Archive for the ‘computer science’ Category
It really isn’t fair to pick on Pattern Recognition Letters, but, well, if the shoe fits…
We had fun at the expense of the journal the last time we found that a duplicate publication had escaped the editors. This time, plagiarism is to blame.
A group of authors from the Institute of Automation at the Chinese Academy of Sciences published, then promptly lost, their September 2013 article in PRL titled “Model-based 3D tracking of an articulated hand from single depth images.”
A group of researchers in Wuhan, China, evidently didn’t quite realize they were walking into a ridicule trap when they agreed to have their paper, “Face Recognition with Learning-based Descriptor,” published in IERI Procedia. The article appeared in 2012 and was part of an issue devote to that year’s International Conference on Future Computer Supported Education, which took place in Seoul.
The Journal of Circuits, Systems and Computers has retracted a 2010 article by a pair of Iranian researchers who put the paper together using previously published work that, simply put, they reconfigured for their own purposes.
The article, “Autonomous Group Testing Based Fault Tolerance in Reconfigurable Logic Devices,” was written (ostensibly, at least) by Javad Sababeh and Karim Mohammadi, of Iran University of Science and Technology, in Tehran.
A group of IT researchers from India has suffered the retraction of a paper in PRL for heavily basing the piece on at least four previous papers written by one of the co-authors without proper attribution (not that such attribution likely would have absolved the sin).
The paper, titled “A robust kernelized intuitionistic fuzzy c-means clustering algorithm in segmentation of noisy medical images,” was published in January of this year by Prabhjot Kaur and colleagues.
Here’s the retraction notice:
Retraction Watch Rule 5.1, which governs ironic article titles (and does not actually exist), clearly states that researchers who plagiarize should avoid the use of words like “new” or “novel” when describing their research (or lack thereof). Failure to adhere to Rule 5.1 can lead to embarrassment — as in the case below.
A pair of electrical engineers from Islamic Azad University, in Isfahan, Iran, has lost their 2012 article in Computers in Biology and Medicine, titled “A novel real-time patient-specific seizure diagnosis algorithm based on analysis of EEG and ECG signals using spectral and spatial features and improved particle swarm optimization classifier,” because, well, it wasn’t. Turns out, the researchers lifted data from an Irish group who, several years earlier, had proposed their own “novel algorithm for neonatal seizure detection.”
An anti-terrorism researcher at the University of Southern Denmark has had a number of papers in conference proceedings retracted for plagiarism.
Debora Weber-Wulff, who has researched plagiarism for a decade, reports on her blog Copy, Shake, and Paste that eight papers by Nasrullah Memon have been retracted after the Vroniplag website revealed similarities between his work and that of other authors.
According to a university website, Memon is Read the rest of this entry »
The Journal of Systems Architecture has retracted a 2010 article by a group of researchers in China who tried to publish their work twice.
The paper first appeared in July 2010 in the Journal of Software under the title, “Description and Verification of Dynamic Software Architectures for Distributed Systems.” At the time, it had three authors — Xu Hongzhen, Zeng Guosun and Bo Chen.
But Xu and Zeng evidently resubmitted the paper to the Journal of Systems Architecture, which published its version, ”Specification and verification of dynamic evolution of software architectures,” in October 2010.