I don't want to be too negative but I had a friend with the same problem. Her internal examiner was an emeritus professor that took nearly 3 months to approve them. I think after the graduate school got involved his department head got involved and then after that the student's supervisor physically visited his house to get it approved. Hopefully you aren't as bad as that but you can't directly contact him. Instead you have to get your graduate department or supervisor to do it.

I don't know anything about AI/ML applications or what they are looking for.
However, if you are in doubt you can ask the university directly. I know ICL is generally competitive but you might be best applying for a range of courses to make sure you get at least one offer. Also, have you considered the fees for each university as they can vary significantly for international students.

The distinction at masters is far more important than your bachelor's degree. I don't think it will hinder you but at the interview stage you might get asked about your bachelors degree and you will need to have a good explanation.

What are you at loggerheads over?
At my university one of my supervisors has to approve my corrections before they get sent to the examiner reviewing the corrections 9usually internal). I honestly never heard of a supervisor blocking corrections so you should really talk with your students union or graduate department about what exactly is needed. You may find that your second supervisor can approve it if you have one or that a more senior academic could approve it instead.

Hi pippy71,

I have never heard of a university reclaiming bursary because someone downgraded. I highly doubt that they will charge you for it or ask you to repay any money. So don't worry about that.
Downgrading to an MPhil will be judged by how you sell it to other people. As not every PhD is perfect and sometimes circumstances are outside your control. If you can explain what happened it won't be seen as a negative on your CV. Although an MPhil is less prestigious than a PhD and it may not be as useful during your career. Hopefully other people on this forum can give you first hand advice.

I did my undergraduate and masters degree in chemical engineering :)
Chemical engineering maths is difficult but any CFD work can be especially difficult. Computer modelling is not a fun place to start but i don't think it would get any more difficult (unless you go towards reaction modelling). You will probably find a lot of other people are struggling and you would hope academics understand that it is on the more difficult end of the spectrum. As Nead suggested, there is a lot of support, advice and educational videos out there can help.
I personally think having a passion for your subject/project makes doing a PhD significantly easier. If you don't enjoy what you are doing you will have less motivation to carry you through the tough times. Is there a part of your PhD that you enjoy? If so focus on that and just endure the CFD parts. Otherwise, there is no shame dropping out of a PhD and applying somewhere else.

Hi springtime,

I somewhat enjoyed writing this answer, thanks for asking it.

My typical day in the lab would be approximately
08:30 Wake Up
09:30 Leave the house at the latest
10:00 Usually arrive in the lab at this time and check emails
10:30 Actually start lab work
12:00 Mid-morning smoke break then back to hard work
13:30 My self imposed cut off time for setting up any new experiment - As most of my experiments take a few hours minimum, setting a cut off time means I always leave on time and don't over stress/overwork myself trying to finish
13:30 Another smoke break then back to work
14:00 and onwards: chat with anyone I see; other PhD students, technicians, facilities staff etc. By this point I have done most of my difficult tasks and can relax a bit depending on how the morning went
15:00 Start tidying my lab area and some glassware cleaning
15:30 Another smoke break and scroll reddit
17:00 Aim to finish all experiments by now, write up lab notes, check emails (and another smoke break)
18:00 Leave the lab

That is very generalized and it will vary day to day depending on the individual experiments I am doing, but I focus on starting on time and doing less work as the day progresses. I also have a fair few smoke breaks and will have 5-10 minute chats with people whenever I can, because otherwise I would burnout.

Normally I aim to do 2-3 days "hard" work a week where I do most of my important/long experiments. The rest of the week is procrastination and bitsy work or prep work for other experiments. I would say I get most of my weeks work done in 2 only days and that gives me flexibility the rest of the time without worrying about falling behind. Granted I have been doing the same style of experiments for over 3 years now and know how long every step will take me. At the start of my PhD I was always over ambitious and got demotivated when I didn't do everything I wanted. I don't know what happened but at the end of 2nd year I found a "rhythm" where I could work hard at a pace that suited me.

I frequently use to use to-do lists but they are incredibly large and basic. Quite regularly they include "in lab by 10am", "label centrifuge tubes", "turn on machine X and let it warm up", "email supervisor" etc. I think a good to do list needs tasks that mainly take 5-10 minutes to do, as otherwise they become daunting. After a while of using the smallest unit of work method, you gain a better understanding of how long everything takes, you can organically develop a routine and you can make realistic time plans.

I hope that was useful

PS: I rarely eat lunch
PPS: There is a lot of procrastinating in that timetable but I try to do it in the afternoon - the morning is for work.

The Academy for International Modern Studies (AIMS) isn't registered to award degrees in the UK. They also don't look to be partnered with any other UK institution.
https://www.gov.uk/check-a-university-is-officially-recognised/recognised-bodies

The University of America is registered in the Netherland Antilles and has a copy of an undated letter from the white house on their front page. They at least have some accreditation but I can't find any information about their staff/lecturers.

Also, I have heard of neither of them

I don't know if anyone has fully disproven their thesis but my supervisor's thesis evaluated the technical side of a novel bioenergy process. Then after she passed her viva wrote a paper saying the economics don't work and it never will make any money. So does that count as disproving your work?

It is a shame glimmerbat left. The abruptness surprised me and they might have went through something difficult. I hope they are doing okay and it is nothing serious.

Back to the topic, I don't get this complaints about printing costs. We are PhD "students" and not staff. It is not unreasonable to pay some extra costs for our degree and I think we all undoubtedly had to buy stuff for our undergraduate courses. Yeah printing is expensive but there are a multitude of printing options. You can get online printing for as little as 5p per page or £15 for 300 pages then pay for binding. A little bit of effort by walking further than the university printers can save a lot of money.

PS: Vice-chancellors are overpaid but the university governance system is fundamentally flawed, so nothing will ever change. It doesn't matter if you are at a Russell Group uni or not, the board of governors are not directly accountable to students or staff. We are only a metric to them and PhD well being is not an important metric in the grand scheme of things.

Has glimmerbat been removed for that post?

I am not speaking from experience so take what I say with a pinch of salt.

You can probably work on improving your research proposal as it will be the main way of assessing your funding application. Do a small literature review, clearly identify your research gap and have a clear methodology.
I would also ask your potential supervisor about potential funding avenues and investigate your best options so that you can apply early and often. Different funding bodies have different requirements or focus, so you want to be prepared.
You should consider other universities as well. I understand you have been accepted to one university but some universities have more internal money than others and you don't want to get stuck at an underfunded university. The results from REF should be coming out this year and that might start a deluge of funding opportunities, as some universities have held off internal funding until it is over.
If you have the time, you could start working on small side projects, maybe in conjunction with your supervisor and get some raw data or a small paper. Though it isn't necessary and is very time consuming with a small chance of paying off

Hopefully other people can give you more advice.

Can you support yourself financially part time? I know plenty of students who have done part-time PhDs but they have had stable incomes. Also 6 years is a long time and do you think you can stay motivated for that long?

Every university deals with applications there own way on their own timeline, so general advice would be worthless. However, it is perfectly acceptable to email the admissions department and ask about you application or when you might hear back from them. Most admission departments are happy to reply with some basic details so that you have an idea of dates.

Hi Ambi,

I completely agree everyone should trust their gut instincts however it doesn't mean we should ignore logic. I understand you have been purposefully vague for anonymity but what you are saying is serious. I think in situations like this taking a step back and talking with someone you trust about the situation can clarify your thoughts. The act of explaining the details to someone can identify your true issues, highlight obvious solutions and rationalise your situation. Is there anyone in your lab/department you can talk with or another PhD student in a different department?

To discuss some of your points directly;
-Yes supervisors have favourites, they are human. If you want to be their favourite student you have to earn it or befriend them. Although a professional relationship with your supervisor does have advantages
-I highly doubt a supervisor will ever purposeful mislead someone. Usually supervisors are clueless and say what they think might be correct or something related to the last paper they read. Your supervisor isn't perfect and if they give you bad advice, it is more likely they are clueless than malicious.
- I think you get as much guidance as you ask for or put in. Supervisors can be vague and hands off in nature unless forced to be otherwise. You can sometimes get a lot of feedback by simply showing them something and discussing it. When I need guidance I go prepared to my supervisor with a plan or specifically framed question, otherwise I get vague pleasantries. If you feel you need more support it is also perfectly fine to ask for it.
- Achieving nothing during a week is fairly common and your supervisor not caring might actually them being understanding
- I can completely understand you wanting proper recognition of your work from your supervisor, I have childhood issues relating to that very issue. My advice is be more confident/positive about what you did (if you don't think you did something significant neither will other people) and try and figure out what your supervisor appreciates. Again my supervisor takes most lab work for granted but she is amazed by a pretty graph or certain types of statistical analysis. If you learn how what your supervisor considers good work you can tailor your output to get proper recognition.
- Don't worry about falling behind, everyone falls behind. Research is full of dead ends and you shouldn't take it personally. Losing 1.5 weeks isn't that big of a deal, I once lost 3 months going down a dead end with the full support of my supervisor. Even if it was a dead end you gained some experience that will be useful in other work and will help you gauge in future how to assess potential work.

Also, have you heard about impostor syndrome? It is incredibly common in PhD students and there is some very good advice out there on how to deal with it. PhDs are psychologically taxing and you are not alone.

Hope that helped,
rewt