I've heard that salary inversion is a problem in academia, and it happens when Universities continue to hire new and highly qualified people at higher and higher salaries, but they don't increase the salaries of the existing faculty at the same rates.
I want to ask - why is this actually a problem? Shouldn't salary be based on merit and qualifications, not how long you've sat at a particular desk?
Earlier this year I entered into a high-profile molecular biology lab and started doing wet lab work (I am an undergraduate). Knowing that I have a computational background, my PI asked that I also help with a project that had been conducted over the last two years and was nearing its completion. I was told that if I made enough of a contribution that I could be listed as a coauthor. I wrote a program for the post-doc that is leading this project and used it to analyze the validity of part of his data. The most current (nearly final) version of the project's manuscript that is being passed around the lab unfortunately don't have my name anywhere on it, even though my code is listed in the supplementary information section.
I have always heard that you should get an authorship on a paper if your work resulted in a figure or sizable part of the discussion. My contribution to this project only slightly altered one figure, ensured the figure's validity, and got about 2 sentences in the discussion. My relationship with my lab and my PI especially is very important to me (I would love to continue my work here for at least another 2 years), so is it worth asking for a co-authorship, or at least an acknowledgement? Would doing so be inappropriate given my relative contribution (a month vs. 2 years) and status as an undergraduate in the lab?
Answer
Asking whether a contribution merits acknowledgement or co-authorship is always appropriate, as long as it is done in a professional and non-confrontational way.
The answer may be "no," but it's certainly worthwhile to ask. (And if the answer is "no," at least you have learned something about standards for authorship and acknowledgement in your lab/field.)
I am a PG graduate working in an engineering college as an assistant professor. Currently I have got one and half year of experience in teaching.
How to become a reviewer for an engineering journal? Do I need to pay money for that? Or by publishing paper in that journal can I become a reviewer?
I'm posting from an anonymous account, for reasons that will be obvious.
I'm an associate professor in China at one of the top 10 universities in China, and have been working in China for a number of years. Most research in our lab is respectable and unproblematic. We get some papers in top journals and conferences.
As a native English speaker, I help on papers from graduate students. Some of these papers are conference papers, and some are journal papers. The conference papers I work on are international.
However, probably between 30% to 50% of the Chinese graduate students I work with copy and paste from the Internet into their research papers (from Wikipedia, from other papers, from software documentation, and so on). The amount ranges from a sentence here and there, to whole sections. It's usually easy for me to notice copy/pasted material (it's where they suddenly write like a native English speaker with 10+ years of research experience). Yesterday, I encountered the worst instance of copy/paste I've ever seen, and I flatly refused to be listed as a co-author.
What's become clear:
I've explained how serious a matter this is, over and over. And honestly, I'm fed up repeating myself – it makes me feel like the university (and research in China) is a joke. It makes me feel ashamed to work here.
I've tried repeatedly explaining this to everyone, but the seriousness is not getting through. They just think I'm overreacting.
Q: How can I convince graduate students in China to not copy/paste from the Internet into their research papers?
I'm looking for an answer along the lines of "the negative consequences of copy/pasting from the Internet in publications are blah". I have no intention to pack up and leave; I just want to get the message across and convince them that plagiarism matters. So I'm thinking about writing a document entitled e.g. "why we shouldn't plagiarize" and sending it around.
Is there any research/study/survey that looked at what percentage of papers submitted to a conference or journal have been previously rejected in the same or another venue?
I am mostly interested in the computer science field (machine learning) and English-speaking venues, but I am curious about other fields and languages as well.
I'm studying molecular biology and I'm trying to understand an experiment which shows the importance of promoters in the relative transcription level (RT). The image below comes from Rolf Knippers' book "Molekulare Genetik" (8th edition).
The legend says (among other things):
Die erste Zeile gibt die normale "Wildtyp"-Sequenz der 5'-flankierenden Region wieder.
Which, in english, means something like:
The first line repeats the normal wild-type sequence of the 5' flanking region.
The column on the right gives the relative transcription (RT) level, 1.0 being the highest possible level of transcription. As we can see, the lines where some parts of the "5' region" have been deleted give quite low RT levels, since some regions of the promoter are missing.
My questions are the following:
1) According to this and this, I understand that RNA polymerase reads and uses both coding and non-coding strands in order to synthesize RNA. Therefore, how did they manage to use the sequences strands regions had been deleted to make a polymerase "read them" and perform transcription?
2) If the polymerase reads the template strand in the 3' -> 5' sense, shouldn't we talk of "ATAT box" or "TAAC box" instead of "TATA" or "CAAT" boxes? Does it mean that the "promoter" regions they are using on the graphic above are actually on the coding strand?
Thanks a lot for your help.
Answer
It appears that this question is one of terminology, so I am answering it as such.
Convention for representing features in DNA sequences
The convention is that in indicating any sequence feature† in a protein-coding gene on double-stranded DNA, a single strand‡ is represented — the one from which the amino sequence could be read using the genetic code (conceptually, with T substituted for U). Like any other nucleic acid sequence§, it is always written in the 5ʹ to 3ʹ direction in the same manner as the mRNA transcribed from it, without this being explicitly stated.
† An exception might be hemi-methylation, in which case both strands would be shown.
‡ I call this the sense strand. I discuss the nomenclature further below.
§ An exception is that tRNA anticodons are sometimes written in the 3ʹ to 5ʹ direction for ease of comparison with the codon, but in this case the directionality is indicated.
Origin and justification for this convention
Historical. The amino acid sequence of the protein (the product of the gene) is central to this convention because knowledge of the genetic code, and hence representation of the region of the mRNA that encodes protein — and by extension the DNA — was the first sequence information to be known.
Logical consistency. Later other sequences features were identified (some of which initially may have just been genetic features), e.g. ribosome binding sites, polyadenylation addition signals, transcription start sites, promoters, transcription factor recognition sites. It was logically consistent to represent them on the same strand as the coding sequence.
Functional agnosticism. In many cases the function of a sequence followed its description, so there was no reason initially to place it on any particular strand. However, even if it were thought that the function of some sequence were to be recognized on the opposite strand (what I would call the anti-sense strand), it would be unwise scientifically to change the representation to indicate this. Science progresses and interpretation changes. Better to separate concrete descriptive features from conclusions about their function.
It couldn’t ever be an ATAT box
Even if you represented the TATA box on the anti-sense strand, it could never be called an ‘ATAT box’ (as suggested by the poster) because, according to the basic convention, ATAT is 5ʹ-ATAT-3ʹ, and on the antisense strand the sequence is 3ʹ-ATAT-5ʹ, i.e. TATA!
Terminology for referring to the two strands of dsDNA
Whereas the above is the convention followed universally, the following is just my opinion. In science terminology is important to communicates ideas unambiguously, so I think it worthwhile explaining the ambiguity in some of the terms, the use of which I discourage.
Sense and anti-sense This is my preferred term because, although not perfect, it avoids the pitfalls of the others. The idea seems to me clear that when you read the string of codons that encode the amino acid sequence from this strand they ‘make sense’. (Anti-sense is used in preference to non-sense, as ‘nonsense’ was the term used historically for mutations that converted amino acid codons into stop codons.) It can also be extended to non-protein coding genes (e.g. for tRNA), where ‘sense’ correlates with the sequence of the gene product.
I shall use ‘sense’ and ‘anti-sense’ as reference terminology in discussing other terms.
Coding and non-coding This has the disadvantage that it cannot be extended to non-protein coding genes. However my primary objection is that it can cause confusion, as coding only unambiguously refers to mRNA. As the anti-sense strand is the template for RNA polymerase, one might make the mental association between this and ‘coding’, whereas it is the sense strand that is meant in this (admittedly common) usage.
Template and non-template Template might be a more logical term for the anti-sense strand as this is the template for transcription by the RNA polymerase (although mRNA is also a template — for translation). However it is used only infrequently.
Plus and minus This terminology is used for single-stranded (especially RNA) viruses to represent the whole genome, where in plus-strand viruses the genome is also the mRNA, i.e. the sense strand. One problem here is that it can be confusing for the beginner, who by extrapolation may assume that in double-stranded DNA genomes one strand is the sense strand for all genes. It is not. Which brings me to my final point…
…whatever terminology you use, it is better to make sure it is clear that you are referring to the sense or anti-sense strand of a gene, not of the whole genome. You need to employ some other terminology to distinguish between the two strands of e.g. bacterial or plasmid DNA if it is necessary to distinguish them.
So, there are numerous species of animals who use parthenogenesis, but to my knowledge the reproduction is clonal. That is, the offspring are identical to the mother. Are there any documented cases where a female goes through meiosis one to produce varied cells that are now diploid and these cells do not go through meiosis two, but rather develop in to a diploid organism? It would seem an effective reproductive strategy in that it generates genetic variation without a mate (at least more-so than strict asexual reproduction). Is my logic flawed in some way?
Answer
In automixy the meiotic cells give rise to diploid offsprings. This can happen by diploidization of the haploid cell (1n->2n), which will produce homozygotes or endomitosis prior to meiosis (4n->2n) which produces heterozygotes. Examples:
Cnemidophorus uniparens : 4n->2n
Sphyrna tiburo: 1n->2n
I don't know of any case where there is fusion of similar gametes to form a diploid cell. It is difficult for two ova to fuse in natural conditions because the vitelline membrane has to be dissolved. Experimentally a haploid ES-cell can be fused to ovum to form a progeny. Haploid ES cells undergo diploidization and when injected in blastocyst, can develop properly (Ref). In fact haploid androgenic-ES cell line had been made in this study by injecting sperm into an enucleated oocyte. These androgenic-haploid cell lines can be fused to ovum to give rise to viable offsprings.
Also see this question. Similar topic
I'm not sure whether I can ask those questions about evolution in one post or should separate them into multiple posts, but I am just curious about the evolutiontheory. (I am new here)
Sorry for my english and my many questions :)
My questions:
They say humans and monkeys have a mutual ancestor. Was it literally one ancestor? Because if so, then it would need a partner to regenerate children right?
Even if they would have children, then these children would be brothers and sisters right, which means they cannot have sex to regenerate their children?
They say that humans and monkeys have a mutual ancestor, does that mean that a certain brother's family became monkeys and the other brother's family became human?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee%E2%80%93human_last_common_ancestor
If humans and monkeys have a mutual ancestor, then how come humans and monkeys are so different in terms of intelligence, hygiene, clothing?
They say humans lost our fur because we don't need it anymore, but how come we still need cloths to wear to protect us from cold?
Why do humans have to brush our teeth, cut our nails, use toilets and work for our food and drinks, while any other animals don't?
Why do men and women have those specific features that make a man a man and a woman and woman? Why do women have to give birth and not men? Why do men have more facial hair growth and are built stronger than woman (while male and female chimpansees (our closest ancestors) both grow facial hair Why do men grow facial hair?)? Some people say men have more facial hair growth and are built stronger because they used to hunt (why did men hunt and not women?), but some say men hunt because they have more facial hair and are built stronger. Wouldn't it be a circle reasoning?
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31zou1/eli5_what_evolutionary_advantage_does_having_long/ (facial hair because hunt)
http://www.answers.com/Q/Why_did_men_hunt_and_women_gather_in_prehistoric_times (hunt because built strong)
Could it be possible that we relate humans to animals, because we associate animal behavior with human behavior due to our human reasoning (which we can't help of course)? But human and animal behavior that look similar, does not mean that they have the same meaning right?
Does 'survival of the fittest' mean the following?: Humans have finger nails and a protruding nose, because animals that didn't have nails or protruding noses are extinct?
Why do humans have a chin, curly hair, eyebrows, lips and facial hair above the lips while monkeys don't?
Why do humans have this specific hairline (separation line between hair and skin)
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/v3w3b/why_do_humans_have_such_distinct_hairlines_as/
https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-the-other-primates-have-long-hair
Some human emotions such as guilt and fear sometimes result in not doing anything at all, but isn't that evolutionary a disadvantage?
Humans have so little fur compared to monkeys. Which means that at some point, starting from the ancestor, the next generation lost more and more fur. At some moment there was so little fur left that generation felt cold and wore some clothing? But what about their naked parents who have about the same amount of fur?
Why are there humans and monkeys, but not intermediate forms that slowly changed from the ancestor to human or ancestor to monkey? Because they would have human characteristics but also monkey characteristic which are still there nowadays?
Could it be possible that new species are not arisen, but just discovered?
Could it be possible that all the species do not arise in series (after each other), but parallel (at the same time). Because if it would be the former, then the food chain would be incomplete?
Why do we have puberty, and why don't boys already have facial hair when they are kids (for warmth)?
They say humans find a lover because, evolutionary speaking, they want to produce children. But how come some couples choose not to have children?
Why do humans talk and write (have a language), while monkeys don't?
They say the big bang was the cause of everything, but how can material appear from nothing? (Which basically means 0=1) Even if organic molecules came from an-organic molecules, they it would still not mean that the organic molecules were living? (example: a wooden door is organic, but does not live)
They say evolution is driven by mutations. Are protruding noses and nails the consequence of mutations? But most mutations are of disadvantages (example: diseases)
I have recently applied for a postdoc in the USA, and because I am on a different continent any interview that I may be offered will almost certainly be by videoconference. I assume that at postdoc level, nobody is going to offer to pay for an intercontinental visit for a second interview (am I right?).
There is some good advice here on interviewing over Skype, and indeed this is something that I have my own past experience of. Something I've noticed before is that while the formal interview itself can work almost the same way in person or by VC, one misses out on the surrounding interactions - chatter before and after, perhaps walking around the building, and so forth - which helps one to form an impression of the people, the place, and whether one wants to work there.
Are there any ways to get a feel for these intangible aspects of culture and personalities without a visit?
I've been studying for my PhD in Sweden (I moved from the UK in January 2014). It's been alright. I've had difficulties before, and I've thought of quitting it, but I pushed through. I don't speak the language, but I'm in an academic environment where everyone speaks English anyway. I've got on with people here, but being back with my parents for Christmas has made me realise just how much I miss things here.
I can't afford a city apartment abroad, so I live with a family as a lodger in the countryside. I can never quite relax there. It's an old house with thin walls and easily damaged doors, so I have to take care with everything. I have a small room and I don't quite feel comfortable expressing myself around somewhat-strangers. We get on, but I never feel comfortable speaking with them, and they don't really know me. I can't really move out either, since I would be moving on in six months as per the program, and would it really be worth it to find a new place for that amount of time?
Folks at work are nice, but I've never felt completely comfortable around them either. We just have different interests and are different ages. They're nice, but I've felt the urge to prove myself and do well and that's isolated me. There is a LOT of support available, but somehow I still find things difficult. Socialising outside of work is very hard due to the language barrier, the distance from the city (which makes weekends abysmally dull unless I want to spend all day on a trip to the shops) and the way things are organised there. It's not impossible, but it takes great effort.
It's not necessarily the work which is getting me down, but I've realised that I've gotten by this year by devoting myself to work. I've made many mistakes (not all of which can be cleared up), but my supervisor doesn't really mind and still thinks I've done well enough. He's probably right, but as I'm so focused on work I notice all the possible small mistakes, and when they could come back to bite me. And that sucks. I do dread going back to work, as I will have to finish this project somehow, and it won't be as good as I had hoped it would have been. But I will finish it.
Some of the later projects (in my department we work on several different but related papers for a PhD) so seem better, and I can usually get back into things, but I don't have a burning passion for the field. I took the PhD because I was struggling to find a job, and I was considering academia. The PhD was related to what I considered that I wanted to study in the future, and my old masters supervisor recommended it.
As I've said, this isn't the first time I've had doubts. Last year I had a very bad period when I wanted to quit too, but it passed when I felt like I was doing better. Every time I'm back in the UK for a few weeks or longer I feel even more rubbish going back, because things are so much easier here. I know my way around, I speak the language, I have friends I can easily relate to and family nearby that loves me... And it'll only get worse when I have to move to Australia in six months for the next part of my PhD, as the PhD is jointly hosted with another uni in Sydney.
I really feel like I want to come back to the UK. I'm not even sure a PhD is right for me; sometimes it feels okay, but it never quite feels wonderful. It feels more like a job than a life. I'm already on medication for depression/bipolar, and I'm autistic too, if that makes a difference. I get the feeling that I just want to be around folks who get me, which for me seems rare to find over there in an environment so devoted to work.
I feel so lonely right now. I have such an empty life, and it sucks so much. Even this kind of work feels kind of wrong for me too: I don't want to be stuck in an office doing facts and figures forever, especially not for four years. I always thought it was what I wanted, but now I feel like I'd much rather go out and help people somehow as my life's work, or find a boring-but-menial job and focus my life outside of that. Even without my work problems, I've felt like this for at least six months. My PhD seems like a temporary thing to me now, and after it I hope to do something else. But four years like this? I'm not sure if I could handle that.
My passion for my work has gone, I suppose.
There are other things to consider too: I'm transgender, and still struggling to get hormone replacement therapy. Sweden is supportive, but they're told me it'd take a year to begin due to the necessary psychological tests. Which I've already done in the UK. Every time I go somewhere else I have to start the whole thing again.
I am scared that I just feel this way because I'm afraid of how my project will turn out. I'm going to go back and get it done, and see how I feel then, but even then I think I'm afraid I'll just slip back into feeling generally miserable again.
I'm not even sure it's an insect: the best I can do is identify it as an arthropod. I captured this slow-moving organism and after a period of observation under high magnification, I concluded that it appears to construct a "shell" from miscellaneous particles or debris. With a scalpel, I carefully cut this outer casing open to observe the organism, and the pictures show what I found. It seems to have six legs, like an insect, but is oddly worm-like and wingless. Total length is approximately 1 cm. I do not believe that this is a juvenile/larval/instar form. I've seen several of these where I live, and they always look like this (with maybe a +/- 20% size variation).
Edit: This specimen was found in San Diego County, California, United States.
Answer
It is the larva of household casebearer moth (a Lepidoptera), named after the larval stage. It is scientifically called Phereoeca uterella.
It is found through out South and North America.
The larva constructs a protective case from silk and camouflages it with other materials such as soil, sand and insect droppings.
References:
Further reading: Household Casebearer, Phereoeca uterella by Juan A. Villanueva-Jimenez and Thomas R. Fasulo
Summary: My paper was accepted to a journal; I realized they missed a handful of edits (which do not alter the findings or conclusion) and emailed them right after to change these things. They ghosted me for two weeks, posted an unedited version of the article online (not assigned to journal yet) and ghosted me for another two weeks. I spent about 20 hours trying to contact someone from the publisher, including calling offices across the US and the UK, and 30 days in total without contact until just this week. I'm super frustrated/angry. What can I do to get my paper corrected? Should and can I withdraw the paper?
My paper was accepted to a journal I like and have supported in the past with peer reviewing and the like. I am a post-doc. Its my dissertation work so I feel quite wed to it. I signed the authorship agreement once it was accepted - and to be honest had never really thought too critically about these agreements until now. I had some technical issues with the correction proofs, but could not get ahold of anyone for three weeks to assist, and noticed once the edited proof was available, it was missing a handful of edits I had made in the correction/editing process.
This was Nov 8/9 when the proofs were available online for the author (me) to view (and apparently approve).
Immediately, I contacted them:
on November 10th - asking them to implement these changes, followed up once after this to the production editor (who I was previously conversing with) and heard nothing.
Without any contact, it was e-published on November 28th without the corrections - e.g. available online and not assigned to an issue, but has a DOI.
I continued to follow up with the production editors and the editor of the journal. The editor of the journal felt very bad and tried to help me get in touch with the production team. Various secretaries from teh publisher also have tried to help and "escalate" the matter. Outside of this, no contact from any of the production team.
I have a log of over 30 attempts to get in touch with someone from the production team over these 30 days. This includes a whirlwind of suggested people I contact, calls, and emails. Throughout this, the editor of the journal has been in touch and apologized for how unreachable the publishing editors have been.
Over this final week or so, I have been and am quite frustrated as the lack of contact continued. This is now almost three weeks after it has appeared online. As no one contacted me, I asked the journal editor and publishing team / editors for the article to be withdrawn, and that I no longer wished to work with this publisher. The Journal editor apologized for the lack of continued radio silence.
Finally, on Dec 9 I received a response from a contact I received through the chain - someone on the publishing team. Her response was really great, it acknowledged the unprofessionalism of what had occurred, said she would follow up to ensure it didnt happen again, and said she can already see the withdrawal request is being processed, as it should not have gone to the e-print stage without contact, and she would keep me posted.
The next morning, Dec 10, another woman contacts me to say she is taking over the case and that it cannot be withdrawn.
She said they will work with me to make the edits and issue a correction - however I made clear in an earlier email I was leaving for a personal / mental health leave as of Dec 10, and although I tried to resolve this before then - I no longer wish to move forward. She said since I would be on a leave they would just review my email chain and implement the changes. If I proceeded with the later (though I don't want to) I believe its reasonable that I'd need to look over the entire article, my notes, and the correction proofs in detail to trace all the missed corrections.
Is it odd to feel this mistreated by the publisher in this case? I have spent 20+ hours calling and emailing the publishers NY, Philly and UK offices, staying up late at night to try to reach individuals in the UK (I'm in Canada) during work hours, and sourcing new people in the chain to contact.
I don't feel they deserve to capitalize on this work considering they essentially ghosted me for 30+ days and proceeded with e-publication without contact. Also, this has caused quite a bit of stress and anxiety which likely elevated my need for a mental health leave - tied into other work/home issues.
This is my first publication, but I am leaving academia and don't really care to publish this work right now, so I am inclined to want to stand my ground. I really dont think authors should be treated this way. But this is my only experience, really - is this typically and I just need to deal with it?
My big questions are :
is withdrawal ever an option in a case like this where the author feels mistreated and wants to pull the publication? If not, are there any other courses of action that function similarly?
Can I leverage the fact that one email said they were already implementing the withdrawal process, only to be rescinded the next day?
Do I just edit the paper, spill into my personal leave to sort this?
Do I escalate this to a copyright lawyer, if so - do I need to first contact my institution? Should it be the institutions law team or can I hire someone to send a letter? Am I completely bound by the copyright agreement or is there ever a case for authors withdrawing their permission?
I write for national newspapers and have a blog on a national media site, is it reasonable to tell them I will work with them on the edits if that is my only option, but I will make it extremely known to my colleagues, networks and social media platforms what this process has been like, and that they proceeded with publication against my wishes?
Thanks for your help.
I have submitted the PhD thesis for examination more than 2 months ago. I am currently working with full time job as a researcher in industry. While I am still subject to my supervisor as I have yet to undergo viva voce, I am tired with how my supervisor is treating me now. She likes to boss me around with work at university.
She asked me to provide training to new PhD students in the lab. While I don't really mind do it during my free time (i.e., weekend), she forced me to do it as soon as possible so that she can get the results and publish them in short time. This has led me to ask for leave from company just so I could demonstrate lab techniques to her new students.
Furthermore, she nonchalantly gave my phone number to new grad students to contact me should any problems arise in the lab without my permission. To make things worse, I was the one held responsible to troubleshoot the problems if the experiment was not successful. Also, she just e-mailed me any papers or manuscripts for me to analyze/check the statistics without me being involved in the project. Then I found out that she didn't even acknowledge me when the paper was published (as co-author/ acknowledgement section).
I am tired of the way she's been treating me. I know I am still bound to her as I have yet to undergo viva. I am scared to tell her that she needs to back off as this will definitely affect my viva voce. What should I do?
"According to preliminary sequences, 99.7% of the nucleotide sequences of the modern human and Neanderthal genomes are identical, compared to humans sharing around 98.8% of sequences with the chimpanzee." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_genome_project
What precisely is the issue with the supposed 2-4% of Neanderthal genetic material, how does that connect with the general near-total-identity of genetic material?
Does the 2-4% refer largely to analysis of haplotypes, which I take to mean clusters of alleles/ groups of specific traits, which reveal direct contact between the populations?
So my student and I are writing a paper, my question is: Among firstname.lastname@student.institution.domain vs firstname.lastname1@gmail.com
which sounds more professional?
I personally submitted a paper back when I was a bachelor student using my gmail address, although I had a similar student account like the one above. But my supervisor back then advised me not to use an @student account
In this related question, a reviewer mentioned that he tends to have a negative a-priori when he sees an author of a paper with a gmail address (he admits that it should mainly be about the quality of the work, but he can't help it)
Answer
It depends on many things, which I tried to order by descending priority:
gmail.com addresses in lieu of our professional ones, because of a national policy forbidding use of commercial email providers for state-paid positions (prohibitions which my institution extends to students)gmail.com may also be (it may not be hard to imagine that, in some near future, you become infuriated by Google's (or any company's) behavior and close your account). On that note: if you graduated from some institution, you may get a permanent alumni email redirection, which may last longer than all those individual accounts.smurf19@gmail.com sure doesn't do any good for your reputation.I am applying for Ph.D program, and I need to find an advisor to accept me in his group. I want to send to him a perfect email and get his attention to me. I would like some opinion on this matter.
Do I include my CV and recondition letter in the first email?
Do I mention my GPA?
Do I straight-up ask them if they are accepting students? Or, do I first attempt to establish a relationship?
The field is renewable energy.
Why are insects so energy-efficient while flying? Is it because of their light weight and aerodynamics or due to very efficient biochemical transformations (food->energy)?
Answer
Insect flight muscle is capable of achieving the highest metabolic rate of all animal tissues, and this tissue may be considered an exquisite example of biochemical adaptation.
Locusts, for example, may (almost instantaneously) increase their oxygen consumption up to 70-fold when starting to fly. In humans, excercise can increase O2 consumption a maximum of 20-fold, and for birds in flight the figure is about 10-fold (Wegener, 1996; Sacktor, 1976).
As Wegener (1996) has put it (in his definitive paper):
The aerobic scope (the ratio of maximal to basal rate of respiration) of insects is unrivalled in the animal kingdom
Flight is powered by ATP hydrolysis, and these impressive metabolic rates are achieved by very effective control of ATP hydrolysis and regeneration.
References
Wegener, G. (1996) Flying insects: model systems exercise physiology Experientia May 15;52(5):404-12. (See here)
Sacktor B. (1976) Biochemical adaptations for flight in the insect. Biochem Soc Symp. 1976;(41):111-31. (See here)
So far I only use papers from ieee, nature, or other research publications.
My supervisor suggested me to write more in motivational background part.
I found tech news website like eejournal.com and semiengineering.com provides more general, more business-related, stories for general audiences.
Can I use them as reference in introduction/motivation part of my master thesis?
My personal opinion is we cannot use them. But I do not know where I can get papers about e.g. cost analysis in CMOS scaling and next gen lithography, or why we need new memory devices like memristor.
Food is cooked/baked at temperatures that are significantly higher than what's considered normal for proteins/amino acids (40°C). Why is it, then, that such food is still considered nutritious after cooking? (meat, cheesecake, lentils, quinoa, mushrooms, etc.)
Answer
Cooking is just a form of digestion.
What is digestion?
Digestion is the process of breaking down big molecules into smaller molecules. When you cook food you break down big molecules into its small components.
Why do we digest food?
Think about a long sequence of DNA for example. You eat corn and you have in your body a long sequence of corn DNA. What can you do with that long molecule....well, nothing. You need to break this long molecule down in order to be able to assimilate the constitutive nutrients. With those nutrients, you can now make up your own DNA. In other words, we need to break the big Lego castle that is food to get the building blocks in order to rebuild a spaceship. Digestion refer to the first process (breaking up the Lego castle). We refer to the part of the metabolism who breaks things down as catabolism and we refer to the part of metabolism that build things up as anabolism. Note that catabolism + anabolism = metabolism.
Why do we cook then instead of digesting by ourself
Digestion takes much energy and require the organism to have the right organs and to have the right matter (enzymes and stuff). We can save up energy (and the other stuff) by digesting the food outside our body. One could say that humans, (just like spiders for example) are performing external digestion.
Why cooked food considered nutritious
Cooked food don't have more nutrients than raw food. It is actually likely that in the process of cooking you would lose some nutrients going in the water that you throw away typically.
The big difference is that nutrients in cooked food are easy to assimilate which might end up being more healthy depending on the specific food source. Cooking may also destroy potentially toxic products.
Note that in response to the cooking behaviour, human gut has evolved to be shorter than it was in our ancestor.
During the last term, I recorded at least 50 cases of student plagiarism. The most common cases were students copying and pasting paragraphs verbatim from various Web sites, assembling them together, and calling it their essay.
I took what I thought were sufficient steps to inform students of what was not allowed:
I also set what I thought were strict enough consequences so that students know it is better to do nothing at all than to cheat:
Note, these are policies I established from the very first day of the class, and carried through the whole term. Yet, even in the final weeks, I continued to catch copied work and failed a lot of students.
What further steps can I take to reduce this problem?
I made an answer on the Scifi.SE that can be read here. It is about how the characters in the story Jurassic Park might have gotten DNA for all the species shown.
In my answer, I said this:
Apes and Humans, for example, share over 99% of their genes. That means the difference between our species is less than 1% of our genes. In fact, all life on Earth shares about 50% of it's genes.
but in the original posting (before someone edited it) I chose to use the word DNA instead of genes.
He left this comment in the section to explain the edit:
Sorry, I'm a biologist, I can't help it. Humans and apes share 99% similarity in the coding sequences of their DNA, the ~5% that codes for genes, not on all the DNA. I simplified this to genes for the answer.
I have a basic high school understanding of DNA and genes, so I'm afraid I fail to see the difference between using "DNA" or using "genes" in my statement. I understand that genes are specific sequences of DNA that are used by the cell in some way. I understand that DNA is more generic, including all of the strands, whether they are used or not, whether they seem to code for something or not.
So is it wrong then to say that apes and humans share 99% of their DNA or is it equally correct to say "genes"?
Answer
So, a quick molecular biology lesson.
Proteins are encoded by genes - while the statement that one gene codes for one protein is not quite correct (one gene can code for different variations of the same basic protein), it's a good way to think about things in this context.
Genes are made up of DNA, a polymeric molecule that constitutes our chromosomes, the informational portion of which resides four “letters” (chemical bases).
However, now we get to the key part — although all genes are made of DNA, not all the DNA of chromosomes makes up genes. In fact, as @terdon mentioned in a comment, only about 5% (or less) of the 4 billion letters in the total DNA — the genome — constitute genes - those sequences that
directly code for protein.
The function of the rest of the genome is not entirely clear. Some is regulatory, some may be structural, and may be “junk DNA”. However it’s stuck around for millions of years, so it we assume it must have some purpose. This non-coding DNA differs between species to a greater extent than the genes themselves do, so perhaps it somehow contributes to the differences between organisms.
From AndroidPenguin
Here are the links to a paper about the function of "junk" DNA from 2013.
I'm an undergrad trying to publish findings on the accuracy of consumer-grade motion sensors for IEEE. I've searched for existing literature on this topic, and I've found some interesting articles. However, I'm not sure how accurate these papers are.
Once IEEE publishes a paper in a journal or conference, has IEEE deemed the paper's findings as accurate?
That is, has a paper passed science's often-vaunted "peer-review" once that paper has been published?
I realize this question applies for my research and any other research published by a respected organization like IEEE or Nature.
Answer
No. The publisher does not and cannot guarantee the correctness of the papers. Also the peer-review system is not perfect.
That being said, even though a single paper might have some chance of being wrong, as studies are replicated, and follow up studies verify and extend the conclusions, the scientific community can build up stronger claims.
Most colleges in developing countries are sub-par by western academic standards. In one developing country, for example, professors are not obliged by law or by their institutions to pursue a doctoral degree. Even worse, this country’s state colleges lack decent science and computer laboratories, affecting in turn the quality of learning experience. No doubt, higher institutions in improvised countries have much to invest in their facilities, research, and faculty.
Having said this, does a student who graduated from a lower-ranking university in a developing country have a chance to be admitted to a graduate school in a western country? Based on your experience, do graduate schools give much weight to the reputation of your undergraduate school? If your school is accredited in your country, will this help?
What is the rough probability for a megafauna specimen to exhibit a gene not present in either parent?
I'm looking, ideally, at the chance for one specific individual to be the first in a breeding population to have a given gene.
Does the brain really function like a computer as in, ultimately every response is related to a binary sequence based on whether particular neurons fire or not?
Answer
First of all, I would like to point out that making analogy between digital computers and the brain is often very misleading.
That being said, my answer is, some scientists believe so, some don't.
Several things to consider:
Some neural systems are not spiking. C. elegans for example has a nervous system that is entirely analogue. Human nervous system also contains neurons with graded responses (mostly in the sensory front-end though).
Spiking neurons may be binary at each time point, but time itself is continuous. Firing at 0.003 seconds later can represent something different. (in contrast to the usual synchronous digital architecture of computers)
The neuron doctrine is sometimes challenged. Glial cells that do not fire may have important functions for information processing. See:
For final exam in my university chemistry class, a note sheet, 8 by 11, was allowed. You could put anything on the sheet, however it was to remain 1-sided. Of all things, I forgot about the last rule, and created a 2 sided note sheet for the exam. Well, now that the grades are out, my professor emailed me saying that a third of my points were deducted because of my note card. He was really being generous, because the rules say that I should actually get a score of 0.
Well, I still passed the class, but will this incident be put on my academic profile for applying to the engineering department? I mean, I'm still mad at myself for this, but do I have to and how would I explain it to the school if it's necessary?
I currently hold a BA in Middle Eastern History, which was a pretty good fit for my last job in the Army. I'm getting ready to move on to the civillian world now, and computer science/programming has always been a hobby for me that I'd like to look into turning into a career.
My question is, what type of program should I look into in order to deepen my knowledge and verify my abilities? Should I look at getting a second undergrad, or would a programming education certificate be enough to get my foot in the door for employment/grad school later on? Are online certificates such as Kaplan/Phoenix respected enough, especially if they are in addition to a traditional degree?
I basically want to know where to set my sights, in order to get going in software development. Getting an additional qualification seems necessary, so which kind makes the most sense for getting started?
I put on arXiv several months ago a paper that has been submitted at the same time to a conference. The conference paper was rejected, and using the reviews, we have started improving the paper, and one thing leading to another, we have substantially changed the paper, to the point that the title has been changed. However, the new paper is similar in many points to the previous one, in particular about the technical results (the most important changes are rather on the presentation of the results).
We plan to submit in a near future the new version to a journal, and to also put this version on arXiv. My question is therefore the following one:
Answer
You cannot completely withdraw a paper from arXiv; instead, the system can add a retraction notice on it. So, if you follow option #1, you'll end up with 1. an old paper, 2. with a retraction notice, 3. a new paper. It's a bit of a mess…
I would suggest the following:
Consider your much-improved version as a new article: get it published, upload it on arXiv. In the arXiv version, you may refer to the older arXiv paper (“This article is based on the same results as …, but the presentation of results and the whole discuss have been reworked substantially”). Put it either in the introduction or, if you don't want to disrupt the flow of text, as a footnote or “banner” before the introduction.
Most importantly: make a update to your old paper, for a version that links to the new paper. That way, you make it completely clear that a improved discussion is available.
This addressed the only issues I see, namely making sure that people can find your work, and that you're not suspected of duplicate publication (which, on an open platform like arXiv, doesn't make much sense anyway…).
[I striked through some passages that might be misleading, resp. where I have been misled.]
Is the following - very simplified - model biologically (or physically) plausible, explaining how spatiotemporal processing on dendrites works, especially how dendritic spikes and short-term potentiation modification of synaptic strength might work together? (I've read the wikipedia article on NMDA receptors but found it quite hard to digest. It's not a gentle introduction into the topic.)
Let the blue dots be two ligand- and voltage-dependent ion channels (eg. NMDA-gated channels) sitting on two synapses.
Let the green dot be a voltage-dependent ion channel that generates dendritic spikes.
Let the red dots be voltage-dependent ion channels that generate action potentials.
Without the green channel (generating dendritic spikes), two simultaneously synaptic inputs with depolarization V0 which sum up at the branching point of the dendrite would not suffice to generate an action potential:
But with it, two subsequent synaptic inputs (e.g. in two synchronous spike trains) would, because the postsynaptic response is stronger due to an additional voltage signal from the dendritic spikes.
At time t2 another synaptic input and the dendritic spikes arrive at the blue channels. The resulting depolarization V1 > V0 suffices to evoke an action potential.
Is this picture correct in principle? Do such processes actually occur? Or are the real processes quite different? (Of course, they will be much more complicated and superimposed with other processes.) At least some NMDA receptors (which are ligand- and voltage-gated) sit on synapses.
When applying for the PhD program in mathematics, usually, one is not required to specify in what field (e.g., PDE, dynamical system, etc.) he/she intends to do. However, I don't know whether it will be disadvantage that one does not have a specific field in mind at all.
I ask this question because some people suggest the students who are applying to the graduate school should talk to or connect with the professor who is in the school he/she intend to apply for. But if one does not even have a specific interest in mind, how can he/she talk to a professor about his/her application? (Even if the student is interested in analysis, say, there are lots of sub-field in analysis.)
So, here is my question:
Does one need a very specific field in mind to apply a PhD program in mathematics? Would this be thought as advantage or disadvantage of an application?
Answer
At least for most graduate programs in pure mathematics in the US, there's no need to have a specialization in mind when applying. [This may be very different in other countries.]
It's valuable to demonstrate in your application that you have studied some serious mathematics, by discussing undergraduate research or advanced coursework. However, there's no implication that you intend to focus on the same fields in graduate school.
It's common to indicate an interest in a few possible specialties, usually at a level of detail ranging from "algebra" to "analytic number theory". If you are completely undecided, then that could come across negatively, by suggesting a general lack of enthusiasm. However, being too specific is also problematic. Matching a possible advisor too closely comes across as pandering, while being specific without matching anyone makes it look like you aren't a good fit for this particular department.
Overall, the general feeling is that incoming graduate students don't know enough to make well-informed decisions about specialization, and that anything they say is a little unreliable because their interests may shift as they learn more. From that perspective, it's not worth worrying about this too much.
As for talking with professors, at least at the schools I'm familiar with this will not increase the chances of admission (the decisions are made by a committee). After you've been admitted, it's important to talk with faculty and try to gauge the chances of finding a suitable advisor. However, that can and should wait until February.
I have been assigned to mark student reports for an engineering coursework, which mainly involves the use of a software. The main content of each report is around 15 pages. There are 45 reports in total. I am also required to write feedback to each student. I have not been involved in designing the assignment nor teaching the course.
The professor who assigned me this task told me that the marker last year took about 4 full days to complete the markings, and yet I have spent more than two weeks doing this (and not really doing anything else), and I am not yet done. I did need to spend some time familiarising myself with the subject matter and the software in the beginning, because I have never used the software before, but it is not that difficult to use.
Since this is my first marking experience, I am wondering whether it is normal to have spent so much time marking. Is there any strategy I can adopt to complete the task more efficiently, especially in my case where I am not involved in designing the assignment?
Answer
Marking assignment is a very demanding and time-consuming task, especially if you intend to do it thoroughly (and you should). It is also a big responsibility, as you have the students' success in your hands. It might be that your supervisor underestimated the time necessary to take care of it, although it's difficult to say without knowing the exact content of the assignment.
From my experience of grading assignments and exams (topics: acoustics and fluid mechanics), 2 weeks of work for a class of the size you mention doesn't sound like a lot, especially if, as you said, you needed to get accustomed to the specific aspects of the course.
I am wondering whether it is normal to have spent so much time marking.
My answer is yes, even though it depends on the type of exam. It might indicate that you take the task seriously, and it's a good thing.
Now as for:
How to mark student reports more efficiently
Here are some of my usual approaches:
The good news is that you will theoretically be better and quicker at doing this next term.
Good luck!
I find it strange that most US departments have so little transparency in tenure-track jobs searches. In the UK the system is a little cleaner. Jobs are generally announced in one place (jobs.ac.uk) and the interview date is often set in advance. In the US there is no central list of jobs and it is difficult to determine where in the process the search is. Why don't search committees set a date for the short list to be decided at the outset and make it publicly available? Even for searches that move sequentially through the short list inviting candidates one at a time for interviews, could still send out a notification. It seems it would reduce the stress of the search for many applicants and not be too much work for the search committee.
Answer
There are several factors at work here:
Remember that there are several thousand colleges and universities in the United States. A central database of such jobs would be significantly harder to publicize and organize.
Most universities in the US are private. They are under no such compulsion to post their jobs on any particular web site, unless constrained to do so by the funding sources that are supporting a particular position, or legal requirements to do so. (To my knowledge, there is no such requirement.)
The more deadlines and constraints you build into the cycle, the more pressure you put everyone under—applicants, recommendation writers, support staff, and departmental faculty involved in the search.
So I think there are multiple reasons not to publicize the results of a search, and I think most hiring committees would be reluctant to do so. There could be a better job done of announcing searches, certainly, and that would make things easier (but again, the places that currently advertise would likely complain about losing their business to a central source!).
This is my case: I've recently co-authored and sent an article to a journal that follows a double-blind review process, so that reviewers shouldn't be able to know the name of the authors. ---I mean, I (as the corresponding author) am responsible for hiding any authoring information to them.
Now I am writing another paper and I want to cite the article that is under double-blind review.
So, it is not only that I should add the typical "under review" label when citing that article, but moreover I can't give any information about the article that may spoil the double-blind process. For instance, if I add the name of the authors and the name of the journal it was sent to, then I can't include the title of the article (because it could happen that the citing article is sent for reviewing to one of the blind reviewers of the first article, or that it is even published before the first one...).
Anyway... How can/should I cite an article that is under review by a journal that follows a double-blind review process without potentially revealing too much information?? How is this problem usually solved?
I must say that I usually publish pre-prints as technical reports, but I didn't do it this time, in order not to reveal any information that could be accessed by the blind reviewers.
EDIT:
I was thinking about putting this label instead of the title of the cited article: "[Title is omitted to protect the double-blind review process]". But I still have some doubts. If I mention the name of the journal it was sent to, could the article be potentially recognized by the blind reviewers?
Answer
Considering the following extreme case can help to clarify: what will you do if article B is accepted before article A finishes peer review? This could easily happen, given the high variability in time in review cycle and number of reviews.
At that point you've got basically two options:
In the mean time, I would recommend citing it as "[omitted due to ongoing blind review; available on request]", and letting the reviewers request through the editor if they feel reading your pre-print article is important.
How do I formulate research interests in my CV? When talking about my field, I like to include some context, such as:
The climate of planet Earth is a complex system. Detailed observations are needed for improving our understanding of individual components and their interaction. Additionally, long-term, large-scale monitoring is required to study the climate system in its entirety. Observations from space are important for both kinds of observations. I am particularly interested in applying space-based observations the atmosphere, for example, for the hydrological cycle. Additionally, I think foo is important because of bar, and would like to research foo deeper.
But on a CV, space and attention are scarce. An alternative would be:
- Space-based observations of the atmosphere
- Foo
But this appears a bit bald to me. I think the context, the motivation, should be relevant: why are my research interests as they are?
What is a better alternative for describing research interests on a CV?
When you meet new people entering the world of academic research, it is often tempting to try and guess what “sort” of researcher they'll be, based on their personality, character, known qualities, and defects, etc. You'll sometimes hear people say things like “he's not cut out to be a researcher”.
But I wonder: are there any studies that have probed the link between personality/character and success in academic life (and academic research in particular)?
The sort of studies I imagine would be possible are things like assessing researchers' personalities (e.g. by the well-known Myers-Briggs classification) and comparing the distribution against that of the general public… But I could not find anything serious through Google, though I imagine researchers in behavioral sciences, psychology, or other related fields must have tried to address this question.
Answer
1) Psychologists on Psychologists:
Helmreich, Robert L.; Spence, Janet T.; Beane, William E.; Lucker, G. William; Matthews, Karen A. (1980), "Making it in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 39(5), Nov 1980, 896-908.
ABSTRACT: Examined personality, demographic characteristics, publication rate, and citations to published work in a sample of 141 male and 55 female academic psychologists. Reputational rankings of their graduate schools and current institutions were significantly related to citations, as were components of achievement motivation. Mastery and work needs were positively related to citations, whereas competitiveness was negatively associated with the criterion. Large sex differences were found in citations, with men receiving significantly more recognition and producing at a higher rate. A model of attainment in psychology is proposed, and possible explanations for the differential attainment of the sexes are explored. (26 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
2) A more general review paper that includes a discussion and literature on psychological factors:
Fox, M. F. (1983). "Publication productivity among scientists: A critical review". Social Studies of Science, 13(2), 285-305.
available at
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/68920/10.1177_030631283013002005.pdf
Dry Humping, is:
dry humping is the process of two people repeatedly moving up and down and back and forth on top of each other fully clothed( or missing various pieces, but the penis must not come in contact with the vagina with out some sort of fabric separating them ex: boxers,panties, or even sheets!!)
We all know that the basic rule for impregnation is that the sperm must come in contact with the egg, and even be able to fertilize it. While sperm can get through clothes, semen (but this is yet been proven or disproved) gets stuck, thus the sperm dies.
What is your opinion about this? If two people are on top of each other, fully clothed, and the male comes to ejaculation, is there any chance that pregnancy can happen, in the realistic and biological look at it (and not some probability or statistical way)? What advice should be given to teens on the matter?
I am a computer scientist with no biology knowledge, and am very interested in getting the opinion of biologists.
But since I know that the stackexchange community likes to see work done before asking questions, I did my own research (I am used to googling code and algorithms): Very few research has been done on the subject. There is one shining research that concluded, as I recall, that:
If the underwear is completely saturated with semen, and is in direct contact with the woman's vagina, pregnancy is possible statistically, but highly unlikely.
Answer
If there has been an ejaculation by the male, and semen is present, there is a chance of getting pregnant. Period. Teens really need to know that.
I think you may have your terms confused - semen is the overall fluid released during an ejaculation, sperm are the cells with tails that are produced in the testes and fertilize the egg. At any rate, according to the WHO, a normal sperm count is over 15 million per milliliter, with some counts much higher (>50e6/ml ), and an average between 20 and 40 million. The volume of the ejeculate tends to be anywhere from 1-6 ml. If you take a healthy young male at the peak of his reproductive capabilities, this equates to a very large number of sperm being released during a sexual encounter. All it takes is for one to reach an egg and fertilize it. Sperm are very very small, much smaller than the pore size of average fabric, so clothing will do very little to stop them. The female is likely sexually aroused during this activity as well, and produces additional fluids and lubricants that promote the survival and motility of sperm, among other things.
So, it depends on many factors. If both parties are fully clothed (at least 4 layers of clothing between their respective reproductive organs) and there is a minumum of soaking through, the chances of pregnancy are correspondingly quite low. On the other hand, if only one partner is wearing just their underwear, it's essentially like there is no clothing present at all, and the relative chances go up significantly.
Safe sex practices can't be emphasized enough to young people, as education and awareness is so much better than ignorance and myths. Even aside from pregnancy, if condoms are not utilized properly to contain all the semen there is the chance of sexually-transmitted diseases, ranging from herpes and gonorrhea to AIDS. None of these require penetration to be passed along, and one might argue that the additional presence of potentially irritating fabrics could open up raw areas or cuts and enhance their transmittal.
Now, all this being said, the chances of impregnation through clothing without direct penetration of the penis into the vagina is quite low compared to "typical" unprotected fully-penetrating intercourse, especially depending on where the female is in her fertility cycle. According to this study, a woman's most fertile day is two days before ovulation (as had been postulated before), and the chances of pregnancy on that day are about 25% (assuming penetrating intercourse). Overall, the chance of pregnancy throughout the month is about 5%.
I don't have any hard numbers on the pregnancy chances when one or both partners have at least some clothing on, as obviously it will vary greatly depending on who is wearing what, the volume of ejaculate, contact time after ejaculation, etc. Just for fun, let's assume it's 100 times lower. That means the chances of impregnation two days pre-ovulation would be 0.25%, or 1 in 400. While rather low, this is still a non-zero chance.
Condoms are about 98% effective if used properly during penetrative vaginal intercourse. Various other birth control methods such as contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, implants and injections are quoted as being 99% effective on their own, although they do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases. I'm certainly not one for preaching abstinence, but done properly it should be 100% effective. Ultimately, it is up to both partners to decide what their risk tolerances are, together. It is much better to seriously talk about it beforehand than to be panicked and unsure afterwards.
Hopefully this addresses your concerns, please leave comments if you have additional questions.
With today's technology it is very easy to collaborate with people around the world (I totally recommend Vyew for that). When you collaborate with people from different countries, are there any rules for who pays the bills? The expenses could be conference fees, attendance fees, journal fees, etc. For collaborations we use Hardy-Littlewood, but is there any such kind of rules for paying the bills? Or is it just a previous agreement or consensus between your coauthors? How do you normally approach the subject to your fellow coauthors?
I heard this suggestion from a mathematics professor:
In writing a mathematical Ph.D. thesis, it is far more tolerable to be tediously-lengthy than having a gap in the proofs.
I think what he means is that whenever in doubt, adding more details to make the argument clearer is always better, even if sometimes doing this may make the proof too wordy.
Now if I really follow his advice literally, it seems there are too many details for me to write. For example, I don't even feel safe to write "the case n=1 is trivial" when proving by induction, or "by a direct calculation we have the following result". Another example is, whenever writing a commutative diagram (some of my diagrams are 3-D), I doubt if I need to prove that every small triangle or rectangle is commutative. (Actually I have asked this question but have received no answer so far.)
Thus my question is: How detailed should be the proofs be in a mathematical Ph.D. thesis?
I used to see these insects frequently in Chennai and Bangalore (South India). I just would like to know if this is a kind of lovebug. The lovebug as mentioned in the Wikipedia page is, however, different in appearance, although they too are walking as pairs.
Why are they always walking as attached pairs? It also seems to me that the bigger one drives the motion and decides the direction. Is that true?
Answer
I believe this is a member of the family of Phyrrocoridae also called firebugs. A more detailed identification would require a more high resolution image of the head and also an image of the ventral (belly) side. However, they are certainly not lovebugs.
Edit: As PhilipC pointed out, they are probably from the genus Melamphaus.
Recently a little insect crawled over the carpet. First I did not notice, as its appearance is quite similar to the coloring of the carpet. Then I understood that it is not a rolling crumble, as the window and the door were closed.
I took it on an ordinary sheet of DIN A4 paper, but have not the slightest idea, what kind of insect it is. It makes the impression to have taken a shower of water and dust in a row.
What's that insect called?
The second photo gives an idea of the size, as it shows a drinking glass turned upside down.
Note: The place this insect was encountered is in eastern Germany
I work in the field of chemistry, where some of the prominent publishers have very invasive (or restrictive) copyright transfer agreements. Thus, I'm considering the use of amendments (or addenda) to publication agreements, such as the one proposed by the MIT libraries. However, I don't really want to spend a lot of time on an unwinnable pursuit, so I was wondering: is there somewhere a decent review of the success of such amendments? I expect that it may vary from publisher to publisher, and from field to field, but is there any data at all? (My own searches couldn't turn much.) In particular, what about the “big names”, such as Elsevier, Wiley, etc?
Answer
I finally managed to take a bit of time today to research this question further, so here goes:
First, there hasn't been much data compiled on the topic. Science Commons's FAQ on publication agreement addenda says:
Anecdotal evidence from a variety of sources reveals that many scholarly authors have had success over the years in altering the terms of a publication agreement. Sometimes this has been done by marking up the publisher’s agreement; other times the change has been done through use of an addendum. However, we are not aware of any statistical data concerning the success rate.
while the more recent Creative Commons Science page fails to mention success statistics at all.
However, we can measure the “success” of such addenda (or its influence) by looking at the reactions of various publishers to it. The MIT Libraries actually maintain a list of publishers and their stance. In a similar vein, the useful (and by now, well-known) SHERPA/RoMEO online database maintains a publishers statistics:
If you look at these lists of publishers/journals, and you cross that information with the hottest and most common journals in each field, you see that things are very field-dependent:
In mathematics, the status of publications is quite different from the other hard sciences listed below. I do not feel competent enough to comment on it, but it seems to be working okay, with most mathematicians able to publish preprints or postprints on their personal websites, or to publish outside the “conventional model” (read: arXiv). This summary of various publishers' policies in the field is quite good (and recent).
Physics: due to the success of arXiv and the open-friendly stance of physics publishers (both American Institute of Physics and American Physical Society), physics seems to be one of the favorable fields for open publishing.
Traditional biology journals tend to belong to the big-money editors, who don't favor open publishing. However, open journals seem to have made good progress in this field in the last few years.
Chemistry is simply a nightmare. Most quality journals in chemistry are published by the American Chemical Society, the Royal Society of Chemistry, Wiley and Elsevier. All four of them have taken a hard stance against the open publishing movement. Open access journals have very little (read: absolutely no) success breaking through in the field of chemistry :(
Above are the fields I felt comfortable enough discussing. I welcome edits (or comments) that add information on other fields (including humanities)!
So, all in all, statistics pertaining to publication agreement addenda specifically are hard to find (if they exist). But, we can measure the success of the open publication model, and it varies widely between fields.
Effectively as per the questions title, are there grants and fellowships for PhD students past the first year, but before candidacy? From what I have seen, most are intended for first year students (i.e. those with no more than twelve months of study), after candidacy has been achieved, or are finishing fellowships for the last semester of work. For example, the Hertz Foundation says the following:
We generally do not award fellowships to students who are already beyond their first year of graduate study except in cases of "exceptional leverage". Such awards are very rare—only three have been made in the past 10 years. (Leverage here means what difference the award of the Hertz Fellowship is likely to make in the kind, quality, and/or personal creativity of the student's graduate research.)
Which seems to be a fairly common theme. As such, I'm looking for answers in two parts:
It sounds stupid, but I came to realize that it's significantly more difficult for me to read scientific papers when they are typeset in two columns than papers in which the text appears in one column. Something about multiple columns feels too "packed" and wearisome to the point that it takes me a lot more time to read than a single-column paper.
Each publisher chooses its own style, obviously (an interesting discussion about it here), but what I want to know is if there is any way to transform a two-column paper into a one-column paper for an easier read? Are all papers being published with a single typeset according to the publisher's preference, or perhaps there may be different versions in different databases?
I am new really to submitting papers for publication. I have an upcoming deadline for a conference. My paper seems to fit the guidelines for a long paper but it is closer to short paper length than long paper length.
Answer
How could I submit it?
The length guidelines are generally for maximum length. You can submit a "long paper" that is shorter than the maximum length allowed for a long paper.
I've published papers 25% under limit without any comments from reviewers on the length. If there is enough original research content for consideration as a full paper, you should be OK.
However, you should consider whether it actually is substantial enough for a full-length paper if it's so short (your advisor can help you make this determination).
Whatever you do, don't pad the paper with unnecessary text (fluff) and/or giant images to fill pages so it looks longer. This lowers the quality of your paper. (As a reviewer, I have seen authors do this and it looks terrible.) If you decide you need to add to your paper to make it substantial enough to be a long paper, then you have to add substantial content.
Could I submit it as both?
Not unless the conference explicitly says this is allowed (usually it isn't). Submitting the same (or a similar) paper as both a long and short paper will get both papers rejected as duplicate submissions.
If I submit is as long could it be accepted as short if it were rejected as long?
This depends on the conference. It will either say something like, "Rejected long papers will not be considered as short papers" or "Rejected long papers may be considered as short papers."
