Profile Evaluation

[dasgut]

Hey Everybody,

I know we're all done with apps, but I'm still dying to know if anybody thinks I have shot in the world at the places I applied to. My profs didn't give me a great idea of where I should shoot for (though they are going to give me amazing LORs). Anyways any opinion is greatly appreciated!

Undergrad Institution: Top 25 University, Top 15 B-School

Major(s): Finance & Accounting

Minor(s): Mathematics

GPA in Major: 3.67

Overall GPA: 3.51 (3.87 Last 2 Years)

Length of Degree: 4

Position in Class: Top 40%

Type of Student: Domestic

Grad Institution: Top 50 Uni, Top 80 Math

Type of Degree: MS in Mathematics

GPA: 3.97

Length of Degree: 2

Courses: 7 PhD Courses (1 yr Analysis, 1 yr Topology, 1 yr Applied Math, 1 sem Differential Geometry), 1 Research (Minimal Surfaces)

GRE Scores:

Q: 770

V: 560

W: 5.0

Subj: 650 (53%)

Research Experience: 1 summer with Naval Research, working on MS project on minimal surface and complex analysis.

Awards/Honors/Recognitions: Just GPA stuff

Pertinent Activities or Jobs: TA for Management Accounting, Constructed financial systems for credit card company

Any Miscellaneous Accomplishments that Might Help: IDK<br style=""> <br style="">

Research Interests: Optimization, Financial Engineering, Mathematical Economics and Finance, Stochastic Processes, Differential Equations, Functional Analysis, Microeconomic Theory

Applying for PhD at:

Stanford – MS&E

Cornell – Center for Applied Mathematics

Princeton – Program in Applied & Computational Mathematics

Michigan – Applied & Interdisciplinary Mathematics

Minnesota – Mathematics

Texas – Mathematics

Chicago - Mathematics

Edited February 6, 2010 by dasgut

[hubris]

Without the subject exam, I think you aimed a bit too high.

So, slim odds.

(I hope you prove me wrong. )

[dasgut]

Without the subject exam, I think you aimed a bit too high.

So, slim odds.

(I hope you prove me wrong. )

Shizzle! I can't believe I forgot to include the subject exam. Good catch and thank you Hubris. It's omission has since been fixed. However, the mediocrity of the score could not.

Edited February 6, 2010 by dasgut

[someDay]

You've perhaps been a little bit too ambitious. Your profile is excellent, but perhaps not amazing enough to make up for the mediocre subject score. Your BS at a good school is average, your MS is really good but at an average school.The main problem I see is your MS courses don't go with your research interests.

Topology, Differential Geometry and Min. surfaces is more suited to a Geometer or theoretical Physicist than someone interested in Financial Mathematics. Financial Mathematics is where the $$ is and more competitive than Pure.

Princeton & Stanford will reject you purely on the basis of your subject score.

Chicago, Cornell and Michigan will be very difficult, though not impossible. Have you talked to profs in your research area? If one really likes your profile and they push for you, perhaps you stand a chance.

The others I don't really know.You should perhaps check whether there're any schools further down the ranking list that still accept applications? You should get one or two insurance unis in the top 25 - 50 league.

sD.

Edited February 7, 2010 by someDay

[dasgut]

You've perhaps been a little bit too ambitious. Your profile is excellent, but perhaps not amazing enough to make up for the mediocre subject score. Your BS at a good school is average, your MS is really good but at an average school.The main problem I see is your MS courses don't go with your research interests.

Topology, Differential Geometry and Min. surfaces is more suited to a Geometer or theoretical Physicist than someone interested in Financial Mathematics. Financial Mathematics is where the $ is and more competitive than Pure.

Princeton & Stanford will reject you purely on the basis of your subject score.

Chicago, Cornell and Michigan will be very difficult, though not impossible. Have you talked to profs in your research area? If one really likes your profile and they push for you, perhaps you stand a chance.

The others I don't really know.You should perhaps check whether there're any schools further down the ranking list that still accept applications? You should get one or two insurance unis in the top 25 - 50 league.

sD.

Someday,

I sincerely appreciate your candor and expenditure of time in evaluating my profile! I was wondering about the following:

1. Will the fact that I received a 3.86 in my last two years mitigate the effects of my mediocre performance in the first two years? The difference on my transcripts between my last semester sophomore year and first semester junior year are night and day!

2. The school I'm doing my MS doesn't do financial math or really even probability. I was originally planning on doing a PhD in pure math when I entered the program. I was hoping that strong performance in PhD core courses would act in my favor. Do you think will act toward my advantage at all? Additionally, when I entered the MS I had almost no math background to speak of. I picked up the math minor only in my last year of college and my experience in undergrad only went up to an intro to proofs class.

3. I didn't study for the subject exam when I took it and was a lil' rusty on some of the basic linear algebra and crazy trig identity calc type stuff. Assuming I get rejected everywhere this year do you think that if I studied and say brought my score up above a 70% or even 80% I might have a shot at these schools?

4. At Stanford I didn't apply for the math department, I applied for the Management Science & Engineering dept. They don't even mention the subject exam. Do you think it will still count against me?

5. What could I do in general to improve my profile if I do unfortunately get rejected everywhere?

Thanks for your time and help!

[dasgut]

Also is it really true that math finance is that competitive? I had heard that anything applied math is a lot less competitive than pure.

[someDay]

Mathematical Finance is more competitive. You have a bunch of mathematically-minded economics students who blew all their cash on MSc in Maths Fin, Fin Eng and are now scrambling for PhD places. Applied in general is a more mixed bag. If you want to go into anything that contains "quantum" or "relativity" it its name you've better had published ten papers in Nature, but if you're looking for something more related to computer-science you won't have too much troubles.

2. I understand. It certainly strengthens your application, though somewhat less than if you applied to a program in Pure Maths.

Could you post the syllabus of your phd courses? If these are your bog-standard MS courses it's not going to help your application as much as if you've attended "advanced" seminars where a prof talks about their research.

3. That's a tricky one. Without knowing your letters it's impossible to say. But assuming they're really good and your grad classes are pretty rigorous then you probably got a chance. Definitely talk to some profs you want to work with.

4. It won't count against you (obviously).

5. Improve GRE; try to take some grad classes in stats at some other uni.

sD.

Edited February 7, 2010 by someDay

[hmmmmm]

Although you have not posted about course details, note that it's quite likely for your Phd level courses to be offered to undergrads in the institutions u've applied to. If that is the case, I don't think you really stand a chance unless you have other things that are truly exceptional.

[dasgut]

You make a good point hmmmmm, but I very much hope your wrong. As for the syllabi:

Analysis I and II

Lebesgue measure on R. Measurable functions (including Lusin’s and Egoroff’s theorems). The Lebesgue integral. Monotone and dominated convergence theorems. Radon-Nikodym Theorem. Differentiation: bounded variation, absolute continuity, and the fundamental theorem of calculus. Measure spaces and the general Lebesgue integral (including summation and topics in such as the Lebesgue differentiation theorem). spaces and Banach spaces. Hahn-Banach, open mapping, and uniform boundedness theorems. Hilbert space. Representation of linear functionals. Completeness and compactness. Compact operators, integral equations, applications to differential equations, self-adjoint operators, unbounded operators.

Texts: Royden "Real Analysis" and Bartle "Elements of Integration and Lebesgue Measure"

Topology I and II

Point set topology. Connectedness, product and quotient spaces, separation properties, metric spaces. Classification of compact connected surfaces. Homotopy. Fundamental group and covering spaces. Singular and simplicial homology. Eilenberg-Steenrod axioms. Computational techniques, including long exact sequences. Mayer-Vietoris sequences, excision, and cellular chain complexes. Introduction to singular cohomology.

Texts: Munkres "Topology" (Semester 1), Bredon "Topology and Geometry" (Semester 2)

For differential geometry we basically did the first two ch. of Do Carmo's Riemannian Geometry and then did about half of Bott & Tu's "Differential Forms in Algebraic Topology." For Applied Math we used Perko's "Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems" for the first few weeks and then have been pulling from Evans book on PDE's for the rest.

Again, thanks you guys!

[someDay]

Hm. Unfortunately these courses won't particularly help your application. I would expect that undergrads at the universities you're applying to know some bits of this material. Have you taken a course in algebra?

sD.

Edited February 7, 2010 by someDay

[dasgut]

Hm. Unfortunately these courses won't particularly help your application. I would expect that undergrads at the universities you're applying to know some bits of this material. Have you taken a course in algebra?

sD.

Just the undergrad abstract I&II.

[someDay]

Just the undergrad abstract I&II.

Hm. It's not overly important for your chosen research area, but it sort of raises the question what you did in your second year? What you've done in Analysis & Topology is pretty much the minimum standard for first year grad courses; additionally one would take a course in algebra (groups, rings, modules, commutative algebra, bits of category theory - Hungerford's book essentially) and some extras (algebraic geometry; stats; representation theory; lie groups; riemannian geometry; elliptic curves; algebraic number theory; category theory; homological algebra etc etc).

Have a look at http://www.math.colu...es/complex.html - these are courses for first year phd students at columbia. Given that you've done a two year master's degree and applying to equally prestigious schools, you'd be expected to know a huge amount of the stuff, not just bits here and there.

sD.

Edited February 7, 2010 by someDay

[dasgut]

Hm. It's not overly important for your chosen research area, but it sort of raises the question what you did in your second year? What you've done in Analysis & Topology is pretty much the minimum standard for first year grad courses; additionally one would take a course in algebra (groups, rings, modules, commutative algebra, bits of category theory - Hungerford's book essentially) and some extras (algebraic geometry; stats; representation theory; lie groups; riemannian geometry; elliptic curves; algebraic number theory; category theory; homological algebra etc etc).

Have a look at http://www.math.colu...es/complex.html - these are courses for first year phd students at columbia. Given that you've done a two year master's degree and applying to equally prestigious schools, you'd be expected to know a huge amount of the stuff, not just bits here and there.

sD.

I totally hear what you're saying. The thing is I had a minimal math background when entering. For the first year of my MS I took Real Analysis I&II, Abstract Algebra I&II, PhD Topology I&II, Complex Analysis, and Scientific Computing (Undergrad Numerical Analysis). This year I'm taking all PhD courses i.e.: analysis I&II, applied math I&II, diff geo I, and the research course. In undergrad the highest course I took was intro to proofs. We sent a kid to columbia last year and he had comparable scores and classes, but he had actually been a math major in college.

[mrb]

Not that I am an expert on admissions or anything, but I think people are maybe being a little too harsh here. I think your coursework is fine. Now your subject GRE may be a problem, but who knows, some schools seem to care very little about it.

I sympathize with you about not knowing what level to shoot for. My professors were really impressed with me and told me I should apply to Harvard and Princeton... However, just a little bit of research made it very clear to me that I had no chance whatsoever of getting in to those schools. So I mostly aimed somewhat lower than that. In retrospect I kind of wish I had aimed lower still, because I'm not at all sure I'll get in anywhere I applied at.

I still don't know what my profs were thinking with Harvard and Princeton.

[hmmmmm]

@dasgut:

A slightly off-topic question: how did you manage your coursework given your subject test result? Forgive me if you find this question a bit offensive. While I disagree that GRE subject test is a good indicator of one's ability, it does show a bit of test takers' foundation.

[origin415]

@dasgut:

A slightly off-topic question: how did you manage your coursework given your subject test result? Forgive me if you find this question a bit offensive. While I disagree that GRE subject test is a good indicator of one's ability, it does show a bit of test takers' foundation.

I also did quite badly on the subject test (a 690, 63rd percentile), so I know what its like. Personally, I was doing around 90th percentile on the sample tests the ETS released, so my score was purely a screw up on my part come test day, one which I can do absolutely nothing about and will be haunting me for quite some time if I don't get into the school I would have because of it, hopefully adcoms can look past it. Regardless, I handled my coursework just fine, a 3.86 gpa (3.96 if you don't count a semester travelling abroad), including an honors thesis and a grad class. Actually I was the sole recipient of a math departmental award, so I am first in my class. I don't think my score is indicative of my ability or foundations at all, and hope my application as a whole makes my subject score look completely out of place and irrelevant.

Regardless, back to the OP: I have to agree you aimed a little high, and not that you shouldn't have applied to where you did, but simply to apply to more schools. Personally I'm rooting for you, as one subject test screw up to another.

[dasgut]

@dasgut:

A slightly off-topic question: how did you manage your coursework given your subject test result? Forgive me if you find this question a bit offensive. While I disagree that GRE subject test is a good indicator of one's ability, it does show a bit of test takers' foundation.

Hey hmmmm,

No offense taken. It's an entirely legitimate question. I'm not a very good test taker when it comes to multiple choice. In fact, well, you'll have to pardon the profanity but I really fucking suck at it. Also I was pretty rusty with regard to certain topics. When I took the exam it had been 7 yrs since I had taken calc I and II so there were different differentiation and integration rules that I had just totally forgotten. I have a couple different tendencies which lead to my lackluster performance on multiple choice exams:

1. I don't answer questions if I don't feel entirely comfortable w/ my answer. I actually omitted 22. L8r realized I prolly woulda gotten an extra 10 pts if I had just gone w/ my gut on a few.

2. I'll get the hard part of the question and then forget about the easy part. For example I did take a single practice test. It concerned an integral using a very complex change of variables. Some ridiculous small percentage of people got it. I understood how to the hard part and performed it. However the integral I was supposed to evaluate was times some constant and after doing the hard stuff I forgot to multiply my result by the constant. I get sloppy when I don't have alot of time.

3. If I feel the question is easy I won't read the entire thing/skim it and then miss some small remark that actually changes the entire nature of the question.

I have met people who have gotten into some pretty amazing places w/ very low scores. Last year at my uni in particular the subject scores were kinda low. Yet 4 undergrads from here went on to top 10's and 20's, and are succeeding admirably, despite their low scores. If you look at the stats for a place like UMN which is top 20 according to USNWR I think about 1/3 of their class had below 70% and they even dipped as low as the 30's. Though I definitely question the test as a way to protect my ego I don't think it is the greatest indicator of ability.

Edited February 7, 2010 by dasgut

[dasgut]

I also did quite badly on the subject test (a 690, 63rd percentile), so I know what its like. Personally, I was doing around 90th percentile on the sample tests the ETS released, so my score was purely a screw up on my part come test day, one which I can do absolutely nothing about and will be haunting me for quite some time if I don't get into the school I would have because of it, hopefully adcoms can look past it. Regardless, I handled my coursework just fine, a 3.86 gpa (3.96 if you don't count a semester travelling abroad), including an honors thesis and a grad class. Actually I was the sole recipient of a math departmental award, so I am first in my class. I don't think my score is indicative of my ability or foundations at all, and hope my application as a whole makes my subject score look completely out of place and irrelevant.

Regardless, back to the OP: I have to agree you aimed a little high, and not that you shouldn't have applied to where you did, but simply to apply to more schools. Personally I'm rooting for you, as one subject test screw up to another.

LOL Origin415. If we end up at the same place first round of beers is on me! We'll drink to kickin' ass despite screwin' up.

[origin415]

LOL Origin415. If we end up at the same place first round of beers is on me! We'll drink to kickin' ass despite screwin' up.

Well we applied to two places in common, Texas and Michigan, both of which my advisor has said to be hopeful about despite my score because they are very large programs. Good luck to us both.

[noojens]

This thread's a bit harsh, I think. SO much depends on your recommendations -- if you have a well-known prof from your MS institution writing you a kick ass letter, that'll compensate for the weaker points of your application.

As for how you could improve your profile on the off chance you get universally rejected (heh), it's pretty simple:

Publish.

You could also retake and rock the subject GRE.

Anyway, I think you have a pretty competitive profile, especially for a domestic applicant. Don't freak out.

[someDay]

This thread's a bit harsh, I think. SO much depends on your recommendations -- if you have a well-known prof from your MS institution writing you a kick ass letter, that'll compensate for the weaker points of your application.

Agreed.

As for how you could improve your profile on the off chance you get universally rejected (heh), it's pretty simple:

Publish.

Replace this by "write some original papers, publish them". Which is very hard in pure and will almost certainly get you into any school. Perhaps this is easier in Financial Math but somehow I doubt it.

sD.

[hubris]

Replace this by "write some original papers, publish them". Which is very hard in pure and will almost certainly get you into any school. Perhaps this is easier in Financial Math but somehow I doubt it.

sD.

Actually, if you either have industry connections, or are working industry it is a bit easier than one might think (it is all about the payoffs).

Edited February 7, 2010 by hubris

[hubris]

This thread's a bit harsh, I think. SO much depends on your recommendations -- if you have a well-known prof from your MS institution writing you a kick ass letter, that'll compensate for the weaker points of your application.

Anyway, I think you have a pretty competitive profile, especially for a domestic applicant. Don't freak out.

Yes, good points.