Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need to curb the rising trend of academic superficiality, which undermines scientific integrity and harms the academic ecosystem [1][2] Group 1: Issues in Academic Research - Recent incidents, such as undergraduates publishing 14 SCI papers, highlight a growing trend of seeking quick results and superficial achievements in academia [1] - The pursuit of quantity over quality leads to the proliferation of low-quality, duplicate, and fraudulent research outputs, wasting societal resources and hindering effective technological innovation [1] Group 2: Evaluation System and Its Impact - An inadequate evaluation system is identified as a significant root cause of academic superficiality, where the focus is primarily on the number of papers and projects, affecting promotions and awards [1][2] - The current "number-based heroism" evaluation system imposes heavy pressure on researchers, making it difficult for them to engage in deep, meaningful research [1] Group 3: Recommendations for Improvement - To combat academic superficiality, there is a call for reforming the evaluation system to focus on innovation, quality, effectiveness, and contribution [2] - Establishing a supportive environment for researchers, including protections for young talent and a clear distinction between long-term breakthroughs and short-term results, is essential [2] - Strengthening the integrity of academic research through mechanisms that penalize misconduct is crucial for maintaining academic purity [2]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the innovative educational practices at Westlake University, emphasizing the need to break the homogenization of education and cultivate truly innovative scientists in the era of artificial intelligence [1][4]. Group 1: Educational Philosophy and Goals - Westlake University aims to cultivate "future scientists" and "problem solvers with human care," encouraging students to engage with current issues while aspiring for greater achievements [5]. - The university's educational innovation aligns with its founding vision, focusing on deepening the practice of nurturing talent over the past seven years [5]. Group 2: Reforming Evaluation Systems - Westlake University is implementing a new academic evaluation system that does not prioritize the quantity of academic papers or citation rates, instead focusing on the originality and substantive progress of research [6]. - The goal is to break free from the constraints of traditional metrics like "only papers" and "only impact factors," promoting a return to the essence of academic research [6]. Group 3: Innovative Talent Development - The university seeks to create an innovative educational system that "breaks the average and expands the variance," focusing on liberating thinking, reshaping evaluation standards, and reconstructing the educational ecosystem [7]. - Emphasis is placed on tolerating uncertainty, encouraging unconventional thinking, and breaking down interdisciplinary barriers to foster significant innovations [7]. Group 4: Regional Advantages and Future Aspirations - Westlake University, as a new type of research university, is positioned in Shenzhen, a city known for its reform and innovation, aligning its mission with the city's spirit [8]. - The university aims to attract top global scientists in the next 10-20 years, while acknowledging current challenges such as international uncertainties [9]. Group 5: Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Education - In the context of rapid AI development, students are encouraged to master foundational knowledge and skills, using critical thinking to understand and leverage AI for future innovations [10]. - The article highlights the importance of adapting educational principles to prepare students for the evolving landscape shaped by artificial intelligence [10].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need to break the "paper-only" evaluation system in the medical field and establish a more reasonable promotion system that aligns with industry practices, ultimately improving healthcare service quality and restoring patient trust [1][4]. Group 1: Issues with Current Research Practices - A recent paper from two gynecologists at Fujian Provincial People's Hospital reported an implausible statistic of 64% male patients among 100 cases of endometriosis, leading to public outrage and a loss of trust in medical research [2]. - The prevalence of absurd research papers highlights the deep-rooted issue of formalism in academic evaluation and daily work, raising questions about the integrity of the peer review process [2][3]. - The article critiques the current standards of research paper review, suggesting that mere adherence to format and quantity of references has overshadowed the importance of logical data integrity [2][4]. Group 2: Motivations Behind Research Misconduct - The article discusses the underlying motivations for research misconduct, attributing it to unreasonable promotion mechanisms that prioritize publication over practical clinical experience [2][3]. - A gray market has emerged where medical professionals feel compelled to pay for publication in journals to advance their careers, indicating a systemic issue within the academic evaluation framework [2][4]. - The article argues that the promotion criteria for clinical staff, particularly nurses, should focus more on practical experience and ethical standards rather than academic publications [2][3]. Group 3: Recommendations for Improvement - The National Health Commission proposed in 2020 to scientifically set evaluation standards that move away from a strict focus on papers, degrees, and language proficiency, encouraging healthcare workers to engage more in frontline patient care [3][4]. - The article suggests that if the current public discourse leads to a reformed evaluation system, the demand for nonsensical papers will diminish, thereby eliminating the gray market for academic publications [4].