CalmLogic

And ISU is way more selective. It is very hard to get a MSCS admit to ISU. Congrats.

This is a no-brainer, at least if you have read some of the older posts in this forum. A MSCS at USC is not necessarily impressive at all since they are not very selective in their admissions. So I would prefer any PhD program at Purdue over that. The USNews ranking you are referring to is for PhD programs only. Amazingly, USC's CS department doesn't even handle MSCS admissions anymore since they have "sold out." Regarding funding, which you did not ask about, you have a much better chance at Purdue than USC. For example, years ago, someone reportedly left USC as a MSCS student and went to the Florida Institute of Technology because he couldn't get any funding at USC. Since then, the situation seems to have only gotten worse. USC's MSCS program seems to be focused on bringing in cash rather than selectively admitting a smaller number of students. I assume you already know some of this already since USC is considered a safety school for MSCS admissions.

And, on the negative side, another problem with lower-ranked Indian universities is that they seem less likely to help with the cost of conference expenses. I think in the last year, someone posted in this forum saying he was accepted to a good conference but could not afford to go. And his co-author (his professor at an Indian university) was not willing or able to go either.

Improving your profile at a relatively minimal cost in India does sound good, especially if you could get published at a decent conference like IEEE or ACM. What do you have to lose that way, anyway? In other words, how much is the tuition in India (your home country?) in US dollars? With getting a masters in the US, the financial pressure can be very stressful, even for American citizens with low-interest loans. So it's good you are interested in Europe since they seem more likely to fund a MS. But for a PhD, I would, of course, go to the US since you can easily get funding if accepted to a decent program and the US still has better job opportunities than Europe (I assume). Of course, I am biased since I am a US citizen.

Grad school tends to take up a lot of time :)

Thianks for the update and congrats about Georgetown. Generally speaking, I would avoid UPenn's MCIT program like the plague, especially in this economic environment. It seems way overpriced for what you get. Then again, I'm biased towards programs that are less professional and more academic in nature since academic programs are generally more conducive to getting a PhD later on.

Based on my own personal experience taking the exam, it's very hard to get a higher score. So I don't think your GRECS score would improve much anyway. Therefore, taking the math subject test seems like a good idea since I assume you are taking some good CS courses during your MSc and you are correct that math can be more relevant than architecture, etc. for CS fields like AI and machine learning.

According to previous discussions on this issue, there are no consequences.

Personally, I don't think there needs to be a major difference -- other than the obvious fact you will be there a lot less time and so may not be able to get a TA or RA position. Other than time, there's nothing to stop a MS student from writing a PhD-quality thesis or getting published multiple times. Certainly, it seems rather common in this forum for a MS student to say he plans on getting a PhD later on.

If your professor allows you to work in groups, then ask a fellow classmate and cite your classmate as a reference. Otherwise, your professor may not want you asking for info on the Internet.

It is very hard to get into UT Austin. I"m sure you know that, but I doubt you fully realize how hard it is. Even if you got an undergrad CS degree from UIUC or UT Austin, the odds could still be against you. Funding does not seem to be a problem there since no one has mentioned any concerns like that. So the only problem seems to be getting admitted. Since it seems you are not from a big-name school, I would have very grave doubts about your chances at UT Austin (unless there is something very exceptional in your profile regarding CS research you have done, which does not seem to be the case). On the positive side, you have more work experience than most applicants. That will help you at places where you have a good shot already. As far as where you have a good shot of being accepted, I don't know but it's a numbers game -- apply to as many places as possible. Even UT Dallas is more selective than they may seem: http://www.www.urch.com/forums/gre-computer-science/128868-anyone-getting-reafy-april-test.html

Your profile is better than I expected. I remember a former member of TestMagic got rejected from GA Tech and some other places, so he was even wondering if SUNY Baffalo would accept him. Of course, they did accept him, as did Penn State. So he was fine and went to Penn State. Before he got his acceptances, I suggested that he exercise more or socialize more to reduce the stress :D

I guess that confirms that UT Dallas isn't really a "safety school." Do you have your profile posted somewhere, either in this forum or elsewhere? Personally, my experience with retaking the GRECS is that my score has been relatively stable, even after taking 3 graduate courses in CS. My score did not improve at all after I took a graduate course in Algorithms, a graduate course in Operating Systems, and, not importantly, a graduate course in software verification. Having said that, I am taking the GRECS again in April because it's now become a hobby and a way to prepare for eventually taking a PhD qualifying exam.

Isn't the exam offered only in November in your country?

A major problem is that there is no way to know how well you can do on the exam, and studying for even 2+ years may only raise your score by 50 points since there is no substitute for natural ability and previous years of academic rigor. Regarding CalTech, even 90+ percentile would probably not be enough for them. You would need research experience, accolades, etc. In the top 10, the best chance you have is GA Tech. So I would suggest searching Google, LinkedIn, etc. to find out who at GA Tech is from your university and what kind of profile they have.

I don't think it would hurt. But yeah, based on what their website says, I don't know if it would help, though. So I would ask them (ideally). Otherwise, I would still probably report it.

Definitely report it. I don't know for sure what they are thinking in Europe, but I would definitely report it even if your undergrad degree had been in CS. Since your undergrad degree is in EE, there is no question that you should report it.

Yes, that seems true, but I don't know if it's much better at RIT since RIT is private. I guess it can't be worse than UT Dallas, though. I don't know, but you can ask them. My guess is that your experience will matter more, including the internship(s) you will get in the US.

What are your career/research interests? For example, if you want to be a software developer in the telecom industry, then probably UT Dallas. How much is the difference in tuition? In this economy, I would be very conservative :) Also, I would suggest doing a Google site search of LinkedIn.com to see where some of the alumni ended up working.

I don't know. It may help to find out where the CS majors at your university end up when they apply to PhD programs. Some of the CS professors at your university may know. Also, if you haven't already, it may help to search Google and LinkedIn to see where people from your university have ended up.

Yes. Definitely.

Some people take the exam since they are from electrical engineering, etc. So it can help those people. It also helps people who get exceptional scores (e.g. the author of Titanium Bits who got accepted to CMU's PhD program even though his major wasn't in CS -- he is now a CS professor). It can also help people who are coming from relatively unknown universities outside of the US. The ancient art of pseudoscience :) I e-mailed the graduate advisor at one of the state universities in my state and he didn't have any pre-existing guidelines to go on for letting me know what would be considered a decently good score. He did agree with me that 50th percentile sounded good enough to compensate for not having CS prereqs. According to NCSU, you are PhD material :)

1) You may want to ask the departments you are applying to. At least one of them may be willing to answer your question, at least if you speak to the right person. (Generally, the people who answer the phone and the e-mails are not on the admissions committee, at least for larger CS programs. And even if they are, they all have a terrible memory since they can't even remember the names of their own students.) Having said that, I don't think it would hurt given your relative lack of CS background. I have problems imagining it would help much (or at all) for any academic (non-professional) program at CMU. But just the fact you took the exam and scored better than 100+ others out of 1000+ who take the exam this year should mean something positive, IMHO, since you were not a CS major. 2) I don't know. But the percentiles are relatively stable over the years, in my experience taking the exam too many times. Taking the exam in April or October would not have likely affected your score much at all compared to November. (With a 610 score, I think you have the ability to get at least a B average in most MSCS programs. But I don't think most CS professors would know that.)

This is why I try not to get involved: Your intro was much better the last time :) You need to remove sentences like "My interest in Computer Science was piqued through an interaction with my uncle who designs computer chips." We already assume you have a great interest in computer science. And when you say you have an interest in AI, we believe you. You don't have to prove it emotionally. The main issue is not about motivation but about your abilities/skills and how you can contribute to the field -- like you are applying for a job. When you talk about motivation, you sound like someone with absolutely no experience. Also, I would remove this: Especially the part about not liking math :) So maybe just stick to the Wizard of Oz, though I think a better way to start an intro is the more matter-of-fact approach, e.g. "I am applying for the PhD program in computer science..." The Wizard of Oz was better than talking about your uncle, camping trips, and other things like your dislike of chemistry that have absolutely no professional/direct relevance (as far as the committee is concerned) to their questions regarding your ability to write conference papers, get at least a B average in grad school, or do a masters/PhD thesis. What is not clear from your intro is if you are applying for a MS, a PhD, or both. And if you do a MS, do you plan to do a thesis? And it may help to briefly mention somewhere in your essay, maybe near the end, what you plan to do career-wise with a MS or PhD. You could remove the 2-paragraph intro and in its place just put a single, short paragraph, e.g. "I am applying for the PhD program in computer science..." . Then after talking about the first professor, be brief about the other professor(s).

I don't have much experience evaluating SOPs, but it seems fine to me overall. No, that seems too general and may seem like "filler material" as a way to compensate for not talking about the papers you have published or have been working on, etc. Some suggestions: Your Dorothy metaphor may be seen as "sappy": I don't think this matters much, but, personally, I would avoid using any metaphors in the first paragraph and avoid using the word "passion." Pretend that you are a professor or someone applying for a job. Professors rarely talk about "passion." They talk about "research interests" since that sounds more professional. And, of course, no one is passionate all the time. Remember, passion often comes and goes, e.g. most passionate relationships end within 6 months. More importantly, is there at least one other professor you could mention? It says here to mention a few: You may want to be more clear here in what structure you are referring to, though I assume you are talking about the knowledge representation: