Abstract:

[Purposes] This paper aims to study the judgment modes of duplicate checking results of scientific papers in the first review, so as to put forward strategies scientifically and dialectically and make the first review of papers more fair and just. [Methods] Firstly, the survey statistical method was used to analyze the current situation of the first review. Secondly, the total duplication ratio of the papers was deconstructed by mathematical analysis. Finally, the papers were classified according to the distribution of similar fragments, and different judgment modes were proposed according to different paper types. [Findings] Papers that exceed the specific threshold of total duplication ratios will be rejected in the first review of journals, which is biased. According to the importance of each part of the papers and the distribution of similar fragments in different parts, the papers can be divided into continuous distribution type, one-head distribution type, two-head distribution type, and intermediate distribution type in the first review, among which the continuous distribution type is divided into the continuous uniform type and continuous non-uniform type. The one-head distribution type is further divided into the head distribution type and the tail distribution type. On this basis, targeted judgment strategies for different types are proposed, and the practical workflow for dialectical duplicate checking and computer block diagram for accepting or rejecting the papers dialectically are provided. [Conclusions] The review of the papers is one of the most important links of journal publishing, so it is necessary to explore and optimize each process of the review. With the continuous development of computer and information technology, the paper duplicate checking system of artificial intelligence based on dialectical analysis is bound to be developed. The problems of academic quality control and the definition of academic misconduct, which have long plagued journals, will also be solved more rationally, which will make the review process of journal papers more reasonable, objective, and fair.

Key words: Scientific paper, Academic misconduct, Duplicate checking result, Duplication ratio

摘要： 【目的】 对科技论文初审查重结果判定模式进行研究,以期提出科学辩证的取舍策略,使论文初审更加公平与公正。【方法】 首先采用调查统计法对当前初审查重现状进行分析,其次利用数学分析法对论文总复制比解构,最后根据相似片段分布对论文加以分类,针对不同类型提出不同的判定模式。【结果】 在目前各期刊的初审工作中,论文总复制比已具备一票否决的作用,有失偏颇。根据论文各部分的重要性以及相似片段在不同部分的分布情况,将初审论文分为连续分布型、一头分布型、两头分布型、中间分布型,其中:连续分布型又分为连续均匀型和连续非均匀型;一头分布型再分为头部分布型和尾部分布型。在此基础上,对不同类型提出有针对性的判定策略,并给出论文查重辩证取舍实操工作流程与论文查重辩证取舍计算机程序框图。【结论】 审稿工作是期刊出版工作的重要环节之一,不断探索优化审稿环节的每个流程尤为必要。随着计算机和信息技术的不断发展,基于辩证分析思想的论文人工智能查重系统一定会被开发出来,长期困扰期刊的学术质量把控及学术不端行为界定等问题也会被更加合理地解决,期刊论文的审稿环节将更加合理、客观与公正。

关键词: 科技论文, 学术不端, 查重结果, 复制比