Cited by 10Academic integrity and plagiarismSoftware Engineering ResearchNatural Language Processing Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cross-Language Plagiarism Detection: Methods, Tools, and Challenges: A Systematic Review

Open access
Botto-Tobar, Miguel, Serebrenik, Alexander, Van den Brand, Mark G.J.·2022·International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology

Abstract

Plagiarism is one of the most serious academic offenses. However, people have adopted different approaches to avoid plagiarism, such as transcribing excerpts from one language. Thus, it is challenging to realize this plagiarism form unless someone fully understands another language. Researchers have developed approaches for detecting plagiarism in a variety of different languages. However, most methods created in the past have proved effective for detecting plagiarism in papers published in a single language, most notably English. Therefore, this paper aims to provide a systematic literature review of cross-language plagiarism detection methods (CLPD) in a natural language context. The approach used to perform this study consisted of an extensive search for relevant literature through an SLR and Snowballing. Therefore, we present an overview of (i) cross-language plagiarism detection techniques; (ii)the artifacts and the aspects that were considered in the evaluation phase; and(iii) the lack of guidelines and tools for its implementation. Its contribution lies in its ability to highlight emerging cross-language plagiarism detection techniques trends. Further, we identify any of these techniques in other domains, for instance, software engineering.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18517/ijaseit.12.2.14711

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Botto-Tobar, M., Serebrenik, A., & Van den Brand, M. G. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Guayaquil (EC)
  • Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
Corresponding author
Botto-Tobar, Miguel
Venue
International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology
Published
2022-04-10
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
589-599
ISSN
  • 2088-5334 (ISSN-L)
  • 2460-6952
OpenAlex
W4225147575
Cited by
10
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3
FWCI
0.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-sa
Locations
  • International Journal on Advanced Science Engineering and Information Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
plagiarism detection, multilingual text, academic integrity, evaluation metrics, software plagiarism, natural language processing

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