X gave some nanoparticles to Y lab 2 years ago. I worked on biological characterization of these particles in Y lab as a postdoc (second postdoc) and wrote a manuscript at the end of my 2 year contract. X lab had said when I joined Y lab that their work on the nanoparticles was almost ready for publication (so approximately 3 years) but till now they have not published the work.

Three years later, they haven’t published the synthesis work. Now it is about a year since I left Y lab and there has been lack of communication across teams. Y lab people do not want to annoy X lab but do not have any plan in place of what is to be done. Y lab doesn’t keep me in the loop and only when I ask they respond with a lame excuse for delay. If I question the excuse they ignore me till I send them a few follow-ups only with a new excuse.

Is there are any workaround the situation of the materials provided if I were to publish? And also if there is no technical reason, Y lab cannot keep blocking my paper from being put on the preprint server at least. So if at all they wash their hands off the paper (I don’t think they will back off easily), how can I go about the issue of the materials provided that we used in our study if X lab refuses to be coauthors?

I am a sophomore college student in the US. I have a friend who is currently in medical school, and has successfully used the to-be delineated strategy, and has gained admission into said medical school.

Strategy: Is it a legitimate strategy to simply learn to use EndNote and format citations for researchers (and subsequently get last author on multiple papers) to get publications on one’s CV?

I have a degree from a good university where I took half mathematics modules, but I would like to study mathematics further, but have gaps in complex analysis and algebra, and metric spaces, I think enrolling in a course might be a good idea, but the only course I can see is the Open University’s Complex Analysis course. I am based in London and will probably be working for the next year, but would like to do a masters the year after that (2019/2020, or even 2020/2021).

Are they any other options, or is the only option to be self-motivated and teach myself in my spare time?

I am writing my master thesis in English and I understand that usually italics are used to put emphasis on a word, because it is an important or a newly introduced technical term. But I still ask myself if I have to use italics for these two cases:

  • Variables’ names. For instance, let’s suppose that I have a complex equation and the variable n appears inside this equation. If I am describing the equation in a text paragraph, and I am talking about n (e.g. “if the value of n is large enough, then…”), in this case, should n be italicized?

  • For programmers: should class names and data types be italicized? E.g. “a variable of type UInt32 is used”.

I am a PhD student and research assistant at a US university. During this past spring, a group of newer students took to harassing me and blaming me for all of their failures even though I was the only one out of a group of more than 10 to actually commit to helping them. They have taken it so far that they have even tried to have me expelled. Even though my adviser prevented the expulsion, he still takes the stance that it is all my fault and is trying to force me to graduate this December even though I will not be ready. I am deeply worried that this is going to result in failure of my defense (by my adviser’s design) to the point that I don’t get any sleep.

I have been working at home now for nearly four months to protect myself from emotional and physical harm from these people. My property on campus has been vandalized, equipment that I built disassembled/defaced, and worse. Now that they can’t reach me at home, they have begun to take it out on my girlfriend who still goes to campus and works in our research group.

We have been told by university officials to file a complaint on their hotline, but we know that once the three other students find out a complaint was filed, they will undoubtedly fabricate another story to take it out on us. Two of these people hold US gov’t security clearances and our adviser thinks they are infallible and are not capable of behaving this way.

These people have been entrenched in their personal problems (which I have not been enlightened on) with me for so long that they are constantly angry. Our last group meeting ended with them arguing with my girlfriend. They then pursued her to our lab to continue the argument. I just don’t know what to do, it seems like the university just does not care what is happening. An HR representative is involved, but claims it is not his job to resolve the issue. She was set to go to Argonne National Lab in a few weeks to run experiments, but now, due to the fact those other people are going, she has cancelled her experiments because she is afraid of being alone with them (my adviser won’t pay for me to go anymore).

Does anyone out there have any advice? I’m worried the situation has progressed so far that I need to worry about hiring a lawyer.

The scenario:

  • in an article, found a point/claim/fact that would fit/support perfectly a broader point I’m trying to construct (@Related works section)

The dilemma:

  • Whom to cite?
    • a) only the article in which I found the [whole] point/claim/synthesis
    • b) the original sources, the author cited during his construction of the point
    • c) both i.e. the complete paragraph or part of the paragraph that serves my purpose

Pros and cons:

  • a)
    • Pro: I pay proper respect to the author from whom I learnt about the sources/facts. + the article is the only source I really read
    • Con: I would have single reference to support the point, while in reality it there are several relevant sources (used by the author)
  • b)

    • Pro: I would provide the reader with deeper/direct references for further researching
    • Con: it is a form of plagiarism, as it would seem that it was me that read all the sources and drawn conclusion presented. The conclusion is not the issue, I discuss that particular point anyway (in my paper), but the first part bothers me: it wasn’t me that studied all that sources, but the author
  • c) seems to me as just solution but I’m not sure how it should be formulated so it is clear for reader what is reference (let it be: [1]) from the article and what (sub) references are just taken from the article (let them be: [1.a] [1.b])

Alternatively, (and this is what I would normally do):
– I follow his references, find the articles, read them and then use (some or all of) them together with other references (known to me from earlier research). The issue with such practice: too often there is no justification for referencing his article — and it seems not to be not right i.e. smells to me like a tiny plagiarism-sin.


The example:

….

To achieve the first goal, the crawler has to visit as many web sites as possible, and to achieve the second goal, the crawler has to
maintain the freshness of the previously visited web sites, which can
be achieved by re-visiting such web sites in a routinely manner. In
the following, the most frequently used re-visiting policies are
summarized: (1) Uniform policy: in this policy, the entire web sites
are downloaded at each visit (Bhute and Meshram, 2010; Pichler et al.,
2011; Leng et al., 2011; Sharma et al., 2012; Singh and Vikasn, 2014).
Although this approach enriches the databases, it requires a large
processing time. (2) Proportional policy: this policy is performed in
many ways, such as: • Downloading only the pages that have a rank more
than a threshold value specified by the crawler administrator (Bhute
and Meshram, 2010;)

From the article:

ALQARALEH, S., RAMADAN, O., & SALAMAH, M. (2015). Efficient watcher
based web crawler design. Aslib Journal of Information Management,
67(6), 663–686. http://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-02-2015-0019

In my article I want to explain/define these two policies, together with his remarks, my own remarks, and, potentially, to expand (support) it with other sources.


I’m not sure if I formulated the issue properly, so please, do not hesitate to demand clarification. Any comments/thoughts are welcome, even if you are not sure what would be the right way.

Thanks in advance!

I am a 3rd-year computer engineering student at a mid-tier state school with a high GPA (3.97/4.0), top of my class, and 1 semester worth of research. I am also currently participating in a very prestigious REU program, so I do have a decent amount of research experience. I have also taken the GRE and done pretty well (mid 80s) percentile in verb/quant and 99th percentile in AWA. I’ve also basically narrowed down my research interests to 2 fields, so I have a general idea of what I’d like to specialize in. My goal is to become a Professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering, and I’m starting to contemplate applying to grad schools. I really want a PhD because I know that it is absolutely necessary for my goals.

My only problem is that I am afraid of doing the PhD, because I feel that I won’t remember everything (or a good amount) of everything from undergrad. This especially scares me because despite my successes in undergrad, I’m not sure that I could pass the qualifying exams. I guess I’m just afraid of the unknown; do you think that I should just go for it?

Thanks, sorry if my question comes off as rambling; I really want to earn a PhD so I can be a professor or faculty member at some point and knowing that I could fail is very scary.

I have been researching a specific topic in computer science for a couple of years now and a well established professor and his students have recently published a couple of publications in that topic too. In their work they do reference the well known and well cited previous work that basically everyone in that topic references, but I have noticed that they ignore (don’t reference) a couple of publications that are doing essentially what they are publishing about, i.e. extremely related work. And I am wondering even though there is a gap of a couple of years between the work they have published and the available previous literature how did they miss referencing the relevant previous work? Was it done intentionally or did they just do a hasty job at finding more recent related work?

Either way my main concern here is if there is anything that can be done to remedy the situation now, since the paper has already been published?