Who can report plagiarism?

[PeteSampras]

Hello,
who can report plagiarism?

If i saw several paragraphs in a paper similar to the paragraphs of other paper. Can i report plagiarism to editor in chief of journal?. Or only the authors of the plagiarized paper can report this ?

 

[.Scott]

Anyone can bring it to the attention of the editors.

 

[symbolipoint]

Hello,
who can report plagiarism?

If i saw several paragraphs in a paper similar to the paragraphs of other paper. Can i report plagiarism to editor in chief of journal?. Or only the authors of the plagiarized paper can report this ?

How do you mean, """similar to the paragraphs"? Do not confuse Form with Content.

 

[PeteSampras]

How do you mean, """similar to the paragraphs"? Do not confuse Form with Content.

Specifically:

1)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.00407.pdf

of relevant cases, such as the Einstein-Maxwell [21] and Einstein-Klein-Gordon system [22, 23, 24, 25], for higher derivative gravity [26, 27, 28], f(R)-theories of gravity [29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35], Hoˇrava-aether gravity [36, 37], polytropic spheres [38, 39, 40], among many others. In this respect, the simplest practical application of the MGD-decoupling consists in extending known isotropic and physically acceptable interior solutions for spherically symmetric self-gravitating systems into the anisotropic domain, at the same time preserving physical acceptability, which represents a highly non-trivial problem [41] (for obtaining anisotropic solutions in a generic way, see for instance Ref. [42, 43, 44]).

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/i2018-12074-2

relevant cases, such as the Einstein-Maxwell [35] and Einstein-Klein-Gordon system [36–39], for higher derivative gravity [40,41], f(R) theories of gravity [42–48], Hoˇrava-aether gravity [49–51], and polytropic spheres [52–54]. In this respect, the simplest practical application of the MGD decoupling consists in extending known isotropic and physically acceptable interior solutions for spherically symmetric self-gravitating systems into the anisotropic domain, at the same time preserving physical acceptability, which is a highly non-trivial problem [55]. For obtaining anisotropic solutions in a generic way, see refs. [56,57]

2)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.00407.pdf

By using the MGD-decoupling approach, we presented in detail how to extend interior isotropic solutions for self-gravitating systems in order to include anisotropic (but still spherically symmetric) gravitational sources. For this purpose, we showed that the Einstein field equations for a static and spherically symmetric self-gravitating system in Eq. (2.6)-(2.8) can be decoupled in two sectors, namely: the isotropic sector corresponding to a perfect fluid Tˆ µν shown in Eq. (3.8)-(3.10), and the sector described by quasi-Einstein field equations associated with an anisotropic source θµν shown in Eqs. (3.12)-(3.14). These two sectors must interact only gravitationally, without direct exchange of energy-momentum.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/i2018-12074-2

Using the MGD decoupling, it was shown in detail how to extend an interior isotropic solution for a static and spherically symmetric self-gravitating system in order to include an additional gravitational source. For this purpose, it was shown that the Einstein’s field equations in eqs. (6)–(8) can be decoupled in a sector for a perfect fluid Ψ(m) μν shown in eqs. (13)–(15), and the sector describe by the equations associated with the additional gravitational source Φμν shown in eqs. (16)–(18). There is only gravitational interacction between these two sectors, and there is not exchange of energy momentum between them.

3) https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.00407.pdf

The matching conditions at the stellar surface were then studied in detail for an outer Schwarzschild space-time. In particular, the continuity of the second fundamental form in Eq. (4.15) 16 was shown to yield the important result that the effective radial pressure ˜pR = 0. The effective pressure (2.11) contains both the isotropic pressure of the undeformed matter source Tˆ µν and the inner geometric deformation f ∗ (r) induced by the energy-momentum θµν.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/i2018-12074-2

The matching conditions at the star surface have been studied in detail for an outer Schwarzschild space-time. In particular, the continuity of the second fundamental form in eq. (28) yields the important result that the effective radial pressure ˜pR = 0. The effective pressure contains both the isotropic pressure of the gravitational source Ψ(m) μν and the geometric deformation η(r) induced by the energy-momentum tensor Φμν.

 

[Orodruin]

If you suspect plagiarism, I would suggest that you contact the editors of the respective journals and let them sort it out. Note that the arXiv post you are referring to is also published in an EPJ journal https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5606-6
Also, the single author of the second paper has the same affiliation as one of the authors of the first. It may be prudent to inform him of this.

 

[PeteSampras]

The same paper

https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2018-12074-2 says:

“Ruderman [7] about more realistic stellar models show that the nuclear matter may be anisotropic at least in certain very high density ranges (ρ > 1017 kg/m3), where the nuclear interactions must be treated relativistically”



And other preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.00592 , with date 2-5 says:

Also the studies of Ruderman about more realistic stellar models show that the nuclear matter may be anisotropic at least in certain very high density ranges (ρ > 1015g/cm3), where the nuclear interactions must treated relativistically [5].

 

[Qurks]

I'm curious, do they actually claim to use the copied results as their own or are they just being lazy when providing background information? It's not good but if they don't actually claim to gotten other peoples results I don't think it really matters.

 

[.Scott]

I'm curious, do they actually claim to use the copied results as their own or are they just being lazy when providing background information? It's not good but if they don't actually claim to gotten other peoples results I don't think it really matters.

It may matter to the editors.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

In reality, anyone can (and should, on occasions where they notice) point out errors in scientific publications, including plagiarism. The quality of the scientific literature depends on all stakeholders taking an active role in correcting errant publications. The reliability of the scientific literature depends on science being self-correcting.

Most of the plagiarism I've caught has been on the student side, usually well before material is submitted for publication. (I mentor lots of student research, and in spite of ample training and care, when the crunch of deadlines approach, plagairism occurs about 10% of the time.) A few years back, I did catch a case where a paper of mine had been copied, both the exact method (slightly different system) as well as part of the method section. Eventually a Corigendum was published here:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0256-307X/27/8/089902/pdf

My original paper can be found here:
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0256-307X/27/8/089902/pdf

The paper from Chinese Physics Letters which copied my method without attribution is here:
http://cpl.iphy.ac.cn/EN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=37803

I didn't notice the issue and move toward corrective action until 6 years or so after the other paper was published. It would have been nice had someone brought it to the journal editors' attention sooner.

Striking Similarities between Courtney, 1996 and Wang and Lin, 2004:

1. Main idea of using closed orbit theory to determine initial angles of closed classical orbits from quantum recurrence spectra.
2. Detailed method for computing initial angles.
3. Abstract excerpts
   1. From the abstract of Courtney, 1996: For a given initial state, closed-orbit theory gives the dependence of this recurrence amplitude on the initial angle of an orbit. By comparing the recurrence amplitudes for different initial states, the initial conditions of closed classical orbitsare determined from quantum spectra.
   2. From the abstract of Wang and Lin, 2004: For a given initial state, closed-orbit theory gives the dependence of this recurrence amplitude on the initial angle of an orbit. By comparing the recurrence amplitude for different initial states, we can determine the initial angles of theclosed classical orbits from the quantum recurrence spectra.
4. Excerpts from paragraph 2:
   1. From paragraph 2 of Courtney, 1996: Semiclassical quantization techniques reverse the causal role between quantum and classical behavior by using the classical solutions to construct approximate quantum solutions.
   2. From paragraph 2 of Wang and Lin, 2004: Semiclassical quantization techniques reverse the causal role between quantum and classical behavior by using the classical solutions to construct approximate quantum solutions.
5. Compare Equations 4-10 and related discussion of Courtney, 1996 with Equations 2-6 and related discussion of Wang and Lin, 2004.
6. Compare Figure 1 of Courtney, 1996 with Figure 1 of Wang and Lin, 2004.
7. Compare caption and column headings of Table 1 of Courtney, 1996 with caption and column headings of Table 1 of Wang and Lin, 2004.
8. Excerpts from concluding paragraph:
   1. From concluding paragraph of Courtney, 1996: In summary, a method is presented for determining the initial conditions of classical orbits from the quantum spectra…
   2. From concluding paragraph of Wang and Lin, 2004: In summary,we have presented a simple method to extract the closed orbits from the quantum spectra.

 

[PeteSampras]

My fear is the following ,
Furthermore of the sopposed plagiarisms above mentioned, there is more supposed plagiarism from one preprint whose owned is mine. Currently i have submitted this preprint to one journal.

Should be stopped the revision of my paper if i inform to the editors about all the supposed plagiarisms (included my case)?

 

[Orodruin]

Is your preprint dated before the other paper?

 

[PeteSampras]

Is your preprint dated before the other paper?

obviously before...

But my fears is that the editor stop the revision of my submission whereas it is determined the supposed plagiarism

 

[Orodruin]

Well, we obviously cannot speak for the editors, they are human beings and may react in different ways too. If you can show that you were the one plagiarised I would not think it to be a reason to stop the revision of your manuscript (if the referee is not the author of the other paper).