China needs some tools to xxxxuate its scientists. SCI, IF, and H-index are not necessarily the most accurate tools to do so, but there is none better if one needs a simple way to judge a person. However, combining the SCI, IF, and H-index may provide something more realistic in scientific xxxxuation. At least it is a good improvement that China is using these indexes to xxxxuate their researchers, which is better than before when the quality of a researcher was purely judged politically or even socially.

The real problem of using H-index in China is the fact that there are many 學霸 in China and the authorship is not serious enough. They lead an institute or a huge group with more than say 50 scientists/students, or they have administrative power so that many suckers like to add their names on the papers. These 學霸 tend to have very high H-index because they publish a lot papers each year, which is why many CAS institute directors have high volume of publications and easily become a CAS academician. This is not fair to others who work hard, and is harmful for the Chinese science overall. It is like 大躍進： 人有多大膽，地有多大產！ You must be 膽大不要臉 to be a "good scientist" in China!