A New Journal Record: Sage Title Retracts 678 More Papers, Tally Over 1,500 23
Sage has retracted 678 more papers from the Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems (JIFS), concluding an investigation that has now purged 1,561 articles -- the most ever removed from a single journal. The publisher, which acquired JIFS from IOS Press in November 2023, began investigating the journal in early 2024 after discovering "indicators that raised concerns about the authenticity of the research and the peer review process."
This final batch follows 467 articles retracted in August and another 416 in January. Problems in the retracted papers included citation manipulation, "tortured phrases," unauthorized third-party involvement in submissions, and evidence suggesting collusion between authors and reviewers. Most authors were from India and China, with some from Pakistan, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq. Cengiz Kahraman of Istanbul Technical University, who authored 20 of the retracted papers, disputed the decision, telling Retraction Watch that Sage acted "without any reason and evidence." The journal has now resumed publishing.
This final batch follows 467 articles retracted in August and another 416 in January. Problems in the retracted papers included citation manipulation, "tortured phrases," unauthorized third-party involvement in submissions, and evidence suggesting collusion between authors and reviewers. Most authors were from India and China, with some from Pakistan, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq. Cengiz Kahraman of Istanbul Technical University, who authored 20 of the retracted papers, disputed the decision, telling Retraction Watch that Sage acted "without any reason and evidence." The journal has now resumed publishing.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Go ahead and challenge any scientific result you want. But you'll need evidence to back up your assertions. From the sound of it, you don't have any. You're just clinging to incredulity and a martyrdom complex.
Re: (Score:2)
the exact same behavior about certain taboo subjects
Please cite papers in the "taboo subjects" that exhibit the same behaviours: "citation manipulation, 'tortured phrases,' unauthorized third-party involvement in submissions, and evidence suggesting collusion between authors and reviewers."
Re: (Score:2)
Well..."tortured phrases" is a subjective evaluation. I can think of many things I've read that have "tortured phrases". And ISTM that much traditional "science literature" uses traditional ."tortured phrases" to be unambiguous in a traditional manner.
Re: (Score:3)
"Tortured phrased" is a concept defined in detection of AI-generated contents. https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.067... [arxiv.org] It includes mistranslated idioms that no human would use, for example "enormous information" where one would expect "big data", or "arbitrary esteem" for "random value".
Re: (Score:1)
this has been enormous information to me. i guess i'm an AI for using unusual combinations of words. BIFF TANNEN WAS A TRAILBLAZER
Re: (Score:1)
don't bother bro its clearly a cult and there's no use arguing with the devout.
it doesn't matter what topic is discussed, they have unquestioning loyalty to the current orthodoxy.
Re:Totally trus (Score:2)
Retracted studies (Score:2)
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/0... [cnn.com]
> The academic publisher Sage Publications has retracted studies used by a Texas judge in a ruling that would suspend federal approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. The retractions, Sage said, were based on unreliable data and conflicts of interest around the authors’ ties to the anti-abortion movement.
Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear (Score:2)
Fuzzy Wuzzy wasn't commissioned to retract documents, was he?
Nah, Fuzzy Wuzzy was the Peer Reviewer (Score:2)
Fuzzy Wuzzy was probably a coin-operated automaton: Insert paper, insert money, turn crank. Extract peer review, get published...
The journal has now resumed publishing. Guess they bought a new and improved automaton...
Chain of Trust / Chain Reaction Needed (Score:2)
There should be a depedency tracking system in place for cited articles and journals. If a cited article changes, it should trigger invalidation across the entire dependency tree, not just at the leaf level. Otherwise, there would be an awful lot of worthless derivative work hanging around based on invalidated priors.