University recommends retraction of two computing papers for plagiarism

Following an investigation prompted by a whistleblower, a university in Australia has recommended that one of its researchers retract two papers, Retraction Watch has learned.

The reviews, “Cryptography and State-of-the-art Techniques” and “An Advanced Survey on Cloud Computing and State-of-the-art Research Issues,” were both published in 2012 in the International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI). In a May 20 letter to the whistleblower in the case, the research integrity officer at Edith Cowan University in Perth wrote: 

In reply to your query about the outcomes and actions from our preliminary assessment, I can inform you that of your 17 individual complaints, two were deemed to be breaches, four were considered to be minor breaches, eight were dismissed and three were referred to other centres within the University.  Actions arising included retraction of publications, where applicable, and training in the ECU online Research Integrity modules. I trust this satisfies your concerns. 

Mohiuddin Ahmed, a lecturer in the School of Science at Edith Cowan University, was first author on both of the papers slated for retraction, and the only shared author between the two. At the time of publication, Ahmed was a lecturer in the Green University of Bangladesh’s Computer Science & Engineering Department. 

He told Retraction Watch by email:

I am fine retracting both these papers. The publishing venue, www.ijcsi.org is predatory in nature and took advantage of my academic writing ignorance when these papers were written.

Ahmed provided us with a report of his investigation into the journal, which has appeared on lists of potentially predatory publications.

SubramanyaRao alleged that “Cryptography and State-of-the-art Techniques” has sections that appear similar to Wikipedia entries, and appears very similar portions and content to the paper ”A New Generation Cryptographic Technique” published in the International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering in 2009. He also claims a paragraph resembles one on page 125 of the book ”Computational Mind: A Complex Dynamics Perspective.”

He also says the paper “An Advanced Survey on Cloud Computing and State-of-the-art Research Issues” has significant overlap in ideas with the article “Cloud computing: state-of-the-art and research challenges” published in 2010 in the Journal of Internet Services and Applications.

When contacted by Retraction Watch, Margaret Jones, the Edith Cowan University ethics officer, declined to provide a report of the investigation or to comment on the three papers complaints referred to other centers in the university.

It is unclear whether the IJCSI will retract the papers. An email to the journal resulted in an “out of office” autoreply: “We will start to reply to emails as from 17th February 2020.”

None of the other study authors could be reached for comment.

“Cryptography and State-of-the-art Techniques” has been cited 15 times and “An Advanced Survey on Cloud Computing and State-of-the-art Research Issues” has been cited 114, according to Google Scholar. The journal is not indexed in Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science.

Part of a larger effort

SrinivasaRao SubramanyaRao, who was previously affiliated with Edith Cowan University but now has no university affiliation, first brought 17 allegations of issues such as plagiarism and gift authorship involving a number of researchers at Edith Cowan to the university’s attention in early February 2020.

Beginning in September 2019, SubramanyaRao had also corresponded with the publisher IEEE, as many of the papers were published in their journals. But representatives wrote to him that none of his claims merited retractions. After some back and forth, they closed their investigations into the publications in April 2020 without taking action.

What made the two IJCSI papers different? SubramanyaRao told Retraction Watch:

Maybe it was because it was copied verbatim from Wikipedia, et cetera.

And what if the journal is predatory? SubramanyaRao said:

Whether a journal is predatory or not… the authors are responsible for the content in their…papers.

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].