This article was published on WR in 2018, and a Corrigendum was published 6 years latter. Difference experiment procedure was described between the original article and Corrigendum. We would like to understand the rationale by which the journal decided to issue Corrigendum.

Eight references (Ref. 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 23, 24) are false. Searching their titles on Google Scholar returned no results. The author and title for the Ref 20 do not match to each other. Further more, the Ref 7 and Ref 26 are the same reference, as are the Ref 9 and Ref 27.

Recently, the we received a message alleging the data reported in article [1] may be manipulated. After the investigation, we found some anomalous data in the article. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/... [1] 10.1038/s41565-025-02082-0

Recently, we obtained a document showing that Wuhan University purchased an 80TB Sci-Hub paper dataset from Shanghai Jiao Tong University in 2025 for a tender price of 70,000 RMB, via a "single-source" procurement.

Investigation revealed abnormal spectra on this article. In Fig. 21, the red, purple, green and yellow lines show unexpected back tracks. It remain unknown whether back tracks were caused by image processing, or they were resulted from problematic data.

Two articles, [1] and [2], contain 20 identical figures, all of which are reused from a Master's Thesis. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/... [1] 10.1016/j.cej.2026.173309 [2] 10.1016/j.energy.2025.137818

We previously identified 10 problematic references in a PLoS ONE article, details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/... And recently, we found another PLoS ONE article, published on the same day, also has a potential hallucination reference, details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

We identified ten problematic references in a PLoS ONE article, details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

The ethics statements on these two article are found to be questionable. The 5GH Team is seeking a volunteer team to replicate the study. If any group is interested, they are welcome to contact the Team at 5GH[at]5gh[dot]org[dot]cn. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Recently, the number of review articles has increased significantly. We examined four journals: CBM (Construction and Building Materials), CEJ (Chemical Engineering Journal), JCP (Journal of Cleaner Production), and WR (Water Research). The percentage peaked around 2020.

An e-mail accused the ethical statement in an article of being false. Investigations identified two additional articles reporting the same approval number, SQ2018-039-01. However, the participant recruitment described in articles is inconsistent. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Duplicated parts (marked with same colour boxes) are observed on the black line in Figure 13c of this article [1], suggesting the spectrum was manipulated. [1] 10.1039/d5ma00354g

LIN Qun (林群), an anesthesiologist in China, has published three materials science articles focusing on the photocatalytic properties of nanomaterials, topics that are entirely unrelated to his professional background. But it is not an isolated case. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Some duplicated parts (marked with same colour boxes) are obsere in Figure 6A of the article 10.1016/j.mtbio.2026.102928. However, I am not fimilar with this matter. I am wondering if it is normal?

We found that some journals have published more articles in the first quarter in 2026 than in the full year of 2025. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Materials Today Bio published 1,242 articles in 2025, nearly three times 478 articles published in 2024. An even higher number is expected this year. During first three months of 2026 alone, journal has already published 437 articles.

Fuel has issued 2,996 articles during the first three months of this year. This number exceeds the total of 2,841 articles published throughout 2025. While this trend does not necessarily indicate any irregularities by the journal, it's worth noting this unusual pattern.

Fuel has issued 2,996 articles during the first three months of this year. This number exceeds the total of 2,841 articles published throughout 2025. While this trend does not necessarily indicate any irregularities by the journal, it's worth noting this unusual pattern.

These two articles by WU Ran (East China Normal University and Second Military Medical University) share the same ethical approval from Second Military Medical University with the approval No. of 20170305, however the recruitment described in them are inconsistent with each other

26 articles were produced in a mass "assembly-line" fashion by an author group from Southwest University, China, between 2021 and 2025. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

😱

Some abnormal data was identified on the article (10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1626476).

Nice step

International Journal of Coal Geology contributes high proportions of the citations to the Editor-in-Chief, details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

17.5% Citations to DAI Shifeng (代世峰), with the China University of Mining and Technology (Beijing), came from "International Journal of Coal Geology", the journal he served as the Editor-in-Chief. Detials: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Our investigation (www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...) revealed that DAI Shifeng, as a guest editor, received a large number of citations via the topical collection published in a MDPI journal. Further investigations show that similar citation patterns. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

A topical collection at the MDPI title "Minerals" is found to contain an excessive number of citations to the guest editor, DAI Shifeng (代世峰) from the China University of Mining and Technology (Beijing). Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

We received a tip-off alleging that T J LEE (李鼎烈) from the Macau University of Science and Technology may be exploiting his position as the EiC of "The International Journal of Tourism Research" to inflate his citations. Here are some detailed data: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

The anonymous Reviewer 2 for this article [1] provided the authors with three irrelevant references, without offering any specific comments or feedback on the content of the article itself. [1] 10.1371/journal.pone.0275472

A recent investigation uncovered the questionable editorial and review practices by HUANG Difang (黄棣芳) on PLoS ONE and other journals. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

The review report submitted by S Chattopadhyay for the PLOS Digital Health article [1] contains notable issues. Rather than providing any specific comments on article [1], Chattopadhyay merely suggested three references for the authors to cite. [1] 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000921

A comment at ForBetterSciene raises concerns about an e-mail domain "poers.edu.pl". Following this lead, we have identified 46 articles, whose corresponding authors listed email addresses under this domain. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Currently, we uncovered a problematic editor-reviewer network, details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Currently, we have analyzed 29 Review articles published on "Journal of Controlled Release" under Open Access model, and found 14 (48%) of them have at least one problematic reference, which was flagged regarding their data/image integrity.

Achal Agrawal, PhD with IRW posted that Scopus delisted 108 journals in 2025, but 30 of them still claim to be indexed by Scopus. So, we have a check on the journals delisted by WOS in 2025. 55 journals were delisted (Editorial De-listing), 18 of them still claim to be indexed in the database.

We have found 9 articles with problematic ethics statements on "Chinese Medicine", a Springer Nature title. Here are some examples, more details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

The ethical approval statements on two articles published by the same author group at Wuhan University are found to be problematic. More details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

Abnormal citation patterns are observed on the article. Seven of the references were co-authored by ZHANG Xianzeng (张先正) with the Wuhan University, and were grouped in Ref 42 to 48, supporting two general citing statement.

The highlighted article reported an abnormal prevalence of cleft lip and palate in Hubei, China. It remains unknown the underlying cause to such abnormal data.

Four distinguish participant cohorts descripted in five articles shared the same ethical approval, suggesting not only the authors' violation on the ethics management regulations, but also regarding to flawed peer review process, in which such issues should have been identified.

Until recently, I found over 40 articles with such weird phrases, @jacksonwryan.com may have found more. "Dirty" translation tool may be one of the reasons, but it can not explain the whole story. We are looking for an answer, any input is welcome.

🧪 Here's a science mystery to start the year. Why are species names for fish and plants appearing in the scientific literature in papers about firefighter injuries, hearing loss and heart attack? Is it AI? Translation tools? Something else? nobreakthroughs.substack.com/p/is-this-fi...

Three articles, published on Springer Nature titles, cited a same ethical approval number, however, the original trials seem to be different, details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

An inconsistency in the style of error bars is observed for the black bars in Figure 7a of the article (10.3390/ma18194532)

Three articles from a same author group at Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute focused on different participant cohorts, but shared a same ethical approval. All of the articles were published on Springer Nature titles. Details: www.5gh.org.cn/Report/2026/...

10.5% of all articles I have notified journals about have been addressed to date. Most articles remain untouched, even after waiting for more than a year. I have send concerns on 2500+ articles in total.

Among the 50 most recently published articles on PLoS ONE, 14 (28%) of them have at least one reference being flagged by "RetractionRisk Scanner", a tool developed by ZHENG Er-Te and his colleagues, to be "High Risk" of retraction.

14 references were grouped with a single statement, most (if not all) of them are irrelevant. However, there is not pattern from those references. I am wondering what is wrong over there? Any input about it?

Potential misbehavior from the handling editor at PLoS ONE: 4 irrelevant citations to the handling editor (HONG Yanggang / 洪扬刚) are found on an article (10.1371/journal.pone.0330619), 3 of them were grouped at a single citing statement, suggesting the citations may be manipulated.