Timeline for Considering a second PhD, this time in statistics. Will any professors be interested in working with me? [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
34 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 13, 2020 at 14:14 | comment | added | user27182 | I used to have a job as a quant in a top hedge fund and I only had a masters. I actually left it for a phd in machine learning. You definitely don't need a different phd. you're perfectly well qualified. Just pick up some books on machine learning/general finance (e.g. bishops book and grinold & kahn) and you''ll be fine. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 13:24 | history | closed |
vonbrand Richard Erickson Anonymous Physicist Nobody Wrzlprmft♦ |
Duplicate of Is doing two PhDs a good path? | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 13:23 | history | edited | Wrzlprmft♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Mar 13, 2020 at 9:49 | comment | added | lalala | Just a few things to consider: it might not always be that the hours you have to put in the job in finance industry are limited by 40h per week. Also, maybe you are the exception, but a lot of Phd students who think they work 7 days per week are actually surprised about the high pace of industry work. Your first priority should be to survive the first year on the job well. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 9:38 | comment | added | Ben | However, my (small) team consists of: A mechatronic engineer, an electrical engineer, two mathematicians (one of them is my boss) and me. A company near to us is developing concepts and pipelines for other companies and they only hire mathematicians and physicists. They told me that, as a data scientist, you wouldn't almost need any programming as you pass your (mathematical) models on to (pure) programmers which convert the models into software later. I guess, e.g., this would be a perfect job for you - while I feel more comfortable around technical guys :) | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 9:35 | comment | added | Ben | Finally, I would say, statistics is a field of a lot of applied tasks - and I think, a phd would focus on "only" improving some optimization tasks behind some questions, so rather mathematically. So I guess, in a "typical" data science/ml job you wouldn't really benefit from that. On the other side, there are, for sure, jobs which are very suited for such tasks, where you would work on implementations and so on and less on "answering applied questions". The former would be very mathematically while the last would be more applied statistics, programming and so on. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 9:30 | comment | added | Ben | @SecondPhD Probably because of two aspects: Though I'm part of a relative large AI team (around 25 people) but finally I'm part of a small team embedded in an engineering department (here I benefit from my experience in particle physics, especially as my work included a lot of technical details and also data analysis of particle experiments) and, as I just mentioned, my work was related to a lot of statistical questions. I had no clue about machine learning but I'm, at least, familiar with statistics and programming. | |
| Mar 13, 2020 at 7:58 | comment | added | SecondPhD | @Ben That's interesting. How did you mange to hired for a machine learning job ahead of statistics/ML people when your background is experimental particle physics? | |
| Mar 12, 2020 at 15:31 | comment | added | WoJ | If you want to do research in statistics, why not doing just that? You can publish without being part of a university and you can use your free time for actual research and not the things which are attached to being a PhD student. | |
| Mar 12, 2020 at 10:59 | answer | added | Plog | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 12, 2020 at 10:23 | comment | added | Ben | as it is very specialized. My background is experimental particle physics and I'm working in a machine learning job now. Before that I worked with the statistics lecturer (a mathematician) and the skills needed in the industry are very different. You need much more software and programming than statistics/ml. At least on a daily basis. Nevertheless, I feel that there are a lot of statisticial questions during the week and they are so very applied that I think one can only answer them thanks to experience and/or as studying statistics (but not as a phd..). | |
| Mar 12, 2020 at 10:21 | comment | added | Ben | Here, in Germany or at least at my former university, it is not possible to receive two PhDs. If one wants, they have to be done in different fields. Let's say someone earns a Phd in chemistry then you would get a "Dr. rer. nat." like everybody did in nature sciences (biology, chemistry, physics and also mathematics,.. etc.). So the 2nd would have to be done in.. Idk.. history or so.. but btw, here you would have no problem to get a job in statistics/mal even when you're not from that field. Mathematics is sufficient. And I doubt a phd in statistics would help | |
| Mar 12, 2020 at 8:47 | vote | accept | SecondPhD | ||
| Mar 12, 2020 at 8:45 | comment | added | SecondPhD | I have realised based on the answers I've received that my math PhD will be viewed as essentially equivalent to a stats/ML PhD in industry so I can see now that there is no need to do a second PhD in this area. | |
| Mar 12, 2020 at 8:37 | comment | added | SecondPhD | @alephzero Yes there are some jobs in this area it is definitely a niche area these days compared to the amount of positions that look for a statistical skillset. Practically every decent sized company/institution is looking for a statistical skillset now. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 22:11 | comment | added | Anonymous Physicist | Relevant Meta: academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4623/… | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 20:02 | comment | added | alephzero | "my research area (numerical analysis of PDEs) is actually very niche in terms of real-world problems in industry." Very strange. I know people in industry who have spent literally decades working on that topic. Maybe you aren't talking to the right companies. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 19:47 | answer | added | Beechside | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 19:11 | comment | added | Nuclear Hoagie | I agree with @MaartenBuis - the first PhD should have given you the skills needed to do independent research. You don't need to relearn that with a second PhD, and moreover, you should be able to do independent research in the field of your proposed second PhD without the need for a PhD advisor. You'll want to be in touch with some domain experts, but you should just focus on research rather than "learning to research," which is no small part of a PhD. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 19:04 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Mar 11, 2020 at 15:00 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 13, 2020 at 13:25 | |||||
| Mar 11, 2020 at 14:11 | comment | added | Jon Custer | @SecondPhD - you seem to be of the opinion that you need to go do another PhD if what you are working on isn't quite what you did your first PhD on. I would suggest that most PhDs are doing something fairly different within 5-10 years of their thesis, yet do not feel they need to get another PhD - they learned how to learn new stuff on the fly without courses in the first one. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 13:51 | answer | added | Erwan | timeline score: 12 | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 13:41 | answer | added | quarague | timeline score: 80 | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 13:14 | comment | added | user9482 | So, perform research on evenings and weekends. Nobody is saying you can't do that. All we are saying is that you don't need to do a second dissertation. It's quite unlikely that you'd find an advisor anyway, because they would also see it as a waste of their time. What you should look for is a cooperation. You should read the answer to this question. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 12:54 | comment | added | SecondPhD | If I move into research in this area I will gain far more proficiency if it is as part of a structured cutting edge research project with clear goals and I am working with a professor who has years of experience. At the end of the process I will have a qualification that certifies my expertise in this area. I would be in a far better position than I currently am - there are countless jobs that I am very much interested in but I am not eligible for because they require probability or statistics PhDs. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 12:51 | comment | added | SecondPhD | @MaartenBuis Yes and I would very much like to do it again in the area of statistical analysis. What else am I going to do in the evenings/weekends..watch TV/go drinking with friends/computer games? I want to continue my current lifestyle when I leave academia for industry..I want to perform research on the evenings/weekends, and publish papers. Longer term, I want a career in the area of statistical analysis and I would like to be highly qualified for this. My own area feels too niche and of little relevance to the real world. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 12:02 | comment | added | Maarten Buis | Of course you know more about the subject of your thesis after writing it than before. That is not the point, because your research is in all likelihood way to narrow and specific to justify hiring you for a substantial amount of time. The real value of your diploma is that it shows you can do this again, and again, and again on different topics. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 11:49 | comment | added | SecondPhD | @MaartenBuis It seems to me that a PhD does certify that you have deep knowledge of a particular field. Anyone I know who completed a PhD in mathematics is far more knowledgeable about their field at the end of the PhD than they were at the start. The precondition for entry in mathematics is that you have potential based on your prior academic achievements. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 11:40 | comment | added | SecondPhD | @Roland I already am a postdoc and when my contract ends I will be leaving for a job in industry. But I still want to perform research on the evenings/weekends as it's my hobby as much as my job and I love it. As I aim to move into the area of statistical analysis I would like a qualification in this area. I can't simply stay in academia and switch my research..nobody will hire me for a postdoc involving stats/probability, they will hire someone with much more expertise in that area. I also have financial commitments which mean I cannot afford to do another postdoc. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 11:40 | comment | added | Maarten Buis | A PhD certifies you can do research. It is not an efficient way of certifying that you have knowledge of a particular field (that was usually a precondition before entering the program). So a second PhD is not going to help you. What you need is to fill the gaps in your knowledge and get some work experience. Probably the most efficient way to fill the knowledge gap is to join some MOOCs. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 11:21 | comment | added | user9482 | Why do you want to do a second PhD? There is no advantage of obtaining a second PhD in a related field over simply switching your future research to that field. A second PhD is simply not an efficient use of your time and resources. The natural step, if you want to stay connected to academia, would be a post-doc. It's very common to switch to a slightly different field during one of your post-docs. | |
| Mar 11, 2020 at 10:55 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 11, 2020 at 14:44 | |||||
| Mar 11, 2020 at 10:54 | history | asked | SecondPhD | CC BY-SA 4.0 |