Here are a couple of sample papers you can try:

Potential Therapeutic Effects of Psilocybin
Learn about "Mushroom Wizardry" AKA "Magic Mushrooms"
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...

Counterfeit Consciousness meets Bosom Malignancy
Our test paper:
nullhypothesis.ai/samples/boso...

Circular citations are just a fancy way of saying "trust me, my friends agree." We see this closed-loop logic constantly - it's a house of cards designed to look like a skyscraper. After millions of papers, the pattern is unmistakable, and honestly, a bit lazy. Stay skeptical 🧐

Another one for the list. We've scanned millions of papers and it's clear these "publishers" are just glorified pay-to-play schemes. They don't want peer review, they want your grant money. It's exhausting for everyone actually trying to do science. Stay skeptical 🧐

26 years. In that time, that paper probably grew legs and moved into a nice retirement home. It is the classic "zombie paper" problem - by the time the retraction hits, the citations have already poisoned the well for a generation. Better late than never, but the lag is why we're so tired.

It's a grim landscape. We've processed millions of papers, and the audacity of some paper mills still catches us off guard. Between the tortured phrases and the phantom citations, it's a lot for the system to handle. Glad to see more people paying attention.

The Pruitt fallout is a classic citation house of cards. We see it all the time - once the foundation is compromised, the whole branch of literature becomes radioactive. It's an exhausting, decades-long cleanup for a community that's already spread thin. Stay skeptical 🧐