• The KIPS Transactions:PartA
• /
• v.16A no.6
• /
• pp.453-462
• /
• 2009

Studies on software plagiarism detection, prevention and judgement have become widespread due to the growing of interest and importance for the protection and authentication of software intellectual property. Many previous studies focused on comparing all pairs of submitted codes by using attribute counting, token pattern, program parse tree, and similarity measuring algorithm. It is important to provide a clear-cut model for distinguishing plagiarism and collaboration. This paper proposes a source code clustering algorithm using a probability model on extreme value distribution. First, we propose an asymmetric distance measure pdist($P_a$, $P_b$) to measure the similarity of $P_a$ and $P_b$ Then, we construct the Plagiarism Direction Graph (PDG) for a given program set using pdist($P_a$, $P_b$) as edge weights. And, we transform the PDG into a Gumbel Distance Graph (GDG) model, since we found that the pdist($P_a$, $P_b$) score distribution is similar to a well-known Gumbel distribution. Second, we newly define pseudo-plagiarism which is a sort of virtual plagiarism forced by a very strong functional requirement in the specification. We conducted experiments with 18 groups of programs (more than 700 source codes) collected from the ICPC (International Collegiate Programming Contest) and KOI (Korean Olympiad for Informatics) programming contests. The experiments showed that most plagiarized codes could be detected with high sensitivity and that our algorithm successfully separated real plagiarism from pseudo plagiarism.

• Journal of Veterinary Clinics
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.174-179
• /
• 2015

Academic integrity guarantees the professional integrity and validity of the education and qualifications offered by the veterinary schools. In this study, we analyzed the responses of 528 veterinary students of two veterinary schools in Seoul regarding their awareness about, knowledge of, and frequency of engaging in academic misconduct. A total of 88.4 percent of the participants agreed that cheating and plagiarism by undergraduates would influence their future academic misconduct. The most common form of academic misconduct was plagiarism (71.7% in the A school, 69.5% in the B school), with falsification (40.2% in the A school, 31.7% in the B school) also reported at a high rate. Students indicated the lack of a culture of academic integrity as the main reason for academic misconduct. According to the regression analysis students' awareness and knowledge of academic integrity and their perception of peers' academic misconduct predicted a significant amount of variance of the frequency of academic misconduct. The findings of this study support that academic integrity should be learned in a flexible format from an early stage of professional development in veterinary curriculum. In parallel with the efforts of faculty, a community approach may be likely to improve the academic environment in terms of integrity.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.39 no.3
• /
• pp.427-439
• /
• 2019

In this study, we investigated how scientists and teachers engaged in mentoring program are conducting research ethics education and how they are creating an ethical educational environment. A questionnaire survey was given to 32 scientists and 44 teachers conducting mentoring programs for gifted high school students. In the content of research ethics education, most of the respondents opined that they should teach against falsification, plagiarism, and fabrication. Teachers were most likely to teach ethical decision-making in each step of the research process. Most of the scientists said that they should teach how to write research note. For the difficulties, the teachers pointed out the challenging system that focuses only on college entrance exams while the scientists answered that it was difficult to recognize research ethics as the problem of the students themselves. For the teachers, the most affective factor in creating an ethical research environment is the amount of time to teach research ethics while for the scientists, it is the ethics of the mentors. For creating an ethical research environment, the teachers responded with making an atmosphere wherein failure is tolerated, and the scientists responded with increasing the degrees of freedom in results. For the difficulties of creating an ethical research environment, the teachers were constrained by research time while the scientists were pressured about the results. These results provide implications for ways to teach research ethics and for ways to create an ethical research environment in the mentoring program for science-gifted students.