Doing the right thing: Authors retract lubricant paper whose findings they can’t reproduce

wearcoverThe journal Wear — an Elsevier title, not a Condé Nast fashion magazine — has retracted a paper by a pair of Chinese physicists after the researchers were unable to replicate their findings.

The 2009 article, “Microstructure and tribological characterizations of Ni based self-lubricating coating,” was written by authors from the MOE Key Laboratory for Nonequilibrium Synthesis and Modulation of Condensed Matter and the MOE Key Laboratory for Strength and Vibration at Jiaotong University, in Xi’an. It purported to find that: Continue reading Doing the right thing: Authors retract lubricant paper whose findings they can’t reproduce

Seeing triple: Optics paper proves to be one of three, retracted

joptA team of physicists has lost their 2013 paper in the Journal of Optics after the publisher learned that the article had already appeared in print twice before.

The article, “Inscription of narrow bandwidth Bragg gratings in polymer optical fibers,” came from researchers at the Instituto de Telecomunicacoes, in Portugal, and the Aston Institute of Photonic Technologies, in Birmingham, England. Per the abstract: Continue reading Seeing triple: Optics paper proves to be one of three, retracted

“Complete copies” earn physicists in Malaysia a pair of retractions

pramanaThe physics journal Pramana — a publication of the Indian Academy of Sciences — has retracted two studies by a group of researchers in Malaysia who appear to have cobbled together their papers from other sources.

The 2007 articles came from A.R.M. Yusoff, M.N. Syahrul and K. Henkel, of the University Science Malaysia, in Penang. One was titled “High resolution transmission electron microscope studies of a-Si:H solar cells,” and the other, “Hydrogenated nanocrystalline silicon germanium thin films.” The retraction notices are identical, and read: Continue reading “Complete copies” earn physicists in Malaysia a pair of retractions

“Stupid, it should not be done that way”: Researcher explains how duplications led to a retraction

grondelle
Rienk van Grondelle, via VU

More than two years ago, we wrote about a retraction for duplication in Biophysical Journal prompted by an email from pseudonymous whistleblower Clare Francis. That post generated a robust discussion, including one comment from someone calling himself or herself “Double Dutch.”

This past weekend, the last author of that paper, Rienk van Grondelle, left a lengthy response to that comment in which he explained how the duplication happened. We’ve confirmed that it was van Grondelle who left the comment, which we reproduce here in full (we’ve added paragraph breaks for readability): Continue reading “Stupid, it should not be done that way”: Researcher explains how duplications led to a retraction

Holes in ASS as journal pulls two papers

asscoverThe journal Applied Surface Science (okay, so maybe it’s not called ASS at the home office) is retracting a pair of articles in its December issue.

The first, “Structure and mechanical properties of Ni–P electrodeposited coatings,” appeared in 2009 and was written by a group of researchers in Beijing. It has been cited nine times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. Its problem: Plagiarism. According to the retraction noticeContinue reading Holes in ASS as journal pulls two papers

Plagiarism leads to retraction of conduction paper

physica bPhysica B: Condensed Matter has retracted a 2013 paper by a group from Morocco and France for, well, inappropriate condensation of printed matter.

The article, “Granular and intergranular conduction in La1.32Sr1.68Mn2O7 layered manganite system,” came mostly from a team of physicists at  University Ibn Zohr, and appeared in June.

According to the retraction notice: Continue reading Plagiarism leads to retraction of conduction paper

That’ll do it: Physics paper retracted for a “pattern that is unphysical”

j phys dLast December, we brought you the story of a math paper that was retracted because it made “no sense mathematically.” Today, we have that retraction’s cousin: A physics paper retracted because some of the data are “unphysical.”

Here’s the notice for “Room temperature ferromagnetism in pure and Co- and Fe-doped CeO2 dilute magnetic oxide: effect of oxygen vacancies and cation valence,” which was published in April 2011 in the Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics: Continue reading That’ll do it: Physics paper retracted for a “pattern that is unphysical”

Author of “way out there” paper merging physics and biology has second paper retracted

jcellsigIn February, we brought you the story of Konstantin Meyl, a

professor who claims to have developed “a self-consistent field theory which is used to derive at all known interactions of the potential vortex”

At the time, one of Meyl’s papers — which a reviewer had called “way out there” — had just been retracted, for duplication. Now a second paper — among the works from which the first retracted paper had drawn — has been retracted.

Here’s the notice from the Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling (which is buried in a footnote at the bottom of the paper): Continue reading Author of “way out there” paper merging physics and biology has second paper retracted

Physics journal retracts underwater discharge paper for figure reuse

aipadvancesA trio of researchers from the United States and China are in, um, hot water for inappropriately reusing figures that had appeared in previous publications about liquids.

The article, “Temporally resolved imaging on quenching and re-ignition of nanosecond underwater discharge,” appeared last year in AIP Advances, a title of the American Institute of Physics. The authors were Yong Yang, Young I. Cho and Alexander Fridman. Yang is from Huazhong University of Science and Technology, in Wuhan, and Cho and Fridman are at Drexel University, in Philadelphia.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Physics journal retracts underwater discharge paper for figure reuse

Gravity paper yanked for plagiarism by another name

jtapcoverThe Journal of Theoretical and Applied Physics has retracted a 2012 paper by a pair of Iranian cosmologists who failed to adequately cite one of the critical references on which they based their work.

We think that falls under the broader category of plagiarism — after all, as Heisenberg famously postulated, the same text cannot simultaneously appear in two published articles under different authorship. Or something like that.

The paper in question, “Torsion of space-time in f (R) gravity,” deals with, as this Wikipedia entry states: Continue reading Gravity paper yanked for plagiarism by another name