University of California, San Diego · Nanoengineering
匿名 · 审核后公开
7.0分均分 · 2 条公开评价
公开评价概览
评价数
2
均分
7.0 分
点赞/踩
0 / 0
匿名表态 · 每个导师仅一次
学生评价
8.0分
I'm not giving a 5/5 as I do not know a clear defination of a perfect PI, but from my experience till now (not graduated yet), Shyue Ping (SP) is a good PI in many perspectives.
Instead of following the suggested subtitles, I would like to list the pros and cons. I will keep updating the review as time goes, and I will reply to questions if any.
## Good points ### He is not a micromanager. SP will not check when and where and how long you are working. You can choose your prefered working style, while he cares about the outcome. ### Funding is not a problem. As long as you are admitted to this group as a PhD student, you will be fully funded until graduation. Students in lab do TA only once per year or once per 5 year, and it is for graduation requirement purpuse instead of stipend purpose. I saw in another review of SP saying that funding for students is not secured, "Some PhD students have to work as a TA for a whole year before they get the GSR funding support." I am really unaware of any formal member in the group suffering from stipend. And if you are not sure if I'm lieing, you can ask SP once you are admited to UCSD. He did tell me never worry about funding years ago in my interview with him, and I do got funded for RA. ### Students can do interns in summer. ### Research projects should be interesting. You can checkout the materials virtual lab group website for more details. ### well organized meetings. No long meetings but frequent (weekly) subgroup meetings for effective discussions. ### Hands-on manuscript writing No need to worry about the final quality of the manuscript. SP edits each paper carefully.
## "Bad" points ### Stressful writing process SP's comments are straight, and it seems "interesting" that he uses GRE words to accurately deliver his critism to bad works. He also have fast pace in working once he gets his hands on the manuscript. So I find the writing process quite stressful. While in the end, the quality will be good. I'm not sure if this kind of pace and strong comments are necessary or not, but I do believe the process is stressful. I also heard that members in our group see Psychologist because of stress. ### Not a lot of group events
Above all, I'm personally satisfied about my decision to join SP's group till now. And I will recommend our group to the potential students if you are interested in computational materials science and would like to achieve something.
Yes, I recommend this PI.
6.0分
## Advisor Style & Mentorship I never had a chance to meet with this PI 1:1 during the three months trial period. Daily guidance by senior students or post-doc. The PI is not very accessible, as he doesn't live in San Diego. Once it took the PI two weeks to reply to my very important emails. (I followed up several times) I think the communication between the PI and me was not very ideal.
## Expectations for PhD Students I think the PI has very high expectations for his PhD students. You really need to work very hard in this group. You also need to have a very strong heart to stay in this lab. Sometimes, you will get pretty harsh feedback from the PI. Also, you may feel you are very trivial in front of him.
## Funding & Support This group has very sufficient funding (and they are hiring now), but it doesn't mean the support for PhD students is very good. Some PhD students have to work as a TA for a whole year before they get the GSR funding support. I don't think the PI is very supportive of other aspects of students' lives.
## Research People dropped out this group because they didn't meet the PI's expectations, or because they didn't get the funding support.
## Lab Culture Research is very good and promising. The PI is an expert in this field (founding developer of pymatgen).
## Additional Information Check out their group website guide: https://guide.materialsvirtuallab.org/. There are lots of useful information about this group. The PI wrote everything in a very detailed manner. I think he did a great job in documenting and organizing.
Instead of following the suggested subtitles, I would like to list the pros and cons. I will keep updating the review as time goes, and I will reply to questions if any.
## Good points
### He is not a micromanager.
SP will not check when and where and how long you are working. You can choose your prefered working style, while he cares about the outcome.
### Funding is not a problem.
As long as you are admitted to this group as a PhD student, you will be fully funded until graduation. Students in lab do TA only once per year or once per 5 year, and it is for graduation requirement purpuse instead of stipend purpose. I saw in another review of SP saying that funding for students is not secured, "Some PhD students have to work as a TA for a whole year before they get the GSR funding support." I am really unaware of any formal member in the group suffering from stipend. And if you are not sure if I'm lieing, you can ask SP once you are admited to UCSD. He did tell me never worry about funding years ago in my interview with him, and I do got funded for RA.
### Students can do interns in summer.
### Research projects should be interesting.
You can checkout the materials virtual lab group website for more details.
### well organized meetings.
No long meetings but frequent (weekly) subgroup meetings for effective discussions.
### Hands-on manuscript writing
No need to worry about the final quality of the manuscript. SP edits each paper carefully.
## "Bad" points
### Stressful writing process
SP's comments are straight, and it seems "interesting" that he uses GRE words to accurately deliver his critism to bad works. He also have fast pace in working once he gets his hands on the manuscript. So I find the writing process quite stressful. While in the end, the quality will be good. I'm not sure if this kind of pace and strong comments are necessary or not, but I do believe the process is stressful. I also heard that members in our group see Psychologist because of stress.
### Not a lot of group events
Above all, I'm personally satisfied about my decision to join SP's group till now. And I will recommend our group to the potential students if you are interested in computational materials science and would like to achieve something.
Yes, I recommend this PI.
I never had a chance to meet with this PI 1:1 during the three months trial period. Daily guidance by senior students or post-doc. The PI is not very accessible, as he doesn't live in San Diego. Once it took the PI two weeks to reply to my very important emails. (I followed up several times) I think the communication between the PI and me was not very ideal.
## Expectations for PhD Students
I think the PI has very high expectations for his PhD students. You really need to work very hard in this group. You also need to have a very strong heart to stay in this lab. Sometimes, you will get pretty harsh feedback from the PI. Also, you may feel you are very trivial in front of him.
## Funding & Support
This group has very sufficient funding (and they are hiring now), but it doesn't mean the support for PhD students is very good. Some PhD students have to work as a TA for a whole year before they get the GSR funding support.
I don't think the PI is very supportive of other aspects of students' lives.
## Research
People dropped out this group because they didn't meet the PI's expectations, or because they didn't get the funding support.
## Lab Culture
Research is very good and promising. The PI is an expert in this field (founding developer of pymatgen).
## Additional Information
Check out their group website guide: https://guide.materialsvirtuallab.org/. There are lots of useful information about this group. The PI wrote everything in a very detailed manner. I think he did a great job in documenting and organizing.