PhD Regulations Fabian M. Suchanek This is a summary of the PhD Regulations for Computer Science at the University of Saarbruecken/Germany, valid from 2007-07-19. This summary describes the state of affairs in summer 2008. By reading the following text, you accept that the author does not accept any responsibility for the correctness or completeness of this text. If you have any corrections or remarks, please send me a mail. This is the only way to make the publication of this summary useful for me, too. My e-mail address is f.m.suchanek@zgmail.com; the letter 'z' has to be removed from the address. In this summary, "(P x.y)" refers to paragraph x, section y in the PhD Regulations. The Regulations are available at http://frweb.cs.uni-sb.de/fileadmin/content/Downloads/Education/Ph.D._Graduate_School/Regulations/promotionsordnung_2007.pdf ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Doctoral Degrees ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Each PhD applicant can choose the degree he will be awarded. There are essentially two parameters to choose: (P 1.1) 1. Male form versus Female form Males are not allowed to chose the female form, but females are allowed to choose the male form (P 1.2). In any case, the form shows only in the German and Latin full version of the title. 2. Dr. rer. nat. versus Dr.-Ing. "Dr. rer. nat." is latin and expands to "Doctor rerum naturalium" , meaning "Doctor in natural sciences". "Dr.-Ing." is German, expands to "Doktor-Ingenieur" and means "Doctor in Engineering". The distinction between the titles is restricted to Germany (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doktortitel#Deutschland_2). Outside Germany, what remains is "Dr." and "PhD". Opinions: My supervisor Prof. Dr. Gerhard Weikum says that the choice is completely arbitrary. He would subjectively suggest to take "Dr.-Ing." for practical works and "Dr. rer. nat." for theoretical ones. He says that "Dr.-Ing." is better respected in the German Business world. My relatives suggested Dr.-Ing., for the following reasons: * Dr.-Ing. sounds more practical. This might counterweight the more theoretical reputation that Saarbruecken has. This way, one would have both, theoretical and practical appearance * Dr.-Ing. is more specific than Dr. rer. nat.. Dr. rer. nat. is for chemists, biologists, paleontologists etc. With Dr.-Ing., people know in which area you are * Dr.-Ing. is better known that Dr. rer. nat. * Most importantly: With Dr.-Ing., it's clear and well-known that one has put much effort and work and invested at least 3 years. With Dr. rer. nat., that is not so clear (Dr. med., e.g., is just 1 year, who knows which discipline gives a Dr. rer. nat. also for just 1 year?) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ People ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- PhD Board / Promotionsausschuss ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The PhD Board (P 2) is the group of people that surveys PhD processes at the UdS. It is fixed by the university. Its boss is currently Prof. Weickert, see http://frweb.cs.uni-sb.de/index.php?id=107 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Gutachter / Reviewers / Berichterstatter ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Each thesis has to be reviewed by * the supervisor * a reviewer, essentially a professor (P 7.1). Other people can be reviewers if the PhD board says it's OK. * an external reviewer (an expert with a PhD at an internationally renowed research institution or a professor from another university), if the thesis aims at "summa cum laude" (P 7.6) The reviewers are ordered by the PhD board, but have to be can be proposed by the PhD applicant. My supervisor implied that the choice of renowed, non-local reviewers is nice in the CV. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Wissenschaftlicher Begleiter / Tutor ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This person shall control whether the work of the PhD student follows good scientific principles. Essentially, he has to be a professor or a specially admitted person. The tutor is declared (P 3.4) but never used. The tutor may not be a reviewer. My supervisor suggested to select a person that has absolutely nothing to do with the thesis, so that choosing a tutor does not limit the choice of reviewers. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Beisitzer / Research assistant ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This person will sit in your defense talk. His task is mainly writing a protocol. The person has to have a doctoral degree. (P 8) You can ask anybody for this task. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vorsitzender / Chairman ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This person will be the chairman of your defense talk. He has to be a professor and may not be a reviewer. (P 8) You may ask any professor in Computer Science for this task. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Timeline of Steps ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Admission to doing the PhD ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To be allowed to work on a PhD thesis, you need the following (P 3) 1. a Master's degree in Computer Science or equivalent 2. a proof of qualification Qualification is proven by an "internal mechanism" by the PhD board (P 3.3), I assume that Gerhard's supervision counts as qualification (?). You should also find a supervisor ("Doktorvater" / "Doktormutter"). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The PhD List ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The next step is to get on the PhD list of the university. This step has to happen before 2008-11-01, if you want to follow the current regulation and not the new one. The new one requires an additional colloquium. For getting on the list, you need to submit (P 3.7) * proofs for items (1) and (2) listed above under "admission" * an agreement of Gerhard * a proposal for a tutor * the choice of the title Once you're on the list, you should finish within 3 years time (P 6). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Writing the thesis ----------------------------------------------------------------------- You should write a PhD thesis (P 4). The thesis has to contain * a German and English abstract of 1/2 page (per abstract) * a German and English summary of around 2 pages (per summary) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Choice of reviewers ----------------------------------------------------------------------- You should select and ask potential reviewers for your thesis. Be prepared to give them a talk or a first draft of the thesis before they decide. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Opening of the PhD process / Eroeffnung des Promotionsverfahrens ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Once the thesis is complete, you apply for the opening at the PhD board (P 5). You need * 5 printed versions of the PhD thesis First print the theses. Then bind them to a book-like format. You can bind the theses for 3 EUR per item, e.g., here: COD Copy Shop Scheidter Strasse 256, 66125 Saarbruecken/Dudweiler This is very close to the campus. * a sheet of paper giving your reviewers with complete addresses * a statuatory declaration (Eidesstattliche Erklaerung) Just print out and sign the declaration in the appendix of this document * an opening declaration (see appendix of this document) * a CV (not provided in this document) * a copy of your master's certificate Hand in this package at the Dean's secretary: Dekanat der naturwissenschaftlich-technischen Fakultaet I der Universitaet des Saarlandes Elisabeth Mueller-Perich Building E 2.4, Room 110, FON: 0681/302-5070, FAX: 0681/302-5068 Mail: sekr.techfak@rz.uni-sb.de Opened: Mo-Th 9:00-11:00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Reviews ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The reviewers will review the thesis. This can be fast, but it may be slower with external reviewers. In any case, the reviews have to be made within 2 months time (P 7.4). If time is pressing, proceed to the organization of the defense already now. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Delay Period ----------------------------------------------------------------------- After the reviews have been made, the thesis and the reviews have to stay in the examination office for 2 weeks time (or 4 weeks in the semester break) (P 7.8). After that time elapsed (without anybody protesting), the thesis is called "accepted". You should use this time to organize your defense. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Organization of the Defense ----------------------------------------------------------------------- After the delay period, you will have to give a presentation to defend your thesis (the "defense", s.b.). This event is public, so you can invite your friends and family, if you like. It is very common to invite your colleagues. In the defense, there have to be (P 8) * a Research Assistant (s.a.) Ask any person from computer science with a doctoral degree * a chairman (s.a.) Ask any professor from computer science * your supervisor * at least one other of the reviewers This group is called the "examination board". You should use the delay period to organize the defense. That means * find a timeslot after the delay period where all participants would be free for 2 hours. * reserve a room for that time * Tell the dean's secretary the time and date of the defense and the names and addresses of the particpants * Invite the participants It is common to offer food (e.g., finger food or buffet) and drinks (e.g., champaign and orange juice) after the defense. You may wish to contact a catering service for this purpose. Here is a list: http://www.partyservice-goestl.de/ http://www.partyservice-dinnerforone.de/ http://www.partyservice-lepatron.de/ http://www.delikat-partyservice.de/ http://www.eisermanns.com http://www.grundergourmet.de/ http://www.lambert-online.com http://www.partyservice-scheidt.de ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Colloquium / Kolloquium / Defense / Verteidigung ----------------------------------------------------------------------- In the defense, you give a talk of 30 minutes (P 9). Then, the examination board will ask questions. After the defense, the examination board meets and sets a grade. The grades are: * summa cum laude (best) * magna cum laude * cum laude * rite (worst) * not passed Once the examination board has decided on the grade, it is common * for you to say some nice words * for your colleagues to give you a doctoral hat * for you to open the buffet * for the participants to congratulate you one after the other It is the day of the colloquium that counts as the day of getting the PhD. This is why there are so many defenses at the end of the year. People want to have the old year as finishing year and not the new one. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Camera-Ready Version ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The examination board may tell you to make improvements on your thesis. These will be announced clearly to you. If this is the case, you have to implement the improvements. Then, prepare the final version of the thesis. It has to have the string Thesis for obtaining the title of Doctor of Engineering of the Faculties of Natural Sciences and Technology of Saarland University Saarbr\"ucken, Germany, DATE on the front page (P 12). On the rear of the front page, list * the dean * the date of the colloquium * the members of the examination board (See appendix) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Appendix ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Statutory Declaration / Eidesstattliche Versicherung ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Eidesstattliche Versicherung Hiermit versichere ich an Eides statt, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbststaendig und ohne Benutzung anderer als der angegebenen Hilfsmittel angefertigt habe. Die aus anderen Quellen oder indirekt uebernommenen Daten und Konzepte sind unter Angabe der Quelle gekennzeichnet. Die Arbeit wurde bisher weder im In- noch im Ausland in gleicher oder aehnlicher Form in einem Verfahren zur Erlangung eines akademischen Grades vorgelegt. Saarbruecken, DATE ________________ NAME ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Opening declaration / Eroeffnungserklaerung ----------------------------------------------------------------------- An das Dekanat der naturwissenschaftlich-technischen Fakultaet I der Universitaet des Saarlandes, Campus E 2.4 66123 Saarbraecken Antrag auf Eraeffnung eines Promotionsverfahrens Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, hiermit beantrage ich die Eroeffnung eines Promotionsverfahrens nach der Promotionsordnung der Naturwissenschaftlich-Technischen Fakultaeten der Universitaet des Saarlandes vom 2007-01-11. Diesem Antrag lege ich bei * Meinen Lebenslauf * Eine eidesstattliche Versicherung gemaess Anlage 1 der Promotionsordnung * Eine Liste der Gutachter * Eine Kopie meiner Master-Urkunde * 5 Exemplare der Dissertation Mit freundlichen Gruessen ________________ NAME ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Camera-Ready Version ----------------------------------------------------------------------- \pagestyle{empty} \ \\[2cm] \begin{centering} {\LARGE \bf }\\[1cm] {\large \bf <NAME>}\\[3cm] Thesis for obtaining the title of Doctor of Engineering \\ of the Faculties of Natural Sciences and Technology \\ of Saarland University\\[3cm] Saarbr\"ucken, Germany, <DATE>\\ \end{centering} \newpage \begin{tabular}{ll} Dean: & Prof. Dr. Joachim Weickert\\ & Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science\\ & Saarland University\\ & Saarbr\"ucken, Germany\\[1cm] Colloquium: & <DATE>\\ \underline{Examination Board}\\[0.2cm] <PEOPLE GO HERE> \end{tabular} \newpage