Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Oct 31, 2022 at 6:07 comment added Hercule Poirot You make some good points, but I think many of us have seen reference letters by advisors who are extremely lucky, every year they have "the strongest student they have ever advised", sometimes even more than one:-).
Oct 30, 2022 at 11:59 comment added David White Remember also that the whole system is unfair. Certain research areas are "hotter" than others. Different areas publish at different rates, with different average waiting times for a referee report, etc. Homotopy theory suffers because our papers tend to be quite long and technical, referee reports often take a year or more, and most mathematicians are not aware of the current state and value of our field. Advisor co-authorship is very different for a graph theorist, who finishes four papers before graduating, than for a homotopy theorist who finishes one, even if they are equally strong.
Oct 30, 2022 at 11:52 comment added David White @HerculePoirot I think letters of recommendation can get at the kind of distinction you refer to. When we hire, we look for letters from advisors saying things like "this is the strongest student I've ever advised" and that the student is motivated, independent, and has a fruitful research program. Also, strong students often have side projects, and strong letters of recommendation from others they've worked with. Stronger students will write better research statements and give a better job talk. The authorship of the first papers matters less than the above items.
Oct 30, 2022 at 10:50 comment added Kimball @HerculePoirot I'm not saying this practice doesn't have it's issues, but I am saying it is a widely recognized practice, and many people on hiring committees won't give applicants as much credit if all of their thesis work is joint with their advisor---see mathoverflow.net/q/57337/6518
Oct 30, 2022 at 7:21 comment added Hercule Poirot @Kimball, this is not true in all countries, and definitely differs a lot by advisor, thus creating disparities between students applying for postdocs. Some students may have written the thesis without any substantial help but can't be differentiated that way. Making this distinction to some extent would make selecting postdocs easier. Also I don't think contributing a lot (in terms of helping on technical details) was standard practice say 20-30 years ago but is a consequence of the vastly increased number of PhD students.
Oct 30, 2022 at 6:12 comment added Kimball @HerculePoirot I agree with that for post-thesis work, but for thesis advising the line between teaching and collaborating is blurred, and it's common practice and understanding (at least in most of pure math) that the advisor contributes a lot typically without coauthorship.
Oct 30, 2022 at 2:47 vote accept ABIM
Oct 30, 2022 at 2:43 comment added ABIM @StanleyYaoXiao Thanks for the advise. This helps also, also this is from the Art of War no?
Oct 30, 2022 at 2:06 comment added Stanley Yao Xiao Please read this answer carefully. In mathematics, as in almost all other areas, building good relationships tends to be more important than anything else. Don't lose the war over the outcome of a single battle.
Oct 30, 2022 at 1:49 comment added Hercule Poirot Agree with most but not with not adding names when substantial contributions have been made. From experience I know from my postdoc in the UK that advisors there tend not to put their name even if they did the majority of the work, but in other countries the usual co-author rule is followed (or worse...). Not putting your name when you did a lot of work gives your students an unfair advantage as they will be perceived as more independent which is far from always the case.
Oct 29, 2022 at 22:51 comment added Yiftach Barnea I totally agree!
Oct 29, 2022 at 22:44 vote accept ABIM
Oct 30, 2022 at 2:47
Oct 29, 2022 at 22:39 history answered David White CC BY-SA 4.0