Build what reality needs next.

I would closely support most first- and second-year students to help establish strong research habits and a solid foundation. As you progress and gain confidence, I gradually transition to a more hands-off approach, encouraging independence and ownership of your research. I will not continuously supply ideas for your PhD project. Although I will be closely involved in discussions, the PhD is not meant to be a process of executing pre-assigned tasks. You are encouraged to develop your own research direction and articulate why it is valuable.

Above all, my job is to support your success in your future career—a principle my own PhD supervisor shared with me when I joined Cambridge—and I will do my best to help make that happen. I also strongly value diversity, equality, and inclusion. If you have any concerns, please raise them: see it, say it, sorted!

I do not personally place strong emphasis on GPA or publication counts alone. However, the University has formal eligibility requirements that must be satisfied. In general, we expect applicants to demonstrate a strong undergraduate academic background, typically within the top 10% of an EECS (or closely related) programme at a well-recognised university (for example, top 20 in China). That said, I care far more about research potential, technical depth, creativity, curiosity, and long-term research fit than raw GPA numbers.

Applicants whose undergraduate degree classification falls below an Upper Second Class Honours standard (<3.3/4.0 GPA equivalent) would NOT meet the minimum requirement for enrolment.

Naturally, strong publications and excellent academic records can be advantageous, particularly when applying for competitive fellowships and scholarships such as HKU-PS or HKPFS, as they help demonstrate research capability and potential. However, I strongly discourage publishing simply to increase the number of papers on your CV. I do not primarily evaluate applicants based on venue prestige or publication count alone.

What matters most to me is whether you genuinely understand the work you have done, can clearly articulate your thinking, and take pride in your research. If you have publications or projects (which are certainly a plus), I will usually read them carefully and ask both high-level conceptual questions and technical implementation questions during interviews.

Again, having a CHI paper or any top-tier publication is absolutely NOT a prerequisite. What matters far more is your willingness to learn deeply, think critically, work independently, and commit to doing meaningful and high-quality research over the long term.

If you have submitted your application via the form, I will review all materials every two weeks. If you haven’t heard from me for more than 1 month, please assume your application has not been moved to the next stage.

You are also welcome to start a conversation if you happen to see me at the HKU campus or any conferences. I’m always happy to chat, and I’ll gladly treat you to a soft drink or a coffee.

To be fair to all applicants, I will NOT be able to provide detailed feedback on your PhD research proposal. However, I’m happy to share my research interests and offer brief comments on your potential directions during our conversation, if shortlisted. Please prepare your proposal to align with my interests, and revise it slightly based on our discussion.

Yes, but usually not during your first year. During this period, the focus should be on developing strong independent research skills. Once you have established a solid level of independence, collaborations outside the group or university are highly encouraged. In practice, after submitting your first solo piece of work (co-authored only with me) is typically a good milestone for making this transition.

In short: at least three solid, independent research projects that can be woven into a coherent and compelling PhD thesis—one that convinces both your examiners and me that “yes and congratulations, you should be a Dr. now!”

Keep writing. Keep polishing. Keep submitting. If I am satisfied with your work, it is not necessary for every piece to be accepted or published. The reasoning is explained below.

I am well aware that peer review can be something of a lottery. Not getting a paper accepted does not define your ability as a researcher. I do not require a specific number of CCF-A/B/C or CORE-A/A* (or equivalent) papers for graduation. While strong publications are often beneficial for your career—and yes, the counting game exists and isn’t disappearing anytime soon—I strongly dislike reducing PhD training to paper counts.

While CCF/CORE rankings themselves are not a priority, it is important to submit your work to the most relevant research community. Publishing in a venue where the audience is unfamiliar with or uninterested in your topic is rarely beneficial. In general, we aim for SIGCHI- or VGTC-sponsored conferences, as well as other closely related journals. Venues such as CHI, UIST, TOCHI, IEEE VR, ISMAR, and TVCG are typically regarded as the most prestigious in our field.

That said, smaller but core venues are equally valued when they are the right fit for the work—for example, SUI, VRST, DIS, ISS, CSCW, UbiComp, and related conferences/journals. The key principle is relevance and impact within the appropriate community, rather than venue rankings alone.

Yes. We value a supportive group culture. We hold weekly or bi-weekly group meetings, along with other academic and social activities. We also care about life outside of work and aim to maintain a healthy balance. Any group member is encouraged to organise their interesting events.

Absolutely! I strongly encourage every PhD student in my group to spend time—at least once during the PhD (3 months or longer)—in industry or at another strong research lab. I’m happy to help with planning, applications, or connections.

Yes. All students with first-authored full papers are expected to present their work in person, and I will provide funding for this. Ideally, each student should attend at least one conference per year. Being active and visible within your research community is an important part of PhD training.

If your funding (partially or fully) comes from my industry-sponsored or collaborative projects, then participation in such projects is expected. If you are supported by your own funding (e.g., a fellowship or scholarship), the situation is much more flexible. In this case, I would appreciate your support for collaborative projects when appropriate, but it is not mandatory. You are always welcome to say, “Sorry, I’m not interested in this project!”

Yes, although this is uncommon. Self-funded arrangements may be considered in cases where you are highly motivated to join our lab but funding is limited. Please think carefully before choosing this option. A PhD is a 3-to-4-year commitment, and academia is ultimately a job—just as a PhD is a degree. You should consider self-funding only if you have a genuine passion for the field and intend to continue working in this area in the future.

Even if you are self-funded, you must still meet the minimum admission requirements of the Department and the standard graduation expectations of the lab; these requirements are not relaxed.

In some cases, I may also consider offering additional financial support, such as hiring you as a part-time RA, to help partially offset the costs where possible.

Just ask!