this brings us to a cultural divide, westerners would see this as a personal scar, as they consider the integrity of the publishing sphere at large to be held up by the integrity of individuals

i clicked on 4 of those papers, and the pattern i saw was middle-eastern, indian, and chinese names

these are cultures where they think this kind of behavior is actually acceptable, they would assume it's the fault of the journal for accepting the paper. they don't see the loss of reputation to be a personal scar because they instead attribute blame to the game.

some people would say it's racist to understand this, but in my opinion when i was working with people from these cultures there was just no other way to learn to cooperate with them than to understand them, it's an incredibly confusing experience to be working with them until you understand the various differences between your own culture and theirs

PSA: Please note that the names are hallucinated author lists part of the hallucinated citations, and not names of offending authors.

AFAIK the submissions are still blinded and we don't know who the authors are. We will, surely, soon -- since ICLR maintains all submissions in public record for posterity, even if "withdrawn". They are unblinded after the review period finishes.

Where do you see the authors? All I'm seeing is:

>Anonymous authors

>Paper under double-blind review

This sort of behavior is not limited to researchers from those cultures. One of the highest profile academic frauds to date was from a German. Look up the Schön scandal.

> these are cultures where they think this kind of behavior is actually acceptable, they would assume it's the fault of the journal for accepting the paper. they don't see the loss of reputation to be a personal scar because they instead attribute blame to the game.

I have a relative who lived in a country in the East for several years, and he says that this is just factually true.

The vast majority of people who disagree with this statement have never actually lived in these cultures. They just hallucinate that they have because they want that statement to be false so badly.

...but, simultaneously, I'm also not seeing where you see the authors of the papers - I only see hallucitation authors. e.g. at the link for the first paper submission (https://openreview.net/forum?id=WPgaGP4sVS), there doesn't appear to be any authors listed. Are you confusing the hallucinated citation authors with the primary paper authors?

In that case, I would expect Eastern authors to be over-represented, because they just publish a lot more.

im not sure if you are gonna get downvoted so im sticking a limb out to cop any potential collateral damage in the name of finding out whether the common inhabitant of this forum considers the idea of low trust vs high trust societies to be inherently racist