Apart from the Kong moth, the references in the MDPI sweetener review (https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14183182) are pretty messed up. I just checked some random references about specific sweetener types in the article:
Lugduname [111] - points to an article about Sucralose, Aspartame (https://doi.org/10.17807/orbital.v16i4.21357, Lugduname mentioned once in the text, but the article is not about that one)
It seems that many references are off or points to irrelevant articles. It might be human mix-up or it could be AI-generated, or both. The usefulness of such a review article is doubtful.
You may be interested to know that one of the authors responded on PubPeer (though they did not respond to my queries directly). I raised the references to the moth, in particular, but I think overall this piece requires removal.
Cui, R.H.; Zhang, Z.; Tong, D.S.; Cui, J.P. Series Arc Fault Detection in Aviation Utetheisa Kong AC Circuits Based on Multi-feature Fusion of Improved Empirical Wavelet Transform. Trans. China Electrotech. Soc. 2022, 37, 3148–3161
Which appears to be a fictional paper, or at least I can't find anything with a similar name and author list. My guess would be AI generated references but honestly the rest of the paper doesn't scream AI at me. However it's another example of "kong" near an aviation related word.
I have looked into this one, too. I believe the reason it's difficult to find is that it may be both a dodgy translation (as evidenced by Utetheisa Kong insertion) and not properly indexed. But it also may simply not exist...
It is probably a real paper, this one: "Aviation AC Series Arc Fault Detection Based on Improve Empirical Wavelet Transform Multi-Feature Fusion" which can be found at the Chinese language journal's homepage (https://dgjsxb.ces-transaction.com/EN/volumn/volumn_1412.shtml) Seemingly it has a more realistic English translation in the original (the title and the abstract is translated to English on the homepage and in the published pdf in English as well). Maybe the authors of the MDPI article used the Chinese title, which was then mistranslated by WPS.
I wonder if they are correct with the no GenAI use, because I think the tools in places like WPS are using some level of LLM or something. It's hard to know. I am pretty disappointed WPS wouldn't just respond so they can fix their tools... unless their tools aren't the problem.
(Agree on the papers. Very low quality. Waved through.)
Apart from the Kong moth, the references in the MDPI sweetener review (https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14183182) are pretty messed up. I just checked some random references about specific sweetener types in the article:
Monellin [101] points to an article about Neotame (https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2025.9480)
Neotame [102] points to an article about Advantame (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2011.06.046)
Lugduname [111] - points to an article about Sucralose, Aspartame (https://doi.org/10.17807/orbital.v16i4.21357, Lugduname mentioned once in the text, but the article is not about that one)
Curculin [178] - points to an article Glycyrrhizic acid (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2021.105696)
It seems that many references are off or points to irrelevant articles. It might be human mix-up or it could be AI-generated, or both. The usefulness of such a review article is doubtful.
You may be interested to know that one of the authors responded on PubPeer (though they did not respond to my queries directly). I raised the references to the moth, in particular, but I think overall this piece requires removal.
That response is here: https://pubpeer.com/publications/137E9EA044A06C8B2A4EA73A4E75E4
I appreciate the shout out! Your explanation seems correct to me. The strangest Utethesia kong I found was a reference in this paper
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/14/24/4840
To
Cui, R.H.; Zhang, Z.; Tong, D.S.; Cui, J.P. Series Arc Fault Detection in Aviation Utetheisa Kong AC Circuits Based on Multi-feature Fusion of Improved Empirical Wavelet Transform. Trans. China Electrotech. Soc. 2022, 37, 3148–3161
Which appears to be a fictional paper, or at least I can't find anything with a similar name and author list. My guess would be AI generated references but honestly the rest of the paper doesn't scream AI at me. However it's another example of "kong" near an aviation related word.
I have looked into this one, too. I believe the reason it's difficult to find is that it may be both a dodgy translation (as evidenced by Utetheisa Kong insertion) and not properly indexed. But it also may simply not exist...
It is probably a real paper, this one: "Aviation AC Series Arc Fault Detection Based on Improve Empirical Wavelet Transform Multi-Feature Fusion" which can be found at the Chinese language journal's homepage (https://dgjsxb.ces-transaction.com/EN/volumn/volumn_1412.shtml) Seemingly it has a more realistic English translation in the original (the title and the abstract is translated to English on the homepage and in the published pdf in English as well). Maybe the authors of the MDPI article used the Chinese title, which was then mistranslated by WPS.
I wonder if they are correct with the no GenAI use, because I think the tools in places like WPS are using some level of LLM or something. It's hard to know. I am pretty disappointed WPS wouldn't just respond so they can fix their tools... unless their tools aren't the problem.
(Agree on the papers. Very low quality. Waved through.)