Just a few examples I found thanks to following questions here on RG:

Tobiloba Adenekan https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tobiloba-Adenekan

Freeman Paul https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Freeman-Paul in the meantime removed

Akanbi Caleb https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Akanbi-Caleb-2

Hannah Adebayo https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hannah-Adebayo in the meantime removed

Antony Owen https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antony-Owen

Emma Oye https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Emma-Oye

Steven Robbins https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven-Robbins-12

Morris Groom https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Morris-Groom in the meantime removed

Dona Marel https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dona-Marel Update 19-08-2025 finally removed!

Erriol Tomas https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Erriol-Tomas Update 22-08-2025

John Jining https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John-Jining Update 22-08-2025

Abukar Hussein https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Abukar-Hussein

or those who create pointless papers with no other purpose than to create self-citations (and a meaningless (high) number of citations and h-index here on RG and in GS):

Mark Ian Cooper https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark-Cooper-24

Thore Graepel https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Thore-Graepel-2

Ashikur Rahman Nazil https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ashikur-Rahman-109 in the meantime renamed to https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ashikur-Nazil

Other suspicious profiles are:

Sultan Saeed https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sultan-Saeed-2

Falade Adeola https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Falade-Adeola in the meantime removed

Bulbul Khan https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bulbul-Khan-2 despite the initial reluctance to act 'they' finally removed this profile

Rudolf Spunda https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Rudolf-Spunda-2/

Jennifer Pomerey https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jennifer-Pomeroy-3/

Kaiser Gatlin https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kaiser-Gatlin/

Tom Roseth https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tom-Roseth-3/

Hannah Adeleye Oluwadara https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hannah-Oluwadara Update 4-09-2025: removed

Folorunsho Adeola Esther https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Folorunsho-Esther

Antara Mahbub https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antara-Mahbub-2

Blessing Idowuor https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Blessing-Idowu

Diana Ailyn https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Diana-Ailyn

or just plain advertisements:

Lucian Miles https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lucian-Miles

Yes, bogus profiles are overwhelming the ResearchGate (RG) database with research papers generated through AI, sacrificing content quality and authenticity. Generative AI introduces the possibility of mass-producing rubbish or gibberish research in a snap, which can manipulate academic metrics, mislead researchers, and diminish trust in the platform. It is crucial that a strong moderation, augmented verification, and AI-detection infrastructure are necessary for maintaining RG's integrity and rendering it a sought-after source for genuine scientific output.

Rob Keller

Dear Rob Keller ,

Yes, this is a problem, but a minor one. I paid an attention to the similar problem

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Inadequate_number_of_posts

I think that the main problem of the RG forum is the quality of questions. There is nothing interesting to discuss.

Dear Rob Keller , AI generated papers at ResearchGate usually comes with:

"First author: Typically an unfamiliar name, likely fictitious, often appearing only once or twice across the literature (Fake)

Second author: A ResearchGate member with an active profile and prior publication history—frequently the actual uploader of the questionable pa-per...

Such practices erode the trust that underpins academic publishing. Plat-forms like ResearchGate, which were created to democratise access to research and foster global collaboration, are now being used as tools for metric-based self-promotion. This not only undermines the fairness of scholarly competition but also distorts the academic record, making it harder for genuine work to be recognised amidst a flood of fabricated content..."

The following preprint is worth to read. Such fake profiles are listed in the preprint and in the reference list.

Preprint From Content Creation to Citation Inflation: A GenAI Case Study

While coming across a question here on RG https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_Artificial_Intelligence_Harming_or_Helping_Childrens_Education and I took a closer look at one of the profiles I reported to RG https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ashikur-Nazil but which is still around and I stumbled on the following ‘paper’

Article AI at War: The next revolution for military and defense

which is around now for little bit more than a month and is cited already 8 times…

The ‘researchers’ citing this 'stellar' paper are:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Folorunsho-Esther which is a fake profile with nothing but either AI generated papers or papers not authored by this ‘person’

and https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Blessing-Idowu which is not Blessing Idowu but Adegunju Oyinkansola see https://www.instagram.com/juanita_expert/ (and calling herself on TikTok shoppreciousco see enclosed fig.).

PS. The ‘journal’ is notorious for publishing garbage, see for example

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384554036_Cost_implications_and_sustainable_design_for_warehouses_considering_fire_safety_regulations which is the plagiarised version of the original paper https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/7/3002

(I informed the authors about this and PubPeer, but PubPeer censored this and did not post my report...yet).

Thanks dear Rob Keller for detailed information about this fake profiles. I am a bit surprised, as I knew and I have read some of your comments on PubPeer!

Maybe, I hope, it is not about censorship, but about inertia and slow feedback.

Best regards.

Dear Rob Keller , I have visited and checked the article which was published in journal which is " notorious for publishing garbage ", which You have suggested. I have found that the first author was a subject of your analysis.

It is Ruchit Parekh , and this has happened in other discussion room.

His profile was removed after a long time.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/ResearchGate_fails_to_act_on_a_serious_and_obvious_example_of_scientific_misconduct_fraud_scam_case_report_1

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Ab2kOjgAAAAJ&hl=en