Resolves YES if the following arxiv link labeled 'Main paper' is updated to include a retraction of the original results, in 2023. NO otherwise.
Small experimental adjustments or clarifications won't count. The paper is allowed to produce a genuine new discovery, as long as the claim to have produced room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductors is retracted. If there is a disagreement among the authors, any author registering a retraction with arxiv is sufficient. If any authors request a retraction and arxiv does not comply, I may still accept it as a retraction as long as arxiv confirms they received the request.
Statements by journalists or other scientists won't count.
Main paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12008
Companion paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12037
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ10,010 | |
| 2 | Ṁ2,875 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1,676 | |
| 4 | Ṁ1,635 | |
| 5 | Ṁ1,594 |
People are also trading
arXiv have responded:
Dear arXiv user,
Thank you for reaching out with your concerns. It is arXiv policy not to discuss the moderation or decisions of individual submissions with third-parties.
arXiv does not do peer review or validation of the scientific content of submissions. You can find out more information about moderation here:
https://info.arxiv.org/help/moderation/index.html
Regards,
arXiv SupportIt seems arXiv was never going to confirm request for retraction. Since no withdrawn paper was uploaded, and since arXiv are not officially confirming a request for retraction from any of the other authors, the default resolution here with no qualifying evidence is NO.
I would've resolved YES had there been arXiv confirmation. The reason this possibility was added was: I knew the paper was likely to be disputed, and was worried that the uploader was a "rogue author" who would stubbornly refuse to withdraw the paper and who has control over the arXiv account and arXiv would be unlikely to adjudicate the dispute.
So while not a general principle for academic papers, for LK-99 specifically, it seemed likely the other authors would want a retraction but be unable to take it down because of "procedural impotence'. I thought of this possibility when I wrote the market, and explicitly wanted to count it as a retraction even if the other authors were powerless.
Unfortunately, since arXiv declines to confirm, I should've allowed for a different source like Korean newspapers, confirmation with relevant Korean universities, or statements from LK-99 authors. Then this market may have resolved YES months ago. Apologies for my oversight.
A request to retract is not the same as a retraction!!!
If one of the authors requested that a paper be retracted, that is not the same as a formal retraction. Even for peer-reviewed publications, for the paper to be retracted, it must either be requested by the corresponding author or done by the publisher.
I've contacted arXiv moderation to ask if any formal request to retract/withdraw the paper was made by any of the authors. Since it is New Year's, it wouldn't surprise me if it takes a couple days to get a response.
I think an arXiv retraction is just uploading a new version of the paper, so I don't think that will happen.
edit: removed stupid comment caused by me not reading description
@jacksonpolack "If any authors request a retraction and arxiv does not comply, I may still accept it as a retraction as long as arxiv confirms they received the request."
On the other hand if they did not do it, they likely would not bother to reply to someone asking if they were asked.
NO is the "null action" so if nothing happens such as 1. Upload of a new withdrawn paper or 2. Confirmation from arXiv of such request, then it does resolve NO. I won't NA if they don't reply.
I would've bought this market up to 10% as a trader, but since I'm the market creator I wanted to avoid a predictable resolution controversy.
@Mira Maybe 0.6% is too low but there is nowhere near a 10% chance they are going to reply, "yeah, we received a retraction request, but we ignored it." i.e. there could be a 10% chance that they received one, but not that they will confirm that fact in these circumstances.
@Mira “Any of the authors” is insufficient to resolve YES. It would need to be by the corresponding author, at the very least!
@KevinBurke Nope. I still have to email them and ask if they ever received a retraction request, even if arxiv policy was to ignore it. Remember there were those news articles where they claimed to have contacted the moderators, so entirely possible this resolves YES.
Refutations keep growing stronger! https://www.cell.com/matter/fulltext/S2590-2385(23)00564-7
An alternate explanations of results and no reproductions in sight.
This market keeps falling, but what do people think the time decay is? @Mira is clearly waiting until the close date to reach out to someone at arXiv and try to confirm the reports that an author requested retraction.
@ErickBall If they received a retraction request, you'd think they'd eventually act on it. The lack of them acting on it is some evidence they haven't received it, increasing with time.
@ErickBall that's not how arXiv works. If you want to 'retract' your paper you just upload a new version with a retraction note. That takes 24h to get published.
@AlexbGoode Then there would still be time decay since the possibility that they would do that on any particular day keeps failing.
