Hallucinated citations are polluting the scientific literature

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
Messages
19,911
Reaction score
10,924

Hallucinated citations are polluting the scientific literature. What can be done?​

Tens of thousands of publications from 2025 might include invalid references generated by AI, a Nature analysis suggests.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00969-z

Anyone have thoughts on their own experience and what the options are to combat this?
 
  • Sad
  • Wow
Likes   Reactions: MrRobotoToo, Filip Larsen, Rive and 1 other person
Science news on Phys.org
Unfortunately, the whole scientific enterprise relies on each individual researcher behaving ethically and professionally, even when there are substantial incentives to 'cut corners'.

IMO, the only way to combat this problem is to hold the authors accountable.- The way that article phrases it, the Journal takes responsibility rather than the authors. Simply withdrawing a manuscript means it will appear elsewhere, in a different journal. The Journal editors could send a report to the author's institutional research integrity officer/conduct board, for example.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and Greg Bernhardt
Honestly, I would consider this fraud.
 
  • Agree
Likes   Reactions: Greg Bernhardt
How about using AI to search out bad references?
 
  • Informative
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mathwonk, berkeman and Greg Bernhardt
Shouldn't peer review be catching these fraudulent citations? If it isn't, what does that suggest about the feasibility of the current peer-review based scientific model?
 
Muu9 said:
Shouldn't peer review be catching these fraudulent citations? If it isn't, what does that suggest about the feasibility of the current peer-review based scientific model?
Again, the merit of peer review relies upon humans acting professionally. Bad actors always exist, but that's why some journals are considered 'higher quality' than others.

Peer review is like democracy- to poorly quote Churchill, "peer-review is the worst form of scientific certification except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
577
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
12K