19
Surge in fake citations uncovered by audit of 2.5 million biomedical science papers (www.nature.com)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/academia@mander.xyz
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 6 months ago (5 children)

I think they are mainly blaming AI hallucinations for fake citations. They had experts check the flagged citations who found 7/10 were true fakes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Maybe I'm generation gapped. I don't understand how this stuff isn't caught during peer review - that's one of the things we are supposed to be looking for, appropriate citations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Because we have to do peer review for free while having a high workload and zero time available to check all 50 citations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Lived it. Most of the citations in my area I'm familiar with the paper, or at least the lab. It's only the novel ones or strange combinations of people that I'd look up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •