At 33, he was the first Chinese winner of the Fields Medal – one of the top honours in mathematics. Today, after decades in the US, Shing-Tung Yau is chair of Tsinghua University’s Qiuzhen College, which is fast-tracking talented young students through a programme of his own design. Yau, who was born in the southern province of Guangdong, was educated in Hong Kong and the US. Now aged 75, he left his position as Harvard University’s William Caspar Graustein professor of mathematics in 2022, to return to China in the full-time teaching role. Here, he shares his views on the dynamics and prospects for China’s mathematical prowess amid the intensifying rivalry between Beijing and Washington. This interview first appeared in SCMP Plus. For other interviews in the Open Questions series, click here. In recent years, many Chinese mathematicians have solved major problems and come into public view. How would you assess China’s current mathematical strength? And how does it compare with the US and Europe? In China, the situation is improving rapidly. If we consider mainland China and Hong Kong, it is still far behind America. However, it’s not a fair comparison because the US benefits significantly from foreign talent. Harvard, for example, has people from China, Germany, and many other countries, and its leadership in mathematics is largely built on immigrants. China also has immigrants, but nowhere near the level of the US, which has been actively recruiting global talent for almost two centuries. However, this trend is changing, as the US has become less welcoming to Chinese scientists. As a result, many Chinese researchers have returned to China, significantly contributing to the development of mathematics. In the past, young Chinese students saw studying in the US as the only path to success, and returning to China was often viewed as a failure. But now, the perception has changed. More parents and students feel comfortable staying in China, and the country is producing more outstanding young mathematicians. While the very best still prefer to stay in the US, even this is changing due to political pressures. In the coming years, China’s mathematical strength will grow significantly, driven by two factors: the return of top talent from abroad and the increasing quality of home-grown researchers. As a result, we expect China to develop a strong research community in mathematics. Next year, mathematicians will meet in Philadelphia for the International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM), the largest conference of its kind. In the quadrennial event’s 127-year-history, China has hosted it once – in 2002. You are leading the team that is bidding for the 2030 ICM to be held in Beijing. What would be the significance for China if it was selected by the International Mathematical Union to host the event? The ICM is a well recognised event, just like the Olympics for athletes, with about 4,000 to 5,000 mathematicians coming together. There are around 160 speakers and each of them tries to demonstrate what is state-of-the-art. And this summarises what has been most important in the subject for the past four years and what is the future of mathematics in their eyes. We mathematicians pay serious attention to this congress. Every four years, you want to appear – to talk about your research, to show the whole world what you are doing. And you learn from others. The congress has changed the way that we think about mathematics periodically. because many young people come and listen to the really important scholars talk about what’s going on. When they go back, they do the research, somewhat influenced by these lectures. The conference also gives the most important awards in mathematics, namely the Fields Medal – regarded as the Nobel Prize of mathematics – as well as the IMU Abacus Medal, the Gauss Prize, and the Chern Medal. The government pays a lot of attention to the ICM. And all mathematicians, young and old pay attention to it. They want to show their strength. So in the next four or five years, they will work very hard to demonstrate that they can do something serious. This will give a lot of energy and motivation to our young students and scholars, which means a lot to a country like China as we are growing and we have the great potential to grow more. During the bidding for ICM 2030, you mentioned on several occasions that China would have a strong base of home-grown mathematicians within five years. You have also noted that many excellent Chinese undergraduates went abroad for further studies. How can China retain this talent? Hosting the conference will be useful, but it is only a small part of the broader effort. The key factor is China’s improved economic situation, which allows us to attract and retain top mathematicians by offering competitive salaries and benefits. We are also creating an environment where returning scholars can continue doing world-class research. For example, Tsinghua University has built a strong mathematical community over the past decade, with support from the government and the recruitment of top talent. This environment makes it possible for young mathematicians to thrive without going abroad. If we succeed in developing a strong graduate programme, we will see breakthrough research emerging from home-grown Chinese mathematicians. If we succeed in developing a strong graduate programme, we will see breakthrough research emerging from home-grown Chinese mathematicians Historically, the turning point for any country in mathematics is when it starts producing its own top researchers. The US reached this stage between 1915 and 1930, after decades of sending students to Europe. Japan followed a similar path. China is now at the stage where it can provide world-class undergraduate education. The next step is strengthening graduate education to produce outstanding PhDs who can lead mathematical research. If we succeed in developing a strong graduate programme, we will see breakthrough research emerging from home-grown Chinese mathematicians, which will significantly elevate China’s status in the global mathematical community. US Republicans have introduced legislation to block Chinese citizens from obtaining student visas. Given the intensifying strategic rivalry between Beijing and Washington, what are the prospects for China’s science and tech development? The bill will cause problems for both countries. It will hurt China in the short-run as the country is still catching up with the most modern aspects of technology. Also, we need the good training that we get by sending students to the US. America needs a lot of talent, which China has provided in huge numbers in the past. By introducing such a bill, American industries will be weakened significantly in the longer term. I think the situation is not that bad for China. Chinese science and technology are mature enough by now to develop on our own. With such a bill, we can become even better because most of the very best talent will stay in China. So it is not necessarily a bad thing for China in the long run. Chinese universities are improving in international rankings. What do these rankings mean for China’s development? Rankings are not always accurate, but they are important for recognition. They boost confidence among students, administrators, and potential recruits. For example, our department at Tsinghua is ranked No 11 globally by QS World University Rankings but much lower by the Chinese education system, which does not fully reflect our recent improvements. We have recruited top mathematicians – including Fields Medal winners – and built a strong academic environment. However, recognition takes time to catch up with reality. The priority should always be substance – building strong research programmes rather than just improving numbers. The priority should always be substance – building strong research programmes rather than just improving numbers. Higher rankings also make Chinese universities more attractive to global scholars. Previously, foreign academics were hesitant to consider positions in China. Now, with rising rankings and growing international recognition, they are more open to joining our institutions. However, rankings should not be the sole focus. Some past policies, like merging universities to artificially boost rankings, were counterproductive. The priority should always be substance – building strong research programmes rather than just improving numbers. Beijing has accelerated the technological arms race with a second consecutive 10 per cent increase in science spending, allocating 398 billion yuan (US$54 billion) in central government spending for 2025. Do you think mathematical research, as a foundational subject, is receiving sufficient attention in China? Can our evaluation system accurately assess achievements in mathematics? In recent years, China’s top leaders have recognised the importance of fundamental mathematics. They often ask about our progress in pure mathematics, rather than applied fields. However, as decisions move through different levels of bureaucracy, priorities shift towards immediate economic benefits. Local governments and universities focus on short-term, practical outcomes, such as GDP growth or industry applications. As a result, evaluation systems emphasise metrics like the number of papers published, rather than the originality of research. This leads to a situation where many papers follow existing research rather than pioneering new ideas. Fundamental research takes years to show its impact, but government officials prioritise short-term gains for their own career advancement. While China’s leadership understands the importance of foundational mathematics, systemic changes are needed to ensure long-term support. You have teaching experience both in China and the US. What’s your impression of Chinese students and American students in terms of their academic passion and capabilities? Most graduate students I contacted in the past decade grew up in China. They’re pretty good. I also trained a lot of American students. They’re good too. But to be frank, the top Chinese students are not as brave and ambitious as those top American students. Many Chinese students are pretty happy with what they have achieved. They don’t want to charge on. They may think it too dangerous to go down a path which may lead to great achievement, but with a small chance of success. They feel insecure. But my American students don’t care. They do not care that much about making money in mathematics or getting a secure job. Many Chinese students want to accomplish something to impress their classmates, parents or teachers, while most American students do not care. They just do what they are interested in. Another important difference is that Chinese parents, even when their children go to PhD level, still want to interfere in things such as what subjects they should get into for a better job prospect. American students are freer to choose the subjects they study. From my own experience, my father died very early, but my mother was really good in that she let me do whatever I wanted, based on my own interests. However, nowadays younger students from China are braver and more willing to tackle important academic problems. And so do undergraduate students in China. But still, I find that our college students are not as outgoing as American students. But after talking with some younger Chinese students – say 12-year-old kids in grade six or seven, I found that they are not necessarily that timid. To my surprise, they raise questions and enjoy mathematics. This is not one or two exceptions. There are 100 or 200 kids like that. I think the reason is that most Chinese students go through the examinations in a very poor manner. The worst part is the training for the gaokao [university entrance exam] and zhongkao [senior high school entrance exam]. The years spent preparing for the exams by repeatedly solving similar maths problems for higher scores suffocated their curiosity and passion. The exams are unavoidable as universities have to select students from a large number of people. However, it is very important that they make some percentage of exceptions so as to allow some of the very original, creative and motivated kids to grow in a different form instead of training for gaokao. That’s what we’re trying to do. We have encountered difficulty from the education ministry because it wants to give uniform training to all students, without exceptions. But American schools routinely render such services if they feel particular students can grow and do something well. They make a lot of exceptions. In fact, even in my own case, I finished most of the subjects in two years at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK). My teacher suggested I should graduate earlier but the university did not allow it at all. So I did not graduate from the CUHK. Instead, the University of California Berkeley offered me a place in its graduate school [in 1969] where I received a PhD three years later. This shows the flexibility of the American education system. So you can see that flexibility is very important to train the subject’s leaders. Since 2021, the “Yau Class” for students as young as 12 who display exceptional maths talent has been introduced in 50 high schools around the nation. Tsinghua’s Qiuzhen College, which you chair, then selects from this pool of around 3,000 students, training them for a couple of years before enrolling those who qualify in an eight-year programme from undergraduate to PhD studies. How is it going? We grant the exceptions, with government approval, for talented 9th-12th graders without going through gaokao or even zhongkao for the programme which enrols around 100 students annually. Lately, we’ve started to train 7th graders. We pick them up from examinations that we design. These young kids perform better than the older kids. They actually know a lot and far more than what I thought they were capable of doing. They grow very fast. It turns out those grade seven students are already mature enough to learn calculus or first year undergraduate college subjects. They are very well motivated and they learn with fun. These students learn not just mathematics. They are being trained in maths and physics, as well as English. We probably teach many of the subjects in English in Qiuzhen College. And they also learn many other subjects – Chinese literature, artificial intelligence, etc. So I think they are growing very well. I think these young students that I see are as good as those best students in the United States, or even better. I’m watching them grow. And I think this group is the very best in the world. We have university professors teaching them. High school teachers are very good at training students to get high grades in gaokao or in the Mathematical Olympiad. But these are not the directions we care about. What we care about is the substance of mathematics. And the professors are very happy to train the kids. Many Chinese are suffering from neijuan – involution – which in the education sector refers to the excessive competition that children are facing as more parents are keen to invest resources for earlier and extra study. The result is that the competition for higher grades becomes cutthroat and leads to widespread depression and anxiety. What’s a healthy education ecosystem in your view? I had no idea what neijuan meant until recently. I also neijuan. I started to learn many things when I was young and put a lot of effort into learning them. I recited poems and classic Chinese literature, as required by my father, when I was 12 or 13. I felt happy when I recited them. I found it easy because I enjoyed it. When I was in high school, I did far more than my homework required, but I also did physical exercise and all kinds of other things. The important question is whether you do it with enjoyment. Our 12-year-old kids enjoy what they are doing, according to my observations. They are learning something which is far more advanced than other kids. And they are happy. It depends on whether your learning is compulsory or if you’re enjoying it. I never did mathematics because someone told me to. I always found it enjoyable and sometimes I felt competitive. It’s just like the Olympics. You practise every day to make yourself quicker and better. There is also a sense of fulfilment in being competitive. For example, you know this guy was so famous, and you can beat him. So I feel good about it. And getting a big award is another source of joy. In all, I feel great. I don’t see it as a problem as long as there is real interest. Compulsory exams are an artificial method of education. But on the other hand, you have to put a standard on it, so they are probably difficult to avoid. But at least for some percentage of students, I think you should let them have more fun and more relaxation, which is conducive to creative thinking. AI and big data are shaping many fields. Do you think they will reshape mathematics in the same way that the theory of relativity and quantum physics did? Relativity and quantum physics fundamentally changed our understanding of nature. AI, however, is not at that level – it is a powerful tool that learns from existing data, but it does not introduce conceptual breakthroughs. AI can be useful in helping mathematicians to discover patterns and process vast amounts of literature, but it does not create new fundamental concepts. Unlike human intuition, AI relies on past knowledge and cannot predict groundbreaking discoveries like relativity. While AI is valuable for practical applications, it does not replace the need for human-driven mathematical research. What do you think is the ultimate goal of mathematics? Is it about uncovering unknowns, finding patterns, or connecting with philosophy? Mathematics is much broader than most people realise. While physics aims to understand nature in a concrete way, mathematics seeks to uncover the order underlying everything – whether in nature, finance, or human interactions. Historically, mathematics has evolved from simple geometric shapes to highly abstract structures, yet these abstract concepts often lead to concrete breakthroughs. For example, modern geometry extends beyond traditional figures and helps to solve problems in areas far removed from its classical origins. Mathematics is driven by the search for patterns and logical structures, making it a fundamental discipline that continues to evolve in unexpected ways. Its impact extends beyond science, influencing philosophy and shaping our understanding of reality. Some reports suggested that you were returning to China for your retirement. Instead, you have founded a new college and are actively involved in major initiatives. Do you feel even busier now? I enjoy seeing students grow and thrive. Teaching and mentoring young mathematicians is not a burden, it is a source of fulfilment. In the US, opportunities to build new educational initiatives were more limited. In China, I have been able to establish programmes that help nurture young talent. This work is deeply rewarding, and I am happy to contribute to the next generation of mathematicians.