> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://balaustine.mymagic.page/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# AI slop clears peer-review
- URL: https://balaustine.mymagic.page/ai-slop-clears-peer-review/
- Published: 2025-12-06T05:39:52.000Z
- Updated: 2026-08-23T11:26:03.000Z
- Author: VM
- Tags: Science, artificial intelligence, gold OA, megajournal, Nature Scientific Reports, Open Access, retraction, #Migrated-1787484114599, #wp, #wp-post, #Import 2026-08-23 11:22

Here's an image from [a paper](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-24662-9?ref=balaustine.mymagic.page) that was published by *Nature Scientific Reports* on November 19 and [retracted](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-31337-y?ref=balaustine.mymagic.page) on December 5:

![](https://balaustine.mymagic.page/content/images/2026/08/0d2dd-46659-41598_2025_24662_fig1_html-w-684.jpg)

This paper made it through peer review at the journal. Let that sink in for a moment. Perhaps the reviewers wanted to stick it to the editors. Then again how the image made its way past the editors is also a mystery.

*Nature Scientific Reports* has had several problems before, enumerated on [its Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific%5FReports?ref=balaustine.mymagic.page#Controversial%5Farticles). It's a 'megajournal' in the vein of PLOS One and follows the gold OA model, with an [article processing charge](https://www.nature.com/srep/open-access?ref=balaustine.mymagic.page) of "£2190.00/$2690.00/€2390.00".