{"id":556923,"date":"2026-07-19T03:50:29","date_gmt":"2026-07-19T03:50:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/556923\/"},"modified":"2026-07-19T03:50:29","modified_gmt":"2026-07-19T03:50:29","slug":"weekend-reads-private-info-in-most-arxiv-preprints-why-did-george-church-decline-authorship-28-misconduct-cases-in-china","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/556923\/","title":{"rendered":"Weekend reads: Private info in \u2018most\u2019 arXiv preprints; why did George Church decline authorship; 28 misconduct cases in China\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

If your week flew by \u2014 we know ours did \u2014 catch up here with what you might have missed.<\/p>\n

The week at Retraction Watch featured:<\/p>\n

In case you missed the news<\/a>, the Hijacked Journal Checker<\/a> now has more than 450 entries. The Retraction Watch Database<\/a> has over 65,000 retractions. Our list of COVID-19 retractions<\/a> is up to 650, and our mass resignations list<\/a> has more than 50 entries. We keep tabs on all this and more. If you value this work, please consider showing your support with a tax-deductible donation. Every dollar counts.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):<\/p>\n

\u201cMost arXiv papers contain information never meant to be shared,\u201d including passwords and GPS coordinates<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Did U.S. scrutiny of foreign research drive several scientists, including prominent geneticist George Church, to decline authorship<\/a> on a recent commentary?<\/p>\n

China\u2019s National Health Commission disclosed 28 cases of research misconduct<\/a> \u201cinvolving data fabrication, paper trading and guest authorship<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cFederal authorities should enforce minimum standards for peer review in \u2018unregulated\u2019 journal sector, argues Thomas S\u00fcdhof<\/a>,\u201d Nobel prizewinning biochemist with two retractions<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cAward-winning Korea studies scholar accused of using AI-fabricated citations<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

National Research Foundation clears South Korea university president of plagiarism<\/a> after three-year investigation.<\/p>\n

\u201cYes, peer review has problems. But Trump\u2019s solution is dangerous<\/a>.\u201d The proposed rule<\/a> attracted nearly 350,000 comments<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cDoctored data sets could trick AI agents<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

University revokes master\u2019s degree<\/a> of daughter of \u201crenowned\u201d writer for plagiarism.<\/p>\n

Historian \u201cappeared to lose her professorship\u201d at Tufts after scholars found factual inaccuracies in her book<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cWell-known\u201d author in China loses master\u2019s degree \u201cover academic misconduct\u201d and plagiarism in her thesis<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Report claiming O\u2019ahu would meet electrical demands through 2050 while transitioning to net zero carbon emissions retracted<\/a>, energy officer says it \u201coffered \u2018nothing serious<\/a>.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

University of North Carolina \u201cSystem official published federally funded paper in scrutinized journal<\/a>\u201d without disclosing her ties to the project. And: \u201cUniversity research needs better publishing guidelines<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cAI reviewers make it easier to get research published<\/a>.\u201d A preprint<\/a> \u201ccalls it paper-laundering.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2018Everything we catch is a huge win<\/a>\u2019: the rise of integrity specialists.\u201d Our cofounders wrote about the trend in 2018<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cHow Has \u2018Opening Up\u2019 Science Changed Scientific Practices<\/a>?\u201d<\/p>\n

For over 100,000 Science and Science Advances submissions, researchers find acceptance rates differ<\/a> with institutional prestige, team size, gender and country.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe case for citation count ranges<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

University officials \u201ccountersue professor who filed civil rights lawsuit,\u201d professor accused of \u201cdefrauding university for travel, wedding<\/a>.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cDid peer review fail? Nature Medicine\u2019s chronotherapy paper retraction<\/a> raises questions\u201d: A podcast<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs well, I express concerns about prioritizing adherence to open science over a depth of engagement with research ethics<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cAI-assisted reviews will result in ordinary, uncontroversial research<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Researchers find women publish fewer articles per year, tend \u201cto publish in lower-impact factor journals, and to be less cited<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cPhysicist says splashy new cosmology study<\/a> made \u2018elemental\u2019 mistake<\/a>\u201d by using the wrong unit.<\/p>\n

\u201cAI Slop Is a Tenure Problem, Not Just a Tech Problem<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cRutgers University investigates ethics complaint against dean who billed the university for services offered by her company<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

A program chair for the Association for Computational Linguistics\u2019 annual meeting dissects this year\u2019s deluge of submissions<\/a>.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the AI era, the human struggle can no longer be the point of research<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cHow can we study scientists who conceal their identities<\/a>?\u201d<\/p>\n

Upcoming Talk<\/p>\n

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a\u00a0tax-deductible contribution to support our work<\/a>, follow us\u00a0on X<\/a> or Bluesky<\/a>, like us\u00a0on Facebook<\/a>, follow us on LinkedIn<\/a>, add us to your\u00a0RSS reader<\/a>, or subscribe to our\u00a0daily digest<\/a>. If you find a retraction that\u2019s\u00a0not in our database<\/a>, you can\u00a0let us know here<\/a>. For comments or feedback, email us at\u00a0[email\u00a0protected]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n\tRelated\n<\/p>\n