Open Letter to the International
Scientific Community - Conflicts of interest.
Link to the full dossier in the image below 👇👇👇
The
Rejection of the Century: When arXiv Said No to the Cornell University
Conference (Its Maintainer).
Author: Prof. Dr. Carlos Roberto
França
Dear scientific community,
I hereby make public a case that
represents not only a disservice to science, but also a serious sign of
conflict of interest, editorial inconsistency and disrespect for the free
circulation of knowledge.
In March 2025, I submitted to the
arXiv repository the article “Mathematical Challenges for Generative AI in
Computational Biology: Cell Proliferation and the Path to Living AI”, the
result of research that began in 1996 and developed with extreme dedication
over almost three decades. This work introduces new mathematical structures,
impossible to find in books or classical databases, and that uses evaluation
methods based on the performance of GenAIs in unsupervised computational
environments.
The arXiv response came in less
than 24 hours: summary rejection, claiming lack of scientific relevance. I
filed an appeal. Within 48 hours, they changed their tune and said that the
article would only be accepted after peer review. A paradox coming from a
platform whose core purpose is precisely to host preprints before peer review.
Well then. The article was
approved with honors by ICTIS 2025, an international event held in person at
Cornell University, the very maintainer of arXiv. The acceptance letter was
sent. I presented the work in person, receiving positive feedback from
researchers in several countries. More than 1,250 downloads have been
registered on Zenodo to date.
Even so, arXiv ignored the
letter, ignored the history, ignored the numbers. I waited 60 days. I
respectfully reiterated the request on June 7. On the 10th, they responded with
a final sentence: “We reviewed it again and upheld the decision. This is the
final verdict and we will not consider any further appeals.”
A question arises here: what role
does arXiv play when it rejects a paper endorsed by two letters of
recommendation from researchers with arXiv credentials, validated by an
international conference and supported by robust metrics of community interest?
What is at stake is not just the
rejection of an article. It is an attempt to silence a disruptive mathematical
proposal that combines infinite series with multiple ratios (SRMs),
post-quantum cryptography and generative artificial intelligence.
If there were no relevance, there
would be no approval at ICTIS. If there were no interest, the numbers would not
grow so quickly. If there were no value, there would be no resistance.
Finally, I express my repudiation
of arXiv’s stance in this case. And I hereby document that I will make this
report public in academic circles, on social media, and with all researchers,
institutions, and scientific journalists interested in understanding what
happens when a preprint platform fails in its own essence.
Knowledge cannot be selective.
Nor silenced.
Chapecó/SC, June 10, 2025
Signed,
Prof. Dr. Carlos Roberto França (prof.carlosfranca@gmail.com )
Heru Technologies –
https://www.herutechnologies.com.br