Live data from Hacker News

Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

arxiv.org

31–40 of 43 posts

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my time in academia (~20 years) I have seen the demands and competition increase quite significantly, however talking to older researchers the this really started in the 90s the demands to demonstrate measurable outcomes increased dramatically and funding moved to be primarily through competitive grants (compared to significant base funding for researchers previously). The issue is that while previously it was com…

This is interesting. Is there a reason why this started happening in the 90s?

I think a lot of it is covered under "New Public Management" [0], which was maybe a result of the financialization happening in the 80's [1].

And I completely GP, having been in or in contact with academic research since the late 90's, there has been a very strong shift from a culture where the faculty had means for independent research, and were trusted to find their own direction, to the system we have today where a research project has much tighter overlook and reporting than most corporate projects.

A professor with a 4-5 person group will typically need two staggered pipelines of 4-5year funding projects to run risk free. In the EU it is virtually impossible to get funding for projects that do not involve multiple countries, so you need to set up and nurture partnerships for each project. Coordination the application process for these consortia is a major hassle and often outsourced at a rate of 50kEUR + win bonus. And you of course need to run multiple applications to make sure to get anything. When I talked to mentors about joining academia around 2010, the most common response was "don't".

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_public_management [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#32
post #6

Sabine Hossenfelder has been on about this topic in the field of physics publishing for quite some time now. It really is a terrible thing, though I can understand how some researchers feel trapped in a system that gives them little if any alternative if they wish to be employed the next year. Not just one thing needs to be changed to fix it.

Citation based metrics are much more prevalent in physics than in math (at least in the US and most countries in Europe). When compared with physics, my impression is that mathematics has the tradition "slow, long term" over "rapid, incremental." Of course, it's not perfect.

>When compared with physics, my impression is that mathematics has the tradition "slow, long term" over "rapid, incremental."

Not anymore :(

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#33

Things like citation brokers (paid to cite papers), abuse of power, paper mills, and blackmail (pg. 10) is appalling to me. I have to question how we ended up here. Academia seems very focused on results and output, and this is used as a metric to measure a researcher's worth or value. Has this always been an issue in academia, or is this an increasing or new phenomenon? It seems as if there is a widespread need to t…

In my time in academia (~20 years) I have seen the demands and competition increase quite significantly, however talking to older researchers the this really started in the 90s the demands to demonstrate measurable outcomes increased dramatically and funding moved to be primarily through competitive grants (compared to significant base funding for researchers previously). The issue is that while previously it was com…

So its economic pressure again, i assume put on academic institutions that in turn pass it through as lower funding/wages.

Its important to note that somehow we see the erosion of families, infractures and institutions everywhere but we never talk about the giant f'ing elephant in the room.

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#34
I love the table of tortured phrases [0], which shows hilarious examples of synonyms of established scientific phrases, machine-generated by fraudulent authors to stay below the radar of plagiarism detectors.

My favorites from that table:

- “fuzzy logic” becomes “fluffy rationale”

- “spectral analysis” becomes “phantom examinations”

- “big data” becomes “enormous information”

[0]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.07257#table.3

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#35
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure math has a far greater vulnerability to this than applied math. Top journals have impact factors of around 5.0. Respectable but tiny specialist journals can have impact factors less than 1.0 (like, 0.4). Meanwhile, MDPI Mathematics is a Q1 journal with an impact factor over 2.0. The now-standard bibliometrics were not designed by statisticians :-)

The key is that mathematicians in the US and most parts of Europe do not count citations. So this is not really an issue.

It is an issue if a mathematician has to apply for grants. Often they are in the same competition as physicists, for instance, and then metrics do matter.

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

education funding cuts

How does that square with the cost of education significantly outpacing inflation?

Highly specialised education doesn't scale well. Computers and factories keep getting more efficient, but a professor can only handle so many students still.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#37

Are "publication metrics" also used heavily in China by the bureaucracy ? I know for a fact that the number of fake-journals exploded once the Govt. of India decided to use this for promotions. It's a bit sad really: in the classical world both these countries spent inordinate amount of time on the questions of epistemology (India esp.). Now reduced to mimicking some silly thing that vaguely tracks knowledge-producti…

Yes. And filtering out publications in "paper mills" and then judging the guy properly doesn't scale beyond the top few institutions. So you'll find a sudden drop-off in research quality once you reach the n_th university. It really is almost like a threshold.

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#39
When I took business 101 in college one of the first things they taught us is that long term, fixed metrics will always become gamified, that both the ones measuring and the ones being measured will replace the real results with the metrics and sacrifice the first for the second. I understand that this is common knowledge in the administrative world. Yet, every single performance metric always becomes ossified as the only target that matters, every time. Why?

Re: Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences

#40

I love the table of tortured phrases [0], which shows hilarious examples of synonyms of established scientific phrases, machine-generated by fraudulent authors to stay below the radar of plagiarism detectors. My favorites from that table: - “fuzzy logic” becomes “fluffy rationale” - “spectral analysis” becomes “phantom examinations” - “big data” becomes “enormous information” [0]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.07257#tab…

There are loads more in [0], including 'brilliant agreement' for 'smart contract', 'bosom malignancy' for 'breast cancer', and many, many others.

[0] https://dbrech.irit.fr/pls/apex/f?p=9999:24

Post reply on HN