> I was curious to see how the self-correcting mechanisms of science would respond [...]
> I was disappointed by the response from Southwest University. Their verdict has protected [a fraudulent researcher] and enabled him to continue publishing suspicious research at great pace.
The self-correcting mechanisms of science can only correct knowledge. Those mechanism work mainly by requiring the research works to be checkable by others. Self-correctness emerges by the accumulation of checks on the same topic, all leading to the same conclusion, and by the progressive retractation of bad research ... not by the elimination of "bad researchers".
Efficiently "correcting" people, whatever that means, is a different beast. Such a mechanism belongs to an administrative entity who can emit decisions - and, by construction, who can make errors.
The self-correcting mechanisms of science can only correct knowledge. Those mechanism work mainly by requiring the research works to be checkable by others. Self-correctness emerges by the accumulation of checks on the same topic, all leading to the same conclusion, and by the progressive retractation of bad research ... not by the elimination of "bad researchers".
Efficiently "correcting" people, whatever that means, is a different beast. Such a mechanism belongs to an administrative entity who can emit decisions - and, by construction, who can make errors.