/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.16077441]

What are some red flags that scientific publications are a joke?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2468023024002402

[Anonymous No.16077443]

If they are used to discredit my argument

[Anonymous No.16077448]

>>16077441
>Lead author is Zhang
That should have been enough desu, but if it wasn't
>Wu
>Yang
>Zhu
>Liu
Reading any further is just a waste of time, immediately discard it and wait for to appear on retraction watch.

[Anonymous No.16077580]

>>16077441
Conspiratard tone right off the bat. Happens a lot in nutrition publications.

[Anonymous No.16077582]

Kooky insinuations that one is a genius being suppressed.

[Anonymous No.16077673]

>>16077441
Computational papers which use non-realistic parameters.

[Anonymous No.16077735]

>>16077443
bro speaking facts fr

[Anonymous No.16077763]

>>16077441
>written by
>indians or similar
>obscure university in bangladesh or rural china

[Anonymous No.16077866]

>look at the journal
>look at it's impact factor
Holy shit. I'm glad I left academia.

[Anonymous No.16078003]

>>16077441
A pubpeer entry
https://pubpeer.com/publications/CAABBF887348FB2D1C0329E0A27BE6

[Anonymous No.16078020]

Introduction

The transition towards renewable energy sources necessitates the development of efficient and reliable energy storage systems. Among various storage technologies, lithium batteries have emerged as a pivotal solution due to their superior energy density, longer lifecycles, and versatility in applications ranging from portable electronics to electric vehicles and grid storage. This paper, co-authored by a diverse team including Prof. Li Wei, Dr. Zhang Jie, Dr. Chen Yu, Prof. Wang Feng, and Dr. Liu Huan, from leading Chinese institutions, presents a novel investigation into the advancements and potential of lithium battery technologies for energy storage.

[Anonymous No.16078214]

>>16077441
Holy shit. If this how the "good" journals are, imagine all the rest.
>>16077866
Based. Fuck academia.

[Anonymous No.16078274]

>>16077441
>chinese names only = red flag
>chinese name + white names = green flag
Is it only me that notices the pattern?

[Anonymous No.16078292]

>>16077441
jewish author

[Anonymous No.16078298]

>>16077441
We need systematized quality control of peer review. Problem is: Even peer review itself is underfunded (which is why the quality problems exist in the first place), so quality control is even less enforced.

I imagine that you would have some kind of organization that submits either fake articles written by authors in the field or introduces subtle mistakes in actual articles in collaboration with the researchers (for a fee) which will get revealed in the final version and serve as feedback to the reviewers and for quality ranking.
But of course this needs massive funding. Such a red teaming initiative could either come from the publishers or from governmental (and nongov) organizations (nih, EU-Grant, royal society)

Maybe this could be made attractive to publishers by selling it as a kind of auditing and introducing auditing scores which researchers can present in their CV.

[Anonymous No.16078362]

[AIFag !Gy8L8Ggb7w No.16078381]

>>16078298
>systematized quality control of peer review
faggots pay reviewers $0/hour when they can make $100-$200/hour doing consulting and complain that peer review is trash
nigga reading a paper and understand it to the point I can review it thoroughly and properly takes like 4-8 hours.
the only one who are doing the most peer review (and volunteerly) are more likely to be paid and bought so they can launder low quality trash or their echo chamber through the "scientific" process.

[Anonymous No.16078945]

>>16078298
>underfunded
they do it for free, it's done on a voluntary basis.
I work in a weapons development adjacent field, and I was actually told by people at my funding agency to never give helpful feedback when peer reviewing papers with Chinese authors, since it's common practice for them to submit stuff just to try to fish for non-public information that would help their work from the reviewers. We let them publish it just to try to trick them into thinking their approach is correct.
Literally nobody in academia or industry trusts chinese papers anyway, including the chinese.

[Anonymous No.16079853]

[Anonymous No.16079996]

>>16079853
>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1930043324001298
Its been corrected i guess

[Anonymous No.16080637]

>>16079996
ctrl+f
In summary,
still there.

[Anonymous No.16080640]

>>16079853
>Raneem, Ashraf, Mohammed
I'm sending a common theme with all these joke papers

[Anonymous No.16081919]

>>16077441
If the word "quantum" appears in the title

[Anonymous No.16082498]

>>16080640
They all go through the same useless rubber stamp gatekeeping peer review system that everyone else's do

[Anonymous No.16082516]

No citations = shit paper.

Also, anything from Chinese companies/research institutions (Chinese inventors working for American/European institutions are OK.) I'm not a Sinophobe, but holy fuck anything from CN is not reliable. And it can't be an Asian thing because Japanese research is actually decent.

[Anonymous No.16082721]

>>16077441
The journal an article gets published in also matters.
Editorial standards fluctuate from "pretty good" to "non-existent."
I learned this the hard way during my PhD.
It also made me the racist I am today.

[Anonymous No.16082831]

>>16077441
If its published in Nature or Science then its guaranteed to be fake and gay

[Anonymous No.16083578]

>>16077441
jewish authors

[Anonymous No.16084557]

>>16077448
also names ending in berg or stein

[Anonymous No.16085603]

>>16082831
If the publisher is jewish owned or run by jews then the publication is guaranteed fake

[Anonymous No.16085622]

>>16077441
Scientific goyslop.

[Anonymous No.16085685]

>>16079853
>Received 23 November 2023, Revised 5 February 2024, Accepted 12 February 2024

[Anonymous No.16085695]

>>16077448
Fuck you sinophobe.

[Anonymous No.16086834]

>>16077443
Kek

[Anonymous No.16087659]

>>16085695

[Anonymous No.16088777]

>>16082498
publishers don't make money by rejecting publications

[Anonymous No.16089063]

>>16077441
zhang, igor or pajeet

[Anonymous No.16089107]

>>16077441
If they include the phrase "as a LLM I can't do..."

[Anonymous No.16090021]

>>16077441
old testament forename, germanic surname

[Anonymous No.16091731]

>>16088777
the "scientific publishing" industry is just a thinly disguised vanity press, they will publish anything so long as their fee is paid

[Anonymous No.16093146]

>>16091731
Right, but in the case of the vanity press at least the fee is paid by the one who's ego is being massaged by the publication, in science publishing the fees are paid taxpayers

[Anonymous No.16094020]

>>16077441
When they're published in a conventional academic journal that pretty much means they're fake

[Anonymous No.16095101]

>>16094020
worthwhile research is never published, the valuable new information is kept secret to be exploited by the discoverer

[Anonymous No.16095987]

>>16085695
Silence, wumao.

[Anonymous No.16096006]

>>16077441
I don't get why it's treated as such a big deal, considering some horrors that got posted previously.

[Anonymous No.16097285]

>>16095101
right, why would anyone pay a free to publish information that was of genuine use when they could just capitalize on it themselves instead?
only a total moron would publish it

[Anonymous No.16097309]

>>16077441
Not written in latex

[Anonymous No.16097664]

>>16078274
chinks and jeets can be smart but need the moral fiber of the hwite man to reign in their natural tendency to falsify

[Anonymous No.16098758]

>>16097285
This, thats why academic publishing is guaranteed to be completely useless and why nobody ever bothers reading it

[Anonymous No.16099880]

>>16091731
This, academic publishing is for people who are too boring and useless to get published in the for profit press

[Anonymous No.16100523]

>>16080640
*berg, *stein, etc.