Nikon has disqualified a winning entry in its Small World In Motion competition after determining that generative artificial intelligence was used in a way that violated the contest’s rules.
The decision followed complaints from scientists who questioned the authenticity of the video, which depicted tiny, hair-like structures known as cilia moving inside the airway of a child with primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD), a respiratory condition.
Nikon said the entry did not comply with its rules on generative AI. However, the company stressed that the decision was not a judgment on the entrant’s professional reputation or scientific contributions.
The company added that it reached its conclusion after reviewing the video and its supporting materials and consulting members of the judging panel. It also plans to reassess the rules and procedures governing the annual competition, which has been running for 15 years and celebrates images captured through powerful microscopes.
Scientists Questioned the Video’s Authenticity
The disqualified entry was submitted by Dr Ning Xu of Tsinghua University in China. The BBC said it had approached Xu for comment.
Xu had acknowledged using AI but maintained that he believed his submission complied with the competition’s rules. He also cooperated with Nikon’s investigation.
The controversy intensified after scientists, including former competition judges, raised concerns on Nikon’s LinkedIn page, arguing that the video did not appear to represent genuine microscopic imagery.
Among the first experts to challenge the entry was Dr Robert Hirst, a University of Leicester scientist who leads the NHS centre for PCD diagnosis at the university. Hirst said he was not surprised by Nikon’s decision, explaining that he immediately suspected the video had been fabricated.
Having spent 20 years diagnosing PCD by examining cilia movement, length, cell size and shape, Hirst said the structures shown in the winning entry did not resemble those found in patients with the condition.
He also warned that the dispute had affected patients, scientists, doctors and PCD support networks around the world.
The incident highlights the growing challenges facing scientific competitions as generative AI tools become more capable of producing convincing visual material. In fields where images can serve as evidence of biological processes, distinguishing authentic observations from AI-generated content is particularly important.
Nikon’s decision places renewed attention on how photography competitions verify submissions and define acceptable AI use. Its planned review of the contest’s procedures could help clarify expectations for future entrants, particularly when scientific accuracy is central to the work being judged.
