Solomon Walker’s Post

I've seen several posts stating how because of this new technology that highlights the amount of suspicious papers per journal, we should be cautious with who scientists publish with. If anything, I see this technology as a good thing. It shows we have a fully functioning peer review processes, and that we are able to highlight problematic papers and remove them where necessary. Science is self correcting, after all. Do you think this article shows that or do you think it highlights major issues? https://lnkd.in/ebtKUbU7 #nature #science #peerreview #publication

Scientific integrity must be defended and promoted, and this type of initiative and tools are essential to that end! Scientists need to learn which publishers to work with, and avoid predators and other risky journals, and readers/consumers also need to be able to identify risky journals or publishers. Maintaining the credibility of science is a priority in a high-risk period, as highlighted by the recent pandemic. https://lnkd.in/e72J6G96

Staggering numbers there for #Journals with high rates of suspicious #papers flagged by science-integrity start-up! According to this Nature Magazine article by Richard V. The Argos Platform launched by Scitility PBC assigns a risk score to scientific papers based on publication history and citation of retracted research. It helps identify “high-risk” papers for investigation. Interestingly it identifies "High-Risk Publishers":  - Hindawi Publishing with the highest number and proportion of retracted papers, with over 10,000 retractions in two years (4% of its portfolio).  - Elsevier: Around 5,000 retractions but over 11,400 high-risk papers (0.2% of output).  - MDPI: 311 retractions and over 3,000 high-risk papers (0.24% of output).  - Springer Nature: More than 6,000 retractions and high-risk papers each (0.3% of output). Other publishers mentioned: Impact Journals, Spandidos Publications, IVYSPRING INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHER PTY LTD with highest proportions of high-risk papers at 0.82%, 0.77%, and 0.67%, respectively. While Portland Press took action to improve screening processes, maintaining a 0.41% high-risk paper rate. Paper mills, AI-generated content, and other systematic manipulations are fueling the growth of fraudulent papers, according to Elsevier. While tools relying on author retraction records face challenges like distinguishing between authors with similar names. https://lnkd.in/dXWR-TPC

Which scientific publishers and journals are worst affected by fraudulent or dubious research papers — and which have done least to clean up their portfolio? A technology start-up founded to help publishers spot potentially problematic papers says that it has some answers, and has shared its early findings with Nature. The science-integrity website Argos, which was launched in September by Scitility, a technology firm headquartered in Sparks, Nevada, gives papers a risk score on the basis of their authors’ publication records, and on whether the paper heavily cites already-retracted research. A paper categorized as ‘high risk’ might have multiple authors whose other studies have been retracted for reasons related to misconduct, for example. Having a high score doesn’t prove that a paper is low quality, but suggests that it is worth investigating. Argos is one of a growing number of research-integrity tools that look for red flags in papers. These include the Papermill Alarm, made by Clear Skies, and Signals, by Research Signals, both London-based firms. Because creators of such software sell their manuscript-screening tools to publishers, they are generally reluctant to name affected journals. But Argos, which is offering free accounts to individuals and fuller access to science-integrity sleuths and journalists, is the first to show public insights. “We wanted to build a piece of technology that was able to see hidden patterns and bring transparency to the industry,” says Scitility co-founder Jan-Erik de Boer, who is based in Roosendaal, the Netherlands. By early October, Argos had flagged more than 40,000 high-risk and 180,000 medium-risk papers. It has also indexed more than 50,000 retracted papers. https://lnkd.in/g9KKWm-w

Journals With High Rates of Suspicious Papers Flagged By Science-Integrity Startup: schwit1 shares a report from Nature: Which scientific publishers and journals are worst affected by fraudulent or dubious research papers -- and which have done least to clean up their portfolio? A technology start-up founded to help publishers spot potentially problematic papers says that it has some answers, and has shared its early findings with Nature. The science-integrity website Argos, which was launched in September by Scitility, a technology firm headquartered in Sparks, Nevada, gives papers a risk score on the basis of their authors' publication records, and on whether the paper heavily cites already-retracted research. A paper categorized as 'high risk' might have multiple authors whose other studies have been retracted for reasons related to misconduct, for example. Having a high score doesn't prove that a paper is low quality, but suggests that it is worth investigating. Argos is one of a growing number of research-integrity tools that look for red flags in papers. These include the Papermill Alarm, made by Clear Skies, and Signals, by Research Signals, both London-based firms. Because creators of such software sell their manuscript-screening tools to publishers, they are generally reluctant to name affected journals. But Argos, which is offering free accounts to individuals and fuller access to science-integrity sleuths and journalists, is the first to show public insights. "We wanted to build a piece of technology that was able to see hidden patterns and bring transparency to the industry," says Scitility co-founder Erik de Boer, who is based in Roosendaal, the Netherlands. By early October, Argos had flagged more than 40,000 high-risk and 180,000 medium-risk papers. It has also indexed more than 50,000 retracted papers. Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Last week we had a productive discussion with scientific community about the “time frame” in peer review process and some challenges raised by fellow researchers; In addition some potential solutions to overcome current challenges were proposed. This paper in Science deserves your read. <Open-access journal elife will lose its ‘impact factor’ over controversial publishing model> “Web of Science index decides to strip key metric because elife’s unusual peer review doesn’t meet its criteria” https://lnkd.in/daFHx9Yn

A recent article highlights the launch of Argos, a cutting-edge tool developed by Scitility, designed to identify potentially dubious scientific papers. Here are the key points and implications for researchers: 1. 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: Argos assigns a risk score to papers based on authors' publication records and citation patterns. It flags papers that cite a significant number of already retracted studies or have authors with a history of misconduct. 2. 𝗜𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗳𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁: Common examples of misconduct that could lead to a paper being flagged as high risk include: - 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗺: Copying text or ideas without proper attribution. - 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗙𝗮𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Inventing or falsifying data and results. - 𝗗𝘂𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗣𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: Publishing the same research in multiple journals without disclosure. - 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗜𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲𝘀: Including authors who did not contribute significantly to the work or omitting those who did. 3. 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀: The introduction of tools like Argos emphasizes the importance of maintaining high ethical standards in research. Researchers should be vigilant about their publication practices and the integrity of their co-authors. Engaging with such tools can help ensure the credibility of their work and contribute to a more trustworthy scientific community. As the landscape of academic publishing evolves, leveraging technology for integrity will be crucial in safeguarding the quality of research. #ResearchIntegrity #AcademicPublishing #Scitility #Argos #EthicsInResearch https://lnkd.in/dcgGas7Y.

Journals with high rates of suspicious papers flagged by science-integrity start-up Which scientific publishers and journals are worst affected by fraudulent or dubious research papers — and which have done least to clean up their portfolio? A technology start-up founded to help publishers spot potentially problematic papers says that it has some answers, and has shared its early findings with Nature. The science-integrity website Argos, which was launched in September by Scitility, a technology firm headquartered in Sparks, Nevada, gives papers a risk score on the basis of their authors’ publication records, and on whether the paper heavily cites already-retracted research. A paper categorized as ‘high risk’ might have multiple authors whose other studies have been retracted for reasons related to misconduct, for example. Having a high score doesn’t prove that a paper is low quality, but suggests that it is worth investigating. Argos is one of a growing number of research-integrity tools that look for red flags in papers. These include the Papermill Alarm, made by Clear Skies, and Signals, by Research Signals, both London-based firms. Because creators of such software sell their manuscript-screening tools to publishers, they are generally reluctant to name affected journals. But Argos, which is offering free accounts to individuals and fuller access to science-integrity sleuths and journalists, is the first to show public insights. “We wanted to build a piece of technology that was able to see hidden patterns and bring transparency to the industry,” says Scitility co-founder Erik de Boer, who is based in Roosendaal, the Netherlands. By early October, Argos had flagged more than 40,000 high-risk and 180,000 medium-risk papers. It has also indexed more than 50,000 retracted papers. https://lnkd.in/eRDfcfrK

Scientific publishers are producing more papers than ever Well, academics are producing more papers than ever. In 2005, the average OECD-based academic published about 0.9 papers per year. In 2021, that number had risen to 1.6. One might wonder where all that high-quality research is coming from.

Journals With High Rates of Suspicious Papers Flagged By Science-Integrity Startup: schwit1 shares a report from Nature: Which scientific publishers and journals are worst affected by fraudulent or dubious research papers -- and which have done least to clean up their portfolio? A technology start-up founded to help publishers spot potentially problematic papers says that it has some answers, and has shared its early findings with Nature. The science-integrity website Argos, which was launched in September by Scitility, a technology firm headquartered in Sparks, Nevada, gives papers a risk score on the basis of their authors' publication records, and on whether the paper heavily cites already-retracted research. A paper categorized as 'high risk' might have multiple authors whose other studies have been retracted for reasons related to misconduct, for example. Having a high score doesn't prove that a paper is low quality, but suggests that it is worth investigating. Argos is one of a growing number of research-integrity tools that look for red flags in papers. These include the Papermill Alarm, made by Clear Skies, and Signals, by Research Signals, both London-based firms. Because creators of such software sell their manuscript-screening tools to publishers, they are generally reluctant to name affected journals. But Argos, which is offering free accounts to individuals and fuller access to science-integrity sleuths and journalists, is the first to show public insights. "We wanted to build a piece of technology that was able to see hidden patterns and bring transparency to the industry," says Scitility co-founder Erik de Boer, who is based in Roosendaal, the Netherlands. By early October, Argos had flagged more than 40,000 high-risk and 180,000 medium-risk papers. It has also indexed more than 50,000 retracted papers. Read more of this story at Slashdot.