AI-generated rat testicles

Year: 2024

In February 2024, an image of a rat with a giant erect penis caused an uproar in the academic community. The eye-catching rat appeared as part of an article on stem cells in a renowned journal, but was retracted after becoming widely spread. The image was created with artificial intelligence, and contained (aside from the grotesque appendage) nonsensical descriptions, like ‘iollotte sserotgomar cell’, and ‘dck’.

How could an image like this be published? In science, new publications are first reviewed by two or more colleagues. This process of ‘peer review’ aims to guarantee the quality of a new article, but can fail spectacularly, as this instance shows. Peer review has been said to be ‘broken’, and each year more articles are being retracted because of various reasons. The process lacks transparency, the colleagues who do the reviewing can be biased, and the reviewers are volunteers and therefore lack an incentive to closely analyse their colleague’s work.

However, in this case, the failure can be attributed to the journal itself. In a statement, the journal mentions that one (!) of the reviewers raised concerns about the figure, but this somehow failed to prevent the article from being changed or published. It shows that science is a social process, and that those who review and publish science can also fail.

For more, read this article or listen to this podcast by the Guardian.