Category: Uncategorized

When a graduate student is supervised by a professor, he may be more developing the routines and basic structure of starting a research, in which case mostly he is restricted to the field the supervisor resides. However, when he graduates, all the restrictions disappears and he can search for his research interest on his own. At this moment, new challenges rises along with freedom of choice.

1. Decide on a promising research field that matches the development of the country and the researcher’s interest. Is the field critical to the country’s need so the research will be potentially funded by big money? Does the field actively studied by in recent 3 years? Does the field studied by great guys such as ones in MIT? Do recent works publish on top tier journals such as IEEE network? Do this field studied intensely in my country so I will have to face fierce competition? Is there any research field that advances relatively more in the US but for some reason ignored in my country so I can get funded effortlessly?

Most scholars follow the stereotype that their supervisor define and never change a bit in his research career. When most scholars behave like that, the outline of plan for research centers become nothing but the same old stuff wrapped up in new packings. After several years, nothing is genuinely implemented and the outline is actually badly fulfilled albeit a kind resolution.

2. Once you decided the field you are going to invest your time and effort in, the next important thing is to propose a good question. The question lies on the fast grasp on the recent research advances in literature. For the application research, a good question may propose like: The original scheme is super powerful and applied everywhere, yet new application scenarios emerge and new requirements are imposed, so changes must be made to the original scheme in the context of new application scenarios. So you check the scheme to find the whereabouts to improve it and test the benchmark to prove that it improves in some meaningful way.

3. The third thing is to form a research proposal, and, inquire the experts in the field for their advice, get feedbacks and supports and form research teams. I was told that most research in UESTC is done in research groups. And there are more than 63 groups that could create income more than 10 million RMBs. So form the notion of doing research as a team. Share your research ambition with group members and potentially form various teams within a group. Aim big. Do not aim research projects that only fund several thousand RMBs.

Any job is in every way questionable if one is too busy and have no time even to maintain the blog

Most conflicts alleviates from growing the pie. Most problems intensifies with zero sum competition. Growing is the recipe. Don’t challenge the vulnerabilities of human characteristics.

Magi system is materializing in real world. I tried the Open AI and found it fantastically useful.  Some Gword company may be falling, even though the apparent evidence may take years to appear.

Some Chinese enterprise owners are concerned about the turmoil that is happening in the process of transferring to younger generations. Yet Microsoft is illustrating a somewhat to the point answer, that is to invest and occupy a company that is promising. Old companies will eventually pass by, as old products will finally do. By giving a hand in the growth of new products, new things, and of course young people, old power remains without the fear to be judged and justified.

For those Chinese companies, one thing is certain, a company is structured to best facilitate the delivery of a product or service. Thus a company will of course fade with the comparative shrink of the product. New organizations will take place with new structure that best suits the new product that is newly occupied. The new comer will inherit the brand though it is not the old one any longer. A company’s fate can not disconnect with the destiny of a nation. Only when a nation is creative enough can a single company escape the fate of falling by having as many alternatives to pick to occupy.

Apple is losing a string of designers [1]. Rumors have come that the designer department is restructured under operations one and that leads to the consequences. To be honest, I am not interested in apple products any more. The new iPhone and new Macbook models do not look as attractive as they were. The app store is still the must-have, and yes if I am gonna replace my handset it would still be another iPhone, but their products don’t deliver the magic anymore. The full consequences would take years to disclose.

There is a severe issue in font displaying when it comes to presenting text with the symbol ’ (u2019, Unicode 2019). The problem is that Chinese text system uses exactly the same ’ (u2019) Unicode  symbol as the right part of ‘(u2018) ’ (u2019) pair. And ’ (u2019) is also common alternative apostrophe of ‘(u0027).  The issue is, while you can’t input that ’ (u2019) with standard American keyboard layout, MS word will by default replace that for you. So when you paste a paragraph of English text from MS word, and the text box on the webpage displays in Chinese font(such as the Song font), you will get several full length ’ (u2019) as wide as an ordinary Chinese text within a English paragraph of half length English texts. And when you change the font to English, it recovers from full length to half length again. So the issue comes from that Chinese fonts assuming all the ’ (u2019) symbols as the right part of the quote pair ‘(u2018) ’ (u2019), regardless of many cases in English such as “He’s a good professor”. Finally, it looks the way as “He＇ s a good professor” in Chinese font.(Just for illustration. Since it is displayed in English font, this symbol＇ is actually  U+FF07[1]. My point is, in Chinese font, the normal U+2019 ’ looks exactly the same as ＇ thereby displaying “He’s a good professor” as “He＇ s a good professor”.)

That’s super annoying. Better the new Unicode standard for  the Chinese typeset use another Unicode position for the  ‘(u2018) ’ (u2019) pair, and leave that ’ (u2019) as the only symbol used in English.

Couldn’t imagine academics in mainland China has developed so rapidly. An impulse – the covid 19 – which drives many good researchers back to China, has generated consecutive good academic changes in China.

Apple is not doing so well in market achievements. I think it should refine its business strategy to reveal new chips. Before apple made his own M-series chips, it is Intel’s responsibility to deal with that. Intel is notorious for its slow improvements in chips [1]. Yet it is commercially beneficial to do it in a crawling way. Consumers do not anticipate a big increase when they already bought an older model. Any potential regret will stop them from buying the products at any time in the interim. When it comes to apple, he has to prove to the public that apple silicon is remarkably better than previous structures of CPUs, to prove that moving to the brand-new M-series CPU is worth all the costs and troubles. So the first performance bump is crucial, yet leaving less space and surprise for the second gen chip product. And all the consumers are holding their pockets to wait for the next generation coming to life, which is a bad situation for apple. So we see the plummet in market performance for apple this year in 2022, especially for Mac products. There are rumors everywhere about the new 3 nanometer M3 chip coming along from TSMC and every intelligent potential customer is just waiting.

That is a dilemma. Apple has to win the performance battle with Intel to prove to the industry that apple silicon chips are worth transferring to, meanwhile he has to slow down the steps to minimize the regret for consumers, especially when apple’s plans are highly visible to the world despite a strict term of confidentiality. Another tough situation for apple, apart from all the twists and turns in developing the chip itself.

Life is an ever-printing inkjet printer. One is finished whenever he stops his foot steps, just as the printhead clogs after idling away for few weeks. Roll out non-stop, or the actual life that truly lives conclude long before it comes to its physical destination.

The best ranking is Ritzberger(2008) [1]. I mostly agree with everything on it, especially the A+ and A tier. Also, the list does not include Journal of Economic Literature and Journal of Economic Perspectives,

because they solicit papers rather than taking submissions,

which is a good point and quite fair in academic evaluation.

The next ranking that is partially worth noticing is Ming-Jen Lin et al. (2019) [2]. The downside of this alternative is that it is too loosely distinguished in its A+ tier. 36 of them are in the same A+ tier. That does not exert the functionality of distinction. There are definitely good ones and not-so-good ones in anything within a basket of 36 items. This list should distinguish the A+ tier more delicately and divide some into the new A tier, and move the original A tier to a new B+ tier. Beside, this list ranks JELs which do not accept submissions from the general public as suggested by Ritzberger(2008), which is not considerate. Anyways, the list is good for a latest ranking list, whereas not as good as the Ritzberger(2008) list.

So, for now, the best ranking list in economics and finance is still the Ritzberger(2008) list. It is too sensible to necessitate a new one. One should fill new journals in the original Ritzberger(2008) list rather than proposing a new one. Here is what it is.

A+ : Top journals  Value KMS PV
Econometrica 100 96.78 100
Quarterly Journal of Economics 72.41 58.11 98.83
Review of Economic Studies 53.02 45.15 64.33
Journal of Political Economy 51.34 65.19 66.86
Journal of Finance 38.33 – –
Journal of Monetary Economics 37.91 36.41 46.10
American Economic Review 36.14 100 75.93
Journal of Economic Theory 34.58 58.76 34.41
Journal of Econometrics 25.99 54.91 21.15
Games and Economic Behavior 21.24 35.49 32.55
A: Excellent journals
International Economic Review 39.44 23.04 15.59
Journal of Financial Economics 30.97 9.89 15.01
Review of Financial Studies 30.39 – –
Journal of Economic Growth 29.45 – –
Journal of International Economics 22.87 7.84 11.40
Review of Economics and Statistics 20.11 28.02 16.28
Journal of Labor Economics 19.21 12.76 17.35
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 17.66 38.41 14.81
Journal of Public Economics 17.10 19.77 16.28
Economic Journal 16.78 20.71 11.89
Economic Theory 15.30 22.43 18.23
RAND Journal of Economics 14.11 11.44 20.08
Econometric Theory 11.78 45.85 16.08
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 11.16 14.54 10.53
Journal of Mathematical Economics 10 7.64 10.04