Scientific research is documented through research papers published in peer-reviewed journals. A large number of papers — somewhere between 2 million and 6 million — are published every year. It is estimated that at least 2 per cent of papers are fake — this number adds up to a lot.

These fake papers are churned out by the so-called paper mills. These papers have either full data fudged, or part of the data fudged. The paper mills operating in the field approach the scientists offering to write papers with credit given to the scientists for a price.

Paper mills have proliferated as the quantity of research is rewarded, rather than the quality of research. These paper mill studies get cited in legitimate review papers if the review writing authors are not careful and are after volume of work.

The funding agencies are impressed by the bolstered resumes of such scientists and precious resources are routed to such scientists, rather than genuine scientists.

Some papers are generated by AI. These days they use tools like ChatGPT.

There is no rigorous evaluation system for these papers. The evaluation is done by recruitment committees or grant committees. They do not have the wherewithal to make an actual evaluation. Scientists are rewarded on the basis of the number of papers they write and the number of publications that cite them.

Even legitimate research papers do not advance the state of knowledge. Researchers add some additional data in an ongoing project. It is converted into a new paper. Majority of these papers make no contribution. They are not worth reading.

The fake papers use a template. Only data and words are filled. Paper mills fabricate papers in those fields which tend to be formulaic (nano technology, computer science and mRNAs).

Many a time, the fake papers are retracted. However, their impact persists as these are cited and mentioned in review papers.

Funding should be made available rigorous peer-review.