US Edition
AI-Enabled Paper Mills Flood Journals, Threaten Scientific Integrity
COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, AUG 4 – Analysis shows 45 editors handled just 1.3% of PLoS ONE papers but were linked to over 30% of retractions, highlighting concentrated editorial influence on scientific fraud.
- Amid growing concerns over academic misconduct, Northwestern University researchers uncovered sophisticated global networks collaborating to undermine scientific publishing, published in PNAS.
- Amid rapid publication demands, researchers identified coordinated efforts by paper mills and brokers fueling fraud, outpacing legitimate scientific publications.
- At PNAS, the study found 45 editors handled only 1.3% of articles but accounted for more than 30% of 702 retractions from 276,956 articles analyzed.
- Preserving research integrity requires stronger oversight, and the authors emphasize enhanced scrutiny of editorial processes and improved detection methods as a wake-up call to the scientific community.
- Richardson said, 'If we're not prepared to deal with the fraud that's already occurring, then we're certainly not prepared to deal with what generative AI can do to scientific literature.
Insights by Ground AI
Does this summary seem wrong?
12 Articles
12 Articles
Coverage Details
Total News Sources12
Leaning Left0Leaning Right2Center5Last UpdatedBias Distribution71% Center
Bias Distribution
- 71% of the sources are Center
71% Center
C 71%
R 29%
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
