Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 18:43:11 UTC No. 16077443

If they are used to discredit my argument

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 18:46:08 UTC 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 at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:42:18 UTC No. 16077580

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

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 19:43:28 UTC No. 16077582

Kooky insinuations that one is a genius being suppressed.

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:19:29 UTC No. 16077673

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

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:54:00 UTC No. 16077735

>>16077443
bro speaking facts fr

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 21:04:36 UTC No. 16077763

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

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 21:44:44 UTC No. 16077866

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

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 22:54:13 UTC No. 16078003

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

Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 22:59:59 UTC 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 at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 23:55:13 UTC No. 16078214

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

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 00:28:04 UTC No. 16078274

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

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 00:39:31 UTC No. 16078292

>>16077441
jewish author

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 00:42:28 UTC 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 at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 01:24:32 UTC No. 16078362

AIFag !Gy8L8Ggb7w at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 01:33:43 UTC 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 at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 11:27:02 UTC 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 at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 20:31:24 UTC No. 16079853

Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 21:28:47 UTC No. 16079996

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

Anonymous at Sat, 16 Mar 2024 05:38:15 UTC No. 16080637

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

Anonymous at Sat, 16 Mar 2024 05:40:37 UTC No. 16080640

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

🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:02:04 UTC No. 16081919

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

Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:17:09 UTC No. 16082498

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

Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:26:04 UTC 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 at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 08:59:23 UTC 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 at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 10:24:48 UTC No. 16082831

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

🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 21:05:05 UTC No. 16083578

>>16077441
jewish authors

Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 09:46:21 UTC No. 16084557

>>16077448
also names ending in berg or stein

Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 22:45:02 UTC No. 16085603

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

Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 22:51:23 UTC No. 16085622

>>16077441
Scientific goyslop.

Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:35:19 UTC No. 16085685

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

Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:41:30 UTC No. 16085695

>>16077448
Fuck you sinophobe.

Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 18:15:59 UTC No. 16086834

>>16077443
Kek

Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 06:14:52 UTC No. 16087659

>>16085695

Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 23:03:21 UTC No. 16088777

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

Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 04:50:38 UTC No. 16089063

>>16077441
zhang, igor or pajeet

Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 06:04:00 UTC No. 16089107

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

Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 21:23:30 UTC No. 16090021

>>16077441
old testament forename, germanic surname

Anonymous at Fri, 22 Mar 2024 22:03:06 UTC 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 at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:05:16 UTC 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 at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 10:45:56 UTC No. 16094020

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

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 23:14:02 UTC No. 16095101

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

Anonymous at Mon, 25 Mar 2024 14:30:12 UTC No. 16095987

>>16085695
Silence, wumao.

Anonymous at Mon, 25 Mar 2024 14:44:23 UTC No. 16096006

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

Anonymous at Tue, 26 Mar 2024 06:18:25 UTC 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 at Tue, 26 Mar 2024 06:58:03 UTC No. 16097309

>>16077441
Not written in latex

Anonymous at Tue, 26 Mar 2024 13:55:51 UTC 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 at Wed, 27 Mar 2024 03:32:29 UTC No. 16098758

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

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Mar 2024 20:31:02 UTC No. 16099880

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

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 04:01:56 UTC No. 16100523

>>16080640
*berg, *stein, etc.