Taleyarkhan Punished for Scientific Misconduct

Rusi Taleyarkhan has been stripped of his professorships by Purdue and barred from being the primary advisor for any students for 3 years. This is the result of his failed appeal against the guilty verdict of scientific misconduct.

Purdue University today reprimanded and sanctioned one of its nuclear engineers for research misconduct. Rusi Taleyarkhan was stripped of his named professorship, which includes $25,000 annually in discretionary resources from the West Lafayette, Indiana-based university, $14,000 of which went into his salary. He will also not be allowed to serve as the primary adviser or co-adviser for students for at least 3 years, at which time he can apply for reinstatement to full faculty status.

Things, of course, are far from over, as you can tell from the article.

Zz.

Taleyarkhan Plans To Appeal

As I've said when I reported the latest Purdue findings of scientific misconduct against Taleyarkhan, this will not be the end of it. And so it isn't. Taleyarkhan plans to appeal against the scientific misconduct finding by Purdue.

Purdue gave Taleyarkhan 30 days to appeal the committee’s verdict. According to his lawyer, he plans to do so. "There are a number of facts and issues that were not allowed in the inquiry, and the other nuclear engineers involved are all in complete support for Taleyarkhan," John Lewis of the Indianapolis law firm Lewis and Wilkins told Physics World. "Xu maintains to this day that Butt’s involvement was his choice. But that part of Xu's testimnony was completely ignored."

... and so it goes.

Zz.

Purdue Declares That Taleyarkhan Guilty of Scientific Misconduct

In a complete about-face, Purdue has released its latest finding on the Taleyarkhan debacle. After an earlier investigation that found no misconduct, the most recent (and presumably, more encompassing investigation) has found him guilty of scientific misconduct.

Purdue University announced today that one of its nuclear engineers was guilty of scientific misconduct in work related to his potentially revolutionary findings about creating fusion from bubbles.

The announcement represented an about-face for the university, which more than a year ago declared that the scientist, Rusi P. Taleyarkhan, was not guilty of misconduct. The university had come under fire from members of the U.S. House of Representatives for that earlier assertion, and subsequently started a new investigation.

Do I think this is the end of this thing? Nope. I'm sure Taleyarkhan will appeal and/or both sue the university.

Edit: more coverage of this by the Science Daily News update.

Zz.

Bubble Fusion Fiasco Just Won't Go Away

Reported in the new edition of Nature (23 April 2008), it appears that Purdue University has sent its final report to the Office of Naval Research that funded Taleyarkhan's work on the so-called bubble fusion that is being questioined. But that's not it. He himself plans to contact the ONR directly to dispute the report (which implies that the report isn't favorable towards him). And, get this, he also plans on suing certain people!

The engineer is also pursuing a defamation lawsuit, filed last month in Tippecanoe County in Indiana against scientists who questioned his claims of bubble fusion. The defendants include Purdue faculty members named in Nature articles, which helped trigger an institutional review. “The complaint filed is to clear up my reputation,” Taleyarkhan says.

Peachy!

Zz.

Purdue's Bubble Fusion Panel Submits Report

This embarrassing and continuing saga of the bubble fusion fiasco has taken another step. The panel set up by Purdue University at the urging of the Office of Naval Research has issued a finding.

A Purdue University panel that reviewed misconduct allegations against a scientist who claims he produced "tabletop fusion" has concluded that "several matters merit further investigation."

The finding was announced without elaboration in the case of Purdue nuclear engineering professor Rusi Taleyarkhan.

Which means that this will go on and on and on and on....

Nature's news report can be found here (link may be available for free only for a limited time).

This is the third inquiry run by Purdue, which was criticized earlier this year by both scientists and lawmakers for its handling of concerns raised by scientists about bubble-fusion claims at the university. Purdue has not said publicly what exactly in Taleyarkhan's work it might investigate further.

Zz.

Taleyarkhan Troubles Aren't Over

If you have missed all the brouhaha surrounding the Purdue's bubble fusion investigation fiasco, you have missed deception and secrecy worthy of an afternoon soap opera. If Taleyarkhan thinks his trouble is over by being exonerated by Purdue, he was totally wrong.

As reported late last week by Science (link open without subscription only for a limited time), Purdue has launch a NEW inquiry on the conduct of Taleyarkhan.

Officials at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, have launched a new inquiry into bubble fusion researcher Rusi Taleyarkhan, just months after exonerating him of research misconduct. The inquiry was brought to light by a congressional report made public today, which concludes that in its previous inquiry, "Purdue deviated from its own procedures in investigating this case and did not conduct a thorough investigation into the allegations against Dr. Taleyarkhan."

Now, why the about face after insisting that they did the right thing in the first place? Here's why:

Purdue's inquiry has faced widespread criticism from both inside and outside the university. Taleyarkhan's detractors complained that the inquiry was too narrowly focused and that they were never contacted by the Purdue committee to express their concerns. And in March, Representative Brad Miller (D-NC), who heads the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science and Technology, asked for a copy of the university's internal reports (ScienceNOW, 22 March). Based on these documents, the House committee argues that even with its limited focus, Purdue's own investigation did find "serious deviations" from commonly accepted scientific practices. Among them: the fact that Taleyarkhan played a significant role in writing papers that he later cited as independent verification of his work, and that he placed junior scientists in "precarious positions" in order to promote his research program. "Based on these conclusions, it is difficult to understand how the Inquiry Committee could have then decided that Dr. Taleyarkhan's actions did not constitute research misconduct," the report states.

So they are now having an open call for "witnesses". In other words, they are now going to do it differently than what they did earlier now that the crap has hit the ceiling fan. They could have saved a lot of grief, not to mention their reputation, had they done this right the first time. Again, look at Bell Labs and the Schon debacle. They cannot plead ignorance on the proper way of doing this. Why don't these institutions of "higher learning" learn this themselves?

Zz.

Even MORE Followup on the Bubble Fusion Fiasco

Those of you who haven't followed this so far may want to read several posts in this blog.

In the March 29, 2007 issue of Nature, Purdue University Provost and vice president for research responded to Nature's earlier report on this debacle. You should read the whole letter, but I will quote only this very last part of it:

Purdue University's policy on research integrity states: "The mere suspicion or allegation of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging to a person's career. Consequently, no information about charges of a lack of integrity in research may be disclosed except to the appropriate university and federal authorities." Any response to an allegation of misconduct at Purdue will adhere to the letter and the spirit of that principle. We believe this is true at the vast majority of universities. Readers of Nature would not understand that truth from your coverage, nor would they be likely to conclude that a successful and fair inquiry might include a finding of 'not guilty'.

Let's get few things straight here:

1. Taleyarkhan's reputation is ALREADY under question. So this confidentiality to protect his reputation is MOOT!

2. If I were Taleyarkhan and I have just been exonerated, I want the report to be available out in the open.

3. If they can't release all the info, citing privacy concerns, then they should at least address why certain key people were never called to testify. This certainly can't break any privacy protection. This fact alone will lead the most of us to consider that this whole process is a sham.

4. In trying to protect Taleyarkhan's privacy and reputation, the puzzling actions by Purdue and confidentiality claims have managed to induce the OPPOSITE effect, not only on Taleyarkhan, but also on the university's image.

I wrote earlier that if Purdue thinks that by such actions that they would have laid this issue to rest, they have it seriously wrong. I rest my case.

Zz.

More Follow-up on the "Bubble Fusion Fiasco Isn't Over"

I wrote earlier about the Bob Park report that a member of the US House of Representative has asked Purdue University for the report on its review of Taleyarkhan misconduct accusations. Thanks to the comment by Lawrence B. Ebert to my blog entry, I have found the New York Times article that reported on the Oversight Subcommittee of the House Science and Technology Committee request that was sent to Purdue's President.

A university spokesman, Joseph Bennett, said, "Purdue’s plan is to work with the committee, with the intention of providing them everything that they’ve requested."

I can only hope that this report is made public, because heaven knows, it certainly isn't coming willingly from Purdue. Like I said earlier, if Purdue thinks they can put this issue to sleep by simply depriving everyone from the necessary information, they have seriously underestimated the issue and overestimated the perception of their integrity.

Zz.

Bubble Fusion Fiasco Isn't Over

If Purdue University thinks that by ending their inquiry and exonerating Taleyarkhan that this mess will go away, they better think again.

As reported in the March 23 edition of Bob Park's What's New:

Now Rep. Brad Miller (D-NC), chair of the Science Committee's Investigations Subcommittee has requested a copy of the University's internal investigation reports.

Would Purdue refuse to provide such a thing? After all, they have kept this under secrecy all the while. From reading what Bob Park wrote, I think he is also getting fed up with the way this has been handled. But then again, other than Taleyarkhan, who isn't?

Zz.

Nature's News on the Purdue's Bubble Fusion Fiasco

Yes, I have decided to call this the Purdue's Bubble Fusion Fiasco, because this is no longer a blemish on Taleyarkhan.

Nature has finally a news item on Purdue's decision. It is longer and more in detail, with almost all of the main player being interviewed. I still can't believe that Purdue administration thinks they can actually get away with something as sneaky as this. It only makes people think they do have something to hide. What I found incredulous was this particular news item:

The university never responded to Suslick's concerns. Peter Dunn, Purdue's associate vice-president for research, told Nature that he believes the university followed its procedures. He declined to comment on why he never replied to Suslick, or on whether evidence related to Suslick's concerns was forwarded to either inquiry. Purdue hasn't revealed the identities of the members of the second inquiry panel, but Dale Compton, a professor of industrial engineering at Purdue and a member of the first panel, says he has no recollection of being asked to consider the questions about Taleyarkhan's data.

Lefteri Tsoukalas, who asked Purdue to investigate Taleyarkhan in February 2006, has called the announcement "an outrage". Tsoukalas was head of Purdue's nuclear-engineering school until he resigned in October 2006 in protest at the way the university was handling the concerns. He notes that the usual procedure for handling allegations of scientific misconduct is to hold a preliminary inquiry, then either proceed with an investigation or close the matter. That did not happen in this case; instead, the university ran a second preliminary inquiry. Apart from Tsoukalas, calls by Nature have failed to locate anyone who raised concerns about Taleyarkhan's work who was interviewed during either inquiry. "Purdue's finding is as mysterious as bubble fusion itself," says Tsoukalas.

I mean, people, you have got to be kidding me! I can understand (barely) if this is a multi-national conglomerate, but for an academic institution that has a reputation to maintain? Hello?

I think the Cold Fusion disciples of Fleshmann and Pons have finally found a place where they can work.

Zz.

Follow-up on the bubble Fusion Fiasco

I should have remembered this when I wrote the earlier post on this issue. Brian Naranjo uploaded a rebuttal to the reply made by Taleyarkhan in PRL. Since PRL has a policy that you can't write a comment to a reply, all he can do is either write a whole new paper, or upload his comment to ArXiv, which was what he did just this past Feb. 1, 2007.

While this comment does not address the issue of what Purdue University was investigating, it does support the argument that this bubble fusion phenomenon is far from being confirmed.

Zz.

Second Inquiry Exonerates Taleyarkhan?

Oh really now?

Supposedly, Purdue University administrators have exonerated Rusi Taleyarkhan of allegations of misconduct in the bubble fusion debacle. Unfortunately, no one knows what was done, what was reviewed, who reviewed it, and how they arrived at such a conclusion. This was done by a secret panel deliberating secretly. In other words, as much as Purdue tries to kill this off, it will not go away, and will continue to be a blemish on the university.

Now, compare this to what Bell Labs did after a similar allegations was leveled at Hendrik Schon a few years ago. Bell appointed a blue-ribbon panel headed by Malcolm Beasley, a very respected physicist from Stanford, and had a very open, full disclosure investigation and findings that were available online. The difference here is night and day!

Whether there was any misconduct at all, at this point, is quite irrelevant. What I do know is that the reputation of Purdue University in terms of integrity is SHOT.

Zz.