Subra Suresh

Untitled 1.jpg

Misconduct by Subra Suresh

  • Download the full report here.

  • Suresh is currently President and CEO of Nanyang Technological University. Previous positions held by Suresh are described elsewhere (references in the report), and include leadership positions at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, National Science Foundation, and Carnegie Mellon University.

  • Suresh started his career by taking data from students at the lab he was at, mostly from Helen Conley, and packaging these data with irrelevant text as his thesis, a doctor of science. He then published and republished this same material found in his thesis it appears as if novel and as if his own. Indeed, it appears novelty of the data and underlying mechanisms were falsely claimed, inflated, emphasized, and repeated but with different mechanisms for the same phenomenon, by Suresh.

  • Articles on which Suresh is co-author: (i) appear duplicated multiple times; (ii) appear to claim novelty where no novelty exists; and (iii) appear inconsistent and nontransparent in ethics reporting.

  • Generous funding is awarded to projects in articles by Suresh and others, but the outcome of funding appears meager, in addition to appearing duplicated.

  • Suresh’s contribution to research management and globalization appears to consist of: (i) thoroughly obfuscating merit review of grant research proposals and peer review of the same or scientific publications; (ii) constraining integrity to the scientific record only. In other words, scientific integrity should apply to publications only and not to any other process such as research work; (iii) suggesting that resources and data should be shared openly and at the same time placed behind barriers of a financial nature; and (iv) placing the responsibility for funding basic research on government, in other words taxpayers, while at the same time placing the decision on whom and what to fund with undefined bodies.

  • Suresh with others appear to apply for patents to various patent offices only to abandon the same or allow the patent to expire. The same or similar patent is then apparently applied for anew at a later date, and so on.

  • Students supervised by Suresh appear to have plagiarized theses.

  • Suresh said, “…"We cannot sacrifice the future by responding only to the present…”. Perhaps he meant to say, ‘We can sacrifice the future by repeating the past.’