gammaxeon

Thanks, everyone! The general opinion is to prefer B over A. X is a subtopic within computer networks. Obviously, A has profs working on computer networks, distributed systems and related stuff - but not on X. In general, I agree that I should not be very very specific to X and be ready to expand. I don't mean switching to different field just because A doesn't have enough research going on in X. Agreed. But, its not about #4 vs #16 according to some XYZ Rankings and I know it doesn't matter much. I put "Top 5" vs "Top 20" just to give a general sense of the reputation of the places. And somehow, the reputation of the university is there in the back of my mind. Ok. So, do you think one is better than the other? Also, how much do the collaborations of the professors across univs matter? B collaborates with top researchers in X and related area. A - well, not as much. I see some of the students at B spending their summer with top researchers and have a lot of joint publications/projects.

Not sure how to add tags to the post. So, posting the link to the original post in this forum.

Hi all, I am unable to decide between univs A and B for PhD in CS. I am mentioning a few points that I am considering in the decision process. Please let me know your opinions. Ranking: A - top 5, B - top 20 Research group I will be joining: A has only one prof (is relatively new) while B has a lab consisting of 3-4 profs (1 very experienced and others relatively new) who work on research relevant to me. Friendliness: Profs at both places seem to be very friendly - based on email/skype/phone conversation. Recent publications: B publishes a lot at top tier conferences. A also publishes - but less in number. But, B's research group has 18-20 grad students while A has 4-5. Alignment with my research interests (X): The prof at A works on slightly different stuff compared to my current interests. It is sort of a new field combining my interest X and some other area, Y. B offers a wide range of research topics and encompasses X. The conferences where B publishes are more relevant X while A publishes in top conferences on Y. Should I put much weight to this point? I am just starting my PhD - does it make sense for me to narrow down my research interests already? There is high probability that X might no longer be an active research topic in 3-4 years from now. Should I keep my research interests slightly more flexible to accommodate A? PhD Funding: A - RA/TA; B - 2 years fellowship followed by RA/TA - Should not matter much? Funding for the group: B has more industry sponsorship than A I have generalized some points so that it can be helpful to others as well. You can respond to individual points as well as the overall situation. To draw a rough overall comparison, I am thinking to assigning scores to A and B based on each criteria. Do you have any suggestions on how much relative weight should I assign to each of the points? Cheers! PS: If some of the questions have already been answered previously, please share the link to the discussion thread.