Geng Report: Liquid Crystal Elastomer Microfiber Actuators Prepared by Melt-Centrifugal Technology (Actuators, DOI: 10.3390/act15020093)

Academic fraud report · Geng Detector

Summary

This Geng fraud-detection report assesses the MDPI paper 'Liquid Crystal Elastomer Microfiber Actuators Prepared by Melt-Centrifugal Technology' by Wei Liao, Chenglin Jia, and Zhongqiang Yang (Actuators, 2026; DOI: 10.3390/act15020093) and renders a verdict of 'highly suspicious' (orange). The central issues are statistical misuse and reference-list irregularities. Section 3.2 reportedly fits continuous fiber-diameter data (10–40 µm) with a Poisson distribution, reporting a mean and variance of 23.3 µm and 23.3 (µm)² (σ ≈ 4.8 µm); Poisson is a discrete distribution and inappropriate for continuous length data, raising doubts about how the fit was constructed. In the reference list, two unrelated papers—[15] Chen et al. and [45] Sun, Liao, Yang—are assigned the identical identifier (Adv. Mater. 2024, 36, 2400763), a duplicate that strongly suggests careless or fabricated citation copying. A further [34] Wang et al. entry lists ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2025, 17, 46161–46171, inconsistent with that journal's annual volume numbering. Image forensics was not performed because high-resolution figures were not supplied. Confidence is moderate and limited by the absence of raw measurement data and images.

Verdict

🟠 Highly suspicious. The paper combines a statistically inappropriate model (Poisson fit to a continuous physical variable) with clear reference-list errors, including a duplicated article identifier and volume inconsistencies. Image-level forensics was not possible due to missing figure files.

Key findings

Section 3.2 applies a Poisson distribution (a discrete probability model) to continuous fiber-diameter measurements (10–40 µm), which is statistically inappropriate; continuous length data are conventionally modeled with normal or log-normal distributions.
Reference [15] (Chen et al.) and reference [45] (Sun, Liao, Yang) share the same identifier: *Adv. Mater.* 2024, 36, 2400763. Advanced Materials article numbers are unique within a volume/year, making this collision implausible.
Reference [34] is cited as Wang, Y.; Zhou, S.; Feng, J., *ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces* 2025, 17, 46161–46171. Given the journal's annual volume numbering, the 2025 volume would be inconsistent with 17.
Several other entries ([5], [6], [10], [12], [43]) reportedly lack authors or titles, consistent with a sloppy or copy-pasted bibliography.
Image forensics (Western blot reuse, splicing, background cloning) could not be performed because high-resolution figure files were not provided to the detection system.

Evidence highlights

Reported statistics from Section 3.2: "expected value = 23.3 µm, variance = 23.3 (µm)², standard deviation = 4.8 µm." The mean–variance coincidence mimics the defining property of a Poisson distribution but does not justify its use for a continuous variable.
Conflicting reference identifiers:
[15] Chen, W.... Liu, K. *Adv. Mater.* 2024, 36, 2400763.
[45] Sun, J.; Liao, W.; Yang, Z. *Adv. Mater.* 2024, 36, 2400763.
Reference [34] page range 46161–46171 with volume 17 in 2025 is inconsistent with *ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces* volume progression.
DOI under review: 10.3390/act15020093.

Notes

The Poisson-fit issue is, by itself, an analytic error rather than proven fabrication; however, combined with citation anomalies it strengthens suspicion of low-quality or AI-assisted drafting.
Verifying the Poisson claim requires access to the original fiber-diameter measurements and the fitting code, which were not supplied.
The duplicated article number can be resolved by cross-checking *Advanced Materials* (2024, vol. 36) records; both cannot legitimately share identifier 2400763.
The ACS volume-number claim is presented as reported by the assessor and should be verified against the journal's official archive.
Because no figures were available, the report explicitly does not make claims about image manipulation.
Final adjudication of misconduct requires institutional investigation; this report is an informational assessment only.