Dialyzing the Academic Misconduct from the Academic Exchange System/DIALYSER D'INCONDUITE DE L'ACADEMIQUE DU SYSTEME D'ECHANGE UNIVERSITAIRES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract At presently, the Academic dishonorable behavior had become a bad phenomenon in the academic circles. This paper points out that it was the result of the whole of the academic exchange system, and the author is only one of respect. The paper analyzes the causes of and countermeasures from authors, publishers, library and information institutions, users, etc.. And pointes out that the phenomenon of academic belongs to social problem that requires a wide range of common boycott. Key Words: Academic dishonorable behavior; Academic exchange system; Analysis of reasons Resume A l'heure actuelle, le comportement deshonorant de l'academique est devenue un phenomene mal dans les milieux universitaires. Ce document souligne que c'etait le resultat de l'ensemble du systeme d'echange universitaire, et l'auteur est un seul de respect. Le document analyse les causes et les contre-mesures par des auteurs, des editeurs, des institutions de bibliotheques et d'information, les utilisateurs, etc et souligne que le phenomene de la academique appartient a un probleme social qui necessite un large eventail de boycott commune. Mots cles: Comportement deshonorant de l'enseignement; Academique du Systeme d'echange; Analyse des raisons INTRODUCTION Academic misconduct has become a major drawback in the modern society. So far, many articles have stated this phenomenon. The author had retrieved more than 100 records from the Chinese full-text journals database and after reading and analyzing those texts, the author found that those paper were mainly talking about the study of academic misconduct, the definition of academic misconduct and its causes, and moreover they were researched this problem mainly from the author's point of view (Lu, 2007). In fact, the author is only one part of the entire system. This issue has more to do with the entire academic communication system rather than just a part of the whole. Because that more or less reflects another kind of social phenomena associated with the digital age, with globalization, with things speeding up, the... the hyperspeed of the internet... . ELEMENTS OF THE ACADEMIC EXCHANGE SYSTEM Author No matter from the traditional or modern academic exchange system, we can find that the authors are at the forefront of the system, they create the research works which are published by the publishing company. Throughout the academia, I think that the authors can be divided into two groups, one is the real academic leaders, they work hard not for fame or fortune, but only for the learning. And they always stand in the front of the subject, leading the new areas of academic development. The other part is perhaps the stream of academic misconduct, including someone who does not have the ability of scientific research or conditions, or maybe they are compelled helpless by the technical titles, assessment and eager for success, so there is the formation of plagiarism, forgery, tampering and other fraudulent malpractices. We know that a new concept or a new point is filled with the author's intellectual work. There is no denying that it embodies the author's hard labor. Even each word in the article is the author's thoughtful crystallization. Therefore simply taking other people's work is the ultimate disrespectful to both the author and the academic accomplishment. According to statistics, since the 1980s, the book named Marxist Philosophy in China or like that was published more than 500 kinds of versions. Despite the great work of Marxist, as a basis for materials used for students, is this really necessary to publish so many versions? If there is a new point of view in each book, and we will have all more than 500 types (Yang, 2005), there should be a new Das Capital being written. Marx has spent nearly 40 years writing Das Capital, now days, scholars can write several books and countless papers in few years. Although someone made a comment or behind indicate the source in the article, they can't copy directly from the context being not modified. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".