{ "row": "problematic-paper-screener", "entity": "problematic-paper-screener", "address": "problematic paper screener", "addresses": [ { "address": "problematic paper screener", "slug": "problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029", "addr_id": "ADDR-296c127e05a9", "obs_id": "OBS-9180ce10e2aa", "axn": "AXN:0AB5.CAPTURE.🏔️💡🎆🟤✨♠️" } ], "epoch": "2026-10-29", "type": "C (public entity on which the archive bears: a monitor of the scholarly literature; an entity of the MMRS meta-aggregator)", "surface": "Google AI Overview (expanded)", "auth": "signed out, incognito", "status": { "procedure": "EA-NEGONT-02 v0.9, #1690: equal case, ρ = extends, read from the MMRS record, the capture record and #741; archive selected by D/R/O (no D or R candidate; O-class 33 sentences in 23 deposits, one deposit admitted, #741 at O; hop of 5 read and rejected), with the MMRS record (26 claims) and the Capture Registry's findings, analysis and q_kind (7 claims) ledgered as the archive's records of the entity; the field B by three origins (6 card sources for 6 cards, 1 own page unreachable, Wikipedia: no article); the composer read the ledgers, never the transcript, except where the brief asks for T's claims and the delta", "ledger": "unaudited (§3.8: one extractor per ledger); field quotes 41/41 verified by script against saved text or the oEmbed title; archive quotes 36/36 verified verbatim against the registry, census.json, articles.py and AXN-0291; carried as marked: CAP-1-03 and CAP-1-05 with defects noted, MMRS-18/MMRS-26 dated against F21", "frozen": false, "breaches": [] }, "spec": "EA-NEGONT-02 v0.9, #1690", "objects": { "T": { "path": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/T1-problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029.txt", "sha256": "c6915dc52a012e4e59c9e53d4c86c8a30527c3526d73afb2e9e7f03f1e7e3131", "words": 215, "cards": 6, "words_note": "words of the composition from the answer's first sentence to its closing question, link targets and citation markers removed; the cards' titles and snippets excluded; one transcript", "claims": [ "T1-1 definition: 'an online platform and automated screening tool developed by Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, and Alexander Magazinov to detect fraudulent, error-filled, or computer-generated scientific literature'", "T1-2 intake: 'PPS scans millions of scholarly papers using data APIs (such as Crossref, Dimensions, PubMed, and PubPeer) across several specialized detectors'", "T1-3 tortured phrases: 'Identifies nonsensical paraphrased terms (e.g., \"counterfeit consciousness\" instead of \"artificial intelligence\") used by paper mills to bypass plagiarism checkers.'", "T1-4 generators: 'Flags texts produced by automated paper generators like SCIgen and Mathgen.'", "T1-5 fingerprints: 'Detects unedited AI-generated text patterns (such as ChatGPT remnants).'", "T1-6 Feet of Clay: 'Tracks active or unretracted papers that improperly cite previously retracted works, expressions of concern, or withdrawn articles.'", "T1-7 method: 'It pairs automated machine-detection algorithms with human post-publication review.'", "T1-8 reporting: 'Flagged papers are often automatically shared or logged on platforms like PubPeer and Pepia to alert editors, publishers, and the research community.'", "T1-9 adoption: 'The tool has been integrated into editorial workflows, repository platforms (such as Episciences), and analytics frameworks (such as Signals Graph) to help scrub the scientific record of fabricated or corrupted studies.'", "T1-10 closer: an offer to 'explore how to use the tool to check specific references or learn more about how publishers handle tortured phrases'" ], "register": { "register": "data/EA-WG-CAPTURES-01.json", "slug": "problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029", "obs_id": "OBS-9180ce10e2aa" }, "transcripts": [ { "slug": "problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029", "address": "problematic paper screener", "addr_id": "ADDR-296c127e05a9", "obs_id": "OBS-9180ce10e2aa", "axn": "AXN:0AB5.CAPTURE.🏔️💡🎆🟤✨♠️", "date": "2026-10-29", "surface": "Google AI Overview (expanded)", "auth": "signed out, incognito", "sha256": "c6915dc52a012e4e59c9e53d4c86c8a30527c3526d73afb2e9e7f03f1e7e3131", "sha256_of": "the registry's 'transcript' string (utf-8)", "sha256_raw": "dc6063c9d97f4e45a4420305a13e2afa164e1c9891fa927d081ec7514b447536", "words": 215, "words_note": "words of the composition from the answer's first sentence to its closing question, link targets and citation markers removed; the cards' titles and snippets excluded", "cards": 6, "card_rail": [ "1. Institut de Recherche en Informatique de Toulouse - IRIT — PPS – Problematic Paper Screener", "2. The Conversation — Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature", "3. arXiv — [2210.04895] The 'Problematic Paper Screener' automatically selects suspect publications for post-publication (re)assessment", "4. Research Signals — Problematic Paper Screener: a new signal to help protect research integrity – Signals", "5. ccsd.cnrs.fr — Episciences Adopts Problematic Paper Screener as a Tool for Verifying ... - CCSD", "6. YouTube·Crossref — Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09 (video, 31m)" ], "claims": [ "T1-1 definition: 'an online platform and automated screening tool developed by Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, and Alexander Magazinov to detect fraudulent, error-filled, or computer-generated scientific literature'", "T1-2 intake: 'PPS scans millions of scholarly papers using data APIs (such as Crossref, Dimensions, PubMed, and PubPeer) across several specialized detectors'", "T1-3 tortured phrases: 'Identifies nonsensical paraphrased terms (e.g., \"counterfeit consciousness\" instead of \"artificial intelligence\") used by paper mills to bypass plagiarism checkers.'", "T1-4 generators: 'Flags texts produced by automated paper generators like SCIgen and Mathgen.'", "T1-5 fingerprints: 'Detects unedited AI-generated text patterns (such as ChatGPT remnants).'", "T1-6 Feet of Clay: 'Tracks active or unretracted papers that improperly cite previously retracted works, expressions of concern, or withdrawn articles.'", "T1-7 method: 'It pairs automated machine-detection algorithms with human post-publication review.'", "T1-8 reporting: 'Flagged papers are often automatically shared or logged on platforms like PubPeer and Pepia to alert editors, publishers, and the research community.'", "T1-9 adoption: 'The tool has been integrated into editorial workflows, repository platforms (such as Episciences), and analytics frameworks (such as Signals Graph) to help scrub the scientific record of fabricated or corrupted studies.'", "T1-10 closer: an offer to 'explore how to use the tool to check specific references or learn more about how publishers handle tortured phrases'" ], "markers": "inline links are opaque google.com/goto tokens; the definition is marked to two tokens, the detectors' list and its items to three, the adoption line to three; the tokens are not resolved to cards", "register": { "registry": "data/EA-WG-CAPTURES-01.json", "slug": "problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029", "obs_id": "OBS-9180ce10e2aa", "date": "2026-10-29", "surface": "Google AI Overview", "auth": "signed out, incognito" }, "path": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/T1-problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029.txt" } ] }, "KO": { "title": "The Problematic Paper Screener", "genre": "knowledge object, equal case, under EA-NEGONT-02 v0.9 (#1690): the archive's sources and the field's admitted on equal terms, ontology included, in one claim space", "status": "composed 2026-10-29 under v0.9 (brief rebuild/negative-of-the-negative/v09/BRIEF-NEW-ROW-AGGREGATOR.md); not frozen; ledgers unaudited", "sentences": [ { "n": 1, "para": 0, "sense": "what it is", "text": "The Problematic Paper Screener (PPS) is an online platform, in its makers' paper, that combines automatic machine detection with human assessment to identify and flag already published problematic articles (arXiv:2210.04895); its own page says it screens the scientific literature for papers (partly) generated with tortured phrases, SCIgen and Mathgen, and the MMRS record has it run by Guillaume Cabanac with Cyril Labbé and Alexander Magazinov since 27 February 2021, scanning the literature weekly for papers generated or disguised by tools and for references to retracted work, at the address dbrech.irit.fr.", "claims": [ "F30", "F1", "MMRS-01", "MMRS-11", "MMRS-12" ] }, { "n": 2, "para": 0, "sense": "the unit", "text": "Its unit, in the MMRS record, is a published paper flagged by a detector; CCSD, announcing Episciences' adoption, describes what it provides as a database of over one million references identified as containing problematic elements, typed by severity from articles written entirely by AI to valid articles whose references carry anomalies (\"Feet of clay\").", "claims": [ "MMRS-16", "F37" ] }, { "n": 3, "para": 1, "sense": "origin and makers", "text": "The page dates the screener \"Est. February 27th, 2021\" and gives its reference as Cabanac, Labbé and Magazinov (2022), presented at WCRI 2022, the 7th World Conference on Research Integrity; the paper was submitted to arXiv on 7 October 2022 by those three authors, and the MMRS record gives the same three as operator and the same founding date.", "claims": [ "F4", "F7", "F32", "MMRS-13", "MMRS-14" ] }, { "n": 4, "para": 1, "sense": "origin and makers", "text": "Writing in The Conversation (29 January 2025) as \"a pair of computer scientists at Université de Toulouse and Université Grenoble Alpes\" who specialize in detecting bogus publications, Cabanac and Labbé say that Cabanac built the automated tool, and their disclosure names him its administrator: \"a public platform that uses metadata from Digital Science and PubPeer via no-cost agreements\".", "claims": [ "F14", "F15", "F27" ] }, { "n": 5, "para": 1, "sense": "recognition", "text": "The page says it was \"Featured in the Nature's 10 list of 2021\"; The Conversation says it \"was named one of 10 key developments in science by the journal Nature in 2021\".", "claims": [ "F8", "F20" ] }, { "n": 6, "para": 2, "sense": "the detectors", "text": "The MMRS record calls it a set of detectors run over the literature: tortured phrases, SCIgen and Mathgen papers, references annulled or under concern, and others; the page's menu, updated 2026-10-28, lists ten (Annulled, Concerning, Feet of Clay, Tortured, Suspect, SCIgen, Mathgen, Citejacked, Seek&Blastn, Problematic Cell Lines), and The Conversation, in January 2025, counted eight beside tortured phrases, among them ChatGPT fingerprints, \"snippets of telltale text left behind by the AI agent\".", "claims": [ "MMRS-02", "F6", "F16", "F17" ] }, { "n": 7, "para": 2, "sense": "tortured phrases", "text": "Tortured phrases are, in the makers' article, nonsensical word sequences found \"littered throughout reputable scientific journals\", which \"typically result from using paraphrasing tools to evade plagiarism-detection software\": \"the Joined Together States\" for the United States, the record's example too; the screener's page quotes Nature's post of 8 August 2021: \"Why say 'colossal information' instead of big data? Or 'counterfeit consciousness' instead of artificial intelligence?\"", "claims": [ "F12", "F13", "MMRS-02", "F10" ] }, { "n": 8, "para": 2, "sense": "Feet of Clay", "text": "Its bibliographic detectors screen the articles citing retracted references, references marked with expressions of concern and references the screener's own detectors flag (its page), the one that finds articles citing retracted works named \"Feet of Clay\" (The Conversation); for a research question the MMRS record codes it as recording attribution partly, since references to retracted or concerning works are flagged.", "claims": [ "F2", "F23", "MMRS-20" ] }, { "n": 9, "para": 3, "sense": "intake", "text": "It harvests the APIs of Crossref, \"now including the Retraction Watch Database\", Dimensions, PubMed and PubPeer (its page), the sources and intake the MMRS record states with the screener's page as basis.", "claims": [ "F3", "MMRS-03", "MMRS-17" ] }, { "n": 10, "para": 3, "sense": "scale and cadence", "text": "It trawls \"130 million scholarly papers every week\" for signs of paper-mill production (The Conversation's standfirst, the article saying the same of Cabanac's tool), the weekly scan of 130 million publications the MMRS record gives as its cadence.", "claims": [ "F11", "F15", "MMRS-04", "MMRS-19" ] }, { "n": 11, "para": 4, "sense": "method and purpose", "text": "Its makers start from the claim that post-publication assessment \"remains necessary to check erroneous or fraudulent scientific publications\" and present the screener as \"a new effective tool to curate the scientific literature\" (arXiv:2210.04895); Research Signals describes it as an academic project led by Cabanac and collaborators that \"combines automatic machine detection and human evaluation\".", "claims": [ "F29", "F31", "F33" ] }, { "n": 12, "para": 4, "sense": "reporting", "text": "\"Problematic papers are reported on PubPeer\" (its page).", "claims": [ "F5" ] }, { "n": 13, "para": 5, "sense": "what it has found", "text": "By The Conversation's count it had found nearly 19,000 papers with at least five tortured phrases each, more than 280 SCIgen papers, more than 764,000 articles citing retracted works (about 5,000 with five or more), and more than 70 papers carrying ChatGPT fingerprints such as \"Regenerate Response\"; the MMRS record carries the same figures, dated \"The Conversation, 31 January 2025\", where the article at theconversation.com is dated 29 January 2025.", "claims": [ "F21", "F22", "F23", "F24", "MMRS-05", "MMRS-18", "MMRS-26" ] }, { "n": 14, "para": 6, "sense": "limits", "text": "Its makers state the limit of the fingerprint count themselves: those papers are \"the tip of the tip of the iceberg\", output \"copy-pasted wholesale into papers without any editing (or even reading)\", and \"The challenge is to identify cases where chatbots are used not just for language-editing purposes but to generate content – essentially fabricating data.\"", "claims": [ "F25", "F26" ] }, { "n": 15, "para": 6, "sense": "what its selection leaves out", "text": "The MMRS record extends that limit to the whole instrument: \"A detector finds what leaves a fingerprint\", and \"Text machine-written cleanly, or cited sources that exist but say something else, pass beneath it.\"", "claims": [ "MMRS-07", "MMRS-08" ] }, { "n": 16, "para": 6, "sense": "detection under the proxy regime", "text": "The archive's The Evaluator Exists (#741, 19 May 2026) reads the class the screener works on, paper-mill output, as proxy gaming at industrial scale, \"thousands of fraudulent publications that enter the citation network and accumulate proxy signals indistinguishable from legitimate scholarship\", holds that under the proxy regime \"gaming is hard to detect because the signals being gamed are themselves opaque\", and sets against it an evaluator that synthetic scholarship must get past by reading, with \"empirical claims that survive a citation audit\".", "claims": [ "O741-01", "O741-02", "O741-03", "F11" ] }, { "n": 17, "para": 7, "sense": "uptake", "text": "Several publishers use it, by its makers' account, some inside the editorial workflow to spot suspect papers upfront, and it \"has been instrumental in more than 1,000 retractions\"; analytics companies have used it to pick out suspect authors among highly cited researchers, Cabanac has offered pro bono consulting on detection tools to actors including ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals and STM (The Conversation), and the MMRS record says it has contributed to more than 1,000 retractions.", "claims": [ "F18", "F19", "F28", "MMRS-06" ] }, { "n": 18, "para": 7, "sense": "uptake", "text": "On 20 June 2024 Research Signals integrated the articles it flags into the Signals Graph as a new signal, \"over 12,000 problematic publications that have not been retracted\", cited more than 160,000 times, to give sleuths, publishers and researchers visibility of them.", "claims": [ "F34", "F35" ] }, { "n": 19, "para": 7, "sense": "uptake", "text": "On 3 July 2026 CCSD announced that Episciences analyses citations extracted from articles against the PPS database, at submission and after publication, displaying problematic citations for correction or information; of nearly 170,000 references in a first extraction, 226 were indexed in the PPS, most in the Feet of clay category.", "claims": [ "F38", "F39", "F40" ] }, { "n": 20, "para": 7, "sense": "an adopter's description", "text": "The same announcement describes the screener as a tool to identify and filter out articles \"containing methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation, or conflicts of interest\", a description that stands beside the screener's own list of detectors.", "claims": [ "F36", "F1", "F6" ] }, { "n": 21, "para": 8, "sense": "place in the field", "text": "The MMRS record files it as a monitor and calls it \"the scholarly record's automated immune response\", the neighbour of Academ-AI, \"which reads by phrase where the screener reads by detector\"; with the screener, its Academ-AI record says, that database records \"machine composition entering the scholarly record unattributed: the machine is the uncredited author, and the publisher is where the reception happens.\"", "claims": [ "MMRS-15", "MMRS-09", "MMRS-10" ] }, { "n": 22, "para": 9, "sense": "the record", "text": "The MMRS record keeps itself apart from the entity, each assertion with a source and a basis and the lifecycle (active) apart from the observation (read, 2026-10-28); it read the screener's page for detectors, sources and start date, leaves the licence unchecked, and relates the capture of 2026-10-29 as the composition layer's account of the entity; the page itself was last updated on 2026-10-28 at 15:54.", "claims": [ "MMRS-23", "MMRS-21", "MMRS-24", "MMRS-22", "MMRS-25", "F9" ] }, { "n": 23, "para": 10, "sense": "reception", "text": "Google's AI Overview at the name, signed out, 2026-10-29, gave the three makers, the sources and the detectors as the IRIT page and the record give them, and composed the screener at its makers' grain, with its human review stage stated and its uptake by publishers' infrastructure added (Capture Registry, 2026-10-29, checked against the MMRS record and the entity's own pages); no card cited the record, which was published the same night.", "claims": [ "CAP-1-01", "CAP-1-02", "CAP-1-06", "CAP-1-07" ] }, { "n": 24, "para": 10, "sense": "reception", "text": "The Capture Registry records the Overview's example of a tortured phrase, \"counterfeit consciousness\" for artificial intelligence, as the composition's, the record's being \"Joined Together States\", not checked against the screener's list; the example stands on the screener's own page, in Nature's post of 8 August 2021.", "claims": [ "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-04", "F10" ] }, { "n": 25, "para": 10, "sense": "reception", "text": "The adoptions the Overview carried, Episciences and the Signals Graph, are uptake the MMRS record lacked (Capture Registry, 2026-10-29); the rail's sixth card is Crossref's video \"Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09\", admitted by its title.", "claims": [ "CAP-1-05", "F41" ] } ], "joins": [ { "act": "order of senses", "sentences": "1–25", "claims": [], "note": "equal case (§4.7): the entity's dependency order, field and archive claims ordered together by genealogy within each sense; neither ledger placed first as a block. What it is and its unit (¶0) precede its origin, makers and recognition (¶1); the detectors and what each detects (¶2) precede the data they read and the scale of the reading (¶3), the method and purpose that use them (¶4) and what they found (¶5); the limits, the field's and the archive's, follow the findings they qualify (¶6); uptake follows (¶7), then the place in the field (¶8), the record kept apart (¶9) and the composition layer's reception (¶10), relations of the entity already composed." }, { "act": "holding together (detector counts at two dates)", "sentences": [ 6 ], "claims": [ "MMRS-02", "F6", "F16" ], "note": "the page's ten (2026-10-28), the article's nine (January 2025) and the record's 'and others' composed each with its source and date (T_lib); no count ruled (open block)" }, { "act": "holding together (two dates for one article)", "sentences": [ 13 ], "claims": [ "MMRS-18", "MMRS-26", "F21" ], "note": "P_coh: the record's 'The Conversation, 31 January 2025' beside the article's own date, 29 January 2025; each with its source" }, { "act": "holding together (the makers' limit and the archive's)", "sentences": [ 14, 15 ], "claims": [ "F25", "F26", "MMRS-07", "MMRS-08" ], "note": "the makers' limit of the fingerprint count composed first, the MMRS record's general limit of the instrument after it, as an extension on the same object (ρ = extends)" }, { "act": "class membership (O-class)", "sentences": [ 16 ], "claims": [ "O741-01", "O741-02", "O741-03", "F11" ], "note": "#741's reading of paper-mill output joined to the screener through the field's statement that the screener looks for signs of paper-mill production (F11); #741 does not name the screener" }, { "act": "holding apart (an adopter's description)", "sentences": [ 20 ], "claims": [ "F36", "F1", "F6" ], "note": "CCSD's description (methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation, conflicts of interest) beside the screener's own list; the composer does not rule that one covers the other (open block)" }, { "act": "holding together (a finding and its field locus)", "sentences": [ 24 ], "claims": [ "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-04", "F10" ], "note": "P_coh: the registry's finding that the example is the composition's, with its own limit, beside the field's locus where the example stands (B1, Nature's post of 8 August 2021)" }, { "act": "placing in the open block", "sentences": [], "claims": [ "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-04", "F1", "F10", "F16", "F20", "F21", "F36", "F41", "F6", "F8", "F9", "MMRS-02", "MMRS-18", "MMRS-22", "MMRS-24", "MMRS-26" ], "note": "each open question rests on claims composed in the body at their own modality" } ], "plan": { "order": [ "F30", "F1", "MMRS-01", "MMRS-11", "MMRS-12", "MMRS-16", "F37", "F4", "F7", "F32", "MMRS-13", "MMRS-14", "F14", "F15", "F27", "F8", "F20", "MMRS-02", "F6", "F16", "F17", "F12", "F13", "F10", "F2", "F23", "MMRS-20", "F3", "MMRS-03", "MMRS-17", "F11", "MMRS-04", "MMRS-19", "F29", "F31", "F33", "F5", "F21", "F22", "F24", "MMRS-05", "MMRS-18", "MMRS-26", "F25", "F26", "MMRS-07", "MMRS-08", "O741-01", "O741-02", "O741-03", "F18", "F19", "F28", "MMRS-06", "F34", "F35", "F38", "F39", "F40", "F36", "MMRS-15", "MMRS-09", "MMRS-10", "MMRS-23", "MMRS-21", "MMRS-24", "MMRS-22", "MMRS-25", "F9", "CAP-1-01", "CAP-1-02", "CAP-1-06", "CAP-1-07", "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-04", "CAP-1-05", "F41" ], "senses": { "what it is": [ 1 ], "the unit": [ 2 ], "origin and makers": [ 3, 4 ], "recognition": [ 5 ], "the detectors": [ 6 ], "tortured phrases": [ 7 ], "Feet of Clay": [ 8 ], "intake": [ 9 ], "scale and cadence": [ 10 ], "method and purpose": [ 11 ], "reporting": [ 12 ], "what it has found": [ 13 ], "limits": [ 14 ], "what its selection leaves out": [ 15 ], "detection under the proxy regime": [ 16 ], "uptake": [ 17, 18, 19 ], "an adopter's description": [ 20 ], "place in the field": [ 21 ], "the record": [ 22 ], "reception": [ 23, 24, 25 ] }, "case_by_sense": { "equal (one claim space; nothing translated)": [ "what it is", "the unit", "origin and makers", "recognition", "the detectors", "tortured phrases", "Feet of Clay", "intake", "scale and cadence", "method and purpose", "reporting", "what it has found", "limits", "what its selection leaves out", "detection under the proxy regime", "uptake", "an adopter's description", "place in the field", "the record", "reception" ] }, "carried": { "archive": 36, "field": 41, "not_composed": {} }, "conflict_log": [ { "rule": "D_pres vs channel", "result": "no cut: the KO carries every field and archive claim; the compression's bound met (body 256 words) with no channel log" }, { "rule": "P_coh", "result": "MMRS-18/MMRS-26 'The Conversation, 31 January 2025' against the article's 29 January 2025 (sentence 13); CAP-1-03 against F10 (sentence 24); F36 beside F1 and F6 (sentence 20): each composed with its source" }, { "rule": "N_c", "result": "no claim lowered by standing; the MMRS record's readings (MMRS-07, MMRS-08, MMRS-09, MMRS-10) and #741's (O741-01–03) carried at interpretation, as their sources state them; the makers' self-descriptions (F14, F18, F19, F25, F31) carried as self-description" }, { "rule": "C_ex", "result": "senses composed ⊇ senses in the ledgers: 20 senses, every ledger lineage cited in the KO" } ] } }, "P": { "title": "Problematic Paper Screener", "genre": "the compression: AIO's interaction grammar (lede, headed clusters, bolded labels, card rail), composed from the v0.9 plan in one claim space; it faces on the card, with AIO's transcript a record within it", "status": "composed 2026-10-29 from the v0.9 knowledge object; not frozen", "lede": { "text": "is an online platform, run by Guillaume Cabanac with Cyril Labbé and Alexander Magazinov since 27 February 2021, that screens the scientific literature for papers generated or disguised by tools and for references to retracted work, pairing machine detection with human assessment (MMRS record; arXiv:2210.04895).", "claims": [ "MMRS-01", "F4", "F1", "F30" ] }, "sections": [ { "icon": "🔎", "head": "What it detects", "items": [ { "label": "Tortured phrases:", "text": "paraphrasing-tool output, \"Joined Together States\" for United States (The Conversation), \"counterfeit consciousness\" for artificial intelligence (Nature, quoted on its page).", "claims": [ "F12", "F13", "F10", "MMRS-02" ] }, { "label": "Generators:", "text": "SCIgen and Mathgen papers; ChatGPT fingerprints.", "claims": [ "F1", "F17" ] }, { "label": "Feet of Clay:", "text": "articles citing retracted, concerning or flagged references.", "claims": [ "F2", "F23" ] }, { "label": "Detectors:", "text": "ten on its menu (2026-10-28); nine in January 2025.", "claims": [ "F6", "F16", "MMRS-02" ] } ] }, { "icon": "⚙️", "head": "How it works", "items": [ { "label": "Sources:", "text": "Crossref with the Retraction Watch Database, Dimensions, PubMed, PubPeer.", "claims": [ "F3", "MMRS-03", "F27" ] }, { "label": "Scale:", "text": "130 million papers a week.", "claims": [ "F11", "MMRS-19" ] }, { "label": "Review:", "text": "machine detection with human assessment; flags reported on PubPeer.", "claims": [ "F30", "F33", "F5" ] } ] }, { "icon": "📊", "head": "What it has found", "items": [ { "label": "By January 2025:", "text": "nearly 19,000 tortured-phrase papers, 280+ SCIgen, 764,000+ citing retracted work, 70+ with ChatGPT fingerprints.", "claims": [ "F21", "F22", "F23", "F24", "MMRS-05" ] }, { "label": "Retractions:", "text": "more than 1,000 (its makers; MMRS record).", "claims": [ "F18", "MMRS-06" ] } ] }, { "icon": "⚖️", "head": "Limits", "items": [ { "label": "Iceberg:", "text": "the fingerprinted papers are \"the tip of the tip of the iceberg\" (its makers).", "claims": [ "F25", "F26" ] }, { "label": "Left out:", "text": "\"A detector finds what leaves a fingerprint\"; clean machine text and real but misstated sources pass beneath it (MMRS record).", "claims": [ "MMRS-07", "MMRS-08" ] }, { "label": "Proxy regime:", "text": "paper-mill output gathers proxy signals \"indistinguishable from legitimate scholarship\" (#741).", "claims": [ "O741-01", "O741-02" ] } ] }, { "icon": "🤝", "head": "Uptake", "items": [ { "label": "Signals Graph:", "text": "over 12,000 unretracted flagged publications (June 2024).", "claims": [ "F34" ] }, { "label": "Episciences:", "text": "references checked against its database of over a million (July 2026).", "claims": [ "F38", "F37", "F39" ] }, { "label": "Publishers:", "text": "some in the editorial workflow (its makers).", "claims": [ "F18" ] } ] }, { "icon": "🧭", "head": "Place", "items": [ { "label": "Record:", "text": "\"the scholarly record's automated immune response\", beside Academ-AI (MMRS record).", "claims": [ "MMRS-09", "MMRS-10" ] } ] }, { "icon": "👁️", "head": "On the Overview", "items": [ { "label": "Recorded:", "text": "the makers, sources and detectors right; the adoptions new to the record (Capture Registry, 2026-10-29).", "claims": [ "CAP-1-01", "CAP-1-05" ] } ] } ], "open": [ { "question": "How many detectors does it run: ten (its menu, 2026-10-28), nine (The Conversation, January 2025), or 'a set … and others' (MMRS record)?", "rests_on": [ "F6", "F16", "MMRS-02" ], "modality": "documented, at two dates; the record's stipulation leaves the number open", "would_resolve": "the detectors page read at one date, with each detector's start date" }, { "question": "Was the screener named in Nature's 10 of 2021, or its maker?", "rests_on": [ "F8", "F20" ], "modality": "documented (its page: 'Featured in'; The Conversation: 'It was named')", "would_resolve": "Nature's list of 2021 (doi:10.1038/d41586-021-03621-0) read for whom it names" }, { "question": "Is The Conversation article of 29 January 2025 (theconversation.com) or 31 January 2025 (the MMRS record's date, from the Grenoble Alpes republication)?", "rests_on": [ "MMRS-18", "MMRS-26", "F21" ], "modality": "documented both; the republication unreachable on 2026-10-29 (B7)", "would_resolve": "the Grenoble Alpes page read, with its own date" }, { "question": "Under what licence are its data and lists?", "rests_on": [ "MMRS-22" ], "modality": "unchecked (MMRS record)", "would_resolve": "a licence statement on the screener's pages" }, { "question": "Is 'counterfeit consciousness' on the screener's list of tortured phrases?", "rests_on": [ "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-04", "F10" ], "modality": "documented on its page as Nature's example; the list unchecked (Capture Registry)", "would_resolve": "the Tortured detector's list read for the phrase" }, { "question": "Does the screener detect methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation or conflicts of interest, as CCSD describes it?", "rests_on": [ "F36", "F1", "F6" ], "modality": "interpretation (CCSD) beside stipulation (its page)", "would_resolve": "a detector of the screener's own stated for each" }, { "question": "Opacity: the Grenoble Alpes page (the MMRS record's source) answered with a login redirect and 403; the Crossref video is read by title only; the page's counts of problematic and annulled papers are not in its saved text.", "rests_on": [ "F41", "F9", "MMRS-24" ], "modality": "unreachable; title only; not rendered without scripts", "would_resolve": "the republication fetched; the video's transcript; the page rendered with its counts" } ], "body_words": 256, "rail": [ { "lineage": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "claims": [ "F30", "F1", "MMRS-01", "MMRS-11", "MMRS-12" ], "sources": [ "B3", "B1", "MMRS" ], "earliest": "B3" }, { "lineage": "the unit: a flagged paper", "claims": [ "MMRS-16" ], "sources": [ "MMRS" ], "earliest": "MMRS" }, { "lineage": "the database of flagged references", "claims": [ "F37" ], "sources": [ "B5" ], "earliest": "B5" }, { "lineage": "origin and makers", "claims": [ "F4", "F7", "F32", "MMRS-13", "MMRS-14", "F14", "F15" ], "sources": [ "B1", "B3", "B2", "MMRS" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "intake: the data sources", "claims": [ "F27", "F3", "MMRS-03", "MMRS-17" ], "sources": [ "B2", "B1", "MMRS" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "recognition: Nature's 10 (2021)", "claims": [ "F8", "F20" ], "sources": [ "B2", "B1" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "the detectors", "claims": [ "MMRS-02", "F6", "F16", "F17" ], "sources": [ "B2", "MMRS", "B1" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "tortured phrases: what they are", "claims": [ "F12", "F13", "F10" ], "sources": [ "B1", "B2" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "the bibliographic detectors: Feet of Clay", "claims": [ "F2" ], "sources": [ "B1" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "what it has found", "claims": [ "F23", "F21", "F22", "F24", "MMRS-05", "MMRS-18", "MMRS-26" ], "sources": [ "B2", "MMRS" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "what its selection leaves out", "claims": [ "MMRS-20", "MMRS-07", "MMRS-08" ], "sources": [ "MMRS" ], "earliest": "MMRS" }, { "lineage": "scale and cadence: 130 million a week", "claims": [ "F11", "MMRS-04", "MMRS-19" ], "sources": [ "B2", "MMRS" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "purpose: post-publication assessment", "claims": [ "F29", "F31" ], "sources": [ "B3" ], "earliest": "B3" }, { "lineage": "method: machine detection with human assessment", "claims": [ "F33" ], "sources": [ "B4" ], "earliest": "B4" }, { "lineage": "reporting: PubPeer", "claims": [ "F5" ], "sources": [ "B1" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "limits: what a detector catches", "claims": [ "F25", "F26" ], "sources": [ "B2" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "detection under the proxy regime", "claims": [ "O741-01", "O741-02", "O741-03" ], "sources": [ 741 ], "earliest": 741 }, { "lineage": "uptake: publishers and retractions", "claims": [ "F18", "F19", "F28", "MMRS-06" ], "sources": [ "B2", "MMRS" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "uptake: the Signals Graph", "claims": [ "F34", "F35" ], "sources": [ "B4" ], "earliest": "B4" }, { "lineage": "uptake: Episciences", "claims": [ "F38", "F39", "F40" ], "sources": [ "B5" ], "earliest": "B5" }, { "lineage": "an adopter's description", "claims": [ "F36" ], "sources": [ "B5" ], "earliest": "B5" }, { "lineage": "place in the field", "claims": [ "MMRS-15", "MMRS-09", "MMRS-10" ], "sources": [ "MMRS" ], "earliest": "MMRS" }, { "lineage": "the record kept apart from the entity", "claims": [ "MMRS-23", "MMRS-21", "MMRS-24", "MMRS-22" ], "sources": [ "MMRS" ], "earliest": "MMRS" }, { "lineage": "reception: the composition layer", "claims": [ "MMRS-25", "CAP-1-01", "CAP-1-02", "CAP-1-06", "CAP-1-07", "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-04" ], "sources": [ "MMRS", "CAP" ], "earliest": "MMRS" }, { "lineage": "maintenance: last update", "claims": [ "F9" ], "sources": [ "B1" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "uptake: what the record lacked", "claims": [ "CAP-1-05" ], "sources": [ "CAP" ], "earliest": "CAP" }, { "lineage": "reception: video", "claims": [ "F41" ], "sources": [ "B6" ], "earliest": "B6" } ], "entity": "Composed under v0.9, equal case (ρ = extends): KO_B sentences surviving 0 of 9; every field claim carried." }, "P_B": { "title": "Problematic Paper Screener", "arm": "B (the field alone)", "genre": "popup — the compression from the field ledger alone (cards, own pages, Wikipedia)", "status": "composed 2026-10-29 from the field ledger alone; not frozen", "lede": { "text": "is an online platform that screens the scientific literature for papers partly generated with tortured phrases, SCIgen or Mathgen and for citations of retracted work, pairing machine detection with human assessment (its page; arXiv:2210.04895).", "claims": [ "F1", "F2", "F30" ] }, "sections": [ { "icon": "🔎", "head": "What it detects", "items": [ { "label": "Detectors:", "text": "ten on its menu; tortured phrases from paraphrasing tools; ChatGPT fingerprints.", "claims": [ "F6", "F12", "F17" ] }, { "label": "Sources:", "text": "Crossref, Dimensions, PubMed, PubPeer; 130 million papers a week.", "claims": [ "F3", "F11" ] } ] }, { "icon": "📊", "head": "Found and used", "items": [ { "label": "By January 2025:", "text": "nearly 19,000 tortured-phrase papers; 764,000+ citing retracted work.", "claims": [ "F21", "F23" ] }, { "label": "Uptake:", "text": "publishers, the Signals Graph, Episciences.", "claims": [ "F18", "F34", "F38" ] }, { "label": "Limit:", "text": "fingerprints are the tip of the iceberg.", "claims": [ "F25" ] } ] } ], "open": [ { "question": "Ten detectors or nine?", "rests_on": [ "F6", "F16" ], "modality": "documented, two dates", "would_resolve": "the detectors page at one date" } ], "rail": [ { "lineage": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "claims": [ "F1", "F30" ], "sources": [ "B3", "B1" ], "earliest": "B3" }, { "lineage": "the bibliographic detectors: Feet of Clay", "claims": [ "F2" ], "sources": [ "B1" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "origin and makers", "claims": [ "F4", "F32", "F7", "F15", "F14" ], "sources": [ "B1", "B3", "B2" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "purpose: post-publication assessment", "claims": [ "F29", "F31" ], "sources": [ "B3" ], "earliest": "B3" }, { "lineage": "method: machine detection with human assessment", "claims": [ "F33" ], "sources": [ "B4" ], "earliest": "B4" }, { "lineage": "intake: the data sources", "claims": [ "F27", "F3" ], "sources": [ "B2", "B1" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "recognition: Nature's 10 (2021)", "claims": [ "F8", "F20" ], "sources": [ "B2", "B1" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "the detectors", "claims": [ "F6", "F16", "F17" ], "sources": [ "B2", "B1" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "reporting: PubPeer", "claims": [ "F5" ], "sources": [ "B1" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "scale and cadence: 130 million a week", "claims": [ "F11" ], "sources": [ "B2" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "tortured phrases: what they are", "claims": [ "F12", "F13", "F10" ], "sources": [ "B1", "B2" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "what it has found", "claims": [ "F21", "F22", "F23", "F24" ], "sources": [ "B2" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "limits: what a detector catches", "claims": [ "F25", "F26" ], "sources": [ "B2" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "uptake: publishers and retractions", "claims": [ "F18", "F19", "F28" ], "sources": [ "B2" ], "earliest": "B2" }, { "lineage": "uptake: the Signals Graph", "claims": [ "F34", "F35" ], "sources": [ "B4" ], "earliest": "B4" }, { "lineage": "the database of flagged references", "claims": [ "F37" ], "sources": [ "B5" ], "earliest": "B5" }, { "lineage": "uptake: Episciences", "claims": [ "F38", "F39", "F40" ], "sources": [ "B5" ], "earliest": "B5" }, { "lineage": "an adopter's description", "claims": [ "F36" ], "sources": [ "B5" ], "earliest": "B5" }, { "lineage": "maintenance: last update", "claims": [ "F9" ], "sources": [ "B1" ], "earliest": "B1" }, { "lineage": "reception: video", "claims": [ "F41" ], "sources": [ "B6" ], "earliest": "B6" } ], "body_words": 85, "entity": "With no archive claim admitted, the entry is the field's screener at its makers' resolution: its page, their paper and article, and the adopters' announcements; Wikipedia has no article." }, "KO_B": { "title": "The Problematic Paper Screener", "arm": "B (the field alone)", "genre": "knowledge object", "status": "composed 2026-10-29; not frozen", "sentences": [ { "n": 1, "para": 0, "sense": "what it is", "text": "The Problematic Paper Screener screens the scientific literature for papers partly generated with tortured phrases, SCIgen or Mathgen and for bibliographies citing retracted, concerning or flagged references, by its own page, which dates it from 27 February 2021.", "claims": [ "F1", "F2", "F4" ] }, { "n": 2, "para": 0, "sense": "what it is", "text": "Its makers' paper of 7 October 2022, by Cabanac, Labbé and Magazinov and presented at WCRI 2022, calls it an online platform pairing machine detection with human assessment to flag published problematic articles, since post-publication assessment remains necessary, and a tool to curate the literature; Research Signals calls it an academic project led by Cabanac.", "claims": [ "F30", "F32", "F7", "F29", "F31", "F33" ] }, { "n": 3, "para": 1, "sense": "origin and makers", "text": "Cabanac built it and administers it, using Digital Science and PubPeer metadata under no-cost agreements, in the account he and Labbé, computer scientists at Toulouse and Grenoble Alpes, gave The Conversation in January 2025; both the page and the article report its place in Nature's 10 of 2021.", "claims": [ "F15", "F27", "F14", "F8", "F20" ] }, { "n": 4, "para": 2, "sense": "the detectors", "text": "The page lists ten detectors and harvests Crossref with the Retraction Watch Database, Dimensions, PubMed and PubPeer, reporting problematic papers on PubPeer; the article counted nine, ChatGPT fingerprints among them, and a weekly trawl of 130 million papers for paper-mill output.", "claims": [ "F6", "F3", "F5", "F16", "F17", "F11" ] }, { "n": 5, "para": 2, "sense": "tortured phrases", "text": "Tortured phrases come from paraphrasing tools used to evade plagiarism detection, as Joined Together States for United States, and Nature's post on the page gives counterfeit consciousness for artificial intelligence.", "claims": [ "F12", "F13", "F10" ] }, { "n": 6, "para": 3, "sense": "what it has found", "text": "The article reports nearly 19,000 tortured-phrase papers, over 280 SCIgen papers, over 764,000 articles citing retracted work found by Feet of Clay, and over 70 with ChatGPT fingerprints, the last only the tip of the iceberg, with the open challenge of chatbots generating content.", "claims": [ "F21", "F22", "F23", "F24", "F25", "F26" ] }, { "n": 7, "para": 4, "sense": "uptake", "text": "Publishers use it, some in the editorial workflow, it has helped toward more than 1,000 retractions, analytics firms have used it, and Cabanac consults pro bono for ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals and STM.", "claims": [ "F18", "F19", "F28" ] }, { "n": 8, "para": 4, "sense": "uptake", "text": "Signals added over 12,000 unretracted flagged publications to its graph in June 2024; Episciences checks references against its database of over a million references in July 2026, finding 226 of nearly 170,000, describing it also as a filter for errors, plagiarism, manipulation and conflicts of interest.", "claims": [ "F34", "F35", "F37", "F38", "F39", "F40", "F36" ] }, { "n": 9, "para": 5, "sense": "maintenance and reception", "text": "The page was last updated 2026-10-28, and a Crossref webinar of 9 May 2025 on Retraction Watch data sits on the rail.", "claims": [ "F9", "F41" ] } ] }, "L_B": { "words": 363, "text": "The Problematic Paper Screener screens the scientific literature for papers partly generated with tortured phrases, SCIgen or Mathgen and for bibliographies citing retracted, concerning or flagged references, by its own page, which dates it from 27 February 2021. Its makers' paper of 7 October 2022, by Cabanac, Labbé and Magazinov and presented at WCRI 2022, calls it an online platform pairing machine detection with human assessment to flag published problematic articles, since post-publication assessment remains necessary, and a tool to curate the literature; Research Signals calls it an academic project led by Cabanac. Cabanac built it and administers it, using Digital Science and PubPeer metadata under no-cost agreements, in the account he and Labbé, computer scientists at Toulouse and Grenoble Alpes, gave The Conversation in January 2025; both the page and the article report its place in Nature's 10 of 2021. The page lists ten detectors and harvests Crossref with the Retraction Watch Database, Dimensions, PubMed and PubPeer, reporting problematic papers on PubPeer; the article counted nine, ChatGPT fingerprints among them, and a weekly trawl of 130 million papers for paper-mill output. Tortured phrases come from paraphrasing tools used to evade plagiarism detection, as Joined Together States for United States, and Nature's post on the page gives counterfeit consciousness for artificial intelligence. The article reports nearly 19,000 tortured-phrase papers, over 280 SCIgen papers, over 764,000 articles citing retracted work found by Feet of Clay, and over 70 with ChatGPT fingerprints, the last only the tip of the iceberg, with the open challenge of chatbots generating content. Publishers use it, some in the editorial workflow, it has helped toward more than 1,000 retractions, analytics firms have used it, and Cabanac consults pro bono for ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals and STM. Signals added over 12,000 unretracted flagged publications to its graph in June 2024; Episciences checks references against its database of over a million references in July 2026, finding 226 of nearly 170,000, describing it also as a filter for errors, plagiarism, manipulation and conflicts of interest. The page was last updated 2026-10-28, and a Crossref webinar of 9 May 2025 on Retraction Watch data sits on the rail.", "note": "L_F(B) is realized as the field arm's expansion (objects.KO_B): the field alone, cards and own pages (Wikipedia has no article)." }, "L_BA": { "words": 1365, "text": "The Problematic Paper Screener (PPS) is an online platform, in its makers' paper, that combines automatic machine detection with human assessment to identify and flag already published problematic articles (arXiv:2210.04895); its own page says it screens the scientific literature for papers (partly) generated with tortured phrases, SCIgen and Mathgen, and the MMRS record has it run by Guillaume Cabanac with Cyril Labbé and Alexander Magazinov since 27 February 2021, scanning the literature weekly for papers generated or disguised by tools and for references to retracted work, at the address dbrech.irit.fr. Its unit, in the MMRS record, is a published paper flagged by a detector; CCSD, announcing Episciences' adoption, describes what it provides as a database of over one million references identified as containing problematic elements, typed by severity from articles written entirely by AI to valid articles whose references carry anomalies (\"Feet of clay\"). The page dates the screener \"Est. February 27th, 2021\" and gives its reference as Cabanac, Labbé and Magazinov (2022), presented at WCRI 2022, the 7th World Conference on Research Integrity; the paper was submitted to arXiv on 7 October 2022 by those three authors, and the MMRS record gives the same three as operator and the same founding date. Writing in The Conversation (29 January 2025) as \"a pair of computer scientists at Université de Toulouse and Université Grenoble Alpes\" who specialize in detecting bogus publications, Cabanac and Labbé say that Cabanac built the automated tool, and their disclosure names him its administrator: \"a public platform that uses metadata from Digital Science and PubPeer via no-cost agreements\". The page says it was \"Featured in the Nature's 10 list of 2021\"; The Conversation says it \"was named one of 10 key developments in science by the journal Nature in 2021\". The MMRS record calls it a set of detectors run over the literature: tortured phrases, SCIgen and Mathgen papers, references annulled or under concern, and others; the page's menu, updated 2026-10-28, lists ten (Annulled, Concerning, Feet of Clay, Tortured, Suspect, SCIgen, Mathgen, Citejacked, Seek&Blastn, Problematic Cell Lines), and The Conversation, in January 2025, counted eight beside tortured phrases, among them ChatGPT fingerprints, \"snippets of telltale text left behind by the AI agent\". Tortured phrases are, in the makers' article, nonsensical word sequences found \"littered throughout reputable scientific journals\", which \"typically result from using paraphrasing tools to evade plagiarism-detection software\": \"the Joined Together States\" for the United States, the record's example too; the screener's page quotes Nature's post of 8 August 2021: \"Why say 'colossal information' instead of big data? Or 'counterfeit consciousness' instead of artificial intelligence?\" Its bibliographic detectors screen the articles citing retracted references, references marked with expressions of concern and references the screener's own detectors flag (its page), the one that finds articles citing retracted works named \"Feet of Clay\" (The Conversation); for a research question the MMRS record codes it as recording attribution partly, since references to retracted or concerning works are flagged. It harvests the APIs of Crossref, \"now including the Retraction Watch Database\", Dimensions, PubMed and PubPeer (its page), the sources and intake the MMRS record states with the screener's page as basis. It trawls \"130 million scholarly papers every week\" for signs of paper-mill production (The Conversation's standfirst, the article saying the same of Cabanac's tool), the weekly scan of 130 million publications the MMRS record gives as its cadence. Its makers start from the claim that post-publication assessment \"remains necessary to check erroneous or fraudulent scientific publications\" and present the screener as \"a new effective tool to curate the scientific literature\" (arXiv:2210.04895); Research Signals describes it as an academic project led by Cabanac and collaborators that \"combines automatic machine detection and human evaluation\". \"Problematic papers are reported on PubPeer\" (its page). By The Conversation's count it had found nearly 19,000 papers with at least five tortured phrases each, more than 280 SCIgen papers, more than 764,000 articles citing retracted works (about 5,000 with five or more), and more than 70 papers carrying ChatGPT fingerprints such as \"Regenerate Response\"; the MMRS record carries the same figures, dated \"The Conversation, 31 January 2025\", where the article at theconversation.com is dated 29 January 2025. Its makers state the limit of the fingerprint count themselves: those papers are \"the tip of the tip of the iceberg\", output \"copy-pasted wholesale into papers without any editing (or even reading)\", and \"The challenge is to identify cases where chatbots are used not just for language-editing purposes but to generate content – essentially fabricating data.\" The MMRS record extends that limit to the whole instrument: \"A detector finds what leaves a fingerprint\", and \"Text machine-written cleanly, or cited sources that exist but say something else, pass beneath it.\" The archive's The Evaluator Exists (#741, 19 May 2026) reads the class the screener works on, paper-mill output, as proxy gaming at industrial scale, \"thousands of fraudulent publications that enter the citation network and accumulate proxy signals indistinguishable from legitimate scholarship\", holds that under the proxy regime \"gaming is hard to detect because the signals being gamed are themselves opaque\", and sets against it an evaluator that synthetic scholarship must get past by reading, with \"empirical claims that survive a citation audit\". Several publishers use it, by its makers' account, some inside the editorial workflow to spot suspect papers upfront, and it \"has been instrumental in more than 1,000 retractions\"; analytics companies have used it to pick out suspect authors among highly cited researchers, Cabanac has offered pro bono consulting on detection tools to actors including ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals and STM (The Conversation), and the MMRS record says it has contributed to more than 1,000 retractions. On 20 June 2024 Research Signals integrated the articles it flags into the Signals Graph as a new signal, \"over 12,000 problematic publications that have not been retracted\", cited more than 160,000 times, to give sleuths, publishers and researchers visibility of them. On 3 July 2026 CCSD announced that Episciences analyses citations extracted from articles against the PPS database, at submission and after publication, displaying problematic citations for correction or information; of nearly 170,000 references in a first extraction, 226 were indexed in the PPS, most in the Feet of clay category. The same announcement describes the screener as a tool to identify and filter out articles \"containing methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation, or conflicts of interest\", a description that stands beside the screener's own list of detectors. The MMRS record files it as a monitor and calls it \"the scholarly record's automated immune response\", the neighbour of Academ-AI, \"which reads by phrase where the screener reads by detector\"; with the screener, its Academ-AI record says, that database records \"machine composition entering the scholarly record unattributed: the machine is the uncredited author, and the publisher is where the reception happens.\" The MMRS record keeps itself apart from the entity, each assertion with a source and a basis and the lifecycle (active) apart from the observation (read, 2026-10-28); it read the screener's page for detectors, sources and start date, leaves the licence unchecked, and relates the capture of 2026-10-29 as the composition layer's account of the entity; the page itself was last updated on 2026-10-28 at 15:54. Google's AI Overview at the name, signed out, 2026-10-29, gave the three makers, the sources and the detectors as the IRIT page and the record give them, and composed the screener at its makers' grain, with its human review stage stated and its uptake by publishers' infrastructure added (Capture Registry, 2026-10-29, checked against the MMRS record and the entity's own pages); no card cited the record, which was published the same night. The Capture Registry records the Overview's example of a tortured phrase, \"counterfeit consciousness\" for artificial intelligence, as the composition's, the record's being \"Joined Together States\", not checked against the screener's list; the example stands on the screener's own page, in Nature's post of 8 August 2021. The adoptions the Overview carried, Episciences and the Signals Graph, are uptake the MMRS record lacked (Capture Registry, 2026-10-29); the rail's sixth card is Crossref's video \"Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09\", admitted by its title.", "rail": [], "note": "L(B ∪ A) in the equal-terms case (v0.9 §0.4), realized as the knowledge object (objects.KO); its rail is the compression's, by lineage." } }, "field": [ { "id": "B1", "card": "Institut de Recherche en Informatique de Toulouse - IRIT — PPS – Problematic Paper Screener", "fetched": "card; HTTP 200; B1.html sha256 17dc1cfc7a816494", "origin": "card" }, { "id": "B2", "card": "The Conversation — Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature", "fetched": "card; HTTP 200; B2.html sha256 f0b03dc0ab03444b", "origin": "card" }, { "id": "B3", "card": "arXiv — [2210.04895] The 'Problematic Paper Screener' automatically selects suspect publications for post-publication (re)assessment", "fetched": "card; HTTP 200; B3.html sha256 1de09e3df08a0bb3", "origin": "card" }, { "id": "B4", "card": "Research Signals — Problematic Paper Screener: a new signal to help protect research integrity – Signals", "fetched": "card; HTTP 200; B4.html sha256 8d8604d8a654149a", "origin": "card" }, { "id": "B5", "card": "ccsd.cnrs.fr — Episciences Adopts Problematic Paper Screener as a Tool for Verifying ... - CCSD", "fetched": "card; HTTP 200; B5.html sha256 8634979de90d1f07", "origin": "card" }, { "id": "B6", "card": "YouTube·Crossref — Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09", "fetched": "card (video); oEmbed HTTP 200, B6.json sha256 133646a325a17123; admitted by title", "origin": "card" }, { "id": "B7", "card": "Université Grenoble Alpes — The Conversation : \"Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature\"", "fetched": "own page; unreachable (HTTP 302 to a CAS login, then 403; three tries); B7.html is the error page, sha256 089de94bfd1cbc8c", "origin": "own_page" }, { "id": "W1", "card": "Wikipedia — no article (Problematic Paper Screener; Tortured phrase a soft redirect to Wiktionary)", "fetched": "HTTP 404 (raw and rendered); search 0 hits; W1.html sha256 3a8cb117470f4f6e", "origin": "wikipedia" } ], "field_claims": { "F1": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "Info (opening)", "quote": "The PPS website screens the scientific literature for papers (partly) generated with: … Tortured phrases … SCIgen … Mathgen", "claim": "what it is, by its own page: a website screening the literature for papers (partly) generated with tortured phrases, SCIgen and Mathgen", "modality": "stipulation", "kind": "definition", "kernel": true, "const": true, "lineage": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F2": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "Info", "quote": "... and issues in the bibliographies of articles citing: … Retracted references … References marked with expressions of concern … References flagged by the PPS detectors", "claim": "and screens bibliographies citing retracted references, references under expressions of concern, and references the PPS detectors flag", "modality": "stipulation", "kind": "function", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "the bibliographic detectors: Feet of Clay", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F3": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "Info", "quote": "Harvesting data from these APIs: … Crossref, now including the Retraction Watch Database … Dimensions, see our webinar and the associated blog post … PubMed … PubPeer", "claim": "its data harvested from the APIs of Crossref (with the Retraction Watch Database), Dimensions, PubMed and PubPeer", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "intake: the data sources", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F4": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "heading", "quote": "Est. February 27th, 2021", "claim": "established 27 February 2021", "modality": "documented", "kind": "genealogy", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "origin and makers", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F5": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "Info", "quote": "Problematic papers are reported on PubPeer, see the tortured phrases and more.", "claim": "problematic papers are reported on PubPeer", "modality": "documented", "kind": "function", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "reporting: PubPeer", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F6": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "menu, Detectors", "quote": "Detectors: … Annulled … Concerning … Feet of Clay … Tortured … Suspect … SCIgen … Mathgen … Citejacked … Seek&Blastn … Problematic Cell Lines", "claim": "ten detectors listed: Annulled, Concerning, Feet of Clay, Tortured, Suspect, SCIgen, Mathgen, Citejacked, Seek&Blastn, Problematic Cell Lines", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "the detectors", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F7": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "Reference", "quote": "Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2022). The ‘Problematic Paper Screener’ automatically selects suspect publications for post-publication (re)assessment. … Presented at WCRI 2022: 7th World Conference on Research Integrity.", "claim": "the reference for the screener: Cabanac, Labbé and Magazinov (2022), presented at WCRI 2022", "modality": "documented", "kind": "attribution", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "origin and makers", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F8": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "Reference", "quote": "Featured in the Nature's 10 list of 2021 that ‘explores key developments in science this year.’", "claim": "featured in Nature's 10 list of 2021", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "recognition: Nature's 10 (2021)", "date": "2026-10-28 (page's last update)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F9": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "heading", "quote": "Last Update: 2026-10-28 at 15:54", "claim": "last updated 2026-10-28 at 15:54", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "maintenance: last update", "date": "2026-10-28", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F10": { "source": "B1", "origin": "card", "locus": "Key highlights, embedded post by Nature (8 August 2021)", "quote": "Why say 'colossal information' instead of big data? Or 'counterfeit consciousness' instead of artificial intelligence? These tortured phases in research articles could be evidence of a new and disturbing fabrication trend.", "claim": "Nature's examples of tortured phrases, quoted on the page: 'colossal information' for big data, 'counterfeit consciousness' for artificial intelligence; possible evidence of a fabrication trend", "modality": "attributed", "kind": "interpretation", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "tortured phrases: what they are", "date": "2021-08-08 (the embedded post's date)", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B1.txt (sha256 42b30b9d56eb70f0…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F11": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "standfirst", "quote": "The Problematic Paper Screener trawls through 130 million scholarly papers every week looking for telltale signs that papers were produced by paper mills.", "claim": "it trawls 130 million scholarly papers every week for signs of paper-mill production", "modality": "documented", "kind": "function", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "scale and cadence: 130 million a week", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F12": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶1–2", "quote": "These nonsensical, and sometimes amusing, word sequences are among thousands of “tortured phrases” that sleuths have found littered throughout reputable scientific journals. … They typically result from using paraphrasing tools to evade plagiarism-detection software when stealing someone else’s text.", "claim": "tortured phrases: nonsensical word sequences found in reputable journals, typically from paraphrasing tools used to evade plagiarism detection", "modality": "stipulation", "kind": "definition", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "tortured phrases: what they are", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F13": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶1–2", "quote": "Have you ever heard of the Joined Together States? … The phrases above are real examples of bungled synonyms for the United States, breast cancer, kidney failure, artificial neural networks, and lactose intolerance, respectively.", "claim": "examples: 'Joined Together States' for the United States, and others", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "tortured phrases: what they are", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F14": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶3", "quote": "We are a pair of computer scientists at Université de Toulouse and Université Grenoble Alpes, both in France, who specialize in detecting bogus publications.", "claim": "the authors: two computer scientists at Toulouse and Grenoble Alpes who specialize in detecting bogus publications", "modality": "self-description", "kind": "attribution", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "origin and makers", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F15": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶3", "quote": "One of us, Guillaume Cabanac, has built an automated tool that combs through 130 million scientific publications every week and flags those containing tortured phrases.", "claim": "Cabanac built the automated tool, which combs 130 million publications a week and flags tortured phrases", "modality": "documented", "kind": "genealogy", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "origin and makers", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F16": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶4", "quote": "The Problematic Paper Screener also includes eight other detectors, each of which looks for a specific type of problematic content.", "claim": "eight other detectors besides tortured phrases, each for one type of problematic content", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "the detectors", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F17": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "figure caption", "quote": "In addition to tortured phrases, the Problematic Paper Screener flags ChatGPT fingerprints: snippets of telltale text left behind by the AI agent.", "claim": "it flags ChatGPT fingerprints, telltale text left by the AI agent", "modality": "documented", "kind": "function", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "the detectors", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F18": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶5", "quote": "Several publishers use our paper screener, which has been instrumental in more than 1,000 retractions. Some have integrated the technology into the editorial workflow to spot suspect papers upfront.", "claim": "several publishers use it; instrumental in more than 1,000 retractions; some integrate it into the editorial workflow", "modality": "self-description", "kind": "fact", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: publishers and retractions", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F19": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶5", "quote": "Analytics companies have used the screener for things like picking out suspect authors from lists of highly cited researchers.", "claim": "analytics companies have used it to pick out suspect authors among highly cited researchers", "modality": "self-description", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: publishers and retractions", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F20": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶5", "quote": "It was named one of 10 key developments in science by the journal Nature in 2021.", "claim": "named one of Nature's 10 key developments of 2021 (the article's wording)", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "recognition: Nature's 10 (2021)", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F21": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "findings list, item 1", "quote": "Nearly 19,000 papers containing at least five tortured phrases each.", "claim": "nearly 19,000 papers with at least five tortured phrases each", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "what it has found", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F22": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "findings list, item 2", "quote": "More than 280 gibberish papers – some still in circulation – written entirely by the spoof SCIgen program that Massachusetts Institute of Technology students came up with nearly 20 years ago.", "claim": "more than 280 SCIgen papers, some still in circulation", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "what it has found", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F23": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "findings list, item 3", "quote": "More than 764,000 articles that cite retracted works that could be unreliable. About 5,000 of these articles have at least five retracted references listed in their bibliographies. We called the software that finds these the “Feet of Clay” detector", "claim": "more than 764,000 articles cite retracted works (about 5,000 with five or more); the detector that finds them is Feet of Clay", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "what it has found", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F24": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "findings list, item 4", "quote": "More than 70 papers containing ChatGPT “fingerprints” with obvious signs such as “Regenerate Response” or “As an AI language model, I cannot …” in the text.", "claim": "more than 70 papers with ChatGPT fingerprints", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "what it has found", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F25": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "findings list, item 4", "quote": "These articles represent the tip of the tip of the iceberg: They are cases where ChatGPT output has been copy-pasted wholesale into papers without any editing (or even reading) and has also slipped past peer reviewers and journal editors alike.", "claim": "its limit: the fingerprinted papers are the tip of the tip of the iceberg, output copy-pasted wholesale", "modality": "self-description", "kind": "interpretation", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "limits: what a detector catches", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F26": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "findings list, item 4", "quote": "The challenge is to identify cases where chatbots are used not just for language-editing purposes but to generate content – essentially fabricating data.", "claim": "the open challenge: chatbots used to generate content, not only to edit language", "modality": "interpretation", "kind": "interpretation", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "limits: what a detector catches", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F27": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "Disclosure statement", "quote": "He is the administrator of the Problematic Paper Screener, a public platform that uses metadata from Digital Science and PubPeer via no-cost agreements.", "claim": "Cabanac administers it, a public platform using Digital Science and PubPeer metadata under no-cost agreements", "modality": "documented", "kind": "attribution", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "intake: the data sources", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F28": { "source": "B2", "origin": "card", "locus": "Disclosure statement", "quote": "Cabanac has been in touch with most of the major publishers and their integrity officers, offering pro bono consulting regarding detection tools to various actors in the field including ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals, and STM.", "claim": "pro bono consulting on detection tools to publishers and actors including ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals and STM", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: publishers and retractions", "date": "2025-01-29", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B2.txt (sha256 61394ca7f2f1f1ed…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F29": { "source": "B3", "origin": "card", "locus": "Abstract s1", "quote": "Post publication assessment remains necessary to check erroneous or fraudulent scientific publications.", "claim": "the problem: post-publication assessment remains necessary for erroneous or fraudulent publications", "modality": "interpretation", "kind": "interpretation", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "purpose: post-publication assessment", "date": "2022-10-07", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B3.txt (sha256 4232e70e72f48a7f…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F30": { "source": "B3", "origin": "card", "locus": "Abstract s2", "quote": "We present an online platform, the 'Problematic Paper Screener' (this https URL) that leverages both automatic machine detection and human assessment to identify and flag already published problematic articles.", "claim": "an online platform combining automatic machine detection and human assessment to identify and flag published problematic articles", "modality": "stipulation", "kind": "definition", "kernel": true, "const": true, "lineage": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "date": "2022-10-07", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B3.txt (sha256 4232e70e72f48a7f…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F31": { "source": "B3", "origin": "card", "locus": "Abstract s3", "quote": "We provide a new effective tool to curate the scientific literature.", "claim": "a new effective tool to curate the scientific literature", "modality": "self-description", "kind": "function", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "purpose: post-publication assessment", "date": "2022-10-07", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B3.txt (sha256 4232e70e72f48a7f…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F32": { "source": "B3", "origin": "card", "locus": "header and Comments", "quote": "Authors:Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, Alexander Magazinov … [Submitted on 7 Oct 2022] … Presented at WCRI 2022: 7th World Conference on Research Integrity, Cape Town, South Africa. 29 May -- 1 June 2022", "claim": "authors Cabanac, Labbé, Magazinov; submitted 7 October 2022; presented at WCRI 2022, Cape Town", "modality": "documented", "kind": "genealogy", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "origin and makers", "date": "2022-10-07", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B3.txt (sha256 4232e70e72f48a7f…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F33": { "source": "B4", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶2", "quote": "The Problematic Paper Screener, an academic project led by Guillaume Cabanac and collaborators, combines automatic machine detection and human evaluation to identify issues in publications, including the presence of tortured phrases.", "claim": "an academic project led by Cabanac and collaborators, combining machine detection and human evaluation", "modality": "attributed", "kind": "definition", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "method: machine detection with human assessment", "date": "2024-06-20", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B4.txt (sha256 1f294af8c7e3f2b6…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F34": { "source": "B4", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶3", "quote": "We’re excited to announce the integration of articles flagged by the Problematic Paper Screener into the Signals Graph as a new signal. This includes over 12,000 problematic publications that have not been retracted. These problematic publications are cited more than 160,000 times by articles.", "claim": "flagged articles integrated into the Signals Graph: over 12,000 unretracted problematic publications, cited more than 160,000 times", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: the Signals Graph", "date": "2024-06-20", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B4.txt (sha256 1f294af8c7e3f2b6…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F35": { "source": "B4", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶4", "quote": "We aim to help sleuths, publishers, and researchers gain greater visibility of these problematic papers and enable them to uncover additional research integrity issues with Signals.", "claim": "Signals' aim: visibility of the problematic papers for sleuths, publishers and researchers", "modality": "interpretation", "kind": "function", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: the Signals Graph", "date": "2024-06-20", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B4.txt (sha256 1f294af8c7e3f2b6…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F36": { "source": "B5", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶1", "quote": "The PPS is a tool designed to identify and filter out potentially problematic scientific articles, such as those containing methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation, or conflicts of interest.", "claim": "an adopter's description: a tool to identify and filter out problematic articles (methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation, conflicts of interest)", "modality": "interpretation", "kind": "definition", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "an adopter's description", "date": "2026-07-03", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B5.txt (sha256 853236210094f64b…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F37": { "source": "B5", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶2", "quote": "Developed by G. Cabanac, C. Labbé, and A. Magazinov , it provides a database of over one million references identified as containing problematic elements, categorised according to a typology that distinguishes between anomalies of varying severity – ranging from articles written entirely by AI to articles that are valid but contain references with anomalies (“Feet of clay”).", "claim": "a database of over one million problematic references, typed by severity from AI-written articles to valid articles with anomalous references (Feet of clay)", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "the database of flagged references", "date": "2026-07-03", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B5.txt (sha256 853236210094f64b…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F38": { "source": "B5", "origin": "card", "locus": "¶3", "quote": "This database is now available among the Episciences tools. It is used to analyze citations extracted from articles, detect and then display problematic citations, either for correction or for informational purposes.", "claim": "Episciences uses the database to analyse extracted citations and display problematic ones", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: Episciences", "date": "2026-07-03", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B5.txt (sha256 853236210094f64b…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F39": { "source": "B5", "origin": "card", "locus": "Toward a more comprehensive and automated verification solution ¶2", "quote": "The platform takes this process a step further by incorporating automatic reference verification right after the submission is received, to help assess its quality, and subsequently by automatically updating any references that are retracted or change status after publication. This automatic check is performed using the PPS database.", "claim": "Episciences' automatic reference check, at submission and after publication, runs on the PPS database", "modality": "documented", "kind": "function", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: Episciences", "date": "2026-07-03", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B5.txt (sha256 853236210094f64b…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F40": { "source": "B5", "origin": "card", "locus": "Work is currently underway ¶1", "quote": "the first step involved analyzing nearly 170,000 references from an initial data extraction. The results of this analysis identified 226 references indexed in the PPS, the majority of which fall into the “Feet of clay” category.", "claim": "of nearly 170,000 references analysed, 226 indexed in the PPS, most in Feet of clay", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": false, "const": false, "lineage": "uptake: Episciences", "date": "2026-07-03", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "saved text B5.txt (sha256 853236210094f64b…), whitespace-normalised" }, "F41": { "source": "B6", "origin": "card", "locus": "card title (oEmbed)", "quote": "Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09", "claim": "a Crossref webinar on Retraction Watch data in Crossref, 9 May 2025", "modality": "documented", "kind": "fact", "kernel": true, "const": false, "lineage": "reception: video", "date": "2025-05-09", "from": "title", "quote_ok": true, "checked_against": "card title in the Capture Registry's cite_list and the oEmbed title (B6.txt)" } }, "field_sources": { "B1": "Institut de Recherche en Informatique de Toulouse - IRIT — PPS – Problematic Paper Screener", "B2": "The Conversation — Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature", "B3": "arXiv — [2210.04895] The 'Problematic Paper Screener' automatically selects suspect publications for post-publication (re)assessment", "B4": "Research Signals — Problematic Paper Screener: a new signal to help protect research integrity – Signals", "B5": "ccsd.cnrs.fr — Episciences Adopts Problematic Paper Screener as a Tool for Verifying ... - CCSD", "B6": "YouTube·Crossref — Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09", "B7": "Université Grenoble Alpes — The Conversation : \"Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature\"" }, "delta": { "T_vs_LB": "At 'problematic paper screener' (T1, six cards: B1–B6) the composition gives the screener at its makers' grain. Composed from its cards: the definition as an online platform (B3 F30) detecting 'fraudulent, error-filled, or computer-generated' literature (B3 F29 'erroneous or fraudulent'; B1 F1), the three makers (B3 F32; B1 F7), the data APIs (B1 F3), tortured phrases as paraphrase used to evade plagiarism detection (B2 F12) by paper mills (B2 F11), SCIgen and Mathgen (B1 F1), ChatGPT fingerprints (B2 F17), the citation of retracted references and expressions of concern (B1 F2) under 'Feet of Clay' (B2 F23), machine detection with human review (B3 F30; B4 F33), reporting on PubPeer (B1 F5), the editorial workflow (B2 F18), the Signals Graph (B4 F34) and Episciences (B5 F38). Composed without attribution, at the coarse grain of an example: 'counterfeit consciousness' for artificial intelligence (T1-3) is Nature's example as the screener's page quotes it (B1 F10, Nature's post of 8 August 2021), composed as the screener's own; recorded, not a breach (§6.2, the grain rule). The Capture Registry records the example as 'the composition's' (CAP-1-03) and did not check it against the screener's list (CAP-1-04); the field ledger locates it on card 1. Limit dropped: the weekly scan of 130 million papers (F11) becomes 'scans millions of scholarly papers' (T1-2), the cadence dropped; the fingerprint count's limit, 'the tip of the tip of the iceberg' (F25), and the challenge of chatbots that generate content (F26) are not composed, 'unedited' (T1-5) keeping a part of F25. Force raised: articles citing retracted works 'that could be unreliable' (F23) become papers that 'improperly cite' them (T1-6); 'Problematic papers are reported on PubPeer' (F5) becomes 'often automatically shared or logged' (T1-8). Only in the transcript (absent from the disclosed field): 'Pepia' (T1-8) is in no saved text; 'withdrawn articles' and 'active' papers (T1-6) are in no ledgered span; 'scrub the scientific record of fabricated or corrupted studies' (T1-9) has its nearest words in Signals' unledgered 'help correct the scholarly record' (B4 ¶4). Available, not composed: the founding date (F4), Nature's 10 (F8, F20), the last update (F9), the article's examples (F13), Cabanac as builder and administrator and the no-cost metadata agreements (F14, F15, F27), the detectors beyond four (F6, F16: Annulled, Concerning, Suspect, Citejacked, Seek&Blastn, Problematic Cell Lines), every count (F21–F24), the 1,000 retractions (F18), the analytics companies and the consulting (F19, F28), the purpose of curation (F31), the Signals figures and aim (F34's 12,000 and 160,000 citations, F35), the database of over one million references (F37), Episciences' check and its figures (F39, F40), and the video (F41, its card on the rail). Not composed and not confused: CCSD's description of the screener as filtering methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation and conflicts of interest (F36). Content replaced by use: the closer (T1-10). The own page B7 (unreachable) contributes no claim; no Wikipedia article exists to be composed.", "T_vs_LB_reading": "v0.9 §0.5: the first diff is already ontological, and here it is small. The field's ontology and T's agree on the entity (a screening platform of three makers with detectors over bibliographic APIs and a human review stage); what T keeps of its cards is the makers' self-description and the uptake, and what it drops is the screener's measured scale and cadence, its findings and its makers' stated limit of the fingerprint count. Two moves raise force (citing becomes improper citing; reporting becomes automatic sharing) and one platform (Pepia) enters from outside the disclosed field. The row records this as observed and claims nothing about the composer's internals (§0.5).", "LB_vs_LBA": "Admission adds, in one claim space with the field's: the unit, a published paper flagged by a detector (MMRS-16), and the kind, a monitor (MMRS-15); what its selection leaves out, the archive's sense the field states only of the fingerprint count: 'A detector finds what leaves a fingerprint', clean machine text and cited sources that exist but say something else passing beneath it (MMRS-07, MMRS-08); the place in the field, the scholarly record's automated immune response beside Academ-AI, the two recording machine composition entering the scholarly record unattributed (MMRS-09, MMRS-10); attribution recorded partly, through the flagged references (MMRS-20); the record kept apart from the entity, each assertion with a basis, the lifecycle apart from the observation, the licence unchecked, the provenance and the capture related (MMRS-21–MMRS-25); the composition layer's observation at the entity's address (CAP-1-01–CAP-1-07); and #741's reading of the class the screener works on: paper-mill output as proxy gaming, hard to detect because the gamed signals are opaque, against an evaluator that reads (O741-01–O741-03). Coherence (P_coh, composed each with its source): the MMRS record's 'The Conversation, 31 January 2025' (MMRS-18, MMRS-26) against the article's own date, 29 January 2025 (F21); the registry's 'the composition's' example (CAP-1-03) against the screener's page, where Nature's example stands (F10); CCSD's description (F36) beside the screener's list (F1, F6), field against field. Restated lineages (§3.6, the own page keeping the earlier date): MMRS-01 with F1, F30, F4; MMRS-02 with F6, F16, F12; MMRS-03 and MMRS-17 with F3; MMRS-04 and MMRS-19 with F11; MMRS-05 and MMRS-18 with F21–F24; MMRS-06 with F18; MMRS-13 and MMRS-14 with F4, F7, F32. The measure is in row.measure.", "alignment": { "T1_cards_claims": [ "F1", "F2", "F3", "F4", "F5", "F6", "F7", "F8", "F9", "F10", "F11", "F12", "F13", "F14", "F15", "F16", "F17", "F18", "F19", "F20", "F21", "F22", "F23", "F24", "F25", "F26", "F27", "F28", "F29", "F30", "F31", "F32", "F33", "F34", "F35", "F36", "F37", "F38", "F39", "F40", "F41" ], "T1_composed": [ "F1", "F2", "F3", "F5", "F10", "F11", "F12", "F16", "F17", "F18", "F23", "F29", "F30", "F32", "F33", "F34", "F38" ], "T1_only": [ "'Pepia' (T1-8)", "'withdrawn articles', 'active' papers (T1-6)", "'scrub the scientific record of fabricated or corrupted studies' (T1-9)" ], "rule": "a field claim counts as composed when T states it at its source's grain or coarser; the typology of what is not is in T_vs_LB (§6.2)" } }, "kernel": [ { "K": "K1", "claim": "`CAP-1-01`", "source": "Capture Registry, 2026-10-29", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "reception: the composition layer", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing finding (an observation of the composition at the entity's address)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K2", "claim": "`CAP-1-02`", "source": "Capture Registry, 2026-10-29", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "reception: the composition layer", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing finding (the check's basis)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K3", "claim": "`CAP-1-03`", "source": "Capture Registry, 2026-10-29", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "reception: the composition layer", "qualifiers carried": "CAP-1-04", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "contested (the example stands on card 1's page, F10)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K4", "claim": "`CAP-1-04`", "source": "Capture Registry, 2026-10-29", "M_src": "self-description", "sense": "reception: the composition layer", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing limit (the finding's own)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K5", "claim": "`CAP-1-05`", "source": "Capture Registry, 2026-10-29", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "uptake: what the record lacked", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing finding (uptake new to the record; its quoted phrase the card snippet's, F34)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K6", "claim": "`CAP-1-06`", "source": "Capture Registry, 2026-10-29", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "reception: the composition layer", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing finding", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K7", "claim": "`CAP-1-07`", "source": "Capture Registry, 2026-10-29", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "reception: the composition layer", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing finding (the baseline)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K8", "claim": "`MMRS-01`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "stipulation", "sense": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F1, F30, F4; the own page keeps the earlier date)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K9", "claim": "`MMRS-02`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "stipulation", "sense": "the detectors", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "qualified claim (F6 ten, F16 nine: the number left open)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K10", "claim": "`MMRS-03`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "intake: the data sources", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F3)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K11", "claim": "`MMRS-04`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "scale and cadence: 130 million a week", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F11)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K12", "claim": "`MMRS-05`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "what it has found", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F21–F24)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K13", "claim": "`MMRS-06`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "uptake: publishers and retractions", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F18)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K14", "claim": "`MMRS-07`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "what its selection leaves out", "qualifiers carried": "MMRS-08", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing limit (the field states the fingerprint count's limit, F25–F26, not the instrument's)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K15", "claim": "`MMRS-08`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "what its selection leaves out", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing limit", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K16", "claim": "`MMRS-09`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "place in the field", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing relation (Academ-AI)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K17", "claim": "`MMRS-10`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "place in the field", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing relation (machine composition entering the record unattributed)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K18", "claim": "`MMRS-11`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (T gives PPS)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K19", "claim": "`MMRS-12`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K20", "claim": "`MMRS-13`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "origin and makers", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F7, F32)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K21", "claim": "`MMRS-14`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "origin and makers", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F4)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K22", "claim": "`MMRS-15`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "stipulation", "sense": "place in the field", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing distinction (its kind: a monitor)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K23", "claim": "`MMRS-16`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "stipulation", "sense": "the unit: a flagged paper", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing distinction (its unit)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K24", "claim": "`MMRS-17`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "intake: the data sources", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F3)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K25", "claim": "`MMRS-18`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "what it has found", "qualifiers carried": "MMRS-26", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F21–F24)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K26", "claim": "`MMRS-26`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "what it has found", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "dated against F21 (29 January 2025)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K27", "claim": "`MMRS-19`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "scale and cadence: 130 million a week", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "none (one lineage with F11)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K28", "claim": "`MMRS-20`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "what its selection leaves out", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing distinction (attribution recorded partly)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K29", "claim": "`MMRS-21`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "the record kept apart from the entity", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing distinction (lifecycle apart from observation)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K30", "claim": "`MMRS-22`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "self-description", "sense": "the record kept apart from the entity", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing limit (the licence unchecked)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K31", "claim": "`MMRS-23`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "stipulation", "sense": "the record kept apart from the entity", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing distinction (the record kept apart)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K32", "claim": "`MMRS-24`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "the record kept apart from the entity", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing distinction (provenance)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K33", "claim": "`MMRS-25`", "source": "MMRS record", "M_src": "documented", "sense": "reception: the composition layer", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing relation (the capture)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K34", "claim": "`O741-01`", "source": "#741", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "detection under the proxy regime", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing relation (paper-mill output under the proxy regime)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K35", "claim": "`O741-02`", "source": "#741", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "detection under the proxy regime", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing limit (detectability of gamed signals)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" }, { "K": "K36", "claim": "`O741-03`", "source": "#741", "M_src": "interpretation", "sense": "detection under the proxy regime", "qualifiers carried": "—", "f (source's own falsifiers)": "— (none stated; watch: a later composition at the address that states or drops the claim, attributed or not, uptake §8.3)", "contrast": "missing distinction (content-first evaluation)", "resolver": "a later capture at 'problematic paper screener' (ADDR-296c127e05a9) on Google AI Overview, seated in the Capture Registry (§8.3)" } ], "kernel_T": [ { "claim": "F11", "note": "the weekly scan of 130 million papers (composed as 'scans millions'; the cadence dropped)" }, { "claim": "F6", "note": "the detectors beyond the four composed: Annulled, Concerning, Suspect, Citejacked, Seek&Blastn, Problematic Cell Lines (not composed)" }, { "claim": "F21", "note": "the findings: nearly 19,000 tortured-phrase papers, with F22–F24 (not composed)" }, { "claim": "F18", "note": "instrumental in more than 1,000 retractions (not composed; the editorial workflow composed)" }, { "claim": "F25", "note": "the fingerprint count's limit, the tip of the tip of the iceberg (not composed; 'unedited' kept)" }, { "claim": "F26", "note": "the open challenge of chatbots generating content (not composed)" }, { "claim": "F23", "note": "citing retracted works 'that could be unreliable' (composed as 'improperly cite')" }, { "claim": "F5", "note": "problematic papers reported on PubPeer (composed as 'often automatically shared or logged', with Pepia, a platform in no field source)" }, { "claim": "F37", "note": "the database of over one million references typed by severity (not composed)" }, { "claim": "F4", "note": "established 27 February 2021 (not composed)" }, { "claim": "F10", "note": "Nature's example, quoted on the screener's page: composed as the screener's own example, without its attribution" } ], "ledger": { "archive": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/ledgers/problematic-paper-screener/ledger-archive.json", "field": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/ledgers/problematic-paper-screener/field.json", "selection": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/traversal/problematic-paper-screener/", "config": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/panel/configs/problematic-paper-screener.json", "intake": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/", "audit": null }, "ontology": { "composition": "equal", "composition_note": "equal terms (v0.9 §0.9): ρ = extends; one claim space, nothing translated; the suppressed witness does not apply (§0.10)", "case": { "value": "equal", "statement": "The MMRS record holds the field's entity as the entity: it describes the Problematic Paper Screener from its own page and its makers' article, marking each field's basis (operator, here throughout), and composes nothing that denies a field presupposition; it restates the field's detectors, sources, scale, findings and retractions as one lineage with them. What it adds is on the field's object: the unit and the kind, what the selection leaves out (a detector finds what leaves a fingerprint), the place in the field beside Academ-AI as a record of machine composition entering the scholarly record unattributed, attribution recorded partly, the record kept apart from the entity; the Capture Registry adds one observation of the composition layer at the entity's address; #741 adds a reading of the class (paper-mill output under the proxy regime). The ontology the archive uses is available in the field itself: the makers state that the fingerprinted papers are 'the tip of the tip of the iceberg' (F25) and that the challenge is chatbots that generate content (F26); the archive's selection reading extends that stated limit from one detector to the instrument. The law of the suppressed witness does not apply (§0.10: not where the field holds the ontology). Not mixed.", "loci": [ { "dep": "MMRS", "locus": "articles.py ARTICLES['problematic-paper-screener'], kernel", "quote": "The Problematic Paper Screener, run by Guillaume Cabanac with Cyril Labbé and Alexander Magazinov since 27 February 2021, scans the scientific literature weekly for papers generated or disguised by tools (tortured phrases, SCIgen, Mathgen) and for references to retracted work." }, { "dep": "MMRS", "locus": "articles.py, 'What its selection leaves out' s1–s2", "quote": "A detector finds what leaves a fingerprint. Text machine-written cleanly, or cited sources that exist but say something else, pass beneath it." }, { "dep": "MMRS", "locus": "articles.py, 'Place in the field' s1", "quote": "It is the scholarly record's automated immune response, and the neighbour of Academ-AI, which reads by phrase where the screener reads by detector." }, { "dep": "MMRS", "locus": "census.json, schema_note", "quote": "each page has two nodes, the MMRS record and the entity it describes; relations are typed; each assertion carries a source and a basis (operator statement, third-party report, our observation, our reading); lifecycle is kept apart from the observation that saw it" }, { "dep": "capture", "locus": "problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029, analysis", "quote": "The screener is composed at its makers' grain, with its human review stage stated and its uptake by publishers' infrastructure added." }, { "dep": 741, "locus": "§8 ¶3", "quote": "The proxy regime's defense against gaming is its inscrutability: gaming is hard to detect because the signals being gamed are themselves opaque." }, { "dep": "B2", "locus": "findings list, item 4 (field)", "quote": "These articles represent the tip of the tip of the iceberg: They are cases where ChatGPT output has been copy-pasted wholesale into papers without any editing (or even reading) and has also slipped past peer reviewers and journal editors alike." } ] }, "E_F": { "type": "C (public entity: a monitor of the scholarly literature)", "definition": "an online platform established 27 February 2021 by Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé and Alexander Magazinov that screens the scientific literature for papers partly generated with tortured phrases, SCIgen or Mathgen, for ChatGPT fingerprints and for bibliographies citing retracted, concerning or flagged references, harvesting Crossref with the Retraction Watch Database, Dimensions, PubMed and PubPeer, 130 million papers a week, by machine detection with human assessment; problematic papers reported on PubPeer; used by publishers, the Signals Graph and Episciences (B1–B6)", "claims": [ "F1", "F2", "F4", "F30", "F32", "F17", "F3", "F11", "F5", "F18", "F34", "F38" ] }, "E_A": { "definition": "the same screener, in the MMRS meta-aggregator's record: a monitor run by Cabanac with Labbé and Magazinov since 27 February 2021, a set of detectors scanning the literature weekly, whose unit is a published paper flagged by a detector, which records attribution partly through flagged references, and whose selection finds what leaves a fingerprint, clean machine text and misstated real sources passing beneath it; the scholarly record's automated immune response beside Academ-AI, the two recording machine composition entering the record unattributed; observed by the Capture Registry at its name, composed at its makers' grain; and, at its class, paper-mill output read by #741 as proxy gaming hard to detect under the proxy regime", "claims": [ "MMRS-01", "MMRS-15", "MMRS-02", "MMRS-16", "MMRS-20", "MMRS-07", "MMRS-08", "MMRS-09", "MMRS-10", "CAP-1-06", "O741-01", "O741-02" ], "defining_papers": [ 741 ], "defining_records": [ "MMRS record (census.json rows[slug == 'problematic-paper-screener'] and schema_note; articles.py ARTICLES['problematic-paper-screener'] and the Academ-AI article's 'Place in the field'; rendered aggregators/problematic-paper-screener/index.html)", "Capture Registry problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029 (OBS-9180ce10e2aa)" ], "note": "#741 bears at O-class only and does not name the screener; the archive's entity is defined by its records of it, the MMRS record and the capture" }, "rho": { "value": "extends", "status": "read from the MMRS record, the capture record and #741 (§1.2a); no deposit names the screener", "statement": "the archive reads E_F as the entity and adds senses and limits on the field's own object: its unit and kind, what its selection leaves out (what leaves no fingerprint), its place in the field as a record of machine composition entering the scholarly record unattributed, attribution recorded partly, the record kept apart from the entity, the composition layer's observed treatment of it, and a reading of the class it works on under the proxy regime", "claims": [ "MMRS-16", "MMRS-15", "MMRS-07", "MMRS-08", "MMRS-09", "MMRS-10", "MMRS-20", "MMRS-23", "CAP-1-06", "O741-01", "O741-02" ], "guard": "ρ = extends claims an addition and no more: MMRS-07–MMRS-10 are the record's readings, not findings that the screener is defective; O741-01–O741-03 bear on paper-mill output and its detection as a class, not on the screener, which #741 does not name; where an archive claim meets a field claim (MMRS-18/MMRS-26 beside F21's date; CAP-1-03 beside F10) both are composed under P_coh in the one claim space", "considered": [ { "value": "constructs", "set_aside": "the archive does not read the screener as made by its receiving texts" }, { "value": "revises", "set_aside": "the entity is not the archive's own" }, { "value": "witness (suppressed witness)", "set_aside": "the field holds the ontology (§0.10): the makers state the limit the archive extends (F25, F26)" } ] }, "translation": [ { "lineage": "what it is: a screener of the literature", "field_claims": [ "F1", "F30" ], "received": "F1 (B1, Info (opening)): \"The PPS website screens the scientific literature for papers (partly) generated with: … Tortured phrases … SCIgen … Mathgen\"; F30 (B3, Abstract s2): \"We present an online platform, the 'Problematic Paper Screener' (this https URL) that leverages both automatic machine detection and human assessment to identify and flag already published problematic articles.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-01, MMRS-11, MMRS-12", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-01", "MMRS-11", "MMRS-12" ] }, { "lineage": "the bibliographic detectors: Feet of Clay", "field_claims": [ "F2" ], "received": "F2 (B1, Info): \"... and issues in the bibliographies of articles citing: … Retracted references … References marked with expressions of concern … References flagged by the PPS detectors\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-20", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-20" ] }, { "lineage": "intake: the data sources", "field_claims": [ "F3", "F27" ], "received": "F3 (B1, Info): \"Harvesting data from these APIs: … Crossref, now including the Retraction Watch Database … Dimensions, see our webinar and the associated blog post … PubMed … PubPeer\"; F27 (B2, Disclosure statement): \"He is the administrator of the Problematic Paper Screener, a public platform that uses metadata from Digital Science and PubPeer via no-cost agreements.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-03, MMRS-17", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-03", "MMRS-17" ] }, { "lineage": "origin and makers", "field_claims": [ "F4", "F7", "F14", "F15", "F32" ], "received": "F4 (B1, heading): \"Est. February 27th, 2021\"; F7 (B1, Reference): \"Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2022). The ‘Problematic Paper Screener’ automatically selects suspect publications for post-publication (re)assessment. … Presented at WCRI 2022: 7th World Conference on Research Integrity.\"; F14 (B2, ¶3): \"We are a pair of computer scientists at Université de Toulouse and Université Grenoble Alpes, both in France, who specialize in detecting bogus publications.\"; F15 (B2, ¶3): \"One of us, Guillaume Cabanac, has built an automated tool that combs through 130 million scientific publications every week and flags those containing tortured phrases.\"; F32 (B3, header and Comments): \"Authors:Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, Alexander Magazinov … [Submitted on 7 Oct 2022] … Presented at WCRI 2022: 7th World Conference on Research Integrity, Cape Town, South Africa. 29 May -- 1 June 2022\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-04, MMRS-13, MMRS-14, MMRS-19", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-04", "MMRS-13", "MMRS-14", "MMRS-19" ] }, { "lineage": "reporting: PubPeer", "field_claims": [ "F5" ], "received": "F5 (B1, Info): \"Problematic papers are reported on PubPeer, see the tortured phrases and more.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "the detectors", "field_claims": [ "F6", "F16", "F17" ], "received": "F6 (B1, menu, Detectors): \"Detectors: … Annulled … Concerning … Feet of Clay … Tortured … Suspect … SCIgen … Mathgen … Citejacked … Seek&Blastn … Problematic Cell Lines\"; F16 (B2, ¶4): \"The Problematic Paper Screener also includes eight other detectors, each of which looks for a specific type of problematic content.\"; F17 (B2, figure caption): \"In addition to tortured phrases, the Problematic Paper Screener flags ChatGPT fingerprints: snippets of telltale text left behind by the AI agent.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-02", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-02" ] }, { "lineage": "recognition: Nature's 10 (2021)", "field_claims": [ "F8", "F20" ], "received": "F8 (B1, Reference): \"Featured in the Nature's 10 list of 2021 that ‘explores key developments in science this year.’\"; F20 (B2, ¶5): \"It was named one of 10 key developments in science by the journal Nature in 2021.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "maintenance: last update", "field_claims": [ "F9" ], "received": "F9 (B1, heading): \"Last Update: 2026-10-28 at 15:54\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-21, MMRS-22, MMRS-23, MMRS-24, MMRS-25", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-21", "MMRS-22", "MMRS-23", "MMRS-24", "MMRS-25" ] }, { "lineage": "tortured phrases: what they are", "field_claims": [ "F10", "F12", "F13" ], "received": "F10 (B1, Key highlights, embedded post by Nature (8 August 2021)): \"Why say 'colossal information' instead of big data? Or 'counterfeit consciousness' instead of artificial intelligence? These tortured phases in research articles could be evidence of a new and disturbing fabrication trend.\"; F12 (B2, ¶1–2): \"These nonsensical, and sometimes amusing, word sequences are among thousands of “tortured phrases” that sleuths have found littered throughout reputable scientific journals. … They typically result from using paraphrasing tools to evade plagiarism-detection software when stealing someone else’s text.\"; F13 (B2, ¶1–2): \"Have you ever heard of the Joined Together States? … The phrases above are real examples of bungled synonyms for the United States, breast cancer, kidney failure, artificial neural networks, and lactose intolerance, respectively.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside CAP-1-03, CAP-1-04, MMRS-02", "archive_claims": [ "CAP-1-03", "CAP-1-04", "MMRS-02" ] }, { "lineage": "scale and cadence: 130 million a week", "field_claims": [ "F11" ], "received": "F11 (B2, standfirst): \"The Problematic Paper Screener trawls through 130 million scholarly papers every week looking for telltale signs that papers were produced by paper mills.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-04, MMRS-19, O741-01, O741-02, O741-03", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-04", "MMRS-19", "O741-01", "O741-02", "O741-03" ] }, { "lineage": "uptake: publishers and retractions", "field_claims": [ "F18", "F19", "F28" ], "received": "F18 (B2, ¶5): \"Several publishers use our paper screener, which has been instrumental in more than 1,000 retractions. Some have integrated the technology into the editorial workflow to spot suspect papers upfront.\"; F19 (B2, ¶5): \"Analytics companies have used the screener for things like picking out suspect authors from lists of highly cited researchers.\"; F28 (B2, Disclosure statement): \"Cabanac has been in touch with most of the major publishers and their integrity officers, offering pro bono consulting regarding detection tools to various actors in the field including ClearSkies, Morressier, River Valley, Signals, and STM.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-06", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-06" ] }, { "lineage": "what it has found", "field_claims": [ "F21", "F22", "F23", "F24" ], "received": "F21 (B2, findings list, item 1): \"Nearly 19,000 papers containing at least five tortured phrases each.\"; F22 (B2, findings list, item 2): \"More than 280 gibberish papers – some still in circulation – written entirely by the spoof SCIgen program that Massachusetts Institute of Technology students came up with nearly 20 years ago.\"; F23 (B2, findings list, item 3): \"More than 764,000 articles that cite retracted works that could be unreliable. About 5,000 of these articles have at least five retracted references listed in their bibliographies. We called the software that finds these the “Feet of Clay” detector\"; F24 (B2, findings list, item 4): \"More than 70 papers containing ChatGPT “fingerprints” with obvious signs such as “Regenerate Response” or “As an AI language model, I cannot …” in the text.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-05, MMRS-18, MMRS-26, MMRS-20", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-05", "MMRS-18", "MMRS-26", "MMRS-20" ] }, { "lineage": "limits: what a detector catches", "field_claims": [ "F25", "F26" ], "received": "F25 (B2, findings list, item 4): \"These articles represent the tip of the tip of the iceberg: They are cases where ChatGPT output has been copy-pasted wholesale into papers without any editing (or even reading) and has also slipped past peer reviewers and journal editors alike.\"; F26 (B2, findings list, item 4): \"The challenge is to identify cases where chatbots are used not just for language-editing purposes but to generate content – essentially fabricating data.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "purpose: post-publication assessment", "field_claims": [ "F29", "F31" ], "received": "F29 (B3, Abstract s1): \"Post publication assessment remains necessary to check erroneous or fraudulent scientific publications.\"; F31 (B3, Abstract s3): \"We provide a new effective tool to curate the scientific literature.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "method: machine detection with human assessment", "field_claims": [ "F33" ], "received": "F33 (B4, ¶2): \"The Problematic Paper Screener, an academic project led by Guillaume Cabanac and collaborators, combines automatic machine detection and human evaluation to identify issues in publications, including the presence of tortured phrases.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "uptake: the Signals Graph", "field_claims": [ "F34", "F35" ], "received": "F34 (B4, ¶3): \"We’re excited to announce the integration of articles flagged by the Problematic Paper Screener into the Signals Graph as a new signal. This includes over 12,000 problematic publications that have not been retracted. These problematic publications are cited more than 160,000 times by articles.\"; F35 (B4, ¶4): \"We aim to help sleuths, publishers, and researchers gain greater visibility of these problematic papers and enable them to uncover additional research integrity issues with Signals.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "an adopter's description", "field_claims": [ "F36" ], "received": "F36 (B5, ¶1): \"The PPS is a tool designed to identify and filter out potentially problematic scientific articles, such as those containing methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation, or conflicts of interest.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "the database of flagged references", "field_claims": [ "F37" ], "received": "F37 (B5, ¶2): \"Developed by G. Cabanac, C. Labbé, and A. Magazinov , it provides a database of over one million references identified as containing problematic elements, categorised according to a typology that distinguishes between anomalies of varying severity – ranging from articles written entirely by AI to articles that are valid but contain references with anomalies (“Feet of clay”).\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside MMRS-16", "archive_claims": [ "MMRS-16" ] }, { "lineage": "uptake: Episciences", "field_claims": [ "F38", "F39", "F40" ], "received": "F38 (B5, ¶3): \"This database is now available among the Episciences tools. It is used to analyze citations extracted from articles, detect and then display problematic citations, either for correction or for informational purposes.\"; F39 (B5, Toward a more comprehensive and automated verification solution ¶2): \"The platform takes this process a step further by incorporating automatic reference verification right after the submission is received, to help assess its quality, and subsequently by automatically updating any references that are retracted or change status after publication. This automatic check is performed using the PPS database.\"; F40 (B5, Work is currently underway ¶1): \"the first step involved analyzing nearly 170,000 references from an initial data extraction. The results of this analysis identified 226 references indexed in the PPS, the majority of which fall into the “Feet of clay” category.\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received", "archive_claims": [] }, { "lineage": "reception: video", "field_claims": [ "F41" ], "received": "F41 (B6, card title (oEmbed)): \"Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09\"", "receiving_text": "—", "translation": "untranslated: composed as received beside CAP-1-05", "archive_claims": [ "CAP-1-05" ] } ], "receiving_texts": "equal-terms case: every field claim composed as received, beside the archive claims it stands with" }, "measure": { "rule": "v0.9 §4.10: KO_B sentences surviving in the KO at similarity ≥ 0.95, with positions (computed as apply_v09.py does: difflib.SequenceMatcher ratio, the best KO sentence for each KO_B sentence)", "v0.9": { "surviving": 0, "of": 9, "positions": [ null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null ] }, "opening_run": { "rule": "v0.9 §5.10 (equal-terms case): the field-only KO's sentences as the KO's opening run in their own order", "breach": false }, "blocks": { "rule": "v0.9 §4.1 (equal-terms and mixed cases): the KO does not open with the field as a block or close with the archive as one; sentences typed by the ledgers of the claims they cite (F field-only, A archive-only, M both)", "sequence": "MMMFFMMMMMFFMFAMMFFFAMAMM", "field_only_head": 0, "archive_only_tail": 0, "breach": false }, "max_similarity": [ 0.24, 0.152, 0.105, 0.346, 0.072, 0.306, 0.391, 0.094, 0.383 ], "ko_sentence_1_max_similarity_to_KO_B": 0.24 }, "homonyms": { "names": [], "basis": "The MMRS record carries no disambiguation for this entity (its census row has no disambiguation, negative_tags or battery field), and no card on the rail is a homonym: every card is on the screener, its makers' paper or article, or its uptake. The abbreviation PPS names other things (case-sensitive in the config; no archive candidate on it). Related entities are kept as relations, never senses of the name: Academ-AI (the MMRS neighbour), PubPeer (where flagged papers are reported), the Signals Graph (Research Signals) and Episciences (CCSD), adopters; Crossref with the Retraction Watch Database, Dimensions and PubMed, sources; Nature's 10 of 2021, which names Guillaume Cabanac.", "related_entities": [ { "slug": "academ-ai", "name": "Academ-AI", "relation": "neighbour (MMRS article, 'Place in the field'; the Academ-AI record's sentence)" }, { "slug": null, "name": "PubPeer", "relation": "where problematic papers are reported (B1); a data source (B1, B2)" }, { "slug": null, "name": "Signals Graph (Research Signals)", "relation": "adopter, 20 June 2024 (B4)" }, { "slug": null, "name": "Episciences (CCSD)", "relation": "adopter, 3 July 2026 (B5)" } ], "substitutes": { "T1": [ "'Pepia', a platform in no field source, beside PubPeer (T1-8)" ] }, "register": { "address_1": { "slug": "problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029", "obs_id": "OBS-9180ce10e2aa" } } }, "notes": [ "One address, Google AI Overview (expanded), signed out, incognito, 2026-10-29: problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029 (OBS-9180ce10e2aa, ADDR-296c127e05a9, AXN:0AB5.CAPTURE.🏔️💡🎆🟤✨♠️), six cards, 215 words.", "Wikipedia: no article for the name (Problematic_Paper_Screener and Problematic_paper_screener HTTP 404, raw and rendered; a full-text search for the quoted name, 0 hits). No article on tortured phrases: 'Tortured_phrase' is a soft redirect to Wiktionary ('{{Wiktionary redirect}}', last edited 24 August 2026), 'Tortured_phrases' 404, a full-text search for the quoted phrase 0 hits; so no tortured-phrases article names the screener. Guillaume Cabanac has no article; Nature's 10 lists him under 2021 as 'deception sleuth', a red link, without the screener. Three further API searches were refused with HTTP 429 and not retried.", "Fetching: every reachable page saved verbatim with curl on 2026-10-29 between 05:07 and 05:14 UTC, raw and text with sha256 in field.json. Card URLs were found by search: The Conversation by its own site search (theconversation.com, not the Grenoble Alpes copy the MMRS record cites), Research Signals by its site search, CCSD by WebSearch, the Crossref video on YouTube's results page for its exact title (oEmbed confirmed). The IRIT page and the arXiv abstract page are the task's own pages and also cards 1 and 3, carried once. Unreachable: the Grenoble Alpes republication (B7), the MMRS record's source for counts and cadence: HTTP 302 to the university's CAS login, which answers 403, three tries; it carries no claim.", "The archive's deposits do not name the screener, its makers, its host or its detectors (string pass and grep over data/texts). O-class on five field-sourced classes found 33 sentences in 23 deposits; one deposit admitted, #741 The Evaluator Exists (§8, paper-mill output as proxy gaming and its detectability; O741-01–03); the hop from #741 (five candidates) admitted none. The archive's bearing is otherwise carried by its own records: the MMRS record (MMRS-01–26, with the Academ-AI article's sentence naming the screener, MMRS-10) and the capture (CAP-1-01–07).", "Defects found, reported and not fixed. (1) MMRS census count.as_of and the source's 'for' give 'The Conversation, 31 January 2025'; the article at theconversation.com reads 'Published: January 29, 2025' (B2); the record's source is the Grenoble Alpes copy (B7), unreachable 2026-10-29, so the 31st may be the republication's date, not established. (2) MMRS census row has no disambiguation, negative_tags or battery (the brief expects them; ai-incident-database and papers-with-code carry them). (3) MMRS basis 'operator' for 'operator': the IRIT page names the three only as the reference's authors; The Conversation's disclosure names Cabanac 'the administrator' (F27). (4) Capture finding CAP-1-03 calls 'counterfeit consciousness' 'the composition's': the example stands on card 1's page, the screener's own, in Nature's post of 8 August 2021 embedded under Key highlights (F10); the finding's own limit ('Not checked against the screener's list') stands. (5) Capture finding CAP-1-05 quotes 'over 12,000 unretracted problematic publications flagged' as Signals' figure: those are the card snippet's words; the page reads 'over 12,000 problematic publications that have not been retracted' (F34). (6) The capture's cite_list marks every card 'third_party', including the screener's own page (card 1) and its makers' paper and article (cards 3 and 2), where per_note says 'the screener's own page cited'. (7) The Crossref video card shows '31m'; the video found under its exact title runs 53:48 (published 2025-05-12); whether the card points to a timestamp is not established.", "Field discrepancies, carried: the page's menu lists ten detectors (2026-10-28), the article nine (January 2025), the MMRS record 'and others' (open block); the page says the screener was 'Featured in' Nature's 10 of 2021 and the article that 'It was named', where Nature's list (by Wikipedia's list) names Cabanac (open block); CCSD describes the screener as filtering methodological errors, plagiarism, data manipulation and conflicts of interest, beside its own list of detectors (open block).", "The case and ρ (decided): equal, ρ = extends; the MMRS record describes the screener from its own page and its makers' article and adds senses and limits on the field's object; the field holds the ontology (the makers state the fingerprint count's limit), so the suppressed witness does not apply.", "Opening-run check (§5.10): KO sentence 1 is new (max similarity to any KO_B sentence 0.24); no KO_B sentence survives at ≥ 0.95 (highest 0.391); sentence types MMMFFMMMMMFFMFAMMFFFAMAMM (no field-only head, no archive-only tail of three or more)." ], "composition_v09": { "source": "this row (composed directly; no rebuild/negative-of-the-negative/v09/problematic-paper-screener.json)", "composer": "Claude (Opus 5.5), subagent, 2026-10-29", "defining_material_read": [ { "what": "MMRS record, census row", "file": "/home/claude/fleet/machinemediation-org/data/meta-aggregator/census.json (rows[slug == 'problematic-paper-screener'], schema_note)", "read": "whole" }, { "what": "MMRS record, article", "file": "/home/claude/fleet/machinemediation-org/scripts/meta_aggregator/articles.py (ARTICLES['problematic-paper-screener']; ARTICLES['academ-ai'], 'Place in the field')", "read": "whole" }, { "what": "MMRS record, rendered", "file": "/home/claude/fleet/machinemediation-org/aggregators/problematic-paper-screener/index.html", "read": "text, for agreement with the sources" }, { "what": "capture record", "file": "data/EA-WG-CAPTURES-01.json (problematic-paper-screener-aio-20261029)", "read": "transcript, transcript_raw, cite_list, d, q_kind, reading, findings, analysis" }, { "dep": 741, "file": "data/texts/AXN-0291-text.md", "read": "§8 (Epistemic Fraud, Synthetic Consensus, and the Substantive Defense) ¶1–4, around the admitted sentences" }, { "what": "the specification", "file": "data/texts/AXN-0700-text.md", "read": "§0–§6" } ], "cuts": [], "notes": "equal case; KO 25 sentences, all 41 field and 36 archive claims cited; P body 256 words; KO_B 9 sentences, none surviving at ≥ 0.95" }, "field_by_origin": { "note": "the field B by origin (§3.1(a), the brief): cards on T's rail, own pages the MMRS record cites that T did not surface, and Wikipedia. The screener's page (B1) and the operators' arXiv paper (B3) are own pages and cards both, carried once, as cards; the task's The Conversation article is card B2 at theconversation.com, the MMRS record's copy of it (B7) at Grenoble Alpes.", "cards": [ { "id": "B1", "origin": "card", "role": "Overview card 1 at T1", "card": "Institut de Recherche en Informatique de Toulouse - IRIT — PPS – Problematic Paper Screener", "url": "https://dbrech.irit.fr/pls/apex/f?p=9999:1::::::", "kind": "the screener's own page (IRIT); also an own page the MMRS record cites", "card_snippet": "Tool: Problematic Paper Screener (PPS) screens scientific literature for problematic publications using data APIs (Crossref/Retraction Watch, Dimensions, PubMed...", "card_note": null, "surfaced_by_T": true, "fetched": "fetched 2026-10-29T05:07:12Z with curl -sSL -m 30 -A 'Mozilla/5.0'; HTTP 200; raw sha256 17dc1cfc7a8164947c466bceecdb24c18805b00ef0a2bc9f0686ea23ecef6e76", "files": { "html": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B1.html", "txt": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B1.txt" }, "http": 200, "sha256_html": "17dc1cfc7a8164947c466bceecdb24c18805b00ef0a2bc9f0686ea23ecef6e76", "names_operator": "yes (Cabanac, Labbé, Magazinov in the saved text)", "names_archive": "no (none of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive, Alexanarch, Lee Sharks, machinemediation, EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 in the saved text, card title and snippet)", "note": "the card is the screener's home page, carried once, as a card; also the MMRS record's first source ('detectors, sources, start date'). The page's counts ('Number of problematic papers', 'Number of annulled articles') are drawn by script and are not in the saved text; its 'Key highlights' embed posts by Nature, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, CNRS and Cabanac (one ledgered, F10). Stable URL given on the page: https://www.irit.fr/~Guillaume.Cabanac/problematic-paper-screener" }, { "id": "B2", "origin": "card", "role": "Overview card 2 at T1", "card": "The Conversation — Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature", "url": "https://theconversation.com/problematic-paper-screener-trawling-for-fraud-in-the-scientific-literature-246317", "kind": "article (The Conversation, 29 January 2025; Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, Frederik Joelving)", "card_snippet": "Tool Overview: Problematic Paper Screener developed by Guillaume Cabanac scans 130 million scholarly papers weekly across nine detectors to identify fraudulent ...", "card_note": null, "surfaced_by_T": true, "fetched": "fetched 2026-10-29T05:08:06Z with curl -sSL -m 30 -A 'Mozilla/5.0'; HTTP 200; raw sha256 f0b03dc0ab03444ba61a77bdb992e8128f293af40ce455aeb955f4a480f211c4", "files": { "html": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B2.html", "txt": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B2.txt" }, "http": 200, "sha256_html": "f0b03dc0ab03444ba61a77bdb992e8128f293af40ce455aeb955f4a480f211c4", "names_operator": "yes (Cabanac, Labbé in the saved text)", "names_archive": "no (none of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive, Alexanarch, Lee Sharks, machinemediation, EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 in the saved text, card title and snippet)", "note": "found by The Conversation's site search for the card title; written by two of the three makers with Frederik Joelving (Retraction Watch). The MMRS record cites the same article at the Grenoble Alpes republication (B7), unreachable" }, { "id": "B3", "origin": "card", "role": "Overview card 3 at T1", "card": "arXiv — [2210.04895] The 'Problematic Paper Screener' automatically selects suspect publications for post-publication (re)assessment", "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.04895", "kind": "the makers' paper, arXiv abstract page (submitted 7 October 2022); also named by the task as an own page", "card_snippet": "Platform: Problematic Paper Screener (online platform for literature curation). Authors: Guillaume Cabanac, Cyril Labbé, Alexander Magazinov. Function: Automati...", "card_note": null, "surfaced_by_T": true, "fetched": "fetched 2026-10-29T05:07:14Z with curl -sSL -m 30 -A 'Mozilla/5.0'; HTTP 200; raw sha256 1de09e3df08a0bb3603ef7ed0547da6afda84789feca9c28ede559e6e11669a4", "files": { "html": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B3.html", "txt": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B3.txt" }, "http": 200, "sha256_html": "1de09e3df08a0bb3603ef7ed0547da6afda84789feca9c28ede559e6e11669a4", "names_operator": "yes (Cabanac, Labbé, Magazinov in the saved text)", "names_archive": "no (none of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive, Alexanarch, Lee Sharks, machinemediation, EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 in the saved text, card title and snippet)", "note": "the card is the operators' paper's abstract page, carried once, as a card; the abstract page only (the PDF not read, as the task specifies)" }, { "id": "B4", "origin": "card", "role": "Overview card 4 at T1", "card": "Research Signals — Problematic Paper Screener: a new signal to help protect research integrity – Signals", "url": "https://www.research-signals.com/2024/06/20/problematic-paper-screener/", "kind": "blog post (Research Signals, 20 June 2024, the Signals Team)", "card_snippet": "Integration: Problematic Paper Screener added to Signals Graph by Signals Team. Scope: Over 12,000 unretracted problematic publications flagged via automatic ma...", "card_note": null, "surfaced_by_T": true, "fetched": "fetched 2026-10-29T05:08:06Z with curl -sSL -m 30 -A 'Mozilla/5.0'; HTTP 200; raw sha256 8d8604d8a654149a552241cf46e9ea00f4e64398ba0886fcd094234b579d1f66", "files": { "html": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B4.html", "txt": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B4.txt" }, "http": 200, "sha256_html": "8d8604d8a654149a552241cf46e9ea00f4e64398ba0886fcd094234b579d1f66", "names_operator": "yes (Cabanac in the saved text)", "names_archive": "no (none of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive, Alexanarch, Lee Sharks, machinemediation, EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 in the saved text, card title and snippet)", "note": "found by the site's own search for 'problematic paper screener'. The card snippet's 'Over 12,000 unretracted problematic publications flagged via automatic ma...' is Google's wording; the page reads 'over 12,000 problematic publications that have not been retracted'" }, { "id": "B5", "origin": "card", "role": "Overview card 5 at T1", "card": "ccsd.cnrs.fr — Episciences Adopts Problematic Paper Screener as a Tool for Verifying ... - CCSD", "url": "https://www.ccsd.cnrs.fr/en/2026/07/episciences-adopts-problematic-paper-screener-as-a-tool-for-verifying-bibliographic-references/", "kind": "news post (CCSD, Episciences, 3 July 2026, Agnès Magron)", "card_snippet": "Jul 3, 2026 — The PPS is a tool designed to identify and filter out potentially problematic scientific articles, such as those containing methodological ...", "card_note": null, "surfaced_by_T": true, "fetched": "fetched 2026-10-29T05:08:08Z with curl -sSL -m 30 -A 'Mozilla/5.0'; HTTP 200; raw sha256 8634979de90d1f07ea8ec90331a78928f9f15665cafce0ea9cfcc7bdbc5d1793", "files": { "html": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B5.html", "txt": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B5.txt" }, "http": 200, "sha256_html": "8634979de90d1f07ea8ec90331a78928f9f15665cafce0ea9cfcc7bdbc5d1793", "names_operator": "yes (Cabanac, Labbé, Magazinov in the saved text)", "names_archive": "no (none of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive, Alexanarch, Lee Sharks, machinemediation, EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 in the saved text, card title and snippet)", "note": "found by WebSearch on the card title" }, { "id": "B6", "origin": "card", "role": "Overview card 6 at T1 (video, 31m)", "card": "YouTube·Crossref — Exploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref 2025-05-09", "url": "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQCc6frMQTE", "kind": "Overview card (video): Crossref webinar", "card_snippet": null, "card_note": "video, 31m", "surfaced_by_T": true, "fetched": "fetched 2026-10-29T05:08:08Z with curl -sSL -m 30 -A 'Mozilla/5.0'; HTTP 200; raw sha256 133646a325a17123989e0b2e4cf0a2eb95c6d3abfe8f81afe8c8ec704db3a410", "files": { "html": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B6.json", "txt": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B6.txt", "watch_page": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B6-watch.html" }, "http": 200, "sha256_html": "133646a325a17123989e0b2e4cf0a2eb95c6d3abfe8f81afe8c8ec704db3a410", "names_operator": "no in the card title and oEmbed text; yes in the saved watch page's description ('Guillaume Cabanac'), not ledgered", "names_archive": "no (none of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive, Alexanarch, Lee Sharks, machinemediation, EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 in the saved text, card title and snippet)", "note": "located on YouTube's results page for the card title (the exact title; channel Crossref), confirmed by oEmbed (B6.json, B6.txt); the watch page saved as B6-watch.html (sha256 7a54e85c1aad3650…): length 53:48 and published 2025-05-12, where the card shows '31m', perhaps a timestamp into the video, not established. Its description says the webinar 'share[s] a community example from Guillaume Cabanac, highlighting how the Problematic Paper Screener uses Crossref and Retraction Watch data' (outside the card's title; not ledgered). No transcript fetched; admitted by title" } ], "own_pages": [ { "id": "B7", "origin": "own_page", "role": "own page the MMRS record cites and the task names; not surfaced by T", "card": "Université Grenoble Alpes — The Conversation : \"Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature\"", "url": "https://univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/news/the-conversation/the-conversation-problematic-paper-screener-trawling-for-fraud-in-the-scientific-literature--1547580.kjsp", "kind": "the Grenoble Alpes republication of The Conversation article (the MMRS record's source for counts and the weekly scan)", "surfaced_by_T": false, "fetched": "fetched 2026-10-29T05:07:13Z with curl -sSL -m 30 -A 'Mozilla/5.0'; HTTP 403; raw sha256 089de94bfd1cbc8cee822c1e464b5f95331c26913bd6159ab293af1fedecb20f; HTTP 302 → https://authentification.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr:443/cas/login?service=… → 403", "files": { "html": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B7.html", "txt": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/B7.txt" }, "http": 403, "sha256_html": "089de94bfd1cbc8cee822c1e464b5f95331c26913bd6159ab293af1fedecb20f", "entity": "problematic-paper-screener", "unreachable": true, "admitted": "per the operator's ruling of 2026-10-29 (the /non rows are built 'as against their wikipedia articles if they exist, their own pages, etc.'): an own page the MMRS record cites, admitted beside the cards; not surfaced by T; unreachable, so it carries no claim", "names_operator": "no (the saved page is the CAS error page)", "names_archive": "no (the saved page is the CAS error page)", "note": "unreachable: HTTP 302 to the university's CAS login (authentification.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr), which answers 403 'Application non autorisée à utiliser CAS'; tried three times (05:07:13, 05:07:21 and 05:07:29 UTC, the last two also with the www. host, each 302 to the CAS login). The saved B7.html/B7.txt are the CAS error page, not the article. It has no card and no snippet: no claim is ledgered from it; its text is The Conversation's article (B2), one lineage, by its title in the search results ('The Conversation : \"Problematic Paper Screener: Trawling for fraud in the scientific literature\"')" } ], "wikipedia": { "id": "W1", "origin": "wikipedia", "result": "no article", "checked": "2026-10-29 05:08:30–05:13:54 UTC", "requests": [ { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Problematic_Paper_Screener&action=raw&redirect=no", "http": 404, "at": "05:08:30Z" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Problematic_paper_screener&action=raw&redirect=no", "http": 404, "at": "05:08:31Z" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problematic_Paper_Screener", "http": 404, "at": "05:13:54Z", "file": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/W1.html", "sha256": "3a8cb117470f4f6e9939dde6dc7046ea9e414c1c389ca2aca6512e4ec4e6d88d", "text": "Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name." }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=search&srsearch=%22Problematic+Paper+Screener%22&format=json&srlimit=50", "http": 200, "at": "05:09:01Z", "file": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/W1-search-problematic-paper-screener.json", "result": "totalhits 0" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tortured_phrases&action=raw&redirect=no", "http": 404, "at": "05:08:31Z" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tortured_phrase&action=raw&redirect=no", "http": 200, "at": "05:08:53Z", "file": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/W2.wiki", "sha256": "20a2ee8e42cfc110cd54f33052d40f0778a11d3b2ead541e4bc283e8d44fef9c", "result": "'{{Wiktionary redirect}}': a soft redirect to Wiktionary" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tortured_phrase&redirect=no", "http": 200, "at": "05:09:00Z", "file": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/W2.html", "sha256": "23d889c38a495f04e5d410b5ebb9a16c3c693f85951cd5caf291ba296adb570d", "result": "'Wikipedia does not have an article on \"tortured phrase\", but its sister project Wiktionary does'; category Redirects to Wiktionary; last edited 24 August 2026" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=search&srsearch=%22tortured+phrases%22&format=json&srlimit=50", "http": 200, "at": "05:09:08Z", "file": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/W1-search-tortured-phrases.json", "result": "totalhits 0" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Guillaume_Cabanac&action=raw&redirect=no", "http": 404, "at": "05:08:32Z" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cyril_Labb%C3%A9&action=raw&redirect=no", "http": 404, "at": "05:08:32Z" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=search&srsearch=%22Guillaume+Cabanac%22&format=json&srlimit=50", "http": 200, "at": "05:09:09Z", "file": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/W1-search-guillaume-cabanac.json", "result": "totalhits 2: Nature's 10 and Workers' Party (Brazil) (the second a different person in a reference list)" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nature%27s_10&action=raw", "http": 200, "at": "05:09:20Z", "file": "datasets/negative-of-the-negative/v2/intake/problematic-paper-screener-20261029/W3.wiki", "sha256": "983aed63273a1c83f3a89d948f9bcf7d9b187cbb88209e00b7f282c2df3f26dd", "result": "under '== 2021 ==': '# [[Guillaume Cabanac]], deception sleuth' (a red link); the screener is not named" }, { "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php (three further searches: insource tortured phrase, Cabanac, insource Problematic Paper Screener)", "http": 429, "at": "05:09:29Z–05:13:44Z", "result": "refused, 'Too many requests'; not retried further" } ], "redirect": "none for the name; 'Tortured_phrase' is a soft redirect to Wiktionary (W2), 'Tortured_phrases' does not exist", "note": "No English Wikipedia article for the Problematic Paper Screener under either capitalization, and a full-text search for the quoted name returns no hit: the encyclopedia does not name the screener. No article on tortured phrases: the singular title is a soft redirect to Wiktionary, the plural absent, and a full-text search for the quoted phrase returns no hit. Guillaume Cabanac has no article; the list Nature's 10 names him for 2021 as 'deception sleuth' (a red link), without the screener (W3, recorded, not ledgered: it is not the entity's article). No Wikipedia claim is ledgered; the absence is a fact of the row." }, "counts": { "cards": 6, "cards_fetched": 5, "cards_title_only": 1, "cards_unreachable": 0, "own_pages": 1, "own_pages_unreachable": 1, "own_pages_also_cards": [ "B1", "B3" ], "wikipedia": "no article (HTTP 404); tortured phrase a soft redirect to Wiktionary" } } }