NEW: We have the University of Rochester's 124-page investigation report. A committee of external reviewers made an unequivocal finding: Dias falsified and fabricated data, and he committed serial plagiarism—including in his 2020 NSF proposal. nature.com/articles/d4158…
We've included the full report in the supplementary information of the article. It is a striking document, and a testament to how much work went into uncovering Dias's deceptions.
@dangaristo (Somehow I had seen both names a few times and wondered about this very question!)
@dangaristo I have never understood why some one would fake scientific research, and declare a breakthrough that will all but guarentee that others try to redo your experiment. If your going to fake something, make sure the outcome isn't so good other teams will try to repeat it.
@dangaristo So, NSF will give money to anyone with big words/labs no matter how shitty or false the work is. I think it is time to use lottery, it will be less biased and more effective than spending months to write a proposal that is clearly not being properly evaluated.