Fraudulent Publishing in the Mathematical Sciences
Ilka Agricola, Lynn Heller, Wil Schilders, Moritz Schubotz, Peter Taylor, Luis Vega
Abstract
This report is the first of two publications of a joint Working Group of the International Mathematical Union (IMU) and the International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM). In it, we shall analyze the current state of publishing in the mathematical sciences and explain the resulting problems. Our second publication will offer concrete recommendations, guidelines, and best practices for researchers, policymakers, and evaluators of mathematical research. It will explain how to detect and counteract attempts to game bibliometric measures, empowering the community to reclaim control over research evaluation and drive necessary change.
arXiv comments
Full version with complete clickable references. A print version with a selection of the most important references appeared in the October 2025 issue of the Notices of the AMS. v2 has some typos corrected and full DOI to the published version
Linked by 2 identifiable commenters in 2 comments across 2 threads, from Sep 2025 to Sep 2025. Found in 1 HN submission from Sep 2025 to Sep 2025. Open submission discussions.
This is a followup with recommendations from the IMU and the ICIAM) to https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.07257 (discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45203935)
I love the table of tortured phrases [0], which shows hilarious examples of synonyms of established scientific phrases, machine-generated by fraudulent authors to stay below the radar of plagiarism detectors. My favorites from that table: - “fuzzy logic” becomes “fluffy…
This is a followup with recommendations from the IMU and the ICIAM) to https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.07257 (discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45203935)
bikenagaView on HNParent context