PanicMode

Which dept?

@painkillers, do you know who your advisor will be and if so who?

"I only applied to one school this year and if that doesn't work out then I want to aim higher next year" Maybe you should aim lower or apply to more places? The people who were accepted have no business here anymore and for the ones who are waiting or were rejected your question isn't relevant. Sorry.

Unless you're accepted they probably won't tell you.

Let me explain how admissions committees work. There are about four items that determine if you will be accepted or not. In order of priority: Is there a faculty member who specifically wants you, will this person go to bat for you? (this is your POI) Does that faculty member have funds to carry you for 5 to 6 years? Do you have a good research statement to back up that faculty's investement (do your letters of recommendation concur) Do you have good GRE/Test scores to convince the rest of the committee If the anwser to any of these questions is no you end up in the waitlist pile. That means you are still a match with regards to topic of research, research statement and test scores. It's just that they're otherwise full. If someone drops out, or if during the first round of personal phonecalls by faculty to high-priority candidates someone drops off, then you've made it off the wait list.

"They say that once you got a offer from top companies..." So you assume you will get that at some point ?

First of all you don't join a group, you're lucky to be asked to be part of a group. Your question depends on how many PIs are involved in a group. If one PI has 4 students vs if one PI has lots of students. Personally I would try to become a PhD student with a faculty member who doesn't have a lot of students. First of all because it's easier for them to keep the funding going and second because you will have more personal time with your advisor.

Score 2

Hi, I'm at CMU and I work a lot with the ML department. One thing you're going to get at CMU and not at Harvard is access to a strong body of other excellent ML, LTI, CS, Neuro, RI, etc researchers. Everyone here collaborates all the time and you would have access to not just one or two great ML reseachers. Also, Pittsburgh is a pretty good living city. It's cheap and it has great resources. Besides, you're going to be working your ass of for 5 to 6 years, you wouldn't see much of Boston anyway

The academic world is notorious for making people feel like impostors. Or more specifically: the outsider. Every part of graduate school has a gate keeping function. And even if you make it and get a Phd or Masters, you're only starting the next round of trying to figure out if you're really a part of it all. If you take a top tier university and you walk into the toughest class, you will find a room full of people who are scared they are not smart enough to be there. Most of them are correct.

> I'm 40 and was rather quickly admitted into my program (MI at Toronto) It's always easier to see the bright side when things are going well.

never mind.

The long version of that line is "with your research interest and background, why don't you go do a PhD". As if you can just walk into any university and begin. Has anyone else had stuff like this happen?

Which programs did you apply to?

@margrets That is the most sensible and realistic thing I've heard in a long while

Thanks

Nope, which was a big mistake. Next year I will apply to lots more schools. Although not CMU.

*sigh* ok why don't I make this really clear. The people who got in are good friends of mine. I know their academic records I know their standing I know what grades they got because they were in the same courses I took (so I know who got in with Cs). I know for a fact that people were admitted with much less of a GPA or academic track record than me.

@bamafan You are absolutely right that I can't say it was my spot, that wasn't fair. How about this though?: my research statement was edited by faculty members on both committees.

@emmm Just got fucked in the ass by two depts of which I know the faculty well. In fact I know all of the committee members personally and my research statement was designed to help most faculty and their research. At least now I know that qualifications don't matter, which at least means I don't have to work to write more publications. I know the committees so well that I know who got my spot, someone with no first author publications and almost no research experience. Good luck on anyone over 35 who got in, must be some fucking magic you're using.

@gradschoolmom "If you have the credentials, you have a chance!" Really? Here are my credentials: 12 conference publications, 2 journal articles and 1 book chapter. 1 patent, 1 award nomination, countless review committees, program committees, invited talks, panels, etc. 16+ years science experience with a prestigious neurosurgery journal article (12 reviewers). Undergrad GPA: 3.82, Current Grad GPA: 3.62. h-index: 7. I just got rejected from the PhD program where my advisor instead picked someone who has ZERO first author publications and only about 2 years of experience. However, this person is about 15 years younger than me.

@ Goobah. I haven't heard things through the grapevine. I've worked in science for 16+ years and I'm reporting what I'm seeing.

Thanks. Apparently they don't understand what the term 'qualfied' means.

I'm 40 and I've been working towards getting into a Phd program for many years. In that sense I'm almost overqualified and I think that's counting against me.

I'm 40 and I have very little chance of getting in. The reason is that faculty are looking for kids they can mold and shape into what they think are good copies of themselves. Also when you're younger you're less competition and not much of a threat. I think you have an excellent chance.