Research Reflection Questionnaire

This questionnaire is not a test of expertise or research ability, and there is no single correct answer. It has two purposes: first, to help you think concretely — before applying — about why you want to do research, what kind of working style suits you, and what kind of guidance you currently need; second, to give both of us a fuller understanding of each other’s expectations and fit before we start working together.

What I want to understand is not whether you would describe yourself with words like “passionate,” “independent,” or “resilient.” Rather than abstract self-evaluation, I hope to see, through concrete and reflective answers, how you think, learn, and face problems. Whenever possible, draw on experiences that are relevant to research in your responses.

Whether you are applying as an undergraduate project student, a research assistant, a master’s student, or a PhD student, you will in principle answer the same core questions. I will do my best to interpret your answers in light of your stage of study, the opportunities you have had, and the role you are applying for.

How to submit

Please compile your answers into a PDF file and attach it to your first email. For details, see Join the Lab. You can also download the Word file, fill it in, and convert it to PDF.

Before answering, please also read How We Do Research.

Suggestions for writing:

For most questions, 5–10 sentences is enough; questions that ask for a concrete experience can run somewhat longer.
I will mainly look at whether your answers are clear, concrete, and thought through — longer answers do not receive higher regard.
The prompts under each question are there to help you think. You do not need to address every prompt, nor follow their order.
If you are currently unsure about a question, it is fine to say “I’m not sure yet” and describe your current understanding and considerations.
If you have no formal research experience, you can draw on course projects, internships, competitions, self-study, student clubs, personal projects, or any other experience that concretely shows how you learn and work.
Please answer in your own words. There is no need to imitate the tone of academic papers or application documents.

On the use of AI tools

You may use AI to polish and improve your answers, but the content must faithfully reflect your own experiences, understanding, and judgment.

Please do not ask AI to fabricate experiences, research understanding, or reflections for you, and do not submit content you cannot explain yourself. In an interview I may follow up on your answers, so you should be able to explain what you wrote in your own words.

Basic information

Please briefly provide the following:

The role you are applying for: undergraduate project student, research assistant, master’s student, or PhD student;
Your current school, department, and year, or your current occupation;
Your intended start date / collaboration period;
Roughly how much time per week you can reliably commit;
Whether you have a capstone project, graduation, graduate school (MS/PhD) application, job, or other concrete timeline goals.

This information is mainly used to understand your situation and to help match you with research work that fits your stage and available time. Please give a stable, realistic estimate — there is no need to inflate your hours to signal commitment.

Questions

1. Why do you currently want to join the lab or try research?

Please try to go beyond answers like “I’m very interested in AI,” “I want to learn more,” or “I want to gain experience.”

I want to see a more concrete motivation. You might consider:

What experience or reason first made you consider doing research?
What do you hope to understand, practice, or accomplish through research?
Why do you want to start at this particular stage?
What does research mean for your current studies or career plans?

2. Which parts of research attract you? Which parts might make you uneasy?

You might consider:

Working for long stretches on problems with no clear answer;
Reading difficult papers;
Mathematical derivation and theoretical analysis;
Coding, reproducing methods, and running experiments;
Analyzing failures or results that don’t match expectations;
Writing, presenting, and responding to others’ criticism;
Collaborating with others over a long period;
Going for a while without visible results.

You do not need to make every item sound attractive. Knowing what you like, what you dislike, and what you are still unsure about is an important part of judging whether a research environment suits you.

3. Describe a time when your idea, judgment, or approach later turned out to be flawed.

This experience does not have to come from formal research. It can be a course project, an internship task, a personal project, a competition, a club activity, or a problem you explored on your own.

You might address:

What problem were you trying to solve?
What was your original idea, judgment, or approach?
Which parts were you personally responsible for? Which parts were done by others?
How did you discover that the original idea or approach had problems?
After discovering the problem, how did you respond or make changes?
What was the final outcome?
Looking back now, what did you learn, or what would you do better?

The point is not how impressive the outcome looks, but to help us understand how you make sense of problems, own your work, face mistakes, and adjust based on new information.

4. When you run into a problem you don’t know how to solve, how do you usually start?

Please use a concrete example to show how you:

Identify which part you genuinely don’t understand;
Break the problem into smaller, more manageable pieces;
Search for information or choose learning resources;
Judge whether the information you find is reliable;
Try, record, and compare different approaches;
Decide when to keep exploring on your own and when to ask for help.

I want to understand not just whether you eventually solved the problem, but also how you decide what to do next.

5. Describe one ability you don’t yet have, but may need to develop for research.

It can be mathematical foundations, programming, reading in English, writing, presenting, time management, domain knowledge, or anything else you consider important.

Please explain:

Why do you think you currently lack this ability?
How might it affect your research?
How do you currently plan to develop it?
How would you judge whether you are improving?

Recognizing your own gaps will not be held against you. Compared to claiming you can already do everything, I care much more about whether you can accurately assess your own learning needs and propose a realistic way to improve.

6. Choose one paper from this lab that interests you, and tell me your understanding of it and why you’re interested.

To prepare your application, please actively read at least one of this lab’s papers, or research on a related topic — not just the names of research areas or the short introductions on this website.

Please explain:

Which paper or research article did you read?
What problem do you think this work is addressing?
What are the limitations of existing methods or prior work?
What main idea or approach does this work take?
Why do you think this problem is worth addressing?
Which part attracts you most?
Which part do you not yet understand, or hope to clarify further?

You do not need to understand every technical detail before applying, but you should invest a reasonable amount of time reading and thinking. And rather than heavy use of jargon or generic praise, I would much rather see what you actually read and thought about — and whether you can think critically.

7. How might your past experience connect to the research you chose in the previous question?

Please don’t just list programming languages or courses.

Choose one or two concrete experiences and explain how they reflect one or more of the following abilities:

Understanding or decomposing problems;
Mathematical reasoning;
Programming and implementation;
Designing and analyzing experiments;
Reading and organizing literature;
Working with data;
Clear writing or communication;
Collaborating with others;
Making progress under uncertainty;
Spotting problems and correcting your own approach.

If you have no directly relevant experience, you can honestly explain which existing abilities might transfer, and which you would need to learn from scratch.

This question does not ask you to prove you are already prepared for every part of research. It is about understanding how you judge the relationship between your past experience and future research.

8. What kind of guidance and feedback usually helps you move forward most?

You might consider:

Clear, concrete small tasks at the beginning;
Regular progress check-ins;
Discussing overall direction while you decide the execution details;
Fixed one-on-one meetings;
Real-time or asynchronous written feedback;
Working alongside senior students or peers;
Clear deadlines and milestones;
A high degree of free exploration;
Having the main problems pointed out directly;
Hearing the overall judgment first, then discussing details;
Receiving concrete revision suggestions;
Being guided by questions to find the problems yourself;
Having time to digest feedback before continuing the discussion.

You might also think about:

How much structure, autonomy, and interaction frequency do you think you need?
Have you learned or worked in a similar guidance environment before? How did it go?
What form of feedback best helps you understand a problem and take the next step?
Has any type of feedback ever left you confused or unsure how to improve?
When you receive feedback you disagree with, or that frustrates you, how do you usually handle it?

This question is not about finding the one “correct” guidance preference. It is about understanding what you currently need, and whether we can build a way of working that is effective for both of us.

9. When you disagree with the judgment of a teacher, mentor, or team member, how do you usually handle it?

Please use a concrete example. If you have no clear experience of this, you can describe how you think it should ideally be handled.

You might explain:

What did you disagree with at the time?
How did you judge that your view might be well-founded?
How did you express it to the other person?
Did you look for data, evidence, or run additional verification?
What was the final outcome?
If the two sides still could not agree, how do you think the next step should be decided?

We do not expect students to always agree with their advisor. But we do hope disagreements are expressed concretely and worked through with evidence, reasoning, and discussion — rather than hidden, or left to grow into conflicts that can no longer be talked about.

10. After reading How We Do Research, which parts made you feel this might suit you? Which parts made you hesitant, concerned, or wanting to confirm further?

Please point to specific content, rather than just answering “I identify with the lab culture.”

You might consider:

Does the way research is described here match your expectations?
Do the lab’s expectations around independent thinking, communication, and responsibility suit where you currently are?
Is the kind of guidance you currently need likely to be available in this environment?
Is there anything that makes you think you might need a different research environment?
Before deciding whether to join, what else would you want to confirm with me or with lab members?

Raising concerns will not be viewed negatively. On the contrary, specific and honest questions help us judge whether we are a good match, may also give me feedback I can use to improve, and help both sides avoid starting a collaboration on too little information.

That said, your answers will be used as material for understanding our mutual fit. If there is a clear gap between what you need and what this lab can provide, that information may affect whether we are a good match to start working together — it does not mean your needs are unreasonable or your ability is lacking. The earlier we understand each other’s needs and expectations, the more responsible a decision both sides can make.