There isn't One Right Way, any more than there is one right way to teach or manage a class room as a whole. I've most taken note of a few styles:

"Old-school" academic style. They state clearly in the rules/syllabus they will treat everyone professionally, with respect, and they expect the same from all students. They will be more than happy to call you out, right then and there, for inappropriate behavior, and they will call a spade a spade without hesitation. They will, if necessary, be so clear and blunt that it will make you cringe, and if the person will not take direction then they will be shown the door - no one is required to be in their class.
Humorist. My dad always use to say, "ask a silly question, get a silly answer." Sometimes its just a fun invitation for a little ad lib comedy. Real smart asses find, if they push it too far, they will quickly end up the focus of the joke in a rather uncomfortable way (some people's version of humor gets very cutting in a hurry). These sorts tend to deal with such people like comics deal with hecklers.
Redirection - judo master. This sort of style will take any question, no matter how assinine, and turn it into a good question that relates to the task at hand. "Why do feet smell? Well, neurobiologists studying sensation often utilize specialized applications of neural networks to improve their understanding, but first we'll need to have a good hold on the fundamentals - which brings me to the next slide on genetic algorithms...any other questions on this slide before we continue?"
Sweet and simple, KISS. This style would just say, "that's not within the scope of this class, or course. Any other questions about this slide/class/topic?"
Tangential. Maybe you just have extra time or enjoy talking about what they asked about. It has nothing to do with the course, or maybe even anything important, but go ahead and answer the question fully, in depth, with citations, if you know it. Go nuts. Have fun with it, and sometimes you can over-load them with so much knowledge and facts about something they didn't actually care about that they will simply reply with a nod and feel sorry they asked. I'm sufficiently good with this that someone once remarked, "never trifle with someone who has a vastly longer attention span than you do." But obviously you'd better not be pressed for time!
Troll right back (thanks to Shion). Tell them you'll be happy to cover his question next class if he'd like, you think it would make some nice variety to add to the mid-term and comprehensive final. Tell the student you aren't sure of the answer, but you love to learn something new every semester - why don't they look up the answer and prepare a 5-10 minute presentation? You'll even give them a bonus point! You can ask them to email you after class if they'd be interested in the bonus point. If they take you up on it, schedule it for an office hour.

The thing is, most of the time you just really must assume good intent, because otherwise you will - especially if you are not in a fantastic mood - bite someone who genuinely wasn't trying to be unpleasant, or just wanted to be a touch playful. Anything you do to that student will ring much more loudly in the ears of the other students than the one you are addressing.

So be careful to promote a positive environment that encourages other students, rather than one that gets locked in on the one wise-acre who might just be playing a clown for the day.


How to gauge the prestige of an individual researcher when selecting a PhD advisor

In my opinion, the prestige of a potential supervisor in the industry (vs strictly academic) can be (rapidly) assessed by first checking his academic curriculum vitae for:

The committees he is part of. As an academic working with the industry, he should be involved with one or several government / industries related committees with a focus on state of the art application of the knowledge in that industry (procedures to do x,y,z) common best practices (for that field), budgeting and assigning funds, defining road-maps for the next 5, 10 years etc. I know some academics working closely with the transport industry (or government related agencies) - and in addition to the usual academic implication, they are also working actively with those instances, often have a student doing a project with those instances as well.
His publications : he should write or be co-author on papers/books that are recognized in his field. Often large efforts with large groups of academics. His methods/work should be found or referred in some textbooks. He should have international collaborations. Patents ?
Editor : is he on any editorial boards for relevant journals ?

If he is an early career academic, is he that person who is always everywhere, always organizing something, always at conferences and meeting with half a dozen presentation - this could give a hint that this person is dynamic and his career may be promising.

This information should be easy to find. If it is hard to find, this may be a flag. I would personally have a good confidence joining a researcher with at some degree meet those characteristics, even if he is not a tenure at a top university.


Is poor English grammar and writing style overlooked in otherwise strong math paper submissions?

Short answer: no

Longer answer: The purpose of the article is to communicate something. If poor grammar and style gets in the way of that goal, then that is something that needs to be addressed before the article can be published. If the paper is indeed strong, then that will typically mean you will get a "revise and resubmit" rather than an outright "reject".


How to deal with uninterested students during an optional exercise session?

Do you prefer more or less authoritarian style?

More authoritarian: "If you come to my class, I assume you wish to be taught by me and respect my time. In other words, you are to work on your assignments. If you do wish to watch videos or to Facebook, that is fine, but please do not do that in my class - it is disrespectful to me and in fact also to your fellow students who come here to learn. Feel free to leave to watch, and to come back when you are done and wish to return to the exercises."

More liberal: "It is everyone's own responsibility to learn and I will help you to understand the material and how to master it. If you do not wish to engage in it, that is your free decision, but you need to be aware that this is your own responsibility to engage with the material in order to benefit from it [and pass the exam]." - say it once at the beginning, and then perhaps one more time in the middle of the semester. That's it.

Modify as required, this is just a coarse line of action, YMMV.


how to apply The Feynman technique efficiently to effectively improve my learning in math and physics?

There are two key parts of the Feynman method: teaching and keeping a record.
The basic insight behind the first is that if you can teach something effectively then you know it well. Many professors have had the insight that "I didn't understand X until I had to teach it". But if you are going to teach something complex to another person who has (much) less understanding, then you will probably need to resort to analogy and metaphor to get them into the correct mind set.
So, the application to the Feynman method is to form analogies about what you are studying, where the analogies are common (enough) and easy to recall.
But the recording part, using notebooks, is also essential, since writing down your insights engages the brain in a somewhat different way and that reinforces the physical changes (synapsis and such) that make deep learning possible.
So, one suggestion for using the method is to imagine someone, like one of your parents or siblings (unless they are also field experts) and imagine teaching some complex topic to them. Jargon and technical figures probably won't work, so you appeal to what they already know and come up with some analogies that will help them get started. But you don't just do this as a mental exercise. Write it down, as a lecture outline.
The other suggestion is that when you read and take notes (or listen to lectures and take notes) that you follow it up by summarizing those notes in a simpler form, say using analogies that will remind you of what you have just read. In fact, I'll guess that when you read something your mind is already working out some analogies. Record those. Having a "faithful" record (copy) of what you have read/heard isn't the same as learning. You need to engage the brain. Forming analogies and writing summaries are both good ways to make that happen.

There is more to learning that just the Feynman method, of course. This is why instructors give assignments and exercises.  Exercises help engage the brain in another way that is even more effective. It is also why cheating on assignments is counterproductive to learning. Reinforcement and feedback are keys to learning. The feedback is needed so that you don't reinforce incorrect things.


Offering admission and then no response!

I expect by now you have had to decide - but

Often there is only one faculty member (grad advisor) responsible for day-to-day worrying about graduate admissions in a medium size department in the US. And it is only one of his/her responsibilities. The best assumptions are that email went astray or buried (make sure to check your spam filtered email also!), or he/she got distracted by other deadlines and cannot get back to it for a few days.

As you did, polite emails (not frantic or demanding) to request clarification are the way to go. Recognize that if there is a large time difference, that it will create slow motion exchanges. A distraction for the faculty member may put the response 2-3 days later. (Make it easy to find the email if it was buried after a day or two by putting your name and some concise note or something like 'grad admissions clarification question" in the subject line

Pay particular attention to the first email you received that said you were admitted but neglected to attach the form you expected. Were there several names cc'd on the email? Make sure to keep those people cc'd on your requests to keep them in the loop. It may be that they can pick up where the first person left off.

And finally, if you decide to accept another institutions offer, then after you have settled that, then send a polite letter to inform the department. It may be that you decide later to switch schools and want to try again with this department.


How does peer-review work for "gigantic" collaboration projects?

While I am not certain about physics, I can speak for biology, which also has a large number of mega-author papers.  There, the overall field is large enough and well enough connected that, although a massive number of biologists may have a conflict of interest, an even more massive number of biologists are not directly involved but still working in areas close enough to be good reviewers.

I also have a suspicion (though I cannot back this up with data) that mega-author papers may in general have an easier time in review than typical small-collaboration papers.  Peer review evaluates papers along several different axes,
key among which are presentation quality, significance of problem, validity of experimental method, and interpretation of results.

In the case of a massive collaboration, typically the questions of significance and validity of experimental method are long resolved: by the time the human genome was submitted for review, nobody was questioning its sequencing methods and a large scientific community was just waiting for enough data to accumulate; likewise for high-energy particle physics experiments.  Similarly, no mega-author paper should be able to be submitted without enough eyes on it to ensure that the presentation is decent.  That leaves interpretation of the results, and my understanding is that these mega-author papers tend to more focus on presenting data (which is already known to be of interest) rather than on its interpretation, and the interpretation (e.g., "What can we learn from the human genome?") is sorted out across many later publications.

Thus, review of a mega-author paper may actually be much easier than a small paper, simply by virtue of the difference in its goals and scale.


Instead of an old work, can I cite a new work that shares an author and cites it?

I would recommend against this as it seems artificial. The year you give isn't some magic number and citing only recent work doesn't give you any advantage.

But there is a deeper reason in this case, I think. Just because a new paper cites an older one doesn't mean that the newer one advances the older one in every relevant direction. Another way to think of it is that the ideas in the new paper don't actually "contain" all of the ideas in the older one. Someone wanting a good overview of the field - the purpose of a review article - will probably need to go see what those additional ideas are, but if you don't point to them their only pointer is indirect through the paper you do cite. This makes the serious reader's job harder.

You seem to be giving an annotated bibliography, I see no reason to truncate it. The annotations, if well done, will help a reader decide whether to go to any given paper you include.


Several questions about Master Applications

Send them the facts, if available partial grades. Do not go speculating on your future grades, it should be enough to list future classes. Do not swamp them with stuff they probably aren't qualified to digest (last draft of your thesis-in-progress). Do concentrate on getting strong letters of recommendation.

Committees which look over applicants normally aren't staffed with specialists in the area to which applications come in, they get lots of applications to process, but also know that some of them won't be able to provide everything asked for for a variety of reasons. Explain the reasons, give firm dates for completing missing data, provide an alternative where it isn't available (unofficial/partial transcripts instead of official, complete ones).


What is the motivation to start a new journal in a crowded field?

Being able to set editorial policies can have a significant impact on how science is done in the field. Some examples of such policies include: encouraging the use of preprint services, mandatory data/code sharing, transparent peer review process, encouraging replication studies, etc. For the big names who are not satisfied with simply setting the direction of their own labs, setting up a new journal can be another ideal career ambition.


Putting an affiliate professor in statement of purpose

It may be difficult to have an affiliate professor as your sole adviser if he or she is not a professor housed in your main department. Administratively, it can be a challenge to have graduate students matriculated in one department but being advised by another.

However, if the professor is an affiliate of the department, he/she likely has someone who is full-time in your target department that they work with. You could say something such as

  I am interested in working with Professors Carl McCauley [in main department] and Demelza Fordham [affiliate]. Their research on the decomposition of rubber aligns closely with the work I did on rubber composites while at the University of ZYX.

If you tie them into a professor in your target department, being associated with an affiliated professor can actually be a good thing. It will give you more diversity and networking opportunities.  It may also fulfill requirements for outside committee members on your dissertation committee.


Where to Place Master-class Certificates in Curriculum Vitae?

My $0.02-- Education appears to be the most relevant category in this instance. A master-class, unless I am mistaken, is neither a certificate nor an award, so wouldn't truly fit there. 'Experience' could certainly be a valid option also, but since you are moving from one discipline to another, it may benefit you more to be able to show some educational experience in film-making and producing as you apply for the Master's program.


Is there any minimum and maximum allowed time-span for acquiring a PhD degree?

What limitations a given student will face presumably depends on the policy of the institution in question, and in some places possibly national regulation.

At US universities, the graduate program often has mandatory courses, making it hard to finish very fast unless some requirement are waived. On the other end of the spectrum, many institutions limit funding after a certain period to try to push stragglers over the line (of finishing or quitting...), or at least make the PhD candidate jump through some hoops (e.g. petitions). Certain institutions have a limit on how long a student can be registered, but it's not clear to me whether this would block someone from submitting a thesis after finishing it on their own.

However, let's try proof by example. Here are some very short PhD durations (I think it will be much harder to finish this quickly nowadays):

Stephen Wolfram of Mathematica fame earned his Ph.D. from Caltech in a year
Robert Wagoner got his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees from Ohio State University in 1974, 1975, and 1976, respectively.

I'm less willing to list regular people who took a long time getting their PhDs, but I personally know some in the 10+ years range. A couple of more extreme example are

Theodore Streleski who ended up murdering his advisor during his 19th year. I don't think he ever received a PhD, but he was still pursuing it at the time.
Ingeborg Rapoport probably holds the record for the technically longest doctorate. She submitted her dissertation in 1938, but was stopped from defending it by the Nazi regime. Eventually, she was awarded her degree in 2015.

Obviously most people aren't going to be like these examples, so let's turn to statistics. In the US, NSF publish reports on e.g. time to degree of doctorate recipients. In education the median is 11.7 years. Presumably there will be some that took e.g. the 16 years you mention.


It's normal and good to tell places you're interviewing about any deadlines you face, that way they have the opportunity to move up their decision process in response.  If I were you I would tell the places you're interviewing something like

  I have a deadline to decide on a postdoc offer at location X by date Y.  If I accept their offer I would still be very interested in taking a job at your school with startdate of year+1.


What can be done about a professor who leaves lectures too early?

As @Nate Eldredge this, how this is received is going to vary widely based on academic culture.

Let me assume that this is a course at a US university, and that it is an "official" course: that is, one that students register for, receive a grade for at the end, and the instructor gets some credit for teaching.  In this context, the practice would probably not be acceptable to many key people in the university.  At most US universities there is a notion of credit hours: there is a positive number of "credits" a student gets for a course (most frequently 1-4) and also a number of hours per week that the course meets.  Now (by widely agreed upon convention rather than cosmic truth, of course) there is a fixed conversion factor for this: at my university, 50 minutes of class time per week = 1 credit.

An instructor who only meets for one hour out of a scheduled two hours is risking the disapproval of the registrar, other departmental faculty including the head, and the students of the course. The registrar is probably going to be unhappy because it looks like the course is trying to cheat the system: if everyone decided to claim twice the number of credit hours that they actually met, it would cause absolute chaos for (especially undergraduate) programs. The departmental faculty are also going to be unhappy (to say the least) about this, on the one hand because the number of credit hours usually figures into the teaching load -- the standard departmental teaching load basically amounts to faculty teaching so-and-so many hours per week (on average; loads can vary from one semester to the next).  Claiming twice as much as you're doing is certainly not okay.  And of course, most faculty want courses to be taught well, and it is hard for me to think of clearer evidence that my colleague is not doing a good job with his teaching than that he is only meeting for half the scheduled time.  Finally, it is likely that the students are going to feel shortchanged ("halfchanged"?), and in light of all the stuff above, I don't see a satisfactory rejoinder to a student who feels that way: on the contrary, I think they're right.

So what to do?  I would suggest beginning by bringing it up to a departmental faculty member.  Good places to start are: (i) the instructor of the course, if you feel comfortable, (ii) the department head, (iii) whichever faculty member you feel closest to in the department (e.g. your academic advisor).  For such conversations, it is important to stay calm and factual.  Be willing to proceed in several steps.  Definitely indicate an awareness that there seems to be some kind of real mismatch here, and if necessary you might want to mention that university administrators like the registrar might be concerned about it as well.  (Again, I honestly think they would, and departmental faculty should know that they would.  So this is more like a reality check than a threat of escalation.)

Another idea: can you ask some other faculty member (or person in a position of authority) to visit the course?  Anyone who shows up is certainly going to notice a two hour course ending after only one hour.  On the other hand, they may well talk to the instructor before they show up, which might result in the instructor's taking the full class time.  Which is what you want, of course.  If that happens once and then he goes back to halftime, then it gives you an easy opening to speak to him about what's going on.

I want to end by saying that this really is cultural.  What you're describing sounds like quite an extreme case, but there is variation between US universities and personnel at those universities on the practice of ending early.  It is not unheard of for instructors and students to feel that they have done all they need to do in a certain course meeting and thus end early: they may even feel great about doing so.  For me personally, over the course of almost two decades of instruction at US universities, I have moved steadily in the direction of thinking that for a three credit course, the very least I owe the students is 150 minutes a week of me in the classroom. I remember though that I taught one undergraduate course at my institution, pretty soon after I got there, and for various reasons I decided to cancel three of the 50 minute class meetings, including the last one (excluding the final exam and review sessions for the final), because I was interested in presentations given by graduate students in a different course that met at the same time.  The present me finds the past me's behavior slightly outrageous...So indeed, some variation on how this is perceived exists!


Does a reviewer get to know comments from previous reviewers?

All publishers I reviewed a revision for so far did this, so I would expect this to be default.
In general, the information in the previous reviews might prove useful without the editor being able to predict this (otherwise, they could review the paper themselves).
Thus it would be unwise to withhold that information, unless there is a good reason for this (like a reviewer accidentally revealing confidential information).

Some specific examples where having the previous reviews is useful:

One purpose of reviewing a revision, if not the main one, is to evaluate whether the previous round of review was properly addressed and no new problems arose from the new material. A new reviewer may miss a problem the previous reviewers found, but they may be capable of telling whether it was properly addressed. (If all reviewers were perfect, why use more than one reviewer at all?)
Sometimes authors make weird changes in response to a review. It is much easier to properly evaluate these changes if you know what happened before. In particular, a reviewer can avoid or directly address the problem of making a suggestion that is in conflict with another reviewer’s suggestions.

Also note that often the authors’ response to a review contains the entire review as quotes anyway (and disentangling the two would be quite tedious for the journal).


Should I be honest about my past history of attending a Master degree in the past?

Consider the worst case scenario under each action: telling them and not telling them.

Under the first it might be a bit harder to get accepted and your search might take longer. You have more to explain about how you will be a success.

Under the second, you are found out and expelled and blacklisted for dishonesty. Academia is a kind of a small place in each discipline.

The best scenario for both is about the same.


Should I wait to quit with MSc or quit right away

Look for other opportunities whilst still continuing with your PhD. Hopefully you find something by the end of your masters year and you can part ways then.

If you can go to an employer and say you're in the middle of a PhD but have realised it isn't the path you wish to follow and are looking for other employment it looks better than dropping out and then looking for work.

Also, not that I'm trying to change your mind but, I don't know a single person doing a PhD who hasn't doubted it was the right thing for them at some point. Make sure quitting isn't something you would regret later in life and think about the reasons you chose to apply for a PhD in the first place.


Would I be facing any kind of trouble in the future for leaving my degrees incomplete?

Leaving the masters unfinished isn't a huge problem. But moving from a Life Sciences Doctorate to Engineering is a big step and would need a lot of justification. You don't say which university in Europe so it is hard to guess at their reputation.
I won't predict that it is impossible, but I think you will have a hard time convincing people unless you have produces some substantial papers that are pretty technical.
Is getting an engineering doctorate in Europe an option for you instead of one in life sciences? Or some sort of joint degree.
Tough road. Uphill all the way, I think.


There is no homogeneous system to name the position in LA. Moreover, there is no unique academic structure. This situation is a source of misunderstanding and many times you cannot find the equivalence position.
An example in Uruguay: In Medicine, as undegraduate you can be student or (last year) internship. In a Department of a Faculty (named "Clinica") you can be (in order) Resident, Chief of Clinic (also named grade II), Assistant Professor (also named grade III), Agregate Professor (also named grade IV) and lastly Titular Professor (also named grade V). Hope to help in some way.


How to respond to reviewer's comment that "magnitude of effect too small"?

I do not believe the reviewer is impugning the significance of your results. Instead, it sounds like the reviewer is suggesting that the scaling used on the graph makes it too hard to see the magnitude of the effects you're talking about. Perhaps he wants you to show a blown-up subset of the graph?


Is it harder to transition from Industry Research to Prof than PostDoc to Prof?

The "assuming one keeps publishing and works on important problems" bit is the hard part.  If you are working at a serious industrial research lab doing academic-style research, then moving to academia is doable.  If you are in a more typical R&D job but doing cutting-edge work and actively publishing, then it's still possible (but you may face more resistance, depending on your subfield).  On the other hand, the vast majority of industrial R&D positions in CS do not put one in a good position to apply for faculty jobs.

It's easy to be overly optimistic about this.  I've seen a number of students take industrial jobs and declare "I'm going to keep my options open by continuing to publish, even though it's not a job requirement."  This rarely works out.  It's far from impossible, but maintaining an active research program when it's not your primary job is difficult.


My guess is that you could move without a lot of turmoil. As you describe your background it seems pretty solid.

But you could try an intermediate approach first. I'm assuming you are still active. I suggest that future papers be in English (or some European language) and submitted to journals there. I also suggest that you make sure to reference your older work that isn't in English as appropriate.

You can, in parallel, see to getting some of that work (the stuff you cite) translated. If you need practice in English you could use the older work as practice to get an English body of work available, even if on some informal sites. You are probably the best person to do this sort of translation, actually. And if it improves your language skills, so much the better, though you may not need that, I realize.

You can also, if funding is available, start to make a presence in conferences in one or more of the countries you'd consider moving to. Preferably get on the program with talks on new stuff that references the larger body of work.

It might be easier to move if you establish some visibility in the world you want to move in to, but it may not be essential to do that.

And if you have a tenured position somewhere, or even a tenure-track position, you can often move and get some credit for that, resulting in a shorter probationary period than the typical (for the US) seven years.


I think you could do a few things to essentially work smarter not harder. My reading is that you want to do a good job on teaching in a time-efficient manner. You know that teaching can become a big time commitment, and you want to make sure you don't succumb to an unwise habit of too much teaching time.

First, consider getting a book or two on teaching and reading through them. I liked "What the Best College Teachers Do" by Bain. You might also check out some of the teaching columns in Chronicle of Higher Ed.

Second, build on the work of good teachers. Reflect on courses you have liked. Try to get syllabi from those courses to use when designing your own course. Or, get syllabi from colleagues at your new school. When you select your texts, try to choose those that come with extras like slides, exam questions, and cases. Try to use a common text so you can ask colleagues for their materials to customize.

Third, prioritize. For me, this has meant "working hard" on one class per semester and putting less effort into customizing and improving other classes. (Then rotating and improving a different class the next time.) I also prioritize what I will cover, as trying to squeeze a lot into a class takes more work than focusing on a more limited number of key takeaways. Lastly, put your efforts into things that are really value-added for your students. I'm not sure what this is in your field. In mine, it is arranging guest speakers and "real-world" assignments and discussion cases. For my students, grading is not as big of a value add, although feedback is useful. Strict grading can start to take up a lot of time if you let it.

Finally, check with your new chair to make sure you have a clear idea of teaching expectations. Each department has different expectations, so you need to get a handle on your particular expectations, not some vague idea you have from your previous institution or the internet. Good luck!


Can UK PhD studentships legally effectively bar EU applicants by stating that "all eligible applicants must also have been resident in the UK"?

You have answered your own question in the question: states can (under EU law) put conditions on, e.g., funding, based on residence, but not based on citizenship. As UK citizens who are not ordinarily resident would not be eligible for this funding, this does not discriminate on citizenship, so this is legal (*).

Anecdotally, in my experience a low single-digit percentage of "UK" applicants fail the ordinarily resident test, and I have seen at my institution roughly 5 students over the past 10 years refused funding from similar sources for this reason.

(*) I am definitely not a lawyer: the case law around ordinarily resident status shows that this issue is not unique to universities.


Is it ethical to take external consultancy jobs during a fully funded PhD programme?

Some universities have policies against funded PhD students doing other paid work. You may want to consult the dean's office (or the equivalent authority at your institution) about this before you sign a contract for a second job (albeit temporary), since there may be serious repercussions such as the termination of your funding.

Your funding may also be coming from a grant which somehow prohibits another income source. This can be unbeknownst to you, arranged by your professor or school, which may be strange and perhaps even unethical, but not impossible and not unheard of. I have seen more than one grant agreement where an "obligation of the researcher to work exclusively for the project" is explicitly stated.

Thus, before you accept the job, make sure to ask your advisor and your dean if there are any conditions which would prohibit you from doing so. You don't have to be very specific about the offer you received. I would say you don't have to hide the facts either, but there are many flavors of advisors and deans so I won't comment further on how you communicate with them. Just make sure to ask.


Should an intern who wrote most of a paper and where the first author contributed little request to be first author?

I think you should talk to the PI about the order of authors.  Don't frame the conversation as a demand/plea/request to change the order: phrase it as a question from a very new researcher who put a lot of work into a project and wants to be shown the ropes about why author order is the way it is.  This is not a cover story: I really think that virtually no high school student could know the conventions of author order in the publications in a specific academic field.  So although it is possible that you deserve to be first author or come in some other place, I don't see how you can reasonably know that without gaining a lot more information about the conventions of the field.

Here is another question to ask your PI: what are the consequences for your career of the author order on the paper?  This is not my neck of the academic woods, but I would guess that a high school student being an author on such a paper is already getting about the maximum amount of credit without being first author.  It may well be the case that the ordering of the other authors has something to do with their academic career...and they may or may not be doing it in what we would agree is a totally ethical way, but unless your contribution was really exceptional, it may in fact turn out to be worse for everyone involved to make a big fuss about it.

I want to end by saying that academic politics really only matters for academics.  I'm not (at all) saying that you don't have the right to engage in the jockeying for authorship position...but you may have the luxury of not needing to worry about it.  That is a luxury, by the way...


Can a high school student involved in a college credit program get an arXiv endorsement?

Endorsement is not a service offered by a college, like academic advisement or career placement. Endorsement is an indication that the endorser knows you and believes you are not a crank, or has read your paper and believes it is a reasonably appropriate paper. It's not like just by having a connection to the college, you could automatically be eligible for an endorsement from a professor there.

A program through which high school students can earn college credit does not necessarily give its students increased access to mathematics faculty. So this "connection" may or may not be of use to you in gaining an endorsement. Instead, I recommend reading What to do with research results while being in high school? and How to find an arXiv endorser for suggestions on what to do with your paper, should you choose to write one. The latter explains how to find names of people who are eligible to endorse in a given area. (There may or may not be anyone in the college you are connected to who is eligible in your area.)


How to read a research paper at faster rate?

Reading and understanding research papers in depth takes time! Two weeks sounds perfectly normal to me. I often need more time for indept understanding.

My strategy is that I read the core papers required for my research in great detail and other papers (context related) more generally. However, if I read quickly, I also tend to forget quickly.

Probably your supervisor is refering to his own (past?) experience or compares your speed with other researchers. However, this may not be a fair comparison. Learning and research styles are highly individual.

I notice that each scientist develops a certain strategy for reading papers. Ocassionally, I also see styles that I do not like. For example a scientist supporting a claim with reference to a source (of many pages) which didn’t even mentionned the subject although the title of the source suggested otherwise. The source clearly has not been read.

To conclude, you have to develop your own style. Ask your supervisor why he/she thinks you should be faster and try to solve the underlying sentiments. Maybe your supervisor is under pressure to deliver results.


For a PhD pursuing a career in academia is a Linkedin helpful?

In my experience (academia and industry), there is very little benefit to LinkedIn in the academic sphere. It just fails to have critical mass in academia, and therefore gets used very little. I'm sure it depends on discipline, but a combination of own/departmental webpage, preprint servers and publication aggregators, and (in some disciplines) Twitter is where it's at. That being said, a low-key LinkedIn profile doesn't hurt, especially if you want to start staying in contact with friends and (former) colleagues who leave academia and for whom LinkedIn becomes a lazy directory of who has gone where and how to stay in touch. I can't imagine it would have a negative effect on perception.
I do however recommend to academics (including advanced Ph.D. candidates) to set up their own, personal (i.e. professionally focused but personally owned, controlled, and managed) webpages, especially if they are in techy- or in any way outreach-to-the-public relevant fields. These days, it is cheap and easy to get a domain name of your own, to set up a WordPress (or similar) site somewhere. Then you get to post your research in the format you want, show a bit of creativity, etc. And by doing it early and well, your site will rank highly in search. It's much more professional looking, to current- and would-be peers as well as to journalists and the public (if relevant) if you have a well-organized and up-to-date website, than if a couple of years down the road a Google Search for you yields 3-4 abandoned pages at institutions you did a post-doc at, with expired links to old papers and no mention of the most exciting topic you are focusing on at the present time. In this day and age you will eventually want to control how you market yourself, and it's easiest to do if you start doing it gently early rather than in a big rush when you discover you ought to have been doing it already.


How to cite Kindle books/ebooks when no fixed page numbers are available?

According to the APA blog, the location number is actually a bad idea because it has limited retrievability. The blog also mentions that since Kindle's third generation, e-books have started to have real page numbers, you may try looking into that.

Another post on apastyle.org suggests that for materials that are not paginated, consider citing chapter number or chapter heading plus paragraph numbers.


How to recruit PhD students when industry pays so much more?

The person who wants to go into industry is a different sort of person than one who wants a PhD. That isn't a universal, as some people want to do one to enable or enhance the other, but it is pretty generally true. You are likely a pretty good example yourself, so look at how you differ from those among your peers who chose as you did or otherwise.

Therefore, think of the possible pool of candidates as bifurcated and try to appeal to those characteristics that are more likely to appeal to those in the desired half (well, less than half, probably).

Future professors are likely more interested in ideas and personal growth and less interested in money. Both may want to do something to improve the world, of course, but in different ways. The potential PhD is more interested in deeper issues and longer term results than the general public. Future professors, especially, are obsessed with ideas and their development.

Another positive aspect of the professorate and the desire for a PhD is the ability, in the large, to control your own schedule. You work all the time, of course, but you get to decide when to work and (mostly) what to work on.

The people you probably are not going to attract are those with heavy life responsibilities already, and who really need that paycheck. On a more positive note, they are also more likely to want to do something now, rather than to work toward more distant goals.

If you actually have access to some of the people you want to attract, then introduce them to interesting parts of your research and those of colleagues. Take them to an advanced class that you teach in some esoteric subject - maybe even one for which you are the premier source in the world. That is very cool. If you have research labs and advise advanced students, take them to a lab and ask them to contribute - ideas if nothing else. Introduce them to your advisees and assistants. Show them how wonderful it is to work with other smart people on important problems.

When you speak to groups, emphasize the excitement of developing new ideas and how a new PhD is, at that moment, the world's foremost authority on some (perhaps small) thing.

Finally, convince them that they will never be bored and that if they work with you, you will never waste their time. Then live up to that promise yourself, of course.


After awarding PhD, if the PhD work is not worth or scientific misconduct of experiments etc. whether Can it be challenged?

Depends highly on the university.  In the US, this would be a case to take to the dean of the graduate college, or an office of research integrity, if one exists and the problem is more systemic within a lab or group.  My university has an office that handles all allegations of research misconduct & ethics, for instance, but for issues regarding students, this is typically handled by a dean.  As Buffy says, getting a PhD revoked is probably going to be very hard, but this seems like a more systemic problem that should be brought to the attention of the school.

For the most part, US universities (perhaps with the exception of "for profit" schools) take this sort of thing very seriously.  In other parts of the world, the incentive structure is usually somewhat different and the university may not take steps to rectify the situation.

I suppose the other question you have to ask yourself is this: does this just make the students look bad, or the whole university?  It sounds like you may be a PhD student at the same university, in which case you would prefer if the university maintains a good academic integrity reputation, and hence pursing this at the institutional level might be worth it.  If you think it's just a few "bad apples", then it might not be worth your time - their misconduct won't win them any favors and will probably sort itself out.


My math students consider me a harsh grader. Is my teaching attitude wrong?

Yes, you do seem to have a bad attitude toward it, but I suspect you knew that.  I would suggest trying as hard as you can to put yourself in their shoes:

Not everyone enjoys the same things you do.  What's a subject you had to take in school but didn't enjoy?  Can you imagine not putting as much effort or showing as much respect to it as someone going to grad school for it?
It's totally rational for someone to try to maximize their grades. I think everyone finds it annoying when students push for every last point they can, especially when you don't feel they've earned it.  I like to remind myself that it makes perfect sense to try to get the best grade you can for the least amount of effort.  That doesn't mean you give in to their exhortations, of course, but if you understand where they're coming from then that's not incompatible with both helping them and keeping your sanity.
Everyone is busy.  A lot of undergrads are adjusting to life away from home for the first time, are taking on responsibilities for the first time, and are probably swimming in social and extracurricular activities.  That's what they're supposed to do; just keep in mind your class isn't the only thing on their plate.
The things you find easy, others find hard.  You specifically gave some logarithmic rules as an example.  To you, that's trivial.  You can't understand how it's not trivial to someone else - I mean, you probably even just told them it was trivial!  But I bet you can think of a field where you struggle with things an expert finds trivial.  Foreign languages are a good example for me - I can hear how to say something in a new language repeatedly, and it just goes right out of my head a minute later.

That said, you suggested you "hate" teaching.  If you really do, maybe it's not for you.  On the other hand, you're here asking about it, so maybe you're interested in changing.  To do that, try hard to put yourself in the shoes of your students, and remember that they're just trying to get by.  Some will fail, and that's okay.  But you can help all of them, even those who won't ever get your subject, without resenting them.


Submitting a paper to a journal: is it OK to indicate the Editor of that journal as a reviewer?

In the journal where I am an associate editor, there is an unofficial policy that editors do not review.  The reason for this is simple and pragmatic: if somebody is an editor, they are doing a whole bunch of work of the journal in that capacity.  Asking them to review as well is double-duty, and the journal wants to spread the service load more broadly over the community.

Now, there are special cases where an editor will do a review, particularly when there is difficulty obtaining a sufficient number of qualified reviewers.  In my experience, though, this is rarely due to difficulty finding people with sufficient knowledge to review, even in highly specialized fields.  Instead, it is most likely to happen with a certain species of dreary borderline paper that is very badly presented but possibly salvageable---confronted with such a beast, reviewers suddenly all become "too busy at the present time" and an editor may end up having to review it themselves.

So, returning to your question: I would suggest not bothering to suggest an editor as a reviewer.  If you have a choice to suggest a handling editor, that's fine, but your suggestion of editor as reviewer is likely to be simply ignored.


PhD advisor used my paper in his grant report. But the paper was my work

"What are your analyses of this incident (especially how would it affect my contributions to the work if it is perceived as being part my advisor's project, while it is not)? What are your recommendations?"

My analysis is that this "incident" is normal, very common, and would not effect at all your perceived contributions. It is normal and common for scholars to list in their grant applications and reports any paper that was remotely done under the umbrella of the project, and that this is expected, for better or worse, in the academic system, where scholars need to justify their grants, in order to receive more grants.

What is written in a grant report/application has no bearing assigning  academic credit  per se, so it doesn't effect at all one's perceived contributions.

My recommendation is thus to be generous and not petty when assigning credits, and generally act with collegiality and not in a confrontational manner when dealing with your advisor, colleagues or, in time to come, your students. There are more important and consequential fights  than nitpicking on precise credit assignment. I see too many people (usually beginners in academia) over emphasizing "precise" credit distribution, until they forget the big picture.


How to format multiple authors name, affiliation and email in a paper?

We had a similar complicated case in our paper. I'd suggest this as a good way to do it.

For your own case, add a comma after the braces, followed by your email.

Here's how it would look like:

{Author.one, Author.two}@univ-one.edu, Author.three@univ-ten.edu

I am assuming your username tells the reader that it is yours (has your lastname, initials or so). Additionally, do your best to sort the emails such that they follow the same order of authors.


Can we submit part of our assignment after deadline?

There's nothing stopping you from thinking about it after the deadline, but if you want any corrections to be graded, you need to tell the professor before the deadline. It's possible he'll give you an extension, especially if you have good reasons (e.g. personal issues).

Handing in assignments after the deadline, without warning, is likely to lead to it simply not being graded. The professor must be fair to other students who might not have had the extra time, and besides, if he accepted your submission everyone else might start doing the same and the deadline might as well not be a deadline.


Transitioning out of a PhD program and into research in industry

TL;DR ... 1. It is not much of a disadvantage, if any, and yes, it is possible to find research work without a PhD.

I've worked in four industrial R&D computer science organizations after getting a Ph.D.  Three were considered "research labs" while the most recent one is closer to the development side (but still has a strong foot in the academic research community).

Only one of these companies hired virtually only PhD-level employees.  The others had a mix of Ph.D.s and M.S.-level people.

So I would modify @dan1111's comment to say that some don't care about a Ph.D. and some do.  And many will hire an M.S. (with or without any time spent in a Ph.D. program), though some won't.

We've certainly hired people who left a Ph.D. program with just an M.S. after changing their mind.  I don't see this as an obstacle for industry, at least in computer software.

In other disciplines, who knows?


What are the good indicators of fake conferences?

In your description, there are three telltale signs that the conference might not be very good:

The reviewer email is revealed: a conference that doesn't protect reviewer anonymity (blind review at least) is probably not very good.
The review itself is, frankly, not high quality. It may make sense for a standard conference scientific committee to appoint another reviewer if the first one didn't do his job properly.
Financial details appear very important to the organizer…

To make your final decision, see answers to this question: check out the organizers and invited speakers.


How can I conduct research when my college has no such facility?

Since you specified Nepal, I'd like to make a suggestion - there are some excellent research institutes in India where you can apply to be a 'Junior Research Fellow' after completing your Bachelor's. You won't get a degree, but you will get a modest stipend and the chance to boost your research profile.

I had some friends from Nepal during my undergraduate studies, and a few of them applied to these places, got selected, and after a year and a half of doing research there, went on to top-notch European and American institutes to do graduate studies. I hope you look into it. Good luck!


PhD Advisor is lying about funding and doesn't write their own grants

Normal? Regrettably I would consider this semi-normal.

A good situation? Absolutely not.

Is the situation likely to get any better? From your description, definitely not.

As you say that you only started 1.5 years ago, and you are in a bad situation, change groups, and if that isn't possible leave or change university.


My webpage counter does not say that many people visited my webpage since Nov. Is this a bad sign? Do hiring committees really visit candidates' webpages?

I wouldn't worry about this, since hiring committees do not necessarily visit web pages, even if they plan to make a postdoc offer.  If your application was reasonably detailed and your papers are available elsewhere (for example on the arXiv or as part of your application), then there's no reason why someone would need to visit your web page.  Even if your papers aren't available elsewhere, the number of visits you might see is both small and unpredictable.

  Are most of the good positions such as "** assistant professorship" already taken around this time?

Almost all of them will be offered to someone by the end of January, but those offers will not all be accepted (so there will be multiple rounds of offers, which may extend beyond the common deadline).  I would bet that most, but not all, of the most prestigious positions have already been offered to someone, but I don't know actual statistics.

Note that early offers tend to cluster on the most popular candidates, so substantially fewer people get first-round offers than will eventually be hired.

  Should I send inquiries about my application this week? Or should I wait for another? I hesitate to ask my advisor to do this, so I think I have to do this by myself.

Inquiring this week is reasonable.  It's worth asking not just your favorite schools, but also schools you are less excited about.  (It may signal to them that they have a shot at you after all, and increase the chances that they will make an offer.  At this point, you'll presumably be happy to have any reasonable offer, and once you have one you may be able to use it to provoke other places to make offers.)  Asking this week leaves a little time for schools to act before the common deadline, although you shouldn't despair even if the deadline goes past.

  I now feel I need to apply for more positions to avoid the worst case

If you applied to relatively few schools, it might be a good idea to add some more even now, but don't panic.  Unless you're in an unusual situation, your job search doesn't sound really problematic at this point.  (I can understand that it is worrisome, but there's a big difference between not getting a first round offer from a top department and not getting a job at all.  Of course I can't predict how your job search will end, but I've seen people get excellent offers after having had no signs of interest this late in January.)

Meanwhile, I highly recommend having a chat with your advisor about your job search.  If your advisor is not worried, it may help you stay calm, and if you do reach the point where your advisor really starts to worry, I hope he/she will have suggestions for what the two of you can do to make sure you get a job.


Can I directly contact the authors to ask for clarification or I must
  conduct all correspondence via the editor?

No, you really shouldn't contact the authors directly. I can see two options regarding the possibility of doing that: you can do it either from your normal email account (or in a similar way that discloses your identity, e.g. a phone call); or you can do it from a throwaway account that preserves your anonymity. Both of those approaches seem very wrong to me, but the first is much worse than the second.

In the first approach, you would be spoiling your anonymity as a reviewer. That would make your entire review useless. The whole point of anonymous peer review is that you can be honest in your review without having to worry about the authors knowing who you are (and without others having to worry if you were influenced by the knowledge that the authors know your identity). You may think that this is a problem only if you intend to write bad things about the paper, but it is just as much of a problem if you want to write good things, since the journal and its readers want to know that you wrote those good things out of an honest motivation and not to personally ingratiate yourself with the authors.

In the second approach, the problem of giving up your anonymity may not exist, but it's still unethical to go behind the back of the editor. The editor is responsible for the quality and the integrity of the peer review process, and needs to be informed of any communication between you and the authors. You may trust your own judgment that you would make sensible use of the information you would be getting from the authors, but the editor might disagree, and it is not your place to appropriate his or her jurisdiction over the review process. As an example, perhaps the journal or editor take the approach that the paper must be judged solely based on its submitted form with no room for clarifying questions. Or, perhaps you would reach a sensible decision to accept the paper based on additional details the authors emailed you, but you would then neglect to require them to add those details to the paper, leaving the paper flawed from the point of view of the journal and its readers - and so on; one can imagine many ways in which a reviewer, no matter how sensible and well-intentioned, can screw up this process in some subtle way due to not having the perspective and experience (and knowledge of the journal's policies) that the editor has. That is why the editor needs to be involved.

  I know that the normal
  procedure is to contact the editor, but I thought it is faster to
  directly contact the authors, as it may need multiple communications.

First of all, why should you care which way is faster? You are the reviewer. It is not your problem if the process goes slowly, it is the authors' problem, and they should have thought of including the missing details when they wrote the paper. Second of all, if multiple communications are needed for the paper to have a chance at being acceptable, then quite possibly you shouldn't be bothering to request clarification in the first place. To me this state of affairs suggests a pretty strong likelihood that the paper is simply not acceptable in its present form, so you should either flat out reject it or make a "reject and resubmit" (or "major revision required") decision, and write back with a report explaining what details need to be added or clarified to make a more in-depth evaluation of the paper possible. It would then be the authors' responsibility to comply and submit a better version if they want the paper accepted.

To summarize, it is understandable (and noble) that you want to be efficient and help the authors improve their paper. However, as a reviewer you are not required to go out of your way to help the authors with an elaborate back and forth exchange of information and critique, and you most certainly should not do so without the involvement of the editor. If you really want to have a detailed communication with the authors, I don't see anything wrong with that as long as it is done through the editor and with their approval.


How are copyright transfers for a journal article done?

There are very few kinds of contracts that require a full written form and a signature (depends on the legal system, but I think in most places real estate is the common exception). It's just easier to prove the existence of a written contract than an oral agreement if things go to court.

But in this case there seems to be no need. You said yourself, that the terms in the instructions you are supposed to read before submitting, so you can hardly argue to have missed them. You also cannot really argue that the terms are unreasonable or unexpected, since a copyright transfer of some form is to be expected when publishing.

Legally what happened is that the publisher offers a contract that involves transfer of copyright in case of acceptance and you agreed to that contract by submitting.


Reviewer wants me to do massive amount of work, the result would be a different article. Should I tell that to the editor?

I've been R2 a few times: I consider the paper's quality clearly below the standards of the journal (because of lack of detail, for instance, to the point where I can't fully understand the paper's methodology; or lack of sufficient evaluation), so that in principle I should just reject the paper outright. On the other hand, there is something about the underlying idea that has promise, and I don't want the authors to get so discouraged that they bury it by resubmitting the paper to some third-tier venue.

So I use Major Revisions as a kind of contract with the authors, laying out exactly the changes the authors would need to make in order for the paper to become acceptable, even if these changes are very extensive. The ball is now in their court: they can either take the time to make the required changes, with a high chance that the paper is then accepted, or, if they really don't want to spend the time, they can resubmit to a lower-tier conference or journal.

And of course, Major Revisions is also an easier recommendation for the editor to ignore than Reject, in case my views are not aligned with those of the other reviewers. In your case, it sounds like you only have two reviewers, who drastically disagree. You could submit only minor revisions, and hope that the editor agrees with R1 that the paper is acceptable without a lot of extra work. Or R1 might look at the revisions, and R2's review, and say to themselves, "oh, R2 is raising a lot of good points. They're right, this paper does need more detail to be understandable/reproducible!" The only way to know for sure is to submit a revision and see what happens, though one potentially useful piece of information: if the editor really did agree with R1 much more strongly than R2, they would have required minor instead of major revisions.

(PS: Writing up your research to a sufficient level of quality that it passes peer review does not "take away from your PhD research." It is your PhD research.)


Is really PhD necessary for someone who wants to work in industry

The title of your question is rather starkly phrased.  Since most electrical engineers working in industry do not have PhDs, clearly a PhD is not "really necessary".

There have been a lot of questions asked about this on the site already, which you may want to look into.  In the absence of more specific information, one can only answer in general terms.  What I would say is that PhDs are first of all for people who want academic careers and second of all for people who have a good, specific idea of what non-academic career they want and how the PhD will help them with it.

If your goal is to work in industry as an electrical engineer, I would try to realize that goal as soon as possible: i.e., as soon as you have a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering.  Then you can find out whether you really like it, get experience and so forth.  You'll have a much better idea of the pros/cons of coming back for a PhD after spending time working in the field, you'll have plenty of people to ask about it, and you may even get financial support from your employers (so that for instance you may not need to do the teaching and grading that other grad students will, though as I type this I realize I don't know how much EE grad students teach or grade).


How to retrieve number of citations for a list of papers?

One solution to programmatically retrieve Google Scholar results is scholar.py (open source,  BSD license), which is

  a Python module that implements a querier and parser for Google Scholar's output. Its classes can be used independently, but it can also be invoked as a command-line tool.

Amongst other things, it can fetch the number of citations of an article.


How to address contradictory comments from two reviewers?

While the other question noted by GoodDeeds may answer your question, let me note that the paper remains yours. The editor has probably seen the reviewers and is aware (or should be) of the contradiction.
I think the two reviewers had different needs. One had the knowledge so didn't need the tutorial and the other wanted to be informed generally. Think about that and about the balance, but the paper is yours. Think about whether there are really two papers here, though a tutorial alone might not be enough for publication.
The proper way (IMO) to respond to reviewers is to edit the paper taking their views into account, but not necessarily taking every bit of advice, which is impossible here in any case. And your suggestion about a response to the second reviewer is more appropriately sent to the editor.
Since it is the editor who will make the decision here, ask them for advice about the tutorial material and how including/excluding it from the paper would affect the decision to publish. Let the editor argue with the reviewers if necessary.


What should I do when I would like to move to a new lab because my current PI is abusive?

A PI who is known to kick out some students, and graduate others after 10 (!!!!!) years, is not one you are likely well-placed with. I would certainly look into other labs. Leaving after such few months, when the period additionally was not officially grad school, might not be very hard. Just talk to other PIs, and, if possible, just profess greater interest in their topics as opposed to fleeing a colleague of theirs; it's better to leave on officially good terms, even if they weren't so good.

However, you cannot expect to always have a thesis topic served on a plate, and for sure not right when you start your Ph.D. - at least judging this from the U.S. perspective (if you are elsewhere, ignore the first half of this paragraph as all my experience is with the U.S. system). In many fields, finding your topic is an important part of writing your Ph.D. You might want to ask around in other groups or labs how things are there. Some advisers (I call them 'drawer advisers' - "What should I work on?", and the adviser opens a figurative drawer with topics they could not pursue yet) will do this for you; others won't. You also should listen to suggestions, and it's a bit early to expect your "optimizations" to be really, and always of use. If you genuinely dislike the PI's approach, you should see this as another reason to consider another lab (and try to be reasonably patient there).

The first version of this answer was wondering what exactly the adviser says or does which is upsetting. After your clarification, he seems unduly harsh, and I can see how that makes you feel depressed about your situation. I'm not convinced (yet) that this is because of sexism, but he sounds rude in ways that are simply not constructive for the close work necessary in a lab. Whatever the reason, it sounds bad, and I wouldn't take it. Some reasons (sexism for sure) could allow you to officially complain using your university's grievances procedures, but that's not a great start 4 months in.

Really, ask around, and see what else is out there. If nothing works at your current school, consider a gentler Ph.D. program approach with a period of coursework first, at another university, maybe in another country, a larger program size, and the almost inevitable student bonding which can be your support network.


What happens when a professor makes damaging comments about another in front of students?

I am sorry this has happened to you. I have observed this at my place of work too. The poisoned well around you will make you sick. I suggest you get out fast and use our remaining dignity to find someplace where you are appreciated for what you do. Your boss or other colleagues are unlikely to help you because the writing is already on the wall that you are suffering negative consequences of someone else's unprofessional, jealous, petty and just plain bad behavior. Unless you are a mean street fighter, best to dodge this battle and understand that even if you win, this colleague will not change their behavior and likely cause future trouble. Do you really want to face that for the remainder of your career here? As fas as I know, this type of harassment is not protected by laws. Even your friends at work will not want to be involved as they will fear the wrath of this nasty person turning on them, if they speak up for you. I am really sorry. You sound like a sincere person who is doing their job the best they can, but it is hard to contribute well when so much of your energy must be sapped by fighting this stupid battle. Find yourself a nurturing place. The world is bigger than this narrow well.


In a paragraph about a paper, where do I put the citation?

I feel that it is best to cite once for each unique referent. In your case, you are referring first to a set of methods, and later to a result. Thus I would write

  The Harman method (Harman, DATE) was devised by T. C. Harman .... steps to complete
  the method .... Harman showed that ZT could be computed from eq. (2.1) (Harman, DATE)


I submitted a paper five months ago. Should I wait a little bit more for a response?

It differs case by case, but journals take a while before acceptance and publishing. Once I waited a year for a high ranking journal! You can always contact the editor and ask about the status of your journal.

Advice On Your Thesis and Submitted Material: You can definitely cite the submitted material within your thesis. Don't forget to add the (Submitted to X) at the end of the citation.


What should be included in an extended abstract (CS)

The content may include the following, some of which may overlap with the points you have mentioned already.

Definition and scope of the topic
The problem you are to focus on the topic
If the problem was faced before, describe the state of the art.
If you are introducing the problem, express the importance of it.
Discuss the methods and novel techniques to be employed
Highlights of the results obtained
Possible future enhancements and further work in progress

Some extended abstracts also allow the use of references, consult with the publisher/conference committee for any clarifications.

The extent of explanation on the above points is confined to the constraint of the maximum length prescribed by the publisher/conference committee you wish to submit to.


Is a math bachelor the right choice for me?

This can only be a partial answer and some perspective. Your idea of a math degree in UK followed by a CS doctorate in US is feasible. It is fairly common to enter a doctorate in US from a different field. But expect there to be advanced coursework as part of the doctoral program.
Taking a CS undergraduate degree isn't really essential, though it will give you some necessary topics. But doing that with "picking up" some maths would probably be pretty hard. And maybe not very satisfying if you can't devote enough mental energy to it.
But, you can stay flexible and there is no need to nail everything down at this moment. You will have plenty of chances to change your mind later. If you start in math, you might well decide to continue in that. Likewise CS.
Another point. You say physics "won't pay the bills", but in academia there isn't a tremendous difference in salary between different technical fields. It is harder to get a position in some fields than in others, but seven years from now the market will almost certainly be different and it is hard to predict these things so far in advance.
The best advice you can get is whenever possible, do what you love. Not everyone has an opportunity to do that. If you can manage a set of choices and follow a dream without compromising for money, then your life will probably be happier.


Seeking out guidance from a Professor at another institute during PhD

Of course you can, and this is probably your best chance to make it into U1 (without any guarantee, clearly), but this involves a risk of straining relationships to your supervisor at U2.
This is a question you should discuss with your supervisor at U2 (after all he/she should give you guidance as well and careful argumentation is needed to explain why extra guidance might be appropriate), but don't be surprised if the professor at U1 would not be seeing a collaboration with you as a priority -- he/she might be busy enough with all the commitments towards his own institution.

Doing what you suggest is all within your legal rights, but I personally think when you have entered an agreement at U2 (possibly involving funding) then you should focus on that and not give the impression that you want to run away at the earliest opportunity.


Essentially, you cannot start a PhD program without a master's degree in Germany. Some programs feature a dual-degree option, whereby you're admitted to a master's program as well as a PhD program. US and UK programs do basically the same thing, which is why the master's degree is not a prerequisite—you earn it, or the equivalent, along the way to the PhD after the bachelor's.

However, in German universities, most PhD positions are actually government jobs in what is known as the TV-L system. More precisely, it's what's called a "TV-L E13." Now, one of the requirements of the TV-L E13 is a master's degree in the appropriate subject. There really isn't a way to waive this requirement.

What perhaps can be done is to ask if the group is willing to sponsor you as a "Wissentschaftliche Hilfskraft"—essentially, a part-time worker in the group—while you complete the master's program. (If they're eager enough to hire you with a bachelor's, then they should be willing to support you while you get the necessary training.)


How to deal with an abusively condescending professor?

As I understand you, you are being publicly shamed (in front of fellow grad students) by this professor by dint of your undergrad record.
If you are in the US, this is violating FERPA by revealing your academic record.  Other countries have similar privacy laws.  File a FERPA complaint and wipe that smug smile off his face.

I'm no expert and I suspect each school is different.  But this is a federal law and I think most schools would take such a blatant violation seriously.  I'm pretty sure this prof would get his leash yanked pretty hard.

Note that it could backfire. You could an enemy who will make your graduate experience miserable. But I'm betting against it. There have been a number of times when I just let a jerk be a jerk because I thought my life would go more smoothly, but found out later that if I had stood up for myself, I would have gotten a standing ovation from 99% of the people around me. This prof is a jerk and his colleagues will likely appreciate him being called out.
Also, in the case of harassment and rights violations, the perpetrator is warned against retaliation in any form. And someone will be watching for it. Someone behind those closed doors will tattle. I think you are perfectly safe.

My experience

When I taught small classes, I would write all the test scores on the board, so that students could see where they ranked.  One young lady thought I was violating FERPA with this tattled on me.  I got hauled into the chairs office where he was accompanied with one of those university JD types (the law students who never pass the bar, but get jobs at universities being annoying.)  and the dean.  They were ready to have a field day with me.  They had already talked to other students and had corroboration that I had, in fact, written all the scores on the board.  The JD was salivating.

We talked at cross purposes for a while, then they figured out that I was writing numbers only.  No names.  No personal information was being displayed.  They were so disappointed. An administrator gets to be administrative so rarely and here they had an open-and-shut case go up in smoke.

So the point here is that at this school at this time, FERPA violations were a big deal.  I suspect that in the current safe-room environment, they might be a bigger deal.  Telling the class that that guy right there has a low GPA could traumatize him for life, eh?


Is it allowed to publish an explanation of someone's thesis?

Properly credited, posting a piece that fills in all the details of a published paper (or thesis) should be fine. Indicate clearly that  the ideas are not your own - that you are just hoping to help others read the original work.
You should probably write the person who did the original research, thanking them for their theorems and telling them what you hope to do with your work filling in details. They will probably be delighted that someone has read their thesis.


How to quickly assess the legitimacy of a conference?

The fastest way possible is to use a policy of "don't call me, I'll call you" with venues (conferences, journals, etc.). If you don't already know them, discard correspondence from them. In most cases there are already too many options to chose from on where to go and where to submit, so there is little to lose from discarding unsolicited contact from people you don't already work with.

The next, more open, version is to ask a few sensible people you already know. "Hey, have you heard of XYZ conference?" Assuming the people you know and respect are not carbon copies of you, this should net you a very high percentage of recognition if the conference is worth bothering with. Asking people you know and respect, and who are not exactly like you, is a great way to broaden your horizons if you are not yet familiar with what the useful venues are already.

Note that I take a somewhat snobby view of venues here, in that I don't actually care about mere legitimacy, in the same way I don't care to eat at a restaurant because I won't immediately be robbed for going in. I want a way to spend my time, effort, and money that is much better than my existing options. Some conference I've only heard of because of some unrequested 'invitation' is vanishingly unlikely to provide an option better than the ones I'm already aware of.

If for some reason something new appears that really piques my interest, I would look to see who supposedly is on the organizing/editorial committee, and see if there are people I know and respect and would like to work with (and if so I might also contact them directly to ensure they actually are affiliated and approve). I would also read previous papers/proceedings/abstracts and see what they have to offer. If I am not impressed with the quality - really, genuinely impressed by how useful and applicable the papers are to my work - easy slam-dunk into the trash bin.


Non-STEM Letter of Rec for STEM PhD Programs

It's important that you show potential for research in your application including letters of recommendation.
For me, I had three letters, two from people I did research with as an undergraduate, and one from a history of science professor I had taken a couple courses with (definitely a more "history" slant than "science").
That worked for me. No idea whether it will work for you because ultimately it will depend on who reads your letters, what they say, and what the rest of your application says.
Remember rule #1, and then go from there:
It's important that you show potential for research in your application including letters of recommendation.


Is it appropriate to ask professors at which schools their recommendation letters have more power?

I would ask your references for "coaching help" with your letters and being strategic with who writes your letters to which schools. As part of the coaching, there are two questions I would ask:

"Do you (the letter writer) any connections to or experience with the programs I am applying to?". For example, did they attend a program? Do they collaborate with faculty in that program? Does your program regularly send students to a program?
"What are you thoughts about the programs?" This allows you to make sure your reference is on good terms with the programs you are applying to. For example, if the graduate admission chair is feuding with you letter writer, this might be (unfairly) held against you.


Can I annex fewer certificates for a shorter application?

It has been my experience that to not include a certified copy of each qualification at least can potentially result in unnecessary delays in processing your application.  Essentially, I have found that many universities frown upon incomplete applications.


Supervisor has said some very disgusting things online, should I pull my name from our paper?

I don't think you need to pull your name from the paper(s). You're junior enough, and there are enough odious high-ranking people spouting nonsense online, that people won't blame you.
I WOULD start looking for more mentors ASAP. You need stronger letters of recommendation, as some people are going to question his judgement and ability to objectively evaluate you. Also, this guy clearly has done a bad job managing his professional image, which means he might have bad judgement about professionalism in general. If you learn professional norms from him, this might do damage to your development as a researcher. This is red flag land, and the sooner you can disentangle yourself the better.


I see essentially two possibilities:

Write out your slides on paper, then scan them.
Get a Tablet & Pen combination and write directly "to your computer". I don't have experience with hand-writing slides this way, but I recently acquired a Wacom Intuos Pen which you could use for this. It has the additional benefit that you can use it in web conferences to write on a shared web whiteboard (this is the use case I personally got it for).

In case 1, you can scan your notes directly to PDF and present them. If you want to mix "classical" slides with your handwritten slides, you will need to mix PowerPoint or Beamer slides with graphics files containing your handwritten slides. You may need to experiment a bit with what picture format works best here, in terms of both file size and graphics quality.

In case 2, you can create PowerPoint presentations and write directly into the presentation with your Pen, which makes integrating "classical" and handwritten slides quite a bit easier.


Should figure captions include the "take home message" that the figure conveys?

A short comment in a caption is ok. But generally captions should stay descriptive of what is drawn in the figure e.g.

  Fig. X: estimated airspeed velocity of an unladen European swallow.

They should also ideally not be too redundant with legends although sometimes it helps to say things like "shown at various headwind velocities". The place to draw attention on a specific aspect of the data shown in a figure is the results section.

These are customs and not strictly-enforced rules, nothing bad will happen to you if you take a few liberties. Worst case scenario, you'll have to make a few minor edits during revision.


Pre-tenure faculty - should I ignore all possible troubles to get tenured?

It is probably worth stating this up front: The relationship you describe has the appearance of an abusive relationship -- and I'm also going to say that I'm sorry you find yourself in this situation :-(
Part of abusive relationships are threats that, in many cases, can or will not actually be realized. While I don't know for sure, my best guess is that your former partner does not actually have much to gain from contacting anyone about your tenure: It would certainly reflect very poorly on them to have been in a relationship with a student, and whatever they would have to say about you would come over as poor taste and sour grapes, not deep insight in your abilities. As such, my best guess is that your former partner is not actually going to pull through with their threat, even if you moved forward with retrieving your possessions with the help of a lawyer.
The second part to keep in mind (and that is something you should definitely take pride in!): Your current department hired you for a good reason, namely that you are qualified in your work! They want you to succeed, and will support you in it. The advice to stay out of contentious topics is probably good, but your colleagues are there to help with get through personal things such as this as they have no stake in it. You will have friends in your current department, or at least people who have good intentions. You can rely on them to find a way through all of this.
My suggestion to be on the safe side would be the following. Write an email to the department head or another senior professor in the department in which you lay out the situation to make sure that it's on record before anyone might hear from your former partner. Maybe something like this:

Dear < department head >
I'd like to bring to your attention a situation that is primarily a personal matter but that might also appear in our professional lives. There is nothing for you to do at this moment, but I want this to be on the written record in case it ever comes up again.
In short, while I was at A University, I was in a relationship with professor X. The end of this relationship was contentious, and I have received threats from X as well as professor Y at B University (with whom he has apparently also had a relationship) that they would try to sabotage my career by writing to you about me.
As mentioned above, there is nothing for anyone to do at this moment. My goal is simply to ensure you know about the threat in case you do get emails from X or Y. When the time comes, in a few years, to thinking about letters of evaluation for the purposes of tenure, I will likely also request that neither X nor Y will be asked to write.
Sincerely, user128851

The point simply is to make sure the issue has been recorded in writing before anyone ever gets an email from X or Y, so that if they ever did, they can find the appropriate place for this email: The trash bin. It will also make sure that your department -- which, remember!, wants you to succeed -- will disregard anything coming from the direction of X or Y when it comes time to decide on your tenure. For example, in a faculty meeting about your case, if someone brings up that they heard bad things about you from X, the department head will say something like this: "We will need to disregard what you have just said. A few years ago, user128851 told me some personal details about her time at A university. I can't tell you what they were, but I will share that she and X had disagreements and that X threatened her. I believe that what X is now saying about her is not something we should trust." And just like this, the issue is gone -- the important point is to get out front of anything X might ever say about you.


Is it helpful to tell a university that I have admission and scholarship from another university?

Yes, but with caution.

The basic premise is, if you're an outstanding applicant, it's conceivable the admissions people at the lower-ranked institute think it's pointless to accept you because you're going to decline the offer anyway. If you've been accepted at Harvard but rejected at Saint Mary's, chances are that happened. In that case you can send them your Harvard acceptance letter and tell them why you really would rather attend Saint Mary's. Similarly, if Saint Mary's accepts you but doesn't give you much funding, then sending them your Harvard acceptance letter with full scholarship is likely to make Saint Mary's add more dollars to your application as well.

Before Saint Mary's makes a decision however, I would not send in the Harvard acceptance letter, because it's irrelevant.


Is it common to ask students to help the teacher in the teacher's normal duties?

Confucius once said (in a rough translation) "It's student's job to serve the teacher when the teacher needs help." (the source in Chinese)

I think in most places, where Confucius's principle is still being followed, helping the teacher in his normal duties is considered normal.

However, help marking the sheets is not normal as far as I understand. At least, Confucius never graded his students. He did have comments about his students, though.


What does it mean to have a low quantitative but very high verbal/writing GRE for stats PhD application?

Most programs have a minimum threshold for GRE scores, and I'd be very surprised if you pass that threshold. I'm applying to engineering programs and most Top 25 programs require atleast 165-166 on Quant. For someone who's applying to statistics, I would aim for at least 90% percentile (166). It's very easily doable, just do a few practice exams and practice problems and I'm sure you can pull it off.


Is it correct to submit a manuscript as a writing sample for graduate admission?

Presumably they want a sample of your writing, not the result of you drafting something, somebody else writing it up, some referee suggesting corrections and your advisor giving it final polish and blessing.


Does the usage of Facebook and Twitter harm a professor's career?

Unless someone has done some quantitative or qualitative research, I think this will be very hard to verify either way. There are certainly professors that are famous and have very vocal political opinions, such as Noam Chomsky, and many philosophers. However, it is hard to verify whether: their opinions help their career, their career helps people accept their opinions more readily, or whether their career could have gone even further without their opinions.

One thing to note, however, is that it used to be many philosophers seemed to take it as a duty to give public talks and so on, on politics (e.g., Bertrand Russell), and perhaps other academics did too. So although we probably cannot give an empirical answer right now, it does seem that in many cases social media is merely an extension of professor's work, even if they are giving thoughts on areas they do not research, as thinkers they may have a duty to contribute informed opinions based on their training.


Why do we write a "threat to validity" section?

As usual, the true (but not very useful) answer is: it depends. I typically come across that section when the article describes an experiment. Experiments typically involve quite an abstraction from the real world, which is why they can keep so much under control. However, this also means that one could question whether what one found in the abstract environment in the lab also applies to the real world. This is called external validity. This is what is discussed in such a section.


Choosing between two letters of recommendation

I don't think it matters too much if the academic letter is about a old relationship, or whether the work letter is actually from your job and not from academia. What matters is that the academic you interacted with has an excellent opinion of you - and that seems to be the case, given the many years in between! - and hopefully that the academic stuff you have been working together is related to your master. Similarly, your employer will have lots to say about your work aethics and dedication, and hopefully his academic background and/or your current job should be somehow pertinent to your masters.


Keep in mind that Elsevier's journal finder indexes only Elsevier journals. This means that if the articles you referenced are from other publishers like SAGE, Taylor & Francis, EmeraldInsight, Mary Ann Liebert, etc. then these journals will not show up regardless of how high impact they are.

You can try to look at different journal finders that are publisher specific like Springer:
https://journalsuggester.springer.com/

Or the more general ones that indexes from various publishers like
JANE Biosemantics (this one only indexes Pubmed I believe, so the vast majority of journals will be health or medicine oriented):
http://jane.biosemantics.org/

Or JournalGuide (this is my go-to):
https://www.journalguide.com/

But even general finders like JournalGuide will often miss a few journals that are highly relevant to your article because of various reasons like: 1) the journal isn't indexed for the engine or 2) the key words didn't get picked up.

That being said, it's normal for many researchers to not go for the top of the top journals because it's fairly obvious that the articles will not be accepted. For instance, it can just be a waste of time and (dare I say) foolish to try to publish a small-scale study at top journals like Nature, Science, or Lancet that often seek out cutting-edge research at the forefront of their fields. It's good to aim high, but sometimes it's advantageous to be realistic about where your manuscript is most likely to find a home (in both content fit and level of originality/rigor/etc.).


Research publications for Masters by Research

If you're going to be doing a master's degree by research, then admissions committees are going to want to see evidence of any previous research that you've done. That way, you're less of a risk for them to admit you, because you've already learned many of the skills you'll need to be successful.

The "currency" for establishing this are patents and research publications. I assume you're familiar with patents, since you ask for a comparison. Basically, research publications will be considered at least as important as patents, as they generally represent a significant amount of original research. (Patents may be a matter of development rather than research.)

As for how and where to release research publications, that depends on your field. In CS, my understanding is that generally means that you have to publish your research in conference papers, which means that you'll have to get your research work written up and submitted to a conference. Then you'll need to get your paper accepted, and then you can publish.

If you don't have any publications, don't worry. If you still have research experience, a recommendation letter from a research supervisor can also help to establish your qualifications. (Absent some evidence, though, most graduate programs will remain skeptical.)


What's expected in a UK postgrad letter of recommendation

You can separate a reference letter into three sections.

In the first, you describe your relationship to the student and in what capacity you know him: modules X, Y, Z, dissertation supervisor, personal tutor etc. Add some standard introductory phrases and you should have a paragraph.

In the second section your refer to hard evidence: details of the student's performance in your courses, coursework/ dissertation topics, grades, performance in percentiles (top 10 - 5 - 2%), where the student has been particularly strong or the topics that interested him and, depending on the type of the relationship, you provide details on the dissertation (supervisor) or the student's engagement (personal tutor). I focus on the qualities that are not apparent from the student's transcripts, e.g. if a particular methodology has been used skillfully in research, if the student participated in societies or university events, organised something, led a group etc. Also, look at the course outline to hughlight performance in relevant areas. This can be important for a student that did exceptionally well in closely related modules but the average or performance in unrelated classes is not that impressive.

In the third section you refer to personal qualities related to academic performance: focus, commitment, initiative, interest, engagement, individual worker/ team player, easy to work with or not, independence, self-motivation, intelligence, academic skill, discipline, stability and continuity in performance, mental fortitude, resilience. You do not have to say if the student is funny, pleasant, introvert/ extrovert, well-mannered, social, with a good taste in wine etc. You should refer, however, to how student dealt with difficulties (very relevant for a personal tutor) or, if you are aware, if the student's performance was affected by certain factors or if there were were any special circumstances. Say nothing you do not feel comfortable with, and if you are not sure what to disclose ask HR or admin. Try to think what you would be interested to read in a reference letter, what would help you decide and what would make you decide. In that way, the colleague reading the letter is more likely to have a clearer idea of the candidate. Do not exaggerate, do not try to make the student look better than he/she is and try to provide examples. In a nutshell, would you suggest that person working with someone or attending further education, and why?

In the conclusion, you can provide a bref overview of your opinion, why the student is particularly suitable for the programme and whether you recommend him. Some people add a phrase such as "I recommend X to all but the highest-ranking institutions" to show objectivity. I prefer showing that in different ways, especially if the student is indeed applying to a top university.


Asking about how to minimize the effect of a not so good thesis due to abandoning by supervisor without even telling in Phd Application Form

Three things:

1) Your angle should be that due to local institutional factors such as expertise availability in your sub-specialist field you have had to pursue your strong interest in number theory with intermittent supervision. Therefore the work you submit largely represents your own drive to pursue this sub-specialty and is the product of your own self-discipline and self-taught knowledge without the high level supervisory input afforded to some other students. This is one of the reasons why you are applying to department x, because the expertise aligns with your passion and you do not have access to it at home. You could even consider saying that you would be very interested to receive feedback on your work as well as being considered for the application.

2) You should also seek feedback anyway on your work beforehand if possible. It does not necessarily have to be a professor and does not have to be face to face locally. I don't know if this is the done thing in maths, but perhaps approach an academic (who you know has done similar work) with a specific question based on your work. You might get a positive response and who knows where it will lead.

3) You seem quite upset about whatever was going on. Relax and let it go, because these sorts of behaviours are encountered all the time (and a lot worse actually). Don't take it personally, you just have to find a work-around. It is what it is, let it go and work around it.