MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411464408 · doi:10.53762/mj5nhw90

10.53762/mj5nhw90

2000· article· en· W4411464408 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zia Farooqi, Fazal Ilahi Khan, Prof. Dr. Abdul Wahab

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArabic Language Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopyingPublishingContext (archaeology)PermissionLawThe InternetLegal writingPrinting pressSociologyLiteratureHistoryComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Earlier it was said that knowledge is a wealth that cannot be stolen. No bandit can steal it. But in modern times where technology has progressed and the acquisition of knowledge has become easier thanks to computers and internet. At the same time, a type of academic, literary and moral corruption has also been made easy through which knowledge, literature and ideas can be stolen. This is called plagiarism. The definition of plagiarism is "to pass off another person's writing or idea as your own, or to present it in such a way that it appears to be the author's." Literary plagiarism is not a new thing, but it has been going on for a long time, but it has come to the fore in the modern era. Materialism has also been introduced. Under Western law, any academic or literary work is owned by its author. And printing it without his permission is a violation of his right. And for the violation of this right, punishments have been set in the context of copyrights (printing rights). According to these laws, one's writing cannot be printed without his permission. There is also a fixed amount of taking copies (photostats) of this writing, making more copies is also a crime. Its purpose is that one's The writing cannot be sold by another person. Likewise, copy to someone's idea is also plagiarism by using your own words and publishing them under your own name, and translating someone else's writing under your own name is also called literary plagiarism.In the era of Hadith, while computers and the Internet have made it easier for the common man to access knowledge, these modern facilities have also made plagiarism easier and its paraphrasing is also easy. Many people and organizations are taking advantage of this facility. These diseases are rapidly flourishing in our country and are affecting the quality of higher education along with research and editing. Our literature and journalism are badly affected by plagiarism. In my article I ll try to present details of plagiarism, its position in Quran O Sunnah and how to control it.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9760.978

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicArabic Language Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207