Skip to main content
added (publishing) tag - if you think it does not fit, feel free to revert my tag-edit
Link
Martin Sleziak
  • 4.7k
  • 4
  • 35
  • 40
Notice removed Comments only by CommunityBot
Post Unlocked by CommunityBot
Notice removed Draw attention by user0100661
Bounty Ended with Joel David Hamkins's answer chosen by user0100661
Post Locked by Kim Morrison
Notice added Comments only by Kim Morrison
added 533 characters in body
Source Link

This post is a sequel to: Collaboration or acknowledgment?

The following has come to my attention. A senior mathematician (let us call him or her Alice) suggested a problem to a young mathematician (Bobby) who proceeded to solve it on her own and wrote up the result. Bobby agreed (*) to let Alice be listed as a coauthor, but Alice also insisted to include her PhD student (Charlotte) as a coauthor because they were thinking about the same problem, despite the fact that Alice and Charlotte did not even have partial results.

(*) Bobby had no problem with Alice joining her as a coauthor for the reasons mentioned by Igor Rivin below (I include you as a coauthor, you write me a good recommendation). Thus, the credit was unfairly diluted by including Charlotte who had not contributed.

Question: Is there a way for Bobby to manage such a situation without creating conflict?

Full disclosure: I am Bobby's PhD advisor. I can not interfere directly because Alice is a powerful person in the field known for aggressive backing of her PhD students and I do not want to inadvertently hurt Bobby's career.

Update: Following the advice of Joel David Hamkins, Bobby will be the sole author. There is nothing in the paper that Alice and Charlotte could point to as an idea they already had in mind. Looking back, what bothered me the most was not that Bobby's credit would be diluted but that someone who did not deserve it would be rewarded.

I will award bounty points to JDH for his uplifting Thanksgiving Day Answer, but, of course, any new comments are welcome.

This post is a sequel to: Collaboration or acknowledgment?

The following has come to my attention. A senior mathematician (let us call him or her Alice) suggested a problem to a young mathematician (Bobby) who proceeded to solve it on her own and wrote up the result. Bobby agreed to let Alice be listed as a coauthor, but Alice also insisted to include her PhD student (Charlotte) as a coauthor because they were thinking about the same problem, despite the fact that Alice and Charlotte did not even have partial results.

Bobby had no problem with Alice joining her as a coauthor for the reasons mentioned by Igor Rivin below (I include you as a coauthor, you write me a good recommendation). Thus, the credit was unfairly diluted by including Charlotte who had not contributed.

Question: Is there a way for Bobby to manage such a situation without creating conflict?

Full disclosure: I am Bobby's PhD advisor. I can not interfere directly because Alice is a powerful person in the field known for aggressive backing of her PhD students and I do not want to inadvertently hurt Bobby's career.

This post is a sequel to: Collaboration or acknowledgment?

The following has come to my attention. A senior mathematician (let us call him or her Alice) suggested a problem to a young mathematician (Bobby) who proceeded to solve it on her own and wrote up the result. Bobby agreed (*) to let Alice be listed as a coauthor, but Alice also insisted to include her PhD student (Charlotte) as a coauthor because they were thinking about the same problem, despite the fact that Alice and Charlotte did not even have partial results.

(*) Bobby had no problem with Alice joining her as a coauthor for the reasons mentioned by Igor Rivin below (I include you as a coauthor, you write me a good recommendation). Thus, the credit was unfairly diluted by including Charlotte who had not contributed.

Question: Is there a way for Bobby to manage such a situation without creating conflict?

Full disclosure: I am Bobby's PhD advisor. I can not interfere directly because Alice is a powerful person in the field known for aggressive backing of her PhD students and I do not want to inadvertently hurt Bobby's career.

Update: Following the advice of Joel David Hamkins, Bobby will be the sole author. There is nothing in the paper that Alice and Charlotte could point to as an idea they already had in mind. Looking back, what bothered me the most was not that Bobby's credit would be diluted but that someone who did not deserve it would be rewarded.

I will award bounty points to JDH for his uplifting Thanksgiving Day Answer, but, of course, any new comments are welcome.

Notice added Draw attention by user0100661
Bounty Started worth 50 reputation by user0100661
Post Reopened by David Handelman, paul garrett, Timothy Chow, Pietro Majer, Suvrit
added 233 characters in body
Source Link

This post is a sequel to: Collaboration or acknowledgment?

The following has come to my attention. A senior mathematician (let us call him or her Alice) suggested a problem to a young mathematician (Bobby) who proceeded to solve it on her own and wrote up the result. Bobby agreed to let Alice be listed as a coauthor, but Alice also insisted to include her PhD student (Charlotte) as a coauthor because they were thinking about the same problem, despite the fact that Alice and Charlotte did not even have partial results.

Bobby had no problem with Alice joining her as a coauthor for the reasons mentioned by Igor Rivin below (I include you as a coauthor, you write me a good recommendation). Thus, the credit was unfairly diluted by including Charlotte who had not contributed.

Question: Is there a way for Bobby to manage such a situation without creating conflict?

Full disclosure: I am Bobby's PhD advisor. I can not interfere directly because Alice is a powerful person in the field known for aggressive backing of her PhD students and I do not want to inadvertently hurt Bobby's career.

This post is a sequel to: Collaboration or acknowledgment?

The following has come to my attention. A senior mathematician (let us call him or her Alice) suggested a problem to a young mathematician (Bobby) who proceeded to solve it on her own and wrote up the result. Bobby agreed to let Alice be listed as a coauthor, but Alice also insisted to include her PhD student (Charlotte) as a coauthor because they were thinking about the same problem, despite the fact that Alice and Charlotte did not even have partial results.

Bobby had no problem with Alice joining her as a coauthor for the reasons mentioned by Igor Rivin below (I include you as a coauthor, you write me a good recommendation). Thus, the credit was unfairly diluted by including Charlotte who had not contributed.

Question: Is there a way for Bobby to manage such a situation without creating conflict?

This post is a sequel to: Collaboration or acknowledgment?

The following has come to my attention. A senior mathematician (let us call him or her Alice) suggested a problem to a young mathematician (Bobby) who proceeded to solve it on her own and wrote up the result. Bobby agreed to let Alice be listed as a coauthor, but Alice also insisted to include her PhD student (Charlotte) as a coauthor because they were thinking about the same problem, despite the fact that Alice and Charlotte did not even have partial results.

Bobby had no problem with Alice joining her as a coauthor for the reasons mentioned by Igor Rivin below (I include you as a coauthor, you write me a good recommendation). Thus, the credit was unfairly diluted by including Charlotte who had not contributed.

Question: Is there a way for Bobby to manage such a situation without creating conflict?

Full disclosure: I am Bobby's PhD advisor. I can not interfere directly because Alice is a powerful person in the field known for aggressive backing of her PhD students and I do not want to inadvertently hurt Bobby's career.

edited title
Link
Loading
edited title
Link
Loading
deleted 2 characters in body; edited title
Source Link
Loading
deleted 84 characters in body; edited tags
Source Link
Loading
deleted 10 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 11 characters in body; edited tags
Source Link
Loading
deleted 2101 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 1526 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
added 204 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
edited title
Link
Loading
Post Made Community Wiki by Todd Trimble
Post Closed as "Opinion-based" by Gerhard Paseman, Amritanshu Prasad, R W, abx, R. van Dobben de Bruyn
Post Reopened by John Pardon, André Henriques, Stefan Kohl, Stanley Yao Xiao, Joel David Hamkins