This is mediocre advice that largely won't work for the members of this community. For neuroscience, where there is relatively little competition, it's ok. For

This is mediocre advice that largely won't work for the members of this community. For neuroscience, where there is relatively little competition, it's ok. For AI/ML, where the competition is crazy, it's bad advice. > Lastly - the dreaded Undergraduate Publication. Are you a co-author on a publication? Fantastic. It means you made a considerable contribution to a project which can only be done through a significant amount of dedication. Are you first author on a publication? Wow! Truly impressive and a rare feat for an undergraduate researcher. Do you not have any publications? Don’t sweat it. I’m looking for people with a history of a strong work ethic, an innate curiosity, and an ability to think and dream big. Downplaying this, and cutely calling it the "dreaded" publication is the worst advice on this page by far. This is what gets you into good departments now. A publication as an undergrad can change your life. If you want to do a PhD, this is your goal as a student: publish a paper. The majority of new PhD students who get into good departments now have at least one publication. And what you did for that publication is what matters. Your supervisor(s) should include in their letter exactly what your contribution was. In our department the guiding philosophy for admitting PhD students mostly is: Are they already behaving like PhD students on the level of those we have in our department? A publication or more is a really good signal. The cleanest and strongest signal you can send. > There are two primary ways most undergraduates get research experience. One, a summer Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU). Two, working with a PI at your home institution for a few semesters. Neither is required for admission, but both are valuable for different reasons. I can hardly imagine a student getting in to our department with zero research experience at all aside from exceptional situations. These are definitely required. > First zoom meeting ... Generally, I’ll try to keep this first meeting focused on you, your interests, your long-term goals, and whether my lab fits those interests and goals. Somewhat counterintuitively, I’ll actually avoid going into depth about science. Of course, we will talk about my research program and open projects in my lab, but I really try and keep this first conversation focused on getting to know you (and letting you get to know me). I want to know how you got to be where you are today, how you made the decision to pursue a PhD, and where you see yourself going in the future. You must read the last few papers of the person who is calling you. You must be ready to talk about all of your work end to end, not just about what you did, but its limitations, what else you wanted to do, other approaches, etc.