The ‘Problematic Paper Screener’: flags unreliable passages in publications, supports a decentralised re-assessment of problematic papers, helps to decontaminate the scientific literature. https://t.co/fSmzEq49x9 That's my research as @InstUnivFr member.

Reverse Image Forensics Challenge: Try to find a unique area in Figure 9 of this recent Scientific Reports paper: 10.1038/s41598-025-17456-6 [Aug 2025] - Annotated by ImageTwin

"Je me suis aperçu que, si le travail bien fait est source de joies puissantes, la paresse savourée en gourmet ne l'est pas moins. Les gens qui ne travaillent pas ne s'ennuient jamais. Les gens qui travaillent s'ennuient quand ils ne travaillent pas." François Cavanna, Les

#MiniReviewMill 58 #FakeReview #CoerciveCitation Reviewers 🔹Monica Butnariu➕Ionel Samfira➕Sarac Ioan University @life_timisoara 🇷🇴 🔹Anonymous 🔷24 verbatim review reports 🔷47 Monica Butnariu’s works to be cited H/T Reese Richardson (database)➕another sleuth (key) 🧵

#ReviewLikeATweet #StrangerThings @MDPIOpenAccess Round 1 🥇 4 words @Sensors_MDPI 🥈 10 words @Symmetry_MDPI 🥉23 words @diagnostic_mdpi 📜 37 words @Applsci Is this compatible with a thorough review of the original manuscript? ⬇️(links and more)

Je reviens donc sur la bonne nouvelle: notre papier sur les sneaked references ( https://t.co/oblwJOFUy1) avec @gcabanac A. Magazinov, et C. Labbé nous a fait obtenir un best paper award. Notre réaction ici: https://t.co/YQbP8WGgHK

Les tortellinis mis à toutes les sauces : « Guillaume Cabanac @gcabanac lui, développe les outils de détection automatique, par exemple le "Problematic Paper Screener", un logiciel qui repère les "tortellinis" , ces expressions tordues ou mots inventés qui résultent de tentatives

🤯 Tortured phrases in ‘ACM Computing Surveys’ a top journal in my field (JIF 28 and SJR Q1, FWIW). @TheOfficialACM tell us it's a bug... Did any of the reviewers recommended acceptance? Please make their reports public with the upcoming retraction notice. https://t.co/oQ1KjnxIlu

One-fifth of computer science papers may include AI content | Science | AAAS

In April 2024 I tweeted about two papers that had "Regenerate Response" as part of the article. These had actually been pointed out by @gcabanac who had raised the issue on #PubPeer. These papers were published in 2023, so that are now about two years old. Both papers are still

Now available in English, featuring @gcabanac, myself, and others:

A polsci-adjacent article which I marked as potentially containing tortured phrases has been retracted from the open-access Cell journal that published it. cc @gcabanac @Thatsregrettab1

River Valley Technologies launches Research Integrity Dashboard https://t.co/s89zR5SMLr Dashboard can be customised by publisher, journal, or even article type @RiverValley1000 @kaveh1000

A new journal record: Sage title retracts 678 more papers, tally over 1,500

Still in Lucca on Thursday? Why not attend our Scholarly Information Access workshop SCOLIA at San Micheletto Campus! We have an open mic session, speak to us if you want to present your work! https://t.co/hm6KiVF4fR @suzan @gcabanac @kreutzch @Philipp_Mayr #ecir2025 @ecir2025

🫥 Withdrawn on 2099-12-31: Thank you @ElsevierConnect for warning readers ahead of time: https://t.co/fiHqk5TwuM CC @RetractionWatch @CrossrefOrg

I am hopeful that we'll get an analysis like this in more fields, and of meta-analyses where we know only the fraudulent entries are taken out and that the rest of the content is assured. But I doubt that'll happen soon. Source:

What happens when retracted studies are included in systematic reviews? https://t.co/H6pdsWXPgV And what can journal editors do about the problem? https://t.co/2FN34PSsI1

Important. This study found that retracted studies have been included in systematic reviews/meta-analyses, with retractions occurring mainly after publication. The inclusion of retracted studies can impact the results and interpretation of reviews.

This study found that retracted studies included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses can impact their results and interpretation, highlighting the need for quality control measures. https://t.co/09SsjjDGEm @gcabanac

😵‍💫 Tortured phrases by a @Google employee in an @arxiv preprint, really? Or an impersonation, or a bad joke? https://t.co/kFOyNxRSmQ