# WithdrarXiv: A Large-Scale Dataset for Retraction Study

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.03775 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.03775/

## Key facts

- Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 4 Dec 2024.

## Built on by (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [When AI Co-Scientists Fail: SPOT-a Benchmark for Automated Verification of Scientific Research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.11855/) (2025)
- [Human-LLM Coevolution: Evidence from Academic Writing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.09606/) (2025)
- [FLAWS: A Benchmark for Error Identification and Localization in Scientific Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.21843/) (2025)
- [Reviewing Scientific Papers for Critical Problems With Reasoning LLMs: Baseline Approaches and Automatic Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23824/) (2025)
- [SciCoQA: Quality Assurance for Scientific Paper--Code Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.12910/) (2026)
- [Semantic Search over 9 Million Mathematical Theorems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.05216/) (2026)
- [TheoremGraph: Bridging Formal and Informal Mathematics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.25363/) (2026)
- [SFBench: The SciFy Scientific Feasibility Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.29630/) (2026)
- [Beyond Imitation: A Framework and Benchmark for LLM-Assisted Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.11087/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Retractions play a vital role in maintaining scientific integrity, yet systematic studies of retractions in computer science and other STEM fields remain scarce. We present WithdrarXiv, the first large-scale dataset of withdrawn papers from arXiv, containing over 14,000 papers and their associated retraction comments spanning the repository's entire history through September 2024. Through careful analysis of author comments, we develop a comprehensive taxonomy of retraction reasons, identifying 10 distinct categories ranging from critical errors to policy violations. We demonstrate a simple yet highly accurate zero-shot automatic categorization of retraction reasons, achieving a weighted average F1-score of 0.96. Additionally, we release WithdrarXiv-SciFy, an enriched version including scripts for parsed full-text PDFs, specifically designed to enable research in scientific feasibility studies, claim verification, and automated theorem proving. These findings provide valuable insights for improving scientific quality control and automated verification systems. Finally, and most importantly, we discuss ethical issues and take a number of steps to implement responsible data release while fostering open science in this area.