I did my Bachelors in computer science. I have been working for 1.5 years in a reputed software firm working on distributed systems, information retrieval and such fields.

I want to apply for MS in CSE (distributed systems or ML) next year but before that I want to start my game development company which has been a dream. It might also help me earn a lot of money which I will need to study further. Game development is largely software engineering, but has nothing to do with distributed systems or ML. If my game development start-up fails I will happily do the MS right away.

Will switching from my current “related” job to a somewhat unrelated field trigger an alarm? Am I at a risk of getting rejected?

How can I patch things up if I have to after my game development gig?

To make things worse, I am an Indian which makes things harder if I want to study in the US.

I’m interested in robotics and particularly in how we can use autonomous systems to aid with environmental conservation. I’m currently looking into PhD programmes but it seems to me that the vast majority of research happening in the relevant departments covers pretty fundamental, low-level technologies which might sometime see an application if they get a whole lot of development.

So, what’s the deal with research in technology? Are universities/institutes not a place for, say, researching “Using Reinforcement Learning in Methane Monitoring Drones?”

Are pure mathematicians, e.g., Algebraists, Number Theorists, Geometers, and Topologists, at good U.S. research universities expected to win research grants to fund their work, in order to gain tenure and be promoted?

If not, are pure mathematicians’ salaries and benefits mainly paid for by the universities which they work for?

I see a lot of questions here on Academia SE that talk about the need to win grant-funding, in order to survive in academia, but I’m not sure whether that applies to pure math professors.

Our department is awesome. But every year, I think: “why aren’t we getting more awesome applicants? They could be super happy here, and we could do a great job of jump-starting their careers.”

Well, this year, I am on the PhD admissions committee.

What can I do to improve the quality of our applicant pool? Of course I realize reputation is a big component, but that is a long-term game (and we are already quite well-ranked by USN≀ I don’t think that’s the core issue here). I’m wondering more about short-term, actionable, guerilla mercenary acts I can execute in the next few months.

If you have participated in grad admissions at your university, what (if anything) helped you get more quality applications?

For reference I’m in North America, in the sciences.

I am planning to apply for a PhD programme (probably in the UK). I have two solid sources for academic letters of recommendation (my Director of Studies and my Master’s Project supervisor. Now, some places I’m applying to require three letters of recommendation and here I have a dilemma: I could go for a generic academic reference from a random professor or strong reference from my Technical Authority at work.

Due to several random factors, I have not managed to establish a particularly strong connections at my university(ies) with anyone apart from the two people I already mentioned. I’ve worked with some people personally but I know if I ask them for a letter I shouldn’t expect anything more than “SaladButt had been a good performing student, he grasped things fast and got good grades THE END”. Being one year out of school does not help. On the other hand, I could ask my Technical Authority at work to write me one. I know it would be a solid letter as I have already seen the feedback she wrote me for annual reviews. On top of that I’m pretty convinced my field (engineering/robotics) values hands-on experience and that I could prove with my work history.

I have seen many people here say that letters from academics always win over ones from employers. Do you think it also applies in this case?

I have two papers that I’m looking to try and publish soon. I would like to cite my own paper as the work is fairly closely linked. Is it worth publishing one as a preprint on something like Arxiv so I can cite? I’ve read that it is more beneficial to publish preprints if you are already an established researcher whereas these would be my first two publications (if accpeted).

I am hoping to be applying for a PhD programme in the UK in the next few months. I have already asked the appropriate people if they would be up to writing me letters of recommendation and they responded positively and enthusiastically.

Now, I am not fully certain about the exact programmes I’ll apply to. I have a few picked out but I’m also looking into a couple others – not really related to my original picks (think research in A vs. research in B by means of A.

Question: should my referees tailor their letters of recommendation to the specific programmes I’ll be applying to, or is the convention usually for letters to be more destination-agnostic? Is it ok to ask a letter-writer to make the letter relevant to many degrees or asking for multiple separate letters is the usual practice?

What are the national and international competitive exams an Indian medical student can take during his/her undergraduate years (during MBBS)?

Specifically, I am looking for an international olympiad type competitive test on medical subjects (Anatomy, Physiology…) which I can apply from India.

I’m sorry if the question is not of the kind usually dealt with in the website. Honestly, I’m looking for a personal advice and/or real-world experience to help me figure what should I do.

My question is whether applying for a master’s program is a good idea? or not? Given that I have no deep knowledge in mathematics, except for some engineering level linear algebra and calculus.

More details about me: I’m an electrical engineering (EE) graduate with a B.Sc. and a M.Sc. in power engineering. Although I finished my degrees with high grades and a strong resume, I didn’t ever feel a thing for EE to be motivated enough to go after it in my professional life. On the other side, I always enjoyed math both in high school and college, and by “enjoying” math I’m not just talking about ordinary problem solving but mathematical stuff including defining mathematical objects, theorems, proofs and so on.

For me, the good thing about mathematics is that I always felt an aptitude for it. I get it naturally and in a joyful way. In many cases, at first sight, I feel the solution or how to get that, in a strange abstract way. During my entire education, I have always had a closer connection with my mathematics teachers/lecturers. The problem in college was that the level and depth of mathematics courses in engineering programs (even EE) was too little to feel satisfaction. Therefore, I am considering pursuing mathematics itself.