Was it hallucinated in the paper? 🤔

Thanks for the feedback and for sharing it. This week I tried many papers from different fields and it worked well.

Semantic Scholar has a large database of academic references, which improves verification and increases search speed. Download CERCA here sourceforge.net/projects/cer...
Check the code github.com/lidianycs/ce...
Give it a Star and leave a comment to support it.

It'd be impossible nowadays. Many PhD candidates gave up going there because of low income and visa difficulties.

Brazilian visiting researchers also do that to stay in the US. The scholarship doesn't cover their expenses.
It hasn't been adjusted since 2013, each researcher receives US$1,300 per month. I didn't need to resort to that bc I also had work sponsorship
educacao.uol.com.br/noticias/202...

se fosse aq, ela ia enterrar a camisa no jardim

Muito lindo. Lembrei da chapada Diamantina.

Faz muito sentido a comparação. Ao criar uma conta devia vir com o aviso, cuidado facebook, instagram e whatsapp fazem mal à saúde.

É uma chapada?

Now the other two reviewers rejected the paper and asked about the same problems. One of them suggested consulting another reference for empirical methods. I'm relieved to see that I noticed the same problems, although I didn't reject it upfront.

I suggested consulting the empirical guidelines to improve the methods and asked about other limitations. I found other suspicious claims in comparison to related work but suggested a major review and informed the editor that I wouldn't oppose a rejection.

Giving the benefit of the doubt, I looked for the authors GitHub to see if they have sent the wrong link. But didn't find anything anywhere about the dataset they were discussing.

It's here. Sorry, I put the link in the first post.
clihc2026.laihc.org/

Thank God we're Brazilians.