Sign in

Guillaume Cabanac

@gcabanac.cpesr.fr
2.2K followers 430 following 97 posts

‘Deception Sleuth’ #Nature10 Scientist go.nature.com/3B29NgY • CS Prof. Univ. Toulouse @IUFrance.bsky.social • Metascience + Scientific Text Mining • www.irit.fr/~Guillaume.Cabanac @gcabanac at X @gcabanac@sciences.re at Mastodon

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Laurent Jégou @ljegou.cpesr.fr · 25/09/2026
Hey @gcabanac.cpesr.fr we have tortured illustrations too, now! 😬
151
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
NanoBubbles @nanobubbles.bsky.social · 22/09/2026
📰 Our team member Guillaume Cabanac is in Physics World today! “Cabanac says that the latest misconduct smoking gun can be found in bibliographies and the growing use of hallucinated references…” Read here: physicsworld.com/a/how-scient... @gcabanac.cpesr.fr
physicsworld.com
How scientific publishers are fighting back against fraudulent papermills – Physics World
The growth of AI and papermills has caused publishers countless headaches
154
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Serhii Nazarovets @serhiinazarovets.bsky.social · 11/09/2026
I presented some of my recent work at @iritoulouse.bsky.social Seminar – from strange bibliometric patterns and #GenAI to research integrity and research climate. Many thanks to @gcabanac.cpesr.fr for the invitation! doi.org/10.13140/RG.... #scientometrics #ResearchEvaluation #bibliometrics
doi.org
(PDF) Apparently, it’s called forensic scientometrics: What happens after we find something wrong?
PDF | This presentation was prepared for the research seminar at the Informatics Research Institute of Toulouse (IRIT), 11 September 2026. It brings... | Find, read and cite all the research you need ...
054
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Guillaume Cabanac @gcabanac.cpesr.fr · 14/08/2026
The PPS Tortured detector tabulates 8626 IEEE articles with tortured phrases, 62% of which have been posted on @PubPeer.com: dbrech.irit.fr/pls/apex/f?p.... The PPS Annulled detector finds that 46% (3966/8626) of the IEEE articles with tortured phrases are retracted: dbrech.irit.fr/pls/apex/f?p...
213
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Jeffrey Brainard @jeffreybrainard.bsky.social · 12/08/2026
Hundreds of ads by #papermills, offering authorship on scientific articles for a fee, wound up published in conference proceedings. Are these venues a back-door route that’s too easy? #scicomm #retractions #peerreview @science.org www.science.org/content/arti...
science.org
Hundreds of paper-mill papers peddled in ads were later published
More than one-fifth of some IEEE conferences’ papers appear linked to authorship for sale
11914
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Sholto David @sholtodavid.bsky.social · 06/08/2026
A tool used to rephrase plagiarised text changed "final solution" to "mass killing of an ethnic group" in a chemistry paper. Now retracted thanks to a PubPeer user who spotted this. pubpeer.com/publications...
271037404
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Thomas Kesteman🦠🧫🔬🌏 @tomk.eurosky.social · 27/07/2026
Sounds like @gcabanac.cpesr.fr 's tortured phrases!
042
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Peer-Reviewed Slop @peer-reviewed-slop.bsky.social · 13/07/2026
Thanks to AI, one can generate SEM images in full color now! Sabet, M. Halogen-free polymer composites: advancing sustainable and high-performance flexible electronics. Iran Polym J 34, 599–624 (2025). doi.org/10.1007/s137...
122
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Smut Clyde, X-Ray Haruspex @smutclyde.bsky.social · 04/07/2026
Today in Serious Scientific Publishing.
4183
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Guillaume Cabanac @gcabanac.cpesr.fr · 30/06/2026
Use #bibCheck if you are a French academic: it's an online tool that audits bibliographies and reports retracted or inexistent references, developed in collaboration with @cnrs-inist.bsky.social (see slide 25 ut3-toulouseinp.hal.science/hal-05646645...). Otherwise check github.com/gianlucasb/h...
bibCheck
01712
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
COSIG @cosig.net · 04/06/2026
Today, COSIG and Sal Sleuthmander turn 1 year old! 🎂 Contributions to COSIG are the best birthday gifts we can ever receive, many thanks to all of our contributors 🎉
Sal Sleuthmander, a Chinese giant salamander, sports a conical birthday hat and gazes appreciatively over his cake with a 1 candle.
084
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Sean Carroll @seanmcarroll.bsky.social · 19/05/2026
Very interesting. Springer retracted two essays from the early 1940s by Max Planck. Apparently because of "duplicate publication" - similar things (also by Planck) appeared elsewhere. But back in the day, that was common and not thought of as bad! There wasn't an internet to spread papers around.
2608
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Dorothy Bishop @deevybee.bsky.social · 22/05/2026
C'mon, @mdpiopenaccess.bsky.social - after all the effort sleuths put in to hunt down the papermill products, is this the best you can do? A "correction"? If you want to be taken seriously as a publisher you need to weed out the gobbledegook. pubpeer.com/publications...
pubpeer.com
PubPeer - Plants: A Key Emphasis to Its Pharmacological Potential
There are comments on PubPeer for publication: Plants: A Key Emphasis to Its Pharmacological Potential (2019)
21412
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Dalmeet Singh Chawla @dalmeet.bsky.social · 14/05/2026
Brokers of scientific fraud are constantly innovating and expanding. Companies looking to spot and tackle their activities are doing the same. My latest feature for @cenmag.bsky.social: cen.acs.org/policy/publi... @clearskiesadam.bsky.social, @stmassoc.bsky.social, @gcabanac.cpesr.fr #WCRI2026
056
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Observatoire des pratiques socio-numériques @opsnum.bsky.social · 11/05/2026
📖 Nouveau rapport de l'OPSN ! Comment la presse française raconte-t-elle les réseaux sociaux depuis vingt ans ? 🔍"Aux origines d'un monde" analyse plus de 150 000 articles et retrace la trajectoire médiatiques des plateformes, de Facebook à TikTok. 📂 opsn.univ-tlse3.fr/rapports-de-...
opsn.univ-tlse3.fr
RAPPORT - AUX ORIGINES D'UN MONDE. Les réseaux socionumériques dans la presse quotidienne française (2003-2024) - Observatoire des pratiques socio-numériques
111
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Solal Pirelli @solalpirelli.bsky.social · 27/04/2026
Did you know there's a barely hidden market for authorship of fake scientific papers in conferences? New preprint w/ @abalkina.bsky.social, @mkunesova.bsky.social, and @yaamurozturk.bsky.social : arxiv.org/abs/2604.22458 We found 4,000+ ads & matched them to 1,720 IEEE conf. papers! ...🧵
arxiv.org
Opening Pandora's box: Paper mills in conference proceedings
Paper mills are a growing threat to the integrity of science, yet their penetration in conference proceedings remains underexplored despite conferences being more important than journals in some scien...
16338
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Reese Richardson @reeserichardson.bsky.social · 28/04/2026
How much does it cost to buy your way onto a scientific paper? To answer this question (and better understand the global market for academic reputation manipulation), we compiled BuyTheBy, a massive dataset of thousands of advertisements from paper mills in seven different countries. Link below!
A boxplot with authorship slot (1st author through 5th author) on the x axis and price in USD on the y axis. Prices are split by paper mill of origin.
37941
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Elisabeth Bik @elisabethbik.bsky.social · 24/04/2026
Retraction at a Spandidos journal 👏 I posted it on PubPeer in 2020, but did not get around to sending it to the publisher until March 2025. Then, @gcabanac.cpesr.fr found more problems. It's a beauty. #FlawCytometry HT: @smutclyde.bsky.social pubpeer.com/publications...
A figure with 6 Flow Cytometry panels. Red dots in 'clouds', and each panel has a cross dividing the dots into the 4 quadrants. I have added rounded boxes in a variety of colors to highlight areas that appear to be shared between the panels.
0304
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Miryam Naddaf @miryamnaddaf.bsky.social · 01/04/2026
My colleague & I teamed up w/ Grounded AI to look for fake/hallucinated references. Our analysis suggests that at least tens of thousands of publications from 2025 likely contain such references. More detz at @nature.com, w/ input from @gcabanac.cpesr.fr, @mhmdhsini.bsky.social & @kowb.bsky.social.
nature.com
Hallucinated citations are polluting the scientific literature. What can be done?
Tens of thousands of publications from 2025 might include invalid references generated by AI, a Nature analysis suggests.
25017
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Elisabeth Bik @elisabethbik.bsky.social · 13/03/2026
New blog post: The Camel's Camel. Today, I found a beautiful example of synonymized plagiarism involving the microbiome of a camel’s udder. #TorturedPhrases #ScienceIntegrity #ResearchIntegrity scienceintegritydigest.com/2026/03/12/t...
A cartoon drawing of a light brown camel with one hump. At the position where one might find an udder, we see a baby camel hanging. It is to illustrate the absurdity of the sentence "The definition and definition of microbes on the camel’s camel is very important ", found in the abstract of a paper about the camel udder microbiome.
55517
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Retraction Watch @retractionwatch.com · 10/03/2026
We're thrilled to announce the Ctrl-Z Award, a US$2,500 prize for researchers “who discover substantial errors in their published work and take meaningful steps to correct the scientific record." Covered by @nature.com today; read more here: centerforscientificintegrity.org/2026/03/10/a...
nature.com
Keep calm and be transparent: advice from scientists who retracted their papers
Retractions correct the scientific record, but they have stigma attached to them. Some in the research community want that to change.
6471197
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Graham Kendall @grahamkendall.bsky.social · 26/02/2026
Stealth corrections are still a threat to scientific integrity. If you are not familiar with stealth corrections, please read this. This guest post is on @deevybee.bsky.social's blog and is authored by from René Aquarius, Floris Schoeters, Alex Glynn and @gcabanac.cpesr.fr buff.ly/t8fWFZq
045
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Grand Labo @grandlabo.com · 20/02/2026
NOUVEL EP - Comment devient-on un "détective" de la #science ? Avec @gcabanac.cpesr.fr, prof. à l'Université de Toulouse et concepteur du "Problematic Paper Screener". youtu.be/pNdLmsXDVn0
youtu.be
Qui sont les "détectives de la science" ?
YouTube video by Grand Labo
0108
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Dead Neanderthals @deadneanderthals.bsky.social · 20/02/2026
We wrote a 1-year update post on stealth corrections. Thank you @deevybee.bsky.social for hosting it. We also wrote a @cosig.net guide to make reporting stealth corrections more streamlined cc: @gcabanac.cpesr.fr
0136
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
NanoBubbles @nanobubbles.bsky.social · 18/02/2026
📰 David Adam reports for Nature News on our Replication Initiative "A European project calls for help to verify whether carbon quantum dots are really able to sense chemicals in cells." 🔗 www.nature.com/articles/d41... @nature.com
nature.com
Nanoscience is latest discipline to embrace large-scale replication efforts
A European project calls for help to verify whether carbon quantum dots are really able to sense chemicals in cells.
1139
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Mohammad Hosseini @mhmdhsini.bsky.social · 03/02/2026
Iranians are experiencing a collective trauma. Thousands have been killed/injured in recent events, the economy is crippled & the threat of a wider conflict is real. This is especially difficult for those living in Iran, as many have lost (or fear losing) loved ones. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
16932
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Jack Ryan 🙏🧪 @jacksonwryan.com · 11/01/2026
🧪 Here's a science mystery to start the year. Why are species names for fish and plants appearing in the scientific literature in papers about firefighter injuries, hearing loss and heart attack? Is it AI? Translation tools? Something else? nobreakthroughs.substack.com/p/is-this-fi...
Red YT wtf circle around the black and white image of a fish with a big black eye. It's a predaceous chub.
97843
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
NanoBubbles @nanobubbles.bsky.social · 07/01/2026
📣 Interested in 🫧 and AI? ➡️ AISB 2026 Symposium titled Hype, Promise, and Speculation: AI Bubbles and the Replication Crisis in Computer Science will take place on 1-2 July 2026 in Sussex, UK. 🕐 Deadline for submissions is 6 March 2026 🔗 For more information aisb.org.uk/aisb-2026-sy...
aisb.org.uk
AISB 2026 Symposium: Hype, Promise, and Speculation: AI Bubbles and the Replication Crisis in Computer Science - AISB - The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour
AISB convention information 1-2 July 2026 AISB 2026, University of Sussex, UK Keynote Speaker: Anil Seth, Professor of Cognitive and Computational Neuroscience, University of Sussex Day of celebration...
1109
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
NanoBubbles @nanobubbles.bsky.social · 05/12/2025
📣 Submit to our track 'Making Science Better?' at the STS NL Conference which will take place in Twente from April 15 to 17, 2026! More details in the link below. 🔗 www.utwente.nl/en/bms/sts-n...
STS NL CONFERENCE 2026 banner with the track proposal titled 'Making Science Better?'
2910
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Reese Richardson @reeserichardson.bsky.social · 31/12/2025
"It might be easy to dismiss the idea of ISO 9001 as just another tool to encourage best practice among publishers. But journal certification would fill a long-standing gap in the chain of external oversight from conduct to translation of research." @jabyrnesci.bsky.social writes in @nature.com !
doi.org
Put pressure on publishers to follow best practice — external regulation is the answer
Journals that work hard to meet the needs of both authors and readers should be acknowledged publicly — encouraging others to follow suit.
0148
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Dorothy Bishop @deevybee.bsky.social · 08/12/2025
Springer Nature retracting papers based on bonkers dataset www.thetransmitter.org/retraction/e... Good. #autism
thetransmitter.org
Springer Nature retracts, removes nearly 40 publications
The dataset contains images of children’s faces downloaded from websites about autism, which sparked concerns at Springer Nature about consent and reliability.
311249
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Retraction Watch @retractionwatch.com · 02/12/2025
“I started reading this article and found some interesting references that I decided to read as well,” Moore told Retraction Watch. “To my surprise, those articles didn’t exist.”
retractionwatch.com
The case of the fake references in an ethics journal
Many would-be whistleblowers write to us about papers with nonexistent references, possibly hallucinated by artificial intelligence. One reader recently alerted us to fake references in … an ethics…
02311
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Anna Abalkina @abalkina.bsky.social · 01/12/2025
Happy Advent! !!!🎄✨ Welcome to a new edition of the Research Integrity Advent Calendar. Each day brings a small challenge: spot the problem, detect inconsistencies, and sharpen your skills. Enjoy the season and the daily puzzles! Day 1. papermills.tilda.ws/advent2025
04325
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Dorothy Bishop @deevybee.bsky.social · 29/11/2025
i’m going to have to stop scrolling through Scientific Reports contents before I go insane www.nature.com/articles/s41... ADHD in dogs? 🙀
nature.com
Development of a human analogue ADHD diagnostic system for family dogs - Scientific Reports
Scientific Reports - Development of a human analogue ADHD diagnostic system for family dogs
5234
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
1000WomeninSTEM @1000womeninstem.bsky.social · 14/12/2024
5️⃣4️⃣ Elisabeth Bik (1966- ) 🇳🇱 #womeninSTEM @elisabethbik.bsky.social Microbiologist, she worked on cholera epidemics in India & Bangladesh. Internationally recognised for her work in detecting image manipulation. 2021 Maddox Prize & 2024 Einstein Foundation award. www.statnews.com/2024/02/28/e...
123158
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Sophie E. Hill @sophieehill.bsky.social · 24/11/2025
Good morning! Today is a day ending in "y", which means I found another mathematically-impossible Table of Summary Statistics in a peer-reviewed "green economics" paper! What can you see? 🔎 #FablesofFlummeryStatistics
Table
293
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Fred Bordignon @freddie2310.bsky.social · 25/11/2025
OpenAlex intégré au Web of Science, ou la capture du travail des “commoners” | carnetist.hypotheses.org/2572
carnetist.hypotheses.org
OpenAlex intégré au Web of Science, ou la capture du travail des “commoners”
C’est une annonce qui est passée relativement inaperçue, mais qui mérite que l’on s’y arrête un instant. Clarivate a récemment annoncé l’intégration d’OpenAlex comme une nouvelle base de données au se...
12928
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Sophie E. Hill @sophieehill.bsky.social · 19/11/2025
In fact, there are several tortured phrases in this paper. My favourite: "Stochastic Effects of Relapse on Popular and Technology (STIRPAT)" which should be: "Stochastic Impacts by Regression on Population, Affluence, and Technology (STIRPAT)"
1. Tortured phrases
This paper contains several tortured phrases.

Observed phrase	Expected phrase
population development	population growth
natural debasement	environmental degredation
Stochastic Effects of Relapse on Popular and Technology (STIRPAT)	Stochastic Impacts by Regression on Population, Affluence, and Technology (STIRPAT)
productive indication	useful predictor
F-score	F-stat
t-score	t-stat
promotion	investment
best-guess estimates	point estimates (?)
conversation valuation reports	reported summary statistics (?)
142
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Caroline @ccarolinemuller.eurosky.social · 19/11/2025
Scène de la vie académique ordinaire dans le tgv Un chercheur voisin (qui n'a pas mis de filtre de confidentialité sur son écran) Est en train de rédiger un long mail d'explications pour répondre à deux co autrices qui lui reprochent très vivement d'avoir écrit sa section d'article avec une IA
3528
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Guillaume Cabanac @gcabanac.cpesr.fr · 19/11/2025
Je tiens les maisons d'édition pour responsables. Elles publient et parfois vendent de la pollution : des articles toxiques. LinkedIn me permet d'atteindre les décideurs de ces publishers et les représentants institutionnels. Du délire... 😵‍💫 voici quelques extraits : www.linkedin.com/in/guillaume...
https://www.linkedin.com/in/guillaumecabanac/recent-activityhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/guillaumecabanac/recent-activityhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/guillaumecabanac/recent-activityhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/guillaumecabanac/recent-activity
162
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Retraction Watch @retractionwatch.com · 17/11/2025
An international computing society has begun retracting conference papers for “citation falsification” only months after the sleuth who flagged the suspect articles was convicted for defamation in a lawsuit filed by one of the offending authors.
retractionwatch.com
Computing society pulls works for ‘citation falsification’ months after sleuth is convicted of defamation
Solal Pirelli An international computing society has begun retracting conference papers for “citation falsification” only months after the sleuth who flagged the suspect articles was convicted for …
04420
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · 11/11/2025
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing: a 🧵 1/n Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820 Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/... Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below.

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.A figure detailing the drain on researcher time.

1. The four-fold drain

1.2 Time
The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce,
with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure
1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material
has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs,
grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for
profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time.
The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million
unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of
peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting
widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the
authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many
review demands.
Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of
scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in
‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow
progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to
volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier,
local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with
limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging
with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks
intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below:

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised
scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers
first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour
resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
8644453
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Solal Pirelli @solalpirelli.bsky.social · 22/10/2025
36 cites to the same author? Retracted. 59 of them? Not retracted! 4 self-cites? Retracted. 21 self-cites? Not retracted! 70 unused cites to the same author? Retracted. 77 of them? Not retracted! Plagiarism? Cites authors didn't add? 113 cites to the TPC chair in a 0.5-page paper? Not retracted!
1122
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
𝖳𝗁𝖾𝖬𝖾𝗍𝖺𝖭𝖾𝗐𝗌 @themeta.news · 03/10/2025
🟢 Vos revues profanées Des revues de référence qui se mettent à publier en masse des articles louches et à augmenter leur frais de publication ? Au moins sept revues françaises seraient passées aux mains d’obscurs éditeurs. On vous explique 👇 themeta.news/linvasion-de... #VeilleESR
31612
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Raphaël Lévy @raphavisses.mastodon.top.ap.brid.gy · 04/09/2025
!!! 6 octobre 2025 - Amphi Weiss - 45 rue des Saint Pères - Paris !!! 15h Conférence d'Irène Frachon, lanceuse d'alerte du #Mediator suivie à 16h d'une table ronde sur la manipulation de l'information scientifique et la protection des lanceurs d'alerte (détails ci-dessous).
Photo d'Irène Frachon, credit @Maxppp - Olivier Arandel
167
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Sophie de Ravinel @s2rvnl.bsky.social · 09/09/2025
<Déroulez !>Au cœur de l’été, une alerte très relayée est arrivée des Etats-Unis. Une de plus, sur la croissance trop rapide de la fraude scientifique. Les publications vérolées augmentent « à un rythme bien supérieur à celui des publications légitimes », prévient l’Académie des sciences (PNAS).
21312
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Retraction Watch @retractionwatch.com · 25/08/2025
Grateful that @lonnibesancon.bsky.social‬, @gcabanac.cpesr.fr, Cyril Labbe and Alexander Magazinov chose to donate the proceeds of their ASIS&T Best Paper Award for 2025 to the @elisabethbik.bsky.social Fund to support the work of sleuths. More here: centerforscientificintegrity.org/our-projects...
asist.org
“Sneaked references: Fabricated reference metadata distort citation counts” Chosen for 2025 Best JASIST Paper Award
The Association for Information Science & Technology (ASIS&T) is delighted to announce that “Sneaked references: Fabricated reference metadata distort citation counts,” written by Lonni Besançon, Guil...
08234
Guillaume Cabanac @gcabanac.cpesr.fr · 09/08/2025
🤯 Tortured phrases in ‘ACM Computing Surveys’ a top journal in my field (JIF 28 and SJR Q1, FWIW). @acm.org tell us it's a bug in the editorial system. Did any of the reviewers recommended acceptance? Please make their reports public with the upcoming retraction notice. pubpeer.com/publications...
Tortured phrases in the article https://pubpeer.com/publications/1497EA7D4D157F282F3910AB471A1B
2197
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
Retraction Watch @retractionwatch.com · 01/08/2025
Once upon a time, two science journalists had an idea for a blog about retractions. And on Aug. 3, 2010, Retraction Watch launched. And now, 15 years and 6,700 posts later, that work seems more important than ever. Happy 15th anniversary, Retraction Watch.
retractionwatch.com
Happy 15th anniversary, Retraction Watch
Once upon a time, a long time ago, two science journalists had an idea for a blog about retractions. And on Aug. 3, 2010, Retraction Watch launched, detailing in the first post why retractions matt…
624885
Reposted by Guillaume Cabanac
FactPost @factpostnews.bsky.social · 23/07/2025
Reporter: The FDA has a new AI tool that's intended to speed up drug approvals. But several FDA employees say the new AI helper is making up studies that do not exist. One FDA employee telling us, 'Anything that you don't have time to double check is unreliable. It hallucinates confidently'
16043781460