The global mathematics community recognizes four journals as the most influential: the "Annals of Mathematics", "Mathematical Progress", "Acta Mathematica", and the "Mathematics Society Magazine". These are collectively singled out as ’the top four authoritative journals in mathematics’.
The impact factor of these mathematics journals isn’t very high, and the half-life of a paper’s citations is long, usually more than ten years.
However, every person in the mathematical community considers publishing in these top journals a source of pride.
One reason is the influence.
The top four journals have a strong influence, and the papers published therein undergo multiple rounds of review, with each published paper representing a latest breakthrough or research in mathematics.
Second is the number of papers published.
The number of papers published annually by the top four journals is strictly controlled, totaling around two hundred papers altogether, of which the "Acta Mathematica" publishes the least - about a dozen papers in its two issues per year.
The "Mathematics Society Magazine" is next, a quarterly with only four issues per year, each issue publishing eight papers, adding up to thirty-two papers in total.
"Annals of Mathematics" and "Mathematical Progress" publish a bit more papers, yet it’s still a miserable number in comparison to the volus in the world of mathematics.
Since the start of the new century, the average number of papers published annually by dostic scholars and research institutions in these top four journals is approximately three, showing a growing trend over ti.
Last year, six papers from dostic mathematicians and research institutions were published in the top four journals, one of which was contributed by Zhao Yi.
From this data, it can be inferred how difficult it is to publish papers in the top four authoritative mathematics journals. Countless mathematicians and research institutions have racked their brains to get a paper published - just the act of publishing it is an incredible achievent.
This is akin to common folks appearing on television.
Even just showing a face on a CCTV cara or getting a photo taken with a celebrity can be worth showing off on social dia.
Given this, one can imagine what the dostic dia’s coverage was like when they discovered that Zhao Yi’s paper was published in "Mathematical Progress".
You would find all sorts of headlines on the internet--
’Genius high school student Zhao Yi’s paper published in top mathematical journal!’
’New Breakthrough: Zhao Yi’s paper published in authoritative journal!’
’Top journal ’Mathematical Progress’ published Zhao Yi’s mathematics paper!’
’Zhao Yi’s paper once again appears in international top journal!’
When people notice the news and click for more details, they find the news content very succinct, simply stating that Zhao Yi’s math paper was published in the top journal Mathematical Progress.
The lower part of the article would either introduce the world’s top mathematics journals or commorate "Mathematical Progress", so even copying and pasting the number of papers published dostically in the top four journals.
But... what’s the paper about?
Those interested in the contents of the paper are kept in suspense by the reports.
In reality, the reporters who published the news had no choice - the latest issue of "Mathematical Progress" had just co out and it’s all in English. The only thing they could understand was Zhao Yi’s na and the tag ’Prover of the Collatz Conjecture’, recognizing that it must be that ’Zhao Yi’.
What about the English title?
If it were a normal title, those who know English would translate it directly, but the professional terminologies in ’Irregular Three-dinsional Tremor Waveform’ are too many and it feels awkward to translate them word by word. Unless you’re a professional in mathematical research, it’s impossible to truly translate it.
The majority of people don’t even understand the title, so news outlets that reported it simply copied and pasted the English title.
Most people are not interested in such complex English content, knowing ’Zhao Yi has published a new paper’ is enough for them, the content of the paper is not at all important.
After the dia published the news, online public opinion about Zhao Yi beca rather intriguing.
Many people once openly discussed Zhao Yi, as if trying to define his genius.
The cause of the widespread discussion about Zhao Yi is largely due to his young age and outstanding achievents.
The achievents of ’Researching a new computer algorithm’ and ’Proving the Collatz Conjecture’ are both sufficient to qualify him for employnt as a full professor in prestigious universities. His academic qualifications are no longer important, because the world-recognized achievent in academia is far more significant than a piece of degree certificate.
This type of genius is beyond the comprehension of ordinary people.
The discussions about Zhao Yi continue to fernt, but debates regarding his ’genius status’ have completely ceased. Within a year, two mathematical papers have been published in the top four mathematical journals, one of which proved a world mathematical conjecture.
If this is not a math prodigy, then what is?
After the new issue of "Mathematical Progress" was out, one dia outlet outrightly said, "If Zhao Yi is not a mathematical genius, then what is?"
"According to this standard, there is no mathematical genius in China, or even in the world!"
Those who claid that Zhao Yi ’is not a math genius’ have all fallen silent, not even pondering counterargunts.
But words once said cannot be taken back.
So dia outlets like to expose past remarks because ’digging up old matters’ is a catchy headline that is likely to attract high user engagent.
User Comments
0 comments from readers