Sorry, fans of papers by Maggie Simpson and I. P. Freely, your days of chortling may be coming to an end. Springer, responding to a case last year in which it and IEEE had to eventually retract more than 120 papers created by SCIgen, is making software that detects such manuscripts freely available. From a … Continue reading An end to fake papers? New software to check for SCIgen-created manuscripts
The tip came from the leadership of another scientific conference. Did the Association for Computing Machinery know that they had published the proceedings of a conference with essentially the same name as that organization, IEEE, on the same dates, in the same venue, and with lots of overlapping authors? The two versions of the meeting … Continue reading More than 300 at once: Publisher retracts entire conference proceedings
A conference proceedings for the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) has retracted a 2021 paper which appears to have been produced in part by the fake article generator SCIGen — an allegation the corresponding author denies. “Estimate The Efficiency Of Multiprocessor’s Cash Memory Work Algorithms” appeared earlier this year in the 2021 IEEE … Continue reading “[T]hese shit comments”: Author of a nonsense paper responds on PubPeer
What do subterranean insect provinces and motion to clamor have to do with microprocessors and microsystems? That’s an excellent question. Read on, dear reader.
A publisher is retracting five papers from one of its conference series after discovering what it says was “clear evidence” that the articles were generated by a computer. The five papers were published from 2018 to 2020 in IOP Publishing’s “Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science.” According to an IOP spokesperson, the retraction notices will … Continue reading Publisher retracting five papers because of “clear evidence” that they were “computer generated”
Date of Change Field Change Reason 7/13/2020 Reasons add: Transfer of Copyright/Ownership To indicate when a retraction is made solely for a change in copyright or ownership of material. Commonly seen when books/journals change or when copyright reverts back to the authors. Does NOT refer to disputes/violations in ownership or copyright. 10/2/2020 Reasons Removed “Prior” … Continue reading Retraction Watch Database User Guide Appendix D: Changes
Wouldn’t it be terrific if manuscripts and published papers could be checked automatically for errors? That was the premise behind an algorithmic approach we wrote about last week, and today we bring you a Q&A with Jennifer Byrne, the last author of a new paper in PLOS ONE that describes another approach, this one designed to … Continue reading Semi-automated fact-checking for scientific papers? Here’s one method.
Reason Description Author Unresponsive The corresponding author(s) did not respond to journal/publisher requests for response, clarification, etc., about one or more concerns/issues with a publication. RW does not apply this reason when the lack of response is only to the language or posting of a notice of correction/EOC/retraction.ion after prior contact by Journal, Publisher or … Continue reading Retraction Watch Database User Guide Appendix B: Reasons
Over the years, we have written about a number of the sleuths who, on their own time and often at great risks to their careers or finances, have looked for issues in the scientific literature. Here’s a sampling:
Kim Kardashian is known for many accomplishments. But now she can add another to her resume: First author of a paper in the Drug Designing & Intellectual Properties International Journal. What can we say? It’s international, and it’s a journal. We talked to Tomáš Pluskal, a post-doc at MIT and the last author of the paper … Continue reading Kim Kardashian pairs up with an MIT post-doc to publish a scientific paper