I am in a tight spot here, I have recently taken my GRE (321/ Q- 168, 153 V)and the circumstances at my current Company are not good, the company is laying of people and it is very likely that I get a notice to leave the company by February else the company will terminate my employment.

After I get my admit for colleges, If I quit the company in February, how would that impact my visa application?

I really can’t join another company after that, as by May – August 2018, the classes at the Grad School would start.

What should I do in these circumstances?

I recently co-authored a paper with about 40 other authors. This was a position paper that appeared as the output from a workshop, and my name appears somewhere in the middle of the list.

My contribution to the paper was a literature review section, which told the history of our field in a novel way, emphasising common themes that hadn’t been commented on before and introducing new terminology to describe them.

I would like to re-capitulate this work in a new paper, following quite closely the story I wrote for the joint paper, although re-writing the text and condensing it quite a bit. This would be as an introductory section aimed at a different audience than the previous paper, which is why I want to say it again rather than just citing it.

The question is about how best to cite the previous paper. On the one hand I could just say something like “we closely follow the treatment given by XXX et al (2017)” without mentioning that it’s my own contribution. However, I’m worried it might look a bit odd that we follow the literature review quite so closely if it’s not clear that it’s my own work I’m citing.

So I’m wondering if it’s appropriate and/or permissible to flag up that I wrote that part of the XXX et al. paper, e.g. “we closely follow the treatment that one of us (YYY) gave in XXX et al (2017).” There is nothing in the XXX et al. paper that identifies this section as my work, so the reader would have to trust me on that.

In case it’s relevant, the previous paper is mostly history and philosophy of science, whereas the new one is aimed at a technical audience in evolutionary theory and cognitive science.

I note that this is related to Citing a result due to a single author that appears in a paper with multiple authors, but the context and my reason for wanting to single out one of the authors are quite different.

It has been identified on stackexchange that Google Scholar has a bug where ArXiv publications are not updated to match the final journal publication information in google scholar (for several months). And the answer claims that google has stated that fixing this bug is not a priority for them.

My question is: Does this bug exist for all preprint servers or just ArXiv? This a huge problem in my field (where the convention is to not cite ArXiv papers), so I’d rather post my pre-print elsewhere if this problem does not exist for other preprint servers.

BioArXiv and ResearchGate come to mind as possibilities.

I am about to submit a manuscript for publication that is useful for solving a certain class of problems in my field. The technique is clearly applicable to a certain longstanding problem in the field, which is why I started developing the method in the first place.

My initial intent was to publish the technique and present it as a solution to the problem all in the same paper. However, after writing it up, I have noticed that it is more general than I expected and that it can be useful to tackle other problems in the field. I have then decided to write the paper entirely on it and how it can be extrapolated to solve other issues. The manuscript is quite long and I and my advisor think that the manuscript would become overly complicated if the solution to the major problem was included (some modification of this methodology would be needed, plus additional discussion).

Therefore, I am currently preparing a second manuscript which adapts the methodology to the major problem and demonstrates that it can effectively solve it. I expect this second manuscript to have a much larger impact than the first one.

However, I am concerned that the reviewers of the first manuscript will detect that the methodology can be used to solve the major issue (it is really obvious that it was designed for that, plus I suggest that it can in the conclusion) and suggest that it be included in the manuscript. While I could write a rebuttal disclosing that we are submitting their suggestion elsewhere, I am concerned that they won’t accept that for an answer.

While we have considered submitting the papers as Part I and Part II, we wanted to submit the second paper to a more prestigious venue, given that we believe the second one has a much greater chance of being accepted.

What are my options? Should I submit the papers to the same venue (i.e., Part I and Part II) and/or cram everything into a single paper? Am I overthinking this issue?

I just finished my first year at a prestigious graduate program in Biophysics. I’ve always enjoyed solving quantitatively inclined problems and have aspired for a career in academia and just after finishing one year, I feel like I don’t enjoy this field anymore. Here are a few reasons I might be feeling so:

(i) I decided to join an experimental lab, having never done experiments in the past and have failed miserably. This choice was mainly driven by interest in the project and the reputation of the advisers as excellent mentors and successful scientists.

(ii) I meet with my advisers (I’m co-advised by two mentors) only once every three weeks.

(iii) My advisers, though experts in their fields, are new to the area that my project is related to. This has several implications. I started my project looking for collaborators (offering certain samples of transgenic animals) by myself. My advisers are hardly able to offer any technical advice. The project that I was assigned has turned out to be way more difficult than both my advisers thought. It also implies that almost no one in the lab (except for one other graduate student, who has little interest to stay in academia) has any useful feedback on my project. Not to mention, lab meetings end up being of little to no value.

(iv) I’ve tried talking to people on campus, looking for people doing similar research and getting some feedback, but that hasn’t worked for me because there aren’t any.

All of this has seriously deteriorated my confidence. While I can go on with my current project and get something done by the time I graduate I’m fairly convinced that I cannot produce anything significant enough to be able to stay in academia.

Considering all this, I have three options:
(i) Joining a different lab that does research of computational/quantitative nature, something I love doing. I’ve already started talking to students of a lab that I might enjoy working in, have started reading their previous work and am considering doing an independent study/coursework with the concerned professor. However, this would involve switching to a different area of research and render the last eight months useless. While I can live with the latter, I’d like to know the repercussions of switching to a different area one year through a graduate program. I’ve just switched careers from Physics to Biophysics a year back with little experience with Biology, hoping to dwell on my quantitative skills and am almost 25 years of age.

(ii) Quit and join a Master’s program to gain some confidence and think about returning back to academia/find a place in industry. That would mean starting a PhD at 28. What does that mean as far as applications in the US are concerned?

(iii) Continue until I complete the requirements for a Master’s degree and quit – I don’t think this would be a good idea considering my diverse background. I’m not sure if I have specialized skills for jobs in industry yet.

If you’re still reading this question, I’m really grateful for showing patience. It’ll be very helpful if you could comment on the three options I’ve listed.

Indeed, some of the work I do would be housed within engineering departments at other schools, and the fact that our group is housed within mathematics is actually a rarity (with advantages and disadvantages).

However why does it seem that engineering has a stigma attached to it, compared to an applied math group in a math department that does almost exactly the same research?

Seems that the perception is engineering is less demanding or less prestigious or easier to get into, and full of hardworking but not necessarily “smart” students.

Regarding the issue of perception: it seems that every student in India majors in engineering. So we have a big world supply of engineers and perhaps not enough demand to meet that supply. Hence the stigma attached to engineering.

My university, Politecnico di Milano, is offering a double degree program in Mechanical and Biomechanical Engineering since the two courses have several exams in common. It is a program that is in an experimental stage, it has so many exams that it will probably take more than just 3 years to complete it and Erasmus is not included. Should I enroll anyway because it will the best choice for my job prospects instead of a single degree in Biomechanical Engineering?

(I already have a BSc in Biomedical Engineering)

The reason I ask is because I am a self taught engineer and mathematician with well over 20 years of product engineering experience. I have various patents and have sat on global standards committees–mostly for occupant safety systems. I work today as an in-house consultant and I find it difficult to accept that I can contribute to the safety of drivers all over the world and yet when it comes to mathematics I am simply not allowed to participate.

I have shared some of my ideas with professors and others in my field with masters and doctorate degrees with a positive reception and have used said math skills to great success in solving a wide range of problems. I have methods and ideas that I feel can help Americans appreciate mathematics beyond the scope of the classroom but I keep hitting the ‘…you must have a PhD (from an accredited college), wall’. Is there a way for people like me to contribute? Or, should I forget the whole thing and take my knowledge to the grave?

I hope this was specific enough. Thanks in advance.