Tag

Research Integrity

All articles tagged with #research integrity

science18 days ago•5 min saved

AI-generated fake citations flood scientific literature, study finds

A Lancet study led by Columbia University researchers finds a growing share of citations in scientific papers are fabricated or AI-generated. Analyzing 2 million papers and 97 million citations, they identified about 4,000 fabricated references across 2,800 papers, with the rate rising from 2023 to 2025 and into early 2026. The rising prevalence could skew systematic reviews and clinical guidelines and reflects broader shifts in citation culture toward checklist-style referencing. Publishers report varying levels of tooling to flag or validate citations, underscoring the need for stronger verification as AI use in research grows.

via statnews.com|

#academic-publishing #ai #fabricated-citations

technology19 days ago•11 min saved

Why Some Researchers Are Choosing to Skip Generative AI

A Nature Career feature profiles researchers who deliberately avoid generative AI, citing ethics (copyright and consent), transparency concerns, environmental costs, and a belief that relying on AI can undermine skill development; while surveys show mixed adoption with some using AI for editing or literature review, many academics argue the downsides—such as hallucinations and questionable accuracy—mean AI should be restricted in certain tasks and prompts a rethink of training and assessment in science.

via Nature|

#academia #environmental-impact #ethics

science1 month ago•6 min saved

Guest-Edited Journals Face Scrutiny Over Quality and Retractions

The BMJ group’s retraction of nearly an entire guest-edited special issue on cancer immunotherapies highlights broader worries about guest-edited publishing: rapid, high-volume special issues driven by APCs can weaken peer review, inflate researchers’ CVs, and undermine research integrity, prompting calls for tighter editorial oversight and reforms in author-pay models and funding practices.

via statnews.com|

#article-processing-charges #guest-editors #peer-review

science1 month ago•8 min saved

Dataset unmasks the price range of fake first-author slots in the paper-mill market

A dataset called BuyTheBy compiles over 18,000 advertisements from seven paper mills across multiple countries, revealing first-author slots selling for roughly $56 to $5,631 and showing some ads align with published papers. The study notes the market is evolving with AI, making enforcement difficult, but provides a starting point for publishers to curb fraud. The dataset isn’t comprehensive (omits Iran/China mills) and can’t confirm completion of purchases or final publications.

via Retraction Watch|

#academic-publishing #authorship-fraud #buytheby

science1 month ago•5 min saved

LLMs Aren’t the Problem, Cash-for-Review Fails, and Vaping Studies Reveal Flaws

Retraction Watch’s weekend digest notes that large language models aren’t the core issue in science publishing, reports that offering cash to spot errors doesn’t work, and spotlights vaping studies with numerous flaws and few retractions, while also outlining ongoing investigations and policy discussions around scientific integrity and publishing practices.

via Retraction Watch|

#llms #peer-review #research-integrity

technology3 months ago•7 min saved

AI Slop Tests the Limits of Computer Science Publishing

Nature reports that a surge of AI-generated, low-quality submissions—dubbed 'AI slop'—is flooding computer science journals and conferences, with ICML 2026 receiving over 24,000 papers and arXiv submissions up more than 50% since ChatGPT; some papers are AI-generated or contain fabrications, prompting arXiv and conference policy changes, expanded reviewer pools, and debates about moving to rolling-journal models to preserve research integrity.

via Nature|

#ai #arxiv #machine-learning

science3 months ago•6 min saved

Stolen study, sold authorship, and a plagiarism trap for the victim

A Bengaluru economist discovers her study was stolen and published by others, with authorship slots allegedly sold on Telegram for roughly $165–$200. The misappropriated paper, later indexed by a different journal, prompts plagiarism concerns when editors find it nearly identical to her rejected draft. The incident underscores how paper mills operate, the push for retractions, and ongoing investigations by publishers, even as some listed authors deny involvement.

via Retraction Watch|

#authorship #authorship-marketplaces #note-extra-tag-not-allowed

artificial-intelligence4 months ago•16 min saved

AI Flood Threatens Trust in Scientific Publishing

A Gizmodo.io9 piece argues that AI-generated or AI-augmented papers are flooding arXiv, undermining traditional signals of quality and risking the reliability of scientific publishing. While AI can help with language barriers, analyses show AI-authored submissions are more prolific and standard quality indicators are becoming less reliable as publication volume rises; incidents like a Nature report about a German researcher misusing ChatGPT and AI-generated data in cancer research illustrate the potential for fraud. The article warns this could overwhelm scholarly communication unless reviewers and repositories tighten safeguards.

via Gizmodo|

#artificial-intelligence #arxiv #peer-review

science4 months ago•8 min saved

AI-suspected technobabble prompts Springer Nature inquiry into prolific editor

A Turkish associate professor and editor, Eren Öğüt, faces a Springer Nature investigation after reviewers flagged multiple 2025 papers that read like technobabble, use irrelevant MATLAB code, and lack reproducible data or overlaid brain images. His unusually high volume of peer reviews (about 650 in one year) and roles as editor across journals raise concerns about editorial bias and integrity, with critics noting AI-assisted editing and a pattern of single-authored works that resemble prior templates. The investigation focuses on methodological gaps, data sharing, and potential misrepresentation of results in Neuroinformatics and related journals.

via Retraction Watch|

#academic-publishing #ai-in-research #neuroimaging

science6 months ago•2 min saved

Clarivate’s Highly Cited Researchers List Faces Criticism and Changes

The Highly Cited Researchers list has updated its methodology for 2025 to exclude scientists associated with ethical breaches, such as excessive self-citation, leading to the re-inclusion of mathematicians after two years of exclusion due to suspicious citation patterns. The new rules aim to improve the list's integrity by removing papers linked to previous research misconduct, although this may inadvertently exclude some deserving scientists. The list now recognizes 6,868 researchers across various fields, with particular attention to addressing gaming of citation metrics, especially in mathematics.

via Nature|

#citation-ethics #clarivate #highly-cited-researchers

science-and-medicine7 months ago•3 min saved

NEJM Launches MMWR Rival Amidst Scientific and Ethical Concerns

The article summarizes recent developments in scientific publishing, including NEJM launching a new public health report rival, a former NIH official's paper receiving an expression of concern, and a study revealing that 1 in 5 chemists have intentionally added errors during peer review, highlighting ongoing issues of misconduct and integrity in research.

via Retraction Watch|

#academic-publishing #nejm #research-integrity

science-and-technology7 months ago•3 min saved

AI Tool Aims to Detect Low-Quality Cancer Research Papers

An AI tool using language models like BERT has flagged over 250,000 cancer research papers as suspected paper-mill products, revealing a steep rise in low-quality or fraudulent publications over the past two decades, though further verification by human experts is needed due to potential false positives.

via Nature|

#ai #cancer-research #paper-mills

science8 months ago•4 min saved

Factors Behind the High Citation Count of a MicroRNA Review Paper

A brief review paper on microRNA published in 2018 has been cited over 2,000 times, largely due to its prominence in search results, but many citations may be from paper mill activities and retracted papers, raising concerns about research integrity in the microRNA field.

via Retraction Watch|

#citation #microrna #paper-mill

science-and-technology8 months ago•5 min saved

AI Identifies Over 1,000 Questionable Science Journals to Protect Research Integrity

A new AI system developed by the University of Colorado automatically screens open-access journals to identify potentially predatory publications, flagging over 1,000 suspicious journals out of 15,200 analyzed. While not perfect, it serves as a crucial first filter to help protect scientific credibility, with human experts making the final decisions.

via Neuroscience News|

#ai #open-access #predatory-journals

science-and-technology8 months ago•4 min saved

AI Identifies Over 1,000 Questionable Science Journals

A team led by the University of Colorado Boulder developed an AI tool to identify questionable scientific journals, particularly predatory ones that lack proper peer review, aiming to protect the integrity of scientific research. The AI screens journal websites for suspicious features, assisting human experts in vetting publications, and has identified over 1,000 potentially problematic journals among nearly 15,200 analyzed.

via ScienceDaily|

#ai #fake-science-journals #peer-review