Category Archives: Professional

Major career news

Since moving to the US and giving up my permanent academic position in NZ, I have been increasingly concerned with finding a more suitable job. This academic hiring season I applied to around 70 traditional positions, almost all in mathematics departments and computer science departments. This effort resulted in zero positive response from Math, and a few Zoom interviews with CS, one of which led to an on-campus interview day. However no offers were forthcoming. I put in a lot of work to present myself as a good candidate, which I believe I am. But it seems that the system is not efficient, or I am a much worse candidate than I think, or senior level hiring is really very different from the much more common junior hiring, or … (?)

In any case I felt the need to move forward, or at least sideways. I have, after several twists and turns, been appointed as the incoming Editor-in-Chief of Notices of the American Mathematical Society. This is an important community role that I hope to make my own as I build on the work of predecessors. It is roughly a half-time  position (at least that is what the pay says, and I hope the timesheets also reflect that, but I will spend as long as I need to do an excellent job). I already know it will be a lot of work and require me to deal with potentially conflicting opinions and interests. As an independent contractor with the AMS, I will have all the fun of self-employment tax and other IRS requirements.

In order to be working full time, I will also be moving at UMass Amherst from a visiting position in mathematics with no prospect of permanence to a (part-time) teaching faculty position in computer science with some prospect of permanence. The two new roles are not equally exciting (yet) but they are each important in their own way and I hope to contribute strongly in each. I will be teaching something new, namely probability for CS students, a course which I strongly but unsuccessfully advocated for at Auckland.

I will still be seriously looking for a more traditional professor role, but I will be able to focus on a much smaller number of job applications to places that seem a very good fit, assuming that this new situation is as acceptable a lower bound as I predict. Wish me luck!

 

If you can’t beat them …

… join them on Twitter, which I have now done (see profile). The sheer number of tweets makes it a little disorienting even if only following tens of people. However it is one more way to advertise one’s work and meet like-minded people, so on balance I will keep trying. Of course I have not yet run into any trolls.

A big change

After 20 years continuous work at the University of Auckland, I am moving with my family to Amherst, Massachusetts, USA (as described here). I will be in the Department of Math & Stat, and also Adjunct in Computer Science. Giving up a tenured position for a limited term visiting one  with no guarantee of anything beyond that may be considered foolhardy by many. Moving a family to the USA from our highly locally optimized life in Auckland, especially in the era of Trump, is also challenging. COVID-19 has made job hunting harder. So I am highly incentivized to work hard and make contacts. Wish me luck!

Review of Reassembling Scholarly Communications

I received the offer to review this book with some trepidation. Although active as an Open Access advocate, I have neither a scholarly background as a researcher and student of scholarly communications, nor a background in the humanities, which forms the disciplinary home for most contributors. I feared a long screed of very complicated terminology with little obvious relevance to those, such as myself, having a background in mathematics and natural sciences. Also, I have been suspicious of the motives of those who study ad nauseam issues such as open access without doing anything to change the world for the better.

In summary, I am glad that I accepted the offer. This book makes a distinct contribution, and its structure of short and very varied chapters contains a wealth of interesting content that should be of interest to anyone with even a passing interest in open access and scholarly communications more generally. I cannot envisage many readers going through the entire book in detail – it is more suited to dipping into one chapter at a time, allowing serendipity to do its magic and breaking the reader out of the algorithmically enforced filter bubbles that threaten to isolate us all.

The editors explain their purpose clearly:

pithy, shorter chapters that would serve as introductions to different perspectives, as gateways to alternative approaches 

 

coupled with a historical approach. They have succeeded admirably. The book has six sections, described under the headings of Colonial Influences, Epistemologies, Publics and Politics, Archives and Preservation, Infrastructures and Platforms, and Global Communities. These sections comprise 25 chapters each by a different authorial team. The introduction by the editors is very good, and contains an elegant and insightful description of the economic difficulties underlying public goods such as scholarly publications, by means of a parable about conference talks. There is an excellent glossary and list of abbreviations and acronyms, unfortunately essential for anyone reading about scholarly communications these days.

The variety of material is impressive and the writing overall clear and interesting, although every reader will find exceptions to that last claim. The historical approach is very useful and will extend the relevance of this book. Almost every chapter contains something new and interesting to me. The chapters that I found most valuable may give an idea of the breadth of topics covered: John Willinsky surveying the history of copyright, back to England in the late 17th century and the Statute of Anne in 1710; Martin Eve discussing the need for digital reading of research outputs when faced with a superabundance of possible articles and books to read, and the relation with open access and research evaluation; Aileen Fyfe on the Royal Society’s history as a publisher, and the little-known fact that for most of its 350 years the philosophy of supporting and subsidizing wide access predominated over the more recent approach of using journal sales to subsidize the Society’s other activities; Abel Packer and Dominique Babini surveying Latin American initiatives such as SciELO and Redalyc; Thomas Herve Mboa Nkoudou discussing the many challenges and yet the necessity of implementing open access in an African context. There are contributions discussing trends in peer review, politically sensitive archives, the history of public libraries, and the relevance of a medieval “how-to” manuscript to modern readers.

No book is perfect, and it is necessary to nitpick no matter how good the book is, in order to retain credibility as a reviewer. I was surprised to find some English errors even in the contributions by the editors (what does “comprise” really mean? what is the simple past tense of “to spring”?). I conjecture that the book took substantially longer to finish than expected (of course, Hofstadter’s Law shows that this must happen), which means that some chapters are, while still relevant, no longer at the cutting edge.

A strong theme of the promise and perils of universal open access to scholarly research runs through the volume. It is easily observed that decision-makers in wealthy countries appear to be obsessed with competition, credentials, and prestige, while in, for example, Latin America, the understanding that open access and open scholarship are justified by arguments from social justice and human rights is higher. This book should be particularly valuable for those in Europe and North America without much exposure to approaches in other parts of the world (and often without much interest in them) – give it as a gift to your relevant administrator today!

 

Journal flipping: another domino falls

I received this today from a mailing list. Some much-needed good news. I urge everyone in the research community related to this journal to get behind the new incarnation and cast the old one into the darkness. Based on previous experience with other journals, the publisher will try to pretend nothing has happened, stack the editorial board with retired people not strongly connected to the research area, and keep extracting as much money as possible. Don’t let them – kill the old journal by a decisive switch to the new!

Dear member of the combinatorics community,

Please pardon this mass e-mailing, and my apologies if you receive multiple copies.

 I am writing to inform you of an exciting development: a new journal, Combinatorial Theory, which is mathematician-owned, and fully open access, with no charges for authors or readers.

  I hope that you will regard this new journal as the successor to the Elsevier-owned Journal of Combinatorial Theory Ser. A (JCT A).  The majority of the JCT A editorial boards have recently notified Elsevier that they will not be renewing their contracts, and will resign after December 2020;  this includes all of the Editors-in-Chief whose contract does not extend past that date. Daily operations for the new journal will be run by interim editors until 2021, so that editors can fulfill any contractual obligations to Elsevier before joining the new journal.

  To aid the success of this venture, I encourage you to do the following.

1. Please do not submit any new papers to JCT A.  Papers already in the pipeline at JCT A will be processed as before.  Send new papers of the same scope and quality to Combinatorial Theory via email to combinatorial.theory@gmail.com.

2. If you are contacted by Elsevier to serve as an editor for JCT A, please do not accept, as this will hurt our efforts.

Sincerely,

Victor Reiner

Interim Editor, Combinatorial Theory

Free Journal Network

The Free Journal Network (previously described here) has now admitted 52 journals from an increasing variety of scholarly fields (although about half are still from mathematics). In order to go to the next level and obtain funding, I have registered FJN as a nonprofit corporation in Massachusetts, and am the first president. This involved learning a lot of new things. The Board of Directors is impressive – check them out.

Cybermath column NZMS Newsletter 2019/Aug

When writing the last column I expected that the topic of this one would be the relaunch of the New Zealand Journal of Mathematics, but unusual circumstances have delayed the relaunch, which is still expected to happen by the end of 2019. The NZJM is a classic example of a scholar-run journal with almost zero budget, subsidised easily by universities and the NZMS because its costs are so low. An argument often made by vested interests in the publishing industry is that high quality journals are expensive (many journals make income of thousands of dollars per published paper). A recent study (fittingly published as a PeerJ preprint) shows that US$200 per paper should be an upper bound. ​

I have spent some time on Twitter recently, but not for mathematical purposes (I run the accounts @oa_math and @freejournalnet). A substantial number of mathematicians have Twitter accounts, although many seem to use them more for political purposes than to discuss mathematics (for example, Ian Stewart (@JoatStewart) and even Timothy Gowers (@wtgowers) who has been using it for less than a year, after the demise of Google+ necessitated another forum.) This list of mathematicians on Twitter is a useful starting point.

Of course there is a large representation of experts in public outreach, such as Steven Strogatz (@stevenstrogatz), Hannah Fry (@FryRsquared​), Marcus du Sautoy (@marcusdusautoy). Interesting feeds relating to the politics of academia include those by Izabella Laba @ilaba.

Some other accounts that caught my eye and focus more on mathematics include: Numberphile (@numberphile) from MSRI (there is also a Youtube channel and other resources at https://www.numberphile.com/​) and Fermat’s Library (@fermatslibrary). These channels are focused more at the undergraduate level. Research-level mathematics is not as well represented. The first mathematical blogger John Carlos Baez has a nice feed at @johncarlosbaez.

The American Mathematical Society (and also London Mathematical Society @LondMathSoc​ and Australian Mathematical Society ​@AustMS) are there, but not the New Zealand Mathematical Society yet. The University of Auckland Department of Mathematics is there: @mathsmatter – are any other departments? Antipodean mathematicians I found include ​Nalini Joshi (@monsoon0) and our own Steven Galbraith (@EllipticKiwi).

Twitter of course has its downsides. The pace at which tweets appear requires a lot of discipline in whom to follow and how to read – at times it is like looking at a library of newspapers but only reading the headlines. This goes against the traditions of mathematics. The 140 (now 280) character limit favours concision. LaTeX is not yet supported; mathematical formulae can be embedded as pictures if necessary. Perhaps the medium is simply not (yet) well adapted for mathematicians. Will we ever see Terence Tao on Twitter? Somehow I doubt it. But overall I think it is worth exploring, and I welcome feedback from readers (if I have any – at least on Twitter I can get some idea about that).​

We finish with some brief notes that may help to feed your procrastination.