A tip for anyone on the ML job/PhD market—people will plausibly be quickly skimming your google scholar to get a sense of “how impressive is this person/what is their deal” read (I do this fairly often), so I recommend polishing your Google scholar if you have publications! It can make a big difference.
I have a lot of weird citable artefacts that confuse Google Scholar, so here’s some tips I’ve picked up:
First, make a google scholar profile if you don’t already have one!
Verify the email (otherwise it doesn’t show up properly in search)
(Important!) If you are co-first author on a paper but not in the first position, indicate this by editing the names of all co-first authors to end in a *
You edit by logging in to the google account you made the profile with, going to your profile, clicking on the paper’s name, and then editing the author’s names
Co-first vs second author makes a big difference to how impressive a paper is, so you really want this to be clear!
Edit the venue of your work to be the most impressive place it was published, and include any notable awards from the venue (eg spotlight, oral, paper awards, etc).
You can edit this by clicking on the paper name and editing the journal field.
If it was a workshop, make sure you include the word workshop (otherwise it can appear deceptive).
Hunt for lost citations: Often papers have weirdly formatted citations and Google scholar gets confused and thinks it was a different paper. You can often find these by clicking on the plus just below your profile picture then add articles, and then clicking through the pages for anything that you wrote. Add all these papers, and then use the merge function to combine them into one paper (with a combined citation count).
Merge lets you choose which of the merged artefacts gets displayed
Merge = return to the main page, click the tick box next to the paper titles, then clicking merge at the top
Similar advice applies if you have eg a blog post that was later turned into a paper, and have citations for both
Another merging hack, if you have a weird artefact on your google scholar (eg a blog post or library) and you don’t like how Google scholar thinks it should be presented, you can manually add the citation in the format you like, and then merge this with the existing citation, and display your new one
If you’re putting citations on a CV, semantic scholar is typically better for numbers, as it updates more frequently than Google scholar. Though it’s worse at picking up on the existence of non paper artefacts like a cited Github or blog post
Make your affiliation/title up to date at the top
A tip for anyone on the ML job/PhD market—people will plausibly be quickly skimming your google scholar to get a sense of “how impressive is this person/what is their deal” read (I do this fairly often), so I recommend polishing your Google scholar if you have publications! It can make a big difference.
I have a lot of weird citable artefacts that confuse Google Scholar, so here’s some tips I’ve picked up:
First, make a google scholar profile if you don’t already have one!
Verify the email (otherwise it doesn’t show up properly in search)
(Important!) If you are co-first author on a paper but not in the first position, indicate this by editing the names of all co-first authors to end in a *
You edit by logging in to the google account you made the profile with, going to your profile, clicking on the paper’s name, and then editing the author’s names
Co-first vs second author makes a big difference to how impressive a paper is, so you really want this to be clear!
Edit the venue of your work to be the most impressive place it was published, and include any notable awards from the venue (eg spotlight, oral, paper awards, etc).
You can edit this by clicking on the paper name and editing the journal field.
If it was a workshop, make sure you include the word workshop (otherwise it can appear deceptive).
See my profile for examples.
Hunt for lost citations: Often papers have weirdly formatted citations and Google scholar gets confused and thinks it was a different paper. You can often find these by clicking on the plus just below your profile picture then add articles, and then clicking through the pages for anything that you wrote. Add all these papers, and then use the merge function to combine them into one paper (with a combined citation count).
Merge lets you choose which of the merged artefacts gets displayed
Merge = return to the main page, click the tick box next to the paper titles, then clicking merge at the top
Similar advice applies if you have eg a blog post that was later turned into a paper, and have citations for both
Another merging hack, if you have a weird artefact on your google scholar (eg a blog post or library) and you don’t like how Google scholar thinks it should be presented, you can manually add the citation in the format you like, and then merge this with the existing citation, and display your new one
If you’re putting citations on a CV, semantic scholar is typically better for numbers, as it updates more frequently than Google scholar. Though it’s worse at picking up on the existence of non paper artefacts like a cited Github or blog post
Make your affiliation/title up to date at the top