On November 22, 2023, the list of co-opted academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Sciences was announced, which became the focus of social attention. This incident involves the selection of academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Engineering, as well as the characteristics of the newly elected academicians, which has aroused widespread heated discussions.
There is a clear difference between the academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Engineering in terms of responsibilities and fields. They not only represent the highest honors in the two major scientific and engineering fields, but also bear the great responsibility of the country's scientific and technological undertakings. In this co-election, we can see the academic achievements and social influence of the newly elected academicians, which has injected new vitality into the cause of science.
Through big data analysis of the co-optation of academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2023, we focus on the performance of universities in terms of academician output. A detailed analysis of the fields and distribution of new academicians can more clearly see the strengths and characteristics of each university in the field of scientific research. This provides us with a strong understanding of the current state of scientific research in China.
However, in addition to the good news, there are also some issues that have attracted much attention. 15 985 universities did not have academicians promoted in this co-election, which aroused people's doubts. What is the reason for this phenomenon?We need to deeply analyze the selection criteria, research evaluation system, discipline layout and other factors to find out the possible reasons.
Perhaps, there are some controversies in the setting of selection criteria, the scientific research evaluation system may need to be more comprehensive and fair, and the rationality of the discipline layout is also an aspect that needs to be paid attention to. Through the in-depth study of these issues, we may be able to provide useful suggestions for the improvement of the scientific research evaluation system in the future.
The results of the 2023 co-optation of academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Sciences have sparked widespread discussion in society. Through the analysis of the performance of new academicians and universities, we can have a deeper understanding of the current status of the scientific research evaluation system and provide a strong reference for its possible improvement directions. It is hoped that in the future scientific research, the enthusiasm of scientists can be better stimulated and the continuous development of China's scientific and technological undertakings can be promoted.
The performance of the universities related to this co-optation in the field of research is also the focus of our attention. Through the detailed analysis of big data, we can clearly see which institutions stand out in the co-optation of new academicians and have made outstanding contributions to the country's scientific and technological innovation. This also makes us more deeply aware that the advantages and characteristics of different universities in scientific research are diverse, and scientific and technological innovation requires the joint efforts of all parties.
However, the phenomenon that 15 985 universities have not been promoted by academicians makes us think about whether there are potential problems in the scientific research evaluation system. The design of the selection criteria and scientific research evaluation system is directly related to the development and incentive mechanism of university researchers. If there is unfairness or unreasonableness, it may affect the improvement of the overall scientific research level of the university.
For universities that have not been promoted by academicians, we need to maintain a rigorous and objective attitude, and we may wish to conduct a comprehensive analysis from multiple aspects. Is the selection criterion too simple?Is the scientific research evaluation system comprehensive enough?Is the discipline layout reasonable?These are all questions that require us to dig deep to find out what the crux of the problem may be.
Perhaps, the scientific research evaluation system needs to take more into account the contribution of actual scientific research results, rather than just the number and citation rate. At the same time, multidisciplinary cooperation should be encouraged to encourage more universities to make achievements in various fields. Such adjustments may take more time and practice to verify, but they are essential to advance the entire field of scientific research.
In summary, the 2023 co-optation of academicians of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese Academy of Sciences provides us with an opportunity to think deeply about the scientific research evaluation system. Through the analysis of the performance of new academicians and universities, we can have a more comprehensive understanding of the current situation of scientific research in China, and also provide a useful reference for the improvement of the scientific research evaluation system in the future. In this era of rapid development of science and technology, we look forward to a more fair and reasonable scientific research evaluation mechanism, so that more scientists can stand out in innovation and contribute to the country's scientific and technological cause.