Image/Figure/Data duplication

Ever had it before? Well you got it again.
Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

Butter up yer popcorn and put on the 3-D glasses.

https://pubpeer.com/publications/540485 ... 6DC8BD41F0
Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

https://pubpeer.com/publications/20B493 ... AE329B1158
This paper has a duplication image with another paper but with no shared author. Besides, there are more than 30 chinese papers in this kind of style which takes a lot of time to analyze them. There should be a third party company behind them to make those similar style papers. Some of them do have duplication or forgery images.
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29660
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Anaxagoras »

Well, I'm glad somebody's paying attention.
Doctor X
Posts: 75282
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Doctor X »

That should be a duplicate post.

Just saying.

--J.D.
Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

Link:

Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

https://pubpeer.com/publications/911813 ... BD2319E0#4
If you have smart gut, you have to disclose your name and I will also explore more about you, if you are self proclaimed false researcher or a blogger. Don't get nervous. Take your time and reply.
Amazing. Only thing missing is "Just relax. Thanks."
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Rob Lister »

Balwant Rai has issues that need to be addressed.
Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

Link:

Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

Link:

Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

https://scienceintegritydigest.com/2020 ... octopaper/
A follower on Twitter asked me to look at two identical papers. I agreed that they looked very similar, did some searches, and found six more. All eight papers presented the same survival curves, table values, and similar line graphs. But they were published in different journals by different authors, at different institutes, on different patients, and different cancers.

In this blog post, I present to you the Mysterious Case of the Octopaper.
Pyrrho
Posts: 31994
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Pyrrho »

A detailed discussion of the use of the same images in certain medical journal articles.

https://scienceintegritydigest.com/2020 ... aper-mill/
Here I will discuss the Stock Photo Papers, a set of 121 papers, almost exclusively published in the same scientific journal. The papers all have different authors from different institutions, and describe different cancer types and tissue samples.

However, although each of these papers looks unique at first glance, all papers in this set contain images from the same library of about 100 photos and plots. Like images in a stock photo library, each of these photos was used multiple times in different papers. My findings, covered by Eva Xiao in the Wall Street Journal, suggest that they were all created by the same paper mill.
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Witness »

This time Bik inconvenienced the French hydroxychloroquine guru doctor:
Scientific image sleuth faces legal action for criticizing research papers

Researchers say the complaint filed against Elisabeth Bik could have a ‘chilling effect’ on scholarly criticism.

A prominent French microbiologist has filed a criminal complaint against a world-renowned research-integrity specialist after she publicly flagged concerns about his published work, including papers suggesting that the drug hydroxychloroquine was effective at treating COVID-19, a claim that has now been refuted.

The complaint was filed on 29 April to a prosecutor in Marseille, France, by a lawyer acting on behalf of Didier Raoult, along with his colleague structural biologist Eric Chabriere, both at the city’s Hospital-University Institute Mediterranean Infection (IHU). It accuses Elisabeth Bik — a microbiologist turned research integrity consultant, based in California — of aggravated moral harassment, attempted blackmail and attempted extortion.

Bik — whose work scrutinizing images in research papers has earned her a worldwide following and has led to more than 170 retractions — denies these allegations, and says that her comments about the pair’s work are standard scientific critiques.

More than 1,000 scientists have rallied to support her in an open letter that claims the case could have a “chilling effect” on scholarly criticism.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01430-z for details.


The vitamin D cure has also its problems:

COVID-19 and misinformation: how an infodemic fuelled the prominence of vitamin D
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Image/Figure/Data duplication

Post by Witness »

Hundreds of gibberish papers still lurk in the scientific literature

The nonsensical computer-generated articles, spotted years after the problem was first seen, could lead to a wave of retractions.

Nonsensical research papers generated by a computer program are still popping up in the scientific literature many years after the problem was first seen, a study has revealed1. Some publishers have told Nature they will take down the papers, which could result in more than 200 retractions.

The issue began in 2005, when three PhD students created paper-generating software called SCIgen for “maximum amusement”, and to show that some conferences would accept meaningless papers. The program cobbles together words to generate research articles with random titles, text and charts, easily spotted as gibberish by a human reader. It is free to download, and anyone can use it.

By 2012, computer scientist Cyril Labbé had found 85 fake SCIgen papers in conferences published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE); he went on to find more than 120 fake SCIgen papers published by the IEEE and by Springer2. It was unclear who had generated the papers or why. The articles were subsequently retracted — or sometimes deleted — and Labbé released a website allowing anyone to upload a manuscript and check whether it seems to be a SCIgen invention. Springer also sponsored a PhD project to help spot SCIgen papers, which resulted in free software called SciDetect. (Springer is now part of Springer Nature; Nature’s news team is editorially independent of its publisher.)

Labbé, who works at the University of Grenoble Alpes in France, originally searched manuscripts for words typical of SCIgen’s vocabulary. But he and another computer scientist, Guillaume Cabanac at the University of Toulouse, France, came up with a new idea: searching for key grammatical phrases characteristic of SCIgen’s output. Last May, he and Cabanac searched for such phrases in millions of papers indexed in the Dimensions database.

After manually inspecting every hit, the researchers identified 243 nonsense articles created entirely or partly by SCIgen, they report in a study published on 26 May1. These articles, published between 2008 and 2020, appeared in various journals, conference proceedings and preprint sites, and were mostly in the computer-science field. Some appeared in open-access journals; others were paywalled. Forty-six of them had already been retracted or deleted from the websites where they were first published.

Since last year, the researchers have added another 20 papers to their list, including gibberish articles created by MATHgen (software that generates mathematics papers) and the SBIR proposal generator (which creates nonsense grant proposals). Cabanac and Labbé have posted some of their findings on Twitter and the post-publication peer review website PubPeer, and they are releasing their full results online.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01436-7 for the rest.