
Applying to Ph.D. Programs in Computer Science (2011) [pdf] - bgar
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~harchol/gradschooltalk.pdf
======
arjunnarayan
As far as I can see, the top PhD programs are getting better and better
applications for the same number of slots, and the process is becoming far
more competitive. There are plenty of students coming in with publications at
good venues (maybe not NIPS, SOSP, STOC level). It used to be that students
came in without doing research, but that doesn't seem to be the norm any more.

I don't know how I got into grad school --- looking at the qualifications the
incoming students have these days I don't think I'd make it --- and I only
started my PhD 4 years ago.

This ratcheting up in qualifications is happening at every level in academia
(and not just in CS). I know some grad students whose work and lifestyle is
best described as "tenure track professors in the 80s." I know researchers at
top labs like MSR who were hired on the strength of a _single_ OSDI
publication. I had one as a second year PhD student, and I'm so far off the
ball that I don't think I will even be attempting to go on the academic job
market when I graduate. At this point I think it's pretty fruitless to apply
to do a PhD without having prior research experience, ideally with a
publication. I may be getting too jaded and pessimistic though. Consider
alternate points of view.

On the other hand, if you can get in, it's a pretty amazing life of learning
and developing industry relevant skills (if you're smart about it) on the
NSF's dime. I know some of y'all are cynical about academia and like to
badmouth PhD students as being unhirable and writing crap code, but consider
that RTM is a top academic, and is pretty relevant as far as the startup scene
is considered.

~~~
ekm2
Are there any fellowships open to international students?

~~~
arjunnarayan
All good PhDs are funded (if it isn't categorically don't go). Typically this
is through advisor's grants, which are usually from the NSF. I'm an
international student (originally from India) and I'm funded through my
advisor's NSF grant (I think. I'm not 100% sure since I don't know the exact
details and he also has some additional funding from other sources like DARPA
that he could be using). You should take the fact that I don't really know
where my funding comes from as a good sign that PhD funding is very stable.

------
mtdewcmu
It may be worth noting that in many areas of CS, you can still do research and
think deeply about hard problems even if you don't go to grad school. You can
read papers on the internet, which are free in some cases, and use your own
computer. It will be a lot harder to publish anything, you won't have a
faculty adviser to steer you in the right direction, and you won't get to go
to conferences. But nothing stops you from doing research anyway, and if you
happen to solve some important problem and can prove it, eventually word will
get out and people will notice (one would hope).

~~~
chubot
A big problem is the lack of publication access though. I happen to have most
accounts through work (ACM, IEEE, etc.), but if I didn't, I'd have to find
other ways to get about half the papers I read.

I think the "unschooled" approach is more appealing for practitioners /
systems software. BitTorrent and BitCoin both have had papers, though of
course that's wasn't their real point, and not their real impact.

If you want to prove results, it seems rare to have the motivation outside the
academic community. The environment and feedback is important.

But I'd be interested in any examples of people who have done this. I recall
seeing some examples of professors without Ph.D.'s a few months back on HN.

I think anyone who is proving good theoretical results will be quickly offered
an academic job, and take it, since they likely won't have another way of
supporting themselves.

~~~
mtdewcmu
Yeah... I wasn't so much suggesting that it's a viable path to a career in
research as observing that if you missed your chance to do a PhD, you're not
cut off for life from the subjective rewards of research that Dr. Harchol-
Balter alluded to, like the satisfaction that comes from working on
fundamental problems. You'd need more self-motivation. However, when research
isn't your real job, there's no pressure, so you can take your time, and
produce results or not, as you wish.

------
mhchitsaz
It was a very good article and I agreed with most of it except that people who
decide to leave academia after PhD still have learned a lot: self management,
self motivation and critical thinking as well as learning how to think are
several of them. I would say that thinking of PhD as a wasted time assuming
that the person is not pursuing academic career is something I don't agree
with.

------
thearn4
Pretty good advice, much of it not exclusive to CS alone. In particular the
notes about the opportunity cost involved with getting a PhD.

I'd add to this: find out with absolute clarity upfront what the terms are for
applying as a doctoral student vs. a masters student (with option to
matriculate).

Often there is an expectation that doctoral students can and will pass
qualifying exams within a pretty short period of time (a year perhaps) of
being accepted to their program. This was the case in my own program.

~~~
throwaway1979
I wish the opp cost was made more clear cut in some way. Maybe a rite of
passage where you take a picture of a house and burn it or something. These
days when an undergrad can pull 6 figures, a PhD is very, very costly.

------
Vega-Lyra
I have BS in CS, MBA-FINANCE, neither will provide the real experience in a
real hacker world, less will do a Ph.D a total waste of money and a debt that
will hunt you for a long time. Time=Money
[https://www.coursera.org/](https://www.coursera.org/)

------
blueblob
Sorry for the aside, this opened for me in pdf.js in firefox (on archlinux)
and the font rendered very poorly, but when I downloaded it and looked at it
in zathura (vi-like pdf viewer) the font looked fine. Does anybody know what I
can do to fix the fonts in pdf.js?

~~~
pcx66
I am using pdf.js with Firefox 27 Nightly on Ubuntu, and its rendering fine
for me.

------
stokedmartin
Manuel Blum's page on research[1] is also relevant. He was Mor's advisor.

[1]
[https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mblum/research/pdf/grad.html](https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mblum/research/pdf/grad.html)

------
patelmiteshb
Thanks for share great doc.

------
Thaxll
In Europe a PhD is 3years~ why such a difference?

~~~
GuiA
The European system follows a strictly defined progression, LMD:

Licence: 3 years after high school, equivalent to a US BSc.

Master: +2 years on top of the previous, equivalent to a US MSc.

Doctorate: +3 years on top of the previous, equivalent to a US PhD.

Some PhDs can take a bit more time - it's not uncommon for a student to take
an extra 6 months or so (or to start a few months after the official school
year starts, because of funding issues). However, I've never heard of
someone's PhD taking 4 or 5 years or more (although I'm sure it may happen in
some edge cases).

The reason why Licence is 3 years compared to the US's 4 is that it's very
focused: often, students don't pick which classes they take until the end of
their curriculum (where you can pick classes for a specialty relevant to your
discipline; for example, AI or Graphics for CS). There are a few general ed
classes (for example macro economics, English as a second language, etc.), but
definitely less than the US. Similarly, you don't get too pick. I've seen US
students get a BSc. in Computer Science and having taken theater and
anthropology classes in their first year; this does not happen in Europe (and
you do notice that in the US, some very focused students do get their BSc. in
3 years).

This also means that the average euro student with a licence is typically
stronger in her field than the average US student with a BSc.; however, the
downside is that you can't change majors halfway or anything. If you do 1.5
years of CS and then realize you want to go do something else, it's pretty
much back to square one.

The reason why a PhD is shorter is also due to the fact that it is common for
the 2nd year of the Master (M2) to be split in two branches- the standard one,
and M2R (for Master 2 Research) for students who know they want to go into
research. M2Rs typically include a 6 months internship in a lab, where you
start working on topics that will be related to your PhD (you can still go
work after an M2R and not do a PhD, but it's uncommon).

Source: I've been through the French, British, and US university systems :)

~~~
mtdewcmu
A US PhD is considered more substantial and held in higher esteem than a
European one.

~~~
GuiA
Really? How so? I was a research assistant in a US lab, and we interacted
regularly with European groups of PhD students/post docs/professors, there was
never such a feeling. I have friends doing a PhD back home, and they publish
at international conferences etc. just like their American peers.

Citation needed?

~~~
mtdewcmu
Note that by PhD I mean the degree itself, not the person holding it -- I'm
sure highly talented people do PhDs in Europe. The simple fact that a US PhD
is more time consuming would be enough to account for a difference in esteem.
Check out arjunnarayan's comments on this same topic on a parallel thread --
he has more to say about it than I do. I'm repeating what I've heard, and IIRC
I heard it from CS professors where I went to college -- the same one where
Mor Harchol-Balter works.

~~~
GuiA
Thanks for the pointers to the comments. They're interesting to read, just
like the replies to them.

