[Corpora-List] why LREC2012 NOT blind-reviewed?

[Brett Reynolds]

Recently, Ben Goldacre was asking if there had been any studies of the accuracy (mostly false negatives) of these services.
<http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/how-accurate-is-turnitin-and-a-brief-scribble>

I didn't look that hard, but I couldn't turn up anything. Anybody here know of anything? It seems like a good project for somebody in this group or one of their grad students.

On 2011-10-07, at 8:09 AM, tpederse at d.umn.edu wrote:

> To be very clear, the plagiarism checks that I run on safeassign do
> not add papers to anything. They are checked against material that is
> available on the public web. I have the option of retaining them in an
> institutional (UMN) database for comparison with other UMN
> submissions, but I do not do that. Students who submit papers can
> opt-in to have their papers added to a database, but that's not what
> I'm doing.
> 
> By now most plagiarism detection services are aware of concerns about
> copyright, etc. and it's very possible to use them without adding
> content where someone doesn't want it added. Of course this should be
> verified, but it's a mistake to assume that all materials submitted to
> these services are then copied and stored and made available to
> others.
> 
> Anyway, I think it's very reasonable to use these services for
> reviewing (and classroom use) and do so in a responsible way. They are
> in fact an example of NLP in action,  which I think is nice to see.
> 
> Cordially,
> Ted
> 
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 4:42 AM, Vlado Keselj <vlado at cs.dal.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> > there is also the practice that some
> >> > of us have of running papers we are going to review through
> >> > commercial (or otherwise) plagiarism detection services.
> >>
> >> You may not realize it, but you do *not* have the right to do that.
> >> These services retain anything you submit them, which is not something
> >> you can authorize for a not-yet-published paper you don't have copyright
> >> to.
> >>
> >> And it's extremely annoying for an author to be rejected because "that
> >> has already been published", when in practice the previous version of
> >> the paper has been rejected at another conference and you have enhanced
> >> it since.  Incompetent reviewers that says to something has already been
> >> published without giving a citation are already annoying enough as it
> >> is.
> >
> > I would like to agree with this comment. (Thanks Galibert for expressing
> > it so clearly.)  While checking for plagiarism in submitted papers is
> > justified, it is alarming that a paper would be submitted to a commercial
> > service, like the ones mentioned.  I do not even use them with student
> > papers, for justified objections by students.
> >
> > I guess, one can see a positive side to it: Authors can always be happy -
> > even if their paper was rejected and they did not get to contribute to the
> > science in an open way, they made an anonymous contribution to the wealth
> > of a company. :-)
> >
> > On the research side, I think that it is an interesting research problem
> > to describe a model where a paper can be checked for plagiarism with an
> > option of not communicating the full paper but to use only a subset of
> > n-grams, or substrings in general.
> > (Another solution is that a company agrees to check paper for
> > plagiarism, but not to keep it in their repository.)
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vlado
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Ted Pedersen
> http://www.d.umn.edu/~tpederse
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
> Corpora mailing list
> Corpora at uib.no
> http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
> 
> 

Best,
Brett

-----------------------
Brett Reynolds
English Language Centre
Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
brett.reynolds at humber.ca




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/corpora/attachments/20111007/57f0908f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora