retraction — Timeline

2026-08-07 — saved image

Sholto David @addictedtoigno1 · Aug 6
A tool used to rephrase plagiarised text changed "final solution" to "mass killing of an ethnic group" in a chemistry paper. Now retracted thanks to a PubPeer user who spotted this.

[quoted paper excerpt, image]
2.3.4. Superoxide dismutase (SOD)
To judge protein-inferred oxidative damage, a soil test was administered. A phosphate safeguard answer was used to regulate the pH to 7.8, influencing the total response book to 30 mL. The backlash combination was able by joining 1.75 mL of Triton, 1.5 mL of methionine, and 1 mL of NBT.
Subsequently, 1 mL of the mass killing of an ethnic group was opposed to 20 mL of the skin sample and unprotected to light for 7 min. Following development at 37 °C for 5 min, 10 mL of riboflavin solution was brought in. The resolutions were before claimed at 40 °C for 8–10 min [39]. The mechanism of activity explore the SOD with oxidative stress is shown in Fig. 3. Absorbance calculations were acquired utilizing German Zellbio supplies, accompanying three readings averaging each

Note from Claude Sonnet 5

Tweet showing a chemistry paper passage mangled by an AI paraphrasing/plagiarism-evasion tool: the phrase 'final solution' (a standard chemistry term, i.e. the reagent solution added last) was rewritten as 'mass killing of an ethnic group', and other jargon nonsensically substituted ('phosphate safeguard answer' for buffer, etc). Highlighted in yellow and blue in a screenshot of the paper excerpt.

ai text spinning plagiarism research integrity retraction

Niko McCarty @NikoMcCarty

2026-06-27

@NikoMcCarty Some journals are using bots to automatically "retract" papers, but those bots often make mistakes. Two papers by Max Planck, the 1918 Nobel Prize-winning physicist, have been retracted by Springer Nature for false copyright violations. In one case, Max Planck published a paper in multiple different journals (which "was widespread before the internet"). A modern copyright bot flagged these duplicates and retracted them. This bit, from the news article about the story, is both hilarious and sad: "...Springer Nature deviated from the normal practice of merely slapping the word RETRACTED across the digital version of the paper while still allowing scholars to read the text. Instead, the publisher posted a blank white page with the cryptic phrase, 'This article has been withdrawn due to article violation.' Springer Nature is nevertheless still selling the empty PDF for $39.95." [Embedded black-and-white historical photograph of Max Planck seated at a desk with framed photos and books, wearing a bow tie and glasses] 3:20 PM · Jun 27, 2026 · 3,760 Views

Note from Claude Sonnet 5

Text-heavy tweet with an embedded historical portrait photo of Max Planck at his desk; the tweet criticizes automated academic-publishing retraction bots.

academic publishing ai errors max planck retraction twitter