ProfessorTel：
Email：leeyoung@skku.edu
IntroductionProfessor Young Hee LEE, a South Korean national, is a foreign academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, an academician of the Korean Academy of Science and Technology, and an academician of the Academy of Sciences for the Developing World. He has long engaged in theoretical and applied research on two-dimensional materials, having published over 700 papers in SCI international journals, including 2 in Nature and 7 in Science. His works have been cited over 94,000 times, with an H-index of 146. He has been repeatedly recognized as a "Highly Cited Researcher" by Clarivate Analytics and his research has had a significant and widespread impact internationally. Academician Young Hee LEE has established the Low-Dimensional Quantum Materials (LQM) Research Center at Hubei University of Technology. This research center spans 16,000 square meters and is equipped with world-class scientific research instruments and facilities, fostering an open and inclusive academic research atmosphere. It serves as a “playground” for researchers to conduct cutting-edge studies on low-dimensional quantum materials. Researchers can access this center through a “one-stop” service, facilitating comprehensive research processes that include material growth, characterization/analysis, and device manufacturing. The research center focuses on the forefront of artificial quantum low-dimensional material development, prioritizing basic research to yield high-level foundational research results while achieving the scaled industrial application of various core technologies related to low-dimensional materials. This aims to provide theoretical and technical support for the development of new materials, new energy, optoelectronics, information technology, biomedical fields, and related industries in Hubei Province.
Education Experience1982-1986 Ph.D thesis: Classical and Quantum Computer Simulation Studies: Molecular Dynamics of the Kerr Effect in CS2 and Green's Function Monte Carlo Calculation of the Electronic Correlation Energy in Atoms (thesis advisor: Michael A. Lee)
1976-1982 B.S., Chonbuk National University (Physics)
Work Experience2024-present Director, Institute of Low- Quantum Materials, Hubei University of Technology
2021-present HCR distinguished professor, Sungkyunkwan University
2012- 2023 Director, Center for Integrated Nanostructure Physics, Institute for Basic Science, Sungkyunkwan University
2001- 2020 Professor, Department of Physics, Sungkyunkwan University
2009- 2020 Professor, Department of Energy Science, Sungkyunkwan University,
1998-2001 Professor, Department of Physics, Chonbuk National University,
1992-1998 Associate Professor, Department of Physics, Chonbuk National University,
1987-1992 Assistant Professor, Department of Physics, Chonbuk National University,
1996-1997 Visiting Professor in Physics, Michigan State University, USA
1993-1993 Visiting Researcher, Zurich IBM Research Center, Switzerland,
1989-1990 Visiting Professor in Physics, Iowa State University Ames National Laboratory, U.S.A.
Quantum material growth
Bose-Einstein condensation in solids with photon-polariton to realize bosonic at room temperature
Realization of hot-carrier solar cells beyond SQ limit
Room-temperature electrical switching of pin flip in 2D ferromagnetic semiconductors
Reaching high mobility and on/off ratio in 2D semiconductors beyond Si
Ultimate Ohmic contact in 2D semiconductors
Energy storage/harvest
Representative publications:
2025 Byoung Hee Moon, Ashok Mondal, Dmitry K. Efimkin, Young Hee Lee*, 'Exciton condensate in van der Waals layered materials', Nature Reviews Physics, 7, 388-401
2024 Hayoung Ko, Soo Ho Choi, Yunjae Park, Seungjin Lee, Chang Seok Oh, Sung Youb Kim, Young Hee Lee*, Soo Min Kim, Feng Ding, Ki Kang Kim, 'Atomic sawtooth-like metal films for vdW-layered single-crystal growth', Nature Communications, 15, 5848
2024 Young Hee Lee*, 'Approaching the quantum limit of contact resistance in van der Waals layered semiconductors', Science, 384(6802)
2024 Young Hee Lee*, 'Beyond the Shockley-Queisser limit: Exploring new frontiers in solar energy harvest'', Science, 303(6686)
2023 Young Hee Lee*, “Is it possible to create magnetic semiconductors that function at room temperature?”, Science, 382(6668)
2023 Lan-Anh T. Nguyen, Jinbao Jiang, Tuan Dung Nguyen, Philip Kim, Min-kyu Joo, Dinh Loc Duong, Young Hee Lee, "Electrically tunable magnetic fluctuations in multilayered V-doped WSe2 ," Nature Electronics 501(69) , 1-18
2023 Riya Sebait, Roberto Rosati, Seok Joon Yun, Krishna P Dhakal, Samuel Brem, Chandan Biswas, Alexander Puretzky, Ermin Malic, Young Hee Lee*, "Sequential order dependent dark-exciton modulation in bi-layered TMD heterostructure," Nature Communications 14(5548), 1-9
2023 Ashok Mondal, Chandan Biswas, Sehwan Park, Wujoon Cha, Seoung-Hun Kang, Mina Yoon, Soo Ho Choi, Ki Kang Kim, and Young Hee Lee*, "Low Ohmic contact resistance and high on/off ratio in transition metal dichalcogenides field-effect transistors via residue-free transfer," Nature Nanotechnology https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-023-01497-x
2023 Matthew D. Watson, Alex Louat, Cephise Cacho, Sungkyun Choi, Young Hee Lee, Michael Neumann, Gideok Kim, "Spectral signatures of a unique charge density wave in Ta2NiSe7," Nature Communications 14(3388), 1-7
2023 Ui Yeon Won, Quoc An Vu, Sung Bum Park, Mi Hyang Park, Van Dam Do, Hyun Jun Park, Heejun Yang, Young Hee Lee*, Woo Jong Yu, "Multi-neuron connection using multi-terminal floating–gate memristor for unsupervised learning," Nature Communications 14(3070), 1-11
2023 Taewoo Ha, Yu-Seong Seo, Teun-Teun Kim, Bipin Lamichhane, Young-Hoon Kim, Su Jae Kim, Yousil Lee, Jong Kim, Sang Eon Park, Kyung Ik Sim, Jae Kim, Yong In Kim, Seon Kim, Hu Young Jeong, Young Hee Lee, Seong-Gon Kim, Young-Min Kim, Jungseek Hwang, and Se-Young Jeong, "Coherent consolidation of trillions of nucleations for mono-atom step-level flat surfaces," Nature Communications 14(685), 1-9
2022 Thanh Luan Phan, Sohyeon Seo, Yunhee Cho, Quoc An Vu, Young Hee Lee, Dinh Loc Duong, Hyoyoung Lee and Woo Jong Yu, "CNT-molecule-CNT (1D-0D-1D) van der Waals integration ferroelectric memory with 1-nm2 junction area'," Nature Communications 13(4556), 1-8
2022 Sunghun Kim, Joonho Bang, Chan-young Lim, Seung Yong Lee, Jounghoon Hyun, Gyubin Lee, Yeonghoon Lee, Jonathan D. Denlinger, Soonsang Huh, Changyoung Kim, Sang Yong Song, Jungpil Seo, Dinesh Thapa, Seong-Gon Kim, Young Hee Lee, Yeongkwan Kim, Sung Wng Kim, "Quantum electron liquid and its possible phase transition," Nature Materials 21(11), 1269-1274
2022 Dohyun Kim, Eui Cheol Shin, Yongjoon Lee, Young Hee Lee, Mali Zhao, Yong-Hyun Kim, Heejun Yang, "Atomic-scale thermopower in charge density wave states," Nature Communications 13(4516), 1-8
2022 Su Jae Kim, Yong In Kim, Bipin Lamichhane, Young-Hoon Kim, Yousil Lee, Chae Ryong Cho, Miyeon Cheon, Jong Chan Kim, Hu Young Jeong, Taewoo Ha, Jungdae Kim, Young Hee Lee, Seong-Gon Kim, Young Min Kim, Se-Young Jeong "Flat-surface-assisted and self-regulated oxidation resistance of Cu(111)," Nature 603, 434-438
2022 Soo Ho Choi, Seok Joon Yun, Yo Seob Won, Chang Seok Oh, Soo Min Kim, Ki Kang Kim, Young Hee Lee*, "Large-scale synthesis of graphene and other 2D materials towards industrialization," Nature Communications 13(1484), 1-5
2022 Kyungwha Chung, Joonho Bang, Athira Thacharon, Hyun Yong Song, S Hwang Kang, Woo-Sung Jang, Neha Dhull, Dinesh Thapa, C. Muhammed Ajmal, Bumsub Song, Sung-Gyu Lee, Zhen Wang, Albina Jetybayeva, Seungbum Hong, Kyu Hyoung Lee, Eun Jin Cho, Seunghyun Baik, Sang Ho Oh, Young-Min Kim, Young Hee Lee, Seong-Gon Kim Sung Wng Kim, "Non-oxidized bare copper nanoparticles with surface excess electrons in air," Nature Nanotechnology 17, 285-291
2021 Yuval Ronen, Thomas Werkmeister, Danial Haie Najaabadi, Andrew T. Pierce, Laurel E. Anderson, Young Jae Shin, Si Young Lee, Young Hee Lee, Bobae Johnson, Kenji Watanabe, Takashi Taniguchi, Amir Yacoby, Philip Kim , "Aharonov–Bohm effect in graphene-based Fabry–Pérot quantum Hall interferometers," Nature Nanotechnology 16, 563-569
2021 Sergey Menabde, In-Ho Lee, Sang Hyup Lee, Heonhak Ha, Jacob Heiden, Daehan Yoo, Teun-Teun Kim, Tony Low, Young Hee Lee*, Sang-Hyun Oh, and Min Seok Jang , "Real-space imaging of acoustic plasmons in large-area graphene grown by chemical vapor deposition," Nature Communications 12(938), 1-7
2020 Van Luan Nguyen, Dinh Loc Duong, Sanghyub Lee, Jose Avila, Gyeongtak Han, Young-Min Kim, Maria C Asensio, Se-Young Jeong, Young Hee Lee*, "Layer-controlled single-crystalline graphene film with stacking order via Cu-Si alloy formation," Nature Nanotechnology 15, 861-867
2020 Seung Yong Lee, Jae-Yeol Hwang, Jongho Park, Chandani N. Nandadasa, Younghak Kim, Joonho Bang, Kimoon Lee, Kyu Hyoung Lee, Yunwei Zhang; Yanming Ma; Hideo Hosono; Young Hee Lee; Seong-Gon Kim; Sung Wng Kim, "Ferromagnetic quasi-atomic electrons in two-dimensional electride," Nature Communications 11, 1526-1~1526-8
2019 Ji-Hee Kim, Matthew R. Bergren, Jin Cheol Park, Subash Adhikari, Michael Lorke, Thomas Fraunheim, Duk-Hyun Choe, Beom Kim, Hyunyong Choi, Tom Gregorkiewicz, and Young Hee Lee*, "Carrier Multiplication in van der Waals Layered Transition Metal Dichalcogenides," Nature Communications 10, 5488
2018 Joo Song Lee, Soo Ho Choi, Seok Joon Yun, Yong In Kim, Stephen Boandoh, Ji-Hoon Park, Bong Gyu Shin, Hayoung Ko, Seung Hee Lee, Young-Min, Kim, Young Hee Lee*, Misorientation-Angle-Dependent Phase Transformation in van der Waals Multilayers via Electron-Beam Irradiation, Misorientation-Angle-Dependent Phase Transformation in van der Waals Multilayers via Electron-Beam Irradiation, Ki Kang Kim, Soo Min Kim, "Wafer-scale single-crystal hexagonal boron nitride film via self-collimated grain formation," Science 362(6416), 817-821
2018 Byoung Hee Moon, Jung Jun Bae, Min-Kyu Joo, Homin choi, Gang Hee Han, Hanjo Lim, Young Hee Lee*, "Soft Coulomb gap asymmetric scaling towards metal-insulator quantum criticality in multilayer MoS2," Nature Communications 9, 2052
2017 Seok Joon Yun, Gang Hee Han, Hyun Kim, Dinh Loc Duong, Bong Gyu Shin, Jiong Zhao, Quoc An Vu, Jubok Lee, Seung Mi Lee, Young Hee Lee*, "Telluriding monolayer MoS2 and WS2 via alkali metal scooter," Nature Communivations 8, 2163
2017 Seung Hyun Song, Min-Kyu Joo, Michael Neumann, Hyun Kim, Young Hee Lee*, "Probing defect dynamics in monolayer MoS2 via noise nanospectroscopy ," Nature Communications 8, 2121
2017 Heejun Yang, Sung Wng Kim, Manish Chhowalla and Young Hee Lee*, "Structural and quantum-state phase transition in van der Waals layered materials," Nature Physics 13(10), 931-937
2017 Thuc Hue Ly, Jiong Zhao, Magdalena Ola Cichocka, Lain-Jong Li, Young Hee Lee*, "Dynamical observations on the crack tip zone and stress corrosion of two-dimensional MoS2," Nature Communications 8, 14116
2016 Hyun Seok Lee, Dinh Hoa Luong. Min Su Kim, Youngjo Jin, Hyun Kim, Seokjoon Yun, and Young Hee Lee*, "Reconfigurable exciton-plasmon interconversion for nanophotonic circuits," Nature Communications 7, 13663
2016 Woo Jong Yu, Quoc An Vu, Hyemin Oh, Hong Gi Nam, Hailong Zhou, Soonyoung Cha, Joo-Youn Kim, Alexandra Carvalho, Munseok Jeong, Hyunyong Choi, Antonio H. Castro-Neto, Young Hee Lee*, Xiangfeng Duan, "Unusually efficient photocurrent extraction in monolayer van der Waals heterostructure by tunnelling through discretized barriers," Nature Communications 7, 13278
2016 Quoc An Vu, Yong Seon Shin, Young Rae Kim, Van Luan Nguyen, Won Tae Kang, Hyun Kim, Dinh Hoa Luong, Il Min Lee, Kiyoung Lee, Dong–Su Ko, Jinseong Heo, Seongjun Park, Young Hee Lee*, "Two-Terminal Floating-Gate Memory with van der Waals Heterostructures for Ultrahigh On/Off Ratio," Nature Communications 7, 12725
2016 Thuc Hue Ly, David J. Perello. Jiong Zhao, Qingmin Deng, Hyun Kim, Gang Hee Han, Sang Hoon Chae, Hye Yun Jeong and Young Hee Lee*, "Misorientation-angle-dependent electrical transport across molybdenum disulfide grain boundaries," Nature communications 7(10426), 1-7
2015 Soo Min Kim, Allen Hsu, Min Ho Park,Sang Hoon Chae, Seok Joon Yun, Joo Song Lee, Dae-Hyun Cho, Wenjing Fang, Changgu Lee, Toma´s Palacios, Mildred Dresselhaus, Ki Kang Kim, Young Hee Lee* and Jing Kong, "Synthesis of large-area multilayer hexagonal boron nitride for high material performance," Nature Communications 6, 9662
2015 David J. Perello, Sang Hoon Chae, Seunghyun Song1 & Young Hee Lee*, "High-performance n-type black phosphorus transistors with type control via thickness and contact-metal engineering ," Nature Communications 6(7809), 1~8
2015 Suyeon Cho, Sera Kim, Jung Ho Kim, Jiong Zhao, Jinbong Seok, Dong Hoon Keum, Jaeyoon Baik, Duk-Hyun Choe, KJ. Chang, Kazu Suenaga, Sung Wng Kim, Young Hee Lee*, Heejun Yang , "Phase patterning for ohmic homojunction contact in MoTe2," Science 349(6248), 625-628
2015 Dong Hoon Keum, Suyeon Cho, Jung Ho Kim, Duk-Hyun Choe, Ha-Jun Sung, Min Kan, Haeyong Kang, Jae-Yeol Hwang, Sung Wng Kim, Heejun Yang, K. J. Chang & Young Hee Lee*, "Bandgap opening in few-layered monoclinic MoTe2," Nature Physics 11(6), 482-486
2015 Gang Hee Han, Nicholas J. Kybert, Carl H. Naylor, Bum Su Lee, Jinglei Ping, Joo Hee Park, Jisoo Kang, Si Young Lee, Young Hee Lee, Ritesh Agarwal & A.T. Charlie Johnson, "Seeded growth of highly crystalline molybdenum disulphide monolayers at controlled locations" Nature Communications 6(6128) , 1-6.
2015 Sang Il Kim, Kyu Hyoung Lee, Hyeon A Mun, Hyun Sik Kim, Sung Woo Hwang, Jong Wook Roh, Dae Jin Yang, Weon Ho Shin, Xiang Shu Li, Young Hee Lee, G. Jeffrey Snyder, Sung Wng Kim, "Dense dislocation arrays embedded in grain boundaries for high-performance bulk thermoelectrics," Science 348(6230), 109-114
2013 Sang Hoon Chae, Woo Jong Yu, Jung Jun Bae, Dinh Loc Duong, David Perello, Hye Yun Jeong, Quang Huy Ta, Thuc Hue Ly, Quoc An Vu, Minhee Yun, Xiangfeng Duan, and Young Hee Lee*, "Transferred wrinkled Al2O3 for highly stretchable and transparent graphene-carbon nanotube transistors," Nature Materials 12(5), 403-409
2012 Dinh Loc Duong, Gang Hee Han, Seung Mi Lee, Fethullah Gunes, Eun Sung Kim, Sung Tae Kim, Heetae Kim, Quang Huy Ta, Kang Pyo So, Seok Jun Yoon, Seung Jin Chae1, Young Woo Jo, Min Ho Park, Sang Hoon Chae, Seong Chu Lim, Jae Young Choi and Young Hee Lee*, "Probing graphene grain boundaries with optical microscopy," Nature 490(7419), 235-239
1996 A. Thess, R. Lee, P. Nikolaev, H. Dai, P. Petit, J. Robert, C. Xu, Y. H. Lee*, S. G. Kim, D. T. Colbert, G. Scuseria, D. Tomanek, J. E. Fischer, and R. E. Smalley, ""Crystalline ropes of metallic carbon nanotubes," Science 273 (5274), 483-487
2026 Lifetime Member of the Korean Academy of Science and Technology
2024 Molecular Science Forum(Distinguished Lecturer)
2023 Materials Science Leader Award (Research.com, a leading academic platform for researchers, ranked #160 in the world ranking and #4 in South Korea.)
2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021,2020, 2019, 2018 Highly Cited Researchers (top 1% by citation for field and year, Clarivate Analytics)
2021 Foreign Member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
2020 The World of Academy Sciences (TWAS) fellow
2020 Sung-Bong Prize
2019 KYUNG-AM Prize
2017 Einstein Award (Distinguished Scientists Award) (CAS President’s International Fellowship Initiative, China)
2014 SU-DANG Prize
2008 Presidential Award in Science and Education
2007 Lee Hsun Research Award, IMR, Chinese Academy of Sciences
2007 Fellow of Korea Academy of Science and Technology
2007 Fellow of Sungkyunkwan University
2006 Nominated as ‘The Most Respectable Scientists & Engineers’, by Ministry of Education
2005 Nominated as ‘The National scholar’, by Ministry of Education
2005 Science Award from Korean Physical Society
2004 First fellow of Sungkyunkwan University
1999 Nominated for 'Man of Jeonbuk State', in Academia and public press
1997 Award from Foundation of Korea Science and Technology for ' The Best Paper in Physics'
Weekly Column10Weekly Column9Weekly Column8Weekly Column7Weekly Column6Weekly Column5Choices in Life
As people move through life, they are constantly faced with choices at countless crossroads. The longer one lives, the more decisions one must make—sometimes so many that they feel almost overwhelming.
My first major choice came during middle school. Because of my family’s financial situation, I could not afford tuition, so I had no choice but to attend a middle school that offered scholarships. High school was no different. I ended up attending a public high school because it required no tuition fees.
Not long after graduating from high school, I decided to prepare for university while working full-time. At the time, becoming a civil servant was considered a stable and respectable path, and everyone around me thought it was a good choice. But before long, a question suddenly came to mind:
“What will I be in the future if I continue living like this?”
The answer was not difficult to find. I only had to look at the older colleagues around me. I could already see what my life would look like ten years later. It was stable, but repetitive—like running endlessly on a treadmill. Comfortable perhaps, but strangely lifeless. I realized I did not want that kind of life.
That was the first major choice of my life.
Looking back, it may have been one of the most important decisions I ever made. I decided to go to university, and that decision ultimately shaped the person I am today.
Getting into university was difficult, but nothing in life comes free. Working all day and studying at night while preparing for university was exhausting. Eventually my health deteriorated, and I had to give up my dream of entering the Korean Military Academy. I passed the written examination but failed the physical examination. Ironically, instead of becoming a soldier, I ended up becoming a scientist. It was my decision, yet at the same time, life unfolded in ways I had not intended.
The moment I made the most decisive choice by my own will came during my second year of university. Because I lacked tuition money, I had worked while attending school during my first year. When I entered my second year, I asked one of my professors if I could continue balancing work and study. He answered firmly:
“You must choose one or the other.”
The next day, I submitted my resignation. That was the second major choice of my life.
At that time, I was not afraid of money. What frightened me more was losing the opportunity to study. Fortunately, from that point until graduation, I was able to continue receiving scholarships. Somehow, life always finds a way forward.
From then on, those years became some of the happiest in my life, because I was finally able to study what I truly wanted. Even after completing military service, I wanted to continue studying. But at that time in Korea, graduate school scholarships were extremely limited. The only realistic option was to study abroad. In many ways, that too felt inevitable.
As the eldest son, I did not have the luxury of spending too much time deciding. I needed to finish my degree quickly and return home to help support my family. Back then, earning a Ph.D. abroad also made it much easier to become a professor in Korea than it is today.
Looking back, the research environment in Korea at that time was extremely challenging. Conducting serious research at universities was not easy. It took nearly ten years before I finally felt that I was doing “real research.” Gradually, I secured research funding, and people around me began to say that I was becoming successful as a researcher.
Then, during my sabbatical in the United States, I had the opportunity to collaborate with Professor Richard Smalley, a Nobel laureate. That was when I became deeply fascinated by carbon nanotube research. After returning to Korea, I fully committed myself to experimental research. That was my third major choice. Looking back, it was an enormous gamble. But I simply loved it—almost recklessly so. It was exciting, and I genuinely wanted to do it.
Fortunately, my research progressed well and produced meaningful results. At the time, I even received attractive offers from other universities, but I was not greatly tempted because I already had sufficient research funding and a strong research environment. Then one day, a thought suddenly crossed my mind:
“I’m afraid of entering a new environment.”
At that moment, I felt disappointed in myself. I disliked the fact that I had begun fearing new challenges. So I made up my mind to move into a completely new environment. That became the fourth major choice of my life.
After that, many other choices followed. Accepting the position of research center director at the Institute for Basic Science, and later moving to Hubei University of Technology, were certainly not easy decisions.
But when I look back, the reasons behind my choices were always surprisingly simple.
Before moving to China, I had many conversations with my family. There were concerns about my elderly mother and many practical matters to consider. Yet the question my family asked me was unexpectedly simple:
“Do you think you’ll be happy working there?”
Perhaps life is ultimately about that. Everyone makes choices in pursuit of their own happiness. Of course, the word “happiness” is somewhat vague. But perhaps it can ultimately be reduced to a much simpler question:
“Do you like it?”
If I truly like something, that itself becomes happiness. Research was no different for me. If I genuinely enjoyed a research topic, I rarely worried about how influential it might become or how much money it might generate. If it was exciting, I pursued it. I simply followed my curiosity.
Of course, loving something does not mean one can continue doing it forever. Even now, I still love research. Perhaps that is one reason why I am here in China today. But I am also getting older. I know I cannot continue in the same way forever.
Still, I have one remaining ambition. Before I die, I want to produce at least one truly impactful piece of research. I want to prove to myself that I am still alive intellectually. At the very least, I would like to believe that I have not yet lost my mind. ^^
Working at Hubei University of Technology, I meet many different researchers—new graduate students, current students, young professors. All of them carry their own concerns and anxieties. That is natural. Perhaps it is simply part of being young.
But one thing I find interesting is how overwhelmingly practical most people have become. Perhaps this is the result of intense competition and survival pressures. Many students seem unable to imagine a larger vision for themselves. I rarely see deep obsession or persistence. Few students remain in the laboratory late into the night.
Even decisions about graduate school are often based primarily on future employment prospects. Of course, making a living is important. But before making such choices, I believe everyone should ask themselves at least once:
“What do I truly like?”
Popular fields constantly change with time. In the past, medicine and law were considered the most prestigious careers. Today, AI is rapidly taking that position. Years ago, people would first go to doctors for answers; now many first ask AI before making decisions.
Today, semiconductors and batteries dominate attention, but that trend will not last forever either. Choosing a field is important in the long run, but the world constantly changes. There is no need to become overly emotional about temporary trends.
The more important question is this:
“What do I truly love?”
Young professors often face a similar problem. Many continue working in the exact same field they studied with their advisors during graduate school because it feels safest and easiest. If the field remains popular, things work out well enough. But if not, people gradually begin producing papers simply for the sake of publishing papers.
The deeper question—“How does my research contribute to society?”—slowly disappears. Before they realize it, they become trapped in the same repetitive cycle. Eventually, they confine themselves within the limitations of their environment at Hubei University of Technology.
That is why I want to ask every researcher in the institute one simple question:
“Is the research you are doing truly the research you love?”
If the answer is “yes,” then you are already a very fortunate person.
But if the answer is “no,” then perhaps it is time to gather the courage to choose a new adventure.
Now, we are finally beginning to build a truly good research environment. If so, perhaps this is the right moment to try pursuing the research you genuinely want to do—even if only once.
人生的选择
人生在世，人们总会在无数个岔路口做出选择。活得越久，需要面对的决定也越多。有时候，甚至多到让人感到难以承受。
我人生中的第一个选择，发生在初中时期。因为家境困难，无法负担学费，所以我只能选择一所能够提供奖学金的中学。高中也是如此。我最终进入了一所免学费的国立高中。
高中毕业后不久，我决定一边工作一边准备大学考试，于是我成为了一名公务员。那个年代，公务员是一份稳定而受人羡慕的职业，周围的人都认为这是一个不错的选择。但没过多久，我突然开始思考一个问题：
“如果我一直这样生活下去，将来会变成什么样？”
答案并不难找到。我只需要看看身边的前辈们就明白了。我几乎可以清楚地看到自己十年后的样子。那是一种稳定却重复的生活，像在永远转动的齿轮里循环。也许很安稳，但总让人觉得缺少生命力。我不喜欢那样的人生。
那是我人生中的第一个重要选择。
现在回头看，那或许是我最重要的决定之一。正是从那时起，我下定决心去上大学，而那个决定，最终塑造了今天的我。
进入大学并不容易，世界上从来没有免费的东西。白天工作、晚上学习，一边准备大学，一边维持生活，是一件非常辛苦的事。最终，我的身体也开始出现问题，不得不放弃进入韩国陆军士官学校的梦想。虽然通过了笔试，却在体检中被淘汰。
有些讽刺的是，我最终没有成为军人，而是走上了科学家的道路。这是我自己的选择，但同时，人生也并没有完全按照我的计划前进。
真正意义上最坚定地按照自己意志做出的选择，发生在大学二年级。
因为没有足够的学费，我在大学一年级期间一直同时兼顾工作与学习。到了二年级时，我向专业教授请求，希望能够继续兼顾两边。但教授非常坚定地对我说：
“你必须选择其中一个。”
第二天，我就辞掉了工作。
那是我人生中的第二个重要选择。
那时候，我并不害怕没有钱。我更害怕的是失去学习的机会。幸运的是，从那之后直到毕业，我一直都能够获得奖学金。人生有时候就是这样，总会找到一条路。
从那时开始，我度过了一段真正幸福的时光，因为我终于能够自由地学习自己真正想学的东西。
服完兵役之后，我仍然想继续读书。但在那个年代的韩国，研究生奖学金几乎不存在，因此如果想继续深造，唯一现实的办法就是出国留学。从某种意义上来说，那也是一种必然的选择。
作为家中的长子，我没有太多犹豫和试错的空间。我必须尽快完成学位，回国帮助家庭。那个时代，如果能在海外获得博士学位，在韩国成为大学教授要比今天容易得多。
现在回想起来，当时韩国的科研环境其实相当艰苦。在大学里真正开展高水平研究并不是一件容易的事。大约又过了十年，我才终于开始觉得自己真正进入了“研究”的状态。研究经费逐渐增加，周围的人也开始说我做得不错。
后来，在赴美国的学术休假期间，我有机会与诺贝尔奖得主 Richard Smalley教授合作研究。正是在那个时期，我第一次真正对碳纳米管研究产生了强烈兴趣。回到韩国之后，我便正式投入到实验研究之中。
那是我人生中的第三个重要选择。现在回头看，那其实是一场相当大的赌博。但我当时几乎是带着一种近乎鲁莽的热情去做的。因为我真的喜欢，真的觉得有趣。
幸运的是，研究进展得很好，也取得了不错的成果。当时其他大学也曾向我发出很好的邀请，但我并没有太过动摇，因为我已经拥有相对稳定的研究经费与研究环境。
可就在某一天，一个念头忽然浮现在脑海里：
“原来我正在害怕进入新的环境。”
那一刻，我对自己感到失望。我不喜欢那个开始害怕挑战的自己。于是，我立刻决定再次进入新的环境。
那成为了我人生中的第四个重要选择。
此后，我的人生里又出现了无数新的选择。无论是接受基础科学研究院研究中心主任的职位，还是后来来到湖北工业大学，都绝不是轻松的决定。
但回头看，我做出这些选择的理由，其实始终很简单。
尤其是在来中国之前，我和家人谈了很多。关于年迈的母亲，关于家庭，也有许多现实问题需要考虑。但家人问我的问题却意外地简单：
“如果去了那里工作，你会幸福吗？”
也许人生最终就是如此。每个人都在为属于自己的幸福做选择。
当然，“幸福”这个词本身其实很模糊。但换一种表达方式，它或许最终只是一个简单的问题：
“Do you like it?”
如果我真的喜欢，那本身就是幸福。
对研究也是一样。如果是我真正喜欢的研究，我很少会去计算它最终会带来多大影响，或者能赚多少钱。只要有趣，我就会去做。我只是顺着自己的好奇心前进。
当然，喜欢并不意味着可以永远持续下去。即使现在，我依然热爱研究。也许这正是我今天来到中国的原因之一。但我也在慢慢变老。我知道自己不可能永远以同样的方式做研究。
不过，我心里仍然保留着一个小小的执念。在离开这个世界之前，我仍然希望能够做出至少一个真正有影响力的研究成果。我想向自己证明，我依然“活着”。至少，希望自己还没有真正老到失去思考能力吧。^^
在湖北工业大学工作期间，我遇到了各种各样的研究者。新来的研究生、在读学生、年轻教授，每个人都带着各自的烦恼生活着。这其实很正常。某种意义上，也许这本来就是年轻人的特征。
但有一件事让我印象很深：大多数人都过于现实。
也许这是因为生存压力太激烈了。很多学生缺少更大的愿景，也缺少一种不断深挖问题的执着。很少有人会在晚上继续留在实验室。
很多人选择读研究生，也主要是为了未来就业。当然，生存问题非常重要。但至少在做决定之前，我觉得每个人都应该先问自己一次：
“我真正喜欢的东西，到底是什么？”
热门专业总会随着时代不断变化。过去，医生和律师曾经是最受欢迎的职业；如今，AI正在迅速取代那个位置。过去，人们生病时首先会去问医生；现在，很多人会先去问AI。
今天，半导体和电池领域很热门，但它们也不可能永远如此。选择专业固然重要，但世界始终在变化，所以其实没有必要对一时的潮流过度焦虑。
真正更重要的问题，其实是：
“我真正热爱的，到底是什么？”
年轻教授们其实也面临类似的问题。很多人在研究生阶段跟随导师进入某个研究方向，成为教授之后，也继续沿着同样的方向前进。因为那是最安全、最容易的道路。
如果幸运的话，这个领域仍然热门，那么一切还算顺利。但如果不是，很多人最终就会慢慢变成“为了论文而写论文”。
“我的研究究竟能为社会带来什么贡献？”这个问题，也会越来越远。直到某一天，人们不知不觉间，就把自己困在了重复运转的齿轮之中，也困在了湖北工业大学这个环境本身的局限里。
所以，我想向研究所里的所有研究者问一个问题：
“你现在正在做的研究，真的是你自己热爱的研究吗？”
如果答案是“Yes”，那么你其实已经是一个非常幸福的人了。
但如果答案是否定的，那么也许现在正是时候，鼓起勇气，去选择一次新的冒险。
如今，我们已经开始拥有一个相当不错的研究环境。那么，至少应该给自己一次机会，去真正尝试做自己想做的研究，不是吗？
Weekly Column4LQM Institute's Operational Strategy
LQM Institute's vision differs from that of traditional research institutions, and its operational strategy will inevitably be different as well.
One of the most distinctive features of LQM Institute is the integration of ultra-clean rooms, dry rooms, chemical laboratories, and advanced nano-research equipment all concentrated within the same space. From material synthesis and basic physical property characterization to device fabrication, almost the entire research workflow can be completed in one place. In other words, once researchers enter the institute, they can truly achieve a “one-stop research” model.
Therefore, the core of this institute naturally lies in its various scientific research equipment. This also directly leads to the institute’s most important operational challenge: how to efficiently manage and maintain over a hundred precision instruments.
To truly achieve this, high-level professional technical staff are indispensable. However, in the practical environment of a university system, building a professional technical team of sufficient scale is not easy. Even if it can be achieved, it will require a considerable amount of time. Therefore, at this stage, we have no choice but to rely more on the faculty members and graduate students participating in the institute.
Currently, there are approximately thirty professors participating in the institute, while the number of graduate students who have truly joined is fewer than ten. Although the university is working hard to expand graduate enrollment, this cannot be realized in the short term and still requires a long-term development strategy. Fortunately, if the current development trend continues, the scale of graduate students is expected to gradually increase starting from the second half of next year. At the same time, we are currently recruiting four equipment engineers.
The renovation project of the research building has also basically completed the most fundamental infrastructure construction. Various equipment is arriving one after another and installation has begun. Of course, due to delays in the ultra-clean room and dry room projects, the installation of some equipment has had to be postponed accordingly. But some things cannot be solved simply by “speeding up.” Many times, time itself is part of the entire process. Nevertheless, I still hope that most of the work can be completed before the institute is officially established—although there is still a long way to go at present.
Thus, the most critical question emerges: how exactly should such a massive equipment system be operated and managed?
The simplest method is to hand over the equipment to the relevant professors for management. In fact, many universities operate this way. However, doing so often leads to equipment gradually becoming the “private resource” of a certain laboratory rather than a shared platform for the institute. Equipment utilization efficiency declines, and other researchers find it difficult to use these instruments freely. Over time, the equipment will effectively be “monopolized” by certain professors or teams.
Of course, if these devices can be well utilized and continue to produce excellent results, that would naturally be fortunate. But the real problems often arise after equipment failures. The maintenance costs for high-end instruments are usually very expensive, and many schools find it difficult to sustain them long-term. In the end, expensive equipment is often left idle or even abandoned.
I have seen this situation many times in Korea. Many universities invested huge sums to build high-end TEM platforms, but a few years later, these instruments could no longer operate normally due to a lack of continuous maintenance. Universities spend enormous amounts to build advanced platforms, but without a long-term operational strategy, these systems can easily fall into paralysis.
To solve this problem, the university where I previously worked, Sungkyunkwan University, established a Central Instrumentation Center where the school centrally manages the equipment, and researchers use it on a paid basis. Nowadays, more and more universities in China are adopting similar models, with Wuhan University being one of them. This model is undoubtedly more efficient than completely relying on individual laboratory management. However, it also brings new problems: graduate students find it difficult to truly learn how to operate the instruments. Students often just send samples to the instrumentation center, pay the usage fee, and then wait for the data to be returned. For simple data, they may still perform basic analysis; but real scientific research often requires a deeper understanding of the equipment principles and the data analysis process. As a result, many students, upon graduation, have not actually mastered the instruments they relied on.
I often see students who, after graduating and entering universities or research institutions, discover that they lack sufficient technical understanding of instruments when they truly need to build and operate experimental platforms themselves.
So, what is the solution?
When I served as the director of a research center at the Institute for Basic Science in Korea, I also faced similar problems. At that time, thanks to the government’s long-term stable and large-scale support, as well as the full cooperation of the school, we had the opportunity to try a new operational model. The solution I proposed back then was actually relatively simple: actively cultivate participating faculty members and experienced graduate students, turning them into “super-users.” These super-users not only master the equipment itself in depth but also take responsibility for training other users and naturally participate in collaborative research.
The greatest advantage of this system is that graduate students are no longer mere equipment users but gradually grow into true equipment experts. This will become a huge competitive advantage for their future development.
Of course, this model also has obvious drawbacks—it requires a significant investment of time and energy. But as their understanding of the equipment deepens, they can obtain more complex and higher-quality data and perform deeper data analysis. At the same time, they naturally become important members in collaborative research and play a key role in paper work.
Many times, super-users also need to invest extra time to help and support other researchers. Therefore, providing additional personnel and funding support for super-users is also very necessary.
For this system to truly operate effectively, the faculty members responsible for the relevant equipment must themselves possess sufficient professional competence. Only then can they properly train the students.
Another key role is that of the engineers.
By cultivating professional instrument engineers, even after graduate students graduate and leave, the institute can still maintain a stable and continuous equipment training system in the long term. More importantly, when equipment problems occur, there must be someone who can analyze the causes and perform real fault diagnosis and resolution. This requires not only engineers but also faculty members with deep technical understanding and practical experience.
In the final analysis, I believe that engineers are the true core of LQM Institute’s successful operation. Faculty members are responsible for research direction and talent cultivation, while engineers are responsible for equipment maintenance, troubleshooting, new equipment development and improvement, super-user training, safety education, and data analysis. Especially considering that LQM Institute itself is an international research environment where many foreign researchers will collaborate long-term, English communication skills are equally essential.
But ultimately, what truly determines whether the institute can operate successfully is still the “human” investment and dedication. Relying on engineers alone is not enough. Young professors, graduate students, administrative staff—all members must work together for the system to truly function.
Establishing a new system has never been easy. In the end, the most difficult part is not the equipment itself, but changing our way of thinking and the long-established scientific research culture we are accustomed to.
LQM研究所的运营战略
LQM研究所的愿景与传统研究机构有所不同，它的运行战略也必然会有所不同。
LQM研究所最鲜明的特点之一，是将超净间、干燥间、化学实验室以及先进的纳米研究设备集中、整合在同一个空间之中。从材料合成、基础物性表征、到器件制备，几乎整个研究流程都可以在一个地方完成。换句话说，研究人员进入研究所后，可以真正实现“one-stop research（一站式科研）”的研究模式。
因此，这个研究所的核心，自然是各种科研设备。而这也直接引出了研究所最重要的运营问题：如何高效地管理和维护这一百多台精密仪器。
要真正做到这一点，高水平的专业技术人员是必不可少的。然而，在大学体系的现实环境中，要建立足够规模的专业技术团队并不容易。即使能够实现，也需要相当长的时间。因此，在现阶段，我们不得不更多地依赖参与研究所的教师与研究生。
目前，参与研究所的教授大约有三十位，而真正加入研究所的研究生人数还不到十人。学校虽然正在努力扩大研究生招生，但这并不是短时间内就能实现的，还是需要一个长期的发展战略。幸运的是，如果目前的发展趋势能够持续下去，预计从明年下半年开始，研究生规模将逐渐增加。同时，我们目前也正在招聘四名设备工程师。
研究楼的改造工程也已经基本完成了最基本的基础设施建设。各种设备正陆续到位并开始安装。当然，由于超净间和干燥间工程的延迟，部分设备安装工作也不得不随之推迟。但有些事情，并不是单纯依靠“加快速度”就能解决的。很多时候，时间本身也是整个过程的一部分。尽管如此，我仍然希望大部分工作能够在研究所正式成立之前完成——虽然目前这仍然有很长的路要走。
于是，一个最关键的问题便摆在了面前：如此庞大的设备体系，究竟应该如何运营与管理？
最简单的方法，是将设备分别交由相关教授管理。事实上，许多大学都是这样运作的。但这样做往往会导致设备逐渐变成某个实验室的“私人资源”，而不是研究所共享的平台。设备利用效率下降，其他研究人员也难以自由使用这些仪器。久而久之，设备实际上会被某些教授或团队所“垄断”。
当然，如果这些设备能够被很好地利用，并持续产出优秀成果，那自然是幸运的。但真正的问题往往出现在设备故障之后。高端仪器的维修费用通常非常昂贵，很多学校难以长期承担。最终，昂贵的设备往往被闲置甚至废弃。
这样的情况，我在韩国见过很多次。许多大学曾投入巨额经费用于建设高端TEM平台，但几年之后，这些设备却因为缺乏持续维护而无法正常运行。大学花费巨资建设先进平台，但如果缺乏长期运营战略，最终这些系统很容易陷入停摆。
为了解决这个问题，我之前所在的成均馆大学建立了中央仪器中心，由学校统一管理设备，研究人员则通过付费方式使用。如今，中国也有越来越多大学开始采用类似模式，武汉大学也是其中之一。这种模式无疑比完全依赖个人实验室管理更有效率。但与此同时，它又带来了新的问题：研究生很难真正学习如何操作仪器。学生们往往只是把样品送到仪器中心，支付使用费用，然后等待数据返回。对于简单的数据，也许还能进行基本分析；但真正的科研往往需要对设备原理与数据分析过程有更深层次的理解。结果是，许多学生在毕业时，其实并没有真正掌握他们所依赖的仪器。
我经常看到一些学生毕业后进入大学或研究机构，在真正需要自己建设与运行实验平台时，才发现自己缺乏足够的仪器技术理解。
那么，解决方案是什么？
我在韩国担任基础科学研究院研究中心主任时，也曾面对类似的问题。当时，由于政府长期稳定的大规模支持，以及学校的全面配合，我们才有机会尝试新的运行模式。我当时提出的解决方案其实相对简单：积极培养参与研究的教师与经验丰富的研究生，让他们成为“超级用户（super-user）”。这些超级用户不仅深入掌握设备本身，还负责培训其他使用者，并自然地参与到合作研究之中。
这一体系最大的优点在于，研究生不再只是简单的设备使用者，而会逐渐成长为真正的设备专家。这对他们未来的发展会成为巨大的竞争优势。
当然，这种模式也有明显的缺点——它需要投入大量时间与精力。但随着他们对设备理解的不断加深，他们能够获得更加复杂和高质量的数据，也能进行更深入的数据分析。与此同时，他们也会自然成为合作研究中的重要成员，并在论文工作中发挥关键作用。
很多时候，超级用户还需要额外投入大量时间帮助和支持其他研究人员。因此，为超级用户提供额外的人力经费支持，也是非常必要的。
而要让这一系统真正有效运行，负责相关设备的教师本身也必须具备足够的专业能力。只有这样，才能真正训练好学生。
另一个关键角色，则是工程师。
通过培养专业的仪器工程师，即使研究生毕业离开之后，研究所依然能够长期维持稳定而持续的设备培训体系。更重要的是，当设备出现问题时，必须有人能够分析原因并完成真正的 故障诊断与解决。这不仅需要工程师，也需要教师拥有深厚的技术理解与实践经验。
归根结底，我认为工程师才是LQM研究所成功运营的真正核心。教师负责研究方向与人才培养，而工程师则负责设备维护、故障处理、新设备开发与改进、超级用户培训、安全教育以及数据分析等工作。尤其是考虑到LQM研究所本身就是一个国际化科研环境，许多外国研究人员将在这里长期合作，因此英语沟通能力同样是必不可少的。
但最终，真正决定研究所能否成功运行的，仍然是“人”的投入与奉献。仅靠工程师是不够的。年轻教授、研究生、行政人员——所有成员都必须共同努力，系统才可能真正运转起来。
建立一个新的体系，从来都不是容易的事情。归根结底，最困难的，并不是设备本身，而是改变我们的思维方式，以及改变我们长期习惯的科研文化。
Weekly Column3Vision of the LQM Institute
In general, vision of the research institute is somewhat different from that of university.
At its core, the mission of a university is education and research. A university exists to educate students and prepare them for the future. That education is not simply about satisfying intellectual curiosity; it also includes helping students acquire the skills and capabilities needed to live and work in society. In modern society, this latter role has become increasingly important. Society has become more complex, and without technological innovation, it is difficult for a nation to maintain competitiveness. Ultimately, without nurturing the next generation of researchers, it is impossible to prepare for the future. This is one of the reasons why research-oriented universities continue to emerge.
As the importance of research has grown, universities have created various forms of research institutes. Their purpose is to develop new technologies and scientific breakthroughs demanded by society. New discoveries and innovations are naturally transferred to students, accelerating the circulation of knowledge and technological progress throughout society.
As research becomes more central, research structures also become more diverse. At the same time, the role of professors has become more important than ever before.
The role of professors and researchers differs from country to country. In the United States, the academic system is structured around assistant professors, associate professors, and full professors, with a tenure-track system designed to rigorously evaluate a researcher’s competitiveness during the early years. Typically, after about five years of evaluation, those who do not pass must leave the university. Korea essentially follows the same model, although the reality is somewhat different. While the structure appears similar, more than 90% of professors ultimately pass the review process. Different universities adopt different standards and practices. Regardless of the system, however, researchers face intense competition and enormous pressure.
One weakness of this system is that even highly successful laboratories may disappear entirely when a professor leaves the institution. Research continuity and accumulated expertise can easily be lost. At the same time, the system has strengths. It functions as a form of self-correcting mechanism that helps maintain a certain level of research quality. What is particularly interesting in the American system is that professors, regardless of rank, are fundamentally independent researchers. Whether a young assistant professor or a senior full professor, each person is expected to lead and take responsibility for their own research.
The Chinese system is somewhat different. Although the structure includes lecturers, associate professors, and full professors, the research environment tends to be more hierarchical and centered around the full professor. Full professors typically oversee research directions, funding, and research outputs. In many ways, this resembles the traditional systems found in Germany or Japan.
The advantage of this leader-centered structure is that leadership becomes critically important. Under a strong leader, younger researchers can grow together, and the continuity of the laboratory can be maintained over long periods of time. However, there are also clear disadvantages. If the leader lacks capability, the researchers beneath them are inevitably affected as well. In some cases, talented young researchers may not be able to fully develop their own potential. For this reason, more universities in China have recently begun adopting systems that resemble the more independent American model. In the end, it is a matter of what kind of structure one chooses to build.
University research institutes are also fundamentally different from general research institutes. In a conventional research institute, research itself is the primary objective. Depending on government policy and mission, these institutes may focus on basic science, applied research, or industrial collaboration.
So what identity should the LQM Institute pursue?
The LQM Institute was established through the strong support of Hubei University of Technology and Hubei Province. It has its own independent research building and is equipped with a broad range of facilities for low-dimensional materials research, including material synthesis, atomic and electronic structure analysis, optical characterization, electrical and spin transport measurements, and energy storage and production technologies. What makes the institute particularly unique is its ambition to become a global research hub—one capable of supporting world-class collaborative research involving scientists from around the world.
The institute continues to recruit researchers internationally, but at present, many of the active participants are young teachers from the School of Materials Science and Chemical Engineering, the School of Science, and the School of Electric Engineering.
Then what should be the vision of these young researchers?
I faced similar questions in Korea while serving as the director of a research center at the Institute for Basic Science. At the time, the center received special government support while remaining affiliated with university, somewhat similar in structure to the Max Planck Institutes in Germany. From the outside, the research goals and direction appeared clear. But internally, establishing a coherent identity was never easy.
There was always tension between the broader research direction defined by the institute and the individual research interests of participating professors. Young teachers are often hesitant to move into entirely new research areas. The life of a pioneer is never easy. Moreover, universities typically demand visible outcomes such as publication numbers, while research institutes hope for larger breakthroughs that can change the field itself. Universities often value quantity, whereas institutes seek depth and originality. Young researchers inevitably struggle between these two expectations.
The LQM Institute faces similar challenges.
An additional complexity is that the young teachers participating in the institute are already connected to existing research structures within their own departments and senior professors. By joining LQM, they effectively become part of another organizational system with another director. In some sense, they suddenly have one more “boss.”
The university, having invested heavily in the institute, naturally expects meaningful results. It hopes to see outstanding publications and the growth of talented young teachers. But such achievements cannot be produced overnight. Ultimately, the most important task is to build a strong and sustainable system over the long term.
After thinking deeply about these issues, my own conclusion has become relatively simple.
First, to strengthen the overall research capability of the university. From the university’s perspective, this also means attracting outstanding international researchers and creating a new scientific culture through global collaboration.
Second, to maximize the potential of young teachers. To achieve this, we must pursue not merely a larger number of papers, but research of higher quality and greater significance. In the end, what matters is not how many papers one publishes, but whether the research itself is meaningful. Ultimately, the goal is for young researchers to grow into independent leaders through their own work.
Of course, not every researcher’s topic needs to perfectly align with the institute’s central direction. The themes valued by the institute and the topics in which individual researchers are most competitive may differ. However, everyone should ask themselves at least once: Is my research truly contributing something meaningful to society, or is it simply research for the sake of publication?
In the end, what matters most is producing meaningful research outcomes.
In this sense, the horizontal structure of the American system has clear advantages compared to a more vertical structure. Research must ultimately begin from individual creativity and independence.
My role, as a leader, is to present a broader vision and new possibilities. I can suggest directions when necessary, but ultimately researchers must think and choose for themselves. As someone with more experience, I can offer advice, but fundamentally I believe research should develop within a horizontal and collaborative environment.
I still have research questions that I personally want to challenge myself with. If necessary, I will continue conducting research directly together with students and young researchers who share the same vision. At the same time, I personally wish to avoid the practice of simply placing my name on the achievements of younger researchers without meaningful scientific contribution. In that respect, my approach differs somewhat from more traditional hierarchical systems.
And I hope that young researchers, too, will not simply follow research directed by someone else, but will grow into scientists who think independently, make their own choices, and lead their own paths forward.
LQM研究所的愿景
一般来说，研究所的愿景与大学的愿景并不完全相同。
大学最根本的使命，归根结底是教育与研究。大学存在的意义，是培养学生，为未来做准备。而教育不仅仅是满足知识上的好奇心，它还包括帮助学生获得在社会中生存与发展的能力与技能。在现代社会中，后者的重要性正变得越来越突出。社会日益复杂，如果没有技术创新，一个国家便很难保持竞争力。归根结底，如果不能培养下一代科研人才，就无法真正为未来做好准备。这也是研究型大学不断涌现的重要原因之一。
随着研究的重要性不断提升，大学内部也逐渐建立起各种形式的研究机构。其目的，是为了创造社会所需要的新技术与新突破。而新的科研成果与技术创新，又会自然地传递给学生，从而加快整个社会知识与技术循环的速度。
研究越被重视，研究体系也就越多样化。同时，教授的角色也变得比以往任何时候都更加重要。
不同国家中，教授与研究者的角色定位并不相同。在美国，大学通常采用助理教授、副教授、正教授的体系，并通过 tenure-track 制度严格评估研究者的竞争力。通常经过约五年的考核，如果无法通过，就必须离开学校。韩国基本上也采用类似制度，只是实际运行方式略有不同。虽然形式上相似，但现实中超过90%的教授最终都能通过审查。不同学校有各自不同的标准与操作方式。无论在哪种制度下，研究者都必须付出巨大的努力，并承受巨大的压力。
这种制度的缺点在于，即便一个教授做出了非常优秀的研究，一旦他离开学校，整个实验室也可能随之消失。研究的连续性与长期积累很容易中断。但与此同时，它也有明显的优点。它像一种自我”净化”机制，能够持续维持一定水平以上的研究竞争力。
而美国体系中最有意思的一点是：无论职级高低，教授本质上都是独立的研究者。无论是年轻的助理教授，还是资深的正教授，都必须独立负责自己的研究方向与成果。
中国的体系则有所不同。虽然同样存在讲师、副教授和正教授的结构，但整体研究体系更接近一种以正教授为中心的垂直结构。正教授通常主导研究方向、研究经费以及研究成果的整合。这一点与德国或日本的传统研究体系有相似之处。
这种以“导师”为中心的结构，其优势在于领导者的作用极其重要。在优秀领导者的带领下，年轻研究者能够共同成长，实验室的连续性也得以保持。但它同样存在明显的问题。如果领导者能力不足，其下属研究者也会受到影响。有时，优秀的年轻研究者甚至无法充分发挥自己的潜力。因此，近年来中国也有越来越多的大学开始尝试引入更接近美国式的独立研究体系。归根结底，这是一种制度选择的问题。
大学中的研究所，与一般意义上的研究机构也并不相同。普通研究机构最核心的目标就是研究本身。根据政府政策与定位的不同，它们可能侧重于基础研究、应用研究或产业合作研究。
那么，LQM研究所应该建立怎样的身份与定位？
LQM研究所是在湖北工业大学以及湖北省的大力支持下建立起来的。研究所拥有独立的研究大楼，并广泛配置了低维材料研究所需的各种平台与设备，包括材料合成、原子与电子结构分析、光学表征、电学与自旋特性测量，以及能源存储与生产相关设备。
特别的是，研究所不仅仅希望建设一个普通实验室，而是致力于打造一个真正意义上的全球研究中心——一个能够吸引世界各地研究者共同开展合作研究的平台。
目前，研究所仍在不断引进新的研究人员，但现阶段主要参与研究的，仍是来自材料与化学工程学院、理学院以及电气工程学院的年轻研究者。
那么，这些年轻研究者的愿景又应该是什么？
过去我在韩国担任基础科学研究院研究团长时，也曾经历过类似的思考。当时的研究中心一方面接受政府的特别支持，另一方面又隶属于大学体系，在某种程度上与德国的马克斯·普朗克研究所有些相似。从外部看，研究方向与目标似乎十分明确，但真正进入内部之后，建立清晰的身份认同却并不容易。
尤其是在研究中心设定的大方向与参与教授个人研究兴趣之间，始终存在某种张力。年轻教授往往会对进入全新的研究领域感到犹豫。开拓者的道路，从来都不容易。
更现实的是，大学通常要求能够量化的研究成果，例如论文数量；而研究所则更希望看到能够改变领域的大突破。大学看重“数量”，而研究所更强调“质量”与“原创性”。年轻研究者必须在这两种期待之间不断挣扎与平衡。
LQM研究所同样面临着类似的问题。
更复杂的是，目前参与研究所的年轻研究者，原本已经隶属于各自院系的研究体系，并与所在团队的正教授保持合作关系。而加入LQM之后，他们实际上又进入了另一个研究体系之中。从某种意义上说，他们相当于“多了一位老板”。
学校既然投入了大量资源，自然也期待研究所能够产生优秀成果。它希望看到高水平论文，也希望培养出优秀的年轻人才。但这些成果绝不可能在短时间内完成。归根结底，最重要的仍然是建立一个能够长期稳定发展的系统。
经过长时间思考之后，我自己的选择其实变得很简单。
第一，是提升整个学校的科研能力。从学校的角度来说，也包括吸引海外优秀研究者，并通过国际交流创造一种新的科学文化。
第二，是尽可能激发年轻研究者的潜力。为此，我们追求的不应只是论文数量的增加，而是更高质量、更有意义的研究成果。真正重要的，并不是发表了多少篇论文，而是研究本身是否真正有价值。最终，希望年轻研究者能够通过自己的研究成长为独立的领导者。
当然，并不是所有研究者的课题都必须与研究所的方向完全一致。研究所重视的方向，与个人最具竞争力的研究主题，本来就可能有所不同。但我认为，每个人都应该至少认真思考一次：自己的研究，究竟是否真正对社会有意义，而不仅仅是为了发表论文。
最终，真正重要的，还是做出优秀的研究成果。
从这一点来看，相较于更垂直的结构，美国式更为平等和独立的研究体系，确实有其优势。因为研究最终必须建立在个人创造力与独立性的基础之上。
我作为领导者的角色，是去展示更大的方向与可能性。我可以提供建议与选择，但最终，研究仍然需要研究者自己去思考、去决定。作为经验更多的人，我愿意给予帮助，但我始终认为，研究应当建立在一种更加平等与开放的关系之中。
我自己也仍然有想要挑战的研究问题。如果有必要，我依然会与学生以及志同道合的年轻研究者一起亲自开展研究。同时，我个人并不希望仅仅依靠年轻研究者的成果而挂名署名。在这一点上，我的理念与传统的等级式体系有所不同。
而我也希望，年轻研究者不要只是跟随别人安排好的研究道路，而是真正成长为能够独立思考、独立选择，并最终走出自己道路的科学家。
Weekly Column2A New Scientific Culture
What does it mean to build a “new scientific culture”?
From the perspective of Chinese scientists, they are already well aware of both the strengths and the limitations of China’s scientific system. In that sense, what they expect from foreign scientists is quite clear: to help address those limitations and contribute to the advancement of Chinese science with new perspectives.
In truth, the development of science in China has been remarkable. I have witnessed the evolution of nanoscience from its very early days to where it stands today. At the beginning of the 21st century, “nano” was the central theme in science. That was when I first became interested in the field, and over time, I found myself becoming a part of it. Starting from theoretical physics, I moved on to carbon nanotube and graphene synthesis, the study of new physical properties, and various applications—working across physics, chemistry, materials science, and engineering. What began as simple curiosity eventually became my professional path.
In early 2000s, Korea had already established itself among the top five countries in nanoscience, while China was still in its early stages. However, China has since advanced at an astonishing pace and now stands among the world’s leading nations in this field. This reflects the country’s immense potential, and it is no longer something that can be denied. Continuous government support and a strong culture of respect for scientists have played a crucial role in sustaining this competitiveness.
When I began my research career in the 1990s, scientific leadership was still largely centered in the West. Yet I believed that one day Asia would become a major force in science. With that in mind, I worked to build research networks centered around Korea, China, and Japan. This led to the creation of Korea–China, Korea–Japan, and eventually Korea–China–Japan joint symposia, which continue to this day.
Through these experiences, I thought I understood Chinese culture fairly well. Korea and China are geographically close and share many cultural similarities. Human relationships, family values—there is much that overlaps. Because of this, I found it easy to build friendships with Chinese scientists, and those relationships remain strong today.
In many ways, creating a new scientific culture is not complicated. It begins with bringing in different people. When researchers from diverse backgrounds come together, a new culture naturally emerges. I experienced this while serving as a Director at the Institute for Basic Science in Korea. The presence of international researchers and students transformed not only the research environment but also the way people think—and those changes led to more creative outcomes. I hope to create a similar environment in our institute.
However, after spending a year and half in China, I find that while my overall understanding of the culture remains, my day-to-day experiences are often still unfamiliar. At a macro level, the ability to plan and execute large projects is highly impressive. This is undoubtedly one of China’s strengths.
But when it comes to the details, things can feel quite different. Small cultural differences often have a surprisingly large impact. I felt this most strongly during the renovation of the institute. Thanks to the university’s strong support, the construction process moved forward quickly and efficiently. Yet in the final stages, things began to diverge.
During the construction of the Center, we made numerous requests for adjustments, but many were not fully implemented. Although there were assurances that changes would be made, they often did not materialize. This was not only an issue with the contractors but also with insufficient oversight. For example, when installing laboratory tables, electrical outlets behind the walls were simply covered and sealed. Even after requesting corrections, the issue has yet to be fully resolved. In such cases, it is difficult to proceed with final payments. It is frustrating to see details that were discussed repeatedly at the beginning overlooked at the end. At one point, the stress even showed physically. One morning, while showering, I was surprised to see how much hair I was losing. It was probably the result of accumulated pressure. I imagine that the younger faculty working alongside me felt much the same.
The bidding process has also been challenging. The procedures are complex, the documentation is inefficient, and coordination between young faculty members and administrative staff is often not smooth. The process of preparing laboratory furniture, in particular, was exhausting. Every small detail—shape, color, function—had to be documented individually, making the process overwhelmingly time-consuming. It raises the question of whether handling everything through formal bidding is truly efficient. Perhaps it reflects a lack of mutual trust within the system.
At times, it feels unclear where to begin making changes. But one thing is certain: trust and accountability are essential. Each individual must take responsibility for their role, rather than allowing responsibility to become blurred.
We have to start with small things. In the institute, everyone—including students—must see themselves as responsible stakeholders. It is impossible for a single director to manage everything. The moment people begin to think, “someone else will take care of it,” it is already too late. Cleaning the lab, organizing shared spaces, fixing small inconveniences—these seemingly minor actions ultimately shape the quality of a research environment. They are also an integral part of scientific culture. It is through these small efforts that a strong and sustainable research community is built.
Now, the laboratory setup is nearing completion. While the cleanroom, dry room, and chemical labs are still under construction, we are already able to begin research meetings in the seminar room. Students and researchers can gather, learn from one another, and engage with invited speakers from different fields.
In this process, honesty is essential. We must be willing to admit what we do not know and to ask questions freely. We should reflect on how our work contributes to the broader community. We need the courage to step into new fields and learn without hesitation.
When a paper is completed, the simple sense of satisfaction it brings is enough. Regardless of the scale of the result, that feeling becomes the motivation for the next step. And more importantly, we must learn to enjoy the process itself.
Perhaps this is what a new scientific culture truly looks like.
Over the past period, everyone has invested tremendous time and effort to build this institute. I want to say to all of you: you have worked very hard. In Chinese, there is a phrase—“辛苦了 (xīnkǔ le).” It feels especially fitting at this moment. Now, it is time to return to what we truly set out to do—research. And in a better environment, I hope we can rediscover the simple joy of doing science.
I hope we can share that joy together.
新的科学文化
什么是“新的科学文化”？
从中国科学家的角度来看，他们对中国科学的优势与不足其实都有着清醒的认识。在这样的背景下，他们对外国科学家的期待也很明确——希望能够弥补现有的不足，以新的视角推动中国科学的发展。
事实上，中国的科学发展是令人瞩目的。我从纳米科学刚刚兴起的时代一路走到今天，亲眼见证了这一领域的发展。21世纪初，“纳米”成为科学界的关键词。也正是在那个时候，我开始对这一领域产生兴趣，并逐渐走上了这条研究之路。从最初的物理理论研究，到碳纳米管的合成、新物性探索，再到应用研究——我在物理、化学、材料和工程等多个领域之间不断穿梭。可以说，是从好奇心出发，最终成为了这个领域的一名研究者。
在2000年代初，韩国在纳米领域已经具备了世界前五的竞争力，而当时中国的纳米研究还处于起步阶段。然而此后，中国以惊人的速度追赶，并迅速成长为世界领先的科研强国。这既体现了中国巨大的潜力，也已成为一个无法否认的事实。政府持续的投入，以及全社会对科学家的尊重，共同支撑了今天中国科学的竞争力。
回想起我在上世纪90年代刚开始从事研究的时候，科学的中心仍然在西方。但我始终相信，有一天亚洲会成为科学的重要力量。因此，我一直努力在韩国、中国和日本之间建立科研网络。从最初的韩中研讨会、韩日研讨会，到后来扩展为韩中日三国联合研讨会，这些交流一直持续至今。
基于这些经历，我曾以为自己对中国文化已经有了相当的理解。韩国和中国在地理上接近，在文化上也有许多相通之处。无论是人际关系还是家庭观念，都有很多相似之处。因此，我与中国科学家之间很容易建立起信任与友谊，至今仍保持着良好的关系。
从某种意义上说，构建新的科学文化并不复杂——关键在于引入不同的人。当来自不同背景的研究者共同工作时，一种新的文化便会自然形成。我在韩国担任基础科学研究院主任时，已经有过这样的体验。外国研究者和学生的加入，不仅改变了研究环境，也改变了思考方式，而这些变化最终带来了更多的创造性成果。我也希望在我们的研究所中实现这样的转变。
在中国生活和工作的这一年半里，虽然我对整体文化的理解没有发生根本变化，但在实际操作中，还是不时会遇到一些新鲜的体验。宏观层面的规划和推进非常高效，这无疑是中国社会的一大优势。而到了具体执行层面，情况往往有所不同。一些看似细微的文化差异，有时会带来意想不到的感受。在研究所改造的过程中，我对此体会尤深。得益于学校的全力支持，工程整体推进得很快、很顺利，只是在最后的收尾阶段，节奏有些不一样了。
施工期间，我们多次提出修改建议，但有些并没有真正落实。当时对方大多表示会调整，可后来部分问题渐渐被搁置。这既有施工方的责任，也有监督管理上的一些不足。比如在安装实验室台面时，墙上的电源插座被直接封住了。我们试着提出修改请求，但至今没有完全处理完。这种情况下，尾款自然也无法支付。那些前期反复确认的细节，到了最后阶段却被忽视，难免让人感到有些无奈。
长期处于这样的状态，有一天早上洗澡时，我突然发现头发一把一把地掉落。回想起来，大概是压力慢慢积累的结果吧。一起工作的年轻同事们，想必也有类似的感受。
招标流程同样让人有些头疼。程序较为繁琐，文件准备效率不高，年轻教师和行政人员之间的协作也不太顺畅。特别是在家具采购中，每一个细节——形状、颜色、功能——都需要一一写进文件里，这样的流程有时让人觉得吃力。是否所有事项都适合通过招标来处理，也让人偶尔会产生疑问。或许，这背后反映的，是在彼此信任方面还有进一步改善的空间。
有时候，我也会感到迷茫，不知道该从哪里开始改变。但有一点是明确的——信任与责任是最关键的。每个人都应该对自己的工作负责，而不是让责任变得模糊不清。因此，我们必须从小事做起。在研究所中，包括学生在内的每一个成员，都应该成为“主人”。仅靠研究所长一个人，是无法完成所有事情的。如果每个人都抱着“总会有人去做”的想法，那么一切就会停滞不前。
打扫卫生、整理实验室、改进微小的问题——这些看似微不足道的事情，实际上决定了一个研究环境的质量。这些，同样是科学文化的重要组成部分。正是这些细节，最终塑造出一个真正优秀的科研环境。
现在，实验室的整理已经接近尾声。虽然超净间/干燥间和化学实验室仍在建设中，但我们已经可以在研讨室开始学术讨论。学生和研究人员可以聚在一起相互学习，也可以邀请外部学者来分享不同领域的知识。
在这样的过程中，最重要的是坦诚。要敢于承认“不知道”，敢于提问。要思考自己能为所在的科研环境带来什么贡献。面对新的研究领域，也要有勇气去学习。
当一篇论文完成时，那种简单的满足感，其实已经足够。无论成果大小，这种喜悦都会带来继续前进的动力。而更重要的是，要享受这个过程本身。
或许，这正是我们所追求的新的科学文化。
在过去的一段时间里，为了建立研究所，大家都付出了巨大的努力。我想对每一个人说一句：真的辛苦了。用中文来说，就是“辛苦了”。现在，是时候回到我们真正热爱的研究本身了。在一个更好的科研环境中，重新体会做研究的快乐。
我希望，这份快乐，我们能够一起感受到。
Weekly Column1The Beginning of LQM – A Personal Reflection on Building a New Scientific Culture
It has now been over a year and a half since I began my work in China. In some ways, it feels like a long time; in others, it feels surprisingly short. During this period, the research building has gradually taken shape. There is still work to be done—the cleanroom and dry room are not yet complete—but at last, the end is in sight. Equipment has been arriving one by one, and some of it is already quietly in operation. With the exception of the PPMS/MPMS and the time-resolved ARPES systems, most of the remaining instruments should be installed before the opening ceremony. Even the laboratory furniture will soon be in place. There are still unfinished floors, and the schedule has been delayed more than once. Yet, for the first time, I feel that we are finally ready to begin.
Last week, we held our very first small-group research meeting in the seminar room. The moment has stayed with me. I had expected to feel overwhelmed with emotion, but instead, I found myself surprisingly calm. Perhaps I had already spent too much time enduring the process internally. What I felt most deeply, however, was gratitude toward the young researchers who have been part of this journey. None of this would have been possible without their dedication. I often feel indebted to them. They are no longer just colleagues—they have become true companions on this path.
I often think back to my first visit to Hubei University of Technology two years ago. At that time, it was clear to me that the environment was not yet ready for immediate research. At the same time, I could see how much effort young researchers were putting in just to produce a single paper.
Fortunately, the university genuinely wanted change—and that desire was stronger than I had expected. With strong support from Hubei Province, the research environment we see today has gradually taken form. Many people have contributed to this journey in ways that are not always visible. I find myself naturally grateful to the university leadership, including the president and party secretary, for their commitment. The people I have met along the way have also become an unexpected gift in my life.
So what, then, is my role here?
Perhaps, first and foremost, it is to create an environment where researchers can truly focus on their work—where synthesis, characterization, device fabrication, and the discovery of new physical phenomena can all flow seamlessly within a single system. In other words, to build a space where ‘one-stop research’ becomes possible.
But over time, I have come to realize that my role does not end there. Through conversations with senior scientists and colleagues, I began to sense a different kind of expectation. It was a simple phrase, yet not a simple request: to help create a “new science culture.”
I have thought about this often.
What does it mean to build a new science culture?
At one dinner, some senior scholars, half jokingly, offered me a few “missions” to accomplish during my time in China. I smiled at the time, but their words stayed with me.
The first was to create something different from the existing culture. As someone from outside, perhaps I could see and change things that are not easily visible from within.
The second was to bring in people—researchers from Korea, and from other countries as well. When individuals from diverse backgrounds come together, interact, and collaborate, something new inevitably begins to form. I strongly believe this. New ideas often begin with new people, and from those interactions emerge creativity and innovation.
The third suggestion was, in a way, the most striking. They told me that I had already done enough good research, and that now, it might be more important to build an environment and nurture the next generation of leaders.<
I have not forgotten those words.
The truth is, I still love doing research. I still want to produce meaningful results. But at the same time, I understand that this is not the only reason I am here.
Perhaps my role is to serve as a small bridge—connecting the inside and the outside. There are things that cannot be seen from within alone, and things that only become visible when an external perspective is introduced.
I am still learning how to walk that path. I do not know how long I will remain here. But whether that time is long or short, I want to do what I can. To help build a new scientific culture, and to create a place where others can pursue their research a little more freely. And if possible, I hope that somewhere along the way, I too can find a bit more happiness.
That would be enough.
LQM（低维量子材料研究所）的起点——关于建设“新科学文化”的一点思考
转眼间，我来到中国已一年半。说长不长，说短不短。这段时间里，中心大楼渐渐成形。超净间和干燥间虽未完工，但终点已隐约可见。设备陆续到位，有些已安静运转。除了PPMS/MPMS和time-resolved ARPES系统，其余大多有望在开幕仪式前完成安装。桌椅家具也将在本月全部就位。当然，还有楼层尚未动工，原定时间表一再推迟。即便如此，我第一次真切感到：我们终于可以开始了。
上周，我们举行了第一次小型研讨会，那一刻让我久久难忘。原以为自己会百感交集，甚至热泪盈眶，但真正到来时却异常平静。或许是在这段过程中，内心早已历经太多起伏。相反，我更深刻地感受到的是对年轻研究者的感激。没有他们的投入与坚持，这一切都不可能实现。我常觉得自己欠他们很多。他们早已不只是同事，而是一同前行的伙伴。
我常回想起两年前初访湖北工业大学。那时我清楚，这里还不具备立即开展研究的条件。同时我也真切看到，年轻研究者为完成一篇论文付出了多少努力。幸运的是，学校确实渴望改变，而且比我最初预想的更为坚定。在湖北省大力支持下，今天的科研环境一点点被建立起来。这一路有许多默默付出的人。我由衷感谢校领导，他们的投入与担当令人敬佩。而在这个过程中结识的许多人，也成为我人生中的珍贵收获。
那么，我在这里的角色究竟是什么？
或许首先，是建立一个让研究者能专心做研究的环境——一个从材料合成、物性表征，到器件制备，再到新物理现象发现，都可以自然衔接的体系。也就是说，打造一个“一站式研究”的科研平台。但随着时间的推移，我逐渐意识到，我的角色并不仅止于此。在与许多资深科学家和同行的交流中，我隐约感受到另一种期待——创造一种“新的科学文化”。
这句话听起来简单，却并不轻松。
我曾反复思考，什么才是新的科学文化？
有一次饭桌上，几位前辈半开玩笑地给我提出几项“任务”。我当时一笑而过，但那些话一直留在心里。
第一，创造一种不同于现有模式的科学文化。作为一个外来者，或许可以看到身处其中的人难以察觉的东西，并尝试做出改变。
坦率地说，我依然热爱科研，也依然渴望做出好成果。但与此同时，我也明白，我来到这里的意义并不只在于此。或许，我的角色更像是一座小小的桥梁——连接内部与外部。很多时候，仅仅身处其中，很难看清全貌；而当外部的视角进入时，一些原本看不见的东西才会逐渐显现。 而我，仍在学习如何走好这条路。我不知道自己会在这里停留多久。但无论时间长短，我都希望能尽己所能，推动一种新的科学文化的形成，创造一个让更多人能更自由开展研究的环境。
如果可以，我也希望，在这个过程中，自己能够变得更加从容，也更加幸福。
那样，就已经足够了。
Copyright © 2025 Institute of Low-Dimensional Quantum Materials, Hubei University of Technology.
