Figure 1From “What peer review deleted, the web kept.”
Referring domains: working-paper URL against version of record
Where the published paper has a third of the working-paper URL's referring domains, one system in four found it. Where it has a twentieth, none did.
Figure 1Referring domains: working-paper URL against version of record
Source: DataForSEO Backlinks, bulk page summary, live index, 27 July 2026. URL-level counts. Working-paper URLs: nber.org/papers/w31161; ssrn.com abstract 4573321. Version-of-record URLs: academic.oup.com/qje/article/140/2/889/7990658; pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2025.21838.

From the essay
From the research bench
What peer review deleted, the web kept.
Four assistants returned a figure the published paper does not contain; most cited material that did contain it when asked for the figure and its source.
Read the essayThis exhibit belongs to an essay: the numbers live here, the argument lives there.
Cite or embed
Related exhibits

Figure 2Figure
Three questions before a research figure enters a decision
What peer review deleted, the web kept.

Table 1Table
The chain, and what is actually found at each link
A vendor page supplied one tested source path for the 5x retention rule

Figure 2Figure
An analysis decision record
What is p-hacking?
Contact
Bring the question you're working on.
Research, a guest lecture, or a commercial question.