To whom it may concern,
I hope this message finds you well. Prof. Yigal Achmon was teaching in China during the summer semester (twitter), but he immediately put down his work and left China after I returned to China since August 14th. It has been nearly three weeks now. Also, he changed his name to Ygal Achmon and is hiring people to spread to rumors to more and more people. Because of the large scope, I can hardly identify when you received the rumors so I had to be untargeted.
Over the past two years, there have been many rumors about me. I am refuting rumors to those who might be aware of it. Everything I mention here is supported by related clues and evidence. Feel free to share this content with anyone who is interested in the matter. I will update my progress on Twitter at https://x.com/johon_lituobang and on this website.
In such situations, the most important thing is to cut all the relations as soon as possible, then you won’t be impacted. This content is already pubically posted in many websites in Chinese and in English with more than 100,000 views in total and sent to more than 300,000 scholars in email, including 30,000 editors, that means, surely, sooner or later, everyone will know that. Also, my papers haven been pubically deposited in Github, Zenodo, ArXiv more than one year ago with intensive traffics. Everyone in statistics knows those papers. My priority is also sure.
Moreover, Prof. Yigal Achmon has coerced and brainwashed many people who originally supported me with murder threats, so now those people are not credible unless Prof. Yigal Achmon is arrested.
Prof. Yigal Achmon’s style is from the Soviet Union, more exactly, Trofim Lysenko. For anyone who interested, he can read related news about Trofim Lysenko, you would found shocking similarity. Prof. Yigal Achmon is like an invasive alien species, the native land is Soviet Union.
Israel is generally very right-wing and worships the strong. Prof. Yigal Achmon’s first elimination principle has no market in Israel. This invasive alien species did not live well in its introduced range.
There are some people in China who advocate the principle of first elimination. Lysenko still has his followers in China. However, CCP has developed many measures to combat such issues.
The only bug is that those measures only worked for citizens. Prof. Yigal Achmon’s spirit could not find enough believers in its first introduced range. However, once it came to a place with a rich nutrition, and no natural enemies, it became a disaster.
There is already so much darkness in the world; writing potential Fields Medal-winning and Nobel Prize-winning papers should be a good thing, not the opposite.
Sincerely,
Li Tuobang
Note: when I refute the rumors in Chinese, Chinese people generally don’t like the name Johon as a formal name. I thank them for taking action against the attempted murderer, Prof. Yigal Achmon. So I won’t use that publically. Anyway, feel free to call me Johon.
Why did it take me so long to speak out?
Because, in my previous understanding, publicly addressing such matters was extremely disgraceful. A gentleman does not speak ill of former friends. After my break with him at the end of 2021, I left the school and did not publicly mention it on any occasion; privately, I would occasionally vent but only in casual remarks.
In mid-2023, I realized he had discovered my paper through illegal means and spread false rumors about it. At that time, my focus was on a large number of unpublished papers, and I did not pay much attention to refuting the rumors because I thought they were too absurd for many people to believe. My parents also advised me to focus on preparing my paper and not to worry about what others said. They told me that if I spent all my time refuting rumors, I wouldn’t have time for anything else. I believed that once my paper was published, the rumors would quickly dissipate. My paper received support from one of the most prestigous scholars in statistics, Peter Bickel, who also helped me gain support from the University of California, Berkeley, and PNAS. The University of California, Berkeley has significant influence in the academic world, and they indeed helped me block Prof. Yigal Achmon’s attempts to plagiarize.
However, I misjudged his methods at the time. The many poorly constructed rumors he spread would not be believed by Peter Bickel. True professionals could see the absurdity of those rumors at a glance. The problem was, he did not intend to persuade Peter Bickel himself. His actual method was to use a large amount of AI-generated evidence to convince many bystanders who knew nothing about statistics to pressure the University of California, Berkeley and PNAS. Although the University of California, Berkeley and PNAS knew these were rumors, dealing with such public pressure was extremely difficult, especially since many of the claims were very technical and hard to explain to outsiders. They did try to counteract the rumors, but the effectiveness was minimal because refuting rumors takes much more effort than spreading them, and I was also reluctant to actively refute them. As the rumors continued for a long time, the pressure on them increased and more people started believing the falsehoods. It wasn’t until June 2024 that I realized Prof. Yigal Achmon’s tactics. Another difficulty I faced was that the actions of Prof. Yigal Achmon were so egregious that if I publicly refuted them, he could easily end up in prison. Deciding to send someone I once worked with to prison required time. I had numerous discussions with Prof. Yigal Achmon, hoping he would stop the rumors and his attempts on my life, but he was unlikely to stop. After I confronted him in mid-June 2024, I recommended two students which helped me do some bioinformatics tasks to him to help his work. (One of the students even helped him do farm work at GTIIT during the summer vacation. I felt sorry for her) By the end of July 2024, realizing he could not plagiarize my paper himself, he began encouraging others to plagiarize it. Under such circumstances, even the University of California, Berkeley found it difficult to withstand the pressure. If I didn’t refute the rumors, I would surely die soon, which is why I decided to publicly refute the claims.
Someone asked me, Prof. Yigal Achmon is so bad and he made so many mistakes, so why you worked with him for eight months? I shared some key details of how he gained my trust in this article https://www.biomathematics.org/?p=728.
Abstract: I am an undergraduate student. My name is Li Tuobang. My English name is Johon. Since April 2021, I worked with Prof. Yigal Achmon, an assistant professor in soil science, helping him with various bioinformatics issues without receiving feedback or education. I haven’t been his lab member and never attended his group meeting. In May 2021, after I initially demonstrated my abilities, he started to test whether he could engage in illegal actions to me without facing consequences. I failed to understand his intentions in time. There is a key recording in June 2024 with Prof. Yigal Achmon confirming most facts https://youtu.be/4Xhn8Wrzxdk?si=Si4evfdlKDvjPro_ https://jmp.sh/2YlQ2hVK . The text version and related analysis is in https://www.biomathematics.org/?p=447 . He later asked me to apply for his graduate, but I declined politely.
Since his tenure review was in mid-2022, he began worrying from the end of November 2021 that I might not help him in the future, which could hinder his research. He started creating trouble for me, trying to delay my graduation. Despite my best efforts to negotiate with him, offering to recommend others to continue the work if I was unavailable, I could not stop his plan and left the school at the end of 2021. But I did not immediately complete the formal termination procedures, hoping to maintain my relationship with the Technion.
At the end of 2021, I stopped attending regular classes but did not submit an application to terminate my studies at that time. After leaving Guangdong Technion (GTIIT), I had more time and independently wrote some biostatistics and theoretical statistics papers while working in a rented room. These papers can let me earn me the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine and the Fields Medal. Due to my poor mental state at the time, especially Asperger syndrome and severe post-traumatic stress disorder, I was afraid that publishing Nobel-level results would severely disrupt my normal life. Thus, I directly transferred the related materials to a U-disk and deleted all files in the computer. It wasn’t until April 2024 that I realized the Fields Medal, since it had never been awarded for theoretical statistics results before. I had previously thought these achievements could at most earn the COPSS Presidents’ Award.
Prof. Yigal Achmon was extremely angry about my departure and began criminal activities towards me starting in May 2022. He published his first paper as the final author one month before the tenure review and became an associate professor. From June to August 2022, he formed a detailed murder plan: to cause a car accident on a national highway I crossed everyday from my rented room behind the McDonald to the Chaoshan Fourth Beef Hotpot restaurant. Since I had not formally terminated my studies, killing a student from the same institution had many difficulties. He hoped to expel me first and then kill me. However, expelling a student in Mainland China requires government approval, typically only possible for students who have committed criminal offenses. To expel me, he fabricated rumors and evidence about me stealing various items in October 2022 and coerced others to spread them. His plan was to spread these rumors to GTIIT’s Undergraduate Studies office to have me expelled before killing me. In November 2022, I received a warning email from the Undergraduate Studies office about my expulsion. I am familiar with related regulation in China and in GTIIT, so I realized the danger, I quickly replied to the email, briefly introducing Prof. Yigal Achmon’s bullying and subsequently explaining the situation in detail to Prof. Harold Corke, an internationally renowned scholar in grain science. His strong support, along with the small-scale public exposure of the conflict, allowed me to safely get through a few months and continue refining my statistical results. Prof. Yigal Achmon changed tactics, spreading the rumors throughout the whole university and beyond, and attempted to induce me to voluntarily terminate the study from November 2022 to March 2023. GTIIT’s annual tuition was 95,000 yuan, and with my excellent grades, these absurd rumors led to many students terminating and faculty resignations.
In early March 2023, I judged that Prof. Yigal Achmon would take further criminal actions upon learning about my theoretical statistical papers, and even Prof. Harold Corke would have difficulty protecting me at that time. Therefore, I submitted an termination application, with the reason, studying difficulties, and got approval on April 2023. In May 2023, Prof. Yigal Achmon discovered my highly confidential theoretical statistical papers through illegal means. However, since he had already secretly spread those theft rumors nationwide, it became extremely difficult for him to murder me due to the high level of attention I received. He then spread the rumor to more scholars to prevent the publication of my papers and planned to collaborate with others to plagiarize them. Spreading false rumors, concealing my strengths, and using other people as his weapon, are his common tactics.
My paper was under review at PNAS, with editor Peter Bickel, who is one of the most prestigous figures in the history of statistics. He is a statistics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, the first COPSS Presidents’ Award winner, and a member of both the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the National Academy of Sciences. He is also a student of Erich Lehmann, one of the leading figure in nonparametric statistics. (Erich Lehmann is a student of Jerzy Neyman, one of the three founders of modern statistics). His valuable comments on my papers substatinally improved the quality and clarity of them and, more importantly, helped me rebuild trust in others. With his and PNAS’s full support, Prof. Yigal Achmon, a soil science associate professor, could not plagiarize my statistics papers. However, the public pressure from the rumors and the leakage of other confidential papers made it difficult for the editor Peter Bickel to make a decision on accepting my paper. Since I did not know the specific scope of the rumors and was concerned about implicating innocent parties, I did not refute the rumors in time.
In February this year, I became aware of my psychological problems and received corresponding treatments. I have basically cured since June. It was only last month that I clarified all the rumors to PNAS and UC Berkeley. However, after realizing he could not plagiarize my papers, he encouraged other scholars to do so, trying to create a collective incident. The situation has become very severe; I have reported the attempted murder to the police, but Prof. Yigal Achmon is currently absconding abroad. Additionally, as plagiarism is an academic dispute, it requires broader dissemination to curb the attempts to plagiarize. I will provide relevant feedback to people who are helping me.
Nobel-level paper: I developed a method based on moment differences of mass-weighted intensity distributions to infer metabolic directions and magnitudes. This method directly addresses the nearly a century issue in biochemistry regarding the ambiguous definitions of the two fundamental metabolic directions, anabolic and catabolic. Additionally, it solves the problem of how to utilize unknown mass spectrometry data that has plagued metabolomics study for over thirty years since 1990s. I posted related education video in YouTube and article in Quora . The related papers are deposited in ArXiv .
Fields Medal-level papers: I designed a new type of estimator called “recombined estimator,” which addresses a more than two-century-old problem in statistical theory since Carl Friedrich Gauss. This method ensures robustness and low variance while minimizing bias as much as possible. The derived theories have established a new branch of statistics and also contributed to the development of geometric mathematics. I posted related education video in YouTube and article in Quora . The related papers are deposited in ArXiv ,ArXiv, and ArXiv .
There is also a paper on matrix dissimilarity that could potentially qualify for the Fields Medal, although the related theory is not yet complete. I posted related education video in YouTube . The related papers are deposited in ArXiv .
Additionally, I have a paper on decomposing random structures that could individually qualify for the highest award in statistics, although the related theory is also incomplete. I posted related education video in YouTube . The related papers are deposited in ArXiv .
Under Yigal Achmon’s aggressive rumors, these papers are known to nearly all professors in biostatistics and theoretical statistics. Some of them just do not yet know that Yigal Achmon’s claims are false.
（1）Growing Up in a Small Town
My name is Li Tuobang. My English name is Johon. I was born in Deqing, a mountain town belonged to the Zhaoqing city in the west of Guangdong province. My father is an engineer focusing on forest pest management. In 2014, as one of three in the Guangdong province and the only one in Zhaoqing city, he was awarded the honorary title of “the most beautiful forest doctor” by the National Department of Forestry. My mother is a senior English teacher in a rural middle school. My middle school was Deqing Xiangshan Middle School. I was admitted to Guangdong Zhaoqing Middle School in 2010, which has the best provincial best high school in Zhaoqing. I have studied Chinese handwriting and painting since I was a kid and love Chinese culture. In 2007 I found that the effect of using commercially available Chinese handwriting paper to practice traditional handwriting was not as good as using paper made by bamboo, I then studied the knowledge with many Chinese artists, and found that it was because the popular used Chinese traditional handwriting papers were similar to that used in Qing dynasty (1636-1912). However, many artists are more interested in studying the handwriting style of Song dynasty (960-1279), which methods of producing papers are very different from those of the Qing dynasty. After realizing this gap, I searched related materials and contacted a factory to try to mimic the papers of Song dynasty (that factory produced a type of paper that is about 60% similar to the Song Dynasty paper). With several trials, in 2009, I successfully almost completely recovered one type of Song Dynasty paper (there are several types of papers popular at that time) and then started to sell that type of paper online and got many customers. Many of them are famous artists and from the best art universities in China. I probably opened a new small market in handwriting papers at that time.
（2）Long term health issues
My health condition has been poor since 2013, and my sleep is also very poor. I usually only wake up at noon or even afternoon. Especially during 2013 to 2014, my mental state was extremely poor. I subsequently self-studied a great deal about biology and medicine. I have studied the classic textbook of molecular biology, molecular biology of the cell. Because I considered to go to a US university, I self-studied most American high school courses and college courses related to the AP exams. In April 2017, I suffered from heart failure (ejection fraction: 32%) due to long-term use of metoprolol. My case is very rare because metoprolol itself is a classic drug for heart failure. I then studied the relevant literature, speculated on several possible mechanisms, and successfully cured the disease, which has a very low cure rate, two years later.
I took the Chinese university entrance exam, Gaokao, in June 2017. I ranked in the top 15% among all students who study science in Guangdong province, and enrolled at Guangdong Pharmaceutical University because I want to study pharmacy and one of my aunts was a physician at the affiliated hospital of Guangdong Pharmaceutical University and also a teacher at that university. My ejection fraction had returned to normal by then, but my health condition was still poor. When I arrived at the campus, I realized that my health condition could not tolerate the school life of taking courses every day, so I terminated the study.
In 2018, PNAS published a series of reviews and papers discussing the issues of reproducibility and replicability in science. It was at this time that I first encountered the precise definition of replicability. The National Academy of Sciences defines replicability as obtaining consistent results across studies aimed at answering the same scientific question, each of which has its own data. In other words, replicability emphasizes the consistency of experimental results. I realized at that moment that this is an extremely fundamental concept, highlighting the importance of consistency at the core level of scientific methodology. Subsequently, I delved into various angles and fields to consider how to improve the replicability of scientific research, primarily focusing on statistics and biology.
At the time, I was exploring how to construct a nonparametric consistent robust mean estimator, as I knew that current robust mean estimators had significant biases under skewed distributions. Thus, according to the NAS definition, experiments using these estimators would have poor replicability. Furthermore, as discussed in a PNAS paper, robust algorithms can enhance replicability. My initial attempt involved using some distances, such as the Stahel-Donoho distance, to detect outliers, remove them, and then apply classical estimations. However, after a while, I realized that this approach was essentially the same as trimming the mean. I couldn’t find any direction, so this research project was put on hold.
In June 2018, my Gao Kao (Chinese college entrance exam) score placed me in the top 5%, with a score of 547. I was subsequently admitted to the Guangdong Technion (GTIIT) to study Biotechnology and Food Engineering. At that time, GTIIT admitted a total of 175 students in Guangdong Province, with the highest score being 601, the lowest score 507, and the average score 543. GTIIT is a university located in Shantou, Guangdong Province, and some courses are taught by visiting professors from the Technion. GTIIT was my first choice for early admission, with my second choice being the University of Nottingham Ningbo China, and the comprehensive admissions option was Beijing Normal University & Hong Kong Baptist University United International College. Many professors from the Technion, such as Susan Zilber and Ron Aharoni, contributed to my education. I had extensive discussions with Prof. Ori Lahav, Dean of the Undergraduate Studies, who, along with Prof. Eli Aljadeff, designed a plan that allowed me to take some pure mathematics courses within the Math department, which helped mature my mathematical skills. I studied biostatistics and theoretical statistics by myself for interest.
（3）Highly complex experience shapes neutral political preferences
On the Chinese Internet, led by Zhihu, a Chinese Quora, there has been a strong anti-Muslim craze since 2015. By the end of 2016, there were even various answers that encouraged public discrimination and reporting of Muslims. These answers clearly violated the basic values, so I wrote an answer about human rights on Zhihu. Around 2017, I realized that conflicts in China and even the entire human society would enter an unprecedentedly intense stage in the future. I have expressed related anxieties on multiple social platforms. This anxieties was due to my highly neutral political preferences. I can hardly stand on firmly on any parties. While such preferences were shaped by my highly complex experience.
For example, both my parents are from Hunan province. Hunan is an inland province in southern China, at the north of Guangdong Province. The accent in Hunan is very different from Cantonese, and the customs and daily habits are also very different. In China, there is a conflict between coastal provinces and inland provinces, similar to the red states and blue states in the United States, and my background makes me neutral in such conflict. Also, my high school is one of the few high schools in mainland China that regularly admits students from Xinjiang province every year. There are two to three hundred Xinjiang students in the school, so I had some close contact with Muslims in high school. I know that most Muslims are just ordinary people and are not related to terrorist activities. The fight against terrorism must not turn into racial or religious discrimination. Then I went to GTIIT and learnt from many Jewish teachers. I know a lot about Israeli history, culture, and technology. Therefore, I am basically neutral on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. I oppose the extremist terrorist attacks from Hamas, but I also oppose many views of the Israeli far-right extremists. My position on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is to hope for peace between Palestine and Israel. I oppose any scheme to intensify the conflict. I am Chinese and I grew up in China. I am familiar with Chinese culture and history, while most of my science knowledge above high school level came from American textbooks and courses. I am studying in the United States. Therefore, I have been very concerned and anxious about the conflict between China and the United States.
In general, I just hope that I can protect myself and do my own thing. My general strategy at that time is to choose areas that are less controversial. Of course, I know that even in these areas, there are undercurrents, and I walk on thin ice with caution. At the same time, I basically stopped posting anything publicly on social platforms since 2018.
（4）Working with Prof. Yigal Achmon and disputes
Since 2018, I started to pretend that I was an ordinary and sometimes ignorant student in front of most of the teachers and classmates at GTIIT. I rarely reveal my knowledgeable side. On the contrary, I try to package myself as an ordinary but slightly outstanding student. I had a lot of answers on Zhihu before, but most of them were changed to anonymous after I enrolled in school, and they were not changed back until 2024.
I have known Prof. Yigal Achmon, an assistant professor of soil science, since I enrolled in 2018. After completing his postdoctoral work in 2018, he became an assistant professor at the GTIIT. In April 2020, I was hospitalized due to illness. As a result, I missed most of the final exams and fell behind in many courses. My health continued to be poor, and starting in October 2020, I lived off-campus. Due to my special circumstances, I often submitted assignments and attended classes later than other students. Some teachers showed their understandings, and some did not; he belonged to the former category. I was thus thankful to him for doing so and learned about his field.
Since April 2021, I had collaborated with him for eight months. I helped him resolve many bioinformatics issues without any form of feedback. I have never been his lab member nor attended any of his lab meetings. During this period, he did not make any direct contributions to me, whether in terms of bioinformatics skills, concepts, or ideas. In May 2021, after I initially demonstrated my abilities (which were at a level similar to the top 3 in GTIIT at the time), he expressed a disdainful attitude towards the Chinese government on different occasions, possibly to test whether a foreigner could break Chinese laws without punishment. I failed to understand his intentions in time.
At the end of May 2021, he showed me a PCA plot created by a student in his lab and prepared to submit a related paper to an SCI journal. I noticed some mistakes and suggested that he should not proceed. He did not heed my advice. At the same time, he sent me materials related to joining his lab. Feeling a sense of danger, I did not sign the documents, did not reply to the emails, and did not complete any related procedures or attend his group meetings. Unlike coursework, which is less hierarchical, working in a lab involves a superior-subordinate relationship with a salary. Technically, students in his lab are his subordinates, and he is the boss. His authority over me would be much greater than that of course instructors. Given my excellent understanding of the various spoken and unspoken rules in the academic world. I chose to maintain a distance from him to avoid potential conflicts. This was the first disagreement between us.
In a subsequent meeting, he told me that he had sent a batch of samples to BGI Genomics for sequencing and that the preliminary results were already available. He asked his assistant to show them to me. After reviewing the results, I found that the sequencing quality was very poor and went to find him. At that time, he was chatting with his students, so I called him outside and quietly informed him that the sequencing quality was very poor and those data were unusable. He said it was BGI’s problem and that we should make them redo the sequencing or he wouldn’t pay them. I replied that it was unlikely to be their problem, as they are highly competent and their processes are standardized and well-managed. We then had some disagreements, primarily because I suggested he stop sending samples to BGI and check his own process for issues, while he insisted it was entirely BGI’s fault. I was very concerned that his decision could affect the entire research progress, so I repeatedly advised him, but to no avail.
His two professional mistakes were shocking, and at that time, I considered whether to stop collaborating with him. However, due to the pandemic, many professors from Technion could not enter China to teach. Prof. Yigal Achmon was the only professor I had frequent interactions with at that time, and he came from a kibbutz, which aligned with my support for the Israeli left. I had always upheld a tolerant attitude, believing that a broad-minded approach is essential. Although I disagreed with some of his practices, I thought they would not affect our continued collaboration. I thought that he would eventually realize his mistakes and change his approach. Prof. Yigal Achmon hoped that I could teach a bioinformatics course to his lab’s students during the summer, and I agreed. He asked me to apply for his graduate, but I declined politely.
In July 2021, I was unwell and went to the hospital several times. In September 2021, I sent Prof. Yigal Achmon a syllabus for a bioinformatics course on microbiome analysis, named community analysis of microbiota, but due to subsequent busy schedules, the course was never formally launched. Meanwhile, Prof. Yigal Achmon became very anxious since October, far from the confidence he had six months earlier. He was facing a tenure review in the summer of 2022. He needed to publish at least one paper as the last and corresponding author to pass the review. By that time, although he had co-authored several papers, he had not published any as the last corresponding author, and his tenure review was approaching. Given the lengthy publication process in academia, the pressure he was under was considerable. He eventually managed to publish such a paper in early May 2022, just two months before the deadline of tenure review.
At that time, I could guess that the paper with the wrong PCA had likely been rejected. He later admitted that he also realized the quality of the previous sequencing was very poor. This meant it would be difficult for him to publish the related paper before the summer of the following year. In a private conversation, we reviewed the entire process from sampling to sequencing and discovered that BGI used a different DNA extraction reagent than the PowerSoil Kit he had used in California. By then, I had reviewed many soil science-related papers and knew that not using that specific kit would significantly increase the risk of failure, so I suggested that it might be an issue with the kit. He knew the importance of the PowerSoil Kit and had bought several for the lab but had not used them. Due to language barriers, he had communication issues with BGI Genomics and was unaware of which reagent they used. I then told him that if he could get the good sequencing data soon, I could complete the data analysis in one or two days, implying that he might still be able to meet the requirement before the deadline.
What I didn’t realize was that he had entertained criminal thoughts since May 2021. Unbeknownst to me, he actually had temporarily abandoned these thoughts between October and November 2021. At that time, I mentioned to him that my father is a plant engineer working in a government department and has connections with the local forestry bureau in Shantou. Additionally, I further showed more about my capabilities (the level I shown at that time was much more than top 3 in GTIIT, but similar to top 3 in Top 30 university). He then realized that the cost of committing a crime against me could be very high, and that if anything happened, I could use my connections to reach the Shantou police, so he temporarily abandoned his criminal intentions.
After that, I gave Prof. Yigal Achmon a 32GB USB flash drive to help me copy the data. He told me that “the USB flash drive was too small. Do you want me to buy a larger one for you”. I thought he was joking, so I said “this was enough for me”. Then he said, “I’m serious, I can get a bigger one”. I said, “ah, that’s not necessary. In fact, I have quite a few USB flash drives, but I just didn’t bring them out”.
（5）Prof. Yigal Achmon started finding my faults
In mid-November 2021, Prof. Yigal Achmon invited a businessman to GTIIT to promote his software, which was designed to use AI to predict changes in soil microbiomes. At that time, he believed this businessman could replace me to do the work. After listening to the businessman’s presentation, I discovered that he had many fundamental misconceptions about microbiomes, but Prof. Yigal Achmon thought the businessman had his strengths in computing. I stayed up late that night explaining the issues to him until dawn, and it was only then that he realized the businessman was unreliable. This incident was as shocking to me as the PCA and sequencing quality issues, and I hardly slept that night.
At that time, I was helping him analyze a set of data, and he often pushed me since September 2021. I contacted five friends who are major in biotechnology and food engineering, hoping they could help share the workload, but none of them were willing to work with Prof. Yigal Achmon. However, after I revealed more of my own capabilities in October and Nobember 2021, he stopped pushing me and instead sought other potential candidates to replace my role.
This case reveal an internal logic of him, that it was impossible for him to work with extremely excellent people in the long term. As long as you are excellent (and this criteria is not very high, just the top 3 in a ordinary university), he will either try to destroy you in various forms, either not work with you, but instead, other people. Because in his world view, the extremely excellent people must be destroyed. If he worked with an extremely excellent people, and that guy was not eventually destroyed by his criminal actions, that means he recognized such things. Such exemption would greatly shake his world view. He cannot let such things happen.
At that time, the data I analyzed with him was registered in a research course, and the analysis results needed to be submitted as a final project. According to the relevant regulations, besides him, several other GTIIT professors would also be involved in grading. After that night’s talk about that businessman, he realized that the businessman was unreliable and decided not to seek others’ help. The next afternoon, he threatened me, saying, “You will be very busy, you won’t have time. It is the best to finish the work before the end of this year. It is related to your research course. If you don’t finish that, the teachers might ask some very hard questions and it might impact your graduation.”
At the time, although I had a sense of danger, I didn’t realize he had already resumed his criminal intentions. This time was different because he was capable of committing murder. It was just a matter of whether he would direct those intentions towards me.
In early December 2021, he, together with Dr. Alex Samusev, the manager of the microbiology lab, found fault with me during the food microbiology lab and expelled me from the lab. This was his academic freedom, which I respected. I knew he was concerned that I wouldn’t work with him in the future, so I explained that I was very interested in his soil pest management research because my father is also a forest pest management engineer. I had read his textbooks since I was young and developed an interest in this field. I also explained that my research would easily attract too much attention, so I hoped his research quality would reach a certain standard; otherwise, someone might notice issues that would not be worthwhile. Additionally, I had already sent him the course syllabus and planned to teach his lab students. I emphasized that if his students were not capable of certain data analysis tasks, I could recommend other professionals to assist with those tasks, even if I was very busy in the future.
When Prof. Yigal Achmon faced my explanations, his attitude was to repeatedly place all the blame on Dr. Alex Samusev, claiming that Dr. Alex Samusev had a prejudice against me and suggesting that I should constantly beg him. He said he had no choice but to stand by teachers and that he hoped to “help” me. At the time, I believed him. Subsequently, I repeatedly beged Dr. Alex Samusev, but it ended in vain, and instead, he became even angrier with me. This is his typical tactics: fabricating rumors that I did not respect someone, turning those people into his weapon to find my faults and then further said something bad about his weapon to me.
Before Prof. Yigal Achmon’s involvement in late November 2021, Dr. Alex Samusev had treated me fairly well. I passed his microbiology lab with a high score, 88. Dr. Alex Samusev‘s character is very sensitive and he cares deeply about whether others respect him. After receiving the rumors from Prof. Yigal Achmon about my supposed disrespect, he became very concerned about me, found more clues that seemed to support these rumors, and then became extremely angry. He then became a weapon of Prof. Yigal Achmon.
I later met with Prof. Yigal Achmon again. This time, he told me that Dr. Alex Samusev was trying to create problems for me in other totally irrelavant courses, and that he was protecting me, suggesting that I could just retake the course. He hinted that I should make more promises to him. I mentioned that I had a paper about database and that he could help with some experiments for it. I hoped he would assist me with this matter, and he verbally agreed. However, he did not help resolve the issue. In the end, all the other students in the food microbiology lab course passed, while I was the only one who was expelled after taking more than 2/3 labs and received no grade. I passed the prerequisite course, microbiology lab, with a high score of 88.
I should be noticed that this is his academic freedom, and I respect that. I am very familiar with these unspoken rules, so although I was very angry, I approached the situation with a compromise mentality. What infuriated me the most was that this issue was initiated by Prof. Yigal Achmon. If it had only been about being expelled from the food microbiology lab, it might have been tolerable. I made a mistake, and Dr. Alex Samusev had the authority to act, which was his academic freedom. I was simply trying to negotiate and didn’t expect him to necessarily agree.
However, Prof. Yigal Achmon initially shifted the blame onto Dr. Alex Samusev when I pleaded, insisting that I should beg him. He then sowed discord between me and Dr. Alex Samusev. After receiving my promises, he explicitly stated he would help me pass the course but failed to keep his word and insisted on expelling me. Prof. Yigal Achmon went back on his word so I lost all trust in him, and I began to worry that he might cause further harm to me in the future.
For me, the most important thing was that I could not take that course again or allow Prof. Yigal Achmon to be involved in any of my courses. There was a high likelihood that he would use similar tactics to extort me academically. I believe the essence of the matter was that he was using my courses to extort me academically, and despite offering a generous ransom, he still killed the hostages.
At the end of 2021, I left GTIIT. In mid-January 2022, I returned to the campus to take the final exam for the food packaging course overseen by Dr. Alex Samusev. The exam was open book, but he had neither emailed nor posted online to inform us about this. He also didn’t mention it during a preparatory class I attended; he might have discussed it in another class. I only found out that the exam was open book the night before, through a WeChat group. I spent the entire night printing out the necessary materials.
The exam had a lot of questions, and by the end, most students hadn’t finished. Dr. Alex Samusev had to extend the exam time for everyone by half an hour. I ended up scoring 69. If I had brought slightly fewer materials, I likely would have failed. His actions were clearly intended to cause me to fail the course. After the exam, I was sweating with anxiety and decided not to return to school unless necessary.
（6）The first elimination principle causes Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
After that, I suffered from severe post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). I suffered from severe insomnia and repeatedly replayed the trauma. I started doing some work with Dr. Mingxun Wang in November 2021. He was a postdoc at the UC San Diego, and he invited me to participate in his MassQL project and become a co-author. Dr. Mingxun Wang hopes to publish that article in Nature Biotechnology. This is a top journal in bioinformatics. He is a well-known bioinformatician who regularly publishes articles in top journals. I initially accepted his invitation, however, after that, Dr. Mingxun Wang found a position as an assistant professor at the UC Riverside, and I became afraid of him because Prof. Yigal Achmon was also an assistant professor. When he sent me an email confirming the author list in June 2022, I did not check the email in time and therefore did not confirm it. Partly due to the fear of his title of assistant professor.
Of course, it seems absurd now, but that was my mental state at the time because Prof. Yigal Achmon inflicted a lot of complex trauma on me. This kind of symptom—fear of anything associated with the trauma—is typical of PTSD. I was already 27 years old, and because of him, I couldn’t even obtain my undergraduate degree.
Prof. Yigal Achmon has a unique worldview from Soviet Union. He is generally good to many ordinary students and was good to me initially as well. However, after I demonstrated some ability in May 2021 (similar to those top three in GTIIT), his attitude towards me began to change drastically. He started planning to use extreme measures to create trouble for me. The expulsion from the lab course in early December 2021 was just the culmination of ideas that had been brewing for six months.
He told me that everyone is equal. He believed that if someone is too outstanding, it is abnormal. He often complained about various problems about GTIIT, saying he lacked the power to change them. He felt that outstanding individuals should unconditionally share everything with others, otherwise, they should be eliminated. He believed that the world should implement the first elimination principle. For him, using extreme measures against outstanding individuals carried no psychological burden at all.
Someone might think, I am not the first, this matter is totally not relavant to me.
1, His standard for “extremely excellent people” is not high. He is only concerned about whether he will be punished. If you think that someone like him, who attempts murder and escapes legal consequences, won’t make crime as a regular part of their life, you’re mistaken. Moreover, when he employs illegal means to continually target people, he completely disregards whether innocent bystanders might get hurt. For instance, when he spreads rumors, does he ever care about the lives of those involved? I usually try to avoid harming innocent people, but he thinks nothing of dragging more innocent people into the mess, believing it will increase his power. How do you think the possibility that might get caught up in it?
Prof. Yigal Achmon’s brutal style can be compared to that of Uday Hussein, Saddam’s son and Trofim Lysenko. If anyone against him, he doesn’t hesitate to start a fight, and if someone defies him, he resorts to murder. Prof. Yigal Achmon likes Shantou because the local culture means people generally have higher emotional intelligence and prefer to keep things comfortable (similar to Japan, where everything is very polite and pleasant). Locals usually adopt a weak, compromising attitude when bullied. Of course, there are also people in Shantou with lower emotional intelligence or those who dislike the approach, but such individuals don’t work with Prof. Yigal Achmon. Therefore, even a person as brutal as him can’t find murder targets in Shantou—until he met me. He is very articulate, and by June this year, when I spoke with him, he had been planning murders for two years and still insisted it was for my own good. This allows him to deceive many people in Shantou because the local customs focus on those altitutes instead of actual things.
2, If the leader selected under a system that destroys the excellent becomes your leader, what kind of life would you have? During the Soviet purges, which happened repeatedly, how would you choose between the Soviet Union and the Western Europe?
3, The development of civilization. Trofim Lysenko was originally a horticulturist. After promoting his theory in newspapers, he was promoted. He then showcased his oratory skills and began persecuting all scientists who supported Mendelian genetics. Among the earliest and most enthusiastic supporters of Lysenko was Nikolai Vavilov, the director of the Lenin All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences. However, after more than a decade, Nikolai Vavilov fell victim due to Trofim Lysenko’s political persecution and he, a pioneer agronomist, died of starvation in prison. The next two director of the Lenin All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences were also persecuted to death. Records indicate that the number of people directly persecuted by Trofim Lysenko reached as high as 3,000. Trofim Lysenko effectively controlled the Soviet scientific community. Later, Trofim Lysenko even started persecuting individuals from other disciplines beyond biology. For example, Soviet Nobel laureate Lev Landau signed a collective letter in 1955 questioning the Soviet leadership about Trofim Lysenko’s rejection of genetics, and directly challenged Trofim Lysenko by using the example of the virgin. Landau was involved in a serious car accident in 1962, and there were rumors of a direct connection with Trofim Lysenko.
After Lysenkoism was discredited in the 1960s, Trofim Lysenko himself was not subjected to any trial but retired safely and died a natural death. This was highly unusual in the Soviet Union.
Under Trofim Lysenko’s leadership, the Soviet scientific community practiced a system that destroys the excellent. Through his own efforts, Trofim Lysenko turned Soviet biology, which had previously won two Nobel Prizes, from being at the forefront of the world to lagging thirty years behind. His escaping from punishment subsequently encouraged many Russian scholars, leading to the prevalence of pseudoscience in Russia, which has been a persistent problem for Russian scientists since the 1980s. Even now, more than half a century later, while there has many efforts in Russia trying to eliminate the impact of Trofim Lysenko and Russia achieved top awards in physics, chemistry, and mathematics, but biology remains at zero.
Sophists might argue that if you do not agree with a system that destroys the excellent, you are supporting a system that destroys the final. Historically, systems that destroy the final are primarily associated with Nazi and the thoughts popular in 1930s. I have specifically written answrs analyzing the causes of Nazism on Zhihu (Chinese Quora, https://www.zhihu.com/question/53049340/answer/133444113), which involve ignoring basic human rights. The system that destroys the excellent is similar. Such arguments are mere sophistry. Only criminals or those uncomfortable with not committing crimes would choose between a system that destroys the excellent and one that destroys the final.
I know some people describe me as having low EQ and often offending people. In fact, although I have autism, Asperger’s syndrome, I have interacted with a large number of different people from child, and my social skills are not as bad as they describe. After being subjected to PTSD by Prof. Yigal Achmon at the end of 2021, my mental state deteriorated for a while, but it has returned to normal this year, June. I might occasionally overlook some minor details in social, but just minor.
Such minor oversights might upset a very particular narrow-minded individual who is highly sensitive to altitute. Based on my past experiences, even such individuals would only find my faults without breaking the rules, complain behind my back, and create some issues to let me feel bad. I had never had any serious disputes with anyone befor Prof. Yigal Achmon.
If someone felt discomforted and directly violated unspoken rules to cause trouble, and then committing crimes and even planning murder, is this something that a narrow-minded person would do? No, this is someone anti-social would do. If my behavior can truly provoke a narrow-minded person to commit murder, then normally, there should have been previous criminal acts against me. But in reality, there have been none. Even find my faults without breaking the rules, no one has ever tampered with issues that might impact my future.
（7）Independently wrote several important papers, wavering on whether to transfer
I lived in a rental room near Mcdonald in Shantou at that time. After leaving GTIIT, preparing papers on biostatistics and theoretical statistics on my own. Except for my family, I never discussed any details related to these papers with others, and the work was done with a high level of confidentiality. In January 2022, I considered transferring to Central South University of Forestry and Technology because my father graduated from there and still maintains a close relationship with the university. However, I was later informed that in China, as with many Western universities, transferring as a senior is not permitted. I found it difficult to find a university willing to accept me due to the reason of studying difficulties created by Prof. Yigal Achmon. Therefore, I considered publishing a good statistics paper and then seeking a professor who could help me resolve this issue.
My first consideration is how to improve the replicability in biostatistics. My first attempt is metabolic pathways. This is an old question, everyone have done some metabolomics analysis know that there are two main gaps in this area, one, there are many pathways haven’t found, second, there are many mass spectra cannot be associated with the corresponding chemical structures. MassQL is a mass spectra language that can be used to classify the chemical class of a spectra. Its super flexibility lets me realize that, in this area, there is no much things that can be done. After several days thought, I developed a method to infer the metabolic directions and magnitudes based on moment differences of mass-weighted intensity distributions. I immediately realized that this is a potential Nobel Prize-winning paper. However, at that time, my mental condition was very poor. I had Asperger symptom and my PTSD further amplified the symptom. I was afraid that such a Nobel Prize would totally destroy my normal life. Then, I transferred the materials to a U-disk and deleted all related materials in my computer.
After that, from UCLA Jingyi Jessica Li and inferring metabolic directions, I considered a matrix dissimilarity based on differences in moments and sparsity. My original plan was working with Prof. Mingxun Wang with this paper, however, after my papers can be shared to him, he found an assistant professor position in UC Riverside and I started to be afraid of him because Prof. Yigal Achmon was also an assistant professor.
These experience let me completely not trust anyone, and hardly work with anyone. I then changed my direction from biostatistics to theoretical statistics, which is mainly math and mostly done by a single author. Theoretical statistics focuses on designing various statistical tools and proving related theorems. Unlike biostatistics, where many important results come from collaborative work, about half of the significant results are achieved by single authors, with the majority of the rest being authored by two or three people. Four-author papers are the most. Completing papers independently is quite normal in theoretical statistics, and most major theoretical breakthroughs are made by only a few individuals.
In March and April 2022, due to the consideration of a suitable mean estimator in matrix dissimilarity, and the hope of publishing in PNAS, which has the fastest processing speed among all top journals, I reviewed the contemporary progress in robust statistics. One PNAS brief report “Cheap robust learning of data anomalies with analytically solvable entropic outlier sparsification” reminded the previous attempt for a nonparametric consistent robust mean estimator. Another PNAS comment “Taylor’s law and heavy tailed distribution” reminded me there is a type of scale estimator based on pairwise differences. After several weeks’ thought, I proposed recombined mean and quantile mean as near-consistent mean estimators for unimodal distributions, and using the kernel distribution to achieve robustness for central moments. Also, I proposed a primary version of binomial mean, which is based on the orderliness of quantile inequalities in unimodal distributions, but at that time the related theorems were not established. I used Google Scholar results to weight the biases computed.
I later submitted an unpolished statistical draft to PNAS in June 2022 due to intensive pushing and misunderstandings from my families. Before submission, to avoid a similar situation as the Nobel-winning paper, I checked the public impact of the highest prize in statistics, COPSS presidents’ award, I found that it has very little public impact. No matter in China or in Western Society, almost no one besides statistician knows this prize. This makes me feel safe and not worry the disruption of my normal life.
Although I didn’t have any titles, the PNAS editor, Peter Bickel, didn’t care about that. Instead, he passed the initial review within ten minutes as I clearly stated the ground-breaking role of the newly designed recombined estimators. The PNAS editor’s comments greatly improved the quality and clarity of my papers and more importantly, restored me the trust to other people.
(8) Prof. Yigal Achmon: From Crime to Murder
On May 19th 2022, he sent a message to me to ask for the possibility of continuing the work and wished me every success. I didn’t know he was saying the opposite. I was mistaken with him that he would stop finding my faults so stop the plan of transferring. Actually, he was hinting that he was preparing to coerce people to harass my personal life. This is a tactic he has frequently used before; after Dr. Alex Samusev removed me from his lab, he repeatedly told me that he hoped to “help” with my coursework. The issue is that I did not need his so-called “help.” Moreover, he wasn’t genuinely interested in helping me; he was merely suggesting that if I didn’t follow his advice, he would continue to have people cause trouble for me in the course. I used to understand these tactics, but on May 19, 2022, my PTSD was severe and my mental state was in a very poor condition, so I didn’t grasp it. Before that, whether the lab course instructors were intentionally or unintentionally causing me trouble, it was an academic dispute within the rules. However, when Prof. Yigal Achmon prepared to cause trouble in my personal life, it crossed into illegal and criminal behavior. This criminal behavior developed independently, starting from May 2021 when I first demonstrated my capabilities to him, leading to inevitable actions within the framework of the first elimination principle.
Prof. Yigal Achmon published his first paper as the last author in May 2022. In the summer of 2022, he passed his tenure review and became an associate professor at Guangdong Technion-Israel Institute of Technology. From June to August 2022, he began planning to murder me. At that time, I was still registed at GTIIT, and he thought it would be difficult to murder a student. He hoped to expel me first and then proceed with the murder. I had initially given up on transferring schools on May 19. In early July, the academic office sent me an email asking me to confirm my enrollment in mathematics courses in the Department of Mathematics, which I signed (I am very careful about signing documents). However, starting in late July 2022, I discovered some clues about Prof. Yigal Achmon’s dangerous intentions, which led me to reconsider transferring schools.
Starting in October 2022, Prof. Yigal Achmon began to bribe and coerce people to fabricate rumors about me stealing various items. He fabricated these rumors because, unlike other countries, in China, all students are registered with the government, and schools do not have the authority to expel students based on their own regulations. Expelling a student is very difficult and requires consent from the government; typically, only students who engage in severe illegal to criminal activities can be expelled. Anyway, because the students are registered in the government, the hardness of expelling a student in China is similar to expelling an employee in a government-owned organisations in US. Despite he had already gathered a lot of information about me, he could not expel me according to the fact. His plan at the time was to fabricate evidence about stealing food and then submitted to the office of Undergraduate Studies to expel me on the back and the formal reason for expelling me is studying difficulties.
According to my reveiw, he even had a detailed murder plan at that time: to stage a car accident. I was living in a rental room behind the McDonald at that time, and I had to cross a dual six-lane national highway every day to go to the local Chaoshan Beef Hotpot restaurant for beef kway teow. Only he and a very few people he had coerced knew about this plan.
In early October 2022, my grandmother suddenly passed away. I was deeply distressed and had trouble sleeping for over a month. In early November 2022, the office of Undergraduate Studies emailed me to inform me that due to my prolonged absence from campus, I might be expelled for studying difficulties. I realized something was wrong because I was in my fifth year, and typically, expulsion for prolonged absence would only occur in the sixth year after repeated communications. The fact that I was given a direct warning of expulsion without any prior notice indicated there was an issue behind it. I briefly replied to the email to the office of Undergraduate Studies, saying, “Yes, I am experiencing studying difficulties because a professor has kidnapped my coursework and continually caused me trouble just because I am unwilling to continue working with him.” Given that my mental state was particularly poor due to my grandmother’s death, these words were not well-considered, but they inadvertently saved my life. Later, in mid-November 2022, I met with top food science professor Harold Corke at the Treehouse Café next to the school.
(9) First disclosure of the dispute, Prof. Harold Corke involved, suspension of the murder plan
During my conversation with Prof. Harold Corke, I used my iPad to review the WeChat chat history with Prof. Yigal Achmon while explaining the situation to him. It was only upon reviewing the chat records that I discovered more issues, such as his repeated disregard for my previous professional opinions, which he later admitted were wrong, but he never reached out to me initiatively. Additionally, his repeated suggestion for me to contact Dr. Alex Samusev was likely an attempt to provoke conflict between us. At that time, I had a good talk with Prof. Harold Corke and believed he was trustworthy, so I revealed the full extent of the situation to him. I also hinted that I had a strong understanding of academic rules and the ability to produce high-level papers, suggesting that it was worth their while to make a significant effort to retain me.
During the conversation, I was also candid with Prof. Harold Corke about my intention to transfer to California. I implied that the treatment I received was extremely unfair and had a significant impact on my mental state, hoping for some form of compensation from the school. As an internationally renowned scholar in agriculture and editor of top journals, Prof. Harold Corke is extremely knowledgeable about academic rules, and I was confident he understood my hints. Prof. Harold Corke mentioned that he initially heard that it was just a case of students failing and dissatisfaction with the teacher, and he was unaware of the rumors. After hearing about the dispute between Yigal Achmon and me, Prof. Harold Corke expressed clear support for me. In November 2022, I canceled my plan to transfer to the University of California, Berkeley. Due to his support and the small-scale public disclosure of the conflict, I was temporarily safe during the following months.
At that time, I already used Donoho and Huber’s theorem for the proving of robustness. Donoho has close relation to Technion. Also, I realized that Bickel’s student, Prof. Ya’acov Ritov, was also a Technion alumni (I didn’t know that previously). In addition, I used Lai’s PNAS paper to form a selective optimization estimator. At this time, Stanford and Technion’s weight was already much higher than that in June 2022. Technion forms an important part in my immediate stopping of the transfer plan. If other people, they will at least have some double plans, they will apply and then decide, but I even did not apply that.
(10) Identified Prof. Yigal Achmon’s criminal intentions
In January 2023, although I wasn’t aware of his murder plan, I had many clues to let me judge that Prof. Yigal Achmon is a potential criminal and it would be too dangerous for me to stay in GTIIT. It would be difficult to counteract the hostility from Prof. Yigal Achmon with just my own efforts or those of Prof. Harold Corke. Before the conversation with Prof. Harold Corke in November, I believed that since Prof. Harold Corke had previously been the research dean and was much higher in rank than the newly promoted associate professor Yigal Achmon, as long as Prof. Harold Corke supported me, I could ensure my safety. However, by mid-December 2023, I realized that the hierarchical relationship only works if Prof. Yigal Achmon still respects basic rules, the hierarchical system, and listens to leaders. It became clear to me that he completely disregards this system. In fact, Prof. Yigal Achmon had privately expressed strong disdain for current academic rules, saying, for example, there are many issues at GTIIT that he currently does not have the power to change and feels he lacks sufficient resources. However, from my perspective, his resources are quite ample. The salary for assistant professors at GT is among the highest in the world (annual salary of 150k dollar). Although I do not know the exact amount of various project funds he has received in China, his extravagant expenditures suggest that they far exceed those of professors at other universities of similar standing. The bioinformatics analysis I provided him was at a top level, yet he could not even take my basic advice. His disregard for professionalism is not only towards me but likely towards the school’s management as well. Therefore, I submitted my application to terminate my studies in early March 2023.
I was a senior in 2021 and I was expected to graduate in the summer of 2022. In March 2023, I was already 28 years old. Leaving because of the studying difficulties caused by Prof. Yigal Achmon was a very difficult decision. If transferring to the University of California, Berkeley, since I already missed the transfer deadline, December 2022, this means I would not be able to start as a transfer student until September 2024, resulting in a one-and-a-half-year wait. I am very familiar with academic rules, the reputation of the Technion, and its status in Israel. I was also concerned that leaving might damage my personal reputation. My families also shared similar concerns to me. However, due to Prof. Yigal Achmon, I had no other choice. I realized that the potential impact of my papers in statistics was far greater than previous achievements that had won COPSS’s president award. However, in the past, statistical achievements have generally been unknown to the general public. Many Chinese, both from China and the United States, have won the COPSS’s president award before. Therefore, I judged that if I left, I would not face public pressure, only the need to explain to the Technion. I planned to start a company in Israel to maintain my relationship with the Technion, also, I asked my friend for Prof. Harold Corke’s research, hoping to feedback his help. So overall, I anticipated not encountering too many problems. It wasn’t until April 2024 that I learned these papers could potentially win the Fields Medal. I had previously reviewed past Fields Medal winners and found that none had focused on theoretical statistics. The Fields Medal rotates consideration among different branches. I realized in April 2024 that statistics is one of the weakest and least fortunate branches in the mathematics community. Despite outstanding statistical achievements in the past, those who made these achievements were almost forty years old at the time, and so no statistician has yet won the Fields Medal. The Fields Medal is awarded every four years to 2-4 mathematicians who have made outstanding contributions and are under forty years of age. Since Fields Medal winners are certain to have high public prestige, this might have caused some misunderstandings.
Looking back, even this judgment still greatly underestimated the consequences. Prof. Yigal Achmon, when I did nothing wrong but just not back to school, already planned to kill me since June 2022, just because Prof. Harold Corke protected me for several months. If he knew my theoretical statistics papers at that time, he would surely kill me as he is fabricating rumors to a future Fields Medal winner, and Prof. Harold Corke didn’t have the ability to really stop him. Prof. Yigal Achmon is very good at using criminal actions to increase his actual power.
Some people might say that Prof. Yigal Achmon should have sought help from the school leaders after I left at the end of 2021, rather than planning a crime and murder me. But if you think in this way, you don’t know him. What he fears most is me helping other professors. He never revealed the ability I showed to him to the other two biotechnology professors. If he had sought help, it would likely that I would work with Prof. Harold Corke. This was something he was unwilling to accept under any circumstances. He would rather have me expelled than worked with other GTIIT professors because that would contradict his logic of destroying the excellent while keeping them around him to assist others. His behavior isn’t just foolish; it’s a result of a series of criminal theories guiding his actions. For him, if I completely disappear and am no longer in his sight, he might stop his murder plan. But if I stay at GTIIT and help other professors, it’s a torment for him. Over time, he would be unable to resist the urge to kill.
I considered to transfer to a UK university, which transfer deadline is often May or June, but due to the strong support and valuable comments from the editor, I did not apply that. In my papers, Hodges, Lehmann, Bickel’s work contributed with nearly half, they are all UC Berkeley’s professors. Also, I contacted Prof. Jacob Steinhardt in May 2023 for further explorations of Robust estimation from distribution structures: Mean.
(11) Too evil to be pursued, many students and teachers left GTIIT
In April, I came back to GTIIT and a teacher from Undergraduate Studies told me that, more than 5% students terminated their studies in GTIIT and some teachers resigned. I didn’t know that those people were mostly left due to those rumors. Prof. Yigal Achmon started to escalate the scope of the rumors to my high school, the things I know from my friends implications including stealing computer, iPhone, express packages, AirPods, food, etc. and going to cheat others for money (yes, a potential Fields Medal winner stole food and cheat others for money when preparing those manuscripts) and coerced someone to track me.
However, he could not find my papers because I made it extremely secret and in front of most teachers and students, I often pretended that I was an ignorant and emotional student. Prof. Yigal Achmon and Prof. Harold Corke are the only two in GTIIT, that I showed a high level of academic ability. Many of my words in front of them are not true, but I don’t intend to cheat anyone for interest, just for my safety, this is my habit of living in such an environment.
The basic principle of Prof. Yigal Achmon is “too evil to be pursued”. As the scope of the rumors increases, and his evil increases, even Prof. Harold Corke, who is much more pretisgous than him in academic world, was not dare to intervine, not even saying other people. By doing more and more bad things, he is constantly increasing the threshold of pursuing his crime. No one in GTIIT now can pursue him. So I need to seek help from the public.
Prof. Yigal Achmon’s strategy to evade legal consequences is to be “too evil to be pursued.” As long as his actions are sufficiently evil, the resources and authority required to pursue his crimes become disproportionately high. No one in GTIIT now can pursue him. Conversely, all the other professors were afraid of him. This created a situation where Prof. Harold Corke, who was academically far superior to Prof. Yigal Achmon, found himself ignored by Prof. Yigal Achmon. Such situations where lower-ranking individuals dominate those above them were quite common in the Soviet Union. For instance, Trofim Lysenko was only elected as a full member of the All-Union Lenin Academy of Agricultural Sciences in 1935 with the support of its president, Nikolai Vavilov. However, by 1940, Nikolai Vavilov was arrested due to the political persecution orchestrated by Trofim Lysenko and this agronomist died of starvation in prison in 1943. The core logic here is that once a person creates a situation that is “too evil to be pursued,” they can intimidate anyone, as everyone fears death.
(12) The theoretical statistics papers were discovered and Prof. Yigal Achmon’s attempted plagiarism.
In May 2023, he found my papers using illegal ways. However, at that time, those rumors had already spread to my high school in Zhaoqing, so my situation was gaining a lot of attention. Probably someone has protected me. In that situation, it was very difficult for him to murder me (I am very lucky in this sense, if I stayed in GTIIT, after he knew my papers, he would surely kill me). However, he realized very quickly that he is fabricating rumors about stealing food to a future Fields Medal winner. What he did was to kidnap the system, in the name of GTIIT and Technion, without permission, and he continued to spread the rumors to more scholars and block my papers from publishing and plagiarized my papers. He succeeded in the first two goals and formed a too evil to be pursued situation, but he, a soil science professor, could not plagiarize my statistics papers as my statistics papers were under review in PNAS and the editor is Peter Bickel, one of the most prestigious scholars in statistics. The editor protected my papers from being plagiarized even though he didn’t know whether those rumors were true, so he did not dare to accept my papers.
This situation of blocking my papers from publishing has lasted for one year, since July 2023, the editor knew about this event. My difficulty is that I wanted to refute the rumors to the editor, but Prof. Yigal Achmon often threat to kill me if I do so, and I believed for a long time, so did not send evidence to the editor (in fact, after sending this email to massive scholars, I have faced many murder threats, but I believe UC Berkeley can protect me). Due to the PNAS regulation, my contact with the PNAS editor could only in indirect ways so I don’t know many rumors. My mental status was quite poor since the end of 2021 to the February 2024, so the misunderstandings between me and other professors constantly grew, especially when constantly facing murder threats.
A more difficulty situation is that becuase he coerced someone to hack my computer, I worried about my other papers stored in the disk would be found, so I deposited my drafts to the preprint, zenodo, in a hurry in November. Previously, I only had two papers publically deposited in GitHub tubanlee, REDS:mean https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12110, REDS:moments https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14570 and https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.16039. . Besides that, matrix dissimilarity (Also a Fields-winning paper, https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.02051), inferring metabolic directions(a Nobel Prize-winning paper, https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.14887) amd REDS:nonasymptotic (a COPSS presidents’ award-winning paper, https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.18951) were stored in the disk.
These papers are still drafts, and many extensions have yet to be explored. I did not have a concrete plan for these papers until Prof. Yigal Achmon’s illegal activities disrupted my normal life. I have contacted many statistics professors from various universities and countries, etc, hoping to collaborate on completing the relevant extensions as soon as possible. Prof. Yigal Achmon’s strategy is to spread rumors wherever I reach out, thus preventing me from collaborating with others.
I tried to talk with Prof. Yigal Achmon to stop the illegal activities when I didn’t know the impact of those rumors. He said in September 2023 to me “Could I be the second author in those statistics papers? Then I can help you end this event. I am just trying to help you. I am just the second author, you are the first author.” I didn’t agree. Later, he asked me for a co-first author or co-corresponding author of inferring metabolic directions, I also didn’t agree. When facing those death threats, I agreed to say something good even not true for them, but those didn’t work, instead, after agreeing some of those rumors, my situation became much worse. Because when facing the extortion of such kind of guys, no matter what we do, the result is the same.
After I went to Berkeley in June, I reported the case to the Shantou police, and the police accepted my report.
The police need certain clues or a great social impact to initiate an investigation. I understand that. Moreover, when Prof. Yigal Achmon was extorting, he also directed people to hack into my phone and computer, so I couldn’t record it, so there was no recorded evidence of those clear extortions. A lot of my key evidence was deleted under their threat. As for the rumor, I mainly learned about it from the WeChat voice call with my friends, but when I asked them to provide clear and direct evidence to help me report to the police, no one was willing to help me. They are my friends, and I am very grateful that they are willing to hint that there are such rumors. If they are unwilling to do that, I can’t provide their information to the police to force them to cooperate with the investigation. I also understand my friend, because Prof. Yigal Achmon has countless ways to threaten me with death. After I rejected him, he said, “I wish you good health and success in publishing your papers.” I guess he threatened my friends in the same way. At the same time, he was careful to spread rumors and avoid spreading them to those who might help me. For example, Prof. Harold Corke didn’t know about those rumors before the investigation. In addition, he invested a lot of resources in those who might help me to sow discord between us.
In February and March 2024, with the help of some online answers from Zhihu, the Chinese Quora, I started to realize that I had PTSD and Asperger symptoms and started to cure myself. After that, my mental state gradually improved. Also, I realized my statistics papers has the potential for winning a Fields Medal since April 2024, so I started to understand such insane. Even Peter Bickel didn’t realize it before. When he first learned about the rumors in July, his first reaction was to ask me to delete the sentence in the papers that predicted the significant impact of these theories in statistics. Like me at the time, he believed that the significance of my papers required a professional statistician to evaluate, and that at most it would win the highest prize in statistics.
In June 2024, I realized that if anyone can plagiarize my matrix dissimilarity, he might also win a Fields Medal, this make me further understand the craziness of rumor mongering and plagiarization. Due to my research has been disrupted by this event, I finished my matrix dissimilarity within one day and submitted to ArXiv as a draft in a hurry without any theoretical work in June 2024. Previously, I already deposited the drafts in to another preprint platform, Zenodo. To be precise, in my current statistics papers, if it had been done by different people, it would have been enough to produce three COPSS presidents’ awards, two Fields Medals, and one Nobel Prize. This is the source of their crazy attempts to plagiarize. Such thing is very common in academia. The works of many Fields Medal winners are actually enough to win Fields Medals several times, but the Fields Medal will not be awarded repeatedly. Because if a person truly has the ability to win the Fields Medal mainly based on his strength, rather than luck, then naturally, he will make results that can win the Fields Medal more than once.
(13) Confront Prof. Yigal Achmon in person to obtain crucial audio evidence.
In June 2024, I returned to the GTIIT and had a conversation with Prof. Yigal Achmon. I reviewed all the key events that occurred during our collaborations, emphasized that he had no direct contribution to my research, and asked him to stop his illegal activities and help me withdraw the termination of studies application. He agreed to the first part but avoided discussing the second part, as he is already an attempted murderer and it is he intended to expel me. How could he possibly allow me to graduate from the GTIIT? He just wants to drag more people down to his level so he can feel secure. Moreover, he does not care that his actions could cause serious trouble for the GTIIT and the field of statistics because he is so bad and knows nothing about statistics. However, unlike before, this time I recorded the conversation, thus obtaining the most direct evidence for the first time. [Link to recording]. If you listen to this recording, you will know that, despite being an attempted murderer and spreading rumors about me, he can still shamelessly claim, “Everything I do is for your own good; I mainly care about your feelings and your interests.” This person is completely different from others involved because while others are somewhat guilty, he has a purely antisocial personality.
(14) Hope to repair the relationship with the Technion and the GTIIT.
I made a lot of efforts to maintain and repair my relationship with the Technion. This is also the main reason why it took me over a year from leaving the school to submitting my application to terminate my studies. I wanted to maintain a good relationship with the Technion while avoiding trouble from Prof. Yigal Achmon, but he continuously caused problems for me. Prof. Yigal Achmon consistently obstructed my efforts to restore my relationship with the Technion and spread numerous rumors within the institution. Some people say that Prof. Yigal Achmon should have sought help from the management of GTIIT after I left at the end of 2021, instead of resorting to criminal activities and planning murder. They just don’t know him. What he fears most is me working with other professors. He didn’t let the other two biotechnology professors know about the talents I displayed. If he sought help, it’s highly likely that I would have ended up working with Prof. Harold Corke. This is something he absolutely does not want. He would rather I terminated from GTIIT than allow me to work with other professors because that would contradict his logic: having talented people around who are not destroyed and are helping others. For him, if I completely leave and am out of his sight, he might stop his plans for murder. But if I stay at the GT and work with other professors, it is a form of torture for him. Over time, he would inevitably be driven to commit murder. His plans to murder me are the inevitable result of his philosophical logic.
GTIIT has some good teachers and students, but many people are kidnapped and coerced by Prof. Yigal Achmon now. I know someone might think my leave is immoral, however, we are statisticians and we know the level is minor and I had been considered for quite a long time, but cannot find a way to graduate from GTIIT, while at the same time, ensure my safety. I put my safety as the priority and I judged Prof. Yigal Achmon might find my faults at a criminal level if he knew my papers. However, in my original plan, I already planned to develop a business in Israel to maintain a relation to Technion. I am teaching the informal bioinformatics course planned three years ago, community analysis of microbiota, to 40 GTIIT/Technion students, without any payment. I uploaded some course records to YouTube https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLv12WMZUyCNBZG9fK1sd4idcNKzeZPZvE&si=XqTOGxPKeQsnTUo5. I have worked with some of those students, Berkeley students and some students from other universities for two important papers, one is transcriptomics meta-analysis of diabetic neuropathy, another is species comparison. Among these students are students from Prof. Yigal Achmon’s lab. Because Prof. Yigal Achmon has significantly expanded the number of lab members, many of my previous close friends have joined his laboratory in 2022. After I confronted him in mid-June 2024, I recommended two students to him to help his work in bioinformatics. (One of the students even helped him do farm work at GTIIT during the summer vacation. I felt sorry.)
(15) Confused about how to deal with the current crisis
PNAS rejected my papers in March 2024. As at that time, there were still many rumors. I came to UC Berkeley in mid-June 2024. I attended KSMB-SMB 2024 at Konkuk university and did a quite well poster presentation about my biostatistics paper. I transit in Osaka, and had a nice trip in Japan locally. I explained all the key events and rumors to the editor on mid-July, before going to George Mason university for attending the ICORS meets DSSV for presenting my theoretical statistics papers. However, it seems too late, although Prof. Yigal Achmon cannot directly plagiarize my papers, he encouraged other people to do so, and now this event is already becoming more complex. After the meeting, I began preparing to refute the rumors. Since prosecuting him would require a tremendous amount of time and effort and involve significant risks, I had initially intended to negotiate with him, considering civil action at most. However, his intent is always on seeing me destroyed. In this struggle, I missed the optimal time for refuting the rumors. Those plagiarizations won’t be accepted by the community, but how to deal with them is still an issue.
My general suggestion is that, if the papers haven’t been published in any journals, then those papers should cite my papers and recognize my priority and inspiration from my papers (modifications or withdraw an ArXiv paper is very easy). Only for very special cases, that they previously had very good foundations that can lead to that work, my work only speed up the progress, not totally inspired, i.e., if without my work, they can also do that sooner or later. In such cases, I recognize the co-independently discovery of their work (I already sent emails to the corresponding authors). However, such case is very rare, because my work is solving some questions that puzzled statistics for more than two centuries.
If there are papers based on my papers already published in a formal journal before August 4th 2024, those papers should not be cited after August 4th 2024. The best way is withdrawing those papers or doing modifications (cite and recognize my priority and inspiration). Withdrawing papers can use different excuses, there are many possible choices, no need with the reasons of plagiarizing. Also, they might publish another similar but more advanced papers to replace those papers after my papers publish, so this can make sure that those plagiarized work won’t be cited by anyone in the future.
I talked with some of the plagiarizers, some of them shows regret, however, some of them doesn’t think they are wrong. Prof. Yigal Achmon proposed a theory to justify his plagiarization and spread those virus to others, like, “I am poor, so I do not need to pay taxes”, “everyone are equal”. I agree that everyone are equal, I made answers about human rights publically https://www.zhihu.com/question/53049340/answer/133444113 . I also did many educational videos and answers to ensure the equality in education. Also, I did these works in a very difficult situation, my papers serious consideration in PNAS reflects the equality of PNAS in treating submitted manuscripts. However, I don’t understand why cite papers that are open-access and recognize the fact, my priority and inspiration, becomes “taxes” and “not equal”??? Do I charge anything for my ArXiv papers or my YouTube Videos? The study of theories has always been driven by a very small number of geniuses. In fields like mathematics, theoretical physics, theoretical chemistry, and theoretical biology, more than half of the top papers are single-authored, and the majority of the rest are authored by two or three people, with at most four authors. This tradition has remained unchanged for centuries. This means that most theoretical breakthroughs are made by just a few individuals. This is an objective fact. Some people advocate for academic egalitarianism because they lack the ability to publish independently. If a paper has only three or four authors, it can be more difficult for them to publish. Under academic egalitarianism, they can seize the opportunity to insert their names into the author lists of papers to which they have contributed almost nothing. If such logic can be tolerant, the hundreds of years tradition of the academic world will be shaken. No matter for my personal interest or for the community, I had to protect my interest.
I understand for such a long time rumor mongering, and also Prof. Yigal Achmon is very good at convincing people and fabricating rumors, he is very similar to Trofim Lysenko, so many people might join him, even some of my previous very good friends and even some of my closest relatives. Even UC Berkeley and Peter Bickel had puzzled for a long time. Otherwise why I didn’t refute the rumors for such a long time. My character is that when my actions might hurt other innocent people’s interest, I am very very very careful. Because I know many Guangdong Technion students and professors are innocent and don’t want to impact them. Because in this event, the source of evil is Prof. Yigal Achmon, because his criminal intention was developed independently, as early as May 2021, and according to his style, no matter whether there are any other events involve, he would surely rise murderous intention after knowing my papers. Also, he is very good in utilizing the weakness of the system and how to kidnap the system. He said to me “We all stands by teachers, not students, you cannot against the system”. The problem is that I never think about against the system. Instead, Prof. Yigal Achmon constantly hurts the system’s interest by creating ridiculous events.
For those persons or systems dragged, I don’t want them suffer negative impacts as long as they correct their mistakes. I won’t have any discrimination to them. Otherwise I just entered the trap set by Prof. Yigal Achmon. They should think, if I am really as weak as Prof. Yigal Achmon said, and he is such a selfish person, would he let you plagiarize my papers? He encourages you to plagiarize just because he can’t plagiarize them by himself and cannot kill me otherwise he would die. Using other people to achieve his own criminal actions is his usual tactic. And if you believe it, you have fallen into the trap, and if I am biased against you or more innocent people because you have fallen into the trap, then I will also fall into his trap. For myself, I used a cracked version of Mathematica without formal lisence while in the method I described Wolfram instead of Mathematica. In addition, I carelessly forgot to cite Prof. Jacob Steinhardt’s PhD decertation, although I recognized that in the YouTube videos. I will also cite those in the formal papers. Generally, for those preprint papers, having some mistakes is very normal and as long as those mistakes don’t appear in the formal SCI journal, it’s okay. I’m actually not particularly worried about plagiarism, because I know very well that even if a very small number of people who don’t know the truth and citate those things, not many people will actually recognize those things.
Overall, what concerns me most is whether this matter can be ended. The most important thing is to bring Prof. Yigal Achmon to justice as soon as possible; once his actions are sentenced, it will serve as a deterrent to others. Prof. Yigal Achmon is the source of evil. Once he is arrested, these thoughts will be dispelled, and the matter can be resolved. I have also told some innocent people who have been inadvertently involved that even if the police believe they are implicated, I will sign a mediation agreement and make every effort to ensure that they are not adversely affected.
(16) Refuting all the rumors
Generally, it is impossible to refute all the rumors as 1, I even don’t know what it is, if I know, I can let the police to further investigate, 2, they seems fabricate rumors that I cannot find evidence, e.g., they seem to accuse me stealing Apple Watch, but I never bought an Apple Watch and I don’t have an Apple Watch, how can I prove that I never steal something that I never bought.
But these are all rumors. He threatened me, implying that he had hired people who are very skilled at using generative AI to fabricate evidence and can create almost any type of rumor. I know he always tries to make things more complicated, presenting various seemingly rational analyses in an attempt to distance himself from the responsibility of attempted murder. Observers should consider whether his logic and rhetoric could apply to any criminal, even a terrorist. Which murderer does not have a reason?
Moreover, the rumors that Prof. Yigal Achmon made about me are basically what they are doing.
The only major accusations I can understand are:
1, stealing. This is a joke.
Prof. Yigal Achmon was trying to plagiarize my papers and stealing my ideas.
2, cheating. I often said some completely different, unreal words in front of different people to avoid troubles, but those words are not intended for hurting other people’ interest. Also, I have already changed my style.
Prof. Yigal Achmon has repeatedly spread rumors and extorted money, and his methods are exactly the same as telecommunications fraud. He was able to achieve this step mainly by taking advantage of the psychological characteristics of academics who generally more care about reputation and are unwilling to call the police.
3, not respecting girls. No, I support feminism. I have never had sex relation with any girl, although dating with a lot of girls. There were doxing events targeting me since October 2021, leading by a group of extreme feminists, who claim “if you are not prepare to merry her, you should not contact her” and they encourage other girls to dox and fabricate rumors to those boys not follow this rule. I had a PTSD towards those extreme feminists, but I am normal now. Those extreme feminism should not be confused with the general feminism. Also, Prof. Yigal Achmon didn’t know those doxing event and those extreme feminists, before June 2022. He developed criminal intention and threaten me independently in May 2021 (even he knew that, according to my interactions with him, he didn’t being impacted by those things). After he knew those events, he learned from those strategies and changed his murder plan to fabricate rumors and then murder. If without those extreme feminists, Prof. Yigal Achmon would also form his murderous intention sooner or later, but his plan would be very crude and simple, creating a car accident to kill me, totally without those rumors. The strategies of fabricating rumors he used were learned from those extreme feminists and he greatly emplified the maganitutes (those extreme feminists mainly fabricates rumors about sex relations, which is legal gray area. They are not dare to fabricate stealing as those are highly illegal). Later, he seems coerse some extreme faminists to transmit those rumors.
4, not respect to assistant professor. I had PTSD to that, so fear of the title, but now already cured. Also, I didn’t have that originally otherwise I would not work with Prof. Yigal Achmon, while I could work with Prof. Harold Corke, a top food scientist in April 2021. However, since Prof. Yigal Achmon was very hurry at that time, I decided only work with him.
Prof. Yigal Achmon himself cares very much about these titles. He told me several times, “We always stand on teachers, not students.” He often complained that he was an assistant professor and did not have enough rights to change GTIIT.
5, antisemitism. This accusation might arise from my public comments about against the discrimination to Muslim several years ago. I had close contact with Muslim, Uighur, when I was in high school, and I think most Muslim are not related to those terrorism attacks, and the battle of terrorism should not turn into discrimination towards Muslim. Recently, there is a growing trend of antisemitism speech in the Chinese Internet, but none of them is related to me and I also posted comments to oppose that publicly. I don’t understand how Prof. Yigal Achmon can accuse someone whose English name is Johon (I made that by myself and used that in front of unknown scholars, I never told Prof. Yigal Achmon this English name), who is very familiar with Israel culture and politics, and plans to develop some business in Israel, is antisemitism?
On the contrary, Prof. Yigal Achmon is obviously racist towards the Chinese.
6, not respect to Russia. I always respect Russian’s contribution in math as my papers cited many Russian mathematician’s work. I had PTSD to Russian, as Dr. Alex Samusev is a Russian Israeli and being the first Prof. Yigal Achmon’s weapon. But now my PTSD is already cured and I know many very smart and kind Russian Israelis in Technion, e.g., Prof. Len Pismen.
Prof. Yigal Achmon’s first elimination principle is originated from the Soviet Union. The Russia has its contribution to the world, but he does not respect or learn from the good things, instead he promotes the bad things that have been abandoned and eliminated by the Russian people themselves. Is this good for Russia?
7, not respect to Nature or any other journals. This is a joke, I often read Nature, one of the most prestigious journal. While my theoretical statistics papers are largely based on papers published in PNAS and the annual of statistics, many papers published in Nature and its subjournals substantially contributed to my biostatistics papers.
As for Prof. Yigal Achmon, he himself faced warnings from a large number of academic authorities, including Peter Bickel, and remained indifferent. He once said to me, “Most of the papers published in Nature, Cell, and Science are nonsense.” “The impact factor of PNAS is not very high, and New Phytologist is about the same, so the two are the same.” The impact factor of The Journal of Clearner Production, which he published, is similar to that of New Phytologist, so it is the same. In his opinion, all journals are the same, as long as their impact factors are the same, this logic respects Nature or other top publications?
8, I am bad in collaboration. I have Asperger symptom, so have a difficulty in understanding social clues, sometimes speak directly. But I always want to work with others if I can and my safety can be ensured. Israel has a culture that speaks more directly. They are called dugri. And it is not Israeli style to think that I am rude and disrespectful because I speak directly. In Israel, my situation is more like a sabra, which means a person who is prickly on the outside but soft on the inside like a cactus. When I worked with Prof. Yigal Achmon, I contacted more than five students in biology and none of them is willing to work with Prof. Yigal Achmon. After that, my relations were totally disrupted by Prof. Yigal Achmon and my PTSD. However, I am now good and PTSD is cured. Also, in math, about 1/3-1/2 papers are single author, 1/3 papers are two authors, and the others are three or four authors. It is very unlike in biology there can be a lot of authors. The collaborations should be fair. Prof. Yigal Achmon often suggest he be a coauthor which has totally no contribution, or other people cannot contribute to my papers, this is a extortion, not collaboration! (Because statistics has many branches, so even statisticians, many of them are unlikely contributed to my REDS if they don’t have specific background, I have sent a lot of emails to a broad institutions in more than 30 countries, to ask for the possibility of reviews and collaborations, but only Prof. Ruodu Wang reviewed my paper and pointed out an important mistake regarding gamma-symmetric distribution before I attended two international conferences in Seoul and Fairfax, Virginia, last month. Prof. Yigal Achmon always disrupted my relation to others by various means and only wants those who controlled by him to be the author in my paper while at the same time they don’t do any work that I cannot do.
Prof. Yigal Achmon? To turn a person who helped him a lot of issues without any payment, the above experience has shown that he doesn’t want to work with excellent people.
9, Guangdong Technion’s professors or Technion’s professors or students play any direct contributions in my papers. No, I have not talked with anyone in Guangdong Technion or Technion with any math/statistics questions since the end of 2021. I had PTSD so even fear of talking with an assistant professor in UC Riverside. There are completely no thoughts, ideas, nor any other things directly coming from Guangdong Technion’s education. My degree is a bioengineering degree. For anyone who is good in robust statistics, he can easily identify all those rumors. Indirectly, probably relevant are two courses from the math programs, 1, combinatorics, taught by Prof. Nader Bshouty, is helpful for better understanding combinatorics, Also, in personal, I was in debt with Prof. Nader Bshouty as he helped my Theory of Computation. 2, 234124 Introduction to Systems Programming, this is course that taught C++, which partially helpful for me to write the REDS package, taught by Prof. Israel Gutter in Spring 2021, I skipped all the final exams of the math degree related courses due to the pushing and shocking by Prof. Yigal Achmon at that time.
When I asked Prof. Harold Corke for help in mid-August 2023, Prof. Yigal Achmon threatened me to make up lies that my research was inspired by him. And because I really hoped he could help at that time, I made up a reason: my paper deriving new estimates from distribution structure was inspired by the structure-determined function in biological molecules.
In fact, it is common sense in biology that structure determines function in biomolecules. My biology is top. I mentioned it clearly in many comments on Zhihu in 2015. And many of my answers actually mention similar principles. https://www.zhihu.com/question/37457524/answer/72659263?utm_psn=1814131811997081600
In fact, my derivation process has nothing to do with any biomolecule structure. I first defined new estimates, then defined new distributions, and then derived more estimates. I thought of using the word “structure” to describe distribution very late. The title of my paper was still: Robust estimations for semiparametric models in July 2023 . https://zenodo.org/records/6629988 Later, it was changed to: Robust Estimation from Distribution Structure in August.
Prof. Yigal Achmon is trying to plagiarize my papers and not acknowledge my contribution.
10, my loyalty to partners. I think, my experience with Prof. Yigal Achmon already clearly showed my loyalty to other partners is much higher than the average. I mean he made so many mistakes (you can hear from the recording) and I did not end the relation due to any mistakes he made. I did consider ending the relation with him, but I did not really do that. It was after he expelled me from his course and after very complicated negotiations and talks and then I ended the relation. If any other students faced my situation, or any other teachers read what I said the treatments of Prof. Yigal Achmon and that lab manager, they might not judge that they were dangerous to a criminal level, while I predicted that in January 2023. So, they might just like my family, saying that there are some Guangdong Technion teachers treating you well, so you should not transfer due to such small issues, while what I thought was that what kind of crime Prof. Yigal Achmon might do if he knew my papers. Although I still greatly underestimate Prof. Yigal Achmon, but my judgment is much better than those of many other students and teachers.
For my loyalty to Technion, first, it depends on my ability. If my ability could not balance the interest, I would consider my interest first, but as long as I have the ability to balance the interest and I am safe, my loyalty is more than other students. I canceled the plan of transferring to Columbia university and submitted the statistics paper with the affiliation of Technion to PNAS in May and June, 2022. Also, I canceled the plan to transfer to Berkeley in November 2022, after the support from Prof. Harold Corke. In such cases, I did not make any double plans, which is others typically do. If any other students have my ability, their actions would be very different from mine.
For my loyalty to Berkeley and PNAS, what I wrote in the papers already tried my best. Also, I did what I can did. For the consideration of studying in UK is due to the additional one year absent. I worried about that, but I did not really apply to any universities besides Berkeley.
After I made the decision of leaving, I’m sorry for the support of Prof. Harold Corke. I asked a friend who used to work in Prof. Harold Corke’s lab about his current research progress in WeChat to see if I could do something for him to repay the favor (renqing). I was very busy at that time for preparing my papers. After that, only three months, my research progress was disrupted by Prof. Yigal Achmon.
Prof. Yigal Achmon, on the other hand, does not care about the interests of GTIIT or Technion at all. He has been trying to expel me from GTIIT since May 2022. For GTIIT, the best strategy is definitely for me to stay and help other teachers, but he is definitely not willing to do it, and he has repeatedly used his power to obstruct this, then saying that it is totally not related to him. Not to mention that he spread rumors everywhere and ruined GTIIT’s reputation. When I attended academic conferences, the scholars looked at GTIIT as if they were fools.
I asked you not to be controlled by such guys. Because contacting with him will inevitably break the law. If he uses this as a reason to blackmail you, just say that if this is the case, he will be prosecuted as a murderer. Don’t be afraid of him, because his problems are countless times more serious than yours, and he has no ability to blackmail you. If you could help me get this matter into judicial channels or spread the content, I would be very, very, very grateful to you. At the same time, because this matter is very severe, when dealing with it, we must be careful not to let populism and public anger controlled this event, instead, we will solve it with wisdom and rational.
Finally, I would also like to share a Chinese idiom “Suspect the Neighbor stole the Axe” (疑邻窃斧) and an Israel idiom “The hat burns atop the thief’s head” (על ראש הגנב בוער הכובע) and a blog posted by my friend. http://chinesereadingpractice.com/2013/03/03/story-behind-the-idiom-lose-the-axe-suspect-the-neighbor/ https://www.hebrewpod101.com/blog/2021/06/10/best-hebrew-proverbs/ https://www.yiddishwit.com/gallery/burn.html
“Suspect the Neighbor stole the Axe”(疑邻窃斧)
There once was a man who lost his axe, and though he searched all over for it he still couldn’t find it. After a while he thought it must have been that the neighbor’s son stole it, so he began to take note of the child’s expressions, words and actions and thought they were all those of a thief. Thus, he concluded that it was the neighbor’s kid that stole it, and in his heart he said, “I always thought that guy was bad.”
On the second day, when he went up the mountain to chop firewood and at the side of a tree he found his lost axe. Now he finally remembered that he’d actually forgotten it there two days before. He regretted casually suspecting his neighbor’s child. After he returned home, he took another look at the child’s behavior, words and actions, and he didn’t seem at all like a person who would steal anything. So he said, “I’ve always thought that he is not the kind of person who would steal”.
After this, people have used the phrase “Suspect the Neighbor stole the Axe” to describe inventing subjective feelings and careless suspicions.
“The hat burns atop the thief’s head” (על ראש הגנב בוער הכובע)
This Hebrew idiom is probably from a Russian idiom “The thief has a burning hat” (На воре и шапка горит) which refers to someone who is guilty or uncomfortable due to their own wrongdoing. It suggests that a thief, knowing their crime, feels an internal sense of panic or unease, as if their metaphorical “hat is on fire”. The implication is that the guilty party is unable to hide their guilt or unease, even if they appear calm on the surface. It’s a figurative way of conveying that the conscience of someone who has committed a misdeed is bothering them, even if they try to act normal. https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-Russian-saying-The-thief-has-a-burning-hat-mean
On October 11, 2022, one of my best friend who has known me for nearly ten years posted a blog in WeChat: “This world is getting worse and worse. It is almost impossible to do anything good. All we do is silently amplifying blame. As the PTSD merged into nerves, everyone who stood by any camp had to bear the responsibility of blaming other camps. Playing multiple roles, the everyday battle is between self-blame and others’ blame. I finally understood my friend’s pain. This blame gradually breaks and cuts off parts and parts of myself. This world may never be beautiful again, but I really want to stop blaming.” The WeChat signature I have used since registering WeChat in 2015 is: “Understand the beauty of this world.” I often share with this friend the things I encountered at Guangdong Technion. Although she faced threats, she hoped that in this way she could hint to me that someone had contacted her and blame me. Unfortunately, I didn’t understand it at the time.
Evidence (updating)：
1, http://app.xjrb.com/print.php?contentid=255113
Leave a Reply