As a PhD student in a multidisciplinary subject, I am grouped with a postdoc by my supervisor. In our lab, the usual rule is student do the theory and coding, and postdoc do the experiment.

My collaborator postdoc is highly unmotivated: he badly performed the experimental tasks that I told him to do (most of the time, the experiments was unqualified), and delayed our project progress.

I am much younger than him, and he refused to follow my instructions, and instead fed me with unreliable “ideas” and asked me to do his job… My supervisor knows the situation, but does nothing and just watches. Each weekly meeting I am the only guy having progress.

At end I had to do the experimental part myself. It was tough but finally the project was accepted to a top journal. I have done 95%+ works, but have to add the postdoc as a coauthor (he didn’t even take part in writing the paper)

I anticipate similar course of action in future projects. I can’t change the group.

How can I properly motivate my postdoc to get him work for me?

As noted in Derek Bok’s “Higher Education in America,” there is a trend in increased funding for large interdisciplinary research programs since the 1970’s (Think NSF MRSEC, for example).

What is the root cause or viewpoint for a shift towards this style of funding, as compared to single-PI research grant? Additionally, if this trend continues, administrators will increasingly pressure their departments into focusing on this type of funding source. Will academia eventually approach a similar climate to a national lab (ie, large teams working on interdisciplinary projects)?

My research is theoretical and have published some papers in high impact journals. However, I need further expertise to advance my works (e.g., advanced mathematics). Is there any online platform to post my research idea on which like minded researchers express their interest?

I look for a platform in which people are frequently doing this. I know it’s somehow possible in websites like researchgate, but it shouldn’t be very likely to happen.

No funding is involved. I do most of the research and write the paper, I just need a mathematician to do the math formulation or even check my math works.

Fellow researchers.

I am in a dilemma and will appreciate if you can please help me overcome it. I am a postdoc in a European University. However I am not finding the city comfortable, so I am planning to quit it in a month from now, or so.

Also, I work with a Professor who is very polite, but also very busy with meetings. My salary comes from the project he administers, so he is the boss of the organization and the project.

Past 4 months I have been working on a problem day and night including weekends as I found the problem very interesting and challenging. The theoretical part of the work is complete. It is a “complete” solution. He had NO contribution at all in this. Not even a single email exchange. He is too busy with meetings all the time. He is like 2 days in a week in the dept for 2-3 hours only. I am also managing his master student as he has no time.

He is definitely polite and nice though, but I have not received any input from him other than giving me printed research papers. But he always asked me to give him the pdfs of lengthy derivations which I did. But I am dealing with analytical/numerical Navier-stokes equation and its variations, so you can imagine how much terse that is. He has the entire theory now with him from my work. He may have been a good researcher in the past but no contribution in this work. And he had no proper publication in the work that I am doing so I am not sure how much he can contribute in writing the paper.

Now remains the numerical part which I believe I can do in next 2/3 weeks. And I have the ability to write the paper by myself when I have the numerical solution.

I talked to him, and asked if I can work for him based in another city. He said if it is a week visit, that is fine, but not otherwise. He said it clearly that “I will not pay you for you working from somewhere else.”

I have still cordial relationship with him. No worries on that part. So, I am going to leave the place and the position in a month or two for sure.

So, he gains co-authorship just because he has the authority to provide employment? What should I do? Please help.

I would like to ask you for an opinion on how to act in the following scenario.

A year ago, some colleague PhD of me has suggested an open problem to me. This problem was already published in his paper, which is on arXiv.

He suggested that problem to me and invited me to collaborate on it.
However, he is not very hard-working and I personally suspect that he is just waiting for me to prove it.
He is working in that way quite often.

I, somewhat blindly, agreed to work on it. However, I do not like the way he
“collaborates” and I would like to work on that problem on my own since he is not helping at all and only waits till the problem is solved so he can write it as a result to his grant.

We are very far from being published. Actually, not much work was done yet. I want to work and solve this problem on my own.

How should I proceed?

  1. Simply ignore him (he didn’t speak about problem for months) and publish the results?
  2. Tell him about my opinion, quit, and publish the results?
  3. Proceed and publish the results with him as a co-author.
  4. Do something else.

As a Ph.D. student, I am curious about the following: if you collaborate with a researcher(not necessarily your advisor) while being a student, should you write in your dissertation the work of the other collaborator?

Assume that while being a student, you collaborate with Prof. X, and you write a paper together. In this paper, the work was split 50-50, so that half of the results belong to Prof. X.

What should you do when writing your dissertation? Most probably, omitting the results of Prof. X will result in a significant gap in the thesis. I am particularly interested in the case of mathematics: if I cite the result, should I give a proof?

As a Ph.D. student, I am curious about the following: if you collaborate with a researcher(not necessarily your advisor) while being a student, should you write in your dissertation the work of the other collaborator?

Assume that while being a student, you collaborate with Prof. X, and you write a paper together. In this paper, the work was split 50-50, so that half of the results belong to Prof. X.

What should you do when writing your dissertation? Most probably, omitting the results of Prof. X will result in a significant gap in the thesis. I am particularly interested in the case of mathematics: if I cite the result, should I give a proof?

As a Ph.D. student, I am curious about how collaborations among researchers are established. To me, it seems like it is a very informal process: someone proposes an idea(while in a lunch discussion, for example) and the other person tries to give some advice. Eventually, the first person will return with some results and the process will continue till they get both involved in the topic. Is this standard in academia? Is there any other way of establishing collaboration?

Some time ago I was approached by a fellow researcher that had an idea on an earlier work of mine. We started a collaboration and as a result we submitted a manuscript in a prestigious journal. Recently, I stumbled on a publication of my coauthor in which he had used almost verbatim a large part of our common submission (a page long). These parts include results which were entirely mine. I am really disappointed and I am not sure how to proceed with this.

I think there is a lot of benefit if done right. I know it is an extremely rare thing to get a second PhD, but what if one completes a PhD in Machine Learning then works in industry for 15 years moving up the corporate ladder and transitioning companies, and then decides to get a PhD in genetics?

Would that be frowned upon? What if the goal was to use the second PhD (and possible post-doc) to create a database of biochemical pathways, signal transduction and molecular genetics that can be ‘modeled’ via an AI and Dynamical Systems using all of one’s previous knowledge/experience?

Is this possible with lots of collaboration over 6-15 years? I hope this is the direction medicine eventually goes. Think of it like a bucket list item before a researcher passes away.