Conference Plagiarism Policy
Plagiarism Procedures for use by the Future Science Society Conference ICAP Chairs and Publications Editors-in-Chief
ICAP defines plagiarism as the reuse of someone else’s prior processes, results, or words without explicitly acknowledging the original author and source. It is important for all ICAP authors to recognize that plagiarism in any form, at any level, is unacceptable and is considered a serious breach of professional conduct, with potentially severe ethical and legal consequences.
2.0 ICAP ComSoc Guidelines for Conference Proceedings
To help ensure confidentiality, due process, and consistency across all Society publications, cases involving papers intended for or published in ICAP conference proceedings, journals, and/or magazines, and allegations of author misconduct, shall be investigated by the ICAP designated volunteer point-of-contact for author misconduct and the Executive Director. An ad hoc committee will be convened as prescribed in the ICAP procedures.
3.1 The ICAP committee and the Executive Director (ED) shall ensure full compliance with ICAP Policies, Procedures, and Guidelines.
In the case of conferences, they shall keep the conference Technical Program Chair (TPC) informed and may make use of such fact-finding assistance as may be offered and deemed appropriate. The TPC may then participate in the determination of corrective action to be recommended to the IEEE VP Publications.
In the case of journal and magazine articles, the appropriate Editor-in-Chief (EIC) shall be consulted, may be involved in any investigation of the facts, and subsequently may be involved in the determination of corrective action.
3.2 Complainants shall bring cases of suspected author misconduct to the attention of the Technical Program Chair (TPC) or Editor-in-Chief (EIC) as appropriate. The TPC/EIC shall ensure that the following documentation is provided to the ORC Chair and the Executive Director:
- Written description of the alleged misconduct. For the original article: title, full list of author names, and publication title in which original appeared.
- For the use of someone else’s ideas: title of idea, full list of creators, and verifiable date of creation.
- For the alleged plagiarized paper: title of article, full list of author names, publication title in which the paper appeared.
- Copies of both articles or, if appropriate, documentation of an idea and the subsequent article, preferably with highlighted text showing all instances of inappropriate reuse.
- Full name and address of the complainant.
It should be noted that similar procedures will be followed in the case of multiple simultaneous submissions of the same work or of essentially the same work to different venues.
3.3 All Participating Parties shall be familiar with the ICAP Plagiarism Guidelines.
4.0 Due Process Overview
Due process and confidentiality are the critical factors in all cases of alleged author misconduct. Anticipating all situations is not possible; however, for cases involving IEEE Communications Society publications, when you become aware of potential author misconduct, the following steps should be taken whenever possible.
- Review the ICAP guidelines
- Notify the Conference Technical Program Chair (TPC) or the appropriate EIC and the ORC Chair or the Executive Director. DO NOT contact the author(s) whose conduct has been brought into question.
- The Executive Director will provide administrative support to help ensure due process. After receiving the documentation, he/she will notify the IEEE VP Publications of an investigation in progress, and contact the author(s) in question requesting an explanation. Based on the response, and in consultation with the ICAP committee and the TPC/EIC, the Executive Director will obtain any additional information deemed appropriate, which may include a review of the paper in question by experts in the field to help determine the level of misconduct.
- The ICAP Chair and the Executive Director will review all of the documentation and draft a notification to the ICAP VP Publications of the facts in the case and the recommended corrective action. The author(s) in question will be advised that the case has gone forward.