skip to main content
10.1145/3543895.3543928acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesacitConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Authorship Verification for Hired Plagiarism Detection

Authors Info & Claims
Published:26 January 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Plagiarism detection is an important tool in modern academia. With growing class sizes and the modernization of the internet, there have been more ways that allow plagiarism to excel in modern culture. Methods such as patchwriting – where an individual may copy, paste and possibly modify the content – and commissioned writing – where an individual hires another person to do the work for them – are not considered by modern plagiarism detectors. This work aims to give instructors a way to identify and detect plagiarism in student writing that addresses these difficult-to-detect issues using artificial intelligence. We introduce a tool to aid instructors in detecting plagiarism that adapts to each students’ individual writing style as they submit writing assignments. This work incorporates artificial intelligence and natural language processing that identifies the ways in which a student writes based on a collection of their essays. The proposed Authorship Verification for Hired Plagiarism Detection (AVHPD) tool includes document storage, a clean user interface, and intuitive break-downs of how a given writing sample differs from prior samples.

References

  1. Christopher J.C. Burges. 2010. Geometric Methods for Feature Extraction and Dimensional Reduction - A Guided Tour. Springer US, Boston, MA, 53–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09823-4_4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Ricardo J. G. B. Campello, Davoud Moulavi, and Joerg Sander. 2013. Density-Based Clustering Based on Hierarchical Density Estimates. In Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Jian Pei, Vincent S. Tseng, Longbing Cao, Hiroshi Motoda, and Guandong Xu (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 160–172.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Simon Coghlan, Tim Miller, and Jeannie Paterson. 2020. Good proctor or” Big Brother”? AI Ethics and Online Exam Supervision Technologies. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.07647(2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Coventry University. 2022 [Online]. British Academic Written English Corpus (BAWE). https://www.coventry.ac.uk/bawe/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Phillip Dawson, Wendy Sutherland-Smith, and Mark Ricksen. 2020. Can software improve marker accuracy at detecting contract cheating? A pilot study of the Turnitin authorship investigate alpha. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 45, 4 (2020), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1662884 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1662884Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Gage Christensen and Daniel Enriquez and Hayden Donovan and Noah Wong and Jared Lam. 2022 [Online]. Authorship Verification for Hired Plagiarism Detection. https://github.com/grchristensen/avpdGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. GrammarlyInc. 2022 [Online]. Grammarly, Free Online Writing Service. https://www.gramarly.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Virginia Gray. 2017. Principal component analysis: methods, applications and technology. Nova Science Publishers, Incorporated.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and James Jay. 1788. The Federalist Papers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Karl O. Jones. 2008. Practical Issues for Academics Using the Turnitin Plagiarism Detection Software. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies and Workshop for PhD Students in Computing (Gabrovo, Bulgaria) (CompSysTech ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1145/1500879.1500935Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Bradley Kjell, W.Addison Woods, and Ophir Frieder. 1994. Discrimination of authorship using visualization. Information Processing & Management 30, 1 (1994), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(94)90029-9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Moshe Koppel and Jonathan Schler. 2004. Authorship Verification as a One-Class Classification Problem. In Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference on Machine Learning (Banff, Alberta, Canada) (ICML ’04). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 62. https://doi.org/10.1145/1015330.1015448Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. James O’Shea. 2022 [Online]. Function word lists | Semantic Similarity. https://semanticsimilarity.wordpress.com/function-word-lists/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Proctorio. 2022 [Online]. Proctorio: Securing the integrity of your online assessments. | Proctorio. https://proctorio.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. PSAL. 2022 [Online]. JStylo-Anonymouth - Authorship Attribution and Authorship Anonymization Framework. https://github.com/psal/jstyloGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Quetext. 2022 [Online]. Original Writing, Made Easy | Quetext. https://www.quetext.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Efstathios Stamatatos. 2008. A Survey of Modern Authorship Attribution Methods. 60 (December 16, 2008 2008), 538–556. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Wendy Sutherland-Smith and Rodney Carr. 2005. Turnitin.com: Teachers’ perspectives of anti-plagiarism software in raising issues of educational integrity. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice 2, 3 (2005), 106–114. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.2.3.10Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. TurnitinLLC. 2022 [Online]. Contract Cheating | Turnitin. https://www.turnitin.com/products/originality/contract-cheatingGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. TurnitinLLC. 2022 [Online]. Empower students to do their best, original work. https://www.turnitin.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Authorship Verification for Hired Plagiarism Detection

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ACIT '22: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Applied Computing & Information Technology
      May 2022
      81 pages
      ISBN:9781450397605
      DOI:10.1145/3543895

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 26 January 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)35
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format