33
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by JoBo@feddit.uk to c/science@lemmy.ml

Reasonably speedy retraction this time, six months from when the problems were first noted on PubPeer (https://pubpeer.com/publications/58E5F4120AB02E9565E3B4DE303EC3). Nine years after publication...

Elisabeth Bik is doing an incredible job. Her toot for this retraction: https://med-mastodon.com/@ElisabethBik/110969401224111581

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago

That technology is still in development, as far as I know. Certainly, when Bik started there wasn't any software that could do the job anywhere near as well as she could. I know she's been testing out some more recent software iterations, and no doubt they're learning from the masses of images she has detected. But it is not an easy problem to solve. Bits of images are not just duplicated (which might be 'easy' to detect if you could do enough comparisons between all possible areas of duplication), they are also rotated, stretched, squished... Automating that kind of pattern recognition would be amazingly hard.

For some kinds of images, detecting the telltale signs of manipulation might be fruitful but that would likely require a whole new set of requirements for images submitted for publication.

No doubt it will happen, and it does work for some kinds of manipulation. But I don't think anyone is close to covering all the bases yet.

this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
33 points (100.0% liked)

Science

13018 readers
9 users here now

Subscribe to see new publications and popular science coverage of current research on your homepage


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS