For the second time in a week, we’ve come across a retraction notice that gave the wrong reason for the retraction.
Last week, it was an Elsevier journal that called a plagiarized paper a duplicate of work by the same authors who’d written the original. Today, here’s the story of a chapter in a book published by Springer Nature that manages to list two different reasons for retraction.
According to one notice for “In-silico Analysis of LncRNA-mRNA Target Prediction” in: D. Reddy Edla et al. (eds.), Advances in Machine Learning and Data Science, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 705, the chapter was retracted for plagiarism.
But according to the other notice, the retraction happened because Continue reading One retraction notice says plagiarism. The other says it was an error in an algorithm. Which was it?


The similarities between recent papers in two different journals about energy were striking — so striking that a number of people have
Last year, an academic society recommended that journals retract nine papers by a researcher in Japan who collaborated with a notorious fraudster. Only two have been retracted.


A professor specializing in the health of children and pregnant women has left her post at the University of Glasgow, and issued three retractions in recent months.
The authors of a 2018 paper on how noisy distractions disrupt memory are retracting the article after finding a flaw in their study.