Investigation Report: 'Strain-Releasing in Tableted Perovskite Wafer for Large-Area Computed Tomography Imaging' (DOI: 10.1002/lpor.202503271)

Academic fraud report · Geng Detector

Summary

Verdict: 🔴 Substantiated (recommends in-depth investigation). This report identifies multiple severe methodological inconsistencies in the paper published in Laser & Photonics Reviews (2026) by Mingbian Li et al., which strongly suggest fabricated or carelessly assembled experimental procedures. Key issues include: (1) a fundamental chemistry error where hydrogen bromide (HBr) is used instead of hydrogen iodide (HI) to synthesize formamidinium iodide (FAI), apparently copied from a MABr synthesis template; (2) physically implausible claim of operating a Hitachi SU8020 cold-field emission SEM under nitrogen atmosphere, which would destroy the filament and prevent imaging; (3) an unrealistic 22-day revision timeline spanning Christmas and New Year for an extensive body of work including large-area perovskite wafer fabrication, custom CT system development, image reconstruction algorithms, and multi-month stability tests; (4) use of a cheap handheld TD8620 digital teslameter for Hall-effect measurements requiring precision magnetic characterization; (5) implausibly small DMF volume (20 µL) for dual-side solvent annealing of a 7 cm wafer; and (6) numerous misspelled top-tier journal titles. Limitations: analysis is based on text extracted from the PDF only; pixel-level image reuse and Photoshop manipulation checks were not performed. Confidence in text-based findings is high; final determination of misconduct requires institutional investigation.

Verdict

🔴 Substantiated (recommends in-depth investigation)

Key findings

Chemistry synthesis error: Section 6.1.2 describes synthesizing Formamidinium Iodide (FAI) from 10.05 g FAAc (formamidinium acetate) using 13.2 mL HBr (hydrobromic acid). Iodide synthesis requires HI (hydroiodic acid); using HBr would only yield FABr. The procedure appears to be copy-pasted from section 6.1.1's MABr synthesis with HBr unchanged. Severity: 🔴
Physically impossible SEM conditions: Section 6.7 states Hitachi SU8020 field-emission SEM operated under nitrogen atmosphere at 3 kV. Cold-field-emission SEMs require ultra-high vacuum (~10⁻⁷ Pa); nitrogen would scatter the electron beam and destroy the filament. Severity: 🔴
Implausibly fast revision timeline: Submission 8 December 2025 → Revised 30 December 2025 (22 days) → Accepted 8 January 2026 (9 days), spanning Christmas and New Year, despite experiments covering large-area perovskite wafer fabrication, custom CT imaging system, 3D reconstruction algorithms, and multi-month stability tests. Severity: 🟠
Inadequate equipment for claimed measurement: Section 4 reports magnetic field strength for Hall-effect measurements measured with a TD8620 handheld digital teslameter (a low-cost consumer/industrial device), inconsistent with the precision required to derive a mobility value of 2.24 cm²·V⁻¹·s⁻¹ to two decimal places. Severity: 🟠
Implausible solvent annealing scale: Section 6.5 uses only ~20 µL DMF on each glass slide at 90°C for 3 minutes to dual-side anneal a ~7 cm diameter, 1 mm thick wafer — insufficient vapor to meaningfully relieve strain over such an area. Severity: 🟡
Reference misspellings: Multiple top-tier journal names misspelled — "Nauret Photonics" (Nature Photonics), "Advance Materials" (Advanced Materials), "Science Advance" (Science Advances) — suggestive of automated or careless assembly. Severity: 🟡

Evidence highlights

Direct quotation (Sec. 6.1.2): "10.05 g FAAc … 加入 13.2 mL 的 HBr（氢溴酸） 溶液……最终得到粗品 FAI 粉末" — chemical impossibility; FAI requires HI, not HBr.
Direct quotation (Sec. 6.7): Hitachi SU8020 SEM operating under "氮气气氛" at 3 kV — incompatible with cold-field-emission electron source physics.
Manuscript timeline: Received 8 December 2025; Revised 30 December 2025; Accepted 8 January 2026 (31 days total, crossing major holidays).
Direct quotation (Sec. 4): magnetic field measured with "TD8620 手持式数字特斯拉计" — incompatible with van der Pauw Hall-effect precision measurements.
Direct quotation (Sec. 6.5): ~20 µL DMF used to treat ~7 cm diameter wafer — orders of magnitude too little vapor.
Reference list misspellings: "Nauret Photonics", "Advance Materials", "Science Advance".
DOI preserved: https://doi.org/10.1002/lpor.202503271

Notes

Image-based checks (image reuse, Photoshop artifacts) were not performed; analysis is text-based only.
Findings strongly suggest either fabrication of experimental sections or reckless template-based assembly of the manuscript; an institutional investigation is warranted.
Recommended follow-ups: request raw NMR spectra and Hall-effect field logs; raise concerns via PubPeer; report to journal editorial office; audit the corresponding author's group for similar templated publications.
This report is AI-assisted and intended for academic discussion only; final misconduct determinations must come from official investigations. False positives and negatives are possible.