Abstract
There are many internationally developed text-matching software systems that help successfully identify potentially plagiarized content in English texts using both their internal databases and web resources. However, many other languages are not so widely spread but they are used daily to communicate, conduct research and acquire education. Each language has its peculiarities, so, in the context of finding content similarities, it is necessary to determine what systems are more suitable for a document set written in a specific language. The research focuses on testing the existent text-matching software systems on a set of documents prepared in the Latvian language. The corpus includes documents containing verbatim plagiarism, paraphrasing, translation plagiarism and original text to test both false positive and false negative cases. In total, 16 different text-matching software systems are compared on the plagiarism coverage using the prepared document corpus. The research presented is a part of an international initiative “Testing of Support Tools for Plagiarism Detection (TeSToP)” established under the European Network for Academic Integrity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ali, A. M. E. T., Abdulla, H. M. D., & Snášel, V. (2011). Overview and comparison of plagiarism detection tools. In V. Snášel, J. Pokorn’y, & K. Richta (Eds.), Proceedings of the annual international workshop on dAtabases, texts, specifications and objects (pp. 161–172). Pisek: Czech Republic.
Badge, J., & Scott, J. (2009). Dealing with plagiarism in the digital age. Synthesis project, final report. School of Biological Sciences, University of Leicester, 18p. http://evidencenet.pbworks.com/w/page/19383480/Dealing%20with%20plagiarism%20in%20the%20digital%20age. Accessed 13 Apr 2019.
Birkić, T., Celjak, D., Cundeković, M., & Rako, S. (2016). Analysis of software for plagiarism detection in science and education. Report. University of Zagreb, 26p.
Chowdhury, H. A., & Bhattacharyya, D. K. (2016). Plagiarism: Taxonomy, tools and detection techniques. Paper presented at 19th National Convention on Knowledge, Library and Information Networking (NACLIN 2016), Tezpur University, Assam, India, October 26–28, 2016. http://arxiv.org/abs/1801.06323. Accessed 17 Apr 2019.
DELFI.lv. (2015). RSU turpina cīņu ar plaģiātismu; sāk izmantot satura oriģinalitātes sistēmu (in Latvian). https://www.delfi.lv/news/national/politics/rsu-turpina-cinu-arplagiatismu-sak-izmantot-satura-originalitates-sistemu.d?id=45582634. Accessed 19 May 2019.
ENAI. (n.d.). Testing of support tools for plagiarism detection. http://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/testing-of-plagiarism-detection-tools/. Accessed 14 Apr 2019.
Hage, J., Rademaker, P., & van Vugt, N. (2010). A comparison of plagiarism detection tools (Technical report UU-CS-2010-015). Utrecht: Utrecht University.
Heres, D., & Hage, J. (2017). A quantitative comparison of program plagiarism detection tools. In Proceedings of the 6th computer science education research conference (pp. 73–82), Helsinki, Finland, November 14–14, 2017.
Kashkur, M., Parshutin, S., & Borisov, A. (2010). Research into plagiarism cases and plagiarism detection methods. Scientific Journal of Riga Technical University, 44, 139–144.
LA.lv. (2014). LU ar datorprogrammas palīdzību kontrolēs plaģiātu studiju noslēguma darbos (in Latvian). http://www.la.lv/lu-ar-datorprogrammas-palidzibu-kontrolesplagiatu-studiju-nosleguma-darbos. Accessed 12 May 2019.
Luparenko, L. A. (2014). Инструментарий поиска плагиата в научных работах: анализ программных решений (in Ukrainian). Інформаційні технології і засоби навчання, 40(2), 151–169.
Martins, V. T., Fonte, D., Henriques, P.R., & da Cruz D. (2014). Plagiarism detection: A tool survey and comparison. In Proceedings of 3rd symposium on languages, applications and technologies (pp. 143–158).
Nahas, M. N. (2017). Survey and comparison between plagiarism detection tools. American Journal of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2(2), 50–53.
Naik, R. R., Landge, M. B., & Mahender, C. N. (2015). A review on plagiarism detection tools. International Journal of Computer Applications, 125(11), 16–22.
Pappas, C. (2017). Top 10 free plagiarism detection tools for eLearning professionals. eLearning Industry. https://elearningindustry.com/top-10-free-plagiarism-detection-tools-for-teachers. Accessed 16 Apr 2019.
Patil, A., & Bomanwar, N. (2016). Survey on different plagiarism detection tools and Software’s. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 7(5), 2191–2193.
Pertile, S., Moreira, V. P., & Rosso, P. (2016). Comparing and combining content- and citation-based approaches for plagiarism detection. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(10), 2511–2526.
Riteniece, K. (2014). Augstskolas sāk datorizētu cīņu ar plaģiātismu; problēmu saskata jau skolu izglītībā (in Latvian). https://www.lsm.lv/raksts/zinas/zinu-analize/augstskolassak-datorizetu-cinu-ar-plagiatismu-problemu-saskata-jau-skolu-izglitiba.a87087/. Accessed 19 May 2019.
Rozenberga, M. (2013). Četras augstskolas sākušas sadarboties cīņā pret plaģiātismu (in Latvian). https://www.lsm.lv/raksts/zinas/latvija/cetras-augstskolas-sakusassadarboties-cina-pret-plagiatismu.a58443/. Accessed 19 May 2019.
Schmidt, E. (2018). For the first time, 90 percent completed high school or more. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/07/educational-attainment.html. Accessed 15 Apr 2019.
Shkodkina, Y., & Pacauskas, D. (2017). Comparative analysis of plagiarism detection systems. Business Ethics and Leadership, 1(3), 27–35.
Shynkarenko, V. I., & Kuropiatnyk, O. S. (2017). Проблемы выявления плагиата и анализ инструментального программного обеспечения для их решения (in Russian). Наука та прогрес транспорту. Вісник Дніпропетровського національного університету залізничного транспорту, 1(67), 131–142.
Skutelis, K. (2018). Tomass Aleksandersons: Modernās tehnoloģijas azartspēļu industrijā (in Latvian). https://kursors.lv/2018/07/31/tomass-aleksandersons-modernas-tehnologijas-azartspelu-industrija/. Accessed 22 Sept 2018.
The Latvian Institute. (2018). Latvia. The Greenovative Country. http://latvia.eu/sites/default/files/media/fl_2018_2.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2019.
Vani, K., & Gupta, D. (2016). Study on extrinsic text plagiarism detection techniques and tools. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 9(5), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.25103/jestr.095.02.
Weber-Wulff, D., Möller, C., Touras, J., & Zincke, E. (2013). Plagiarism detection software test 2013. http://plagiat.htw-berlin.de/wp-content/uploads/Testbericht-2013-color.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2019.
Wikipedia. (2016). Robotika (in Latvian). https://lv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robotika&oldid=2545152. Accessed 22 Sept 2018.
Wikipedia. (2018a). Plagiarism detection. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plagiarism_detection&oldid=860449242. Accessed 22 Sept 2018.
Wikipedia. (2018b). Население Земли (in Russian). https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%97%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BB%D0%B8. Accessed 22 Sept 2018.
Acknowledgements
The authors of the paper express their gratitude to Gints Jēkabsons, who tested the VDPKS system developed in Latvia.
Comparing Text-Matching Software Systems Using the Document Set in the Latvian Language.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kamzola, L., Anohina-Naumeca, A. Comparing Text-Matching Software Systems Using the Document Set in the Latvian Language. J Acad Ethics 18, 129–141 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-09355-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-09355-z