An environmental journal has retracted a paper on a technology that helps degrade explosives released into soil, because the first author never got the permission of his “co-authors” — oh, and used data that were “illegally obtained,” according to one of the slighted co-authors. According to the EPA, more than 30 sites around the country are … Continue reading Forged author list blows up explosives contamination paper
ISPACS’ Journal of Nonlinear Analysis and Application, whose website promises “very fast publication,” has pulled a paper for ripping off an article posted on arXiv.org. Their plagiarism wasn’t exactly subtle. Here’s the abstract from the paper on arXiv.org: We introduce and study the class of weak almost limited operators. We establish a characterization of pairs of Banach … Continue reading Math paper subtracted for plagiarism
Mario A. Saad, who last year retracted a paper for plagiarism, is now suing the American Diabetes Association over four expressions of concern in its flagship journal, Diabetes. As reported in the Boston Business Journal, Saad’s lawsuit claims that his institution, the State University of Campinas, investigated two articles at the journal’s behest. The American Diabetes … Continue reading Diabetes researcher sues journal to prevent retractions of papers cited more than 600 times
On Friday, we reported on the retraction and republication of a paper in The Lancet. One of the paper’s authors, Yale’s Harlan Krumholz, took issue with how we characterized the reason for the retraction. We offered him a chance to write a guest post about the situation, which we are pleased to publish below. Please … Continue reading Retraction Watch “mischaracterized the reason for a retraction:” Harlan Krumholz responds to a post
This week at Retraction Watch featured polar opposites: Two new entries in our “doing the right thing” category, and one in our plagiarism euphemism parade. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
A paper on quantum communication has been retracted for failing to address several important problems, making the conclusions invalid. Quantum communication involves sending a series of photons in specific quantum states over fiberoptic cables. It’s a little like the 1s and 0s of traditional computing, but much more secure. If the photons are intercepted on … Continue reading “The main improvements reported are invalid”: Quantum communication paper retracted
A group of scientists at the Chinese Earthquake Administration in Beijing have lost their 2014 paper in Nature Scientific Reports for lifting chunks of text from a previously published article. The abstract of the paper, “Early magnitude estimation for the MW7.9 Wenchuan earthquake using progressively expanded P-wave time window,” states:
PubPeer continues to make its mark on the scientific literature. Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:
A team led by David Latchman, a geneticist and administrator at University College London, has notched a mysterious retraction in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, and has had 25 more papers questioned on PubPeer. The JBC notice for “Antiapoptotic activity of the free caspase recruitment domain of procaspase-9: A novel endogenous rescue pathway in cell death” is as useless as they come, a … Continue reading Prominent geneticist nets retraction, two corrections, and a lot of questions
The long-running feud between Italian physicists Ignazio Ciufolini and Lorenzo Iorio (which we’ve covered here and here) turned up a notch in November, when Ciufolini filed a defamation lawsuit against Iorio. You can read the full lawsuit here (in Italian). The gist is this: Iorio accused Ciufolini of criticizing the work of other physicists on … Continue reading Spat between physicists hits Italian courts for the second time