Integrity Assessment Report: "Rational Design of High-Na P2-Type Cathodes for Sodium-Ion Batteries" (DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5c20111)

Academic fraud report · Geng Detector

Summary

Verdict: Substantiated concerns (🔴 实锤/confirmed) against the JACS paper by Yitong Zhou et al. on P2-type sodium-ion battery cathodes. The most serious finding is a mathematical impossibility in Section 3.4: the GITT-derived Na+ diffusion coefficient range (7.92×10⁻⁹ to 8.74×10⁻⁹ cm² s⁻¹) cannot be reconciled with the reported average of 6.52×10⁻⁹ cm² s⁻¹, which lies below the stated minimum. Additional confirmed issues include verbatim duplication of two consecutive sentences in the DFT methodology (Section 2.4), nonsensical citation pairing (a 1996 PBE theory paper cited as backing for specific Hubbard U values of Fe, Ni, Mn), corrupted equation rendering in Sections 2.4 and 3.7, and a non-existent JEOL SEM model designation "JEOL JSMM-7800" (likely a typo for JSM-7800F). These findings collectively suggest hasty compilation rather than rigorous scholarship. The report is limited to textual and logical anomalies; independent verification of underlying experimental data is required.

Verdict

🔴 Confirmed concerns. Multiple text-level inconsistencies and at least one logically impossible statistical claim have been verified within the manuscript as published. The DOI of record is 10.1021/jacs.5c20111.

Key findings

Mathematical impossibility in GITT diffusion coefficient summary (Section 3.4). Reported range 7.92×10⁻⁹–8.74×10⁻⁹ cm² s⁻¹ with an average of 6.52×10⁻⁹ cm² s⁻¹; the mean falls below the stated minimum.
Verbatim duplicated methodology sentences (Section 2.4, DFT Calculations). Two consecutive sentences describe selection of GGA/PBE identically with sequential citations (37) and (38).
Illogical citation pairing (Section 2.4). Reference (37), the 1996 PBE paper, is cited immediately after specifying Hubbard U values of 4.0 eV for Fe, 5.5 eV for Ni, and 4.0 eV for Mn; reference (38) is a 2024 aqueous sodium-ion battery experimental article unrelated to GGA/PBE selection.
Corrupted equation rendering (Sections 2.4 and 3.7). Formation energy formula appears as "EE n f total ele ="; cationic competition coefficient η appears as "x ATM A =" and "(X R TM TM =)".
Non-existent instrument model (Section 2.2). SEM listed as "JEOL JSMM-7800"; JEOL does not produce a "JSMM" series (likely intended JSM-7800F).

Evidence highlights

Direct quotation of the contradictory GITT summary: "The Na+ diffusion coefficients (D Na+) determined via galvanostatic intermittent titration technique (GITT) analysis range from 7.92 × 10−9 to 8.74 × 10−9 cm2 s−1, with an average value of 6.52 × 10−9 cm2 s−1."
Direct quotation of duplicated DFT methodology: "The generalized gradient approximation (GGA) proposed by Perdew-Burke-Ernzerh (PBE) is selected for the exchange-correlation potential. (37) The generalized gradient approximation (GGA) proposed by Perdew, Burke, and Ernzerhof (PBE) is selected for the exchange-correlation potential. (38)"
Reported Hubbard U values of 4.0 eV (Fe), 5.5 eV (Ni), and 4.0 eV (Mn) trailing reference (37).
Corrupted formulas captured verbatim in Section 2.4 and Section 3.7.
SEM model string: "JEOL JSMM-7800".

Notes

Confidence is high for findings 1–4 as verifiable textual or arithmetic issues in the published article.
No independent verification of raw GITT, XRD, or DFT data has been performed; the authors' raw datasets have not been examined.
Publication metadata noted in the source report: Received Nov 11, 2025; Accepted Apr 1, 2026; J. Am. Chem. Soc.
These findings indicate serious editorial and methodological lapses but do not, on their own, constitute definitive proof of fabricated experimental data. Formal institutional investigation would be required to reach an integrity ruling.