MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345336946 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.04.033

RETRACTED: USP1 Regulates Cellular Senescence by Controlling Genomic Integrity

2016· article· en· W2345336946 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Müge Öğrünç, Ricardo Iván Martínez‐Zamudio, Paul Ben Sadoun, Gregory J. Dore, Hélène Schwerer, Philippe Pasero, Jean-Marc Lemaı̂tre, Anne Dejean, Oliver Bischof

Post-publication record

NatureRetraction
ReasonError in Data;Error in Image;Manipulation of Images;
Date2/23/2021 0:00
Flagged by OpenAlex?Yes

Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLigue Contre le CancerFondation ARC pour la Recherche sur le CancerAgence Nationale de la RechercheCNIB
KeywordsReuseBlotResearch integrityRetractComputer scienceEditorial boardLawLaw and economicsSociologyPolitical scienceBiologyGeneticsLibrary sciencePublic relationsGeneMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted at the request of the authors. We, the authors, were made aware of irregularities associated in western blots shown in our article. We have further investigated the matter and found that the paper contains multiple examples of incorrect data use and image flipping in four figures, including the vertical flipping and reuse of the panel in Figures 1B and 3D, similar flipping and incorrect blot image in Figure 2C, and incorrect data use in Figure 4A. All of these figures were assembled by the corresponding author (O.B.) who takes full responsibility for the inaccuracies. Under these circumstances, we believe that the most responsible course of action is to retract the paper. We sincerely apologize to the scientific community for any inconvenience resulting from the publication and retraction of this manuscript.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0090.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2120.165

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207