14 ms·

Scandal at America's top science fair

290 points by potench 2y ago

pstrateman 2y ago
That's not only scientific fraud, it's real felony fraud. Maybe community service equivalent to 50,000.00 at federal minimum wage would sort him out.
- thriftwy 2y ago
  The child is nothing to be blamed for, it is a 100% problem of the organizers. For a 17 years old, even throwing together such work is already an worthwhile result. Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing.
  - Xelbair 2y ago
    >The child is nothing to be blamed for, it is a 100% problem of the organizers. If I,as a child, stole 50k USD, surely i would get thrown into the jail, or juvie. >For a 17 years old, even throwing together such work is already an worthwhile result. Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing. There's difference between remixing and outright stealing with intent to deceive, for monetary gain. Even more so when one's under university tutelage, and comes from well off family - where 50k USD matters way less.
    - thriftwy 2y ago
      This case only became severe because they chose to award these money to compilated work with no attribution. If they didn't reward this specific work it would be a non-issue. So by induction blame lies on the offering part. Doing subpar work is not stealing. Come on, we've been through "intellectual property" already and now this.
      - Xelbair 2y ago
        you are doing some heavy mental gymnastics right now. What he did was a crime, reward or not, and he should be old enough to understand why that was immoral and possible consequences of it. aren't you affiliated with him somehow?
        thriftwy 2y ago
        > What he did was a crime No! It wasn't. I'll bet no court will agree with you. Next question.
  - JKCalhoun 2y ago
    > Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing. Yeah, in the arts maybe, but not in the sciences.
    - thriftwy 2y ago
      You have enough life experience to know the difference. Do teens? Are you confident in that? Are you a child psychologist? Do you have any? How many papers did you publish?
      - JKCalhoun 2y ago
        I'm only saying you don't excuse it because they are teens.
  - isef_researcher 2y ago
    If his project was just shoddy scientifically, that wouldn't be an issue. I'm sure 90% of the projects are like that. He committed deliberate fraud, stealing other people's work (including past kid winners!), and won 50k for it. That's not "throwing something together" it's deliberate cheating.
    - thriftwy 2y ago
      If they've already awarded him these $50k, congratulations and they should probably close the project down. They've failed basic validation of inputs before transferring $50k to a fradulent competitor. You do not fail that hard by accident. It speaks of prolonged negligence and as I've said elsewhere, their whole portfolio needs to be rechecked. As for research ethics, not everybody is a researcher and thus has the same ethic. For me the guys who get bogus computer-generated articles through reviews and into journals are genius, even though people with research background may see that as a violation. Tough life.
  - CaliforniaKarl 2y ago
    > The child is nothing to be blamed for, it is a 100% problem of the organizers. I am surprised that the organizers did not catch this, though I don't know enough to know how much time the organizers had. > For a 17 years old, even throwing together such work is already an worthwhile result. Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing. For kids, in general, if one kid makes a claim ("I made this," or "This game cartridge is mine") that turns out to be false, there is generally some sort of comeuppance. That could be as simple as the kid losing respect within their peer group, or it could be as serious as parents being informed about the kid commiting a petty crime. This is important, because it instills society's values (such as they are) in the child. For example, what if kid A steals a game cartridge from kid B, and then kid B retaliates by shooting and killing kid A? That response is generally frowned upon, in most parts of the world. In my opinion, it would be fine if "the child" was presenting a poster showing the current state of research in microbial recycling of plastics. That's a cool thing for a high school senior or college freshman to do. But to take existing research (stealing), manipulate images (lying), and cast it as their own work (stealing and lying), on a national stage, that requires an appropriate comeuppance.
    - thriftwy 2y ago
      My point, if you can't get adult professionals with wages admit they fk'd up, there's zero and even negative expectations of unpaid teenager contestants. And that's what I am seeing happening right now. You have unacceptable amount of leniency towards organizers, in "don't know how much time did they have". They should've had enough to scrutinize their short list. Perhaps it all looks like the winning submission.
  - distances 2y ago
    17 year olds are of course fully responsible for their own academic claims and creations. You would get expelled from many high schools for much smaller cases of plagiarism.
    - thriftwy 2y ago
      Do you really get expelled from high school in the USA? Isn't that basically mandatory education? And for plagiarism? I'd see some evidence.
      - dagw 2y ago
        Big difference between public and private schools. Getting expelled from a public school is pretty hard, you basically have to do something seriously illegal involving guns and/or drugs. Getting expelled from a private school is an entirely different thing. They can expel you for a lot of things, and basically anything that makes the school look bad in the eyes of prospective future 'customers' is high on that list. Especially among more prestigious schools.
      - distances 2y ago
        I don't know, my anecdotes would be from a private school in Europe where a family member is a teacher. They take plagiarism seriously, but also can expel students a lot easier than public schools can.
        thriftwy 2y ago
        The point being is that plagiarism at a known private school that you pay good money for and hope to rely on, is something you will give much more consideration than sending work to a science fair to see if it will stick to a wall or not. Neither are particularly good behaviors, but as a "computer guy" I think your public-facing API (science fair admissions) should validate its inputs. There are people out there who send know malicious requests to endpoints, you know. Instead of blaming an underage student I'd reevaluate all of their prior nominations. Chances of dragons being there.
liendolucas 2y ago
Isn't this equally embarrassing for the people that decided to award him? I mean just looking at those images or even imagining the sort of research and equipment that would take to achieve something like this, shouldn't have raised red flags easily?
- mike_hearn 2y ago
  Sure, but it happens all the time with "professional" science too. This guy did nothing that isn't seen every day in the literature. The reason these people didn't check the claims is because they have an extremely strong culture of never checking any claims. If they did they might discover the claims were false, and then they might feel obliged to attack a colleague who realistically will be protected by their institution, and who might be a peer reviewer or even colleague in future. So, ignorance is bliss.
- jerf 2y ago
  Consider the distribution of the entered projects. Due to the selection process (think evolution-style selection rather than "human judging" selection), all the projects, whether purely-student-driven, student-driven with just a dash of parental help, half-and-half, and the student basically along for the ride as the parent runs a project, are in one big pile. Is there going to be a bright, sharp dividing line? Especially in light of the fact that quality is only going to be loosely correlated with external help? Perhaps this is an unpopular call but my personal opinion is that the whole idea of a "national scale" science project contest is irredeemably flawed and the correct answer is simply to discard it. It is a common flaw in thinking, often expressed by many commenters zealous to "correct" other people, that if you can't draw a bright sharp unarguable line between the various elements of a group of some sort that you can't claim the group "exists". This is nonsense; almost every practical grouping scheme will always have borderline cases or exceptions. But there does need to be some sort of actual grouping, or some sort of relatively objective way to sort and categorize the elements, that is accessible to the sorter. In this case, while from the objective divine perspective maybe we could create an objective standard for who got "too much help" to be qualified, there is no conceivable world in which the contest judges could ever get sufficiently accurate information to be presented with anything other than a very smooth gradation that they simply will have no handle to make a correct decision with. So the incentives will always be to get as much help as possible and then have human-intelligent agents doing their best to fool the human-intelligent judges, and that's just a hopeless situation. Of course, the contest will not be shut down. But what can happen and what may well happen is that it will get more and more embroiled in controversy each year as the game-theoretic local optimum approach for the contestants each year becomes more and more to accuse their competition of being "too helped" and thus take out the competition until it is simply a farce. This is the worst game-theory case for cooperation; very limited repetition of plays by any given participant, most likely one, so no reason to care about the integrity of the contest for next year when they won't even be participating most likely.
up2isomorphism 2y ago
Sadly he actually has a big chance to survive and strive in today's science community, as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis.
poulpy123 2y ago
I'm baffled by the idea of making science competition with so much prize money for teenagers. For me it's antithetic with the goal of scientific research and can only fail in the long term. As a side note, the real responsible here is not the tennagers, but the organizers that didn't manage to catch a fraud so obvious
- strikelaserclaw 2y ago
  most of these teenagers already come from upper middle class (professional parents) backgrounds, they don't need the money, they know that winning it is a guaranteed admission to MIT or Harvard. Getting admitted to top schools today is an order of magnitude tougher than it was even 10 years ago.
  - poulpy123 2y ago
    Maybe it's different in the US but everywhere else in the world 50K is a really huge amount of money for everyone but the 0.1% richest.But anyway if as you same it's also a ticket for the best schools, the rewards is still huge beside the money. I would even say it's even worse like that, because attending the best school give so many opportunities
- xnorswap 2y ago
  The amount of prize money shocked me too, I put it down to a culture I don't understand. See also $50,000 prize money for what's called a "Spelling Bee": Asking children to spell words correctly. I feel so far removed from understanding that culture that I feel like I can't criticize it.
jgalt212 2y ago
Reading this article and comments it seems that cheating is just as common in the Tour de France as the Regeneron.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
adr1an 2y ago
I will take the liberty to expreas my most profound cynicism. Didn't Google fake some of its AI showcases recently? Didn't Apple fake stuff about their iPhone on some presentation? I believe this goes beyond a young person "mistake". And no. It's not just to the universities. There are plenty of institutions involved. There are commercial successes from technology corporations to take inspiration from. The lack of consequences stems from a judicial power that's made in an extreme conservative set of rules. So, everything is on fire. Or should be. And don't get me started on research journals and editorials...
- riku_iki 2y ago
  you can start with politicians who win the race using their lying skills and who decide our policies and future.
paulcole 2y ago
When I was 16 I did a project on whether plants could be used to remove heavy metals from soil. I don’t know why I did this but I did a nitrate test on the plants (because I had been putting lead nitrate into the soil) and drew the conclusion that it must’ve worked. About 2 weeks before the city science fair I realized my error (none of my teachers had said anything). So in an attempt to lose, I made my backboard as bad as possible. I didn’t use scissors or glue, I just tore the paper and used masking tape. Long story short, I have no idea how, but despite my best efforts, I won the city science fair including an HP-48 graphing calculator and a trip to the state science fair. At the state science fair my backboard (you had to use the same one as the city contest) was mocked by much more studious 8-year olds. I found out that teachers weren’t allowed in the exhibition hall so I just abandoned my space and went to the beach. I did not win the state science fair.
- tocs3 2y ago
  Did you tell the judge or could you get a sense of what they thought?
  - paulcole 2y ago
    I probably talked to 3 or 4 judges and explained to all of them exactly what I did and never lied. But I also wasn’t forthcoming about the error. I just explained the experiment and the result. None of them asked any questions that I couldn’t answer. I remember I was sitting next to a girl who had an amazing project. At the end of the day they called her name for 2nd place and I remember thinking, “Wow, who beat her?!” And then they call my name… I thought it was either all a mistake or that maybe the judges thought I was mentally challenged on account of my backboard and it was a pity situation? In hindsight, perhaps an emperor has no clothes situation where everybody sees the error but nobody wants to be the first one to call it out?
- jmercouris 2y ago
  why would you try to lose instead of just writing about the null hypothesis? why even make a submission?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
readthenotes1 2y ago
There's a good book, Punished By Rewards.
- hilux 2y ago
  Borrowed - thanks!
  - readthenotes1 2y ago
    There's more to it, but I found the advice "Praise effort, not results" to incredibly useful.
sgerenser 2y ago
Sounds like someone is a member of the Dan Ariely school of science. There might be a professorship at Duke in his future.
- throwawaymaths 2y ago
  Home hellinga also at duke!
zimnmley 2y ago
[flagged]
- mathattack 2y ago
  This version is much better, and captures the juvinality of it all.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Science fairs always have hints of fraud around them. Many of the children putting out incredibly advanced research, beyond their capacity, are benefiting from their parents’ expertise, or friends of family, or access to labs, and such. It’s not talked about much but has been an issue for decades. As a side note, the criticism around this incident seems to have some racial tones. It’s weird to see tweets referring to participants as the “Indian guy” and “Chinese guy”. Or is that just me?
- tbyehl 2y ago
  > Or is that just me? Click around on Karlstack some more.
- throwawaysleep 2y ago
  Definitely racial tones. Asian countries are frequently accused of copying, cheating, and stealing intellectual property from others, so it matches what people assume about members of those races.
  - miningape 2y ago
    I think this comes down to "face culture" where its "better" to lie and be caught than be forthright from the beginning. The people used to / raised in face cultures think this is normal and acceptable behavior (because: hey everyone else is doing this I should too - If I don't I will fall behind), whereas those from more "honest" cultures tend to despise the behaviour as it makes work less trustworthy and tends to give an unfair advantage. Notice how the reason for and against doing this is the same: unfairness. Face cultures tend to embrace systemic unfairness as "fair" whereas non face cultures tend to call it as it is. What's interesting is that countries "with a face culture" tend to have higher levels of corruption and unfair business practices but also much higher levels of societal cohesion and trust. In other words, the more likely you are to save face the less likely you are to live in a democracy. And the less likely you are to trust institutions/organisations the more likely that they are trustworthy.
    - 2y ago
uneekname 2y ago
I was a finalist at the 2017 ISEF and it was quite an experience. A lot of super smart kids there and we all had fun living it up in Los Angeles. There was a stark contrast between those of us who had designed our projects completely ourselves, and those who had significant mentors/lab affiliations. No hate to high schoolers getting valuable STEM experience at local universities, but Regeneron should do more to differentiate between these different projects.
- levi-turner 2y ago
  > There was a stark contrast between those of us who had designed our projects completely ourselves, and those who had significant mentors/lab affiliations. Love to see someone confirming my cynicism. In high school, a science teacher asked me if I were interested in doing something for the (then) Intel Talend Search. I looked up the previous finalists / winners and noticed that an overwhelming majority of the kids were in cities with top tier research universities (or did math stuff, those kids' locations varied a bit more). At that point, my spider sense told me that it wasn't worth the effort to try to compete without the backing / mentoring of a credentialed adult.
- isef_researcher 2y ago
  Not saying this phenomenon of having connections isn't true, but also, kinda unrelated to the issue here, no? This kid plagiarized & had serious research misconduct. The fact that he has connections via his sister & dad is not the problem imo.
  - uneekname 2y ago
    I agree that research misconduct is different than what I'm describing. I think that students who conduct serious research with local universities (for example) should be celebrated. But I do think the issues are related in that Regeneron needs to think about the (lack of) systems in place for vetting and supporting projects of all types.
- uneekname 2y ago
  Correction: Regeneron is the sponsor, it is the Society for Science that is responsible. When I was there the sponsor was Intel, so I didn't immediately recognize the meaning of "Regeneron"
throwawaysleep 2y ago
I wrote an earlier reply to someone about how all I learned from the several mandatory ethics courses is that the people who cheat tend to be winners even after their punishment, if any. I bet that even after all this, that kid will still be better off having cheated than not.
- capybara_2020 2y ago
  I am curious, what is the definition of winners here? Do they make more money or do they invent more successful products/ideas or is it something else?
  - throwawaysleep 2y ago
    Money, social acceptance, access to desirable partners, positions of prestige, etc. All the nice things we wrestle over in life. Anything you compete for except the “he was a good man” phrasing in obituaries, the cheaters usually get to have. Even if caught. Not cheating outside of a few really heinous crimes such as murder (killing your science fair opponent wouldn’t be a winning strategy if caught) is an altruistic action.
    - JKCalhoun 2y ago
      > Not cheating outside of a few really heinous crimes such as murder (killing your science fair opponent wouldn’t be a winning strategy if caught) is an altruistic action. I can only imagine someone trying to justify cheating would say that. Cheating on your spouse is okay? Not cheating on your spouse altruistic? That concept is alien to me. I don't understand someone having no self-respect or being completely numb to how others feel. I know some exist, but I can't comprehend. If there's "winning" in life it's through living a good and happy life. Some time past our teenage years I think all but the most self-adsorbed people realize that being kind and respectful to others also contributes to our own happiness.
    - rendall 2y ago
      > Not cheating... is an altruistic action. Wow that's dark.
userbinator 2y ago
[flagged]
- defrost 2y ago
  What are you attempting to say with "scare quotes" and conspiratorial nods to The Consensus?
  - jgord 2y ago
    Slightly offtopic : there seems to be a lack of articles loosely related to climate change / green-tech on HN... given the amount of new tech and the size and urgency of warming, Id expect to see more discussion/argument. It seems to be a self-censored topic on HN, for reasons I genuinely cant guess.
    - fnordian_slip 2y ago
      There are a lot of climate change deniers on hn, though they have mostly moved on to denying the human impact on climate instead, after outright denial became harder and harder to argue for. Some have even already moved on to the third phase, "it's too late now, so we might as well not do anything", but these are still few. It's sad, but education and intelligence do not guarantee understanding or wisdom.
    - userbinator 2y ago
      "urgency"? That's what they want you to think... and yes there are lots of articles but they get quickly flagged by those who don't believe in that religion.
      - jgord 2y ago
        Can you define "that religion" .. I'm guessing you mean "people who believe that climate change / global warming is caused by humans burning carbon fuels and emitting CO2" .. ie. Im assuming, but want to check, that you are one of the many people who believe climate warming is happening, but is caused by natural processes, rather than human burning of carbon fuels ? Im aware of polls that show around half of people think that. If say 3/4 of HN users agree with you, it explains pretty well why articles on climate change are flagged as "political" or such - which is my assumption, after reading your comment.
zachlatta 2y ago
It's frustrating that we encourage fraudulent behavior for the college application process. I blame the judges, and college admissions departments. It orients the entire USA public education system around training sociopathic behavior into teenagers. We tell young people the best way to get ahead in life is through exaggerating. Then we train them to do it in their college essays and extracurriculars. Gross.
- BeFlatXIII 2y ago
  That's why admissions should be tests-only. No interviews, no personality scores, no intentional shaping of the leadership class.
- WillPostForFood 2y ago
  We need lottery based admissions. Let schools set a minimum test score, and anyone over that goes into lottery for admissions. Kill off essays, extra curriculars, club sports, summer programs, AP tests, Legacy admits, early applications, and let kids have some life again.
  - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
    And the cool second order effect of this, is that all the energy currently invested in this zero sum competition will be redirected into a plan B for kids that don't make the cut. Which prompts all sorts of interesting ideas like, why don't we have more prestigious universities? Did we decide that there was only so much science that needed done? Or were we trying to put a protective moat round the children of the elites so they didn't need to compete? And then put all our energies into ensuring our kid scraped into the bottom rung of that protected elite and didn't end up on the scrap heap?
    - WitCanStain 2y ago
      >why don't we have more prestigious universities? Legacy families need prestigious universities to be rare and exclusive so that them having gone there increases in value. They already know that their kids will get in so making top universities more exclusive only has benefits for them.
_lvbh 2y ago
One of the details that strike me is that the cheater comes from a fairly wealthy background and has no need for that prize money at all. They have much more to lose than gain and this doesn’t seem rational at all.
- saagarjha 2y ago
  They don’t need the money. They want to win so they can get into college.
  - armchairhacker 2y ago
    Googling his name brings up this article as the third result. Someone in whatever college he has been accepted to will surely discover and spread rumors, which he can’t really defend against because all the evidence supports that he did it. If he tries to publish anything, people will see his name and immediately question its legitimacy. If he gets an offer and the employer finds out they may rescind it because they can’t trust him. Maybe he won’t outright get his admission rescinded, but I can’t see how a prestigious college is worth more than an intact reputation (I’m sure that without this award he still would’ve been accepted to a great community college at worst, and with his research internship assuming good AP scores, he may have even got into his top choice).
    - krisoft 2y ago
      Sure. The gist of what you write is true. Being caught cheating harms his future prospects. You are thinking that now because he was already caught. But when he decided to cheat he didn’t know he will be caught. Probably he either estimated the chanches of him it wrong. Thinking perhaps that he will do a better job with the cheating, or that nobody looks that hard. Or he assumed lower consequences. Perhaps assuming if they catch him they just won’t give him the award, as opposed to making a big deal out of it.
      - throwaway48476 2y ago
        If the chance of getting caught is low enough the expected value of cheating is positive.
dataflow 2y ago
> The image boxed in red above is a falsified image taken from online, and has had mirroring performed in the hopes that no one would notice. This probably won't happen in the future... because future competitors will learn from this mistake and know to run their image generation through AI so that their images are "novel"... > Don't mentors have to sign off along the way? That part I don't get... Can someone explain this? Is it plausible the mentors genuinely had no idea?
snickerbockers 2y ago
>Everyone makes mistakes — Lord knows I did plenty of stupid, immoral things when I was 17 — and there is always the opportunity for growth and redemption. when did the definition of 'mistake' change to encompass actions done on purpose? a mistake is when your data is invalid because you did the math wrong, not when all your data is simultaneously false and plagiarized. i don't mean to disagree with the notion that his entire life shouldn't be ruined over one incident at a science fair when he's a teenager, but let's not make it sound like this is a careless blunder that could happen to anybody.
- edanm 2y ago
  > when did the definition of 'mistake' change to encompass actions done on purpose? It didn't change, it's always been that way. From Google search: > an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong. > Example: "coming here was a mistake"
- throwawaysleep 2y ago
  We generally consider anyone under 18 now to basically not have capacity to make decisions. Therefore anything they do that is bad is a mistake.
- halayli 2y ago
  A mistake is not exclusive to actions, it encompass judgement as well. Misguided actions start from a misguided judgement.
- physicles 2y ago
  Those stupid, immoral things that the author did at 17 were also done on purpose. The mistake is in the reasoning that led to the decision to do the action. Pai's mistake was _deciding_ to commit research fraud, and then doing it.
- smogcutter 2y ago
  Most mistakes aren’t accidents, plenty of accidents aren’t mistakes.
- bee_rider 2y ago
notjoemama 2y ago
In reading this, I am reminded of a YouTube video by CGP Grey about how anger is more viral than any other emotional reaction online, including love. But then I think, isn't this one of those times where at least some level of annoyance is justified? Except, there's nothing I can do about it. Does making more people aware, that can't do anything about it, improve the situation? Or is awareness pointless because of how transient it is? And, what if the next great filter isn't great, but a series of smaller exponential filters pulled into a tight timeframe by the advancement of technology? I probably just need more sleep.
- JKCalhoun 2y ago
  Not anger, justice. Most of us crave justice porn, and only when I am feeling in my most generous, zen-like mood can I find fault in that.
- isef_researcher 2y ago
  There is a reason to increase awareness - to put pressure on Society for Science to take action. So far they still have not made a public statement, have disabled their YouTube comments etc, and seem to just be waiting for this all to blow over.
  - HelloMyNeighbor 2y ago
    They are taking action - the google doc has been updated to show this. They aren't taking PUBLIC action and I suspect won't make a PUBLIC statement until the investigation is over. How about you give them some time to go through the process?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - isef_researcher 2y ago
      Very naive take. They have only responded to some journalist who pressured them so that it wouldn't become a news story and are claiming they're investigating. But then go on to post on Youtube, share the press release with media outlets, etc. They're clearly waiting for attention to die down without having to get any public scrutiny for this big fuck up, b/c useful idiots like you will say "they're doing something!!"
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
relwin 2y ago
My kids attended the same high school district that this student's school, Canyon Crest Academy (CCA), is part of. My youngest has friends that attended CCA and I asked him once why he didn't want to attend (it's an open school district) -- his reply is "all they do is study for AP tests." So I'm thinking there might be other pressures (i.e. parental) to perform, and this student may have responded in a desperate fashion.
- JKCalhoun 2y ago
  Raising my kids in the Bay Area, I certainly am aware of what I call unhealthy competitiveness in even the public schools. If you think this is an unfortunate way to raise a child — in that kind of overly competitive environment – then there is a lot of blame to go around. The difficulty of getting into a UC school being an obvious place to start.
  - riku_iki 2y ago
    > The difficulty of getting into a UC school being an obvious place to start. its obvious that there is competition to get to top school. So, it is question of setting expectation to get there and not necessary difficulty (which is natural and given)
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
fattegourmet 2y ago
Hope he ends up in Tarkington College. 'What's the hurry, son?'
thaumaturgy 2y ago
This is pretty similar to some fraud in professional science that's more common than it should be. A few people have started to make it a hobby to detect copy-and-pasted and altered images in published research: Fabrication discovered in prominent Alzheimer's research: https://www.science.org/content/article/potential-fabrication-research-images-threatens-key-theory-alzheimers-disease https://www.science.org/content/article/potential-fabricatio... "Sleuths" uncovering fraud and getting retractions for thousands of papers: https://apnews.com/article/danafarber-cancer-scandal-harvard-sleuth-science-389dc2464f25bca736183607bc57415c https://apnews.com/article/danafarber-cancer-scandal-harvard... and https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/how-a-sharp-eyed-scientist-became-biologys-image-detective https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/how-a-sharp-eyed-... and https://retractionwatch.com/2022/07/22/papers-in-croce-case-with-blatantly-obvious-problems-still-arent-retracted-after-misconduct-investigation-sleuth/ https://retractionwatch.com/2022/07/22/papers-in-croce-case-... So I'm dismayed but not surprised that the incentives driving fraud in research science are trickling down into pre-college science fairs. A cynical person might conclude that we're just training the next generation of scientists to be better at fraud.
- isef_researcher 2y ago
  [flagged]
nsajko 2y ago
Source, "Open Letter to Regeneron ISEF": https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e4vjzp6JgClCFXkbNOweXZnoRnGWcM6vHeglDH1DmGM/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e4vjzp6JgClCFXkbNOweXZno...
- refurb 2y ago
  Wow, the entire project was basically copy pasted from other work. What gets me, is there are clear scientific errors (talking about RNA fragments but should have been protein fragments). This would have been immediately caught by someone with a basic knowledge of the field. How do they judge the projects if not having subject matter experts closely review them and the results?
ipython 2y ago
Many, many years ago I participated in ISEF, so this is personally disappointing to me. I'll echo some of the sibling comments about the difference between kids who did the project alone versus parents/lab mentors who ... ahem ... contributed significantly to the project. In contrast, my project was entirely self-made and therefore not very impressive, but it had some gimmicks in how I presented it which managed to impress judges at the school and regional levels, enough to send me to ISEF. ISEF was an amazing experience, especially as a kid from a school that was nothing special. Our school was so excited that they hired a public speaking specialist to work with me to prepare. Looking back, that training in public speaking directly contributed to many successes in my career decades down the line. Plus the experience of going to ISEF still brings back positive memories. I never felt like I belonged - there were some amazingly smart kids there - but the social camaraderie and the ability to meet kids that thought it was cool to be smart was eye opening. As far as "making mistakes when you're 17" - yeah, I made mistakes then too, but I certainly paid the price for them. Especially when you make conscious decisions to defraud and falsify, if these allegations can be proven. There should be serious consequences for this.
- fransje26 2y ago
  > Especially when you make conscious decisions to defraud and falsify To earn $55,000...
thriftwy 2y ago
The elephant in the room is that 17 years old should not be writing long scientific articles witha lot of supporting material. They are not paid for that and they are expected to study first. We should definitely expect to see short, brilliant discoveries from teenagers when they notice a gem in a heap of data adults discarded. But not that kind of bureaqucratic nightmare style scientific papers where the result is attained mostly through prespiration, not inspiration. 100% great for already learned and paid adults, being fraud or exploitation of adolescents.
fergie 2y ago
We shouldn't internationally name and shame 17 year olds on HN.
- imiric 2y ago
  Their name is already widespread online. A niche forum linking to an article that mentions it will hardly make an impact. Besides, this behavior deserves shaming, revoking of their prize, and maybe even legal repercussions. A 17 year old is practically an adult in many jurisdictions, and if they're doing this at that age, they will only continue to commit fraud later. Ethics should be learned early on in life, and a 17 year old should know better. Let this be a lesson.
mihaaly 2y ago
> These actions, while serious, should not define Pai’s entire life Too late for that. Very late. Unluckily his mind is set on pretending too much. Which is ubiquitous and actually encouraged in life to a great degree (not like this should be an excuse for adapting). What is not late is to seek a different career in life. Be an influencer, praised youtuber or a political adviser perhaps, but the science world needs much different mindset. His reputation is annihilated by himself beyond repair anyway. The useful side of the story: be it a learning experience for the others.
- autoexec 2y ago
  I wish reality were closer to how you see it, but there are people who do far worse to their reputation, but continue to have careers. In the US a doctor can tell their patients that the diseases they have are caused by demon sperm and that alien technology is in their medications/treatments and that doctor still gets to keep their practice/medical license. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stella_Immanuel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stella_Immanuel) Police officers can lie, steal, rape, or murder forcing them to resign or causing them to get fired, but they have no problems getting another job as a police officer the next county over (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fired-cops-routinely-rehired-dc-california-2022-11-07/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fired-cops-routinel...). Scientists can repeatedly fabricate evidence for corporations and have long careers doing so. The scientists hired by the tobacco industry to lie are also used by the oil industry and are deciding what chemicals are safe to put in our food (https://publicintegrity.org/politics/food-safety-scientists-have-ties-to-big-tobacco/ https://publicintegrity.org/politics/food-safety-scientists-...) This guy probably has a long and profitable career as a scientist ahead of him.
  - mihaaly 2y ago
    Right. The way the science community carry out their activity is increasingly shameful, I was thinking about an idealistic situation still, that is right. He will definitely have a fruitful career in a science leadership position, possibly not only in China. Scary examples. Scary. It is increasinlgy benefitial to live life with a great deal of ignorance just to feel worthwhile getting out of the bed in the morning and put one tiny straw into the big haystack of the humanity, while others put it on fire all the time for their own personal warmth.

290 points by potench 2y ago

That's not only scientific fraud, it's real felony fraud. Maybe community service equivalent to 50,000.00 at federal minimum wage would sort him out.

thriftwy 2y ago
The child is nothing to be blamed for, it is a 100% problem of the organizers. For a 17 years old, even throwing together such work is already an worthwhile result. Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing.
- Xelbair 2y ago
  >The child is nothing to be blamed for, it is a 100% problem of the organizers. If I,as a child, stole 50k USD, surely i would get thrown into the jail, or juvie. >For a 17 years old, even throwing together such work is already an worthwhile result. Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing. There's difference between remixing and outright stealing with intent to deceive, for monetary gain. Even more so when one's under university tutelage, and comes from well off family - where 50k USD matters way less.
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    This case only became severe because they chose to award these money to compilated work with no attribution. If they didn't reward this specific work it would be a non-issue. So by induction blame lies on the offering part. Doing subpar work is not stealing. Come on, we've been through "intellectual property" already and now this.
    - Xelbair 2y ago
      you are doing some heavy mental gymnastics right now. What he did was a crime, reward or not, and he should be old enough to understand why that was immoral and possible consequences of it. aren't you affiliated with him somehow?
      - thriftwy 2y ago
        > What he did was a crime No! It wasn't. I'll bet no court will agree with you. Next question.
- JKCalhoun 2y ago
  > Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing. Yeah, in the arts maybe, but not in the sciences.
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    You have enough life experience to know the difference. Do teens? Are you confident in that? Are you a child psychologist? Do you have any? How many papers did you publish?
    - JKCalhoun 2y ago
      I'm only saying you don't excuse it because they are teens.
- isef_researcher 2y ago
  If his project was just shoddy scientifically, that wouldn't be an issue. I'm sure 90% of the projects are like that. He committed deliberate fraud, stealing other people's work (including past kid winners!), and won 50k for it. That's not "throwing something together" it's deliberate cheating.
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    If they've already awarded him these $50k, congratulations and they should probably close the project down. They've failed basic validation of inputs before transferring $50k to a fradulent competitor. You do not fail that hard by accident. It speaks of prolonged negligence and as I've said elsewhere, their whole portfolio needs to be rechecked. As for research ethics, not everybody is a researcher and thus has the same ethic. For me the guys who get bogus computer-generated articles through reviews and into journals are genius, even though people with research background may see that as a violation. Tough life.
- CaliforniaKarl 2y ago
  > The child is nothing to be blamed for, it is a 100% problem of the organizers. I am surprised that the organizers did not catch this, though I don't know enough to know how much time the organizers had. > For a 17 years old, even throwing together such work is already an worthwhile result. Teens is a golden age of compilation and remixing. For kids, in general, if one kid makes a claim ("I made this," or "This game cartridge is mine") that turns out to be false, there is generally some sort of comeuppance. That could be as simple as the kid losing respect within their peer group, or it could be as serious as parents being informed about the kid commiting a petty crime. This is important, because it instills society's values (such as they are) in the child. For example, what if kid A steals a game cartridge from kid B, and then kid B retaliates by shooting and killing kid A? That response is generally frowned upon, in most parts of the world. In my opinion, it would be fine if "the child" was presenting a poster showing the current state of research in microbial recycling of plastics. That's a cool thing for a high school senior or college freshman to do. But to take existing research (stealing), manipulate images (lying), and cast it as their own work (stealing and lying), on a national stage, that requires an appropriate comeuppance.
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    My point, if you can't get adult professionals with wages admit they fk'd up, there's zero and even negative expectations of unpaid teenager contestants. And that's what I am seeing happening right now. You have unacceptable amount of leniency towards organizers, in "don't know how much time did they have". They should've had enough to scrutinize their short list. Perhaps it all looks like the winning submission.
- distances 2y ago
  17 year olds are of course fully responsible for their own academic claims and creations. You would get expelled from many high schools for much smaller cases of plagiarism.
  - thriftwy 2y ago
    Do you really get expelled from high school in the USA? Isn't that basically mandatory education? And for plagiarism? I'd see some evidence.
    - dagw 2y ago
      Big difference between public and private schools. Getting expelled from a public school is pretty hard, you basically have to do something seriously illegal involving guns and/or drugs. Getting expelled from a private school is an entirely different thing. They can expel you for a lot of things, and basically anything that makes the school look bad in the eyes of prospective future 'customers' is high on that list. Especially among more prestigious schools.
    - distances 2y ago
      I don't know, my anecdotes would be from a private school in Europe where a family member is a teacher. They take plagiarism seriously, but also can expel students a lot easier than public schools can.
      - thriftwy 2y ago
        The point being is that plagiarism at a known private school that you pay good money for and hope to rely on, is something you will give much more consideration than sending work to a science fair to see if it will stick to a wall or not. Neither are particularly good behaviors, but as a "computer guy" I think your public-facing API (science fair admissions) should validate its inputs. There are people out there who send know malicious requests to endpoints, you know. Instead of blaming an underage student I'd reevaluate all of their prior nominations. Chances of dragons being there.

liendolucas 2y ago

Isn't this equally embarrassing for the people that decided to award him? I mean just looking at those images or even imagining the sort of research and equipment that would take to achieve something like this, shouldn't have raised red flags easily?

mike_hearn 2y ago
Sure, but it happens all the time with "professional" science too. This guy did nothing that isn't seen every day in the literature. The reason these people didn't check the claims is because they have an extremely strong culture of never checking any claims. If they did they might discover the claims were false, and then they might feel obliged to attack a colleague who realistically will be protected by their institution, and who might be a peer reviewer or even colleague in future. So, ignorance is bliss.
jerf 2y ago
Consider the distribution of the entered projects. Due to the selection process (think evolution-style selection rather than "human judging" selection), all the projects, whether purely-student-driven, student-driven with just a dash of parental help, half-and-half, and the student basically along for the ride as the parent runs a project, are in one big pile. Is there going to be a bright, sharp dividing line? Especially in light of the fact that quality is only going to be loosely correlated with external help? Perhaps this is an unpopular call but my personal opinion is that the whole idea of a "national scale" science project contest is irredeemably flawed and the correct answer is simply to discard it. It is a common flaw in thinking, often expressed by many commenters zealous to "correct" other people, that if you can't draw a bright sharp unarguable line between the various elements of a group of some sort that you can't claim the group "exists". This is nonsense; almost every practical grouping scheme will always have borderline cases or exceptions. But there does need to be some sort of actual grouping, or some sort of relatively objective way to sort and categorize the elements, that is accessible to the sorter. In this case, while from the objective divine perspective maybe we could create an objective standard for who got "too much help" to be qualified, there is no conceivable world in which the contest judges could ever get sufficiently accurate information to be presented with anything other than a very smooth gradation that they simply will have no handle to make a correct decision with. So the incentives will always be to get as much help as possible and then have human-intelligent agents doing their best to fool the human-intelligent judges, and that's just a hopeless situation. Of course, the contest will not be shut down. But what can happen and what may well happen is that it will get more and more embroiled in controversy each year as the game-theoretic local optimum approach for the contestants each year becomes more and more to accuse their competition of being "too helped" and thus take out the competition until it is simply a farce. This is the worst game-theory case for cooperation; very limited repetition of plays by any given participant, most likely one, so no reason to care about the integrity of the contest for next year when they won't even be participating most likely.

up2isomorphism 2y ago

Sadly he actually has a big chance to survive and strive in today's science community, as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis.

poulpy123 2y ago

I'm baffled by the idea of making science competition with so much prize money for teenagers. For me it's antithetic with the goal of scientific research and can only fail in the long term. As a side note, the real responsible here is not the tennagers, but the organizers that didn't manage to catch a fraud so obvious

strikelaserclaw 2y ago
most of these teenagers already come from upper middle class (professional parents) backgrounds, they don't need the money, they know that winning it is a guaranteed admission to MIT or Harvard. Getting admitted to top schools today is an order of magnitude tougher than it was even 10 years ago.
- poulpy123 2y ago
  Maybe it's different in the US but everywhere else in the world 50K is a really huge amount of money for everyone but the 0.1% richest.But anyway if as you same it's also a ticket for the best schools, the rewards is still huge beside the money. I would even say it's even worse like that, because attending the best school give so many opportunities
xnorswap 2y ago
The amount of prize money shocked me too, I put it down to a culture I don't understand. See also $50,000 prize money for what's called a "Spelling Bee": Asking children to spell words correctly. I feel so far removed from understanding that culture that I feel like I can't criticize it.

jgalt212 2y ago

Reading this article and comments it seems that cheating is just as common in the Tour de France as the Regeneron.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

adr1an 2y ago

I will take the liberty to expreas my most profound cynicism. Didn't Google fake some of its AI showcases recently? Didn't Apple fake stuff about their iPhone on some presentation? I believe this goes beyond a young person "mistake". And no. It's not just to the universities. There are plenty of institutions involved. There are commercial successes from technology corporations to take inspiration from. The lack of consequences stems from a judicial power that's made in an extreme conservative set of rules. So, everything is on fire. Or should be. And don't get me started on research journals and editorials...

riku_iki 2y ago
you can start with politicians who win the race using their lying skills and who decide our policies and future.

paulcole 2y ago

When I was 16 I did a project on whether plants could be used to remove heavy metals from soil. I don’t know why I did this but I did a nitrate test on the plants (because I had been putting lead nitrate into the soil) and drew the conclusion that it must’ve worked. About 2 weeks before the city science fair I realized my error (none of my teachers had said anything). So in an attempt to lose, I made my backboard as bad as possible. I didn’t use scissors or glue, I just tore the paper and used masking tape. Long story short, I have no idea how, but despite my best efforts, I won the city science fair including an HP-48 graphing calculator and a trip to the state science fair. At the state science fair my backboard (you had to use the same one as the city contest) was mocked by much more studious 8-year olds. I found out that teachers weren’t allowed in the exhibition hall so I just abandoned my space and went to the beach. I did not win the state science fair.

tocs3 2y ago
Did you tell the judge or could you get a sense of what they thought?
- paulcole 2y ago
  I probably talked to 3 or 4 judges and explained to all of them exactly what I did and never lied. But I also wasn’t forthcoming about the error. I just explained the experiment and the result. None of them asked any questions that I couldn’t answer. I remember I was sitting next to a girl who had an amazing project. At the end of the day they called her name for 2nd place and I remember thinking, “Wow, who beat her?!” And then they call my name… I thought it was either all a mistake or that maybe the judges thought I was mentally challenged on account of my backboard and it was a pity situation? In hindsight, perhaps an emperor has no clothes situation where everybody sees the error but nobody wants to be the first one to call it out?
jmercouris 2y ago
why would you try to lose instead of just writing about the null hypothesis? why even make a submission?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

readthenotes1 2y ago

There's a good book, Punished By Rewards.

hilux 2y ago
Borrowed - thanks!
- readthenotes1 2y ago
  There's more to it, but I found the advice "Praise effort, not results" to incredibly useful.

sgerenser 2y ago

Sounds like someone is a member of the Dan Ariely school of science. There might be a professorship at Duke in his future.

throwawaymaths 2y ago
Home hellinga also at duke!

zimnmley 2y ago

[flagged]

mathattack 2y ago
This version is much better, and captures the juvinality of it all.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Science fairs always have hints of fraud around them. Many of the children putting out incredibly advanced research, beyond their capacity, are benefiting from their parents’ expertise, or friends of family, or access to labs, and such. It’s not talked about much but has been an issue for decades. As a side note, the criticism around this incident seems to have some racial tones. It’s weird to see tweets referring to participants as the “Indian guy” and “Chinese guy”. Or is that just me?

tbyehl 2y ago
> Or is that just me? Click around on Karlstack some more.
throwawaysleep 2y ago
Definitely racial tones. Asian countries are frequently accused of copying, cheating, and stealing intellectual property from others, so it matches what people assume about members of those races.
- miningape 2y ago
  I think this comes down to "face culture" where its "better" to lie and be caught than be forthright from the beginning. The people used to / raised in face cultures think this is normal and acceptable behavior (because: hey everyone else is doing this I should too - If I don't I will fall behind), whereas those from more "honest" cultures tend to despise the behaviour as it makes work less trustworthy and tends to give an unfair advantage. Notice how the reason for and against doing this is the same: unfairness. Face cultures tend to embrace systemic unfairness as "fair" whereas non face cultures tend to call it as it is. What's interesting is that countries "with a face culture" tend to have higher levels of corruption and unfair business practices but also much higher levels of societal cohesion and trust. In other words, the more likely you are to save face the less likely you are to live in a democracy. And the less likely you are to trust institutions/organisations the more likely that they are trustworthy.
  - 2y ago

uneekname 2y ago

I was a finalist at the 2017 ISEF and it was quite an experience. A lot of super smart kids there and we all had fun living it up in Los Angeles. There was a stark contrast between those of us who had designed our projects completely ourselves, and those who had significant mentors/lab affiliations. No hate to high schoolers getting valuable STEM experience at local universities, but Regeneron should do more to differentiate between these different projects.

levi-turner 2y ago
> There was a stark contrast between those of us who had designed our projects completely ourselves, and those who had significant mentors/lab affiliations. Love to see someone confirming my cynicism. In high school, a science teacher asked me if I were interested in doing something for the (then) Intel Talend Search. I looked up the previous finalists / winners and noticed that an overwhelming majority of the kids were in cities with top tier research universities (or did math stuff, those kids' locations varied a bit more). At that point, my spider sense told me that it wasn't worth the effort to try to compete without the backing / mentoring of a credentialed adult.
isef_researcher 2y ago
Not saying this phenomenon of having connections isn't true, but also, kinda unrelated to the issue here, no? This kid plagiarized & had serious research misconduct. The fact that he has connections via his sister & dad is not the problem imo.
- uneekname 2y ago
  I agree that research misconduct is different than what I'm describing. I think that students who conduct serious research with local universities (for example) should be celebrated. But I do think the issues are related in that Regeneron needs to think about the (lack of) systems in place for vetting and supporting projects of all types.
uneekname 2y ago
Correction: Regeneron is the sponsor, it is the Society for Science that is responsible. When I was there the sponsor was Intel, so I didn't immediately recognize the meaning of "Regeneron"

throwawaysleep 2y ago

I wrote an earlier reply to someone about how all I learned from the several mandatory ethics courses is that the people who cheat tend to be winners even after their punishment, if any. I bet that even after all this, that kid will still be better off having cheated than not.

capybara_2020 2y ago
I am curious, what is the definition of winners here? Do they make more money or do they invent more successful products/ideas or is it something else?
- throwawaysleep 2y ago
  Money, social acceptance, access to desirable partners, positions of prestige, etc. All the nice things we wrestle over in life. Anything you compete for except the “he was a good man” phrasing in obituaries, the cheaters usually get to have. Even if caught. Not cheating outside of a few really heinous crimes such as murder (killing your science fair opponent wouldn’t be a winning strategy if caught) is an altruistic action.
  - JKCalhoun 2y ago
    > Not cheating outside of a few really heinous crimes such as murder (killing your science fair opponent wouldn’t be a winning strategy if caught) is an altruistic action. I can only imagine someone trying to justify cheating would say that. Cheating on your spouse is okay? Not cheating on your spouse altruistic? That concept is alien to me. I don't understand someone having no self-respect or being completely numb to how others feel. I know some exist, but I can't comprehend. If there's "winning" in life it's through living a good and happy life. Some time past our teenage years I think all but the most self-adsorbed people realize that being kind and respectful to others also contributes to our own happiness.
  - rendall 2y ago
    > Not cheating... is an altruistic action. Wow that's dark.

userbinator 2y ago

[flagged]

defrost 2y ago
What are you attempting to say with "scare quotes" and conspiratorial nods to The Consensus?
- jgord 2y ago
  Slightly offtopic : there seems to be a lack of articles loosely related to climate change / green-tech on HN... given the amount of new tech and the size and urgency of warming, Id expect to see more discussion/argument. It seems to be a self-censored topic on HN, for reasons I genuinely cant guess.
  - fnordian_slip 2y ago
    There are a lot of climate change deniers on hn, though they have mostly moved on to denying the human impact on climate instead, after outright denial became harder and harder to argue for. Some have even already moved on to the third phase, "it's too late now, so we might as well not do anything", but these are still few. It's sad, but education and intelligence do not guarantee understanding or wisdom.
  - userbinator 2y ago
    "urgency"? That's what they want you to think... and yes there are lots of articles but they get quickly flagged by those who don't believe in that religion.
    - jgord 2y ago
      Can you define "that religion" .. I'm guessing you mean "people who believe that climate change / global warming is caused by humans burning carbon fuels and emitting CO2" .. ie. Im assuming, but want to check, that you are one of the many people who believe climate warming is happening, but is caused by natural processes, rather than human burning of carbon fuels ? Im aware of polls that show around half of people think that. If say 3/4 of HN users agree with you, it explains pretty well why articles on climate change are flagged as "political" or such - which is my assumption, after reading your comment.

zachlatta 2y ago

It's frustrating that we encourage fraudulent behavior for the college application process. I blame the judges, and college admissions departments. It orients the entire USA public education system around training sociopathic behavior into teenagers. We tell young people the best way to get ahead in life is through exaggerating. Then we train them to do it in their college essays and extracurriculars. Gross.

BeFlatXIII 2y ago
That's why admissions should be tests-only. No interviews, no personality scores, no intentional shaping of the leadership class.
WillPostForFood 2y ago
We need lottery based admissions. Let schools set a minimum test score, and anyone over that goes into lottery for admissions. Kill off essays, extra curriculars, club sports, summer programs, AP tests, Legacy admits, early applications, and let kids have some life again.
- ZeroGravitas 2y ago
  And the cool second order effect of this, is that all the energy currently invested in this zero sum competition will be redirected into a plan B for kids that don't make the cut. Which prompts all sorts of interesting ideas like, why don't we have more prestigious universities? Did we decide that there was only so much science that needed done? Or were we trying to put a protective moat round the children of the elites so they didn't need to compete? And then put all our energies into ensuring our kid scraped into the bottom rung of that protected elite and didn't end up on the scrap heap?
  - WitCanStain 2y ago
    >why don't we have more prestigious universities? Legacy families need prestigious universities to be rare and exclusive so that them having gone there increases in value. They already know that their kids will get in so making top universities more exclusive only has benefits for them.

_lvbh 2y ago

One of the details that strike me is that the cheater comes from a fairly wealthy background and has no need for that prize money at all. They have much more to lose than gain and this doesn’t seem rational at all.

saagarjha 2y ago
They don’t need the money. They want to win so they can get into college.
- armchairhacker 2y ago
  Googling his name brings up this article as the third result. Someone in whatever college he has been accepted to will surely discover and spread rumors, which he can’t really defend against because all the evidence supports that he did it. If he tries to publish anything, people will see his name and immediately question its legitimacy. If he gets an offer and the employer finds out they may rescind it because they can’t trust him. Maybe he won’t outright get his admission rescinded, but I can’t see how a prestigious college is worth more than an intact reputation (I’m sure that without this award he still would’ve been accepted to a great community college at worst, and with his research internship assuming good AP scores, he may have even got into his top choice).
  - krisoft 2y ago
    Sure. The gist of what you write is true. Being caught cheating harms his future prospects. You are thinking that now because he was already caught. But when he decided to cheat he didn’t know he will be caught. Probably he either estimated the chanches of him it wrong. Thinking perhaps that he will do a better job with the cheating, or that nobody looks that hard. Or he assumed lower consequences. Perhaps assuming if they catch him they just won’t give him the award, as opposed to making a big deal out of it.
    - throwaway48476 2y ago
      If the chance of getting caught is low enough the expected value of cheating is positive.

dataflow 2y ago

> The image boxed in red above is a falsified image taken from online, and has had mirroring performed in the hopes that no one would notice. This probably won't happen in the future... because future competitors will learn from this mistake and know to run their image generation through AI so that their images are "novel"... > Don't mentors have to sign off along the way? That part I don't get... Can someone explain this? Is it plausible the mentors genuinely had no idea?

snickerbockers 2y ago

>Everyone makes mistakes — Lord knows I did plenty of stupid, immoral things when I was 17 — and there is always the opportunity for growth and redemption. when did the definition of 'mistake' change to encompass actions done on purpose? a mistake is when your data is invalid because you did the math wrong, not when all your data is simultaneously false and plagiarized. i don't mean to disagree with the notion that his entire life shouldn't be ruined over one incident at a science fair when he's a teenager, but let's not make it sound like this is a careless blunder that could happen to anybody.

edanm 2y ago
> when did the definition of 'mistake' change to encompass actions done on purpose? It didn't change, it's always been that way. From Google search: > an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong. > Example: "coming here was a mistake"
throwawaysleep 2y ago
We generally consider anyone under 18 now to basically not have capacity to make decisions. Therefore anything they do that is bad is a mistake.
halayli 2y ago
A mistake is not exclusive to actions, it encompass judgement as well. Misguided actions start from a misguided judgement.
physicles 2y ago
Those stupid, immoral things that the author did at 17 were also done on purpose. The mistake is in the reasoning that led to the decision to do the action. Pai's mistake was _deciding_ to commit research fraud, and then doing it.
smogcutter 2y ago
Most mistakes aren’t accidents, plenty of accidents aren’t mistakes.
bee_rider 2y ago

notjoemama 2y ago

In reading this, I am reminded of a YouTube video by CGP Grey about how anger is more viral than any other emotional reaction online, including love. But then I think, isn't this one of those times where at least some level of annoyance is justified? Except, there's nothing I can do about it. Does making more people aware, that can't do anything about it, improve the situation? Or is awareness pointless because of how transient it is? And, what if the next great filter isn't great, but a series of smaller exponential filters pulled into a tight timeframe by the advancement of technology? I probably just need more sleep.

JKCalhoun 2y ago
Not anger, justice. Most of us crave justice porn, and only when I am feeling in my most generous, zen-like mood can I find fault in that.
isef_researcher 2y ago
There is a reason to increase awareness - to put pressure on Society for Science to take action. So far they still have not made a public statement, have disabled their YouTube comments etc, and seem to just be waiting for this all to blow over.
- HelloMyNeighbor 2y ago
  They are taking action - the google doc has been updated to show this. They aren't taking PUBLIC action and I suspect won't make a PUBLIC statement until the investigation is over. How about you give them some time to go through the process?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - isef_researcher 2y ago
    Very naive take. They have only responded to some journalist who pressured them so that it wouldn't become a news story and are claiming they're investigating. But then go on to post on Youtube, share the press release with media outlets, etc. They're clearly waiting for attention to die down without having to get any public scrutiny for this big fuck up, b/c useful idiots like you will say "they're doing something!!"

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

relwin 2y ago

My kids attended the same high school district that this student's school, Canyon Crest Academy (CCA), is part of. My youngest has friends that attended CCA and I asked him once why he didn't want to attend (it's an open school district) -- his reply is "all they do is study for AP tests." So I'm thinking there might be other pressures (i.e. parental) to perform, and this student may have responded in a desperate fashion.

JKCalhoun 2y ago
Raising my kids in the Bay Area, I certainly am aware of what I call unhealthy competitiveness in even the public schools. If you think this is an unfortunate way to raise a child — in that kind of overly competitive environment – then there is a lot of blame to go around. The difficulty of getting into a UC school being an obvious place to start.
- riku_iki 2y ago
  > The difficulty of getting into a UC school being an obvious place to start. its obvious that there is competition to get to top school. So, it is question of setting expectation to get there and not necessary difficulty (which is natural and given)

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

fattegourmet 2y ago

Hope he ends up in Tarkington College. 'What's the hurry, son?'

thaumaturgy 2y ago

This is pretty similar to some fraud in professional science that's more common than it should be. A few people have started to make it a hobby to detect copy-and-pasted and altered images in published research: Fabrication discovered in prominent Alzheimer's research: https://www.science.org/content/article/potential-fabrication-research-images-threatens-key-theory-alzheimers-disease https://www.science.org/content/article/potential-fabricatio... "Sleuths" uncovering fraud and getting retractions for thousands of papers: https://apnews.com/article/danafarber-cancer-scandal-harvard-sleuth-science-389dc2464f25bca736183607bc57415c https://apnews.com/article/danafarber-cancer-scandal-harvard... and https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/how-a-sharp-eyed-scientist-became-biologys-image-detective https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/how-a-sharp-eyed-... and https://retractionwatch.com/2022/07/22/papers-in-croce-case-with-blatantly-obvious-problems-still-arent-retracted-after-misconduct-investigation-sleuth/ https://retractionwatch.com/2022/07/22/papers-in-croce-case-... So I'm dismayed but not surprised that the incentives driving fraud in research science are trickling down into pre-college science fairs. A cynical person might conclude that we're just training the next generation of scientists to be better at fraud.

isef_researcher 2y ago
[flagged]

nsajko 2y ago

Source, "Open Letter to Regeneron ISEF": https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e4vjzp6JgClCFXkbNOweXZnoRnGWcM6vHeglDH1DmGM/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e4vjzp6JgClCFXkbNOweXZno...

refurb 2y ago
Wow, the entire project was basically copy pasted from other work. What gets me, is there are clear scientific errors (talking about RNA fragments but should have been protein fragments). This would have been immediately caught by someone with a basic knowledge of the field. How do they judge the projects if not having subject matter experts closely review them and the results?

ipython 2y ago

Many, many years ago I participated in ISEF, so this is personally disappointing to me. I'll echo some of the sibling comments about the difference between kids who did the project alone versus parents/lab mentors who ... ahem ... contributed significantly to the project. In contrast, my project was entirely self-made and therefore not very impressive, but it had some gimmicks in how I presented it which managed to impress judges at the school and regional levels, enough to send me to ISEF. ISEF was an amazing experience, especially as a kid from a school that was nothing special. Our school was so excited that they hired a public speaking specialist to work with me to prepare. Looking back, that training in public speaking directly contributed to many successes in my career decades down the line. Plus the experience of going to ISEF still brings back positive memories. I never felt like I belonged - there were some amazingly smart kids there - but the social camaraderie and the ability to meet kids that thought it was cool to be smart was eye opening. As far as "making mistakes when you're 17" - yeah, I made mistakes then too, but I certainly paid the price for them. Especially when you make conscious decisions to defraud and falsify, if these allegations can be proven. There should be serious consequences for this.

fransje26 2y ago
> Especially when you make conscious decisions to defraud and falsify To earn $55,000...

thriftwy 2y ago

The elephant in the room is that 17 years old should not be writing long scientific articles witha lot of supporting material. They are not paid for that and they are expected to study first. We should definitely expect to see short, brilliant discoveries from teenagers when they notice a gem in a heap of data adults discarded. But not that kind of bureaqucratic nightmare style scientific papers where the result is attained mostly through prespiration, not inspiration. 100% great for already learned and paid adults, being fraud or exploitation of adolescents.

fergie 2y ago

We shouldn't internationally name and shame 17 year olds on HN.

imiric 2y ago
Their name is already widespread online. A niche forum linking to an article that mentions it will hardly make an impact. Besides, this behavior deserves shaming, revoking of their prize, and maybe even legal repercussions. A 17 year old is practically an adult in many jurisdictions, and if they're doing this at that age, they will only continue to commit fraud later. Ethics should be learned early on in life, and a 17 year old should know better. Let this be a lesson.

mihaaly 2y ago

> These actions, while serious, should not define Pai’s entire life Too late for that. Very late. Unluckily his mind is set on pretending too much. Which is ubiquitous and actually encouraged in life to a great degree (not like this should be an excuse for adapting). What is not late is to seek a different career in life. Be an influencer, praised youtuber or a political adviser perhaps, but the science world needs much different mindset. His reputation is annihilated by himself beyond repair anyway. The useful side of the story: be it a learning experience for the others.

autoexec 2y ago
I wish reality were closer to how you see it, but there are people who do far worse to their reputation, but continue to have careers. In the US a doctor can tell their patients that the diseases they have are caused by demon sperm and that alien technology is in their medications/treatments and that doctor still gets to keep their practice/medical license. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stella_Immanuel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stella_Immanuel) Police officers can lie, steal, rape, or murder forcing them to resign or causing them to get fired, but they have no problems getting another job as a police officer the next county over (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fired-cops-routinely-rehired-dc-california-2022-11-07/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fired-cops-routinel...). Scientists can repeatedly fabricate evidence for corporations and have long careers doing so. The scientists hired by the tobacco industry to lie are also used by the oil industry and are deciding what chemicals are safe to put in our food (https://publicintegrity.org/politics/food-safety-scientists-have-ties-to-big-tobacco/ https://publicintegrity.org/politics/food-safety-scientists-...) This guy probably has a long and profitable career as a scientist ahead of him.
- mihaaly 2y ago
  Right. The way the science community carry out their activity is increasingly shameful, I was thinking about an idealistic situation still, that is right. He will definitely have a fruitful career in a science leadership position, possibly not only in China. Scary examples. Scary. It is increasinlgy benefitial to live life with a great deal of ignorance just to feel worthwhile getting out of the bed in the morning and put one tiny straw into the big haystack of the humanity, while others put it on fire all the time for their own personal warmth.