u/MathChief

Yes. Happening.

You can simply use git and add overleaf as an upstream along with another GitHub upstream.

struggling for money

You should move anyway, given the current trends in higher ed.

I think that's on your advisor. The corresponding author should taking the lead in submission (cover letter, authors list, funding acknowledgement) if the student author is new to this business. At least this was what my advisor did for me and now I do the same for my students.

What did you do for exactly? I could not fathom how a premature manuscript is hurting your rep unless some LLM bs were left unchanged. But even that won't be a death penalty to your academic future in today's climate. So chill.

In Arena, Japanese art cards always show English text when played or on the stack. The Japanese texts are only shown when there is no zooming in effect ongoing (e.g., in your hand).

BTW: this is [[Vampiric Tutor | SOA]]

[[Nyxbloom Ancient]]

9 is good but 13 and 15 are better.

Math, and this is my graduate class weights:

Homework: 2% Coding labs: 3% Pop Quizzes: 30% Midterm: 30% Final: 35%

Giving anything LLM-cheatable more than 5% is too much IMO. BTW, I post the homework solutions when I post the homework, yet the students are still supposed to turn in their handwritten copy. $\LaTeX$ is not allowed.

If he pays for the subscription (esp. the enterprise-level API cost), I see no problem with that. However, by "tripling down on me getting subscriptions", you meant that he pushed you "BYOK" (bring your own key), then this is a huge red flag.

For example, our school's ChatGPT admin can see what I uploaded and how my API key is used in VSCode.

To be frank, if you do coding for your research, no PI would want to hire you if you do not use LLM-based coding agents. Learning a code base (at least in my niche field of applied math x physics) is a long and slow process for grad students without the help of language models.

Unpopular take among the peers of this subreddit: society as a whole will be driven by the language models to a dystopia in the near future, where learning from human instructors in liberal arts subjects becomes a luxury. Unproctored composition-based assessment will be completely eliminated.

Meta glasses have two very distinctive camera modules.

These "AI" glasses can be spotted from a light-year away because of the camera module. Just say "any form of recording device usage is not allowed during the exam" in your syllabus.

OCR+LLM feedback was experimented in a UC Calculus class. This link is the paper published in ICML https://openreview.net/forum?id=vcdsMrNGqP

If feasible, at least for the lower-level undergraduate math classes (Calculus/Linear Algebra/Diff Eq), being properly OCR'd and formatted, LLMs would provide light-year better feedback than my TAs (YMMV but just from my own perspective).

Last semester in my linear algebra class, I teach my students how to use LaTeX to prompt Pearson MyLab's integrated Language model-based help system in their Pearson MyLab. For example, when being clearly prompted, Pearson's LLM would generate directions and clickable links to the online textbook, and generate a similar problem for the student to practice with a step-by-step interactive interface. This is immensely helpful, because one of the biggest issues for people struggling in college-level math classes is that they do not know which material they should look for (when multiple techniques are involved), and surprise surpise, TAs in the help room do not empathize with students struggling in math because TAs are normally the "A" students.

My personal 2 cents are always: (at least for STEM), instructors who incorporate language models in their teaching will replace those who do not.

IMHO and speculatively, you are too senior and too good, it is highly probable that POs won't put your proposals in the priority queue for awarding even if it is rated competitive.

Thanks for the answer.

Just curious: before the official recommendation email (or asking for upated abstract/budget email), did you hear anything informal-ish from the PO?

Here is my data point.

• Proposal 1: submitted in July 2025, rejected in April 2026.
• Proposal 2: submitted in July 2025, recommended in mid May, and awarded mid July.
• Proposal 3: submitted in Dec 2025, pending.

My undergraduate exam-making workflow (Calculus series/Linear Algebra/Diff equations) was largely streamlined by LLMs. I used to randomize the numbers myself (using my old janky Python scripts), and then adjust the solution LaTeX. Now I deploy an AI agent in VSCode Copilot who have full access to my past 15 years' exam repositories, the agent runs the shell script in cloud which uses the index it builds to know how to use the Python scripts in my workspace, modifying the existing solutions. LLMs also refactored my old shell scripts, tidied up TikZ figure repositories, and Python scripts for exam-making as well.

This allows me to pour more time to the graduate classes, where I still do everything manually. For graduate classes, I have removed the written homework overall (because the LLMs have better and more explanatory proofs than the proofs I prepared), and added quizzes and post-quiz interviews (the students have to come to my office to show math on my board).

Disclaimer: I only read the title, first and last few paragraphs. Here are my 2 cents.

Answer 1: unfortunately whether objectively you did poorly in terms of professionalism or are "in the wrong" is not always judged by objective facts, but rather subjectively judged by someone.

Answer 2: being passionate is good and essential trait of a good teacher. Staying professional is another, and if you cannot stay professional, unfortunately it is highly likely this job is not suitable for you.

Normal. If your PO asked for an updated budget and/or abstract and/or CPS, then your proposal will be recommended. NSF is really slow these days due to the staff shortage. So be patient.

Cat is never standard legal.

I offer a quiz "retake" in my office for my graduate-level math classes. The students can come to my office, explain where they got the problems wrong, and rework a similar one on my board. Then based on my feedback such as "you need to re-learn Calculus 1 to survive", they evaluate themselves to assign a score for themselves.

Possibly OP is a 115 fanboy, intentionally jinxy or try to imposter a cringey gooner.

I'm happy for you if you are happy to insult a fellow gooner. Very good for you.