Data manipulation and non-availability in hydride superconductivity research

The first and only magnetization measurements for hydrogen-rich materials claimed to be high temperature superconductors under high pressure (after some preliminary results reported in 2015) were reported by Eremets and coworkers in 2022 [1]. The authors claimed to prove diamagnetism without disclosing the presence of a huge diamagnetic background signal for 15 months [2]. The published data underwent a variety of originally undisclosed [2] transformations that the authors called “linear manipulations” [2]. I will point out that the data show anomalies [3] and inconsistencies [4] that raise serious questions about the authenticity of the claimed findings. To date, the authors have declined to share supporting data, that could prove the validity or invalidity of their claims, contrary to the paper’s data availability statement. I will suggest that the refusal of the authors of Ref. [1] to make supporting data available is analogous to another recent situation in this field [5], [6] and raises concerns. Implications of this situation and its relation to other hydride superconductivity research will be discussed.



[1] V. S. Minkov et al, Nat. Commun. 13, 3194 (2022).

[2] V. S. Minkov et al, “Author Correction”, Nat. Commun. 14, 5322 (2023).

[3] J. E. Hirsch and F. Marsiglio, J Supercond Nov Magn (2023). doi.org/10.1007/s10948-023-06622-4.

[4] J. E. Hirsch, OSF preprints (2023) https://osf.io/axfpj.

[5] J. E. Hirsch, Physica C 613, 1354228 (2023).

[6] E. Snider et al, Nature 610, 804 (2022).