I'm unclear on whether to pin this on the publisher or on the authors. In the first example shown in the linked pre-print [1] there's a paper with 62 downloads

I'm unclear on whether to pin this on the publisher or on the authors. In the first example shown in the linked pre-print [1] there's a paper with 62 downloads that's been cited 107 times within two months. The pre-print looks deeper into a paper with 7 "real" references whose metadata has an extra 40 references not found in the PDF. This leaves us with three options: * the author of a paper with 62 downloads (not an amazing number) was convinced into joining a citation ring along with 40 other authors, * the publisher has been sneaking references onto unsuspecting papers, or * the publisher has a vulnerability on their metadata system that's being actively exploited by the two scholars identified in the pre-print. Whatever the case, I'm glad the solution is as simple as "you should parse the references yourself". I do however wonder: is someone checking whether all of the references are actually referenced within the paper? [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.02192 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.02192