Benjamin Carr, Ph.D. 👨🏻‍💻🧬May 5
Influential study touting #ChatGPT in #education retracted over red flags
“In some cases it appears it was synthesizing very poor quality studies, or mixing together findings from studies that simply cannot be accurately compared due to very different methods, populations, and samples,” Williamson told Ars. “It really seemed like a paper that should not have been published in the first place.”
#Retracted study on ChatGPT in education was already cited hundreds of times. https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/05/influential-study-touting-chatgpt-in-education-retracted-over-red-flags/
Influential study touting ChatGPT in education retracted over red flags

The retracted study on ChatGPT in education was already cited hundreds of times.

Ars Technica
Katharine O'Moore-Klopf, ELSApr 28
From arXiv: “Do Large Language Models Know Which Published Articles Have Been #Retracted?” No, #authors, it doesn’t appear that they do, so using #LLMs to produce your research paper’s reference list doesn’t decrease your chances of citing #faulty #research. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.16872
Do Large Language Models know Which Published Articles have been Retracted?

Large Language Models (LLMs) can be helpful for literature search and summarisation, but retracted articles can confuse them. This article asks three open weights (offline) LLMs whether 161 high profile retracted articles had been retracted, performing a similar check for a benchmark multidisciplinary set of 34,070 non-retracted articles. Based on titles and abstracts, in over 80% of cases the LLMs claimed that a retracted article had not been retracted (GPT OSS 120B: 82%; Gemma 3 27B: 84%; DeepSeek R1 72B: 88%). The reasons given for a correct retraction declaration were often wrong, even if detailed. This confirms that LLMs have little ability to distinguish between valid and retracted studies, unless they are allowed to, and do, check online. For the benchmark test, there were only 55 false retraction claims from 34,070 non-retracted full text articles, and 28 false claims when only the title and abstract were entered, suggesting that there is only a small chance that LLMs discount valid studies. When retractions are erroneously claimed, this does not seem to be due to mistakes in the article. Overall, the results give new reasons to be cautious about LLM claims about academic findings.

arXiv.org
Kpop News HubApr 4
HYBE's Official Position On KATSEYE Manon's Return Gets Retracted #HYBEs #KATSEYE #Manons #Official #Position #Retracted #Return
https://kpopnewshub.com/hybes-official-position-on-katseye-manons-return-gets-retracted/?fsp_sid=23868
HYBE's Official Position On KATSEYE Manon's Return Gets Retracted - KpopNewsHub – Latest K-Pop News, Idols & Korean Entertainment

The mystery around Manon’s return to KATSEYE just got more complicated.

Kpop News Hub
Katharine O'Moore-Klopf, ELSDec 4, 2025

ONLY *8 years after* a court case revealed that #Monsanto employees ghostwrote a research article on weed killer Roundup's "safety" for humans was the article #retracted! Damn! The US exists solely for #corporations and #wealthy people to make boatloads of money at the expense of everyone else's #health. 💰💰💰💰

https://retractionwatch.com/2025/12/04/glyphosate-safety-article-retracted-elsevier-monsanto-ghostwriting/

Glyphosate safety article retracted eight years after Monsanto ghostwriting revealed in court

Credit: Mike Mozart/Flickr (CC BY 2.0) A review article concluding the weed killer Roundup “does not pose a health risk to humans” has been retracted eight years after documents released in a court…

Retraction Watch
Sabine.PahlDec 3, 2025
#RETRACTED after 25 years! Safety Evaluation and #RiskAssessment of the Herbicide #Roundup and Its Active Ingredient, #Glyphosate, for Humans https://www.sciencedirect.com:5037/science/article/pii/S0273230099913715
Paco MartínezDec 1, 2025
Question for #repository managers, what do you do if you detect that one of your articles has been #retracted for the journal?#openaccess
Show threadParents For Future #EndFossilFuels 🪧🛢️❌Dec 1, 2025
RETRACTED: Safety Evaluation and Risk Assessment of the Herbicide Roundup and Its Active Ingredient, Glyphosate, for Humans "…in the context of misrepresentation of the contributions by the authors & the study sponsor & potential conflicts of interest of the authors." #Glyphosate study #retracted

RETRACTED: Safety Evaluation a...
SkeptixNov 25, 2025

📰 | #Retracted: Die Frass-Studie „#Homöopathie bei #Lungenkrebs“ ist zurückgezogen worden

Vor zwei Wochen haben wir schon darauf hingewiesen – jetzt ist es soweit:
Das renommierte Fachjournal The Oncologist hat die Skandal-Studie zum „Überleben von Lungenkrebspatienten mit homöopathischer Komplementärbehandlung“ (#Frass et al. 2020) zurückgezogen.

Bernd Harder stellt im #SkeptixBlog innerlich den Gin kalt. Kalt genug ist es ja.

https://skeptix.org/2025/11/25/retracted-die-frass-studie-homoeopathie-bei-lungenkrebs-ist-zurueckgezogen-worden/

#TheOncologist

Retracted: Die Frass-Studie "Homöopathie bei Lungenkrebs" ist zurückgezogen worden - Skeptix

Fünf Jahre hat's gedauert. Aber Beharrlichkeit und Integritätsarbeit haben jetzt zum Retract einer skandalösen Homöopathie-Studie geführt.

Skeptix
Katharine O'Moore-Klopf, ELSAug 19, 2025

#Science #authors and #editors, you need to know about this #problem with #ChatGPT: If authors use ChatGPT & end up #citing #retracted #research #papers, that reduces their own papers' believability & usefulness. https://cen.acs.org/policy/publishing/ChatGPT-tends-ignore-retractions-scientific/103/web/2025/08

H/T to @grammargirl's AI Sidequest, issue 78.

ChatGPT tends to ignore retractions on scientific papers

Study finds the chatbot doesn’t acknowledge concerns with problematic studies

Chemical & Engineering News
Jens NotroffApr 25, 2025

🚫☄️ #Retracted: The controversial (if not to say: obscure) paper on a "Tunguska sized airburst [that allegedly] destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle #BronzeAge city in the Jordan Valley" has been finally retracted by @nature Sci Rep after several corrections & strong criticism:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-97778-3

RETRACTED ARTICLE: A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea - Scientific Reports

We present evidence that in ~ 1650 BCE (~ 3600 years ago), a cosmic airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam, a Middle-Bronze-Age city in the southern Jordan Valley northeast of the Dead Sea. The proposed airburst was larger than the 1908 explosion over Tunguska, Russia, where a ~ 50-m-wide bolide detonated with ~ 1000× more energy than the Hiroshima atomic bomb. A city-wide ~ 1.5-m-thick carbon-and-ash-rich destruction layer contains peak concentrations of shocked quartz (~ 5–10 GPa); melted pottery and mudbricks; diamond-like carbon; soot; Fe- and Si-rich spherules; CaCO3 spherules from melted plaster; and melted platinum, iridium, nickel, gold, silver, zircon, chromite, and quartz. Heating experiments indicate temperatures exceeded 2000 °C. Amid city-side devastation, the airburst demolished 12+ m of the 4-to-5-story palace complex and the massive 4-m-thick mudbrick rampart, while causing extreme disarticulation and skeletal fragmentation in nearby humans. An airburst-related influx of salt (~ 4 wt.%) produced hypersalinity, inhibited agriculture, and caused a ~ 300–600-year-long abandonment of ~ 120 regional settlements within a > 25-km radius. Tall el-Hammam may be the second oldest city/town destroyed by a cosmic airburst/impact, after Abu Hureyra, Syria, and possibly the earliest site with an oral tradition that was written down (Genesis). Tunguska-scale airbursts can devastate entire cities/regions and thus, pose a severe modern-day hazard.

Nature