Academic Publishing Faces Growing Threat From Fabricated Researcher Identities

The Phantom Mathematician

Beatriz Ychussie appeared to be a promising mathematics researcher at Roskelde University in Denmark, publishing four papers on quantum particles and geometry in 2015-2016 while reviewing manuscripts for reputable journals. According to investigative reports, there was just one problem: Ychussie never existed.

The Phantom Mathematician
Paper Mill Operations Exposed
Identity Verification Challenges
Technological Solutions and Limitations
Industry Response and Concerns
Systemic Incentives and Future Outlook

Sources indicate her name belonged to a network of 26 fictitious authors and reviewers that infiltrated four mathematics journals published by Springer Nature. These sham scholars were allegedly created by a paper mill—a company that manufactures fake research papers and favorable peer reviews for paying customers seeking to boost their academic profiles.

Paper Mill Operations Exposed

This particular paper mill operation used two dozen fake identities to publish 55 articles, making it one of the largest such cases documented. After a lengthy investigation, Springer Nature retracted all affected papers by early 2021. Analysts suggest the scheme was likely operated by a China-based paper mill.

Tim Kersjes, head of research integrity at Springer Nature, explained that paper mills publish under fake names specifically to establish credibility for future peer review invitations. “The fact that fake scientists with a publication history were invited to review papers more often than were those without explains why paper mills would bother to publish papers under fake names in the first place,” Kersjes stated in his presentation at the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication.

Identity Verification Challenges

The case highlights broader challenges in academic publishing, where most communication occurs remotely through email or submission systems. Scientific publishing traditionally operates on trust, but paper mills exploit this vulnerability by creating fictitious personas or hijacking real researcher identities., according to industry experts

Most publishers already conduct some identity checks, with methods ranging from verifying institutional email addresses to cross-referencing previous publications. Frontiers journals, for instance, require authors to confirm contributions by co-authors and check researcher records. However, verification remains difficult without standardized industry practices.

Adya Misra, associate director of research integrity at Sage Publications, noted that “What we lack as an industry is standards on what we consider to be a verified researcher.” Stricter measures risk excluding independent scholars, early-career researchers, and those from low- and middle-income countries who may lack institutional emails.

Technological Solutions and Limitations

Publishers are increasingly adopting the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) system, which provides researchers with unique 16-digit identifiers they maintain throughout their careers. Approximately 10 million researchers use ORCID annually, and major publishers now require submitting authors to include their identifiers.

However, ORCID doesn’t verify identity—anyone can create an account, and duplicate accounts remain possible. The platform relies on its nearly 1,500 member organizations to contribute “trust markers” by confirming affiliations, works, and peer review activities. About 5.7 million ORCID accounts contain at least one such verification.

Some startups are developing more robust solutions. Earlier this year, ORCID’s founding executive director launched VeriMe, an identity verification platform that incorporates multi-factor authentication and can validate official documents. Meanwhile, automated tools from companies like Digital Science analyze author relationships to flag suspicious patterns indicative of paper mill activity.

Industry Response and Concerns

The International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) established an expert task force in late 2023 to address identity verification. Their March report recommended a framework combining risk and trust indicators, with fall-back options including phone verification or document requests.

Richard Northover, product manager for identity and privacy at STM, clarified that “we’re certainly not saying everybody has to provide their passport to be able to submit a paper.” The approach emphasizes flexibility to avoid excluding legitimate researchers.

Some analysts caution that technological solutions have limitations. Tom Demeranville, product director at ORCID, noted that “Looking at someone’s passport doesn’t tell you if they’ve got a track record of being a diligent scholar or someone who’s involved in malpractice.”

Systemic Incentives and Future Outlook

Reese Richardson, a metascientist at Northwestern University, suggests that identity fraud might be less concerning than other forms of misconduct. “My gut instinct is that people engaging in unethical or unscrupulous behaviour under their own name is a far bigger issue than people using somebody else’s name,” he stated.

Richardson warns that increased gatekeeping based on trust markers could itself become vulnerable to manipulation. “The answer is not more policing. It is creating an environment where the abuse of trust systems is not profitable,” he added, noting this represents “an incredibly tall order” given academic incentives that often prioritize publication quantity over quality.

As publishing continues to grapple with these challenges, the case of Beatriz Ychussie serves as a reminder that while the phantom mathematician has disappeared, the systems that created her remain very much operational. According to industry reports, publishers expect to continue confronting sophisticated fraud operations as paper mills evolve their methods, potentially incorporating artificial intelligence to generate increasingly convincing fake research.