院士候选人包刚捏造国际同行高度评价
作者：Yequan 近日，美国电磁科学院院士谢干权举报包刚国家自然科学二等奖的项目《散
射与反散射问题的数学理论与计算方法》存在学术剽窃。笔者只找到包刚的项目
简介（见附件pdf），其中介绍了他在三个方面的贡献。其中第三部分，包刚写
道：“在纳米光学的研究中，…… 提出了高效自洽算法，被著名物理学家
Malomed高度评价。” 这是包刚的项目简介中，唯一一处提及被国际学者高度评价。笔者知道以色
列特拉维夫大学Boris Malomed教授，是非线性光学、非线性动力学、冷原子物
理等研究领域的国际领军人物。
https://www.eng.tau.ac.il/~malomed/ 但是笔者从未听说Malomed提及过包刚。于是发email给Malomed教授询问。
很快Malomed回信说，他压根不认识包刚，也没有评价过他的工作。Malomed教授
还告诉我，他认识另一位姓包的数学家，就是在ICM上做过45分钟报告，和包刚
同样做计算数学的新加坡国立大学教授包维柱。
-----------------------
Dear Yequan,
I have not heard anything about this story before. I cannot read
how Gang Bao referred to me, because (unfortunately) I am not able
to read Chinese. I can only tell you that I never evaluated any work
by Gang Bao, I don't not know who this person is, and I have never
seen any of his works (as far as I remember it). I know another person
with family name Bao, Weizhu Bao from Singapore , but this should be
a different researcher, I guess.
Best regards,
Boris Malomed
------------------------
那么是否可能还有另外同名的物理学家呢。笔者搜索了美国数学会
MathSciNet的citation，只有一位学者姓Malomed，就是上面提到的Boris
Malomed教授。为了更加确信，笔者又发email给Malomed教授，问他是否认识其
他和他同名的物理学家。Malomed教授的回信完全否认了这一可能。并重申他完
全不了解包刚的工作，也从没有引用或评价过他的工作。
-----------------
Dear Yequan,
> The plain translation of what Gang Bao wrote is that
>
> "My work in Nano-optics, such as developing an efficient
> self-consistent algorithm ... , was highly praised by the famous
> physicist Malomed."
- I really have no idea what he was meaning here. I never "praised" his
works, as I was not aware of them. I have now briefly checked that he is
a coauthor of several papers on nanosensors, that were cited many times.
I have never worked in the field of sensors, therefore I did not know
anything about those papers by Gang Bao, and (as far as I can recollect
it) I have never cited them
> Do you happen to know any other famous physicist with family name
> "Malomed", working in nano-optics or related fields.
- I am absolutely sure that no other author with the same family name
as mine exists.
Best regards,
Boris
----------------------------------
笔者还是心存疑惑，如此杜撰国际学者评价，包刚胆子也恁大了点。在朋友
帮助下，笔者找到包刚申报国家自然科学奖在浙大的公示材料（百度绝对搜不
到）。
http://rd.zju.edu.cn/djbg/kindupload/attached/file/20170105/20170105093027_43998.docx 其中包刚写道：
B. Malomed在德国《数学文摘》称“...,this semiclassical description
is far too difficult for systematic numerical simulations....the
method is eventually developed ...to demonstrate practically
significant examples.”。 翻译过来就是：
“……这个半经典的描述对系统数值模拟太过困难……这个方法最后被发
展……用来演示实践中的重要例子。” 这个review的全文可见
https://zbmath.org/?q=an:06190519 笔者好歹也混学术圈，这个评论从头至尾只是在陈述文章的结果，连正面评
价都算不上，更不要说“高度评价”了。细读包刚公示材料中罗列的同行评价，
都是类似的事实陈述，没有一句是正面评价。 笔者也看到了其中的玄机，在浙大的公示材料中，包刚不提“高度评价”，
而只用在国家科学技术奖励办公室的非公示材料中。 Malomed教授给《数学文摘》写了近600篇review，他不是每个都记得也很正
常。笔者把这个review发给Malomed教授，他的回复也印证了笔者的观点。
Malomed教授说，他只是按照《数学文摘》的要求，总结了文章的主要结论。既
不对文章的正确性负责，也不评论其重要性。Malomed教授最后还写道，“说我
的review认可包刚文章的影响力，这纯属凭空捏造。”
--------------------------------------------------
Dear Yequan,
First, I absolutely do not remember this review. Second, this is a pure
formality: it was a review of an already published paper. The review
briefly recapitulated claims made in the paper. By definition,
in this case the reviewer does not check the correctness of the paper,
nor evaluates its significance. Zeitschrift fuer Math,
which publishes these reviews, asks the reviewers only to summarize
claims of the paper in a form appropriate for broad readership.
The statement that I "endorsed" the impact of that paper by my review is
absolutely unsubstantiated.
Best regards,
Boris
--------------------------------------------------
至此，包刚在国家自然科学奖的申报书中捏造国际同行高度评价，确凿无疑。
由于笔者没有包刚项目的详细申报书，暂无法对其他部分进行核实。 但是就是这样一个涉嫌剽窃，捏造国际同行高度评价，没有任何国际同行正
面评价的科研项目竟然能顺利通过国家自然科学二等奖的初评。 (XYS20170904)(SciFans.Net)
