Sfdwhf

Word or phrase for showing great skill at something without formal training in it

Why did Bush enact a completely different foreign policy to that which he espoused during the 2000 Presidential election campaign?

Why can a 352GB NumPy ndarray be used on an 8GB memory macOS computer?

Quenching swords in dragon blood; why?

How do you funnel food off a cutting board?

What does "at rest" mean involving data encryption?

Do authors have to be politically correct in article-writing?

Why would the Pakistan airspace closure cancel flights not headed to Pakistan itself?

Using loops to create tables

integral inequality of length of curve

Using only 1s, make 29 with the minimum number of digits

Can I become debt free or should I file for bankruptcy? How do I manage my debt and finances?

Slow moving projectiles from a hand-held weapon - how do they reach the target?

Is it safe to try charging my laptop with a USB-C PD charger that has less wattage than recommended?

Why did the villain in the first Men in Black movie care about Earth's Cockroaches?

Why do members of Congress in committee hearings ask witnesses the same question multiple times?

When does coming up with an idea constitute sufficient contribution for authorship?

What to do if authors don't respond to my serious concerns about their paper?

Can a hotel cancel a confirmed reservation?

A starship is travelling at 0.9c and collides with a small rock. Will it leave a clean hole through, or will more happen?

What makes the Forgotten Realms "forgotten"?

What kind of hardware implements Fourier transform?

How should I handle players who ignore the session zero agreement?

How did the original light saber work?

Retractions in mathematical journals

Is there any world-wide ranking of conferences/journals?Verifying that cited results are still current before publishingWhy do many recent open access “mega-journals” only cover biological sciences?Access to journals for individuals outside of an institution?What is the relationship between impact factor and journal rankingWhy do journals have limits on the number of references?Does assigning DOI numbers signal anything about the authenticity of a journal? Why do some journals not assign them?Why do people publish on arXiv instead of other places?Can I publish in a field completely unrelated to my present field? If yes, what about affiliations?Editors resigning because they published a low quality paper

1

The number of retractions in some scientific fields like medicine, life and material related science seems rising in the past years. However, retractions in mathematics seem rare because of its rigorous nature. I wonder if there are retractions in mathematical journals.

publications journals retraction

share|improve this question

edited 38 mins ago

Math Wizard

asked 6 hours ago

Math WizardMath Wizard

1114

New contributor

Math Wizard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Probably, but errors in math journals are often corrected by writing a new paper with better results. Citing the old paper, of course. In medicine, not retracting bad results can result in harm. I don't know about material science - bridges falling down?
  
  – Buffy
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Here's a related post from Math Overflow.
  
  – Anyon
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

1

The number of retractions in some scientific fields like medicine, life and material related science seems rising in the past years. However, retractions in mathematics seem rare because of its rigorous nature. I wonder if there are retractions in mathematical journals.

publications journals retraction

share|improve this question

edited 38 mins ago

Math Wizard

asked 6 hours ago

Math WizardMath Wizard

1114

New contributor

Math Wizard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Probably, but errors in math journals are often corrected by writing a new paper with better results. Citing the old paper, of course. In medicine, not retracting bad results can result in harm. I don't know about material science - bridges falling down?
  
  – Buffy
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Here's a related post from Math Overflow.
  
  – Anyon
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

The number of retractions in some scientific fields like medicine, life and material related science seems rising in the past years. However, retractions in mathematics seem rare because of its rigorous nature. I wonder if there are retractions in mathematical journals.

publications journals retraction

share|improve this question

edited 38 mins ago

Math Wizard

asked 6 hours ago

Math WizardMath Wizard

1114

New contributor

Math Wizard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

edited 38 mins ago

Math Wizard

asked 6 hours ago

Math WizardMath Wizard

1114

New contributor

Math Wizard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

edited 38 mins ago

Math Wizard

asked 6 hours ago

Math WizardMath Wizard

1114

New contributor

Math Wizard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 6 hours ago

Math WizardMath Wizard

1114

New contributor

Math Wizard is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 6 hours ago

Math WizardMath Wizard

1114

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

4

The Daniel Biss case is one example where the retraction is due to legitimate mistakes (not misconduct). These retractions are rare because much of the time, incorrect proofs can still be salvaged with some work (recall Wiles and Taylor) and even papers with wrong results often contain enough correct material to be considered useful. Also, there are much fewer people that have the time to properly evaluate a paper in mathematics than in (say) psychology, where anyone with a decent understanding of statistical fallacies can find half a dozen bad studies per day.

There are also, quite likely, some cases where plagiarism has led to retractions.

Then there is the Ted Hill GMVH controversy (Quillette, Gowers's blog 1, Gowers's blog 2, Retraction Watch). NYJM has removed that paper from its archives, which can be construed as a kind of informal retraction, albeit easier to construe as a mess-up in the face of unexpected hostility from parts of the community. (The explanation given for the retraction is that the paper did not fit the journal's scope and level; note, however, that this is an extremely unusual grounds for retraction in academic publishing.)

RetractionWatch has a tag for retractions in mathematics.

share|improve this answer

edited 5 hours ago

answered 6 hours ago

darij grinbergdarij grinberg

2,68711221

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  (I also vaguely recall a journal publishing one and the same paper twice in a row... anyone?)
  
  – darij grinberg
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

1

Many years ago I saw a page in an Eastern European mathematics journal retracting a past paper. It seems the paper had originally appeared in a Chinese journal, and some enterprising guy in Eastern Europe translated it into English and submitted it under his own name. The journal only found out about that fraud years later.

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

GEdgarGEdgar

11.7k72742

add a comment | 

1

I definitely think there are field differences. Psychology and medicine are much more prone to issues with sample size, confounding variables, etc. Plus there is a huge amount of money pumped into biology/medical research (look at NIH budget versus NSF) and this likely leads to issues of worse scientists, declining returns on investment, etc. (Add in business drivers of drug research, political biases on social policies, etc. and it becomes even worse.)

There are some sketchy mat sci papers (nanoscience, devices) where there is hype science present and even deception. But in general, I bet mat sci has more solid stuff than psych and medicine. Math even more so.

A lot of times when people talk about the replication crisis, they really mean fields like psych, nutrition, cancer, education, crime, etc. I don't see general replication issues in chemistry. Yeah, there are a very small percentage of mistakes (wrong crystal structure). But in general if you repeat a chemical synthesis for a new molecule, you get the new molecule. Try that in a priming study! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)#Criticism

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

guestguest

112

New contributor

guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

Math Wizard is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125848%2fretractions-in-mathematical-journals%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

4

The Daniel Biss case is one example where the retraction is due to legitimate mistakes (not misconduct). These retractions are rare because much of the time, incorrect proofs can still be salvaged with some work (recall Wiles and Taylor) and even papers with wrong results often contain enough correct material to be considered useful. Also, there are much fewer people that have the time to properly evaluate a paper in mathematics than in (say) psychology, where anyone with a decent understanding of statistical fallacies can find half a dozen bad studies per day.

There are also, quite likely, some cases where plagiarism has led to retractions.

Then there is the Ted Hill GMVH controversy (Quillette, Gowers's blog 1, Gowers's blog 2, Retraction Watch). NYJM has removed that paper from its archives, which can be construed as a kind of informal retraction, albeit easier to construe as a mess-up in the face of unexpected hostility from parts of the community. (The explanation given for the retraction is that the paper did not fit the journal's scope and level; note, however, that this is an extremely unusual grounds for retraction in academic publishing.)

RetractionWatch has a tag for retractions in mathematics.

share|improve this answer

edited 5 hours ago

answered 6 hours ago

darij grinbergdarij grinberg

2,68711221

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  (I also vaguely recall a journal publishing one and the same paper twice in a row... anyone?)
  
  – darij grinberg
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

The Daniel Biss case is one example where the retraction is due to legitimate mistakes (not misconduct). These retractions are rare because much of the time, incorrect proofs can still be salvaged with some work (recall Wiles and Taylor) and even papers with wrong results often contain enough correct material to be considered useful. Also, there are much fewer people that have the time to properly evaluate a paper in mathematics than in (say) psychology, where anyone with a decent understanding of statistical fallacies can find half a dozen bad studies per day.

There are also, quite likely, some cases where plagiarism has led to retractions.

Then there is the Ted Hill GMVH controversy (Quillette, Gowers's blog 1, Gowers's blog 2, Retraction Watch). NYJM has removed that paper from its archives, which can be construed as a kind of informal retraction, albeit easier to construe as a mess-up in the face of unexpected hostility from parts of the community. (The explanation given for the retraction is that the paper did not fit the journal's scope and level; note, however, that this is an extremely unusual grounds for retraction in academic publishing.)

RetractionWatch has a tag for retractions in mathematics.

share|improve this answer

edited 5 hours ago

answered 6 hours ago

darij grinbergdarij grinberg

2,68711221

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  (I also vaguely recall a journal publishing one and the same paper twice in a row... anyone?)
  
  – darij grinberg
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

The Daniel Biss case is one example where the retraction is due to legitimate mistakes (not misconduct). These retractions are rare because much of the time, incorrect proofs can still be salvaged with some work (recall Wiles and Taylor) and even papers with wrong results often contain enough correct material to be considered useful. Also, there are much fewer people that have the time to properly evaluate a paper in mathematics than in (say) psychology, where anyone with a decent understanding of statistical fallacies can find half a dozen bad studies per day.

There are also, quite likely, some cases where plagiarism has led to retractions.

Then there is the Ted Hill GMVH controversy (Quillette, Gowers's blog 1, Gowers's blog 2, Retraction Watch). NYJM has removed that paper from its archives, which can be construed as a kind of informal retraction, albeit easier to construe as a mess-up in the face of unexpected hostility from parts of the community. (The explanation given for the retraction is that the paper did not fit the journal's scope and level; note, however, that this is an extremely unusual grounds for retraction in academic publishing.)

RetractionWatch has a tag for retractions in mathematics.

share|improve this answer

edited 5 hours ago

answered 6 hours ago

darij grinbergdarij grinberg

2,68711221

share|improve this answer

edited 5 hours ago

answered 6 hours ago

darij grinbergdarij grinberg

2,68711221

answered 6 hours ago

darij grinbergdarij grinberg

2,68711221

answered 6 hours ago

darij grinbergdarij grinberg

2,68711221

1

Many years ago I saw a page in an Eastern European mathematics journal retracting a past paper. It seems the paper had originally appeared in a Chinese journal, and some enterprising guy in Eastern Europe translated it into English and submitted it under his own name. The journal only found out about that fraud years later.

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

GEdgarGEdgar

11.7k72742

add a comment | 

1

Many years ago I saw a page in an Eastern European mathematics journal retracting a past paper. It seems the paper had originally appeared in a Chinese journal, and some enterprising guy in Eastern Europe translated it into English and submitted it under his own name. The journal only found out about that fraud years later.

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

GEdgarGEdgar

11.7k72742

add a comment | 

Many years ago I saw a page in an Eastern European mathematics journal retracting a past paper. It seems the paper had originally appeared in a Chinese journal, and some enterprising guy in Eastern Europe translated it into English and submitted it under his own name. The journal only found out about that fraud years later.

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

GEdgarGEdgar

11.7k72742

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

GEdgarGEdgar

11.7k72742

answered 6 hours ago

GEdgarGEdgar

11.7k72742

answered 6 hours ago

GEdgarGEdgar

11.7k72742

1

I definitely think there are field differences. Psychology and medicine are much more prone to issues with sample size, confounding variables, etc. Plus there is a huge amount of money pumped into biology/medical research (look at NIH budget versus NSF) and this likely leads to issues of worse scientists, declining returns on investment, etc. (Add in business drivers of drug research, political biases on social policies, etc. and it becomes even worse.)

There are some sketchy mat sci papers (nanoscience, devices) where there is hype science present and even deception. But in general, I bet mat sci has more solid stuff than psych and medicine. Math even more so.

A lot of times when people talk about the replication crisis, they really mean fields like psych, nutrition, cancer, education, crime, etc. I don't see general replication issues in chemistry. Yeah, there are a very small percentage of mistakes (wrong crystal structure). But in general if you repeat a chemical synthesis for a new molecule, you get the new molecule. Try that in a priming study! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)#Criticism

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

guestguest

112

New contributor

guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

add a comment | 

1

I definitely think there are field differences. Psychology and medicine are much more prone to issues with sample size, confounding variables, etc. Plus there is a huge amount of money pumped into biology/medical research (look at NIH budget versus NSF) and this likely leads to issues of worse scientists, declining returns on investment, etc. (Add in business drivers of drug research, political biases on social policies, etc. and it becomes even worse.)

There are some sketchy mat sci papers (nanoscience, devices) where there is hype science present and even deception. But in general, I bet mat sci has more solid stuff than psych and medicine. Math even more so.

A lot of times when people talk about the replication crisis, they really mean fields like psych, nutrition, cancer, education, crime, etc. I don't see general replication issues in chemistry. Yeah, there are a very small percentage of mistakes (wrong crystal structure). But in general if you repeat a chemical synthesis for a new molecule, you get the new molecule. Try that in a priming study! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)#Criticism

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

guestguest

112

New contributor

guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

add a comment | 

I definitely think there are field differences. Psychology and medicine are much more prone to issues with sample size, confounding variables, etc. Plus there is a huge amount of money pumped into biology/medical research (look at NIH budget versus NSF) and this likely leads to issues of worse scientists, declining returns on investment, etc. (Add in business drivers of drug research, political biases on social policies, etc. and it becomes even worse.)

There are some sketchy mat sci papers (nanoscience, devices) where there is hype science present and even deception. But in general, I bet mat sci has more solid stuff than psych and medicine. Math even more so.

A lot of times when people talk about the replication crisis, they really mean fields like psych, nutrition, cancer, education, crime, etc. I don't see general replication issues in chemistry. Yeah, there are a very small percentage of mistakes (wrong crystal structure). But in general if you repeat a chemical synthesis for a new molecule, you get the new molecule. Try that in a priming study! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology)#Criticism

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

guestguest

112

New contributor

guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this answer

answered 6 hours ago

guestguest

112

New contributor

guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 6 hours ago

guestguest

112

New contributor

guest is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 6 hours ago

guestguest

112