Experts page

“Antiplagiat.RSL”
 For plagiarism tests carried out with the research documents, the Russian State Library (hereinafter the RSL) uses software “Automated system of specialized text document processing” (hereinafter System) developed exclusively for the RSL by the “Antiplagiat” company.
 The System reveals the volume of coincident fragments of the text document respectively the sources of the collections of the Digital Library of the RSL. The System detects the coincidences and forms the report indicating all the found fragments.
 An integral part of the plagiarism test is the analytical work of the specialist who studies the received data, evaluates the character of the revealed coincident fragments and makes the decision whether they are plagiaristic or not.
 One of the collections of the Digital Library of the RSL which is of the greatest demand and which is used for the plagiarism test is the Digital Dissertation Library of the RSL counting over a million full texts of dissertation theses and author’s abstracts in all the branches of science.
 The plagiarism test being over, the specialist composes a report in the written form. The report is made in the firm form of the RSL and contains signatures of both, the specialist themselves and the head of the department/organization, as well as the official stamp.
 The plagiarism tests realized at the RSL are based on the principles of proper enforcement of the current legislation of the Russian Federation and of the science ethics, as well as of the independence and impartiality of the specialist carrying it out.
 Since the year of 2009, within the framework of the “Antiplagiat. RSL” project there has been tested over 3,700 dissertation theses, articles and other documents in 27 scientific specializations.
 
In order to make the plagiarism test most objective and of a highest quality, the submitted documents are to be arranged in a proper way as follows:
– the text of the document is to contain its author’s name along with its title and the year of publication/creation;
– the structure and contents of the document are to be relevant to its table of contents;
– references and bibliography list are obligatory.
 
Reference list
Grazhdanskii kodeks Rossiiskoi Federatsii: chast 4 (dated by 18.12.2006 # 230-FZ). – URL: http://www.consultant.ru/popular/gkrf4/79_2.html.
Polozhenie o prisuzhdenii uchenykh stepenei : ed. 24 September 2013. # 842. – URL: http://government.ru/media/files/41d4925efff87b74f22e.pdf.
Polozhenie o sovete po zashchite dissertatsii na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni kandidata nauk, na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni doktora nauk : ed. 13 January 2014 # 7. – URL: http://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/prime/doc/70503292/.
Vysshaya attestatsionnaya komissiya (VAK) pri Ministerstve nauki i vysshego obrazovaniya Rossiiskoi Federatsii: official website. – URL: http://vak.ed.gov.ru/ru/77.
O plagiate v dissertatsiyakh na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni : 2nd ed., rev. and exp. / Vysshaya attestatsionnaya komissiya (VAK) pri Ministerstve nauki i vysshego obrazovaniya Rossiiskoi Federatsii ; [compiling auth.] S.M. Shakhrai, N.I. Arister, A.A. Tedeev. – . : II, 2015. – 192 P.
Current standards for document arrangement within the Russian Federation
GOST 7.0.11–2011 Sistema standartov po informatsii, bibliotechnomu i izdatelskomu delu. Dissertatsiya i avtoreferat dissertatsii. Struktura i pravila oformleniya. – . : Standartinform, 2012. – 17 P.
GOST 7.0.5–2008 Sistema standartov po informatsii, bibliotechnomu i izdatelskomu delu. Bibliograficheskaya ssylka. Obshchie trebovaniya i pravila sostavleniya. – . : Standartinform, 2008. – 41 P.
GOST 7.1–2003 Sistema standartov po informatsii, bibliotechnomu i izdatelskomu delu. Bibliograficheskaya zapis. Bibliograficheskoe opisanie. Obshchie trebovaniya i pravila sostavleniya. – . : IPK Izdatelstvo standartov, 2004. – 166 P.
GOST 7.82 2001 Sistema standartov po informatsii, bibliotechnomu i izdatelskomu delu. Bibliograficheskaya zapis. Bibliograficheskoe opisanie elektronnykh resursov. Obshchie trebovaniya i pravila sostavleniya. – . : IPK Izdatelstvo standartov, 2001. – 23 P.
GOST 7.80 2000 Sistema standartov po informatsii, bibliotechnomu i izdatelskomu delu. Bibliograficheskaya zapis. Zagolovok. Obshchie trebovaniya i pravila sostavleniya. – . : IPK Izdatelstvo standartov, 2000. – 11 P.
Articles and other thematic materials
2018 
Avdeeva N.V. Zaimstvovaniya v nauchnykh dokumentakh: iz opyta ekspertov RGB : video of the webinar organized at the RSL in cooperation with CC “Antiplagiat”07.06.2018. – URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqACnT_cjVU&feature=youtu.be.
 
2017 
 
Avdeeva N.V. Kultura podgotovki nauchnykh publikatsii // Digital Century of Culture : collection of theses of speeches of the res. and pract. conf. (Perm, 18-22 Sept. 2017) / Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, Russian State Library, Perm State Regional Universal Library named after A.M.Gorky, Russian Association of Digital Libraries. – ., 2017. – PP. 5-9.
 
Revealing plagiarisms in research documents. From the experience of the Russian State Library / N.V.Avdeeva [and others] // Digital Libraries. – 2017. – V.20. – # 5. – PP. 285-297. – URL: http://elbib.kpfu.ru/ru/article/431.
 
2016
 
Avdeeva N.V., Ledovskaya V.., Lobanova G.. Methods of detailed expert verification of scientific papers which obtained low rank in the course of computer-aided quality ranking // Information Resources of Russia. – 2016. – # 4. – PP. 2-5. – URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=27036412.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Lobanova G.. Structuring scientific works in the “Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion” format – what a beginner ought to know. // Open Education. – 2016. – V.20. – # 5. – PP. 4-10. – URL: http://openedu.rea.ru/jour/article/view/314.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Sus I.V. Structuring scientific texts – practice and peculiarities // Scientific periodicals – problems and solutions. – 2016. – V 6. – # 2. – PP. 81-87. – URL: https://bgscience.ru/viewpdf/?a=21835277.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Sus I.V. Experts and their role in evaluating quality of scientific documents with computer means // Information Resources of Russia. – 2016. – # 6. – PP. 2-5. – URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=27656646.
 
2015
 
Avdeeva N.V., Ledovskaya V.. Plagiarisms in dissertation theses – how to detect // Herald of the Chelyabinsk State Academy of Culture and Arts. – 2015. – # 3 (43). – PP. 16–20. – URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/v/nekorrektnye-zaimstvovaniya-v-dissertatsiyah-sposoby-ih-obnaruzheniya.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Lobanova G.A. Izbytok zaimstvovannogo teksta v dissertatsiyakh i ego raznovidnosti // Information Resources of Russia. – 2015 – # 2. – PP. 2-4. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/press_center/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69707123/.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Lobanova G.A. Refusal to quote scientific publications in foreign languages and problem of fictitious usage of such sources in Russian dissertation theses // Scientific periodicals – problems and solutions. – 2015. – V. 5. – # 4. – PP. 194-200. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/press_center/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69707124/.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Sus I.V. Problema avtorstva nauchnykh rabot v epokhu Interneta // Information Resources of Russia. – 2015. – # 3. – PP. 7-9. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/press_center/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69707128/.
 
2014
 
Avdeeva N.V., Ledovskaya V.M., Nikulina O.V. Na strazhe kachestva vysshego obrazovaniya i nauki // Accreditation in Education. – 2014. – October – PP. 20-21. – URL: http://www.akvobr.ru/na_strazhe_kachestva.html.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Lobanova G.A. Klassifikatsiya fragmentov teksta pri ekspertize dissertatsii na predmet zaimstvovanii (plagiata) // Information Resources of Russia. – 2014. –# 1. – PP. 2-6. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/digital_resources/digital_resources69/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69705071/.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Lobanova G.A., Sus I.V. Kultura podgotovki i predstavleniya nauchnykh rabot // Quality of Education. – 2014. – # 7-8. – PP. 52-56. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/press_center/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69705805/.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Lobanova G.A., Sus I.V. Predstavlenie nauchnoi statyi dlya publikatsii kak problema realizatsii osobykh avtorskikh kompetentsii // Information Resources of Russia. – 2014. – # 4 (140). – PP. 22-25. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/digital_resources/digital_resources69/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69705605/.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Nikulina O.V. «Antiplagiat.RGB»: na puti k istinnoi nauke // University Book. – 2014. – July-August. – PP. 90-92. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/digital_resources/digital_resources69/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69705339/.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Nikulina O.V. Nezavisimaya ekspertiza dissertatsii – vazhnyi etap na puti povysheniya kachestva podgotovki nauchnykh kadrov // Quality of Education. – 2014. – # 6. – PP. 16-20. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/press_center/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69705579/.
 
2012
 
Avdeeva N.V., Nikulina O.V., Sazanov A.V. «Antiplagiat.RGB»: Naiti i obezvredit // University Book. – 2012. – October. – PP. 49-51. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/digital_resources/digital_resources69/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69704025/.
 
Avdeeva N.V., Nikulina O.V., Sologubov A.M. Sistema «Antiplagiat.RGB» i nedobrosovestnye avtory dissertatsii: kto pobedit? // Scientific periodicals – problems and solutions. – 2012. – # 5 (11). – PP. 11-16. – URL: http://www.aselibrary.ru/digital_resources/digital_resources69/digital_resources6970/digital_resources69703944/.
 
 
Frequently asked questions
1. Why the information data of the computer test cannot be considered without any other steps?
The system finds different coincident fragments in the documents, and among them there can be not only potential plagiarisms but also quotations and commonly use word combinations. If the information data of the primary automated test are considered without any other steps in this analysis to be made, we shall get the facts of inadequate lowering of the level of text authenticity.
 
2. Which is the allowed volume (in percent) of the borrowed text, of the authentic text, of the quoted text and of self-quotations? 
For the moment there do not exist any qualitative restrictions for the volumes of the borrowed text, of the authentic text, of the quoted text and of self-quotations. 
 
3. Are the low-volume borrowings really considered?
The incorrect borrowings of even low volumes (less than of 1%) can be Copyright violating. 
 
4. What is the expert evaluation of authenticity of research texts needed for?
Systems reveal coincident places within the tested document with respect to those ones belonging the collection of sources, but they would not specify their nature. Numerous fragments happen to turn out correct borrowings or widely-used expressions and terms. Considering the information data of the computer report on the primary test without excluding the like fragments would lead to the facts of inadequate lowering of the level of text authenticity.
 
5. Does the computer check guarantee the 100% exactness and objectivity of the information data?
No, it does not. Any automated system reveals coincident fragments of different types within the tested documents and the collection of sources, and not all of them are plagiarisms. Only an expert specialist is able to distinguish between plagiarisms and borrowings of other kinds. 
 
6. How can it be that the system considers commonly used word combinations and terms to be plagiaristic?
This is the common phenomenon for all the modern software products. And that is why any computer report needs expert verification.
 
7. What is «an authentic text»?
Within the framework of the plagiarism tests carried out at the RSL, that is a text which does not contain any plagiarisms with respect to the texts of the sources against which the tests are realized.
 
8. How to arrange quotations correctly if I do not want them to be considered plagiarisms?
The quotations are to have references and links to them. Bibliographic descriptions should contain true information about the sources used in compliance with the accepted arrangement standards. You are welcome to view details in section «Reference materials” and “Articles and other thematic materials».
 
9. Should the quotations from legal documents be considered borrowings?
Texts of laws and other legal documents are not copyright, still the quotation rules should be followed when dealing with them. In case those rules are broken or left aside, such quotations turn to be plagiarisms. 
 
10. Is a paraphrase plagiarism?
A paraphrase (retelling) can be plagiarism if it does not have any references to its source. 
 
11. What is a "paraphrase"?
For the moment the “paraphrase” term is defined by linguists in different ways. Sometimes it would mean the same with “rephrasing” (expressing the same idea with different words, or transferring the idea into a different situation) and “periphrasis” (expressing the meaning by a description). All the aforementioned concepts have in common the basic idea of transforming the initial variant of the sentence. 
 
12. What is a «compilation»?
This is the results of other people’s thoughts and research being combined without independent work over the sources by its author. 
 
13. How to evaluate the correctness of the borrowed fragment if the essential meaning of the text is preserved and its wording differs from the source? 
The degree of correctness of the borrowed fragment (irrespective of its difference in form from the text of the source) is established on the basis of the fact of presence/absence of references and bibliographic descriptions. 
 
14. What about self-quotation in dissertation theses? Is that allowable?
Clause 14 of Decree # 842 dated by 24 September 2013 “ O poryadke prisuzhdeniya uchenykh stepenei” (“About Order of Assignment of Scientific Degrees”) says that “When using in their dissertation thesis results of their previous research work performed by themselves or in co-authorship, the degree applicant is to highlight that condition in their dissertation thesis”. Thus self-quoting is allowable if you arrange your references and quotation marks correctly.
 
15. What about borrowings from publications performed in co-authorship? Will they be considered plagiaristic?
You are welcome to use your previously created works, be they your own ones or published in co-authorship. In case you quote and give all the necessary links and references, and bibliographic descriptions as they should be, such quotations will not be considered plagiarisms.