[R] [FORGED] Re: 'R' Software Output Plagiarism
r.turner at auckland.ac.nz
Wed Sep 23 02:54:34 CEST 2015
RIGHT ON!!! I concur most heartily with the sentiments expressed by Duncan.
On 23/09/15 12:33, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> On 22/09/2015 4:06 PM, peter dalgaard wrote:
>> I don't think Copyright/Intellectual property issues factor into
>> this. Urkund and similar tools are to my knowledge entirely about
>> plagiarism. So the issue would seem to be that the R output is
>> considered identical or nearly indentical to R output in other
>> published orotherwise submitted material.
>> What puzzles me (except for how a document can be deemed 32%
>> plagiarized in 25% of the text) is whether this includes the
>> numbers and variable names. If those are somehow factored out, then
>> any R regression could be pretty much identical to any other R
>> regression. However, two analyses with similar variable names could
>> happen if they are based on the same cookbook recipe and analyses
>> with similar numerical output come from analyzing the same standard
>> data. Such situations would not necessarily be considered
>> plagiarism (I mean: If you claim that you are analyzing data from
>> experiments that you yourself have performed, and your numbers are
>> exactly identical to something that has been previously published,
>> then it would be suspect. If you analyze something from public
>> sources, someone else might well have done the same thing.).
> I don't see why this puzzles you. A simple explanation is that Urkund
> is incompetent.
> Many companies that sell software to university administrations are
> incompetent, because the buyers have been promoted so far beyond their
> competence that they'll buy anything if it is expensive enough.
> This isn't uncommon.
More information about the R-help