(international) My chances of getting into top Astrophysics programs?

[gaugeinvariance]

Dear All.

I am an international student who is planning to apply for the Ph.D. in astrophysics in the US in the coming application cycle. I am aiming for the top astrophysics school in the US. For the top, I mean CALTECH, Princeton, MIT, Columba, JHU, Cornell ... e.t.c. I would kindly ask for all of you for comments on whether I am capable enough to be admitted to these programs.

Major: Physics
Type of student: International Asian Male
Institution: Some East Asia University
Undergrad Major GPA: 3.86/4.00
Undergrad CGPA: 3.52/4.00
Length of degree: 4 years
M.Phil. GPA: 3.86/4.00
Length of degree: 2 years

Research experience:
3 years at the home institution
0.5 years at US institution

Publication:
One published (1st Author APJ)
One submitted under review (1st Author APS)
Two writing (One 1st author, one co-author)

Presentation:
One oral in AAS
One informal oral (5 minutes) in one of the top schools listed above

Awards/Honors/Recognitions:
3 years dean list
5 scholarships

Toefl: 105
GRE: To be taken

Research interests:
Most likely theory. Numerical astrophysics, modeling, and computer simulation

Special concerns:
I have got B+ in one basic computational physics course, one introductory physics course,
one introductory math course, and one group discussion course
I have got B in two laboratory course
I have got B and B+ in grad course during Covid. But then get two As after Covid

Other concerns:
Although the GRE is now accessible by most students, some schools (such as CALTECH) still would not accept any GRE scores. Without the GRE scores, is my profile competitive enough? If not, how could I increase my odds to be admitted to top schools?
I have applied to most of the schools in the last cycle. Would there be a penalty score for students who applies for the school twice?
I have got an M.Phil degree (Yeah, British system). However, digging into the post by:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=181859&p=256286&hil ... ce#p256286
Who claimed that having a Master's degree will be a minus to the application. Is it true that schools prefer not to admit students with Master's degrees, even if it is not a MSc?

How are my chances to be admitted to these top programs? If it is low, how can I improve my odds? I would like to ask for your helping hand. Please kindly comment on anything you think is important. Thank you so much

P.S.
I do know that people usually would come up and say ranking is not important in school selection, the crucial factor would be whether the schools conduct impactful research in the corresponding field. I disagree. Ranking carries weight and your future career depends on your school name. One example, CALTECH statistics on the career path of their alumni showed that more than half of them are having faculty positions. Another example, if you are responsible for the recruitment of the faculty or a company. Which one would you choose? A Ph.D. coming from a top school or a Ph.D. coming from a second-tier school, or even some small school that you don't even know its name? This is the reality. People differentiate good from bad first by where they graduate. Another thing is that the most impactful research that I am interested in is conducted in some of these top schools. But most importantly, I would like to show people that I am capable of studying in the most competitive environment.

 

[CrysPhys]

I have applied to most of the schools in the last cycle.

* By "last cycle", do you mean before you started your M.Phil. program? If not, what time period are you referring to? What were the responses at the time?

* Also clarify: What were your majors for undergrad and master's?

 

[gaugeinvariance]

* By "last cycle", do you mean before you started your M.Phil. program? If not, what time period are you referring to? What were the responses at the time?

* Also clarify: What were your majors for undergrad and master's?

Hi CrysPhys, thank you for your clarification. By the last cycle, I mean last year (the 2020-2021 cycle). And I am applying for the (2021 - 2022) cycle. And I am majoring in physics

Thanks a lot

 

[berkeman]

Research experience:
3 years at the home institution
0.5 years at US institution

Publication:
One published (1st Author APJ)
One submitted under review (1st Author APS)

Those seem to be strong points for your PhD applications. Do you have advisors for these who will be writing you recommendation letters? How do they feel about writing letters for the half-dozen universities that you listed?

 

[CrysPhys]

Hi CrysPhys, thank you for your clarification. By the last cycle, I mean last year (the 2020-2021 cycle). And I am applying for the (2021 - 2022) cycle. And I am majoring in physics

Thanks a lot

Let me see if I have this straight.

* You applied late 2020/early 2021 for admission in fall of 2021. Correct? You didn't answer a key question I posed ("What were the responses at the time?"), but I assume you were not accepted by any university. Correct?

* So now you plan to apply late 2021/early 2022 for admission in fall of 2022. Correct?

* How does the timeline of your M. Phil program map into all this? Were you still in the process of completing your M. Phil. when you first applied late 2020/early 2021, but you have since received your M. Phil?

* More to the point, what changes to your circumstances between your first round of applications and your planned second round of applications do you think will flip the decision from reject to admit?

 

[gaugeinvariance]

Let me see if I have this straight.

* You applied late 2020/early 2021 for admission in fall of 2021. Correct? You didn't answer a key question I posed ("What were the responses at the time?"), but I assume you were not accepted by any university. Correct?

* So now you plan to apply late 2021/early 2022 for admission in fall of 2022. Correct?

* How does the timeline of your M. Phil program map into all this? Were you still in the process of completing your M. Phil. when you first applied late 2020/early 2021, but you have since received your M. Phil?

* More to the point, what changes to your circumstances between your first round of applications and your planned second round of applications do you think will flip the decision from reject to admit?

Hi. Thanks for the reply. Some ans to your question may invovle personal info. May I ask to PM for a further discussion? Thx

 

[gaugeinvariance]

Those seem to be strong points for your PhD applications. Do you have advisors for these who will be writing you recommendation letters? How do they feel about writing letters for the half-dozen universities that you listed?

Hi berkeman,

My advisors are very kind and we are having an excellent relationship. They are all willing to write recommendation letters. What do you mean by "How do they feel about writing letters for the half-dozen universities that you listed?"

Thanks

 

[berkeman]

Each letter will presumably be tailored to the university. I would be hesitant to write 6 letters of recommendation for someone I had worked with who was shotgunning applications to multiple universities. But if your advisors are okay with that, that is good for you.

 

[CrysPhys]

Each letter will presumably be tailored to the university. I would be hesitant to write 6 letters of recommendation for someone I had worked with who was shotgunning applications to multiple universities. But if your advisors are okay with that, that is good for you.

It's been many, many moons since I applied for grad school. But as best I can recall, I sent applications to 4 universities. Six appears like a reasonable number to me (even in regular times, but especially in these uncertain times), rather than indicative of shotgunning. Curious as to what number you and others consider to be reasonable these days.

 

[Vanadium 50]

P.S.

Your PS is very, very foolish.

The top schools are not the ones you are thinking of. The top astronomy school in the country overall? Arizona. Caltech? It's strength is in planetary science. (Not saying it's a bad school, but every school has its strengths, and that's Caltech) Another outstanding schools not on your list? Hawaii.

More to the point, about half of all PhDs in physics (I don't have the astronomy numbers) are awarded by a dozen large schools. You see these names on faculty members' CVs a lot because they produce a lot of PhDs. You also see places like South Carolina, Purdue, Oregon...

But worse than your misjudgement of the situation is your dismissal of advice before you even got it - advice from the very people you are asking for advice. Because you already know better. Does this sound wise?

More to the point, what changes to your circumstances between your first round of applications and your planned second round of applications do you think will flip the decision from reject to admit?

This.

What you have posted so far is not strong.. The GRE might help - and in any event is pretty much necessary in evaluating international students - but without the GRE GPA matters more. And your GPA is not very good. It's in the bottom third of those accepted to grad school. Not at Caltech. Accepted at all.

LoRs are important. "Best student this year" is an average Letter. "Best student in the last decade" is a good letter. "The best student I have ever had or likely to have" is a very good letter. I don't have a crystal ball so I don't know what the letters say, but from what you have told me, average seems like a good bet.

So, of the three things that matter most, where are we?

• Grades - weak
• Letters - average
• GRE - nonexistent

This does not look competitive for the schools you are looking at.

FWIW, I don't think six is too many LoRs to send. Twenty would be.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Your PS is very, very foolish.

The top schools are not the ones you are thinking of. The top astronomy school in the country overall? Arizona. Caltech? It's strength is in planetary science. (Not saying it's a bad school, but every school has its strengths, and that's Caltech) Another outstanding schools not on your list? Hawaii.

More to the point, about half of all PhDs in physics (I don't have the astronomy numbers) are awarded by a dozen large schools. You see these names on faculty members' CVs a lot because they produce a lot of PhDs. You also see places like South Carolina, Purdue, Oregon...

But worse than your misjudgement of the situation is your dismissal of advice before you even got it - advice from the very people you are asking for advice. Because you already know better. Does this sound wise?This.

What you have posted so far is not strong.. The GRE might help - and in any event is pretty much necessary in evaluating international students - but without the GRE GPA matters more. And your GPA is not very good. It's in the bottom third of those accepted to grad school. Not at Caltech. Accepted at all.

LoRs are important. "Best student this year" is an average Letter. "Best student in the last decade" is a good letter. "The best student I have ever had or likely to have" is a very good letter. I don't have a crystal ball so I don't know what the letters say, but from what you have told me, average seems like a good bet.

So, of the three things that matter most, where are we?

• Grades - weak
• Letters - average
• GRE - nonexistent

This does not look competitive for the schools you are looking at.

FWIW, I don't think six is too many LoRs to send. Twenty would be.

@Vanadium 50 , I have several comments regarding your quotes above:

1. The OP states that his undergraduate CGPA is 3.52 (out of 4.00), his major undergraduate CGPA is 3.86 (out of 4.00), and his GPA for his MPhil is 3.86 (out of 4.00).

I've known plenty of people who have been accepted into graduate schools with GPA's in that range. So I think you are frankly mistaken in thinking that the OP's grades are somehow "weak".

2. You keep stating that LoR's where the advisor where they state "Best student in the last decade" is a good letter. Frankly, I think it is unrealistic to expect that any professor would make that statement for students that they are supervising at the undergraduate level. Have you ever written such a LoR in your role as a professor? No? I didn't think so.

Because in essence what you are saying is that only those far outside of the distribution of intelligent, dedicated, hard-working students have even a faint hope of being accepted into graduate schools. But again, this is not empirically supported by the people I've known who have graduate degrees, in various fields (be they in physics, math, statistics, etc.).

TBH, you are giving the OP bad advice. Specifically advice that he cannot act upon, so it is worse than useless.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I've known plenty of people who have been accepted into graduate schools with GPA's in that range.

Plenty have. About a third. However, the OP is not interested in getting into graduate programs. He's interested in getting into the very top graduate schools. For that, I'd be looking at higher.

Have you ever written such a LoR in your role as a professor? No? I didn't think so.

Read plenty. Written one. She was truly outstanding, with a lot of light between her and the next one down.

Because in essence what you are saying is that only those far outside of the distribution of intelligent, dedicated, hard-working students have even a faint hope of being accepted into graduate schools.

I'm not saying that at all. A student who gets above a 3.7 and 3.8, a PGRE above the 80th percentile and a somewhat-strong set of letters is competitive for anywhere she wants to go. Below this in one, and it has to be made up somewhere else. Below this in two areas, and the third has to be really, really exceptional. Otherwise, one needs to start looking at less competitive schools.

According to the Makkinje paper, the average GPA among students admitted to graduate programs is 3.74. You could say "yes, but physics GPA is higher", but that is likely also true for the cohort that makes up the 3.74. The standard deviation on that is 0.21, so the OP's GPA puts him 1 standard deviation below the average. For "highly competitive schools", it's 3.87 with a standard deviation of 0.11, so he's 3 sigma down (or would if the distribution were Gaussian). This is not strong - especially since he's not trying to get into grad school - he's trying to get into a very small number of extremely competitive grad schools.

It's also worth pointing out that the OP is from "Some East Asia" country. He doesn't say which one, but there is one with over a billion people who have thousands of students with 4.0's who want to study in the US. That's his competition.

advice that he cannot act upon

Sometimes that's the case. "I need advice on how to win a race, given that my competitor is about to cross the finish line and I am a lap behind" doesn't have many answers. But there are two things he can do - ace the PGRE (which he seems less interested in) and apply to a broader range of schools (which he said he is totally uninterested in).

 

[gaugeinvariance]

Those seem to be strong points for your PhD applications. Do you have advisors for these who will be writing you recommendation letters? How do they feel about writing letters for the half-dozen universities that you listed?

Ah! Thanks to CrysPhys that I should have mentioned that I have been rejected by every school In the last application cycle.

@Vanadium 50 , I have several comments regarding your quotes above:

1. The OP states that his undergraduate CGPA is 3.52 (out of 4.00), his major undergraduate CGPA is 3.86 (out of 4.00), and his GPA for his MPhil is 3.86 (out of 4.00).

I've known plenty of people who have been accepted into graduate schools with GPA's in that range. So I think you are frankly mistaken in thinking that the OP's grades are somehow "weak".

2. You keep stating that LoR's where the advisor where they state "Best student in the last decade" is a good letter. Frankly, I think it is unrealistic to expect that any professor would make that statement for students that they are supervising at the undergraduate level. Have you ever written such a LoR in your role as a professor? No? I didn't think so.

Because in essence what you are saying is that only those far outside of the distribution of intelligent, dedicated, hard-working students have even a faint hope of being accepted into graduate schools. But again, this is not empirically supported by the people I've known who have graduate degrees, in various fields (be they in physics, math, statistics, etc.).

TBH, you are giving the OP bad advice. Specifically advice that he cannot act upon, so it is worse than useless.

Hi StatGuy2000, Thank you for the reply

For the concern about GPA. I heard from other forums saying about Major GPA matters. I am not sure whether CGPA is the decisive factor. I have asked but no one has a concrete answer.

Plenty have. About a third. However, the OP is not interested in getting into graduate programs. He's interested in getting into the very top graduate schools. For that, I'd be looking at higher.Read plenty. Written one. She was truly outstanding, with a lot of light between her and the next one down.I'm not saying that at all. A student who gets above a 3.7 and 3.8, a PGRE above the 80th percentile and a somewhat-strong set of letters is competitive for anywhere she wants to go. Below this in one, and it has to be made up somewhere else. Below this in two areas, and the third has to be really, really exceptional. Otherwise, one needs to start looking at less competitive schools.

According to the Makkinje paper, the average GPA among students admitted to graduate programs is 3.74. You could say "yes, but physics GPA is higher", but that is likely also true for the cohort that makes up the 3.74. The standard deviation on that is 0.21, so the OP's GPA puts him 1 standard deviation below the average. For "highly competitive schools", it's 3.87 with a standard deviation of 0.11, so he's 3 sigma down (or would if the distribution were Gaussian). This is not strong - especially since he's not trying to get into grad school - he's trying to get into a very small number of extremely competitive grad schools.

It's also worth pointing out that the OP is from "Some East Asia" country. He doesn't say which one, but there is one with over a billion people who have thousands of students with 4.0's who want to study in the US. That's his competition.

Sometimes that's the case. "I need advice on how to win a race, given that my competitor is about to cross the finish line and I am a lap behind" doesn't have many answers. But there are two things he can do - ace yhe PGRE (which he seems less interested in) and apply to a broader range of schools (which he said he is totally uninterested in).

Hi Vandadium, thank you for the reply

For your concerns about LoR. I was mentioned by an admission committee last year that my letters are strong, but perhaps just a little bit weaker than those who got admitted. I am not sure whether it is a good sign

And for your concern about GRE, I am not saying that I am not going to take the GRE. Instead, I am concerning about schools which do not accept GRE. I am concerning how are my odds changes if I am not able to provide my GRE (assuming it to be a stellar score)Thank you everyone

 

[berkeman]

Thank you everyone

Indeed, thank you everyone for the helpful replies. I'll tie off the thread now.