Recently we now have written a study paper and posted a preprint from the Arxiv to get some non-official peer review and also to boost the quality of our paper. Till now we have perhaps perhaps not submitted this paper to virtually any meeting or log (its unpublished), but our company is thinking about sending it up to a meeting.
While testing our paper for plagiarism utilizing free internet sites, we obtained outcomes showing 83% plagiarism through the variation we posted in the Arxiv. The software is saying that we plagiarised our own paper in other words. We additionally attempted pulling straight straight down our paper through the Arxiv to prevent this plagiarism, however it’s extremely hard. Does that mean our paper shall get refused by all seminars? Just exactly What should we do?
This concern originated in our web web site for expert mathematicians.
3 Responses 3
The specific situation as it is understood by me:
You composed a manuscript A and uploaded it to your arXiv. That you do not intend to publish manuscript the in a journal or conference.
You later on had written a manuscript B. You intend to submit B up to a conference. This manuscript B shows 83% overlap with manuscript A.
Therefore, you will be concerned to possess issues with publishing manuscript B.
While both are your projects there was a possible danger someone may think you might be committing self-plagiarism. (As you attempt to publish both A and B in a journal or conference there may be a genuine issue. in the event that you would) to prevent this perception the status should be made by you of a definite.
You can certainly do this via:
Including a footnote to your front web page of a stating that it really is a report/etc that is draft/technical. and never meant for customwritings book. You’ll be able to add this remark as “comment” into the meta information on arXiv.
Mentioning the draft A in your paper B, like: “an initial form of these results with an increase of step-by-step proofs can be obtained on arXiv.” or whatever fits you context.
Doing either of these should suffice, but doing both might then include safety that is extra.
(presuming there’s no policy that outcomes ought not to be circulated beforehand for the seminar where you distribute. However in math this will virtually never ever function as the instance.)
But while testing plagiarism making use of sites that are free unearthed that outcomes had been showing 83% plagiarism from our paper just that is published on Arxiv.
Why do you examine your paper for plagiarism when you look at the beginning? I’ve submitted about 50 papers and also never done this. partly because we know haven’t committed plagiarism because I wrote the papers because I never thought of it and partly! had been you in question whether you plagiarized or otherwise not? I do not have it.
You correctly, you seem concerned that a plagiarism detector found your paper on the Arxiv if I understood. But that is super weird – a paper cannot plagiarize it self, and you are perhaps perhaps perhaps not the very first or ten-thousandth individual to create their preprint in the Arxiv. Why would that be a challenge?
Predicated on that which you stated, it is astonishing that you simply got 83% plagiarism. I assume the reason why that it is not 100% is you did earn some nontrivial adjustments in your paper (and ignored to say that in your concern). OK, therefore. I would suggest you publish the updated version from the Arxiv. Then a plagiarism detectors will either determine what’s going on or report that you have got plagiarized 100% from the preprint with all the exact same writers and name. a puzzle that even the many harried meeting editor will be able to straighten out.
Finally, because the question had been initially published on Math Overflow, I would ike to state that in math it could look ridiculous for the paper to cite its Arxiv that is own preprint. If it is obviously a halfway standard meeting in other industries, i’d be really interested to see examples.