STAR Graduate Student Thesis Policy:
Predraft Notes

This is not intended to be a first draft - it's just a numbered list, in no particular order, of many of the points and suggestions that have been made concerning student theses in STAR.

Please comment on which points you feel should be changed or omitted, and on needed points which are currently missing. Then we can proceed to assemble a first draft.

1. The STAR policy on student theses is based on the principle that any collaborator is free to delve into any aspect of the data. The main purpose of the policy is to state expectations about communication within the collaboration.
2. PWG convenors maintain lists of analysis topics in their areas of interest which are not yet covered by anyone (includes students, postdocs, and other categories of collaborator).
3. Students and their advisors are free to choose a project from any PWG convenor's list, or to choose a project that is not listed.
4. The chair of the STAR thesis committee could work with the Analysis Coordinator to maintain a descriptive list of all ongoing analysis projects, including names of all students and non-students working on those projects. The STAR council member from each institution is expected to submit the necessary information to keep these listings up-to-date.   (I believe that John envisaged that this committee would continue to exist beyond the stage of coming up with a draft policy on theses.)
5. It is anticipated that there will always be many unpursued analysis projects in STAR. The likelihood of independent analyses with a large degree of overlap is small. However, STAR policy does not explicitly discourage duplicate analyses.
6. In the event that there is a large degree of overlap between two independent analyses, it is the task of an ad hoc godparent committee appointed by the spokesperson to draw on material from the independent analyses and assemble the manuscript for a journal publication.   It does not appear that there is any natural role for the STAR thesis committee as a separate entity at this point.
7. Each student is expected to contribute "community service" to STAR before becoming totally absorbed in the physics analysis for his/her thesis.
8. The expected amount of community service by a PhD student using STAR data for his/her thesis is on the order of fraction X (one-third to one-half ??) of the total research effort for a typical PhD.   This wording makes allowance for the fact (as noted by Jean-Pierre) that a PhD project in France is typically much shorter than in the US. I get the impression that some people want a rather explicit statement, as above, about the expected amount of community service. However, few if any experiments that I am aware of are this specific. On balance, I would favor omitting this item from the policy.
9. It was requested that this committee should somehow help in identifying students for recruitment to community service areas. Perhaps it is sufficient if we ask Liz to add a flag to the STAR roster:
   The STAR roster should include a flag to identify students who intend to use STAR data for a PhD thesis.

Return to STAR thesis committee page

Last Updated: July 2,  2000