been lively and vivid. But when he moved to secondary school they became stilted and artificial.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: First, follow the journal's style guide. It doesn't matter how well your paper is written: if it doesn't comply with the rules, you'll make the editor's job harder. Getting published is, in fair part, about making the editor's job **easier**. And you are writing in order to get published, right? The more like recent papers your writing style is, the easier you may find it to get published. So look at how the active and passive voices are used in similar papers to yours, in recent issues of your target journal.
Then, as far as compatible with that, follow your institution's style guide, as far as you must.
Then, as far as is compatible with those, write in professional, lucid, interesting prose. The choice between active and passive will depend on context and rhythm. I highly recommend the books from <NAME>'s article [Three books you should read if you want to write](http://blogs.ft.com/undercover/2010/03/three-books-you-should-read-if-you-want-to-write/), which are:
1. Style: Towards Clarity and Grace by <NAME>
2. The Art and Craft of Feature Writing by <NAME>
3. The Creative Habit by <NAME>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Web search for "active voice" and you'll find that a great *many* top universities (MIT, Stanford, Yale, Harvard, Cambridge, and several more) have taught their science students to prefer active-voice writing in their reports, papers and articles for *more than 20 years*.
Also, America's leading science magazines (*Nature, Science,* etc.) now clearly urge submitting authors to lean toward active-voice writing in the lion's share of each submission.
Further, the U.S. government's plain-language law (enacted in 2010 and fully on display at www.PlainLanguage.gov) now ranks among *several* laws worldwide that urge technical writers to "make it clearer and plainer."
Which always will include a predominantly "active" form of writing, with clear cause-and-effect linkages dominating. (Passive voice leaves cause and effect fairly vague.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/03 | 886 | 3,771 | <issue_start>username_0: A question that has been bothering me for so long about research work is, *what level of work can be called research and is worthy of publishing in a research paper*?
Let's say I am working with JPEG compression, if I make some may be *a little* enhancement in the algorithm for the compression, can it be given the title of research.
So my question is:
If I make a little enhancement or added a little new stuff to an already existing work, can it be called a research and can I write a research paper for it?<issue_comment>username_1: I would definitely say yes, if you researched your field thoroughly and found a solution to a problem, why not? But just to make sure: I would discuss my ideas with a supervisor, or colleague first.
A lot of people made improvements on existing algorithms and wrote about it. I have read a few papers about compiling mpeg on the GPU using OpenCL.
Check out Erich Marths Paper: **"[Parallelization of the x264 encoder using OpenCL](http://li5.ziti.uni-heidelberg.de/x264gpu/)" at ACM** he did improve some aspects, but interesting is rather what was researched. We tried his code and approach years in 2012 to find: CPUs had outgrown the improvement already and the approach could not be followed any more without significant work put into it.
Just make sure your research effort becomes clear. If in doubt, hand the draft to a "mentor" or colleague to judge the degree of research effort.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What matters most is the time and memory complexity of the algorithm. The crucial step is having the improvements repeatable (reproducible) by another person.
E.g. if instead of **O(n2)** your algorithm offers **O(n log(n))** execution time, it is worth publishing and you may well expect your name to be remembered for a long time.
If your **implementation** of the algorithm has lower startup time, or spends 5% less time on each iteration, it is not altogether clear that this is an advance in the field. With another compiler or with error-checking on, these results may not be valid.
There are important **exceptions**: self-tunable, configurable, hardware error-resistant, hard realtime algorithms, to name a few. Adding valuable properties to algorithms is a very nice result.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The question I would ask is: *"Are there people working in this area who would learn something interesting and useful from what you've done?"* If the answer is yes then your paper makes a contribution and so is potentially publishable. At that point you could consider some secondary questions, e.g.:
* **Length of the paper:** this should be commensurate with the extent of the contribution (i.e., how much someone would learn) -- a small contribution merits a short paper.
* **Venue of publication:** some place (conference, journal, forum) typically accessed by the people who would learn the most from your paper. For example, a theory journal would not be the right place for systems-oriented paper about the guts of a compiler.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Actually, you are not necessarily required to show any improvement in performance.
What journals typically require of a publication is for the results to be novel, sound and withing the scope of the journal's area. More prestigious journals also judge how interesting your results are to their readership. However, some journals will accept any work as long as it is novel and technically sound (e.g. [PLoS ONE](http://www.plosone.org)).
As an example, if you find an algorithm that has performance that is similar to current state-of-the-art algorithms but gives some new insight about the structure of the problem it could be interesting enough for publication.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/03 | 438 | 1,660 | <issue_start>username_0: I notice that in Germany, basically all the professors are addressed as Prof. Dr. XXX, say Prof. Dr. Mueller.
However, in other parts of the world, only Prof. would be sufficient, ~~since a non-doctor can never be a University professor.~~
So why are the German professors addressed this way? Isn't it kind of redundant?<issue_comment>username_1: In Germany, in rare cases also non-doctors can become a professor. Then it's just "<NAME>". Regarding Doctors, we don't have a "PhD" title. "Dr." is the official title for a doctor which is traditionally a prefix to the full name.
See also: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)#Germany>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In Germany, professorships and doctorates are considered to be "legal" titles, and have special status not accorded to other degrees and professions. In particular, university professors in Germany are *Beamte* (appointed civil servants, sg: "Beamter"/"Beamtin"), which places them in a relatively small class of government employees.
It is to be noted that a professor in a German university can be called "<NAME>" or "<NAME>" only so long as he or she is actively working as a professor. Following retirement or leaving the university profession, it is technically not permitted to use the title.
Thus, in this sense, the appellation "Professor"/"Professorin" is legally part of someone's name, and should therefore be used in formal greetings and salutations. (This can sometimes be annoying—for example, in a physician's waiting room, you can hear them call for "<NAME>!")
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/03 | 537 | 2,320 | <issue_start>username_0: I and two other student, did a course project and it has been accepted for publication in an international conference. I am confused now that whether I should add his name as a co-author or acknowledge him in acknowledgements ?
I would like to share that though, the entire implementation and writing the paper was done by us, we were student of his class and the work was produced as a part of course project.
My field is Computer Science.
Edit: As F'x suggests, that I should ask the instructor. What would be an appropriate way to do so given that his name was not added as co-author before acceptance.(We were confident about the work but were not sure about the acceptance. The conference management software was EDAS and it spams email of all co-authors which we wanted to avoid in his case)<issue_comment>username_1: If he/she supervised your work, and/or read your paper, and/or somehow gave his/her contribution to your paper, **I think that yes**, you should add his/her name as author.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Co-authorship depends on the person and (sometimes) internal rules. For instance, during my PhD it was common for the professors to consider reading a paper + giving feedback as contribution worth authorship. Some of them even thought that they deserve authorship just because they talked to you about your idea:)
During my Masters (at another university) my supervisor did not only read the paper, but also corrected some errors in the formulas and checked the experimental results. When I put him as a co-author, he asked to remove his name motivating this as "I just did the work a normal supervisor will do".
So, as others suggest - do ask the professor ASAP.
P.S. Many professors will not fund your trip to a conference if their name is not on the paper unless explicitly agreed beforehand:)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Regarding *“given that his name was not added as co-author before acceptance”*: **ask him ASAP**. Be honest, be apologetic, explain clearly the situation and the reasons you did not want to add his name beforehand, but also be very clear that you realize now it was a mistake not to discuss it at the time, and that you made the mistake due to your lack of experience in academic publishing.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/03 | 477 | 1,785 | <issue_start>username_0: In the literature review when I have many definitions from the literature can I paraphrase them or do I have to put them in quotes as they are?<issue_comment>username_1: If you use another source's definitions verbatim, then they must be placed in quotes; otherwise that's plagiarism. However, it should be pointed out that general facts and definitions—one that would be reasonably obvious to anyone who has, for instance, an undergraduate background in your field—need not be cited, so long as you are not literally quoting someone else. For instance, saying "Newton's second law states **F** = m × **a**" does not require a citation; saying
>
> The second law states that the net force on an object is equal to the rate of change (that is, the derivative) of its linear momentum p in an inertial reference frame [[Wikipedia]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_second_law#Newton.27s_second_law).
>
>
>
requires a citation to Wikipedia.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me add a bit to the [answer of Aeismail](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/12415/75368).
If something is "common knowledge" then it doesn't need to be cited and can be paraphrased. But if you do "quote" a source literally, then it must be cited, even if it is common knowledge.
But even if something isn't common knowledge then it can be paraphrased, but must be cited to avoid plagiarism. Paraphrasing is sometimes needed, in fact, to avoid copyright issues, independent of plagiarism.
And note that "quoting" doesn't necessarily imply "quote marks" which are only one way to indicate that something is a literal copy of someone else's words. There are other conventions that might be used. The answer of Aeismail shows one such convention, in fact.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/03 | 1,843 | 7,808 | <issue_start>username_0: Say this year the university A advertises one postdoc and one tenure-track position. If I prefer the tenure track position, but am not sure that I can get it, what should I choose between the following two options?
Option A: Apply for both postdoc and tenure-track positions.
Option B: Apply for tenure-track position only, hoping that even if I don't get it, the university will consider offering me the postdoc position.
I thought that Option A is safer, but some of my friends say the opposite. They think that if you apply for both positions, then even if you are good for the tenure-track position, the university will tend to offer you only the postdoc position, the lowest rank that you asked for.
Do you have any insight on this?
For more information: the job market I am referring to is the US'.
What if we have other situations: postdoc/lecturer, lecturer/tenure-track, or postdoc/lecturer/tenure-track?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest choosing the job you want and think you have a good shot at, and then apply for that position. Here is my rationale (and supposition, to a certain extent):
If you apply to both positions, you've told both hiring committees a couple of things: you've said to the tenure-track committee that you would be happy with the post-doc position, otherwise you wouldn't be applying for it. You've said to the post-doc position, "I'm doing this as a backup in case I don't get the tenure-track position." In both cases, you're not telling them anything particularly good. Sure, there is the possibility that they'll see your dual application as really wanting to work in that particular department, but I wouldn't bet on it.
If you can make a good case why you are very competitive for the tenure-track position, then go for it. Apply to post-docs elsewhere if you want a bit more of a backup (although in the job market it isn't really worthwhile to talk about "backups" in the same way you talk about it for school applications). Also, there is something to be said about applying for the position you really want: it demonstrates your own belief that you are well qualified (but, of course, you may end up without a job...).
If you can't make the case that you're a strong candidate for the tenure-track position, apply for the post-doc position. You'll get the experience you need to be competitive for future tenure-track positions, and there is always an off-chance that there may be another position opening up at this school, and you'll be more competitive for it (and know people on the committee). I don't believe there is the same stigma about hiring post-docs into positions at the same school as there is for hiring PhD students into positions at the same school (which is rare).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As a recruiter, I don't see much of Chris's point. And, as a candidate (some years ago), I followed pretty much your option B (apply to both). Here's the reasoning:
Times are though, and the academic job market is very competitive. **Anyone who expects you to apply only to a single position** (*“applying to more that different positions shows that you don't know what you want”*, or *“you don't believe in your chances”*) **is delusional to some extent**. You will apply to backup post-doc positions, and I don't think you benefit by excluding the place where you also apply for faculty position.
In fact, you can actually turn that into a pretty positive argument: “**I love your institution/department, this is really my dream place to work at, and if I don't get on faculty this year I'm willing to take a post-doc, know you all better and try again next year** (if circumstances permit).”
I'll add that **this is actually commonly done in France, UK and some other European countries**: once you've traveled a bit, find the place where you want to settle, apply there, and if you don't get the job on the first try, get a post-doc there and try again later.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: My experience is in mathematics in the US. My personal experience is that people will not read anything especially deep into applying for both jobs. Everybody understands that the market is tough, and basically expects everybody to apply to every opening. I've seen instances where a person was considered both for a postdoc and TT position at the same university, and this was not seen as an issue at all (there was much more strategizing around the question of whether they would come for a postdoc).
In the vast majority of cases (without, say, a severe geographical constraint), I think if you consider TT and postdoc at the same place as both reasonable options for you and plausible possibilities, you're probably kidding yourself on one score or another. Generally if you'd even be seriously looked at for a TT job at University X, then when the postdoc committee looks at your file, they'll say "We could hire this person for a TT job. There's no way that a postdoc at University X is the best job they'll get." and they probably won't offer you the position. But unless you feel confident about which way it is, I don't see any problem with applying to both.
**EDIT:** One thing I'll add, which is mathematics specific: if you're applying MathJobs, the visual difference between applications for the different jobs is negligible. There is a column where you can see what positions the applicant applied for, but it's not very noticeable. So, it's quite possible the committee for one job won't even notice you applied for the other (I have seen this happen).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: One thing to be aware of that I don't think others have mentioned is timing. In my field (theoretical particle physics in the US), postdoc hiring decisions are all made in December and January, while interviews for faculty jobs usually take place in February, March, and possibly April. Postdocs who are on the last year of their current job *have* to apply for and accept a postdoc position, even if they are hoping to get a tenure-track offer, simply because of the timeline. If they haven't accepted a postdoc job in January, and they don't manage to get a tenure-track offer that spring, they have no job at all. Because of this, everyone expects that people will apply for both postdocs and faculty positions simultaneously.
The timing of these things will potentially vary depending on your field, so this consideration might or might not be relevant. But it's something to think about.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Unless it is a huge department, the committees will overlap and/or communicate with one another. If you are a strong shortlist-able contender in the TT candidate pool they will proceed thus and so; if you are somewhat marginal TT-wise, but still strong relevant to the PD pool, they will say OK this person is a bit overly ambitious right now but let's take him on a PD for a few years and see how things go; and if you are not strong in either pool none of this matters.
Now, you may get an interview for a TT position and then they bring up the PD application and say, if we offer you a PD instead, would you take it up. Tricky! They think you are TT material (you are being interviewed) but can be got on the cheap (it opens up a slot for some other good person). If you blink now you will always be a push-over in the eyes of this department, and this will delay any subsequent promotions by many years. If you want to be there badly enough that you are prepared to take this hit, then agree. If not, say that you now feel the TT is the appropriate fit and see where the chips fall. You may also propose a compromise: take a PD for a few years with an official commitment from them that you will get TT at the end of that.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/03 | 1,814 | 8,268 | <issue_start>username_0: Papers published from an academic project (MSc or PhD) usually have two authors; the first author is the student who mainly conducted the research, and the second author is the professor who supervised the projects.
The corresponding author is the one who take the responsibility of a paper, and thus, some believe that students are not yet prepared to take this responsibility.
Ideally, who should be corresponding author for papers published by MSc or PhD projects?
I understand that it mainly depends on personal agreements and preferences, but I want to know which case is more reasonable from academic logic?<issue_comment>username_1: This is something that ought to be agreed on in discussion between the student and supervising professor. Ideally, this decision should be made from the start of the research.
In my own situation, when I was completing my PhD, the 4 papers published had me as both the first author and corresponding author. My advisor told me that part of the research process would be to field any and all questions, concerns and queries that come from the paper.
Edited (in response to question edit): From an academic point of view, it can be argued that the student is the primary researcher, hence expert in that specific topic, hence would be the only one who can completely answer any questions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I was always the corresponding author; my advisor(s) thought it was good for me, and they had other things to do than to fiddle around with LaTeX...
So, to answer your question, I think it is good for phd students to be the corresponding author; besides, if there is any trouble, you have always your advisor/coauthor to ask.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It varies widely, not only on your field's customs, but also on individual research groups. In the research groups I have worked in, and worked with, in *chemical engineering*, **the corresponding author is usually the most “perennial” researcher, i.e. usually the PI/professor**. The idea is to ensure that the corresponding author is a faculty member, meaning he is the person most likely to still be around in 5 to 10 years' time to answer questions about the work. (In that time, PhD students and post-docs may change field completely, exit academia, etc.)
Also, the PI is usually the one who gets to keep the archives (raw data, lab notebooks, etc.) in the long term, so it makes sense that way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: "The corresponding author is the one who take the responsibility of a paper". I've never heard this before. For example: <http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2010_04_16/caredit.a1000039> says "The corresponding author is the point of contact for editors, readers, and outside researchers who have questions about the contents of the paper. Often, the corresponding author is also the last author, but she or he may be listed first or even in the middle of the author list."
All authors take responsibility for the paper (or should). The point of the corresponding author is who to contact if you want to correspond about the paper. If this were someone who was likely to move institution (because they are finishing, or have finished their study), they are going to be hard to contact, so make it someone who's likely to hang around for a while. I've never seen anyone take any notice of who the corresponding author is.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm (as the postgrad and lead author) the corresponding author on a paper, rather than my supervisor, which is common here. I've had a few queries on the experiment and equipment, which realistically, as I did the work, and I'm not so busy as my supervisor I'm better placed to deal with.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I think it mostly depends upon the mutual understanding between the supervisor(PI) and the student. I had a similar case with my PhD colleague. She wanted to be a corresponding author but the adviser of the study group (a large scale multidisciplinary study) denied which could be due to the factors mentioned above such as: the PI will be staying there at least for few years however the student might leave the institute or even academia.
In my opinion, it is very helpful for a PhD student be the corresponding author because being a corresponding author will improve some skills: experience in answering critiques from the reviewers, writing, giving reasonable explanations and so on. More importantly, it is the student who did most of the work for the publication and will be able to give answers to most of the queries from the reviewers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Since the ordering of authors differs between fields the meaning and usefulness of a corresponding author also varies. In fields I am familiar with, the corresponding author is usually the same as the "first author" (quotes because it may not be literally the first). Many journals therefore do not explicitly identify a first author unless different from the "first". There are then several cases where the corresponding author may need to be identified. One example is when a person lacking a permanent academic address is first author. Then the supervisor may take on the responsibility for the paper and be corresponding author. This can be important since it can be near impossible to track down someone who has left academia and so the supervisor stands for continuity in terms of contact. There are many variants on this and in some cases, a person heading a project or who by legal obligations carries responsibility for a project may be identified as corresponding author. This could be the case with some governmental organisations where communications are funnelled through hierarchies for bureaucratic reasons. I am sure there are lots of examples good and bad but the main purpose of identifying corresponding author, unless first, is so that anyone requiring more information can go directly to the main source for such.
So based on this background and the field you are in you may find a good way to determine corresponding author. In most cases, I would say it is the person who has done the most work, or the one who "owns" the project. It is not clear in some cases whether it is the student or the advisor who should be corresponding author. One also has to weigh in the intellectual work behind the project as a whole and from that perspective the person who has done the work, perhaps a detail in a much bigger perspective, may not be the appropriate person for details although that person has done most of the work for the paper in question. So in some cases the question is definitely harder to answer. Not being corresponding author, does not necessarily detract much from being first author since such details are not visible in literature searches and CVs.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_8: When I was working as senior resident,the department head was the first author and also the corresponding author in all the scientific papers written by me. I thought that a senior person is better placed to answer any outside researcher's question easily and be available for years instead of a student who is likely to leave the institution once study period is completed. But once the internet facility has come, the point of being permanent or regular has become irrelevant and anybody can be contacted anywhere over E-mail.I feel that only those with maximum involvement in the scientific work should be the corresponding author as he only knows well about the work and can give reply on his own to any outside researcher's question regarding the contents of the paper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: Most of the time students never know how, what and where to write,they purely depends upon their supervisor,who is directly involved in this exercise.Paying regards is another factor that is also linked and making a segregation in teacher and taught is a good practice.Supervising any task is not easy,it requires complete involvement in form of legal, responsibilities & other issues as well.Therefore CA deserve proper place with dignity in research papers as it also carries a message.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/09/04 | 1,874 | 8,458 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a doing a dissertation funded by a company and my dissertation is basically a report of my progress on the problem they have given me. I have an **academic supervisor**, an **industry contact** who has given me occasional guidance and basically the company itself who sponsored it, to acknowledge.
* Should I acknowledge the industrial sponsorship the same way one would acknowledge a government grant?
* Also, Since this is a mathematics dissertation, It is written in First person plural: "We do this we do that". For the acknowledgements section, should I use 3rd person to keep it formal: "The author would like to..." or first person singular: "I would like to thank"
* Finally, I think the order should be sponsorship, academic adviser, and lastly the industry contact. Is that the right order?<issue_comment>username_1: This is something that ought to be agreed on in discussion between the student and supervising professor. Ideally, this decision should be made from the start of the research.
In my own situation, when I was completing my PhD, the 4 papers published had me as both the first author and corresponding author. My advisor told me that part of the research process would be to field any and all questions, concerns and queries that come from the paper.
Edited (in response to question edit): From an academic point of view, it can be argued that the student is the primary researcher, hence expert in that specific topic, hence would be the only one who can completely answer any questions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I was always the corresponding author; my advisor(s) thought it was good for me, and they had other things to do than to fiddle around with LaTeX...
So, to answer your question, I think it is good for phd students to be the corresponding author; besides, if there is any trouble, you have always your advisor/coauthor to ask.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It varies widely, not only on your field's customs, but also on individual research groups. In the research groups I have worked in, and worked with, in *chemical engineering*, **the corresponding author is usually the most “perennial” researcher, i.e. usually the PI/professor**. The idea is to ensure that the corresponding author is a faculty member, meaning he is the person most likely to still be around in 5 to 10 years' time to answer questions about the work. (In that time, PhD students and post-docs may change field completely, exit academia, etc.)
Also, the PI is usually the one who gets to keep the archives (raw data, lab notebooks, etc.) in the long term, so it makes sense that way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: "The corresponding author is the one who take the responsibility of a paper". I've never heard this before. For example: <http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2010_04_16/caredit.a1000039> says "The corresponding author is the point of contact for editors, readers, and outside researchers who have questions about the contents of the paper. Often, the corresponding author is also the last author, but she or he may be listed first or even in the middle of the author list."
All authors take responsibility for the paper (or should). The point of the corresponding author is who to contact if you want to correspond about the paper. If this were someone who was likely to move institution (because they are finishing, or have finished their study), they are going to be hard to contact, so make it someone who's likely to hang around for a while. I've never seen anyone take any notice of who the corresponding author is.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm (as the postgrad and lead author) the corresponding author on a paper, rather than my supervisor, which is common here. I've had a few queries on the experiment and equipment, which realistically, as I did the work, and I'm not so busy as my supervisor I'm better placed to deal with.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I think it mostly depends upon the mutual understanding between the supervisor(PI) and the student. I had a similar case with my PhD colleague. She wanted to be a corresponding author but the adviser of the study group (a large scale multidisciplinary study) denied which could be due to the factors mentioned above such as: the PI will be staying there at least for few years however the student might leave the institute or even academia.
In my opinion, it is very helpful for a PhD student be the corresponding author because being a corresponding author will improve some skills: experience in answering critiques from the reviewers, writing, giving reasonable explanations and so on. More importantly, it is the student who did most of the work for the publication and will be able to give answers to most of the queries from the reviewers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Since the ordering of authors differs between fields the meaning and usefulness of a corresponding author also varies. In fields I am familiar with, the corresponding author is usually the same as the "first author" (quotes because it may not be literally the first). Many journals therefore do not explicitly identify a first author unless different from the "first". There are then several cases where the corresponding author may need to be identified. One example is when a person lacking a permanent academic address is first author. Then the supervisor may take on the responsibility for the paper and be corresponding author. This can be important since it can be near impossible to track down someone who has left academia and so the supervisor stands for continuity in terms of contact. There are many variants on this and in some cases, a person heading a project or who by legal obligations carries responsibility for a project may be identified as corresponding author. This could be the case with some governmental organisations where communications are funnelled through hierarchies for bureaucratic reasons. I am sure there are lots of examples good and bad but the main purpose of identifying corresponding author, unless first, is so that anyone requiring more information can go directly to the main source for such.
So based on this background and the field you are in you may find a good way to determine corresponding author. In most cases, I would say it is the person who has done the most work, or the one who "owns" the project. It is not clear in some cases whether it is the student or the advisor who should be corresponding author. One also has to weigh in the intellectual work behind the project as a whole and from that perspective the person who has done the work, perhaps a detail in a much bigger perspective, may not be the appropriate person for details although that person has done most of the work for the paper in question. So in some cases the question is definitely harder to answer. Not being corresponding author, does not necessarily detract much from being first author since such details are not visible in literature searches and CVs.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_8: When I was working as senior resident,the department head was the first author and also the corresponding author in all the scientific papers written by me. I thought that a senior person is better placed to answer any outside researcher's question easily and be available for years instead of a student who is likely to leave the institution once study period is completed. But once the internet facility has come, the point of being permanent or regular has become irrelevant and anybody can be contacted anywhere over E-mail.I feel that only those with maximum involvement in the scientific work should be the corresponding author as he only knows well about the work and can give reply on his own to any outside researcher's question regarding the contents of the paper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: Most of the time students never know how, what and where to write,they purely depends upon their supervisor,who is directly involved in this exercise.Paying regards is another factor that is also linked and making a segregation in teacher and taught is a good practice.Supervising any task is not easy,it requires complete involvement in form of legal, responsibilities & other issues as well.Therefore CA deserve proper place with dignity in research papers as it also carries a message.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/09/04 | 670 | 3,018 | <issue_start>username_0: I am part of a team working on the second phase of a project. The project hasn't been published in any journals or conferences yet, mainly because not a lot of work has been done completely. Practical work of a certain significant part has been done by a previous team. My team started two months ago and we have enough exposure to write a conference paper proposing the design and the theoretical work completely.
My project guide asked us to start writing a publish-ready paper encompassing everything, including the previous years practical work. He says, cite their term project and use their data. He was the guide of their term project too. I'm unsure as to whether it's right to just cite their unpublished thesis work. I think maybe they should be co-authors too since their work does comprise a significant part in the paper.
Am I right and should I bring it up to the professor? If so, how should I do it without offending him? If the question is vague, I could give more specifics.
EDIT: The field is control and robotics. The practical work is calibration of the equipment in question. The overall paper does include control strategy, dynamics and other sections that the previous researchers have not touched upon.<issue_comment>username_1: You said "their work does comprise a significant part in the paper". The question is to judge the nature of their contribution: if their work is a scientific contribution (by opposition to a technical contribution), then they indeed deserve to be co-authors of the paper. If their work is considered a technical contribution, then they should be left of.
It is a judgment call and what you say about their work ("the practical work is calibration of the equipment in question") makes it borderline. Sure, calibration is crucial, but is it an intellectual contribution, or is it something any technician with access to the apparatus user's manual could have done? In short: did they design the calibration procedure, or did they just follow an established (standard) procedure?
In all cases, you may want to bring that issue to the other authors' attention, in a diplomatic manner.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: That's a delicate question. My own rule is to offer a co-authorship to anybody with whom I discussed the problem unless I use only the results they have already published and took the official credit for. However I don't insist and if they decline, I just give them extended thanks in the paper. So, I would definitely contact the (leader of) the previous team and offer to include all the names in the author line.
As to ow to approach your professor, it is not entirely unlikely that he is reading this very thread at the same time as you already, so once you decided to go public with it, just show him the replies you get here and ask what he thinks and what his arguments are. If he is a good man, he'll be straight with you and hold no grudges. If not, well, then you are in trouble already...
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/04 | 1,399 | 5,943 | <issue_start>username_0: I am looking to start a PhD project soon and I have almost decided on the group in which I will apply. But I know that I am a very sensitive person when it comes to any work atmosphere. I have to feel comfortable where I don't work alone in the corner of a room for 4 years.
What are telltale signs of the academic work atmosphere? When I visit the group with the professor, will he let me ask questions to students already there? What should I ask and to whom?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. First off, if the professor is reluctant to have you talk to members of the group, this is a huge red flag.
2. When you visit, ask if you can sit in on lab meetings or seminars (some group setting) and observe the dynamic. Does everyone seem engaged and happy to be there? Is the mood collaborative and friendly, or authoritarian? Basically, put yourself there and ask yourself if you'd be comfortable.
3. Ask the professor about their advising style and philosophy. Some like to be very involved, some want their students to be independent. Make sure their answer works for you.
4. Most important one, in my opinion: contact a few of the other students independently, tell them you are coming to visit, and offer to take them out for a coffee or beer. This is an opportunity to ask them, in a relaxed non-work setting, about what they like and don't like about working in the lab. Do not tell the professor what the students are thinking, in any case.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: 1. Did you decide on which project you will be working on? Did you propose it (freedom, at the cost of being on your own), did you get assigned to it (as a worker), or did you plan it with the professor (teamwork)? Chances are that whatever happened during this phase will carry on during the PhD.
2. How central to the supervisor's own work is the question you are going to work on? This will massively influence how much support you get from him, especially when competing with other team members for resources.
3. It is very important to find out how the team handles results that go against their main hypotheses/theories/assumptions. Do they pour in resources to discover whether they should abandon their preconceptions, do they assign you to another less threatening line of research, or do they put pressure on you until you give them the "right" result?
4. Do people help each other to conduct their work, or do every person concentrate on their own work?
5. Check the order of authors on their papers. Do the people who actually worked get first authorship, or do the most senior post-doc get first authorship, the head of the lab gets last, and everybody else gets authorship in order of seniority (BAD!)?
6. On conferences and social occasions, does the team hang together (whether alone or mixing with other teams), or does the lab head leave the students aside and goes looking for "important people" to talk to?
7. Do the team enjoy their own time together? Do past team members still nurture personal friendships with the lab head/team members? Do you know of closet skeletons, team mates turned enemies?
8. The most important: Do people, including the professor, look **happy**? If they don't, run for your life!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Contact the people who left the group, either by graduating with a PhD, finishing their post-docs, or through getting tired of it, and find out about their experiences. You can find their names on the group/professor website either explicitly under "students" / "post-docs", or by looking through the list of co-authors/publications. In all likelihood, they will be more independent in their judgments than the current members of the group who are financially dependent on the leader -- at least those doing their PhDs and post-docs. There is no point whatsoever in asking grad students about how they feel in the group in the presence of their adviser -- you will get them in an awkward position, and the leader will definitely raise a brow about you. Besides, the grad students usually don't have any other experience, anyway, so they have no reference point to say whether their atmosphere is better or worse than the average across the field. The "graduates" of the group will have at least one more work group to relate to.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In our group, potential new starters are more than encouraged to talk to current postgrads - for example we normally take them out to lunch when they come to interview/present, without the academics in the group present. This works both ways - a group that works as a team will want members that fit into the team. If you are asked to present to the group at interview, that's inherently a good see (IMO), but the tone of a question session after that is a good gauge - not the supervisor's questions, but how the rest of the group ask questions in front of him/her.
You can get a feel for the dynamic of the group without asking directly - find out about whether they do stuff together out of work, for example.
Checking the order of authors as suggested by username_2 is a good idea, but you need to do that in the context of the field - e.g. in my area of applied physics, postgrads generally do experiment+analysis+writing and are first author. My perception of particle physics is rather different.
Your worry about being isolated is certainly valid, I feel very lucky in the group and department I'm in, when talking to people elsewhere in the university they are often quite lonely in their work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You also need to realize that your behavior during the tour of the group is also a way for your potential advisor to see how you interact with other scientists. It will also be (if you take the position) your first contact with your future team mates! So be sure to show interest, take your time, ask questions… don't rush it!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/04 | 585 | 2,400 | <issue_start>username_0: I teach a writing course that has many students who plan to study economics or finance in graduate school. I am not so familiar with these disciplines, but want to make sure these students finish the semester with the skills they need to succeed in graduate school. What kind of writing assignments can they expect to see?<issue_comment>username_1: I ma sure someone can write a more thorough answer, but the following are some resources that may help:
Duke University's ["A Guide to Writing in Economics"](http://lupus.econ.duke.edu/ecoteach/undergrad/manual.pdf)
Charles Sturt's ["Business and Report Writing Skills"](http://www.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/51934/Business-Report-Writing-Skills.pdf)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [Economical Writing](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1577660633) is one standard reference for economists. An economics paper usually has a lit review, an economic model, analysis of what this model predicts, and how the data supports this model. A great outline is provided by the [Toilet Seat Equilibrium](https://www.msu.edu/~choijay/etiquette.pdf) paper.
Your students might want to look at the [Research Papers in Economics](http://repec.org) archive, pick some papers there, and critique them from the intensive writing perspective. This collection has both published and unpublished versions, so with some luck they might be able to trace as the paper is getting into a more publishable state as it moves between versions and revisions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As a teacher of graduate-level finance classes, the main writing they are expected to perform are business reports and essays. I find that writing essays is easier for them but it is quite common for students to have challenges writing business reports (using bullet points properly, using graphics properly, using section headings and very concise writing properly).
As far as key skills you should be thinking about, the biggest ones are:
* How to construct a proper argument using academic evidence (reasonable sources as opposed to some random person's blog
* The ability to properly cite the work of others (related to the point above)
* Including counter-arguments in their work (another extension of the first point)
If all my graduate students had these skills, my life would be much easier.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/04 | 588 | 2,320 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to cite someting from [this workbook](http://www.bristol.ac.uk/it-services/learning/documentation/webaccess-1/webaccess-1t.pdf). How can I cite it? The year is 2009 but what should I put between brackets if there is no specific author?<issue_comment>username_1: I ma sure someone can write a more thorough answer, but the following are some resources that may help:
Duke University's ["A Guide to Writing in Economics"](http://lupus.econ.duke.edu/ecoteach/undergrad/manual.pdf)
Charles Sturt's ["Business and Report Writing Skills"](http://www.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/51934/Business-Report-Writing-Skills.pdf)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [Economical Writing](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1577660633) is one standard reference for economists. An economics paper usually has a lit review, an economic model, analysis of what this model predicts, and how the data supports this model. A great outline is provided by the [Toilet Seat Equilibrium](https://www.msu.edu/~choijay/etiquette.pdf) paper.
Your students might want to look at the [Research Papers in Economics](http://repec.org) archive, pick some papers there, and critique them from the intensive writing perspective. This collection has both published and unpublished versions, so with some luck they might be able to trace as the paper is getting into a more publishable state as it moves between versions and revisions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As a teacher of graduate-level finance classes, the main writing they are expected to perform are business reports and essays. I find that writing essays is easier for them but it is quite common for students to have challenges writing business reports (using bullet points properly, using graphics properly, using section headings and very concise writing properly).
As far as key skills you should be thinking about, the biggest ones are:
* How to construct a proper argument using academic evidence (reasonable sources as opposed to some random person's blog
* The ability to properly cite the work of others (related to the point above)
* Including counter-arguments in their work (another extension of the first point)
If all my graduate students had these skills, my life would be much easier.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/04 | 1,745 | 7,257 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a master student of some engineering (other than EE/CS) in a decent US institution who will apply for a PhD in mathematics in Fall 2014 (possibly in PDE / applied analysis, but not sure). I finished with three A's and five A+'s in eight upper-undergrad / grad math courses, along with four more to come this fall. Since my intention for a math PhD came pretty late, I am only able to look for supervisor this semester. The sad thing, as expected, is that all three potential supervisors declined my request softly. My previous engineering research experiences are mostly experimental, with little to do with math.
So I have roughly one full semester left, and my questions are:
1. Is it possible to gain any sort of research experience in this semester without a supervisor?
2. If not, then how can I show my research potential by other ways?
3. Will the three LORs solely from course lecturers be convincing, even if the lecturers are well-known, and I did pretty well in their courses?
4. In addition, is abstract algebra a must or at least very important in math PhD application? Since I have to make a choice between Algebra II and Dynamical systems, and I don't have Algebra I.
Thank you for your responses and criticisms.<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, I should mention that I am a 3rd year math PhD student at Brown. So I have a hint of knowledge, but not as much as a professor who has been to more institutions, and certainly not as much as someone who has been on an admissions committee.
Firstly, many starting PhD mathematicians have no real research experience. The reason is simply that research mathematics is so far from most undergraduate mathematics. This is also why doing research is so hard without a supervisor (for that matter, it's hard with a supervisor). Many candidates have done [REUs](http://www.ams.org/programs/students/undergrad/emp-reu), which look generically good but often don't usually result in a publication or anything.
What I recommend to you is that you:
1. Identify what you're interested in and pursue it. You say you maybe like applied analysis or PDE. Maybe see what some people are doing, read some of their stuff, backtrack if you need to. In this sense, you *can just do research* without waiting for someone else's permission. I'd like to mention that there is a polymath project you might be interested in, [Polymath 7](http://michaelnielsen.org/polymath1/index.php?title=The_hot_spots_conjecture) on the Hot Spots Conjecture (here is a link to the most recent [progress page](http://polymathprojects.org/2013/08/09/polymath7-research-thread-5-the-hot-spots-conjecture/)). It's slowed down, but they've done some interesting things and the polymaths are generally good about leaving a clean trail of breadcrumbs.
2. Ask about showing research potential and getting letters of reference. Instead of worrying about what's the absolute best thing, I think you should worry about doing the best that you can do. You've tried to set up some research with professors and that fell through. You haven't done math research before, and you're probably not going to get far in the next 4 months. In particular, it's unlikely that you're going to come up with a result great enough to inspire someone you haven't worked with to write you a letter of reference. This is all to say that you should get your letters of reference from those best able to recommend you. If these are lecturers, then so be it. But I hope that you've been attentive, proactive, and inspired in those classes. For that matter, if you're inspired, you might be able to ask your dynamical systems professor for an interesting project - approachable projects exist. It might not be new research, but at least it would be something you, and others, could talk about. As a final note, you should talk to your math professors and ask them for advice - I suspect that at least one of them will be able to say something, and they're more familiar with your situation.
3. Have you done any research in your 'some engineering?' Conceivably, a great letter of reference could come from your advisor/a great teacher/I don't know these details. You should talk to them about this, and get their advice.
4. Determine what schools you're interested in applying to (apply to many), and their requirements. Brown's Applied Math department does not require algebra. But they do (essentially if not officially) require the math GRE, which does require algebra (though for less than 1/4 of the test). On the other hand, Brown's Pure Math department (the one I'm in) has a severe algebra requirement. Interestingly, PDE is done in both, though in different directions. Many schools require algebra, or require it in the sense that they will have qualifying exams and one of those is in algebra. My undergrad, which I'd say has an applied bent, had quals in algebra and both real and complex analysis. So you could consider taking algebra if you needed to or wanted to, based on looking into what universities you want to apply.
However, algebra II without algebra I sounds incredibly perilous, especially as the fall semester is upon us already, or is about to be. Perhaps possible with a lot of pre-work. If you are going to attempt to hop into algebra II, I recommend getting a copy of Dummit and Foote's algebra book (clear exposition at a low level).
Finally, plan on taking the math subject GRE. It's only offered 3 times each year, and you've missed the summer one. You should take it both times this fall, and those signups might already be occurring.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To supplement what @mixedmath aptly observed: your experiences in engineering departments will have been misleading about the expectations of mathematics grad admissions, almost universally. That is, it's not so much "research record" as getting up-to-speed on the very basics of the vast established literature in mathematics. Usually this is done by coursework, but not necessarily, though having a paper trail is useful. Taking the GRE subject test is a sign of awareness of how the game is played, if nothing else.
I am frequently surprised at the apparent possibility in engineering and CompSci to do meaningful research at an undergraduate level. Perhaps "research" refers to a different thing than it does in mathematics... I think we have a severe shortage of labels, insofar as there seem to be only two valid/understood descriptors: "coursework" and "research", with some belief that the former is just gatekeeping and unrelated to the latter.
In any case, unless one tries awfully hard, the very most-basic topics in mathematics are used and useful throughout mathematics, despite much gossip and mythology to the contrary. E.g., the central notions of abstract algebra arise everywhere... although, sure, one can struggle to "get by" by reinventing crappy versions of "wheels" without ever knowing that the technology had been perfected 100 or 200 years ago.
Yes, it is toooo often true that courses and exams are conducted in a nearly-punitive fashion, and perversely emphasize separation from other subject matter, but one should try to ignore this exaggeration and caricature.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/04 | 613 | 2,357 | <issue_start>username_0: I am organizing a one day workshop as a part of a major conference in my field.
I would like to have a website to
* introductory text (static html)
* announce things (some content management)
* keep everybody up to date (mailing list)
* maintain a pre-workshop and post-workshop online discussion forum
**Is there a web service that would implement these things easily?**
Also, I don't want the visitors to register accounts. Perhaps a mailing list accessible via web would be sufficient, since I do not expect anybody to regularly visit just to check the forum (except for myself). Is there a mailing list/forum service suitable for such purpose?
Free would be best. I am capable of building such website myself, but I do not want to host it nor spend too much time setting it up. In the past, I used wordpress.com, google sites, google groups and such...<issue_comment>username_1: Some large institutions maintain platforms for such tasks: some of them are restricted to their members, others have a more liberal policy. For example, the French CNRS (largest national research institute) has developed [`SciencesConf.org`](http://www.sciencesconf.org/?lang=en). It fulfills your requirements, except for the forum (which, as far as I can tell, is rather unusual for conferences to have).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I would recommend a generic tool for making websites.
[WordPress.com](http://wordpress.com/) (or [WordPress.org](http://wordpress.org/) if you are more tech-savvy and want to host it on your univ. server) is a popular option (e.g. [NetSci2013](http://netsci2013.net/wordpress/)).
In both you can add comments for discussions.
Other CMSes would work - for example [Wikidot](http://www.wikidot.com/) (e.g. [Offtopicarium](http://offtopicarium.wikidot.com/)).
When it comes to mailing, [Google Groups](https://groups.google.com/) are one easy solution (unless you want something more sophisticated.)
The only general advice is to use as many made tools as possible, so you don't waste time on reinventing the wheel (or dealing with too many services at once).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If the forum is not a must, for static web pages [Google Sites](https://sites.google.com) is another easy-to-setup option which has *inter alia* a visual editor available.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/04 | 945 | 3,477 | <issue_start>username_0: Is there a website or software for one to search for all the past co-authors/collaborators of a given researcher?
I can of course go through the researcher's publication and get the names one by one, but just wonder if there is a shortcut way of doing this.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can do this with many scientific indexing service. Personally, I like [Scopus](http://www.scopus.com). It is subscription-based, though.
First, find the [author page](http://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?origin=resultslist&authorId=31267510200&zone=). I find this easiest by searching for the title of any publications by the said author, because most names are far from unique.
Here, you can click on co-authors. This will give you a list. For example, I currently have [31 co-authors](http://www.scopus.com/search/submit/coAuthorSearch.url?authorId=31267510200&origin=AuthorProfile&sot=al&sdt=coaut&st1=Holl&st2=Gerrit), here sorted by number of publications:
Note that this doesn't state how many documents in particular I have in common with this co-author. To get that, click instead on [Documents](http://www.scopus.com/search/submit/author.url?author=Holl%2c+Gerrit&origin=AuthorProfile&authorId=31267510200), then, under *Author Name*, on *More*:
You can get similar information through the Author Evaluator → co-authors.
Needless to say, 100% of my publications have myself as an author ;)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For researchers in computer science, another approach is to use DBLP, which is free. For example, [this is the coauthor list for me](http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/pers/hd/v/Venkatasubramanian%3ausername_2.html#coauthors) on my DBLP page. It is reached by going to the researcher page at DBLP, and then clicking the little 'people' icon on the right hand side.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It is widely assumed that [Web of Science](http://thomsonreuters.com/web-of-science/) is the most comprehensive citation index. It is also true that it is not the most intuitive web interface available, but it is very powerful.
As an example, you can create criteria such as counting the number of citations for an author excluding past co-authors. This one is great to measure impact outside one's own circle of acquaintances.
*I would have included a link to the search page, but unfortunately I don't have institutional subscription for that service anymore.*
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Google scholar tries to do this, but it looks as though the author needs to have a profile, and so do the co-authors, and either both authors need to have added the publication to their record, or one author needs to have added the others (in addition to them being named on the paper's author list).
ResearcherID can apparently do the same, again, if the author has a profile, but the search doesn't appear to work (I can't even find myself without the ResearcherID), and it can only cross-populate the author list from papers which the author has added using web of science.
So if your target person has a google scholar profile that they maintain nicely, and that's common in the field, you might do quite well.
Otherwise, can you automate scraping their publications page?
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/04 | 435 | 1,785 | <issue_start>username_0: [Nature](http://www.nature.com/)’s [“News and Views”](http://www.nature.com/nature/archive/category.html?code=archive_news_views) articles summarize high-impact research published recently in other journals. The News & Views articles are typically *not* written by the authors of the research paper, but by other researchers in the same field.
However, the topic of News & Views articles are not covered at all in Nature’s [information for authors](http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/submissions/presubs/). So, how are people writing the News & Views chosen? Is it only by invitation of the editor? And who chooses the articles written about in the first place?<issue_comment>username_1: From the [Nature guide on Other Submitted Material:](http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/gta/others.html)
>
> 1. News & Views
>
> These articles inform nonspecialist readers about new scientific advances, as reported in recently published papers (in Nature and elsewhere). This is a commission-only section.
>
>
>
So the articles are selected and commissioned by Nature editorial staff, and written by invited authors. A quick look through recent News & Views articles finds contributions from scientists and science writers (including former Nature writing / editorial staff).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In addition to EnergyNumbers' answer:
Many of the News & Views are about Nature papers published in the same issue. Sometimes the editors will ask one of the reviewers to write about the paper they reviewed. This makes some sense since they should be experts in the field and have already read the paper (which hasn't been published yet) thoroughly. There is a chance though that this will reveal their identity.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/05 | 736 | 2,748 | <issue_start>username_0: In my industry-sponsored dissertation, I want to thank my industry contact and some non-academic persons in the acknowledgement section of my dissertation. How should I refer to them:
* <NAME>
* <NAME>
* Mr. <NAME>
Considering the slightly informal nature of the acknowledgement section, yet keeping in mind that these are industry folks who wouldn't mind a bit of respect.<issue_comment>username_1: You should refer to him in the precise manner in which he wishes to be referred to, which you can only determine by **asking him directly**.
In other words: The same way you would refer to an academic person.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Acknowledgments usually skip formal titles, i.e. no *Prof.*, *Dr.*, *Mr.* or *Ms.* Some journals even insist on it in their authors guidelines (here for [J. Chem. Ed.](http://pubs.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/jceda8/jceda8_authguide.pdf)):
>
> **Acknowledgment**
>
> Include acknowledgment of grant and other financial support, technical assistance, colleagues’ advice, and so on. Do not use professional titles or honorifics in this section.
>
>
>
If your journal has guidelines on the topic, follow them.
Otherwise, just refer to the person as you would if you were giving his name to a colleague, i.e. omit the titles and honorifics unless you barely know them. But if you think they will like it, use their titles, it doesn't hurt!
---
To give a few examples from Nobel-prize winning papers:
---
---
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As you're talking acknowledgements rather than co-authorships, you need to take into account journal style and be sensible and polite. If someone in industry has helped you, in company time or with company resources, you should acknowledge that. So "... would like to thank <NAME>, XYZ corporation for ...", but if that doesn't fit with journal style guides, you could try "...would like to thank XYZ corporation for support, especially <NAME> for valuable discussions".
A company may not get anything for helping you, except that a mention in the literature is good for their profile. Of course if you paid them for work, they could end up anywhere from not mentioned to co-authors depending on the contribution)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/05 | 928 | 3,862 | <issue_start>username_0: If a group of students (say, 3 students), produces a work which has been accepted to a reputable conference. All of them contributed equally to the project,from implementation to writing and proof reading of the paper.
How should one decide who should be the first author. Even if the names are listed in alphabetical order, so by not being the first author, does it affect the prospects for the other two in any means ?
My field of research is computer science.
(This question has been partly inspired by the flurry of questions on ASE, regarding the importance of being the first author)<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the subfield of computer science. For example, if the paper is in theoretical computer science, then author order is alphabetical, and the equal work put in by the authors is not negated by the author ordering. If in a discipline where author order is meaningful, then it's standard practice to (say) order the authors alphabetically and add a footnote saying that all authors contributed equally to the work.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes, since the order of authors is often used to convey meaning, it can. As an example, in Neuroscience (my background), the conventional order of authorship is:
1. The **first author** is the one who did most of the work, and who is responsible for writing the paper;
2. **Second authors** are listed in order of contribution to the work. Usually the people who contributed work come first, and the ones who contributed with ideas come last.
3. Last comes the **mentor**. This could be the head of the lab, the supervisor, or a senior researcher who might have assigned the first author to this study. This person is usually a reference in this field, and the one who would provide general guidance to the project or line of research.
However, often it is difficult or impossible to order authorship with fairness. Some journals (not all) accept footnotes telling the reader all authors (or which) contributed equally to the work. But the footnote will not be visible in bibliographies, and the second authors will be forced to indicate their equal contribution in their resumes and applications. So coming second, even in these circumstances, is a handicap.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It may be advantageous to be the first author even in disciplines where author names are ordered alphabetically. In a study by Einav and Yariv (emphasis added):
>
> **proxies for success** in the U.S. economics labor market (tenure at highly ranked schools, fellowship in the Econometric Society, and to a lesser extent, Nobel Prize and Clark Medal winnings) **are correlated with surname initials**, favoring economists with surname initials earlier in the alphabet. These patterns persist even when controlling for country of origin, ethnicity, and religion. We suspect that **these effects are related to the existing norm** in economics **prescribing alphabetical ordering of authors’ credits**. Indeed, there is no significant correlation between surname initials and tenure at departments of psychology, where authors are credited roughly according to their intellectual contribution. The economics market participants seem to react to this phenomenon. Analyzing publications in the top economics journals since 1980, we note two consistent patterns: authors with higher surname initials are significantly less likely to participate in projects with more than three authors and significantly more likely to write papers in which the order of credits is non-alphabetical.
>
>
>
* <NAME> and <NAME> (2006), [What's in a Surname? The Effects of Surname Initials on Academic Success](http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/089533006776526085) (or [free pdf here](http://www.hss.caltech.edu/~lyariv/papers/Einav_Yariv.pdf))
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/09/05 | 731 | 2,541 | <issue_start>username_0: There are many different corpora[1] for the English language:
* [Google Books ngram database](http://books.google.com/ngrams) is freely accessible and covers publications indexed in Google Books from the 16th century; words are tagged by part-of-speech ([more info here](http://books.google.com/ngrams/info)).
* [The Corpus of Contemporary American English](http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/) is a large and balanced corpus of American English, including not only books but also magazines, newspapers and spoken English.
* The [British National Corpus](http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk) is a similar enterprise for British English, both spoken and written.
However, one may want to do an analysis of the evolution of English as used in written academic works (theses, journal articles, etc.). This came apparent to me while I was trying to research usage of passive vs. active voice for [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/12400/2700).
So, are there any available corpora of academic works in English language?
---
1. corpus: *collections of written or spoken material in machine-readable form, assembled for the purpose of studying linguistic structures, frequencies, etc.* [New Oxford American Dictionary]<issue_comment>username_1: Someone will no doubt provide a better answer for you, but here are a couple of resources that may be of interest/help/use:
["Applying corpus methods to written
academic texts: Explorations of MICUSP"](http://www.jowr.org/articles/vol2_2/JoWR_2010_vol2_nr2_Roemer_Wulff.pdf) (Romer and Wulff, 2010).
["Looking at citations: Using corpora in English for Academic Purposes"](http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num3/pdf/thompson.pdf) (Thompson, 2001)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, [JSTOR](http://jstor.org/) provides a corpus for linguistic (and other) analyses of academic literature, at [JSTOR Data for Research](http://dfr.jstor.org/)
See [this Language Log discussion](http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=6545) of one such analysis done on that corpus.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'll self answer, because I realized just now that [COCA](http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/) (The Corpus of Contemporary American English) actually includes academic texts (a subpart of the corpus they refer to as COCA-Academic). It even allows one to search by section, for example restricting the search to academic works:
(and it was right under my nose the whole time!)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/06 | 1,873 | 7,226 | <issue_start>username_0: We have submitted a paper to an [Elsevier Journal](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ad-hoc-networks/) and now I want to know how much time each stage in article lifecycle take?
There is an [article](http://help.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/160/p/7923/related/1/session/L2F2LzEvdGltZS8xMzc4NDYxOTEyL3NpZC9iUzVURkR6bA==) in Elsevier site which describes different status of a paper from submission to publication:
1. *Submitted to Journal*
2. *Editor Invited* (Conditional - this step may not occurs)
3. *With Editor*
4. *Under Review*
5. *Required Reviews Complete*
6. *Decision in Process*
7. *Completed – Accept*
It also noted that:
>
> **Please Note:** Most journals aim to communicate decisions to authors within **four months** of the start of the review process. There are a number of factors that may influence the actual time taken, most notably the availability and responsiveness of the article's referees. In consequence, peer review times do vary per journal. During the peer review process your article will show a status of ‘Under Review’.
>
>
>
But our paper status is *Technical Check In Progress*. this status is not mentioned in Elsevier site! I'm confused about this statuses. and now after 40 days the status is still in that stage. I want an estimation about time of this steps to see if I should be concern or not.<issue_comment>username_1: **Most of the time will be spent *“under review”***. That's the limiting step: sending the paper to reviewers, and waiting for them to review it. In some cases, the paper might also take some time before that (“with editor”), if the editor has a hard time finding willing reviewers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Each electronic manuscript handling system typically has a set time frame for each part of the review-revisions process. The systems have default values which, I would assume, are what most journals use. It is, however, possible to custom make the different time periods for each part of the process.
**1.Submitted to Journal:**
This usually does not involve a lot of time and a reasonable time frame might be `5-10 days` depending on factors such as workload, time of year etc. The step might involve inspection of the quality of the submitted material, but not necessarily.
**2.Editor Invited** (Conditional - this step may not occur):
This may again be another `5-10 days` and may be affected by workload etc.
**3.With Editor:**
The main problem that occurs here is difficulty to assign reviewers. The editor may also be overloaded with work. The time frame is likely something like `3 weeks` but will vary.
**4.Under Review:**
Each journal has a time frame and `3 weeks` is what I am accustomed to in my field. Reviewers that accept reviews and never return them is a problem here. How quickly the editor tries to assign other reviewers to speed up the process will vary from person to person and journal to journal.
**5.Required Reviews Complete:**
I am not sure if you actually mean revisions here because typically the author gets about `3-6 weeks` to revise the manuscript. This is another point where delays can occur but they are self-inflicted.
**6.Decision in Process:**
The decision process may require some time since the editor needs to read the revised manuscript and the revisions/rebuttal from the author to make a decision. In many cases there is cause for another round of reviews which would loop back to 4 and 5.
**7.Completed – Accept:**
7 could be 6 if the manuscript gets accepted after one round (rare in many circumstances).
Once accepted, the manuscript goes to copy editing and type-setting. This may be a quick process depending on the resources provided by the publisher. Journals using LaTeX have the advantage of having print ready proofs basically at the turn of a switch.
To sum up. Each of these steps can take various amounts of time depending on the working conditions at the journal as well as the expedience of reviewers and authors. I think the time frames I have outlined are reasonable but that does not mean all journals will be that quick (or slow, depending on your view).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: *Technical Check In Progress* refers to the *Technical screening* which is explained at:
<http://www.elsevier.com/editors/technical-screening>
>
> To solve the problem of peer reviewers and Editors being overloaded with manuscripts which contain many ‘technical’ problems such as poor English, Elsevier introduced a Technical Screening process for all journal submissions
>
>
>
This process shouldn't take too long. 40 days sounds too much to me and you may want to email the editor asking for an update on the status of your paper.
**UPDATE:** I just realised from your profile that you are Iranian. The delay might also be caused by the sanctions implemented by Elsevier against your compatriots.
<http://elsevierconnect.com/trade-sanctions-against-iran-affect-publishers/>
<http://news.sciencemag.org/2013/05/scientific-journals-adapt-new-u.s.-trade-sanctions-iran>
A shame, I would say.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I found this [link](http://akiraoconnor.org/2011/01/21/the-life-of-an-ees-manuscript/) that describes *The Life of an Elsevier Editorial System Manuscript*. I think it may be useful to others. It is a real-life report of the editorial process from the beginning to end.
(Answer edited to increase its length in an attempt to avoid future vandalism attempts.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I have many publication in peer review journals and I would share my experience with manuscript submission. When the manuscript is within the scope and of high quality, one should not always expect that an Editor would be willing to pass it to review. There are many reasons. It is most likely that an Editor would not challenge other recognized authors and, in order to avoid complications, he/she would not take a responsibility to publish it. So, if you receive later something like "the topic is too broad or too narrow and the Editorial Board has decided to reject your submission", - do not be surprised. The most of Editors are fair enough, but sometimes strange thins may happen.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I happened to have recently gone through most of this process with EES in the past few months and can provide my actual timeline (but not done yet!), for what it's worth:
1. Submitted to Journal: ***Day 0***
2. Editor Invited (Conditional - this step may not occur): N/A
3. With Editor: ***Day 2***
4. Under Review: ***Day 14***
5. Required Reviews Complete: ***Day 44***, revisions were then submitted back to EES 14 days later (***Day 58***).
6. With Editor: ***Day 60***
7. Under Review: ***Day 65***
8. Required Reviews Completed: ***Day 73***
9. Decision (Accepted): ***Day 75***
10. Final Disposition: ***Day 76***
11. Sent to/Received by Elsevier: ***Day 76***
12. Publishing agreement/Offprint order/Color figures forms sent: ***Day 80***
13. Proofs Available: ***Day 81***
Once the last few steps are complete, I'll add these, but this covers most of the process. Perhaps if others do the same, a statistical estimate can be made.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/09/06 | 4,398 | 18,406 | <issue_start>username_0: An alternate title could be "Do we award a PhD for what the student became or for what he produced?". More precisely, if a research thesis report does not advance human knowledge, yet still shows that the student acquired the right skills of investigation, should the title of Philosophy Doctor be awarded?
* I kind of always assumed that a thesis (PhD thesis in particular) should have some positive results (where positive means "advancing the state of human knowledge"), and that part of the art of finding a good topic of research was the art of asking the right kind of question, which would yield some positive result independently of the answer. Similar views are expressed in this other [stackexchange](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7421/what-to-do-with-negative-research-outcomes-results-of-phd-research-experiment) question and the corresponding answers:
>
> It is an expectation that the PhD would make an original contribution and/or advance knowledge in a given field. I understand this is a universal assumption for this level of study across all universities. (...) usually a PhD is measured on its contribution to expand knowledge.
>
>
>
* Nevertheless, <NAME> defends convincingly the opposite view in "Writing for Computer Science", p.154 of the Second Edition:
>
> even if good results are not achieved, the thesis should pass if you have shown the ability to undertake high-quality research. (...)
> A thesis with negative results can, if appropriately written, demonstrate the ability of the candidate just as well a a thesis with positive results. (...)
> it is you, not the research, that is the primary object of scrutiny
>
>
>
Is there an agreement across disciplines about this question?
I am not directly concerned (I reported positive results in my PhD thesis long ago, have many positive results to report in my "Habilitation" thesis, and I certainly aim for my students to report positive results in theirs), but I am curious about the real objective of the thesis:
- as an advisor, I could suggest a more risky topic if it had the potential to teach more to the student without risking the whole graduating thing; and
- as a referee or member of an evaluation committee, I have to judge students and/or their thesis...
---
Extreme Fictional Example
-------------------------
A student and advisor do the entire research work following the most rigorous scientific process for several years, only to find their efforts ruined near the end of the process either by a budget cut, the disappearance of the species they were studying, or the discovery that the problem is the consequence of an obscure results from year ago in another research community.
The student has followed and learned the scientific process, but did not contribute to human knowledge (apart from maybe improving the index of its bibliography). If the student has showed the qualities required from a good researcher, should(n't) he/she be awarded the title of "Doctor in Philosophy", independently of the contribution made to human knowledge?
This is truly a rhetorical question, and I doubt this kind of situation happens often. Yet the idea is new to me and I kind of like it, albeit I doubt the whole community would agree...
---
Opposite Extreme Example
------------------------
Imagine that a student, stroke by luck, makes an amazing scientific discovery which deeply impact human knowledge, and can be understood by all even though the student poorly redacts it. It seems clear to me that the society would not benefit from awarding a PhD to such a student, who has not learned how to do research even though contributing to human knowledge.
On the other hand, setting two conditions for the awarding of a PhD, having learned how to do proper research AND having advanced human knowledge by using it, introduces trade-offs and compromises (which again do not serve society).<issue_comment>username_1: I assume that by negative results, you mean non-significant results.
"It is an expectation that the PhD would make an original contribution and/or advance knowledge in a given field." Yes, this is true. And "X doesn't work" is a contribution to the field.
(To use an example from my area). Health practitioners are constantly dreaming up things that might work to treat various ailments (illnessess), and using them. The job of health researchers is to find out which ones work - and most of them don't work.
We used to joke that our role as health care researchers was to say no. "Nope. That doesn't work. Don't do it. No, that one's not effective either. No, don't use that. No. No. No."
Pressure for positive results just means you tweak models and data until you find them - using 'researcher degrees of freedom' (see <http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/11/1359>). Your results are therefore significant, but worthless.
My PhD thesis was trying to demonstrate the nature of the relationship between stress and psoriasis symptoms (many people say "stress worsens psoriasis" - it's taken as a given truth, but it's never been empirically demonstrated). I was trying to answer things like what kind of stress, how long does it take, does it differ between people? I never found any evidence that stress did worsen psoriasis. Nor that psoriasis worsened stress (or any other psychological symptom).
A PhD is an educational process. One should demonstrate that one has learned. The most important thing about a PhD is showing what you know, what you have learned, and what you understand. If anyone gets to the end of a PhD and says "Well, those results were all positive, just as I expected", they've learned little. At the end of your PhD (or any research project) you should want to start again, and this time do it properly.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: For a research project to be successful, you need more than just
* a good student
You also need
* a good concept and
* a good advisor
Of course these points are not independent: up to a certain point a good student will be able to make sure the concept is good. At least the good advisor will do that. But what if the advisor isn't that good, and in consequence the project concept is flawed and the student gets bad advise and that is the reason for only negative results?
---
IMHO, **having only negative results likely hamper the project success in an indirect way**:
* do not underestimate the psychological effect on the student: not succeeding in something that the advisor told you to do can have serious effects on the student's self-esteem and that can in turn lead to giving up or anyways loose the "psychological bonus" that you can only get if you are convinced of your work.
* Depending on what kind of negative results, and how the project was specified, "it doesn't work" could be either due to the student's inability/laziness or due to the fact that things just don't work that way. Therefore "it doesn't work" always has a danger of falling back onto the student, even if it was not the student's fault.
* It is hard for the student to prove that it wasn't his fault in that case, which may mean wasting lots of effort just to make sure that noone can come and blame the student for the bad results.
---
All together, I'd be extremely cautious with
>
> I could suggest a more risky topic if it had the potential to teach more to the student without risking the whole graduating thing
>
>
>
Whether I'd at all consider this would also depend on other circumstances. Maybe it is because I've seen bad advisors putting students into risky projects and leaving them in the resulting difficulties.
So at the very least I think that entering a project that the advisor already before it ever began perceives as more risky, should be entered
* by a clear understanding between advisor and student that this is risky (but much may come out of it)
* only if the advisor knows the student well enough to be able to judge whether the student could stand this
* only with a clear risk-management strategy: the risk the student takes must be made up by something else.
How about treating such risky projects as normal job and paying a full wage if you cannot guarantee that even a good student will be able to get a thesis out of the results?
Here's an example (heard of it by rumour only) of how such things go wrong:
project involves growing some plants over 2 years. If all goes well, student can finish thesis in 3 years.
Student is hired for the project on a fixed 3 year contract, and is told that the project really shouldn't take longer. (Apparently, there is no money for more than 3 years). In the 2nd year a minor flooding kills the experiment.
Floods are in no way an unheard of occurrence in the region.
IMHO in this project the student was left not only with a project that had the inherent risk that the work of 2 years may be lost just before it was "ripe". The really bad thing is that it was combined with no plan B (e.g. extending the project), and occured in a country where a failed thesis is a serious thing: it wouldn't work to say in the beginning: "let's try this, and if it fails after 3 years, why, then you can just go on and try another project".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Well, [this negative result](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_Last_Theorem) got a fair amount of press, [this negative result](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems) is generally considered a big deal, and my guess is that a negative result about [this problem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem) would probably be considered an acceptable thesis. :-) So the trivial answer to the original question is: "Yes." On the other hand, it's easy to think of negative results that wouldn't pass muster for a thesis. So perhaps the underlying question is: "How can we tell whether a negative result qualifies for a thesis?"
A thesis is expected to make an intellectual contribution. If I prove a bunch of trivial negative results that surprise no one, then I don't make any intellectual contribution. On the other hand, if a lot of good researchers believe X, and I show that X doesn't hold, then that changes the state of knowledge in the field and therefore is a contribution. (In many cases, the real contribution from such negative results is the analysis explaining *why* X doesn't hold --- i.e., why the scientific intuitions of a bunch of good researchers are incorrect.)
So the questions I would ask would be: are the negative results unexpected? Do they give us new insights into, or a better understanding of, the phenomena being studied? If these questions can be answered positively then I think the negative results qualify for a thesis; if not, then IMHO they do not. The bottom line is, simply: "Do the results (positive or negative) teach us anything?"
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a tough question. Just to abstain from the discussion of different standards in different fields, I'll talk of mathematics only. Also, I'll assume that it is a question about a PhD thesis, not about anything of lower level like Masters, etc.
The main thing is that the gap between "advancing human knowledge" and "mastering the subject" is huge and there is a lot of grades in-between. IMHO, the works that advance human knowledge are rare, be it PhD theses or papers in refereed journals. Most of us live off "doing what hasn't been done before", which is much less demanding. What I mean is that each work introducing a new idea is followed by 1000 ones applying this idea combined with already known stuff to all setups where it works. Each of those 1000 papers does what hasn't been done before but does not advance human knowledge because, once the new idea appears, every sufficiently high level professional can figure out how it may be applied elsewhere, though getting all details right may require patience and even some effort. I certainly would accept "doing what hasn't been done before" (a successful application of a well-known idea in a fairly straightforward way to a new setup) as a tolerable (but not brilliant) PhD thesis.
How much below that would I consider acceptable? Four out of every five projects I try end up in a miserable failure, when I cannot even claim that I have proved some partial result in the desired direction. I have never tried to write a detailed account of "mein kampf" for any of those (dead end moves with counterexamples at the end, chains of implications that never meet the goal, associations and studies of seemingly relevant things that failed to relate to the question at hand for some fundamental but hard to discern reason, etc.) but I would let a report like that pass as a PhD thesis if it really shows 3 years worth of high quality effort.
What I find not acceptable is a "literature survey" (understanding what is written elsewhere and relating things in a superficial way without deriving any new result or introducing any new twist into the story). In other words, my idea is that you should get your PhD after you show that you can "fight a mathematical battle on your own", not only study the battles fought by other people. The victory in a decent battle is sufficient, but not necessary. Sometimes you can be made a "general" even if you lose but show good fighting skills.
All this is my humble opinion only. As to the official point of view, in Russia we had the central committee that had to confirm every degree award before it became valid and there were written guidelines. In the USA it is way more relaxed, so 4-5 professors conspiring together can pass anyone (to the credit of them I should say that I cannot give an example of such conspiracy). Canada requires an external review to be positive (which, by the way, makes perfect sense as a simple safeguard against "local standard relaxation" to me), and so on.
As to "risky topics", the best ambitious projects are such where "something" can be done right away (not something that is worth talking about as "defendable" or "publishable", but something that shows that the student has the general grasp of the subject and decent problem-solving skills). If that something (or something equivalent) is not done within the first half a year, it is a sign of trouble and the ambitious project is better abandoned and replaced with an "apply a known idea in a straightforward way to a new setup" one. If it is, you have a chance and may consider taking the risk. Unfortunately, there is nothing that can guide you then except your gut feelings and your knowledge of the student. You and your student are in an uncharted territory all on your own, and no general advice can be given except "play by ear" and "act by circumstances".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The question as currently asked is: **Is a research thesis (report) with zero contribution to human knowledge acceptable?**
And the answer to that question is **no**.
A thesis or portfolio submitted for a PhD or higher doctorate must make a **novel contribution to human knowledge**. It **must also** demonstrate that the applicant has acquired the appropriate level of research skills.
Some negative results do advance human knowledge. So a thesis with negative results and no positive results may make a novel contribution to human knowledge. e.g. demonstration of **absence** of an effect is a negative result, but can be a distinct and significant contribution to new knowledge (particularly if the effect was previously believed to exist).
However, just spending the time, putting in the effort, and churning out the right quantity of work, is not in and of itself sufficient.
### Basis for this
This is based on a combination of my employer's guidelines, my experiences as a PhD supervisor, and advice from my colleagues. I hear that there are other (less well-respected) institutions that award doctorates just for putting in the effort and churning out the right quantity of work, regardless of novelty of contribution, or of demonstration of research skill
### A quote from some official guidelines.
Here's a quote from the relevant part of the [academic regulations for PhD examinations from UCL, University College London (pdf)](http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ras/acd_regs/2012_13/RD_Section_2_2012_2013.pdf):
>
> A thesis for the awards of EngD or PhD degree shall be examined in accordance with
> the criteria prescribed by UCL and the thesis shall demonstrate that it: ...
>
>
> shows a student's capacity to pursue original research in the field of study
> based on a good understanding of the research techniques and concepts
> appropriate to the discipline; ...
>
>
> represents a distinct and significant contribution to the subject, whether through
> the discovery of new knowledge, the connection of previously unrelated facts,
> the development of new theory, or the revision of older views;
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: In fast moving fields one can get scooped fairly easily. For example a biology PhD thesis may be based around determining the structure of a protein. If someone else publishes the structure before the thesis is reviewed then there is not a contribution to human knowledge since the structure is already known. I think in these fast moving fields the student would be expected to do more. In my "slow" moving field I am aware of two theses (one PhD and one MSc) where the results where the key findings were published by someone else in the weeks before the thesis was finished.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: An historical example: <NAME> was named a fellow at Cambridge on the basis of work that Lindeberg published over a decade prior. Admittedly, this was not a PhD thesis, but I am under the impression the import is comparable. Keynes, for example, had no PhD but was named a fellow prior to becoming a professor.
There is no evidence to suggest that Turing was aware of Lindeberg's work, but I am under the impression that they're approaches were quite similar.
I have heard similar stories on a less grand scale. No doubt the results of many theses have been previously published. Should it matter whether this connection is discovered before or after the thesis is submitted, assuming the new results did not draw on the old?
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/07 | 493 | 1,885 | <issue_start>username_0: If I apply to a job, and it asks for 4 recommendation letters, is it good if I submit 5 or more letters? Why and why not?<issue_comment>username_1: The search committee, or whoever it is who is reviewing applications, asks for 4 letters because that's the number of letters they want. For a postdoc, four is logical because that is typically the size of a doctoral committee.
Unless you have a very good reason (which, off the top of my head, I can't think of), don't send more letters than they ask for. (1) They don't want to read them. (2) They will think you don't know how to follow directions and will toss your application (which is what I would do, if it wasn't clear why I was getting >4 letters). In my field of biology, there might be over 100 applicants for a position (particularly a faculty position; I've heard of 200-300 in some cases). I've been on numerous search committees, and I really can't fathom some of the materials that get sent in with applications.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US in math my understanding is:
* For the NSF fellowship follows the rules to a T.
* For other postdocs there's probably no harm in submitting an extra letter, but there's also rarely a compelling reason to do so.
* For tenure track positions it is common, and not frowned upon, to submit 4 or 5 research letters instead of the requested 3 research letters. If you have a compelling reason to submit more (for example, you work between two adjacent fields) then go ahead, but if you don't have a compelling reason you're also not going to be penalized for sticking with 3 research letters. It's better to have all the letters be great than to have more letters.
There's a lot of discussion about this in the comments on [this thread](http://sbseminar.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/some-advice-on-job-hunting/).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/07 | 1,466 | 6,506 | <issue_start>username_0: I am well aware of the ethic guidelines in the academic publishing world regarding submission for publication of the same article to multiple journals: I know this is broadly considered unethical and creates a bad reputation for the author in question among the academic community (this eventually giving way to negative repercussions –presumably and informal, tacit type of ‘black listing’).
I have a slightly different problem here:
I am wondering what happens if I submit a series of articles, one different article to one different publisher, but all of them more or less at the same time: each of these articles would consist of a theoretical premise (a formula of principles according to which a text’s analysis will be conducted in the article), **which is common to all the articles** in object, and then the main body, different in every article: that would be the analysis itself (on the basis of the formula) of the works of an author –a different author in every article.
The field of research is humanities (literature). I am attempting to determine, on the basis of existing definitions of a literary trend (the aforementioned formula, which itself is a sum up of existing definitions of the literary trend, by other researchers), which authors and which works of theirs may be plausibly associable to the trend.
So, to sum it up, **the formula of analysis (the definition of the trend) is the introductory part of each article**. **Conceptually speaking it is the same for all of them**. I could change the exposition from one article to the other for the sake of not using the same exact text in all articles. The concept(the theoretic formula), however would remain the same: it would mostly not be my own original contribution, give or take a few corrections or specifications I am adding. **The main body of the text –the original contribution to knowledge- is the analysis of the author’s text**: **this is the greatest part of the text and it is different for each article** (one author for every article).
Much of this research has already been done in a draft form. Hopefully at some point in the future, and if these texts are published as articles, I’d be able to organize them (along with a few necessary additions) into a broader text to be submitted for publishing as a book.
So the question is: would this strategy be viewed by any reviewer/publisher/editor as a breach of ethic guidelines in the academic publishing sector? Would it cause me problems of reputation in it?<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing unethical about simultaneously submitting different articles to different publishers. The slight problem is that you probably need to quote the other articles in each one (where needed of course). This is more of a technical problem, though. As long as the articles you submit are significantly different so that none is duplicating the other, you should be fine. It is not uncommon to submit at least two articles more or less simultaneously, to the same or different journals. Having three or more is just more unusual but certainly not wrong.
I have not heard that submitting papers the way you suggest would lead to any negative effects. That said, there is a tendency to split research that could be a longer paper into several shorter contributions, mostly to get more publications. Although this is not wrong, sometimes the papers may become too fragmented ("cooking soup on a nail" as the proverb goes in my part of the world). It is therefore a careful balance when dividing up (packaging) papers from a research project.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. You should avoid **self-plagiarism**. Having an identical section in both papers would be ethically questionable. They could have the same overall meaning, but I would try to rephrase them differently as you might already have done.
2. Also have your papers **cite each other** as being submitted, and possibly update the final manuscript with full citations.
3. It may be a good idea to let the journal editor know that this is happening. They may be able to provide you with specific guidelines.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This practice is usually termed [Salami Slicing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_slicing) or [Least publishable unit](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_publishable_unit). This is conducted by many researchers for whom having a series of N small and terribly overlapped papers is more convenient than having just one substantial paper.
>
> In academia, salami slicing refers to the practice of creating several short publications out of material that could have, perhaps more validly, been published as a single article in a journal or review.
>
>
>
This often happens when someone finds a result that applies to a certain family of logical concepts and prefer to "study" one member of such family at a time. For instance, you find that a certain result applies to any colour and, instead of publishing this result, you publish a paper saying that result X applies to red colour, another one for the green colour, another one for the black colour ...
It is not considered unethical in general (although Elsevier says it is unethical `http://www.ethics.elsevier.com/pdf/ETHICS_SS01a.pdf` in some cases such as slicing data sets), just ask yourself if you want to be classified as a Salami Slicer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In some fields, if you are referring in a manuscript to other unpublished material you must submit it together with the manuscript. I suggest that if you plan to submit each of these manuscripts to a different journal, also submit the other papers as supporting material and notify the editor that they are submitted for review elsewhere. That way you are not hiding anything and the editor has all the information to reach a decision.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: What you suggest somewhat sounds like a series of applications of some concept. If that is the case, and assuming you're not salami slicing but present a well thought out selection of applications of the concept, why not talk to a journal editor about this? A series of papers exploring a particular topic from different application perspectives isn't unheard of.
So if your idea is as good as you think, you should be able to find an editor. And if the selection isn't that concise (i.e. each new paper doesn't provide enough new stuff), your book wouldn't be worth its money anyways.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/08 | 996 | 4,380 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been approached to submit an extended version of a research paper in a journal.
The original paper is already published in a conference proceedings by publisher A.
What "degree of extension" do I have to provide so that publisher B will (legally?) be able to publish my work?
Also, does "extended version" in this case mean additional results, or purely textual extension?<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing unethical about simultaneously submitting different articles to different publishers. The slight problem is that you probably need to quote the other articles in each one (where needed of course). This is more of a technical problem, though. As long as the articles you submit are significantly different so that none is duplicating the other, you should be fine. It is not uncommon to submit at least two articles more or less simultaneously, to the same or different journals. Having three or more is just more unusual but certainly not wrong.
I have not heard that submitting papers the way you suggest would lead to any negative effects. That said, there is a tendency to split research that could be a longer paper into several shorter contributions, mostly to get more publications. Although this is not wrong, sometimes the papers may become too fragmented ("cooking soup on a nail" as the proverb goes in my part of the world). It is therefore a careful balance when dividing up (packaging) papers from a research project.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. You should avoid **self-plagiarism**. Having an identical section in both papers would be ethically questionable. They could have the same overall meaning, but I would try to rephrase them differently as you might already have done.
2. Also have your papers **cite each other** as being submitted, and possibly update the final manuscript with full citations.
3. It may be a good idea to let the journal editor know that this is happening. They may be able to provide you with specific guidelines.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This practice is usually termed [Salami Slicing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_slicing) or [Least publishable unit](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_publishable_unit). This is conducted by many researchers for whom having a series of N small and terribly overlapped papers is more convenient than having just one substantial paper.
>
> In academia, salami slicing refers to the practice of creating several short publications out of material that could have, perhaps more validly, been published as a single article in a journal or review.
>
>
>
This often happens when someone finds a result that applies to a certain family of logical concepts and prefer to "study" one member of such family at a time. For instance, you find that a certain result applies to any colour and, instead of publishing this result, you publish a paper saying that result X applies to red colour, another one for the green colour, another one for the black colour ...
It is not considered unethical in general (although Elsevier says it is unethical `http://www.ethics.elsevier.com/pdf/ETHICS_SS01a.pdf` in some cases such as slicing data sets), just ask yourself if you want to be classified as a Salami Slicer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In some fields, if you are referring in a manuscript to other unpublished material you must submit it together with the manuscript. I suggest that if you plan to submit each of these manuscripts to a different journal, also submit the other papers as supporting material and notify the editor that they are submitted for review elsewhere. That way you are not hiding anything and the editor has all the information to reach a decision.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: What you suggest somewhat sounds like a series of applications of some concept. If that is the case, and assuming you're not salami slicing but present a well thought out selection of applications of the concept, why not talk to a journal editor about this? A series of papers exploring a particular topic from different application perspectives isn't unheard of.
So if your idea is as good as you think, you should be able to find an editor. And if the selection isn't that concise (i.e. each new paper doesn't provide enough new stuff), your book wouldn't be worth its money anyways.
Upvotes: 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.