Identifying academic plagiarism is a pressing task for educational and research institutions, publishers, and funding agencies. Current plagiarism detection systems reliably find instances of copied and moderately reworded text. However, reliably detecting concealed plagiarism, such as strong paraphrases, translations, and the reuse of nontextual content and ideas is an open research problem. In this paper, we extend our prior research on analyzing mathematical content and academic citations. Both are promising approaches for improving the detection of concealed academic plagiarism primarily in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). We make the following contributions: i) We present a two-stage detection process that combines similarity assessments of mathematical content, academic citations, and text. ii) We introduce new similarity measures that consider the order of mathematical features and outperform the measures in our prior research. iii) We compare the effectiveness of the math-based, citation-based, and text-based detection approaches using confirmed cases of academic plagiarism. iv) We demonstrate that the combined analysis of math-based and citation-based content features allows identifying potentially suspicious cases in a collection of 102K STEM documents. Overall, we show that analyzing the similarity of mathematical content and academic citations is a striking supplement for conventional text-based detection approaches for academic literature in the STEM disciplines. The data and code of our study are openly available at https: purl.org hybridPD
In a recent short paper @cite_13 , we extended the idea of citation-based PD. We proposed that mathematical expressions share many characteristics of academic citations and hence are promising nontextual content features to be considered when searching for concealed forms of AP. Similar to academic citations, mathematical expressions are essential components of academic documents in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics fields. Furthermore, mathematical expressions are independent of natural language text and contain rich semantic information. Additionally, some STEM disciplines, such as mathematics and physics, are known for their comparably sparse use of academic citations @cite_8 . A citation-based analysis alone is, therefore, less likely to reveal potentially suspicious content similarity for these disciplines.
@cite_13 @cite_8
2767810198 1978868011
This paper presents, to our knowledge, the first study on analyzing mathematical expressions to detect academic plagiarism. We make the following contributions. First, we investigate confirmed cases of plagiarism to categorize the similarities of mathematical content commonly found in plagiarized publications. From this investigation, we derive possible feature selection and feature comparison strategies for developing math-based detection approaches and a ground truth for our experiments. Second, we create a test collection by embedding confirmed cases of plagiarism into the NTCIR-11 MathIR Task dataset, which contains approx. 60 million mathematical expressions in 105,120 documents from arXiv.org. Third, we develop a first math-based detection approach by implementing and evaluating different feature comparison approaches using an open source parallel data processing pipeline built using the Apache Flink framework. The best performing approach identifies all but two of our real-world test cases at the top rank and achieves a mean reciprocal rank of 0.86. The results show that mathematical expressions are promising text-independent features to identify academic plagiarism in large collections. To facilitate future research on math-based plagiarism detection, we make our source code and data available. An analysis of three major problems in the application of bibliometric research performance indicators is made in three separate sections. In the first section, the influence of field-dependent citation practices is analysed. The results indicate that rankings of publications from different fields, based on citation counts, can be affected seriously by differences between citation characteristics in those fields. If certain assumptions hold, one should expect high (short term) citation levels in Biochemistry, Celbiology and Biophysics. Medium citation levels are to be expected in Experimental and Molecular Physics, Physical and Organic Chemistry, Pharmacology and Plant Physiology, and low citation levels in Mathematics, Taxonomy, Pharmacognosy and Inorganic Solid State Chemistry. In the second section time-dependent factors are studied. It is shown that trend-analyses of output and impact based on bibliometric scores can be disturbed by changes in theSCI-database and in publication and citation practices. One of the disturbing factors is shown to be the inclusion of so called Books into theSCI data-base in 1977. Finally, in the third section a case is presented which illustrates the consequences of operating on incomplete bibliometric data in the evaluation of scientific performance. A completeness percentage of 99 for publication data is proposed as a standard in evaluations of the performance of small university research groups).