How to obtain citation counts per year or exportable data from Google Scholar?

Are you referring to this type of plot, which can be found through an author page containing that paper (in this case Evan Shelhamer), by clicking on the title:

At the Google scholar page of that paper you can also hover over the bars to see e.g. that the paper has 109 citations from 2015. I don't know about a way to directly export data from Google scholar. You could probably html scrape the data though, or by manually using "custom range" here to get citation counts for each year.

Another option is to use the Publish or Perish software (which functions as a front-end to Google scholar), which allows you to use the "Lookup citations" feature to get an exportable list of all the citing papers found through Google Scholar. This list will contain year, title, authors, citation count etc for all the citing papers.

An excerpt of the data for this particular paper is included below. In this particular case (since most of the citations are coming from arXiv) you can actually get a better temporal resolution of the citations after some post-processing of the exported data, since it includes the arXiv identifier which contains the month of publication (posting to Arxiv). That plot looks like this, for the 77 arXiv papers citing "Fully Convolutional Networks for Semantic Segmentation":

Data excerpt:

427,"K Simonyan, A Zisserman","Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition",2014,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.1556","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=15993525775437884507&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",1,2015-11-18,""
51,"LC Chen, G Papandreou, I Kokkinos, K Murphy…","Semantic image segmentation with deep convolutional nets and fully connected crfs",2014,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.7062","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=12556287530133233148&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",2,2015-11-18,""
31,"B Hariharan, P Arbeláez, R Girshick, J Malik","Hypercolumns for object segmentation and fine-grained localization",2014,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.5752","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=338188405356970854&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",3,2015-11-18,""
24,"S Zheng, S Jayasumana, B Romera-Paredes…","Conditional random fields as recurrent neural networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.03240","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=4680896688857314530&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",12,2015-11-18,""
20,"J Dai, K He, J Sun","Convolutional feature masking for joint object and stuff segmentation",2014,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.1283","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.1283","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=3867986733742388443&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",4,2015-11-18,""
18,"G Papandreou, LC Chen, K Murphy…","Weakly-and semi-supervised learning of a DCNN for semantic image segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.02734","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=12298732919189295864&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",6,2015-11-18,""
14,"J Dai, K He, J Sun","Boxsup: Exploiting bounding boxes to supervise convolutional networks for semantic segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.01640","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.01640","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=10583411756105923851&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",9,2015-11-18,""
13,"AG Schwing, R Urtasun","Fully connected deep structured networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.02351","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.02351","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=9137941562147447673&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",10,2015-11-18,""
13,"G Lin, C Shen, I Reid","Efficient piecewise training of deep structured models for semantic segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.01013","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.01013","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=1420854562551446027&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",25,2015-11-18,""
12,"S Ren, K He, R Girshick, J Sun","Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.01497","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.01497","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=16436232259506318906&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",5,2015-11-18,""
10,"G Bertasius, J Shi, L Torresani","DeepEdge: A Multi-Scale Bifurcated Deep Network for Top-Down Contour Detection",2014,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.1123","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.1123","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=2089551699301366907&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",8,2015-11-18,""
9,"D Pathak, E Shelhamer, J Long, T Darrell","Fully convolutional multi-class multiple instance learning",2014,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.7144","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.7144","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=6242051221514792488&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",11,2015-11-18,""
7,"H Noh, S Hong, B Han","Learning Deconvolution Network for Semantic Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.04366","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.04366","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=4896002303003783815&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",80,2015-11-18,""
5,"M Jaderberg, K Simonyan, A Zisserman…","Spatial transformer networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.02025","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=1662293494062093494&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",7,2015-11-18,""
5,"R Girshick, J Donahue, T Darrell, J Malik","Region-based Convolutional Networks for Accurate Object Detection and Segmentation",0,"ieeexplore.ieee.org","","http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7112511","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=2674763949973029385&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",42,2015-11-18,""
4,"S Ren, K He, R Girshick, X Zhang, J Sun","Object Detection Networks on Convolutional Feature Maps",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.06066","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.06066","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8299550676813721451&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",21,2015-11-18,""
4,"S Xie, Z Tu","Holistically-Nested Edge Detection",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.06375","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.06375","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=18154299256265143241&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",112,2015-11-18,""
3,"W Liu, A Rabinovich, AC Berg","Parsenet: Looking wider to see better",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.04579","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.04579","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=11105541992267753132&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",13,2015-11-18,""
3,"A Dosovitskiy, T Brox","Inverting convolutional networks with convolutional networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.02753","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.02753","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=3843085858101673825&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",14,2015-11-18,""
2,"S Hong, H Noh, B Han","Decoupled Deep Neural Network for Semi-supervised Semantic Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.04924","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.04924","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=15385340253531275638&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",15,2015-11-18,""
2,"O Russakovsky, AL Bearman, V Ferrari…","What's the point: Semantic segmentation with point supervision",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.02106","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=14456480836534501375&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",16,2015-11-18,""
2,"Z Xie, K Xu, W Shan, L Liu, Y Xiong…","Projective Feature Learning for 3D Shapes with Multi-View Depth Images",2015,"Computer Graphics …","Wiley Online Library","http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cgf.12740/full","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=16653555319690091022&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",17,2015-11-18,""
2,"P Wang, X Shen, Z Lin, S Cohen, B Price…","Joint Object and Part Segmentation using Deep Learned Potentials",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.00276","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=4342156029683513177&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",48,2015-11-18,""
2,"B Yang, J Yan, Z Lei, SZ Li","Convolutional Channel Features For Pedestrian, Face and Edge Detection",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.07339","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.07339","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=6994455475312011326&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",59,2015-11-18,""
2,"S Gidaris, N Komodakis","Object detection via a multi-region & semantic segmentation-aware CNN model",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.01749","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.01749","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=17076919334968493616&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",65,2015-11-18,""
2,"G Papandreou, I Kokkinos…","Modeling Local and Global Deformations in Deep Learning: Epitomic Convolution, Multiple Instance Learning, and Sliding Window Detection",2015,"Proceedings of the IEEE …","cv-foundation.org","","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=372687354279680428&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",84,2015-11-18,"PDF"
2,"X Zhang, J Zou, K He, J Sun","Accelerating Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Classification and Detection",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1505.06798","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.06798","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=11183077033015235296&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",89,2015-11-18,""
1,"A Khosla, AS Raju, A Torralba, A Oliva","Understanding and predicting image memorability at a large scale",2015,"","people.csail.mit.edu","","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=4151583339195604249&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",18,2015-11-18,"PDF"
1,"B Shuai, Z Zuo, W Gang","Quaddirectional 2D-Recurrent Neural Networks For Image Labeling",2015,"","ieeexplore.ieee.org","http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7118156","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=13720065868238901658&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",19,2015-11-18,""
1,"Z Liang, S Ding, L Lin","Unconstrained Facial Landmark Localization with Backbone-Branches Fully-Convolutional Networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.03409","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.03409","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=12791133750001877582&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",20,2015-11-18,""
1,"D Pathak, P Krähenbühl, T Darrell","Constrained Convolutional Neural Networks for Weakly Supervised Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.03648","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.03648","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=18113115400192563138&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",22,2015-11-18,""
1,"C Ionescu, O Vantzos, C Sminchisescu","Matrix Backpropagation for Deep Networks with Structured Layers",2015,"","maths.lth.se","","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=17387807402435828231&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",23,2015-11-18,"PDF"
1,"V Badrinarayanan, A Kendall, R Cipolla","SegNet: A Deep Convolutional Encoder-Decoder Architecture for Image Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.00561","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.00561","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=18037094217443794526&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",24,2015-11-18,""
1,"K Lee, A Zlateski, A Vishwanathan…","Recursive Training of 2D-3D Convolutional Networks for Neuronal Boundary Detection",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.04843","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=17230449095463437923&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",26,2015-11-18,""
1,"B Pepik, R Benenson, T Ritschel, B Schiele","What Is Holding Back Convnets for Detection?",2015,"Pattern Recognition","Springer","http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-24947-6_43","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=1468500825478747183&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",27,2015-11-18,""
1,"C Ionescu, O Vantzos, C Sminchisescu","Training Deep Networks with Structured Layers by Matrix Backpropagation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.07838","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.07838","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8704018611282114837&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",28,2015-11-18,""
1,"Z Liu, X Li, P Luo, CC Loy, X Tang","Semantic Image Segmentation via Deep Parsing Network",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.02634","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.02634","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=18281955767933637624&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",29,2015-11-18,""
1,"X Gibert, VM Patel, R Chellappa","Deep Multi-task Learning for Railway Track Inspection",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.05267","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.05267","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=16444267879523298138&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",30,2015-11-18,""
1,"X Gibert, VM Patel, R Chellappa","Material classification and semantic segmentation of railway track images with deep convolutional neural networks,”",2015,"IEEE International Conference …","researchgate.net","","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=13942078593779597868&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",31,2015-11-18,"PDF"
1,"H Xu, S Venugopalan, V Ramanishka…","A Multi-scale Multiple Instance Video Description Network",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.05914","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=1990066366497434516&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",33,2015-11-18,""
1,"F Liu, C Shen, G Lin, I Reid","Learning Depth from Single Monocular Images Using Deep Convolutional Neural Fields",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.07411","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.07411","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=2562418167496300062&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",52,2015-11-18,""
1,"PD Vo, A Ginsca, H Le Borgne, A Popescu","Effective Training of Convolutional Networks using Noisy Web Images",0,"comupedia.org","","","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=12447971813084759439&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",70,2015-11-18,"PDF"
1,"Z Zhang, AG Schwing, S Fidler, R Urtasun","Monocular Object Instance Segmentation and Depth Ordering with CNNs",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.03159","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=7431213548054053779&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",78,2015-11-18,""
1,"S Tsogkas, I Kokkinos, G Papandreou…","Semantic Part Segmentation with Deep Learning",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.02438","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=16300824466121812385&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",79,2015-11-18,""
1,"G Bertasius, J Shi, L Torresani","High-for-Low and Low-for-High: Efficient Boundary Detection from Deep Object Features and its Applications to High-Level Vision",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.06201","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.06201","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=6429592123688911770&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",86,2015-11-18,""
1,"M Havaei, A Davy, D Warde-Farley, A Biard…","Brain Tumor Segmentation with Deep Neural Networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.03540","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=4159936825454045654&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",91,2015-11-18,""
1,"P Fischer, A Dosovitskiy, E Ilg, P Häusser…","FlowNet: Learning Optical Flow with Convolutional Networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.06852","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=4399198863370102461&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en&num=20",111,2015-11-18,""
0,"CA Brust, S Sickert, M Simon, E Rodner, J Denzler","Efficient Convolutional Patch Networks for Scene Understanding",0,"hera.inf-cv.uni-jena.de","","","http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=related:G0POBdhSJIsJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&num=20&as_sdt=0,5&sciodt=0,5",32,2015-11-18,"PDF"
0,"J Vašícek, M Hradiš, F Radenovic, O Chum","Camera Elevation Estimation from a Single Mountain Landscape Photograph",0,"cmp.felk.cvut.cz","","","",34,2015-11-18,"PDF"
0,"A Dubrovina, P Kisilev, B Ginsburg, S Hashoul…","Computational Mammography using Deep Neural Networks",0,"cs.technion.ac.il","","","",35,2015-11-18,"PDF"
0,"DL Richmond, D Kainmueller, MY Yang…","Relating Cascaded Random Forests to Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Semantic Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.07583","",36,2015-11-18,""
0,"X Liang, Y Wei, X Shen, J Yang, L Lin, S Yan","Proposal-free Network for Instance-level Object Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.02636","",37,2015-11-18,""
0,"M Xie, N Jean, M Burke, D Lobell, S Ermon","Transfer Learning from Deep Features for Remote Sensing and Poverty Mapping",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.00098","",38,2015-11-18,""
0,"S Gupta, J Hoffman, J Malik","Cross Modal Distillation for Supervision Transfer",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.00448","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.00448","",39,2015-11-18,""
0,"H Chu, H Mei, M Bansal, MR Walter","Accurate Vision-based Vehicle Localization using Satellite Imagery",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1510.09171","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.09171","",40,2015-11-18,""
0,"D Dai, Y Wang, Y Chen, L Van Gool","How Useful Is Image Super-resolution to Other Vision Tasks?",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.07009","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.07009","",41,2015-11-18,""
0,"A Raj, D Maturana, S Scherer","Multi-Scale Convolutional Architecture for Semantic Segmentation",2015,"","ri.cmu.edu","","",43,2015-11-18,"PDF"
0,"F Xia, J Zhu, P Wang, A Yuille","Pose-Guided Human Parsing with Deep Learned Features",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.03881","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.03881","",44,2015-11-18,""
0,"J Xie, M Kiefel, MT Sun, A Geiger","Semantic Instance Annotation of Street Scenes by 3D to 2D Label Transfer",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.03240","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.03240","",45,2015-11-18,""
0,"J Kim, V Pavlovic","Discovering Characteristic Landmarks on Ancient Coins using Convolutional Networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.09174","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.09174","",46,2015-11-18,""
0,"C Sun, M Paluri, R Collobert, R Nevatia…","ProNet: Learning to Propose Object-specific Boxes for Cascaded Neural Networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.03776","",47,2015-11-18,""
0,"LC Chen, JT Barron, G Papandreou, K Murphy…","Semantic Image Segmentation with Task-Specific Edge Detection Using CNNs and a Discriminatively Trained Domain Transform",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.03328","",49,2015-11-18,""
0,"N van Noord, E Postma","Exploring the influence of scale on artist attribution",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.05929","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.05929","",50,2015-11-18,""
0,"A Kendall, V Badrinarayanan, R Cipolla","Bayesian SegNet: Model Uncertainty in Deep Convolutional Encoder-Decoder Architectures for Scene Understanding",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.02680","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.02680","",51,2015-11-18,""
0,"C Wang, X Yan, M Smith, K Kochhar…","A unified framework for automatic wound segmentation and analysis with deep convolutional neural networks",2015,"… in Medicine and …","ieeexplore.ieee.org","http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7318881","",53,2015-11-18,""
0,"PH Liu","Novel Convolutional Neural Networks for Deep Learning and Its Applications to General Image Classification",2015,"","pc01.lib.ntust.edu.tw","http://pc01.lib.ntust.edu.tw/ETD-db/ETD-search/view_etd?URN=etd-0708115-214445","",54,2015-11-18,""
0,"S Bittel, V Kaiser, M Teichmann, M Thoma","Pixel-wise Segmentation of Street with Neural Networks",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.00513","",55,2015-11-18,""
0,"D Ravìa, M Bober, GM Farinella, M Guarnera…","Semantic Segmentation of Images Exploiting DCT Based Features and Random Forest",2015,"Pattern Recognition","Elsevier","","",56,2015-11-18,"HTML"
0,"H Nam, B Han","Learning Multi-Domain Convolutional Neural Networks for Visual Tracking",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1510.07945","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.07945","",57,2015-11-18,""
0,"LC Chen, Y Yang, J Wang, W Xu, AL Yuille","Attention to Scale: Scale-aware Semantic Image Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.03339","",58,2015-11-18,""
0,"A Seff, L Lu, A Barbu, H Roth, HC Shin…","Leveraging Mid-Level Semantic Boundary Cues for Automated Lymph Node Detection",2015,"… Image Computing and …","Springer","http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-24571-3_7","",60,2015-11-18,""
0,"AL Jones","Segmenting Microarrays with Deep Neural Networks",2015,"bioRxiv","biorxiv.org","http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/06/03/020404.abstract","",61,2015-11-18,""
0,"Y Wang, J Liu, Y Li, H Lu","Semi-and Weakly-Supervised Semantic Segmentation with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks",2015,"Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM …","dl.acm.org","http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2806322","",62,2015-11-18,""
0,"BS Riggan, C Reale, NM Nasrabadi","Coupled Auto-Associative Neural Networks for Heterogeneous Face Recognition",2015,"Access, IEEE","ieeexplore.ieee.org","http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7270978","",63,2015-11-18,""
0,"A Carlier, A Salvador, F Cabezas, X Giro-i-Nieto…","Assessment of crowdsourcing and gamification loss in user-assisted object segmentation",2015,"Multimedia Tools and …","Springer","http://scholar.google.comhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11042-015-2897-6.pdf","",64,2015-11-18,""
0,"P Hu, D Ramanan","Bottom-up and top-down reasoning with convolutional latent-variable models",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.05699","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05699","",66,2015-11-18,""
0,"SS Mukherjee, N Robertson","Deep Head Pose: gaze-direction estimation in multimodal video",2013,"","ieeexplore.ieee.org","http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7279167","",67,2015-11-18,""
0,"MM Cheng, VA Prisacariu, S Zheng…","DenseCut: Densely Connected CRFs for Realtime GrabCut",2015,"Computer Graphics …","Wiley Online Library","http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cgf.12758/full","",68,2015-11-18,""
0,"J Pan","Visual Saliency Prediction using Deep learning Techniques",2015,"","imatge.upc.edu","","",69,2015-11-18,"PDF"
0,"A Dosovitskiy, P Fischer, J Springenberg…","Discriminative Unsupervised Feature Learning with Exemplar Convolutional Neural Networks",2015,"IEEE Transactions on …","computer.org","http://www.computer.org/csdl/trans/tp/preprint/07312476-abs.html","",71,2015-11-18,""
0,"X Wu","An Iterative Convolutional Neural Network Algorithm Improves Electron Microscopy Image Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.05849","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.05849","",72,2015-11-18,""
0,"LC Chen, G Papandreou, I Kokkinos, K Murphy…","SEMANTIC IMAGE SEGMENTATION WITH DEEP CON-VOLUTIONAL NETS AND FULLY CONNECTED CRFS",0,"stat.ucla.edu","","","",73,2015-11-18,"PDF"
0,"C Frogner, C Zhang, H Mobahi, M Araya-Polo…","Learning with a Wasserstein Loss",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.05439","",74,2015-11-18,""
0,"G Bertasius, J Shi, L Torresani","Semantic Segmentation with Boundary Neural Fields",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.02674","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.02674","",75,2015-11-18,""
0,"Y Wei, X Liang, Y Chen, X Shen, MM Cheng…","STC: A Simple to Complex Framework for Weakly-supervised Semantic Segmentation",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv: …","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.03150","",76,2015-11-18,""
0,"H Lai, S Xiao, Z Cui, Y Pan, C Xu, S Yan","Deep Cascaded Regression for Face Alignment",2015,"arXiv preprint arXiv:1510.09083","arxiv.org","http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.09083","",77,2015-11-18,""


In terms of whether it is worth it to continue to pursue a PhD, that's up to you and your own life and career goals. Based on your reasons for leaving the program, though, you may have a better chance of continuing in another program than students who leave for other reasons (such as failure to complete qualifying exams, conflicts with a supervisor, etc). You will probably need to explain your leave of absence, at least in vague terms.

Although US programs often admit students for direct PhDs, at least in engineering disciplines it is not that uncommon for students to be admitted with Masters degrees. At my institution, I just checked a couple of engineering programs and they allow at least some credits from a prior masters program to count towards the course requirements of the PhD, and they expect students with a masters degree to progress through the program more quickly. It's still more efficient by about 1 year to start as a fresh PhD student and skip a separate masters, but the masters degree is not "wasted" (whereas in some other disciplines there may be no transfer at all). Of course all of this will vary by institution.

There is little distinction between MA and MS; MA in engineering is more unusual but may occur when engineering programs build out of departments more commonly housed in the arts. Since your institution offers both, then that distinction matters more than the letters. Probably the thesis-based masters is better, but I suspect that it will matter little compared to a course-based masters plus the work you've done towards a thesis (especially if this includes publications).

If you decide to continue towards a PhD, I would suggest you begin contacting professors at other institutions that have research programs you are interested in, and simultaneously checking the posted policies for the programs at those institutions. You can also apply directly to programs you are interested in (hopefully those that have more than one professor in your chosen field; the narrower your focus the more likely you need to have an advisor in mind ahead of time). Pretty much the same process as a new student. Your former advisor may be a good resource for suggestions as far as who to contact if you are still on good terms with them (I don't see anything in your question that implies you are not).

Letters of recommendation from your former advisor and possibly others at your current institution that can explain the situation will also be helpful.


MOOC's for failed modules in PhD applicaiton

By and large, in the UK, MOOCs completion does not help your chances of admission; they are almost entirely ignored during the admission process. The only things that are considered are your results in your accredited degree programs. Paying for a certificate will not validate your MOOC participation in any way that Universities recognise; you should only pay for a certificate if you want a certificate for yourself, they do nothing else (take it from me, I lead a MOOC).

The good news is that an excellent MSc result can do a lot to make up for a poor Undergraduate result. How you did as a postgrad is much more indicative of the kind of PhD student you would be than your undergraduate record. Consider writing a cover letter that takes your record head on, explains how you've matured as a researcher since then, that you are ready for real research, and your MSc is proof.


How to specify Phi Beta Kappa membership?

"Inducted" is the term normally associated with the process of joining an honor society, whether it is a group such as Phi Beta Kappa or Tau Beta Pi, or a professional society such as the National Academy of Science, or even something cultural, like a sports hall of fame.

As a usage note, though, the term "inducted" is normally accompanied by a temporal reference.


Should I tell my advisor that our paper is full of mistakes?

Your name is on the paper; you should be able to take a look at the draft, and suggest improvements.

  The paper is completely awful and full of mistakes. The thing is, my advisor will take it personally if I give comments that would put him to a bad light in front of the other co-authors.

Okay, there are two ways to address this. You can pubically say, "This paper is awful and full of mistakes," paint your advisor in a bad light, and face his ire.

Or, you can take each of the mistakes, and tactfully offer an improvement. That is, you could privately say, "I think the paper might have a better chance of acceptance if we made these changes."

In other words, don't edit as a critic; rather, put some work into the paper as a co-author.

There's a fine art to editing work in a way that isn't off-putting for the primary author. People tend to get defensive when their writing is critiqued – it's a very natural reaction. However, if each of your suggested changes is offered constructively, as an improvement to an initial draft, rather than an indictment of it, you stand a better chance of incurring thanks instead of wrath.

On the other hand, if the paper is so bad that it's not salvagable, then I'd suggest requesting that your name simply be removed from the author list.


Is there a tool that can retrieve subject area listings for a journal using an API

Not an API, but still machine-readable: Scopus provides an Excel file comprising the database's coverage, including each journal's disciplines and subject areas. See this page and click on "Download the Source title list".
(Elsevier provides an API, too, so it is possible that you might obtain the same information through that venue.)


A master's degree from IGNOU is eligible for a CSIR -NET qualification?

The requirements for the NET application can be found in the CSIR homepage. Take a look into the main notification documentation.


Is it fine to ask this kind of question to the corresponding author of a paper?

Your advisor will give the best advice, of course, especially if he knows any of the people involved. But in general there is no ethical reason you can't ask such questions of an author.

But I might phrase it differently. I'd probably ask if there is any current work on the topic that will shed more light on the questions. And your suggestion of asking if they think it is a good line to pursue is good also, I think. Express your interest in the topic and that you are considering it as a research topic.

But I wouldn't couch the question in terms of responding directly to a (partial) rebuttal if that's how you judge the new work. It doesn't sound like that is the case, though, so just asking about what they can tell you about current thinking and research is fine.

And, if they are working on the topic it might save you from the problem of going along on a parallel track and getting scooped by more experienced researchers.


What does one do the summer between graduation and graduate school?

As someone who jumped keenly straight from my undergraduate into graduate school (we could start at any time), my advice is to rest. Even if you cannot travel, spent time with your parents or grand parents or anyone who will give you a room to sleep in. Maybe help out at a local charity. Clear your mind. Read some novels. Go hiking.

This could be the last extended break of your life (before retirement). Enjoy it.


Is it a contribution if I prove the result in previous paper in my own way and provide small extension in the form of application of the results?

It is often very difficult to answer "Is this paper worth writing?" in general terms.  Sorry to say, but it is very common that you don't know whether a paper is worth writing until you write it, and you don't know whether a paper is publishable until you submit it (sometimes more than once).

If I understood the situation properly, it's this: there is a paper in the literature by someone else that contains some mathematical-ish result: something that received a proof in the original publication.  You have (i) your own proof and (ii) a small extension of the result, and you are wondering whether it's worth writing up and trying to publish.  So the answer is: it might or might not be.  If you are a junior researcher -- by which I mean anyone who has a designated advisor or mentor -- then I strongly suggest that you talk to your advisor about this.  The question of what constitutes publishable work (and if so, where it can/should be published) is really a question about the sociology of your discipline, and a veteran researcher in your field will probably have better instincts about this than a newer researcher...and this can continue to be true even when the veteran researcher has equal or lesser insight into this particular project.

Probably though at some point you will just have to decide whether to push on with it or not.  That's really up to you.  The main downside is that you may spend time writing and trying to publish the paper and eventually learn that the paper is not publishable, or at least not publishable in the sort of journal you want to publish in.  There is also the chance that you could publish the paper and that others in the field may view your contribution as too minor to meet their own standards of publication, but in that situation I would expect them to mostly ignore the paper.  (There are other situations in academia where people count papers, and even a very minor publication will still count for that.  This is not a great situation, in my opinion, but it exists, and some people may in fact have large incentives to keep the publications coming.)

I think the right way to look at the decision is this: the question is not really whether to write up and publish versus not to write up and publish.  Rather, you will want to spend your time writing up and publishing something, and practically speaking there is a limit on the number of projects you can try to write up and publish at any given time.  (This varies based on the field and even the person.  For me (a mathematician), even if I start with a huge stack of manuscripts already on my desk with all the Theorem:... and Proof:...'s already written down in some mathematically satisfactory form, nevertheless I would struggle mightily to find the time to edit and submit more than 4-5 of them per year.)  So do you want to spend your time on this or something else?

I want to end by mentioning that a few months ago I submitted for publication a project that has the same rough description as the OP: in this note I give a new (though not completely new) proof of a recent theorem of M. Kapovich, and then I prove a stronger result in a special case.  There is no question that I view this as a very minor work.  Why did I decide to submit it for publication?  Well, first I found Kapovich's result very interesting so I had already decided to give an exposition of it in some notes of mine.  Writing up these results led directly to my (very minor) new contribution, so the amount of additional polishing I had to do in order to have something submittable was rather small.  Second, the paper concerns a mathematical subfield, complex manifolds, in which I absolutely do not possess a research-level knowledge....so I have no reputation to ruin.  Finally, I have enough other publications that I think no one is going to try to draw any conclusions about my research program or trajectory from this one paper.  Whether this was a good decision is not yet clear to me...

Added: Just this morning I received an email that the above note has been accepted!


Is it possible to write and defend a dissertation on work for a private company?

There are certainly ways to get a PhD while working on a project supported by a private company.

It will almost certainly require enrolling in a PhD program, doing the required coursework (if any), passing the necessary exams, assembling a committee, proposing the dissertation, then writing and submitting it. There are few credible institutions that will look at a body of work done outside the institution, go "Well, that's it then." and award you a doctorate.

You would be well served in talking to potential advisors and chairs within the department about their feelings on the matter, as well as your current supervisors - they may not view a PhD earned while working for them as the same as an external PhD ("If we hire you, we get new expertise") so it might not actually resolve your career ceiling problem to your satisfaction.

But in principle, there's nothing prohibited (barring a university's guidelines) in working on research driven by private industry. Though additional complexities may arise - what if the company doesn't want you to publish one of your dissertation papers, for example? Get everything settled, preferably in writing, beforehand. And recognize that working full time and getting a PhD is a tough road.


Losing confidence after a series of paper rejections

This sounds like a pretty common case of the human condition.  In my single days, I used to think of dating like "strikes and gutter balls".  That is, either I was getting many dates in rapid succession or going through a prolonged dry spell.  In the former, I was feeling pretty good about myself and was quite down in the latter.
In my current research days, I find a similar emotional oscillation.  This is the nature of research, in my opinion, and it builds character.  You actually sound quite productive, and the results will come.  In fact, I would encourage you to try to get more enjoyment from the process of seeking truth rather than putting all your eggs on the often opaque 'accept/reject' decision.  If I may with another analogy, it's like learning golf.  It's a slew of mishits, duffs, shanks, slices, hooks, flubs, and ineptitude until suddenly you smash a beauty down the fairway and are the envy of your friends.  If the one great shot makes up for the many bad shots, you're hooked.  If not, you're probably going to quit.
Also, pragmatic advice holds: get sleep, review diet, practice self-care, take mental health breaks, seek advice from colleagues/advisors, confirm writing and presentation adequately represents results, etc.


Should I inform my letter writer about a summer school rejection? Should I ask the same professor to write me a letter for grad school?

Yes, you should tell them and yes, it makes sense to ask them again. Likely the rejection wasn't due to the letter they wrote, but to the level of competition for positions in the program.
But, in general, your letter writers should be people who know you and your work well and can make a confident prediction of your future success. I assume that this is one of those people. And informing them might get you an even stronger letter.
Note, of course, that the standards are different for a summer program and a graduate program. And the competition won't be less. Apply to universities that fall over a range of rankings so that you have a better chance of acceptance. If you apply only to top ranked small schools you greatly lessen your chances.
While a summer program has a fixed number of "seats", applying to several schools opens the number of possibilities.


Is there a way to get a complete name bibliography from Scopus? How can I set my scrape, in that case?

You just need to click on the author and it will take you to the author details page. There you will find the complete name of the author.

The bibliography you are exporting should be in the form as it is. While you can follow the above description for complete names.


Is it ok to cite someone who provided a bad citation for correct information?

If you want to refer to his work (i.e. his results, discussion or conclusions), you should cite it.

If you want a reference to the particular piece of information he cited (the sentences describing plasma etching before his call to ref. 4), then you should find a direct source: either a textbook or review on the topic. This would be much better than a research article (or thesis), especially one badly sourced.


Prof asked to interview me, now I can't get in touch with him - what's the etiquette?

I had similar issues with contacting my future PhD supervisor when applying and found the most efficient route was contacting the assistant. The professor is clearly busy but definitely doesn't want to be inundated with your emails. The assistant may plan his schedule and can book you in. Contacting the post doc isn't as efficient and can look like you are sidestepping the professor.


What exactly is a "non-archival venue" and "workshop with proceedings"?

What do people exactly mean when they say "non-archival venues" although the venue might have "publications"?

Usually a conference/workshop is made "non-archival" so that the research presented at the venue can be published somewhere else (either before or after the event), i.e. the venue does not require exclusivity. An author can present their work to the conference/workshop specialized community, while at the same time keep the option to publish it in another reputable venue (for instance a journal). It seems common that the venue would let the authors choose whether they want their paper to be published in the proceedings or not, in this case the proceedings are made of the papers whose authors opted in. Example: https://sites.google.com/view/acl19studentresearchworkshop/call-for-paper.

  What is the exact difference between "workshop with proceedings" and one without it? Is there a way to determine this without having to contact organizers?

The difference is literally that in one case the papers are published in the proceedings of the workshop, in the other they are not. In my experience workshops without proceedings do not require submission of a full paper, only a one page abstract for instance. There are also some conferences/workshop which don't have proceedings, but the abstracts presented can be selected for publication later as a full paper in a journal. In general this kind of information should be provided in the call for papers, but if it's not then the only way to know is to contact the organizers.


Can authors/acknowledgements be edited once paper is published?

Generally speaking, adding to the authors or acknowledgements after publication would be very unusual.

I can imagine it might happen for acknowledgements ("terrible oversight, very embarrassing, we didn't mention XY, please could you change..."), but even then, it would not be surprising if the journal says no.
However, I am finding it very hard to imagine it happening for authors. The editor will ask - if this person had already contributed enough to be an author, why weren't they listed earlier? And if they hadn't contributed enough at the time, why are you trying to make them an author? I can't think of a good answer to either of those without imagining a very unusual set of circumstances.

After submission but before publication, however, things are a little more flexible.

It should not usually be a problem to add to the acknowledgements during the submission process - note the enormous number of papers that acknowledge the help of the peer reviewers, which of course couldn't have been known at the time of submission! Many publishers even explicitly recommend that you do not include acknowledgements in the submitted paper, as this can be a problem for double-blind peer review.
Adding an author at this point would still be pretty unusual. You might be able to persuade an editor that there was a simple administrative error that meant you missed off an author from the original submission, but this would still be seen as quite strange; in theory everyone who contributed to a paper enough to be an author should have seen it before submission and been able to notice that their name was missing.

The one plausible circumstance I can think of where it would be reasonable to add an author is if the paper has changed and they have contributed an appropriate amount to the new version of the paper. For example, perhaps the reviewers concluded that your work needed some particularly specialised statistical analysis, so you went off, found a statistician with the relevant expertise, and incorporated their work into the revised paper. The statistician has now done enough work to be considered an author, so you add them to the authors list (and explain very clearly to the editor why you've done this, because they will ask those questions above...).

Finally, minor clerical changes should usually be fine before publication - changing a name because you've written Jane D. Smith rather than J. Diana Smith, etc. After publication, this comes down to journal policies - some will permit it, some have a hard line against it, some are vague.


Should I talk about research done in a different field from the department I apply to?

You should talk about the research at least a little. Math research and CS research are very similar in many ways, so the capability to do one is helpful. How much to talk about is trickier and should be something you should discuss with your adviser and others who are more directly familiar with your research itself.


"Computers & Security" journal latex template?

Following the various links of the Guide for Authors one arrives at the LaTeX Instructions page of Elsevier, which recommends the usage of the class elsarticle.


getting funding as a master of engineering student

Look for scholarships from your university, as well as outside scholarships devoted to your specific branch of engineering. Another option would be to do a co-op or have a part time job, as that would not only pay your costs, but also give you real-world work experience. If all else fails, ask your adviser and financial aid people. They will be able to show you whatever is needed. You could also apply for entry-level work positions and try to work and study at the same time.


Which tense to use when presenting my master thesis?

I think it really depends on what the research shows. If the research demonstrates a process that is ongoing, or straddles multiple timelines/periods, you can go with "the research shows that". However, if it is related to something that happened squarely in the past, you can use the past only.

I personally tend not to use the first person when discussing results of undertaken research, though I have seen it done in all the ways you describe. Really it comes down to what feels most natural and right to you as the author.


Is a researcher with the same name in a different field likely to cause confusion?

First, you don't lose anything by adding initials. They will make it easier to search for your name in databases, until the day comes when academia has a unique/canonical researcher ID scheme in place.

If you have a middle name (or middle names), you can use those. If you don't, just choose a "pen name" by adding initials, chosen to make the combination of your name + initials unique (for now, of course… you cannot do anything about someone having the same name and starting to publish in a few years). I recommend doing that.

What can happen is that other people searching for your publications in the future might miss your first three papers. But if you have a publication list on your webpage (you have a webpage, right?), it's no big deal. Also, three seems like a large number now, but it will not always be that way.


What are successful techniques for convincing Professors in becoming PhD advisor?

This might depend quite a lot on the field and on how much the individual professor has to say in your general admission to the program.

But, the best method is a personal visit and directly asking them. You will need to convince them, no matter how you proceed, that you have the correct background and good prospects for success. Your proposal, if you have one, needs to mesh well with their interests. Or you might need to be flexible enough to fit into one of their projects rather than your own.

But face to face is best if you can arrange it. Professors get a lot of email from potential students who are just sending out broadcast appeals without being especially serious in any of them. You want to avoid getting lumped together with those. So, if you must do it by email, be sure that you express knowledge of what it is that they do and can say how you might fit into that in a productive way.


Explaining bad grades in application: SOP or separate letter

Some web-based application forms have dedicated fields for comments on grades or academic hardships. I would first of all take advantage of these if possible, and second, read the fine print if not: some application guidelines will forbid submission of additional materials. This doesn't have to stop you, but I would contact the admissions staff either way if there isn't a dedicated field. It should be as simple as asking, "May I enclose a brief additional letter explaining an issue in my academic history?"

In my opinion, that's what you should do however you can, unless admissions expressly forbids it, or if the issue at hand somehow affected your academic purpose. The statement of purpose is a fairly important and somewhat haphazardly scrutinized document, so anything tangential that interrupts your flow or the optimism and enthusiasm you express for your present and future work is likely to detract from the cohesiveness your message, the consistency and positivity of your tone, and the room you have to go into detail and cover other important information. You never really know what your readers are going to pay attention to in your writing, so it's best not to take any chances and leave it as flawless as can be, while conveying important but unexpected information through other channels if possible.


How to know if these congresses (i.e. organized by ISCA) are good?

Consulting the Australian Computer Science Conference Ranking reveals that one of their conferences, CATA, is ranked C. I did not check any others.

Indicators   that the conferences are not good include:

The conference is extremely broad. CATA covers topics including Algorithms, Programming Languages, and Multimedia.
The conference is in an exotic location (e.g. Hawaii).
People involved in the conference are not the leaders in their field.
Conference is not well established.
Conference does not appear in the Conference Ranking list, even though it has been around for a long time.

Note that conferences satisfying some or all of these criteria are not necessarily poorly ranked.


Explaining Poorly Chosen Major and Average Grades

I do think you should explain your mediocre grades in your major in your application.  Give the honest truth that you feel it was a poor choice of major and you lacked interest in the subject.  It's not perfect, but it's better than no explanation.

The more you can portray it as a story of growing and maturing over time, the better.  Focus on the positive: lessons learned, developing more discipline, finding your passion in your physics classes, etc.

I don't think you should say you were "viciously lured" into engineering.  It doesn't really add anything to the story, and also it comes across as blame-shifting.


Formal Title for Someone with a Masters Degree?

In the United States there's no formal pre-nominal title held by individuals holding a Master's degree that I know of, so it's very unlike Dr. Xxxx that one holding a Ph.D., etc. might be addressed. In text, you would address such a person with a post-nominal suffix like M.A., MBA, etc. I'm sure the logic is different among specific types of degree, where Esq. for Esquire is a post-nominal suffix for those in the legal profession in the US. To give you an example, though: If I hold an M.Sc., you might refer to me as "Kendall, M.Sc." if you wanted to address me in an email or letter, but I would realistically expect Mr. Kendall or what have you face-to-face.

I should also add that courtesy titles like Esq. or Mr., and academic titles don't get used at the same time. Kendall, Esq. M.Sc. would be wrong, as would Mr. Kendall, M.Sc.!


My advisor escalated things after not getting a coauthorship he did not deserve

How are 'attitude problem' and not obeying your adviser a 'crime'?  In my university, there is a 'co-authorship policy', which clearly states that any co-authors must have made significant intellectual contributions.  If such a policy exists at your university, I would bring it to support your case.

If you're fronting the committee because of supposedly poor progress, then I would gather as much evidence as possible to support your case. For example, your communication with your external adviser, papers published, etc.

I suggest you change the supervisor. The situation will definitely get worst because it looks like the internal adviser is unethical.  He/she will 'burn you alive'.


Giving up good position because of studies

An important consideration is "window of opportunity".  How long will you have the chance to go back to school?  Will the school be happy to let you defer for a year?  In contrast, if you leave your current job for school, is there a good chance that you could return to work there after you finish a masters degree?

Also ask "What are my long-term goals?"  It sounds like you mainly want to be challenged and experience personal growth; perhaps also to "do something useful".  Do you have others long-term goals?  How likely are you to be happy and on your way to these goals in 5 or 10 years if you stay at your current job.  Grad school can be fun, but it's often just a way to delay "real life" for a few years.  If you get a masters, will that really help you to be happier with your life and where you're headed 5 or 10 years after you finish school?


How does someone who holds two doctoral degrees sign their name?

Depending on the country and local department customs, signing Dr. So and So would be already ridiculous enough. But I don't know of any situation where signing Dr. Dr. So and So wouldn't come out as a show off. I particularly would think very poorly of someone signing their name in this way.


How to tell professor the reason for dropping his/her subject without it sounding rude?

Tell them that you need to focus your efforts on fewer things especially your thesis as you find it challenging.

Be polite and don't forget professors have heard it all before, they will understand or should do.


Can I enroll to graduate school (PhD) in Germany?

The formal requirement for enrolling as a PhD student at a German university will typically be to have a Master's degree, potentially with some (modest) grade requirements (on the Master's, the Bachelor wouldn't matter); and to obtain the agreement of a Professor to act as your PhD supervisor. The latter of course is a very individual decision.


Is finding an interest in Mathematics in late teens not a good sign for amazing research capability?

It is somewhat common to find highly intelligent, promising students that find it difficult to apply themselves in topics they are not interested in. Upon finding that one topic, these people excel quickly because it consumes them. I actually know scientists at top universities that previously flunked out of college for just that reason. So the fact that you’re experiencing this now is not surprising; in fact you’re fortunate that you’re still so young - plenty of time to dive in.

On your less-than-reputable undergrad institution, this may hurt you a bit as names do matter, sadly. Fortunately, if you mean to go academic in life, this is less a problem for undergraduate institution than graduate. So, you should set your sights on a good graduate school and start working on it. The best way to do this is to gain the respect of a professor you know to secure a strong letter and also start reaching out to specific people you’d like to work with. Take a very impassioned, personal approach, and you’ll be given a bit more consideration than the nameless others that apply.

Good luck, future mathematician!


Is it sensible to do two PhD's simultaneously?

It sounds like you have offers from two different universities in two slightly different fields. If so, you will need to check with both universities to see if you can be simultaneously enrolled. My guess is that neither university will be happy about that, and especially the one that is providing a studentship. Even if it is allowed, you have to ask yourself what the advantage is.

A PhD is more about the research than the nominal department (or even university) that grants the degree. A PhD is all about gaining the skills needed to do independent research. Sometimes (maybe) a good way (or potentially the only way) of gaining those skills is to do two PhDs. More often a PhD with multiple supervisors will give you the necessary opportunities.

It sounds like for you that you want to start the first PhD and then switch to the second Phd if you do well enough in the MPhil year. While this provides some security, if the first PhD program is such a bad fit (either in terms of reputation or area of study) that you want that type of security, then the program is probably not a good fit for you.


Useful software resources for reviewing papers

If you have access to the LaTeX source, there are a number of packages that will help you. Some include todonotes and fixme.

However it's more likely that you have a PDF only. In that case, you need a PDF annotating package. A free cross-platform solution is Xournal, which runs on windows/linux (and maybe Mac).

If you're on a iOS device, then Goodreader is a nice app that does annotations.
There's always Adobe Acrobat as well. Both of these solutions are not free though.

Update: (by @atiretoo)

One issue to be careful with providing comments on a pdf or other document is maintaining anonymity. Adobe Acrobat (and probably other software), automatically flags your annotations with information about you unless you are careful to remove that from the document before commenting.


How to handle Co-author who is not listening the suggestions to improve the paper quality

In every scientific paper that I have been involved in, there has been opportunity for co-authors to directly edit the manuscript themselves, if they wish to make a contribution.  If you feel that you have suggestions that are not being taken up, I would advise you to ask something like:

  Would you mind if I did a pass on the paper to edit in some of the suggestions I've made?

If your co-author hasn't been editing in your suggestions because they are unclear, overloaded, or not able to do so, this will give you a chance to adjust the paper in the ways that you want.  If, on the other hand, they actually disagree with your suggestions, then they may not want you to edit them in, and you can then actually have a discussion about whether and why the proposed edits should occur.

In short: I believe that you need to shift from being a passive critic to being an active contributor who provides actual text that accomplishes what you want to have accomplished.


Is there any degree for "intelligence studies" in Germany?

It seems like this field hasn't established itsself in Germany yet, and is mostly common in the anglophone world. However, the German Intelligence offers courses at the Hochschule des Bundes
Fachbereich Nachrichtendienste (Federal University of Applied Administrative Sciences).

  [...] [T]hey focus on undergraduate education for
  generalists in intermediate-level posts.29 To some degree, the existence of this
  program also precludes the necessity of similarly-structured undergraduate
  programs at regular public universities. In the graduate and postgraduate sec-
  tors, no similar program exists. (source, p. 86)

Contents of the answer and further information from: source


Does the duration of doctoral and postdoctoral phase *always* matter for a W1 position in Germany?

There are two different regulations applying here:

On the federal level, it is mandated that barring exceptional circumstances, a researcher is not supposed to exceed 12 years in total on temporary German university positions. Since a typical duration for a junior professorship is 6 years, that would mean no more than 6 years of temporary employment at German universities before that. This rule does not apply to certain external funding sources inside Germany, and not at all to positions held outside of Germany. Thus, this imposes a rather tight deadline on people intending to have their whole career in Germany, but does not matter much for those who are doing part of their career elsewhere.

In addition, each state has their own law describing who exactly is eligible to become a junior professor. For example, in Hamburg one may not have more than 3 years of postdoc experience. Since there are 16 states, listing all laws is not feasible for me. Also, do not count on this information being listed explicitly in job adverts.


How to critically review an article when one doesn't have proper background knowledge?

This is really the whole point of the challenge the supervisor has presented you. I bet he was hoping to hit you with something that wouldn't exactly be easy for you. He's trying to get you to stretch a bit and get out of your comfort zone. I don't know what he intends by the review format that he gave you, but if you have any critiques, concerns, or other thoughts about this article, this is where you should put them. It almost doesn't even matter if you're right (almost), but you need to show him that you've thought about the article, that you can explain its implications, and that if there are things that worry you about it, that you can explain them.

If you are really stuck, it's probably worth looking through some of the articles that are cited by the article in question to give yourself some more background. This should also help you set the article in the context of some of the rest of the literature.


How to refer to works that I did not read

You skim those papers to verify that the data is indeed there and then you cite them as a source of the data. If you have the time or they are otherwise relevant, read the papers to figure out that the data is suitable for your purposes and there are no glaring problems there.

Sometimes, everyone cites something because everyone else has been doing so, but the citation might be wrong (in detail or completely).

An explicit citation is useful, because it lets you and others verify the result.
Checking that the cited paper includes what you suppose it includes is even more helpful, since it might just be a rumour that the thing is included there.
Reading more of the paper would be even more useful, since it might have qualifications that have been omitted by the citing literature, or methodological issues, or whatever else. Mentioning these with the citation would be good.
Some papers that cite the original might contain errata, important qualifications, etc. Hence, it might be worthwhile to check what cites the classical papers, especially if there is something by the same author(s) on the same idea.

I think all of the steps above increase the value of the work, but all of them also take time. Up to you to decide where to cut off the process and how far to go in vetting the data-to-be-used.

But consider also the next new (PhD) student who would like to use the same data? What would you like to have known or had when using it? If it was non-trivial to track down the data, then certainly provide a reference, for example, so that the next generation will have an easier time.


What do AHRS, EHRS, QHRS mean on a transcript?

Attempted Hours
Earned Hours
Quality Hours

Source


You will need to speak to the different departments on this. You may lose credit for the classes you have already taken in Chem. Engineering since the two fields are different. It is not "impossible", however, these two department might have different requirements for admissions, so you may not be admitted to the Theoretical Physics program. Again, best to speak to your adviser and the departments.


How much teaching in Sweden is done in an intensive block mode?

It varies, most likely between universities but also between disciplines. In my field, a social science, the bachelor level has full-time courses except the final semester in which two courses run in parallel. At the advanced level, the students take two courses at the same time. But in a closely related master's program, courses are given the way you describe.

At my university in the STEM field, I believe it is more common to be enrolled in 3 or more courses simultaneously.

For your specific situation, it should, however, be fairly easy to check online.


Should a graduating doctoral student "care" about his or her advisor's tenure considerations?

I think your approach to this situation is a bit misguided. Yes, you should absolutely care about your advisor’s success (and he should care about yours). But “caring” doesn’t mean that you should sacrifice your own career and self-interest to the cause of helping your advisor, just as, by the same token, I wouldn’t expect your advisor to sacrifice himself for you either. Thus, the way you frame the question as a dichotomy between the extremes of “couldn’t care less” and “will do anything to help my advisor get tenure” is a false dichotomy.

The truth lies somewhere in between those extremes, but broadly speaking I tend to agree with your assessment that the advisor is unreasonable to have an expectation that you will defer the launch of your career for a semester and give up money, health insurance and professional opportunities to stick around and help him finish a project that is no longer a priority for you, for whatever reason. You need to stand up for yourself and explain what your priorities are. But do it in a civil and polite way that shows that you are grateful for the mentoring and other help he has given you (and may yet give in the future through letters of reference etc). Don’t say you don’t care (and better yet, don’t even think it). Do say that you would be willing to make reasonable efforts to ensure a smooth handoff of the project, as you seem to have been doing already. And finally, as @aeismaeil said in his answer, don’t mention the tenure or the grant, since they are simply irrelevant to the discussion. Good luck!


What are the advantages of putting your dissertation on Facebook?

Why Facebook, in particular?  I know you didn't want to do it, but I do suggest setting up a minimal website with your pertinent information (CV, Bio), and then hosting the dissertation there, with a link.  I would be very surprised if you can't get a free website through your university, and setting up a small site is relatively painless.  If you're going to link anything on other sites (e.g., Facebook), I would link your homepage.  I do not think you will get extra traction by simply hosting your dissertation on a particular website, social or otherwise.


White supremacists marching at the University of Virginia – does this reflect the university’s attitude?

The march, and even more so the violence, were strongly condemned by UVA. Here are some statements from the President of the university to that effect.

The mayor of Charlottesville condemned the march in even stronger terms, calling it “a cowardly parade of hatred, bigotry, racism, and intolerance.” Note that the protestors came from out of town; they chose Charlottesville because it was in the process of removing and renaming monuments to the city's white supremacist past.

The US has a very strong tradition of free speech; generally speaking, if some people want to march, it is difficult or impossible to stop them, even if you oppose the cause for which they stand.

In my opinion the violence reflects badly on the US as a whole, but not on Charlottesville or UVA in particular. Whether or not things get worse, no one can say. I certainly hope not.


Allegations of harassment by a faculty member and reporting?

As Allure points out, opinions on this matter will vary, so let me note some points that I think are important here, and also offer an opinion that is slightly to the contrary of some other answers.  (For brevity, these points are framed as an answer to the person you are talking about who is the academic dealing with these students.)

Academics have a duty of care to students: Students at university are adults, but they mostly are still young and inexperienced.  In my humble opinion, academics should generally err on the side of pushing for assistance in cases like these, even if the students are reluctant.  Students are generally young adults who may be intimidated by the positions and standing of older adults who have attained academic success and institutional power.  Having another academic push the matter forward may be helpful in overcoming this disparity.
Harassers thrive on the "I won't make a fuss" mentality: Without making any assumption about whether or not harassment has actually occurred in this case, it is worth noting that cases of harassment tend to be done over and over again by a small number of individuals, and tend to proliferate because each person who is being harassed thinks it is only them, and they don't want to make a fuss and risk retribution by a powerful person.  In cases where a victim of harassment reports the conduct, it is not unusual for this to precipitate an avalanche of other allegations against the same harasser.  Recent events in Hollywood (e.g., Harvey Weinstein) testify to this fact, as do many other cases of sexual harassment.
Merely referring an allegation is not "accusatory": Reporting an allegation for it to be investigated need not presume the truth of the allegation, and need not be "accusatory".  That is the point of an investigation - to get to the truth from a starting point of it being unknown.  It is perfectly legitimate to report allegations you have heard on to the administration, while taking no position on whether they are true or false, but still asking the university to consider whatever investigation into the matter is warranted by the allegations.  There is no contradiction between wanting to bring this matter to the attention of the administration, and also wanting to avoid a false accusation.  Just make sure that if you do send an email to the administration, you write it in a neutral way that does not presume that misconduct has occurred.
In the end, evidence will be required: While it is legitimate to report hearsay allegations for the purpose of bringing a matter to the attention of the administration, you should bear in mind that your hearsay is not evidence.  Unless one of the affected students is willing to speak to the university administration about this, the university will probably be very limited in its ability to investigate the matter.  That is perfectly legitimate - after all, people should not be subject to negative proceeding against them without evidence, and hearsay evidence is weak evidence.
With this in mind, the contribution you can make here is to bring the allegation to the attention of the administration, leading to contact with the students, and giving them an opportunity to report this matter formally.  By acting as the initial referrer of the allegation, you can also show your students that actions are louder than words - you are willing to get involves, so maybe that will make them more willing.  Still, at the end of the day it will depend on them.  In my view even this step might be a good idea, even if the students ultimately decide not to proceed.  I don't agree with the recommendation to do nothing.
Have the courage to put your name to the referral: Think carefully about whether it is appropriate to report this anonymously.  If it is justifiable to refer the matter to the university administration, and if you frame your email in a fair way that does not presume misconduct, then you ought to have the courage to put your name to it, and stand by your own actions.  Reports of harassment are generally treated in confidence (at least up to the point where the accused is able to face the accusations), and this is an opportunity to set an example for your students and show that you are willing to act on your own principles.  If a grown-up academic can't show the backbone to make a report about a colleague, without hiding behind anonymity, why should younger students show the courage that is absent in their elders?

Anyway, that is my two-cents.  I'm sure there will be plenty of others with contrary opinions.  Hopefully others will also give their views, as it would be worth getting some contrary ideas on this matter before making your decision.


Is this academic organization a predatory one?

This is hard to say. I lack any first-hand experiences, so I need to rely on vague cues. There are some good signs for them not being predatory, though, such as the following:

Their Twitter account shows that they have a relatively large following with a high degree of community engagement, being tagged by influential researchers and institutions such as the Physics Magazine (of the American Physical Society) etc. This indicates that they are taken seriously within a larger scholarly community. (However, their main account @theSAIorg seems to be inactive.)

Most of their editorial board members seem to know how to publish well.

They deposit metadata at CrossRef, according to a search for the publisher "Science and Information Organization" in CrossRef's Title List. (But then again, according to the discussion here, there are notorious predatory publishers that do the same.)

Their articles seem well-cited. Google Metrics shows a h5-median of 59 for this journal, for example.

Researchers affiliated at some reputational institutions publish in their journals. Just look at the left-hand side list titled "Top Institutions" at Microsoft Academic, such as for this journal (IJACSA) (e.g. showing the Max Planck Society) or for this journal (IJARAI) (e.g. showing the MIT).

At the same time, there are some puzzling circumstances, which makes me skeptical of my initial judgement. Such as the following:

They are not indexed at the DOAJ, even though their journals are all Open Access.
There are "< 10" peer review reports validated by Publons for their main journal, which could mean anything from 1 review to 9. And that is quite a low number for a journal that has published so many articles over multiple years.
Likewise, there are no peer review reports documented at SciRev.

Thus, my conclusion is: I am not sure...


I am having difficult first year in my part-time PhD program; How can I figure out whether I should leave it or not?

I'll keep this answer fairly general, because what you describe sounds like a fairly general situation.

The transition from undergraduate to Ph.D work is difficult because you're going from a very structured environment (take classes; get grades) to a very unstructured one (take classes, but focus on learning rather than grades; deal with material that's more cutting-edge and therefore open-ended; start getting into research, which is really open-ended).

This is hard, and it's normal to expect a period of transition where things seem out of whack.

Coupled with that is the shame: people going to grad school are usually the ones who do well in undergraduate and have done well all their life in school. You've received praise from your teachers throughout, and have received constant encouragement.

Now you're in grad school. Everyone there is like you, so the competition is more fierce. There are no pseudo-objective measures like grades so there's no way to compare yourself to others (which for high achievers often means that you compare yourself negatively). And above all, all those nice professors who used to encourage you have turned into scowly curmudgeons who expect more and more and more...

It's a wonder everyone isn't depressed. And on top of that you have a full-time job !!

The recommendation that I will give, and that everyone here is giving you, is to ease up on yourself and try separate out your feelings of shame and inadequacy from the reality. You should find a support network of friends, hang out in study groups, do extracurricular stuff. The friends you make in grad school will be friends for life - such is the nature of this crucible. Since you're working full time this is going to be even harder, but maybe you can find others who also work full time and are in a similar position. Also see if you can find senior grad students who are part-time: their experience will be very valuable.

And then in a year you'll be back year asking about how to avoid discouragement in research, and how to avoid procrastinating, without realizing that this is a sign you've made it through the first year successfully :)


Modify the submitted manuscript to journal

I think the best course is just to wait for the reviewer reports. Probably they will suggest some changes. Make additional changes at that time and submit them with the revised manuscript. Otherwise it will just be confusing, even chaotic, for the editor and reviewers. Let the process run for a bit.

I'm assuming that the changes you want to make wouldn't make the difference between acceptance (with revision) and rejection. If you get rejected, revise and submit elsewhere.

But don't do things likely to confuse the editor.


A good GRE score can help your chances at admissions; a poor GRE score does not do anything to help your chances, but they can hurt you, particularly if you're already a somewhat "borderline" case.

However, if a school does not require GRE scores, then I would only submit them if they are strong (well above average). Otherwise, you're introducing at best a neutral "fact" into the conversation.


Journal paper published without correction of errors

You have probably done all you can do at the moment. What the journal is willing to do is up to them.
But it may be that the "early access" version can't/won't be changed but a later final version will have the corrections.
Longer term, if you still have issues with the errors it may be possible to at least have an errata page published.


When is the appropriate time to email professors as a prospective PhD student?

The worst time to contact faculty is when they are deliberating the current round of applications and while they are recruiting the accepted students. In the USA, this would be December through April.

Conversely, best time would be May through October.


PhD thesis Report has questions from reviewer

My experience is the US, not the EU, but, while the "defense" is mostly pretty pro-forma, you still need to give a reasonable answer to any question asked there. In rare cases the candidate failed the defense and failed to get the degree for responding to a question wrongly when they "should have known" the answer.

I think that the written questions are given as a favor to the candidate, though the questions will most likely be only about the dissertation rather than general questions about the field as a whole. In some places you need to be prepared for both. But if you can answer the written questions you have a good idea about what a careful reader of your work might still want to know. This prepares you for the first, but not the second sort of questions - about the field as a whole.

The lesson here is not to focus so closely on the dissertation itself that you forget everything else you know. Freezing up can be an issue for some people, so it is good if you have practice in speaking generally (say through teaching) and have ways to calm yourself quickly if asked an odd question. This is more of an issue in those places that have an "out of field" member of the defense committee - a person from a totally different field who will not have read your work. Your answers need to be reasonable, even when not strictly correct.


Is hourly paid lecturing a viable route into a permenant lecturing position?

I would personally not do this.

The world is cruel so why should the institution you are at right now offer you a permanent position when they can get you are a discounted rate?
The perspective could change if you knew for certain that a position was to open in the near future, but even then I doubt you would just be “gifted” the position: there would likely be a formal competition with no guarantee that you actually get the job.
Indeed coming back to 1., if a position is open but the locals know you’re willing to stay, why would they hire you if a position comes open when you’ll still be around anyways?  They could get 2 for the price of 1 by hiring someone else if a position comes open.

Where I work contract lecturers have some sort of protection against outright exploitation (after a few years they have the right to first refusal) but these very very rarely get transformed into permanent positions.
Not that I agree with this way of treating people as human commodities, but then again... it would not be the first time the scenarios above actually happen.


Get ready for the part where you stop doing most of the research and start fighting for the money to fund the people who do if you want to work as a professor. Other options are to find a pure research track and not teach (like I do). These positions are often follow a progression like Research Associate, Research Scientist, and Senior Research Scientist. Though, there's a fair amount of grant chasing and personnel management on this track, too, and no tenure so job security is based on winning grants regularly.


Asking about funding when you've already been told you'll be funded

It's common for funding to end during a prospective PhD student's expected stay, especially in places where a PhD takes 5 or more years. If grants are for about 3-5 years then this is almost a certainty. It's not unusual to get a student late in a funding cycle - maybe there wasn't an appropriate student for the role until now, maybe a prior candidate went someplace else or left early.
However, yes, it's a bit of a short window to have this funding already expiring within the next year. Sometimes there are other funding streams for a lab, sometimes there are possibilities for non-competitive extensions. You don't have enough information to know this is a problem.
All these uncertainties make it an uncomfortable but also necessary conversation to have. A PI should be comfortable talking about funding plans and contingencies and you should definitely ask about it. PhD programs should also have information about what they do when there are funding issues. For example, is there some department funding that can help cover a student if there is a gap?
Definitely ask your professor about funding. Avoid being accusatory and alleging any sort of misrepresentation, and just go in with questions you have: how long is funding actually secured for? What are the plans when it runs out? What happens if those plans fail?


When describing a joint effort, refer to colleague by name or by their title?

Written Texts

In the context of a written text I usually use the person's title letters (Mr. Dr. Etc.) and state their affiliation if it actually adds something to the point I'm trying to make. Say for example I wish to point out the collaborations I have set up with other institutions, then I'd probably be verbose about it.

Of course it doesn't make sense to explicitly mention collaborators in all written texts. Neither it is customary to do so. For example in a paper the collaborators are listed as authors, and this collaboration relationship is therefore very explicit. In your thesis you should probably concentrate on your work. That doesn't necessary mean you shouldn't explicitly acknowledge collaborators, but that's the type of scenario in which I'd err on the verbose side.

Oral Presentations

In case you are referring to an oral presentation, you could state their title and position the first time you introduce them, and subsequently refer to them by their name whenever you mention them again. Something like:

  I conducted this work with Joe Rnano who is Distinguished Professor at the University of Academia.SE. Joe and I demonstrated that ...

I just came out of a conference and that's what most speakers did.


Why does a university not require me to send proof of high school degree?

This is not normal in the US -- but that doesn't mean it's an illegitimate process. Private institutions can select applications using whatever criteria they deem appropriate; so while it sounds a bit questionable to me, it's perfectly within reason.

It is also perfectly valid to admit students without a high school degree; it happens to be uncommon, but depending on the subject matter of the BA, it may not be (at least in the university's eyes) a strict necessity, provided your other credentials are sound.


What is the requirement for submitting a revised workshop paper to a conf in CS?

Depends on the specific workshop and conference.

Some workshops (if they are small events at bigger conferences, and if they don't publish the proceedings) don't count as prior publication, so you can use all the material again.

Some workshops are actually more like a regular conference, but use the name workshop.  So you should treat it as prior publication.

I suspect from your question that it is more the former.  I would suggest asking the papers chair for the conference;  if the workshop is related, they are probably familiar with it.


When is a supervisor unable to request paper retraction if a paper gets published without her consent?

I can see three main reasons why a PhD student would require permission from the supervisor to publish a paper:

Because the supervisor contributed to the paper enough to deserve authorship.
Because the supervisor is listed as a co-author.
Because university regulation stipulate that students require permission before publishing.
The supervisor is responsible for ensuring that external obligations are met (e.g. ethical handling of medical data; confidentiality agreements with third parties; etc etc.)

Now the third reason does not really affect the journal, but only the internal relationship between student and university. If the student lists the university as affiliation, they may demand to change this, but would not really be in a position to demand a retraction.

If the second case applies but not the first, again a correction of the misleading metainformation needs to be done, but this would probably not be grounds for a retraction.

The first case does merit demanding a retraction, but for this it is irrelevant that the objecting co-author is the former PhD supervisor of the publishing co-author. In particular, it would not really matter how exactly the collaboration of the two broke down.

In the fourth case, the missing permission by the supervisor itself would again be irrelevant for the journal. If the objection however is due to say lacking ethics approval for experiments required those, then the latter circumstance would be cause for retraction. Here, too, the details of the relationship between advisee and advisor are irrelevant, only the potential ethics infractions should impact the journal's decision.


I want to leave my tenure track position before fall. I have great prospects but no new position "locked up": when should I break the news?

Giving notice in 6 weeks time gives them the entire summer to replace you. Wait as long as you can to give your potential next department the time to make you a formal offer. As soon as you have accepted it, tell your current department chair. Don't do it before you have the offer in hand and have accepted. Unless you outright resign effective tomorrow, your current department may assume you are fishing for a counter offer, a raise, or early tenure. Without waiting until you have accepted the potential offer, you may end up burning even more bridges through this process even if you deny that you are trying to force your current department to upgrade you. If you don't walk out the door immediately, then you will have to spend the next several weeks being around your current colleagues. Wait until the semester is over and you have completed your obligations for the spring at the very least.


How can one differentiate between Dr. (PhD) and Dr. (MD or DO)?

You can't immediately tell from the title, but then titles are not typically used by an individual to broadcast their occupation - we don't have variants of "Mr" for plumbers, bank managers, or rock stars - despite their very different occupations. Rather, the title is to be used by others when addressing that individual, in order to signify a degree of respect, typically for a particular level of training, qualification and responsibility, or else for a particularly respected position in society. Even the term "mister" is a meaningful sign of respect that historically would not have been as widely applied as it is today - the ratchet of etiquette has gradually eliminated everything below it.

The actual title "Doctor" means "teacher" (from Latin "doceo", "I teach"). This title is more often more relevant to PhDs than MDs, so you probably have your suggested solution backwards. That said, the solution is really neither necessary nor appropriate. Much like "Master" (from Latin "magister", in this case "teacher"), "Doctor" signifies that an individual has not only gained enough competency to practice in a particular field, but has developed enough expertise to instruct others. An individual who is sufficiently qualified to practice but not teach would historically have been known as a "journeyman", roughly equivalent to "professional".

In short "doctor" refers not to a field of expertise, but rather to a level of expertise.

Incidentally, most UK surgeons drop their title of "Dr" and revert to "Mr" after joining the Royal College of Surgeons. I've heard through a friend of at least one surgeon who reacted quite angrily at being addressed as a mere "Dr", which in such circles, due to a collision between traditional titles and modern medical training, could be unkindly translated as "trainee".


How to stop a researcher cutting corners in research?

I find this question very interesting but difficult to tackle. It will be difficult to provide specific answers to a general hypothetical situation since one is left with too many unknowns. First, one could wonder what the policies at the university are like? Do they have a panel for scientific fraud, misconduct etc.? Are there guidelines in place?  Then, we deal with persons and each situation is unique. People cheat for a variety of reasons from fear and feelings of inferiority and inadequacy, through stress and peer pressure to the narcissistic or psychopathic. Thirdly, the severeity of the problem is on a continuous scale and the response depends where you are on that scale. This also holds for the reverse problem, what works in one place may not work in another for these reasons.

In your question you state you wish to keep harmony but in essence the fact that "you" are uneasy with someones less than adequate research methods is already disharmony. So regardless if you do or do not do anything, there will be disharmony, either you will feel bad or someone else will. So there is no painless way out.

As for the case. I can see that you describe a sliding scale for what I would call poor science (overinterpreting results) to actual falsification of results. In the latter case, it is clear, one "must" pursue the problem. How this is done will vary but I am sure there are guidelines in place either at the university level or at a national level (on my home turf the national science foundation provides such services).

In the case of someone producing poor science by either, for example, being too lazy to do the work or by jumping to conclusions, there can be only one way forward: to try to confront the person and have open discussions around the science (or lack thereof) to bring out the problem in the open. It may be possible to start a discussion group where you read and discuss each others manuscripts. Such discussions are useful under any circumstances to help improve the manuscript and spot problems before submitting to a journal. Under such circumstances the problems can be discussed (if they become solved is a different matter). My sense is that a person who is aware of their shortcomings is not generally fond of talking about them so you may end up having these discussions with everyone but the one you want to target.


(Re-)entering UK academic system after a long time abroad

It is not true that there are no research only academic posts. There are post-doctoral researchers, research assistants and research only professors in many places within the UK academic system. There are also research institutes outside universities and affiliated with universities who wholly perform research.

It's just that there are fewer advertisements for  these posts as there are fewer of these types of vacancies than teaching lecturer posts. You could get the impression  that they do not exist based on reading job advertisements alone.

You would need to research more carefully what institutions are performing the research in the specific area of your skills and try to find out how they advertise.

You should  be aware of the UK Universities own vacancy notification site www.jobs.ac.uk as traditional advertising of vacancies (such as in scientific journals and newspapers) is no longer performed due to budgetary reasons.


In the same way you evaluate quality of a non-open access journal: who are the people on the editorial board, what kind of papers do they publish, etc.


Are you supposed to come up with a thesis problem on your own in math?

There's nothing necessarily wrong.  There are different ways to a thesis.  Many advisors expect students to come up with their own problems and others don't.  For certain fields/people this is easier than others, but in general finding good problems is hard and takes time.  Choosing good problems to work on is a large part of being a good mathematician.  Often experts who give problems to students will consult with other experts before giving a thesis problem or before deciding on whether to work on something themselves.

There are many successful mathematicians who wanted to do something in a different area than their advisor.  However, it is a bit riskier, as you seem to realize, for several reasons: it may be hard to find a problem, you want to make sure what you do isn't already known, you may want some perspective/guidance, you want to make sure what you do is interesting, ...

Here are some things you can consider, in no special order:

Look for a secondary advisor.  You should of course ask your advisor what he thinks about this, and he may be able to suggest some people.
Go to conferences/workshops/etc in this area (also local seminars if possible) and meet people and talk to them about ideas.  You shouldn't expect someone to give you a problem, but if you have some general ideas for things to try, they may have valuable specific suggestions.
See if you can visit an expert at another institution.  Again, talk to your advisor about this and perhaps he can make suggestions.
If you know how to do some things, you can just do them and write them up, then send them to experts and ask for feedback (is this known?  is it interesting?).
Do your thesis in your supervisor's area, and then you can consider doing work in this other area later.
At the minimum, talk to your advisor about your concerns about feeling "lost."  That's one of the things they're there for.


Can you use brand names in a research survey

Yes, you can use brand names and trademarks as long as you mark them as such.

You should also, probably include a disclaimer that you have no ties to any of the companies you are researching.

But be aware that some companies are paranoid about their public image, so make sure that anything you say is supported by facts, not your opinions.

The brand names are public, by intention. You can use them. Notice that the popular press mentions brand names and trademarks constantly.


How to decide when it's worth investing the time to learn something new

First of all, good luck on your PhD!

The way I was explained it, the point of a PhD is to become super good at something. To do so, a shallow understanding of lots of things is oftentimes less useful than a deep understanding of one thing. This is just practicality: you need to graduate in X years with a PhD certificate. I would say 80/20 ratio in favor of deeper understanding of a topic vs reading something new, at least.

I would attend seminars anyway to keep abreast of what’s going on, and to learn how to speak about one’s work.


When can I send a status update query to editor for paper under major revision?

Depending on the field, "Under Review" can also be 6 months. The reviewers review in their spare time. If they don't have spare time or are unorganised reviews take very long time.


Travel grants to lecture in a poor country: where to apply?

I am US-based, but I assume things work more or less the same.

Do you have a PhD? If so, then I imagine that as long as your colleague is able to put together a decent proposal and formally invite you, you should be able to use whatever travel grants that you hold to travel there (much like traveling to a conference while paying your own way to give a talk, except the duration would be longer). In the US, you would be able to apply to various grants such as the National Science Foundation's research grants, American Mathematical Society - Simons Foundation travel grant, and also American Women in Mathematics travel grant (since it seems that you may be a woman). Any of these grants should be enough to cover a round trip plane ticket to Sierra Leone, and I assume some equivalent agencies exist in Australia.

If you do not have a PhD, then the situation is trickier. Since you do not have the "expertise," the aforementioned agencies are less willing to cover your travel, which is presumably why so many people ask for donations from their family and friends or through Kickstarter campaigns. I have heard that you can also write to various companies and if they think your cause is worthwhile, they may agree to donate some money.