CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 29Academic integrity and plagiarismAcademic Publishing and Open AccessPublishing and Scholarly Communication

Collusion rings threaten the integrity of computer science research

Littman, Michael L.·2021·Communications of the ACM
DOI 10.1145/3429776
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Experiences discovering attempts to subvert the peer-review process.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3429776

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Dishonest behavior is a prominent problem in reviews of papers that they were unable to study in the context of reviewing reviews.

    “There is one prominent problem which exists in reviews of papers which we are unable to study in the context of reviewing reviews—dishonest behavior.”

    From Peer reviews of peer reviews: A randomized controlled trial and other experiments (2025) · cites this paper as [45]

  • Collusion rings have become a topic of grave concern because of recent reports of their increasing prevalence at major computer science conferences.

    “Collusion rings have become a topic of grave concern because of recent reports of their increasing prevalence at major computer science conferences (Vijaykumar, 2020; Littman, 2021).”

    From What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review? (2024) · cites this paper as Littman, 2021

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Littman, M. L.
Affiliations
Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Littman, Michael L.
ORCID
Littman, Michael L.
Venue
Communications of the ACM
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2021-05-24
Volume
64
Issue
6
Pages
43-44
ISSN
  • 0001-0782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7317
DOI
10.1145/3429776
OpenAlex
W3164964801
Cited by
29
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9
FWCI
7.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
Communications of the ACM (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
Keywords
research integrity, peer review, plagiarism, academic misconduct, computer science research, research ethics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review