I have a publication on a Springeropen journal. It seems a bunch of co-authors have their ORCID linked somehow on the article page (example). I can't seem to find a way to do it. Anyone have insight?
Listeners to Mike and Conor's podcast 372 Pages will certainly remember Ron Goulart, the ghostwriter of William Shatner's Tek War as well as a series of mystery novels featuring Groucho Marx. He has died at age 89. Disdainful robot pimps everywhere mourn his passing.
I am a PhD candidate in Economics at a US school. I have another couple of years in my program and planning to go on the academic job market, I am trying to increase my paper production. So far I worked with a cohort-mate and by myself but I see that is more than common for strong job market candidates to have coauthorships outside their department.
How do you manage to find coauthors outside your department? Do you have any tip on how to improve networking and then finding potential coauthorships?
Our group (western Europe) has submitted a review on a device that generates a lot of money (i.e. multibillion $ industry). Our results speak against the use of said device, with low confidence in the evidence presented.
Since the inception of the study, we have been queried multiple times by a VP of the relevant company through email, asking us to share our data (which we refused). Since submission, the VP is asking for a meeting in person and there are rumors of them not being happy about our results (which are BTW still unpublished). We did not respond. In the meantime, the company also reached to our head of dept. to express that they were worried about our work.
They are obviously treading very carefully so we can't accuse them of exerting pressure on us. But we are worried about the risk of retaliation on publication (i.e. legal action). Our boss told us not to worry and discouraged us from seeking legal advice. Neither the study nor our group are financially supported. How can we protect ourselves? Are there organisms specializing in / providing (free?) researcher protection?
Lesson from the Bosnian Genocide
-
Never trust International Community
-
It will happen again
-
Do not surrender, they have no mercy
-
Muslims in Europe, no pasaran
https://twitter.com/srebrenicahasan/status/1455644301959041031
Hi all- in my old lab, I spent a lot of time helping with a consortium - the results of which will be used for several studies. Iβm proud of my contribution to this, and Iβm kind of listed as a coauthor on a couple manuscripts in submission atm. However, I saw βkind ofβ because Iβm not sure exactly how to describe it, wanted to see if anyone had any input on this.
For the author list on these papers, instead of my name being in the main author list (eg, βFirst Author, Second Author, β¦ My Name β¦ Last Authorβ), a consortium name is listed in the author list with an asterisk (like βFirst Author, Second Author, β¦ Consortium* β¦ Last Authorβ), and then if you look at the corresponding asterisk later in the paper, you see a list of coauthors in that consortium, including me. Iβm not complaining about being listed like this, I think itβs appropriate.
What I guess Iβm wondering is, should I describe this as something else as being a coauthor? I know Iβm technically a coauthor (eg Iβm sent a draft of the manuscripts before submission for my approval, like all the other coauthors), but it feels weird to say that since Iβm not on the main author list. Iβm also at an early stage in my career (just started my PhD), so any publications will help, and these papers have been submitted to high impact journals.
As an aside to this, Iβm also wondering how best it would be to list these papers in my CV? For other papers on my CV, I have my name bolded in the author list. For these papers, should I just have the βConsortiumβ in bold? Is there a better way to convey that my name is included in that group? Thanks!
TL,DR below
So the Coauthor of a story we've been writing for well over a year is starting to worry me. I'm honestly more worried about losing this story than I am about losing her as a friend now.
She butts in and takes over any conversation I have with people outside of her, she gets mad if I don't want to hang out with her, she's followed me into the bathroom before. She wants me to move in with her and she's threatened to remove my access to the story (witch I've made a private copy of just in case.)
My issue is that she came up with the initial idea, has written half the story, and made some characters; I've written the other half, created the laws, government system, maps, magic system, and most of the lore. I'm very invested in this story, and so is she. But what if she carries through in her threat can I still continue my copy? I'd still give her credit cause she's done so much, but would it be wrong to keep writing without her?
TL,DR: Coauther is getting scary irl, can I keep the story and not her?
Also I'm 22 and she's 28
Specifically, I mean when they act as they want to take decisions over the paper all together but they do take important decision behind your back (presentations at conference / asking other people if they would like to join the study).
#####Nov 19 (Reuters) - Vaccine passports without testing allow cases to be missed
"Vaccine passports" that exempt vaccinated people from regular COVID-19 testing would allow many infections to be missed, Israeli data suggest. Researchers analyzed infection rates in citizens returning to Israel through Ben-Gurion airport, for whom PCR tests upon arrival are required regardless of vaccination status.
"Surprisingly," in August 2021, the rate of positive tests among vaccinated travelers was more than double the rate among the unvaccinated, said Retsef Levi of the MIT Sloan School of Management, coauthor of a report posted on the SSRN server ahead of peer review. Travelers who had received the second dose of the Pfizer (PFE.N)/BioNTech vaccine within the past six months or who had received a booster dose were considered vaccinated. The group considered to be unvaccinated included the never-vaccinated and those whose most recent shot was more than six months prior, given evidence of waning vaccine efficacy by then.
In September, when the Israeli government was recommending booster shots for all adults, the positive-test rate dropped among vaccinated travelers and was about 3.5 times lower with vaccination than without. By October, the positive-test rate in the vaccinated group, while still lower, had started to climb again, Levi said. The data suggest that limiting frequent COVID-19 testing to unvaccinated people would "pose potential risks by reinforcing the misrepresentation that vaccinated individuals are protected from infections."
Source: https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/breakthrough-infections-raise-health-death-risk-vaccine-passports-without-2021-11-19/
Please enlighten me. Thanks
I found something intresting (well I find it intresting anyways). Now I'm not a seasoned researcher at all. I keep doubting myself and as a result, I'm not making any progress at all. It seems to me though that anytime someone listens to my ramblings I gain some new insight in the mean time which is kind of weird. However, I don't know anyone who would be interested in actually working on this project with me, I've asked some people they made it clear that they don't want to. Admittedly, I don't have a lot of connections in academia and this topic I have in mind (graphs defined on groups) is not at all trending in my area for some reason.
So my questions are: how does one find someone to work with? I suppose conferences are partially for "networking" (God, I hate this word). Have you guys had any positive experiences in this field during the restrictions through online conferences/seminars?
I am aiming to have pubmed-indexed journals.
Serious question: how do you encourage coauthors to fulfill their timeline promises? How long of a grace period is reasonable? When do you take over their responsibilities on a paper, if that is possible?
https://preview.redd.it/xg6jlzzkp8e51.png?width=2866&format=png&auto=webp&s=ab347340f8d4dda65086b3da82d3d59eca40897f
>I'm organizing a free Bayesian data analysis course for 300 students starting 4th March with priority for global south and other underrepresented groups. The course is a copy of my Aalto course and possible with volunteer TAs. The course web page
>
>
>
>There is a limit of 300 students as this is feasible amount for me to handle. The course uses peergrading which I have successfully used for many years in my course. This way the TAs can focus on helping with learning instead of checking the reports.
>
>
>
>All the material (the book, videos, extra material, assignemnts) are freely available so you can also study at your own pace. The duration is 12 weeks (until the last week of May) with fixed schedule so you can study together and get support from other students and volunteer TAs.
>
>
>
>This is not the easiest course for learning Bayes, but it can be your first Bayesian course if your mathematical and programming skills are sufficient. See the prerequisites on the course web site.
Source: https://twitter.com/avehtari/status/1364550167295311874
I'm leaning towards no, but wanted to run it by you all. There are multiple coauthors on this project. For the sake of time/cohesion, only 2 are doing the presentation. The other coauthors and I will be there (but virtually, all virtual conference). I made the first draft of the powerpoint, but won't be speaking unless something is directed to me at the Q&A.
If you were to fire a researcher who you were working on a publication with for reasons unrelated to their ethics or quality of work, would it be normal for you to threaten to remove them from the publication if they left before you wanted them to (several months), despite their contributions up to that point?
Hi everyone, I'm a research master's student (I think this is only a thing in some countries, basically it's a longer selective master's programme that prepares students for doing a PhD without automatically guaranteeing a PhD position) in linguistics. I work in a lab that is rather focused on computational techniques, whereas my background is more theoretical/traditional. Most of my fellow lab members are PhD students, and I am often asked to help out with things like data collection, assessing recordings, making graphs etc. Sometimes this work is payed (I sometimes work for our PI), but usually it isn't. I don't mind helping out, and I hope the help would be reciprocated if I need it.
I have ended up in the acknowledgments of a couple of papers now, which is fine as I think my work on the papers was not so substantial that I would deserve coauthorship. I mostly did practical things, but wasn't involved in the 'actual' research, planning or writing etc. My question is, how do I take this to the next level? I think my theoretical background could really contribute to the papers but I don't think I'm seen as a serious option for collaboration because I'm not a PhD student and because of my different background. How do I signal to my fellow lab members that I would like to do more and become a collaborator rather than someone who does the practical things they could also hire an undergrad for?
Thanks!
We are postdocs at different locations. Originally I did ex situ work to support her work. I gave her all my data, figures, the experimental and results and discussion write ups. She asks me to write whole abstract/intro for paper, too. I tell her no, itβs the job of the first author to write the paper. She says it will never get done, because she is too busy and her English is not good. I say I can be first author/paper writer, and I will put her as my co-first author. She says no, write this and you will be my co-first author.
I know itβs more than I would normally do for second, but I agree so that the paper can be published before I apply for faculty positions. I write an agreement saying what I will do, what she will do, and if other things come up then it will be her responsibility to handle, she agrees in writing.
She calls me now to say she can no longer honor the contract as she had a grad student do more than me, and she should give the grad student second. She asks me to do even more (for third author).
I know she manipulated me and likely the grad student into writing her paper for her, and I know I have a case with my written agreement, but it might be best to just never work with her again. Should I contact her advisor? I have no idea what to do but do not want to face retaliation or be dragged into a time consuming and emotionally draining experience, for something that is inconsequential(second vs third author).
THE KILLER ACROSS THE TABLE takes a deep dive into the process of interviewing serial killers and violent predators in prison, which led John Douglas and his colleagues at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia, to the insights that led them for the first time to be able to correlate what was going on in the offender's mind before, during and after his crime, with the evidence left at the crime scene and body dump sites. You can Ask Me Anything about this book and the four deadly killers we examine, anything having to do with MINDHUNTER or anything on the subjects of behavioral profiling and criminal investigative analysis that we've been writing and speaking about for the past twenty years.
I am working on a fresh new system design course similar to grokking system interview. The unique idea is to introduce and explore more advanced techniques and problems as well as deconstruct fresh content (Design Zoom, p2p Twitch live-streaming app, mass video surveillance system). I already have brainstormed 3 dozens of unique topics for lessons.
My background 10 years in tech + over 100 interviews on both sides of hiring. The reasons I am looking for a coauthor are 1) It's a lot of work 2) It's a lot of work 3) Fresh look and second opinion.
I am targeting to prepare 40 lessons with ~ 40k words of text within the next 3 months working part-time. Fair split 50%-50% since it's a long term game. The ideal partner needs to be fluent in system architecture, system design interviews, and English ?and Chinese
Plz DM for more details and intro.
I saw the post announcing the ICLR Meta-Learning workshop, and I came up with an idea for a paper that I wanted to submit, that uses the way that competitive videogame players conjecture about and adapt their playstyles to new patches while also gaining skill over time to inspire modifications to Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning. It ends up a bit like a cross between Contextual Meta-Learning, Gradient-Based Meta-Learning, and Continuous Learning. I have a draft laying out my ideas and explaining what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. The thing is, I would greatly appreciate having somebody to collaborate with, both to have a second pair of eyeballs looking over it, and to help design an appropriate experiment. It's just a workshop, but still, always nice to make a new friend.
Is there a place to go to find collaborators for this sort of thing?
