Is it a good idea to add an invented middle name on arXiv and other repositories for scientific papers?

Question

As the profile indicates, my name is Max Muller. I've recently started working on a dual PhD on process mining and natural language processing at a university and a governmental institution in the Netherlands.

According to this overview, the surname Muller (or variations thereof, including Müller and Mulder) is the 5th most popular surname in Austria, the (single) most popular one in Germany, the second most common one in Luxembourg, the 10th most common surname in the Netherlands, and the single most popular one in Switzerland.

In other words, there are a lot of Mullers in Northwestern and Central Europe. Moreover, the first name 'Max' is quite popular as well, and the combination 'Max Muller' is pretty widespread too.

Although I don't think there's much wrong with the name itself, I am slightly worried people won't be able to find my (hopefully upcoming) research articles on repositories like the ArXiv, Google Scholar, ResearchGate and similar venues.

Therefore, I currently consider adding a pseudonym to my full name, and use the combination as a profile name on these websites. This could help make me and the papers more easily identifiable. In my case, I'd like to add the name Lonysa, a pseudonym I've thought up years ago. It's also the name of my website. So the full name would become 'Max Lonysa Muller' or 'Max Muller Lonysa'.

My full name is Maximiliaan Alexander Muller, so I could also consider using the name Max A. Muller or something along those lines (as suggested in the answers to this question), but I'm not sure that would help in this case, given there are so many Max Mullers who might have done something similar to their academic names.

I have the following questions:

1. Is it generally a good idea to add a pseudonym, and the aforementioned one in particular, to your full name on venues for scientific articles in order to make yourself more easily identifiable? Why or why not?
2. Are there other ways to distinguish yourself from people who bear the same name as you?

Answer 1

There are two related but separate concerns here: One is to provide a way to figure out which papers are yours, and which papers were written by other Max Mullers. This problem is solved by ORCID, which also handles things like future name changes, etc. In my opinion, every academic ought to get themselves an ORCID.

The second is the question whether you are googelable. For example, if someone reads an older paper of yours and wishes to find out your current affiliation, you really want that searching for your name plus maybe a keyword from your research area leads them straight to you. Here, adding something rather unique to your name as you propose would be very helpful.

Giving yourself a middle name of your own choosing would be completely straight-forward. None of the few potential problems with having a different academic name than legal name would apply here. On the other hand, picking 'Max Muller Lonysa' would probably lead you to become "Dr Lonysa" in short, and then there would be some rare situations where the fact that your passport or degree certificates don't have "Lonysa" on them at all could lead to (surmountable) difficulties.

Answer 2

You could do that. It isn't a problem. However, it might not matter much unless there are more people with your name publishing in your field in the same time period.

There is another prominent academician with my exact (real) name publishing concurrently, but we are in such different fields that it doesn't matter.

It is important, however, that a person publish under a single name, whether a true name or a pseudonym in a given field over their career to make things easier on potential readers.

But the modern alternative is to get an ORCID identifier that will, in principle, keep you and your work connected. I suggest that you explore that. I've never felt the need for one, myself, but my name isn't all that popular either.

Answer 3

Is it generally a good idea to add a pseudonym, and the aforementioned one in particular, to your full name on venues for scientific articles in order to make yourself more easily identifiable? Why or why not?

I'll answer from personal experience. My surname was Smith. No-one could ever find me in directories or anywhere else despite the fact that I included my middle initials. Let's face it, who knows or remembers someone else's middle initials?

After constant complaints from people who needed my services (and for my own personal reasons) I changed it to something much more unusual. In Britain one's legal name can be changed easily by deed poll. I did this at zero cost and I now use it in every aspect of my life. I have never regretted it and people remember me for my unusual surname alone - never mind my achievements.

If you can change your name legally, I would recommend it. My passport, driving licence and everything else are in my new name. It just works.

Max Muller Lonysa would distinguish you from any other author. However, if you want to steal a march and appear first alphabetically in every list of authors, change your name to Max Aardvark or similar and you'll be remembered for all sorts of reasons! (I'm only half joking about this latter idea).

Are there other ways to distinguish yourself from people who bear the same name as you?

Many - but unless you are a talented and unrelenting self-publicist or an undoubted trail-blazing genius, most of them are undesirable.

Answer 4

I think that some of the arguments in favor of using a pseudonym presented here do not apply in the academic world.

A creative pseudonym added to someone's real name could leave an unintended funny impression (I am thinking of the honorific nicknames of artists or athletes). And one's own taste may change sooner or later. In science, you just want to be identified correctly during your entire life. For that purpose, I consider consistency more helpful than creativity. Not to mention the hassle that may arise from adding another version of your name (e.g. when travelling).

Thus, I second the points in favor of using your full real name, especially considering that it does not seem that common to me, and that there are supplementary tools such as the ORCID identifier.

Answer 5

A simple solution would be to just use your full name. For every publication, on any institute/personal academic website, when registering at the university, when entering into collaborations, at conferences, ...

Multiple things will then help you (specifically you, with your name) here:

1. Your (full) first name, Maximiliaan, is the Dutch version of writing that particular name, a version usually not used in e.g Austria or Germany (Maximilian or just Max), but also not in the UK (usually just Max afaik) or e.g. Italy (Massimiliano, see one of the other answers) or France (Maxime, I think). Unless of course the person has some connection to the dutch speaking part of the world, but this already quite limits the number of people with your first last name combination. Of course, this does not help you much if you get abbreviated to M. Muller.
2. Having a second name helps you get ahead in the combinatorics game. There are probably fewer M. A. Muller than M. Muller. And M. A. Muller is probably similar to M. L. Muller as far as frequency goes, so I dont think Lonysa would be any better (or worse) than Alexander here, since most people will only see the initial in the shortened form anyway. Now, if you started using a middle name that started with an X, things may be different, I would wager that there are not many people (in Central Europe, in academia) with that middle initial.
3. Muller is not the same as Müller, Mueller, Möller, Miller, Møller, Mulder, .... People can, and usually do in my experience, use the full range of UTF-8 (well, maybe not the full range, but certainly the parts used to write most people's names, in particular if the characters come from a characterset that looks similar enough to latin characters...) in bibliographies, especially if wherever they copied the citation from (the author field in the paper, another paper's bibliography, ArXiv, the publishers website, some citation managament tool/database...) also did.
4. There are so many specialisations in science. How many M. A. Mullers that publish in underwater basket weaving (specifically the kind done close to underwater vulcanoes) that got their PhD at Atlantis University are there really going to be?

All of that put together means that you are probably going to be fine, if you just go with your full name (or swap out your actual middle name for the one you came up with).

And if not, that is why you should get an ORCID in any case (among other reasons like your legal name possibly changing at some point in the future due to some reason or another).

Answer 6

I have a common, but complicated name (including two diacritics). While still in academia, I made the terrible mistake of not simplifying it (removing all complexities and especially the diacritics that cost me a paper).

Other answers recommend ORCID and, by all means, do it. This is an unambiguous identifier that is much, much better than your name.

At the same time, I would recommend keeping your name as simple as possible. Many countries do not use the middle name or use it sometimes, or use it with a specific order, or use a letter, or a few letters, etc. Names are horribly messy.

Max Muller sounds great.

---

Since you mention the Netherlands, they have a weird thing about (changing? inventing?) first names a Dutch friend of mine explained to me once, but I forgot what it was. So keep it simple.

EDIT: I called my friend and the story is that parents (used to) choose traditional "Official" first names, but never used them in real life and also (used to) choose at the same time a short version more or less aligned with the "official" name. People would always use the second one in their day-to-day life. The usage of the first one is only on official papers (and especially on papers abroad such as visa applications)

Answer 7

I know scientists who do not use their real first name on their publications but a nickname that once stuck with them. It is not forbidden.

But there is a question whether it helps to be confused with your nickname's doppelganger instead of the other names's doppelganger...