Cornell grad student Philip Davis describes on Scholarly Kitchen
an experiment he designed to test the peer-review process at Bentham Science
, a publisher of "open-access" journals. (Open-access journals charge authors for publication, but make the articles available for free.)
He used software to create an article full of computer-generated nonsense, such as, "we discuss existing research into red-black trees, vacuum tubes, and courseware . On a similar note, recent work by Takahashi suggests a methodology for providing robust modalities, but does not offer an implementation ."
He told Bentham the manuscript had two co-authors from the Center for Research in Applied Phrenology (CRAP). Four months after submitting it, a Bentham representative told him the manuscript had passed peer-review and would be published in The Open Information Science Journal
... assuming he paid the $800 publication fee. He declined the offer. New Scientist
has more details.
Four years ago
a group of MIT students pioneered the "computer-generated article" hoax when they submitted a nonsense paper that was accepted for presentation at the World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics Conference. Though you can go back to 1944's Ern Malley hoax
for an example of hoaxers submitting nonsense for publication.