We recently discovered an article in the preprint database that discussed the use of AI for reviewing manuscripts. Its title is The Obsolescence of Traditional Peer Review: Why AI Should Replace Human Validation in Scientific Research.
It was so unusual and the topic of this was so important that we posted it on the channel.

The issue of peer review is a very important thing, both for the editorial office and for scientists, so we, as editors of publications on advanced technologies, analyzed this material in detail.

References:
The article under consideration cites 21 sources. But 20 of them turned out to be unrealistic - it is impossible to find them. The only source that was found seems to be random and has no relation to the topic of the article.

Author's profile:
The author's profiles on ORCID and ResearchGate were analyzed. ORCID added articles only for 2024, and 95% of them are preprints. The situation is similar in ResearchGate: articles for 2023–2024, and again the vast majority are preprints, that is, all of this is unreviewed.

Unrealistic number of publications:
The volume of publications looks anomalous. Over the past three months, 79 articles have been submitted as preprints. A living person simply cannot physically create such a number of scientific works.

Publication history:
In the ResearchGate profile, the author has publications for 2014–2018 - one article per year, with co-authors. Since 2023, activity has suddenly increased to dozens of articles per month, and all of them are written by one author.

Quality of articles:
During a selective review of articles, it was noticed that some of them have real sources, but some, like the analyzed article, contain fictitious references. In addition, all articles are marked as not peer-reviewed.

CONCLUSION:
The loud title and scientific-like text were intended to cause resonance and promote active citation, thereby manipulating the consciousness of the scientific community. This situation raises serious concerns about the veracity and ethics of such authorship.

It is especially important to be careful when using preprints in your own research, because it is not clear who is the author of such "publications" - a person or an AI, or are they not science fraudsters at all? And shouldn't AI be equated with fraudsters in this case?

HAVE YOU ENCOUNTERED SIMILAR CASES?