Information Superhighway to Nowhere: “Persistent” Hyperlink Identifiers & Phantom Scholarly Objects

It proposes that the “anarchic freedom” of hyperlinks to point anywhere also means they can point nowhere, with dead links, misconfigured servers, and defunct content all being possible outcomes of following a hypertextual trail. It places the often-celebrated freedom to point anywhere alongside the possibility of pointing nowhere as the starting point for discussing the stability of scholarly links. This is a conceptual observation offered in the talk, functioning as an argumentative frame rather than an empirical measurement.

The DOI, designed as an intermediate redirect so that null content at a destination can theoretically be repointed to a new location for the same material, takes on an authority in this context. It reframes the DOI from a redirection mechanism into an object carrying authority claims, noting that its independent metadata makes specific claims about its targets beyond the control of the link. Based on conceptual analysis of the DOI mechanism and its metadata relationship; the talk provides no specific statistics or case counts.

Such “hyperlinks” can instantiate phantom citation objects describing targets that never existed and never will exist; coupled with the growth of LLM-generated papers and their “rancid hallucinated claims” for cited works, these phantom research objects proliferate throughout the scholarly record. It links the authority of DOI metadata with LLM hallucinated citations, offering “phantom scholarly objects” as an analytical lens. A conceptual frame and problem diagnosis proposed in the talk; the text offers no quantitative evidence.

The talk further explores what these “triangulated” scholarly non-objects mean for the authority claims of DOI hyperlinks and the practical implications they imply, not least for digital preservation. It extends the discussion from identifier semantics to the practical consequences for digital preservation. A direction the talk announces for exploration; the text does not develop specific proposals or results.

The work speaks to discussions of scholarly publishing, persistent identifier governance, and digital preservation, and is suited to readers concerned with the authority of DOI metadata and citation trustworthiness; it offers a conceptual frame and problem diagnosis rather than a deployable technical solution.

A reader would still want to know how the talk argues specifically that DOI metadata carries authority “beyond the control of the link,” how the link between phantom citation objects and LLM hallucinated citations is defined, and what practical recommendations for digital preservation are proposed. In addition, the current text is an abstract and does not include the talk body, figures, or cases, which would affect a complete grasp of the argument’s detail.