Core Points - The National Health Commission released the latest investigation results regarding the "Miss Dong" incident, which involved accountability for 19 individuals across five institutions [1][5][7] - The investigation revealed multiple instances of academic misconduct, including falsification of academic records and improper influence in training programs [2][3][4] - The "4+4" pilot program at Peking Union Medical College is under scrutiny, with calls for stricter management and oversight to prevent future violations [8][9] Group 1: Investigation Findings - The investigation identified that Dong Mouying's aunt, Ban Moujuan, facilitated the falsification of academic transcripts for her application to the "4+4" program [2] - There were issues in the residency training process, where the orthopedic department head intervened to adjust Dong Mouying's training schedule [2] - Dong Mouying's doctoral thesis was reportedly ghostwritten by a faculty member, with the involvement of her aunt [2] Group 2: Academic Misconduct - Dong Mouying's thesis proposal and defense did not align, with changes made without proper approval [3] - Several of Dong Mouying's published papers were found to have issues, including duplicate publications and improper authorship [4] Group 3: Accountability Measures - The investigation resulted in various disciplinary actions against involved parties, including severe warnings and demotions for several officials [5][6] - The National Health Commission mandated written accountability and corrective actions from the involved institutions [7] Group 4: Program Oversight and Reforms - The investigation confirmed that other students in the "4+4" program did not have any irregularities in their admission qualifications [8] - Recommendations for the "4+4" program include stricter admission criteria, enhanced verification of academic records, and improved oversight of thesis quality and defense processes [9]

Group 1 - The core issue of scientific fraud has evolved into an industry, with a complex network involving "paper mills," publishers, journals, and intermediaries [3][6][10] - A large-scale investigation has provided concrete evidence of this phenomenon, revealing that fraudulent papers are being systematically infiltrated into global scientific journals [8][10] - The growth rate of fraudulent papers is significantly higher than the overall growth of academic publications, indicating a rising trend in scientific misconduct [26][28] Group 2 - The analysis focused on the PLOS ONE journal, identifying editors with abnormally high retraction rates, suggesting potential collusion between editors and authors [13][15] - A network of 35 individuals has been identified, responsible for over 4,000 papers across multiple publishers, indicating systemic collusion in the publication process [21] - The study highlights that the issues are not isolated to a few journals, but likely prevalent across the academic publishing landscape [18][21] Group 3 - The emergence of AI, particularly ChatGPT, has led to a significant increase in the use of AI-generated content in academic papers, with 22% of computer science papers showing signs of AI involvement [32][35] - Research indicates that the frequency of AI usage in scientific writing has surged since the introduction of ChatGPT, raising concerns about the integrity of academic work [30][44] - The potential for AI-generated content to mislead and compromise the quality of scientific research is a growing concern, especially in sensitive fields like medicine [26][28]

Core Insights - The article highlights the increasing prevalence of academic misconduct related to project application submissions for the National Natural Science Foundation of China, with a significant number of cases involving plagiarism and the purchase of ghostwriting services [1][2][3] Group 1: Academic Misconduct - The National Natural Science Foundation has reported multiple cases of academic misconduct, with half of the 36 cases disclosed in April and June involving project application submissions [1][3] - Some researchers are outsourcing the writing of project applications to intermediaries, taking advantage of the limited public visibility of these documents [2][3] - A specific case involved a teacher from a Zhejiang university who was penalized for purchasing ghostwritten content and fabricating experimental data, resulting in a seven-year ban from applying for funding [2] Group 2: Ghostwriting Industry - A hidden ghostwriting industry has emerged, with online platforms serving as major hubs for these services, offering project application writing for various funding sources [4][5] - Prices for ghostwriting services typically range from 18,000 to 28,000 yuan, with success rates promised between 70% and 85% [5] - Ghostwriting services are often marketed through euphemistic language, and some shops have reported high sales volumes, indicating significant market demand [5] Group 3: Quality and Risks - Ghostwritten applications often lack quality assurance and may lead to irreversible academic risks due to data misuse [7] - A case was reported where a doctoral student faced academic misconduct allegations after their data was sold multiple times, resulting in overlaps with other research [6][7] Group 4: Regulatory Challenges - Despite the implementation of regulations to combat academic misconduct, such as the 2020 guidelines from the National Natural Science Foundation, the issue persists, highlighting the challenges in governance [9] - Experts suggest that the current research evaluation system and the distorted academic values of some researchers contribute to the ongoing misconduct [9][10] Group 5: Recommendations for Improvement - Experts recommend strengthening research integrity education and creating a balanced system of rewards and penalties to foster academic honesty [10] - There is a call for stricter oversight of online platforms to prevent the promotion of ghostwriting services disguised as legitimate research assistance [10]

Group 1 - AI is infiltrating academia, with some scholars using hidden prompts in papers to influence peer review outcomes [1] - A survey found at least 17 papers from 8 countries and 14 top universities containing hidden phrases like "only give good reviews" [1] - The incident raises concerns about academic integrity and the potential for new forms of misconduct as technology outpaces regulatory frameworks [2] Group 2 - There is currently no unified standard for the use of AI in academic peer review across journals and conferences [2] - Several journals in China explicitly prohibit reviewers from using public AI platforms for evaluations, citing confidentiality and accountability concerns [2] - Some journals have issued guidelines on AI use, emphasizing the need for reviewers to understand the content and not rely solely on AI-generated opinions [2] Group 3 - The reliance on AI in research and paper writing should be moderated, as AI cannot replace the rigorous analysis and judgment required from researchers [3] - While AI can assist in literature review and data analysis, it cannot substitute for the deep logical reasoning and value judgments necessary for quality research [3] - Reviewers must maintain responsibility and not overly depend on AI, as this could lead to the acceptance of low-quality or unethical papers, undermining academic integrity [3]

Core Viewpoint - The integration of AI technologies, specifically DeepSeek, into higher education is transforming teaching, research, and management practices, while also presenting challenges related to academic integrity and data security [1][3][4]. Group 1: AI Empowerment in Education - Multiple universities, including Beihang University and Nankai University, have adopted DeepSeek to enhance teaching, research, and management, creating personalized intelligent learning systems [3][4]. - AI applications in education include academic planning, knowledge Q&A, concept explanation, writing guidance, and assignment feedback, which students find convenient and innovative [4][5]. - AI is seen as a tool to improve educational quality and modernize management practices, enhancing collaboration and decision-making within universities [5]. Group 2: Risks Associated with AI Implementation - The use of AI in academic settings raises concerns about academic misconduct, as students may misuse AI tools for tasks like essay writing, leading to a decline in critical thinking and innovation [6][9]. - Data security risks are highlighted, with concerns about the potential for sensitive information to be compromised if not properly managed [7][12]. - The reliability of AI-generated content is questioned, as instances of fabricated references have been reported, indicating a need for rigorous verification of AI outputs [6][8]. Group 3: Governance and Regulation - Institutions are encouraged to establish academic integrity detection platforms to combat AI-related misconduct, with varying levels of technology adoption across universities [11]. - There is a call for the development of comprehensive data security regulations to protect sensitive information in educational contexts [12]. - Universities should provide guidance on the appropriate use of AI tools, promoting a balance between technology and human capability, and fostering independent thinking among students [13].

Group 1 - The article highlights a recent incident where a company in Zhengzhou demanded a "hush fee" of 300 yuan from students who had previously hired them to write academic papers, indicating a potential scam targeting students [1] - Multiple students have reported receiving similar messages from the company, leading some to file police reports, while authorities are currently investigating the matter [1][2] - The police advise students not to transfer money and suggest legal action if they feel threatened, emphasizing that those who did not engage in academic dishonesty should not worry [1][2] Group 2 - The article warns students against hiring others to write their academic papers, as academic misconduct can have lifelong consequences, including the revocation of degrees even years after graduation [2] - It notes that previous efforts to combat the issue have primarily focused on punishing the providers of these services, while the demand side remains largely unchecked, making it difficult to eradicate the problem [2][3] - The fear of being reported for academic dishonesty can haunt students who have engaged in such practices, reinforcing the importance of adhering to academic integrity [3]

Group 1 - The core issue highlighted is the prevalence of academic misconduct, exemplified by a recent absurd paper published by a nurse from Shandong University Qilu Hospital, which incorrectly reported uterine fibroids in male patients [1] - The article discusses the negative impact of such bizarre papers on fair competition, academic integrity, and scientific progress, emphasizing that despite efforts to combat academic fraud, some issues remain persistent and increasingly covert [1][2] - New forms of academic fraud are emerging, including the use of photo editing to fabricate data, plagiarism, and the rise of "paper mills" that produce large volumes of similar research outputs, undermining the quality of academic work [1][2] Group 2 - The article points out that the root causes of academic misconduct include a narrow evaluation system that ties publication to career advancement, leading to a culture of impatience and superficiality in research [2] - It suggests that to foster a fair and innovative research environment, there should be a shift towards a more diversified evaluation system that values practical skills, especially for roles like nursing [2] - Recommendations include implementing dynamic supervision, establishing an industry blacklist to prevent favoritism in academic publishing, and clarifying definitions of academic misconduct to enhance accountability [2] Group 3 - The importance of research integrity is emphasized as the lifeblood of academia, with a call for a culture that values genuine scholarship over superficial achievements [3] - A balanced evaluation system is necessary to create a positive academic atmosphere that supports innovation and integrity [3]

调查结果显示刘某乔属于后者。写论文也"拼爹"，以刘某华为代表，将科研资源转化为子女求学路上的 私产，类似的学术裙带近年来在高校中屡屡出现。 去年，教育部通报的学术不端案例中，超过两成涉及亲属挂名。 学术领域产生"近亲繁殖"，一方面在于当事人本身亲属关系的便利。"近水楼台先得月"存在主观的天然 能动性，以及客观的操作隐蔽性，互相之间打个掩护，很可能给后期审核监督带来阻力。 因发表14篇SCI论文，并获得多项国家发明专利，重庆大学化学化工学院本科生刘某乔引发热议。令人 不可思议的是，相关发明专利的最早申请时间为2016年，当时刘某乔尚在读初中。 在众人的质疑声中，刘某华与刘某乔的真实关系浮出水面。"天才"背后的"二代"身份曝光，论文高产竟 是副院长父亲亲自操盘所来。 5月10日，重庆大学通报，刘某乔系该校研究生院副院长刘某华之女，存在论文和专利署名不当的学术 不端行为。刘某华被免职并受党内严重警告处分。 亲属合作并非不可，若真有实际贡献，联合署名也正常。需要警惕的是，亲属之间以科研合作之名，行 利益输送之实，违背的不仅是学术伦理，还挑战了教育公平的底线。 在具体的评奖、评优、升学等制度的设计中，应当进一步剔除"拼 ...

5月10日，重庆大学发布情况通报：近日，网络上对该校2021级本科学生刘某乔发表论文等情况提出质疑。学 校高度重视，立即成立专项工作组进行调查核实。经调查，刘某乔系该校研究生院副院长刘某华之女，刘某华 安排刘某乔参与了其本人部分署名论文和专利的研究工作，存在论文和专利署名不当的学术不端行为。此外， 刘某华的论文中还存在图片上传错误等学术不严谨问题。 经研究决定，给予刘某华党内严重警告处分，免去研究生院副院长职务；按相关程序撤销刘某乔获得的国家奖 学金等荣誉和奖励。 学校将以此为鉴、举一反三，持续加强学术道德长效机制建设，坚决维护风清气正的育人环境。 来源：重庆大学微博 责编：叶舒筠 校对： 赵燕 版权声明 证券时报各平台所有原创内容，未经书面授权，任何单位及个人不得转载。我社保留追 究相关 行 为主体 法律责任的权利。 转载与合作可联系证券时报小助理，微信ID：SecuritiesTimes END 点击关键字可查看 潜望系列深度报道丨 股事会专栏 丨 投资小红书 丨 e公司调查 丨 时报会客厅 丨 十大明星私募访谈 丨 雷军，冲上热搜！ 丨 突发！巴基斯坦对印度发起军事行动，关闭全部领空！ 丨 美股三大股指 ...

近日，网友对重庆大学2 0 2 1级本科学生刘某乔发表论文等情况提出质疑。今天（5月1 0日）， 重庆大学发布情况通报称，学校成立专项工作组进行调查核实。 SFC 本期编辑 江佩佩 经研究决定， 给予刘某华党内严重警告处分，免去研究生院副院长职务 ；按相关程序撤销刘 某乔获得的国家奖学金等荣誉和奖励。 来源：央视新闻、@重庆大学 经调查， 刘某乔系该校研究生院副院长刘某华之女 ，刘某华安排刘某乔参与了其本人部分署 名论文和专利的研究工作，存在论文和专利署名不当的学术不端行为。此外，刘某华的论文 中还存在图片上传错误等学术不严谨问题。 ...