The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
State-of-the-art in detecting academic plagiarism
Open accessAbstract
The problem of academic plagiarism has been present for centuries. Yet, the widespread dissemination of information technology, including the internet, made plagiarising much easier. Consequently, methods and systems aiding in the detection of plagiarism have attracted much research within the last two decades. Researchers proposed a variety of solutions, which we will review comprehensively in this article. Available detection systems use sophisticated and highly efficient character-based text comparisons, which can reliably identify verbatim and moderately disguised copies. Automatically detecting more strongly disguised plagiarism, such as paraphrases, translations or idea plagiarism, is the focus of current research. Proposed approaches for this task include intrinsic, cross-lingual and citation-based plagiarism detection. Each method offers unique strengths and weaknesses; however, none is currently mature enough for practical use. In the future, plagiarism detection systems may benefit from combining traditional character-based detection methods with these emerging detection approaches.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Some of these tricks were highlighted as technical weaknesses, decreasing the detection accuracy in TMSPs (Meuschke & Gipp, 2013).”
From Some students' plagiarism tricks, and tips for effective check (2021) · cites this paper as Meuschke & Gipp, 2013
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“some students found ways to trick them.”
From Some students' plagiarism tricks, and tips for effective check (2021) · cites this paper as Meuschke & Gipp, 2013
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Students can fool the TMSPs by different acts that hamper them from identifying the text correctly by intentionally hiding the copied text, stated as”
From Some students' plagiarism tricks, and tips for effective check (2021) · cites this paper as Meuschke & Gipp, 2013
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
Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents
Small, H. (1973) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science · doi:10.1002/asi.4630240406 · Cited by 5,345
Price, D. J. D. S. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.149.3683.510 · Cited by 3,205
Syntactic clustering of the Web
Broder, A., Glassman, S. C., Manasse, M. S., & Zweig, G. (1997) · Computer Networks and ISDN Systems · doi:10.1016/s0169-7552(97)00031-7 · Cited by 1,348
A survey of modern authorship attribution methods
Stamatatos, E. (2009) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21001 · Cited by 1,176
Schleimer, S., S, W. D., & Aiken, A. (2003) · Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data · doi:10.1145/872757.872770 · Cited by 1,099 · cited 3×
“However, the fingerprint index for a full-resolution fingerprinting PDS requires eight or more times the hard disk space of the original document collection and significant processing time (Bernstein & Zobel, 2004; Schleimer et al., 2003).”
BackgroundIn Other (People's) Words: Plagiarism by university students--literature and lessons
Park, C. (2003) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930301677 · Cited by 898
Juola, P. (2007) · now publishers, Inc. eBooks · doi:10.1561/9781601981196 · Cited by 623
Finding similar files in a large file system
Manber, U. (1994) · Cited by 597
Copy detection mechanisms for digital documents
Brin, S., Davis, J., & García-Molina, H. (1995) · Proceedings of the 1995 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data - SIGMOD '95 · doi:10.1145/223784.223855 · Cited by 479
New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing
Garfield, E., & Sher, I. H. (1963) · American Documentation · doi:10.1002/asi.5090140304 · Cited by 427
Flagged first, then by citations
6 of the 91 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Fano, R. M. (1956). Information theory and the retrieval of recorded information. Documentation in Action (pp. 238-244). New York: Reinhold Publ.
- Heintze, N. (1996). Scalable document fingerprinting. In 1996 USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce.
- Lancaster, T. (2003). Effective and efficient plagiarism detection. PhD thesis, School of Computing, Information Systems and Mathematics South Bank University.
- Maurer, H., Kappe, F., & Zaka, B. (2006). Plagiarism -A survey. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 12(8), 1050-1084.
- Oberreuter, G., L'Huillier, G., Ríos, S. A., & Velásquez, J. D. (2010). FastDocode: Finding approximated segments of N-Grams for document copy detection. In Notebook Papers of CLEF 2010 LABs and Workshops, Padua, Italy.
- Oberreuter, G., L'Huillier, G., Ríos, S. A., & Velásquez, J. D. (2011). Approaches for intrinsic and external plagiarism detection. In Notebook Papers of CLEF 2011 LABs and Workshops, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
- Palkovskii, Y. (2009). "Counter Plagiarism Detection Software" and "Counter Counter Plagiarism Detection" Methods. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Uncovering Plagiarism, Authorship and Social Software Misuse and 1st International Competition on Plagiarism Detection.
- Si, A., Leong, Hong, V., & Lau, R. W. H. (1997). CHECK: A document plagiarism detection system. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (pp. 70-77). ACM.
- Suárez, P., González, J. C., & Villena Román, J. (2010). A plagiarism detector for intrinsic plagiarism. In Notebook Papers of CLEF 2010 LABs and Workshops, Padua, Italy.
- Tsatsaronis, G., Varlamis, I., Giannakoulopoulos, A., & Kanellopoulos, N. (2010). Identifying free text plagiarism based on semantic similarity. In Proceedings of the 4th International Plagiarism Conference, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
- Weber-Wulff, D. (2010). Test cases for plagiarism detection software. In Proceedings of the 4th International Plagiarism Conference, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–112 of 112
The Writing Process of a Ph.D. Proposal: Corpus Analysis and an Interview with the Author
Arsic, O., & Popović, S. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72718-5_5
Perceptions of plagiarism by students at the University of Economics in Bratislava
Maierová, E. (2023) · CASALC Review · doi:10.5817/casalc2022-2-3
NewsDeps: Visualizing the Origin of Information in News Articles
Hamborg, F., Meschenmoser, P., Schubotz, M., Scharpf, P., & Gipp, B. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-40406-2_8
Self-citationSimilarity Detection in Two or More Submitted Documents
Nagpal, P. (2023) · International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology · doi:10.22214/ijraset.2023.54240
Improving Academic Integrity in Indonesia: Proposed Recommendations for Managing Alleged Misconducts
Siaputra, I. B., & Santosa, D. A. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-39989-3_4
Lexical Measurement of Teaching Qualities
Biester, L., Stewart, I., Hirshfield, L. J., Mihalcea, R. F., & Pozzi, S. A. (2024) · ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition · doi:10.18260/1-2--43475
ELEMENTS OF PLAGIARISM IN NIRMANA 2D ASSIGNMENTS WITH THE CONCEPT OF PRIMARY COLORS
Nasruddin, M. F. (2024) · Proceeding of International Conference on Business Economics Social Sciences and Humanities · doi:10.34010/icobest.v7i.560
Kaibassova, D., & Temirzhanov, B. (2025) · International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Knowledge Economy (ICCIKE) · doi:10.1109/iccike67021.2025.11318285
AI Tools for Writing and Editing in Academia and Research
Lavania, S., Verma, A. K., & Basuel, R. B. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-5601-3.ch014
Text and Image Plagiarism Detection Using Histogram Matching and LCS
Reddy¹, G. L. A. S. M. A., & Kumar³, M. V. N. T. M. (2026) · International Journal of Advanced Research in Science Communication and Technology · doi:10.48175/ijarsct-32136
Zhang, C., Li, Z., Lin, P., Xu, Y., Yang, J., & Feng, F. (2026) · Mechanisms and machine science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-17313-3_55
Nurislom, A. (2026) · Eurasian Journal of Mathematical Theory and Computer Sciences · doi:10.70413/ejmtcs-v06-i10-s92242
Metadata
- Authors
- Meuschke, N., & Gipp, B.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- ORCID
- Meuschke, Norman
- Venue
- International Journal for Educational Integrity
- Published
- 2013-06-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1833-2595 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2096194908
- Cited by
- 112
- References
- 91
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 17.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal for Educational Integrity (publishedVersion)
- KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
- GRO (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
- Keywords
- academic plagiarism, plagiarism detection
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
