Professor Reacts: PhD Terminated Despite 4 Q1 Papers?

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this reaction are my own. I’m not claiming to know the full story or rule on who’s right or wrong. My goal is simply to discuss the common challenges PhD students and supervisors might face, and how to handle similar conflicts in a constructive way. If you find yourself stuck in a difficult supervisor relationship, or need guidance on publishing and academic strategy, check the links below for direct support. I hope this video helps spark meaningful dialogue rather than pass any final judgment on this specific case.

📈 More Resources for Your Research Success:

[terryjwood]

A friend was in the situation where he was told by his PhD advisor in the math department that he would NEVER be granted a PhD and that his funding was being terminated. He was told to pack his bags and go back home to Europe. I asked him what his research in math was about. As he explained it, I realized that he had a novel approach to a problem in Computer Science. I asked him if he had discussed this with any of the CS faculty. I introduced him to several PhD graduates of the CS department who were able to identify the faculty members he needed to speak with.

Long story short, the CS faculty saw the value of his research and suggested he pursue a PhD in CS, rather than math. When the math Dept. learned of this they soon changed their minds. I guess they were embarrassed. He did a compromise. He removed 2 of the math professors on his committee and replaced them with Computer Scientists. In under a year he had his PhD. Today he's faculty of a Computer Science Dept. in Ireland.

Never give up. NEVER SURRENDER!

[syuan]

I checked Hanxin Zhao’s publications from Google Scholar. He does have 4 first author journal publications in Q1 journals. He is also the corresponding author of the 4 journal publications, which is unusual in my field and school - usually we put the PhD advisor as the corresponding author. He was the sole author of his last two publications published in 2024. If his advisor has no contribution in the manuscripts and his advisor admits so, it should have no problem for him to submit the papers by his own. And that would be considered as a good thing for a PhD student to conduct independent research. So the key question here is whether his PhD advisor admits that she has no contribution to the last two publications. If she thinks she has contribution, what evidence she could provide to show her contribution. Given he is listed as the corresponding author of his first two papers, I would imagine the advisor’s contribution was limited in the previous papers and I would not be surprised that Hanxin did the research by his own. In addition, given he could publish his last two papers in Q1 journals - I would consider his advisor’s comment about that the third paper was very bad is very biased.

In addition, all his research and papers were funded by the China Scholarship Council, and not from the school or the advisor’s fund and he acknowledged the research fund in all papers. It seems to me as long as his advisor admits no contribution, he could submit the papers by his own and also as the sole author - he doesn’t need the permission from his advisor if she doesn’t provide research fund or research contribution.

[sebvanjole]

From a Dutch perspectives, the tone and the two-against-one approach with even the co-promotors humiliating comments are nauseating, what a torture scenario for the Chinese student.

[prakhars]

My PhD was 3 years long with 3 supervisors (2 internal, 1 industry). I was very lucky to get supportive and nice supervisors.

[Derguez]

Some supervisors are a sort of gangster. A friend of mine told me a PhD is slavery for 5 years.

[sohrab]

I klicked right away when I saw you reacting to the video of Hanxin because I saw it 2 months ago and was disturbed. There are no concrete suggestions for improvements, they talk with like he is a child and when you see the the last publications of Zofia you see many of her publication includes Hanxin, so he was golden goose to them and they didn't wanted to lose him so they delayed his work!

[isaklytting]

You can't protect against psychopaths.

[asdfasdfasdf]

You can exactly hear how this supervisors are completely above their intellectual or patience limits - no professional will ever communicate like this, you never ever do this. They needed take a step back and look how to go forward constructive.

[aminyarmand]

I think it's very shallow and opportunistic to take the honest and genuine grievances of a student and use it to promote your "things." Your "reaction" is incredibly shallow. You pass surface-level judgements just to ride the wave of his popularity. Your view on PhD being an apprenticeship and a PhD supervisor being a "boss" is far removed from the perspective that universities themselves promote. Hanxien's case screams of systematic discrimination and bias in academia. Your position as a "professor" screams of complacency to the system. You should watch DW's documentary on Max Plank's institutes and "react" to it. This is reflected in the "brand" of your channel. In addition to encouraging students to communicate well and set milestones with their profs, you should criticize the ways academia takes advantage of the students to publish papers. Otherwise, you remain a part of the problem.

[TarasZakharchenko]

I don't understand. When I was writing my PhD thesis, my supervisor was my friend, we were a team. Something sick happens if you have to confront your supervisor

[katiekawaii]

I wish you had noticed that he showed emails from the co-promoter telling him it was okay to submit the paper _before_ the conversation in which they claimed he submitted it without permission. I'd have liked to hear your commentary on that.

[mathunt]

My PhD supervisor wasn't responding to me, so I dreamt up my my own mini-research project. I did all the work myself, and the final paper had three other authors on...

[haskalah]

Whoever has intensive connections and works in this field knows that the exploitation of PhD Students by Professors is a huge problem and professors very often act like gods. The overwhelming number of cases has nothing to do with any milestones and goalkeeper relationships but is mere exploitation. There is a part in this contract that has no power to enforce its rights and a part with no real supervision but all power to enforce its greed.

[t.j.pattbergaudiobooks]

This is terrifying. I know many such "supervisors" and know that they bully students on purpose, just to torture them.

[Sarah.Lemontea]

This represents a flaw in cases where a PhD’s graduation criteria are determined solely by the supervisor rather than institutional regulations. Universities should establish strict guidelines outlining the requirements for a candidate to be declared a PhD graduate.

[Luis-fcsn]

Some comments:
-the thesis advisor, director, whatever.., should organize a weekly or at least monthly meeting with the student
- there should be a commitee that controls someway this sort of comunication, by frecquently questioning both director and student about the scope and progress of the research

Best from Argentina

[Drganguli]

Doing research on the PhD advisor before joining the program is more important than all the research you do after joining the PhD program

[JoePOP-kq]

I feel so sad for Hanxin. In reality his supervisor punished him for being different. Discrimination is bad. After 6 years I fear mental issues are involved. Give us an update. All the best for Hanxin. Never give up on "you are here to learn how to read so you are bad because you are reading".

[sonjak]

By the tone of the voice and her bad English, you can tell that the supervisor is a bully.

[marcopignone]

This gentleman has a verifiable record (google scholar...) of successful publishing of multiple first author papers (higher than usual for a PhD student) in major journals (Elsevier), and citations higher than average for someone at his career stage. I am not in a position to comment on the issues you discuss, but it is surprising that she says his paper was "very very bad" given his VERY successful record of publishing. It is always possible that this particular paper was, for some reason, far below his usual standard, but still it would be an outlier for someone with his record. This is exactly the kind of scientist that most labs want at least in terms of getting funding and delivering results. Of course there is no way to evaluaute him or his supervisor on other measures as you mention.