Operations Research: Stanford vs MIT

[ORFEboy]

Hi all,

I got accepted into the Master's programs at
- Stanford (Management Science and Engineering)
- MIT (Computation for Design and Optimization)
- Cornell (ORIE in Financial Engineering)
- UMichigan (Industrial and Operations Engineering)

My ultimate goal is to go to the Ph.D. program in Operations Research or Operations Management. My current interests are:
(1) financial engineering - risk management, credit risk, dynamic pricing
(2) om - supply chain, vehicle routing, airline scheduling
(3) stochastic optimization
(4) machine learning

Basically, I'm choosing between Stanford and MIT now; though if you have strong opinions about Cornell/UMich, please share as well. Thanks a lot!

[ThisGuyRiteHere]

why didnt you just apply for a phd

[ORFEboy]

I didn't have research experiences back in undergrad, so I would like to spend a year or two working on projects before applying to Ph.D. programs in the future.

[Arcanen]

Stanford (along with Columbia and Princeton) is one of the financial engineering powerhouses. The only person at MIT who really does FE work is Andrew Lo. The same could be said of Stanford MS&E and Giesecke (who currently has like a million PhD sudents), but there are more people in Stanford GSB who do FE (unlike Sloan) who you could take classes and work with. That said, there isn't really a wrong choice (except that you didn't apply for the PhD straight away; Stanford and Columbia for example both allow you to be considered for the masters automatically if you don't get accepted into the PhD, so there's no reason not to try with schools like this).

[user31]

Stanford (along with Columbia and Princeton) is one of the financial engineering powerhouses. The only person at MIT who really does FE work is Andrew Lo. The same could be said of Stanford MS&E and Giesecke (who currently has like a million PhD sudents), but there are more people in Stanford GSB who do FE (unlike Sloan) who you could take classes and work with. That said, there isn't really a wrong choice (except that you didn't apply for the PhD straight away; Stanford and Columbia for example both allow you to be considered for the masters automatically if you don't get accepted into the PhD, so there's no reason not to try with schools like this).

 

Hi Arcanen, thank you for your detailed information. Although this is a thread for Stanford and MIT, would you mind if I ask you one question?

 

My goal is to get into financial engineering PhD and I'm struggling between Stanford MS&E and Columbia Stats (both in masters). FYI, I have a math/engineering background back in undergraduate and applied to PhDs this year but got these offers instead. I don't have know which one will be more suited for this purpose. As you said, MS&E seems to be focused in Finance rather than FE. And the problem with Columbia Stats is it is generally not considered as a way to FE. My plan for Columbia Stats is taking as many courses as in IEOR department and then re-apply for the Columbia IEOR department at the 2nd year of Master.

 

Any thoughts or recommendations are welcome. Thanks in advance!

Edited April 17, 2013 by jhpark

[Arcanen]

It's hard to say. On one hand, Columbia IEOR has way more people doing FE than Stanford MS&E and a number of research centres dealing specifically with financial engineering (the Center for Financial Engineering and the Center for Financial Analytics at the enormous new Institute for Data Sciences and Engineering). On the other hand, your Stanford admit is to the faculty that you'd apply to for a PhD, and your Columbia admit is not.

 

I would suggest you make a decision purely on personal preference. They are both fantastic schools in fantastic (but very different!) locations. What is important to recognise is that entry to these masters programs is by no means a guarantee to the corresponding PhD programs. For example, I heard from friends that Columbia IEOR accepted 2 students from the MSOR this year. Scores of MSOR grads applied and were rejected. Regardless of which of the two you choose for your masters, you'll likely end up applying to the PhD programs at both schools anyway.

 

Make your decision based on location, financing, your gut feelings about the schools, and the programs themselves (for this last point I'd give the slight edge to Stanford because an OR masters is better for an OR PhD than a stats masters). Regardless, both schools will give you options for getting into fantastic programs both at the corresponding school and elsewhere. 

 

#firstworldproblems

Edited April 17, 2013 by Arcanen

[user31]

It's hard to say. On one hand, Columbia IEOR has way more people doing FE than Stanford MS&E and a number of research centres dealing specifically with financial engineering (the Center for Financial Engineering and the Center for Financial Analytics at the enormous new Institute for Data Sciences and Engineering). On the other hand, your Stanford admit is to the faculty that you'd apply to for a PhD, and your Columbia admit is not.

 

I would suggest you make a decision purely on personal preference. They are both fantastic schools in fantastic (but very different!) locations. What is important to recognise is that entry to these masters programs is by no means a guarantee to the corresponding PhD programs. For example, I heard from friends that Columbia IEOR accepted 2 students from the MSOR this year. Scores of MSOR grads applied and were rejected. Regardless of which of the two you choose for your masters, you'll likely end up applying to the PhD programs at both schools anyway.

 

Make your decision based on location, financing, your gut feelings about the schools, and the programs themselves (for this last point I'd give the slight edge to Stanford because an OR masters is better for an OR PhD than a stats masters). Regardless, both schools will give you options for getting into fantastic programs both at the corresponding school and elsewhere. 

 

#firstworldproblems

 

Thank you very much Arcanen, I really appreciate your reply.

 

You are RIGHT. I agree that both schools are nice and I will end up with applying to both of them whatever I study in master program. I know that getting into PhD programs is getting more harsh, and yes, I should do my best to get prepared in a given situation and the fit (or the first feeling) would be an issue. And good point: 'an OR master would be better for an OR PhD'.

 

Are you applying for this season? If so, hope you best of luck  

Have a good day!

Edited April 17, 2013 by jhpark

[ORFEboy]

I'm really torn now. Any other thoughts/advice?

[ORFEboy]

As a stats guy, I have to warn you that I've heard so many people badmouth Columbia's stats MA program that I'd recommend the other program, regardless of how good it is.

 

Anything about Stanford MS&E or MIT CDO? Thanks!