PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Accountability in Research· 2026Q1

Opening Pandora’s box: Paper mills in conference proceedings

Anna Abalkina. Marie Kunešová, Marie Kunešová, Yağmur Öztürk, Solal Pirelli

Short summary

Researchers identified 2,062 papers in 366 IEEE conference proceedings that were previously offered for sale on social media, revealing paper mills are a significant, organized market for scientific misconduct.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • 2,062 papers in 366 IEEE conference proceedings were identified as being previously offered for sale on social media.
  • These papers accounted for up to 23.5% of an individual conference's publications.
  • Problematic papers involved over 7,500 researchers from 2,000 institutions in 56 countries.
  • Identified papers showed collaboration anomalies, high affiliation diversity, citation manipulation, and a predominance of six-author papers.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Paper mills are a growing threat to the integrity of science, yet their penetration in conference proceedings remains underexplored despite conferences being more important than journals in some scientific subfields. This study aims to identify papers in conference proceedings whose titles have been offered for sale on social media platforms. METHODS: We collected publication offers for more than 4,000 unique paper titles or topics from more than 200 social media channels and used semi-automated methods along with human assessment to match offers with papers published in IEEE conference proceedings. RESULTS: We identified 2,062 papers in 366 IEEE conference proceedings, accounting for up to 23.5% of an individual conference. These problematic papers are coauthored by more than 7,500 researchers from over 2,000 institutions or companies in 56 countries. The identified papers demonstrate collaboration anomalies, high diversity of affiliations per paper, citation manipulation, a predominance of six-author papers, and content irregularities. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that paper mills are a large, organized, and often public market that commercializes scientific misconduct.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Accountability in Research, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Statistics, Probability and UncertaintyDecision Sciences