 So, I am going to quickly recollect the points we discussed in the video on authorship. How do you determine authorship of technical work and how to determine the order, who is the author, who is not an author and so on. So, firstly who is an author of a technical work? The important thing is they should have made a significant intellectual contribution that is very important. An author of a technical work is somebody who has given intellectual contribution. Intellectual means they should have planned the work, they should have executed the work or they should have analyzed the results, so this is the intellectual contribution. Some people may think that writing is also intellectual, while you can argue that writing is intellectual, but usually writing can be both ways. Somebody has written it roughly and then you work on it and improve it, that is not so much, but somebody who has not done anything in the work and just writing, just formatting, just putting the table, just putting the figures, drawing plots is not necessarily an intellectual contribution. Similarly, it can happen that somebody has just given you an idea. You go and you go to a conference or you go to discuss something with somebody else and while you present your work, they say that why do not you try this, this might work. And then you go and try it, it worked. You did all the hard work and that person comes and tells you, I gave you the idea, you should have my name on your paper, what will you say? So not sufficient that you just give an idea. Idea anybody can give, it might just fail also. Maybe there is an intellectual contribution in giving the ideas, not just random guess, but many ideas can fail. So in general it is not considered a significant contribution, it is an intellectual contribution but it is not a significant intellectual contribution. And more importantly, the author should own responsibility. Now I might have given you an idea to work on. You did it, it worked. You are going to put, you are saying you should put my name because you think it was I who gave you the idea, but I might have a different opinion. I need to own a responsibility of what you have done. You claim that you have done a certain experiments. Now how do I know that what you did is right? So I am very uncomfortable if you put my name in that work for which I do not even know what you have done. I have hardly given an idea, very broad idea which could be stated in why do not you try this, it might work which hardly takes 10 seconds to tell. But you have spent a whole year doing experiments, planning experiments, analyzing the results and writing a paper. You think you should put my name, but I may not feel so. I do not feel responsible for what is that you have done, I only gave an idea. So it is very important that each author owns a responsibility of some aspect of the work, some intellectual contribution, just not just giving the idea. So I think it will become clear when we see what is bad authorship. I have discussed all these things in the lecture before, an authorship like a gift authorship, honorary, insignificant, ghost and without permission. You thought I gave you the idea and you could just put my name without even asking me, but I may not feel so. I might feel that I do not trust the way you do the work. I do not like the way you do analysis. I do not trust that that is the correct way to do, but my name is being associated with the bad work. So it is your fault to have included my name without my permission. So these are different situations. Now I will just stop here and allow you to come up with discussions or any comments or questions around who can be an author, who cannot be an author. If you have come across some situations where you are found in a very tricky position, you thought somebody should not be the author and they were forced to be put an author. So let us discuss many of these issues openly and try and find some kind of guidelines or principles over which we can work together. So I am going to reset the questions now and I want you to give comments, raise questions on this question of who is an author, who is not an author. We will come to the order of authorship later, but currently we will just restrict to who is an author and who is not an author. On that topic if you have questions and comments. So think about for a 5 minutes and then I am going to reset. Think about for 5 minutes. If you have come across some situation and discuss with your neighbor and ask if that is appropriate situation to be discussed and then I will reset the hand raise. So I have reset it now. So if you have any questions or comments, so please come ahead. So let us have knowledge institute of technology, knowledge institute. I am studying some literature survey and I am applying it for my work and I am writing my paper and when I am writing, I am using some technical terms or a technical phrases which cannot be rephrased by my own words. Can I use it, whether it will be accounted as a plagiarism or should I use it as a reference, I should put the reference mark in the my part of the work. So we discussed this point earlier, but I will just reiterate once more. The question is if I use there are technical terms that you are not finding equivalent alternatives. Yes, if you do not find equivalent alternatives, you must use only the original phrase. But usually it is only one or two words which can be that original. If it is more than four words, it is usually a concept which can be written in a different way. You will not have four key words coming together, usually it is one or two other words in the sentence. So yes, you have to use as if it is original definition and there are no equivalent synonyms, you must use only the original key words. However, you keep a thumb rule as three words, not more than three. Usually more than three, you will have non-technical words which are coming which can be easily replaced by equivalent words, okay. Let us go to Federal Institute of Science and Technology. I was just worried about plagiarism of hiring ideas or copying ideas and presenting it in your research paper at the idea level. Second, language parts, we are simply copying it and appropriating it as one so on. So these two levels, idea that is content level, language part which is expression level. So how can a teacher, I mean, bring to the notice of a student. That is plagiarism taking place in both these areas. What can be our way of dictating plagiarism? Yeah, it is a very good question. Let me just reiterate your question for the benefit of others. So the question is there are two levels of plagiarism. One is the idea level which is content and other is the actual expression or the language. Now if you take look at most of the plagiarism checkers, they will only look for language level copying. So content level or idea level copying cannot be, all these ideas can be rewritten very beautifully but the idea is copied. Unfortunately, there is no way to detect it. So but that is why we have something called as a peer review. Now if somebody is working in a particular area and you have taken a work from somebody else but not given the citation to the original work, it possibly will get caught in the peer review but again it can go, we can miss that also. So there is, it is only a human, at the moment only a human can detect this kind of idea level plagiarism. We still do not have artificial intelligence for that. But again how to prevent it is a question that can come only by inculcating the ethics among the students. We cannot, we should just inculcate that it is as bad as to copy an idea as to probably kill your friend. So somebody has done it and you are not giving them credit is as good as killing his work or killing him. So it is that kind of ethics that we need to inculcate and it is, it is really difficult. We are all in a same boat that way. Thank you for raising this question. Vidya Pratishthan. Yeah, I am answering to your question, who is the author? Okay, according to me the author is the one who, according to me the author is the one who originates the content from the existing work or completely from a new idea and he should be able to put them in proper words with some form or he should be able to put some words. So he is the author. Good. So can you share any, I would like all of you to think about some anecdotes where you were put in this situation where you cannot, you are not able to come out of an embarrassing place or something where you asked to do something which you didn't want to, you were asked to put somebody's name as author but you didn't want to put their name. How did you come out of that situation? What do you think is right to do and so on? Sometimes what happens for example, let's say someone is a guide for me in academic institution but he has given maybe a little idea or little information but the whole work will be done by a student. So in that case maybe a personal point of view or whatever the gift you say, in that respect I may give his name as author but might be he is not an author but due to some personal relation we may put. So are you talking about the guide or guide in some other institute? Guide means the one who guides me or one who has given a topic or one who has given an objective but not exactly, he is not one who is working or who is not carrying the experiment but the experiment by carrying by the student but due to that since he has given an objective I am putting his name as an author. Okay so this again would be subjective, very specific to that particular paper but in general a guide is not just supposed to give a topic and leave it at that, okay guide does not simply define a problem and leave it at that, at every stage they are supposed to guide you, they are supposed to show you which way to take, show you which way not to take, okay and once the results are there they help you analyze it, okay. So it is very, you are right there are situations where there are people who are guiding, you are supposed to be guides but only state the problem and expect their name to be there, even in big institutions you have such cases but they are very rare. Usual cases a guide is supposed to give a broad indication or broad indication of the where to look for answer, where not to look and so on. So in that case there is an intellectual contribution, there is a significant intellectual contribution in analyzing the results usually it will be the analysis of results and writing of the paper organizing the paper all that intellectual inputs go into it, so it is not just the idea alone or problem statement alone, okay. So let us go to D.Y. Patil college of engineering, yes D.Y. Patil do we have any questions, comments. My question is you said the contribution of author is either nil or very less contribution it is said, how do you define the barrier line for this contribution of an author whether nil or less, this is one question. Secondly I want to say that very often it is said for the authors that the contribution should be it should have a novelty it is said but very often if we see that novelty or originality to project that it is hard to do it for every person. There are chances also that the person may not having novelty in his work but he has done really commendable job, practical job perhaps a good application, in the engineering application maybe. So why should not we cannot be called as a novelty too. Let me just repeat your question for sake of others there are two things that you asked one is how do you differentiate the extent of work done by somebody between no work done and very little work done. The second question is about novelty somebody might have got something new to do but somebody else might have got might have worked very hard but not very new idea and so on. So will they be considered as an author is that correct. It may be having a practical implications also rather societal work. Engineering applications to the society of rural area. So to give an example is a power factor improvement in engineering it is a old one actually but if it is done in large area like comes in rural areas to improve the power factor it may not be novelty but it is a practical application too. If it is a platform many areas rural areas also villages why should not be called a novelty too. True you are very correct so the question is we are not now talking about we are not saying that only persons who have novel contribution have to be authors no that is not right. Persons who have significant intellectual contributions I will just show you that definition again. Significant intellectual contribution now significant intellectual contribution means it need not be new the idea itself may not be new but just that you are doing it for the first time in for this one that is also in a sense a new thing. So the idea of doing it in 1 kilowatt is one thing the idea doing it at 100 kilowatt is another thing so that itself is new. So that is not a question that is still an intellectual contribution that you do to finally see that outcome. Engineering as you said do it in large form whatever example that you gave that is certainly considered an intellectual contribution. Now your second question so novelty the summary is it is just not novelty the novelty might have you can interpret novelty in a different way just by just doing it for a large scale is also a novel thing. Now where it will be published is a question there might be journals which publish this kind of work but there might not be journals many journals may not accept this kind of work which is okay but there might be journals places you do not even have to submit it as a journal article you might just go and carry it out and show that it works that is a different thing that will be recognized in a different way as a development activity as an implementation activity. So that is a different thing your other question is how to distinguish between somebody who has not done any work and somebody who has done little work. So again these are some things that norms that you have to define so in many labs in many labs in the US they clearly have defined rules before they take up the project that is very important you have to define the rules before a project starts if you keep changing the rules as the project is progressing then you are you might be biased towards a particular student suppose that there is a student whom you do not like and then you change the rule that no you should have done 10 experiments only then I can count it earlier you said 5 experiments now you change it to 10 experiments this is an example. So if you change your rules as you progress then there is no meaning of having a rule you might want to change it for the next student but not now so having a predefined criteria ok if it is an experimental project I expect that to be an author you must have done so much amount of work that might be measured in terms of time it measured in terms of experiments ok and so on. So that is saying some minimum limits that you have to have this much amount of work to be called as an author pre define it before the work starts similarly if it is an analysis you have to have at least derived these equations without which is not existing in the literature you define it beforehand then you can be called as an author ok. So these are predefined conditions that you set to be called as an author so then there is no conflict if there are 4 students working each of them has contributed so much then all 4 students are authors in this work ok. So it is very important that you define these things let people know let your students know let your department head know it let your principal know that this is what I am following then next time when the principal says comes and asks you why have you not included my name in your paper you have an answer you say that this is the principle I followed and this is the way I would like to determine my authors ok. So we have just 10 more minutes we have looked at who the author is now the order of authors now order of authors is again tricky thing many people there is no one answer for all those things typical methods that are followed are the there is a descending order of contribution so you decide that ok. So previously you have decided that if I cross this limit you considered an authors so how much you exceed that limit the person who exceeds the most is considered the first author then the next author and so on. So this also the criteria for this also you pre-designed before starting the work or you just have the criteria beforehand do not change the criteria while doing the this one usually the communicating author the lead author ok is the lead of the group who has given the idea who is guiding the students who analyzes helps in analyzing the results who helps in writing up the paper or rewriting the paper they are usually last unless the extent of contribution of the lead author is itself so significantly high compared to their students work students simply did experiments without any analysis then there is a reason to put the lead author as the first author otherwise usually the lead author is the last others are coming decreasing order and then the lead author. So these are some typical methods that are followed some bad practices in this are you need to decide on the order of authorship together so what usually happens which is not desirable is only one person has a say on who is authorship who constitutes authorship and I will decide in which order I will put that is not a good way instead of telling that you will come first you will come second I will come first I will come last instead of saying that state the principle state a principle agree on a principle among the possible authors and then ask each of them to come up with an order based on the principle. So if you base it on a principle write down the principle and say that okay these are the principles all of us agree that who should be the author and what order it has to come and then each of us work among ourselves and write down okay by this principle this person is the first this person is second and so on and then you all exchange notes among yourself and find out okay you might find that all of you agree or maybe there is a small discrepancy okay and that you can resolve but it is very important that this principle is clear among the especially among the guide and the students that what principle was used to determine the order of authorship okay. So in another 5 minutes that we have I will reset and we will take some quick questions or discussions on this topic of order of authorship Amal Jyoti college of engineering. Sir I have a doubt actually yeah I did my MDAC in institution where I did my project and there I have a gate there so we two together publish a paper right now I am working in another institute where I want to continue this work with the help of my this institute so it just does I need to get the permission from the gate who is in the institute or I can publish myself without his name I can I publish my paper alone that's my doubt. So the question is you had you are working on a particular area and you already have publication with your m tech guide now you have come out of that institution m tech institution you are working on another institution where you want to work in the similar area the same area but another problem do I need to take permission from my m tech guide do I need to include their name in my work. So again the principle is what is important the principle is who constitutes an author the person your guide was responsible for educating you on the problem on the area while you are there you are there you paid fees they taught you you learn from them you had a paper that's all after you have come out you might have had some intellectual discussions with them okay some discussions they are like floating ideas they he must say that this might work this might not work unless you have a consistent and continuous collaboration or criticism you doing he is also putting equal effort if not equal significant effort then I don't think that person should qualify the simple reason is the principle that does the person have significant intellectual contribution if somebody is just sitting in a far institute who just taught you or even he might have given an idea to the new problem that you are working on now but just giving an idea does not constitute an authorship you don't even have to take permission it might be a courtesy to tell them that I am working on this just to make sure that he doesn't work on that problem and solve it before you you might just want to tell it as an matter of information but it is not required that you should have and it is actually wrong to have their name some people have the name just because if you have your guides name maybe it's easier to publish but that is wrong one doubt I have is if I am doing this experiment that the present experiment if I am doing in new material that is personally it's pure from the other the old experiment that I already conducted so that is in that state what should I do so long as you are doing a new the same process you are doing on a new material so there is it's still a different thing for this particular project that you are handling there is no intellectual contribution you ask a question you simply go at the list that I have shown here you ask these three questions has that person helped in planning the experiment that you are doing now not previously is that person executing the present work now is that person analyzing the results that you have got now not the previous one okay these three and again I have listed here this is one of the best practice criteria that an author is considered somebody who has definitely done one of planning execution or analysis and has contributed to the writing rewriting reviewing the manuscript number two and three approves the final manuscript that is very important now you might think that it is nice it is a courteous thing to include your former guides name but your former guide may not think so it might be an insult to him that you you are including his name even without his permission even with his approval of what you have done he can easily think that I don't trust the way you do the work when you went out of my institute why did you put my name so it is very important that you have every author approves the final manuscript very important every author has got some contribution to the writing of the manuscript either it is first draft second draft correcting something okay and it has to be one of these three things planning planning of the experiments now not the previous one execution means actually carrying out the experiments and analyzing the results either one of these things and this and this this is a very solid criteria which is followed in most top universities abroad so if you try to follow this and try to inculcate this among your students hopefully someday we will also have a good system where the students appreciate why somebody is considered an author and why somebody is not okay I think we have reached the time so we have to officially close but anybody wants to continue for five minutes I can still I am just going to reset the button now thank you so officially the classes close now so if anybody still wants to ask questions Mount Zion College of Engineering I would like to know what is the minimum allowable allowable percentage of plagiarism in thesis as well as in the journal paper okay so we have answered this question before but I will repeat it so first of all percentage is if you go by strict terms 0 minimum is 0 but strictly we can't go by so I we can definitely say that something more than 20% is really bad something less than 5% is okay now between 5 and 20% you have to be very subjective and need to look at what has been copied if it is few technical words I mean technical words is not full sentences if it is a few technical words which cannot which doesn't have a equivalent synonyms and if it is like few equations which are coming like that similar to the original thing those are acceptable so these are very subjective sir can you tell about the differentiate primary author as well as the corresponding author the corresponding author or the lead author is somebody who has who is the lead of the group in a sense usually in most of the publications which is done in universities the lead author is the guide or the communicating author who has worked on the subject for a large period of time and a primary author is somebody who has done the particular execution of the experiment more than analysis usually it is expected that persons who are beginning in their career are just beginning to learn to analyze the results okay so they mostly execute what is being told and then carry out some minimal analysis so but most of the work is done by the primary author most of the first or two drafts is written by the primary author the analysis of results is done by the lead author because they have little more experience in looking at the results and looking at shortcomings and looking at alternate ways to analyze and so on LDRP instead of technology UGC University grants commission has come up with a scheme to evaluate the work of the teachers now in that they state that the first author would get 60% of the credit for the paper while the remaining authors the remaining 40% get distributed equally between the remaining authors so this somehow supports the tendency for the guide to keep his name first which I think contradicts with the scheme presented by you or the principles that you have stated so do you have any view on this yeah so I have not heard of this but if it is such a thing it is very unfortunate I believe that if even if such a thing is there it should exclude the guide it should exclude the leader communicating author that should even if that criteria is there in a sense it is good because usually the primary author is the one who does a lot and in that sense it is okay to give 60% but putting the guides name in front is certainly not desirable and if you have your say you please write to UGC and to say that they should include a clause that guide guides name first is not acceptable yeah I do not agree with that yes go ahead please sir as you mentioned that that we supposed to get a final approval for our work from so and so for the contributor on the contributor what if the contributor I mean the author is a famous suppose and he doesn't refer our manuscript and because many times it happens that suppose author is a famous author and if I would recite or if I would work on his idea I mean that's intellectual contribution as you mentioned if I would take his intellectual contribution consideration and later on if I would work on that and if I send him for a final approval and what if he doesn't refer my manuscript which I sent him so first of all if that person has not given any intellectual contribution which is what you are saying he has taught you five years ago and for this particular problem he has not given any intellectual contribution he does not even qualify it is one of the bad authorships to have persons were just famous and have them as honorary authors it is a bad practice you must not have them in the first place at all forget the question of they don't have the time because they are famous they don't have the time to read the papers so if they don't have the time to read the papers it's a very good reason not to have them as an author as I said here they should have had one of execution planning or analysis and something some contribution to the manuscript either initial draft reviewing the draft or at least in reviewing the intellectual content even if you are not looking at the English language and the grammatical corrections at least intellectual correction if they don't have time for any one of this it's a nice reason to say we will not have them as an author okay Jawar Lal Nehru College of why don't the academic world come together to why don't the academic will come together to control the mushrooming agencies who tend to put across ISB and publication and take many of the young research scholars for a ride is there no mechanism because plagiarism starts from there because there is somebody who is prompting me to take up a young research scholar doesn't know whether the process of verification is done so can you just repeat this what is it that people are doing I didn't get the first portion what you know these young research scholar get influenced by many agencies which tends to provide ISB and ISS and number and then say that it's a referee journal there is no way to cross verify okay okay see I think the the way I would look at is in a very local way I don't know how to tackle it on a large scale I would simply educate my students to identify what are good journals and then publish in them I think if you are able to train them to identify good journals I think that is more important at least I don't have any ideas about I have not heard of this first of all I'm hearing for the first time I'm sorry I'm not aware of it but if there is such thing that is really happening then my own way is to tell the students which is which are the good journals and not to publish in anything else that's that's all I can I have control on my own students which I can tell them when they are here is there any parameter to identify a good journal is it based on the number of hits or how do you evaluate in a journal is good and which is bad I think you need to so okay this can be developed only over a period of time if we see where so you go to a conference and say you listen to people's talk are you able to judge whether the talk is rigorous done well and so on so you are able to identify persons who are doing sincere and rigorous work just see where they are publishing that is one step to find out which are good journals so that's why we have some some beginner reporter general might yeah I'm not saying reputed in sense very reputed but even some say not so reputed journals of course a good thing is the impact factor but at least beginning with you can start with the impact factor for beginners but again there is no real beginner that very everybody has got a guide and so on so in a sense we are not put into the world of scientific publication from nowhere we are only slowly coming into this we come through we exposed we are exposed to good research from our guides and we transmit that to our students so it is not that I came from my B Tech and M Tech and suddenly I found that which is good journal which is bad no I spent five seven years doing my PhD with my guide and the way I saw them working other people in my department I saw them working and that's how I gained a knowledge of judgment of which is good and which is bad and that is how I try to tell my students which is good and which is bad so I think I don't see any other way that this can be done more analytically like seeing just the just the impact factor or just some other H index and so on thank you PhD college in the case where there are two equally contributed authors and the first name maybe my friend and the second name is me when I go to an interview they take only the first person to be the main paper presented and the second person as a contributor just to help us so in that case how can we choose whose name should be presented as the first writer and assistant correct so see it is whenever you find a work in which there are people who are having equal contributions usually you will find a second paper where the order is shifted because suppose in a particular work you have done equally as your friend but your name came second but certainly there would have been another similar work where you would have done little more than not that friend maybe somebody else so it is expected that at least in one or two of them you have a significantly more contribution than the others so that you can use it certainly but of course in certain cases where say you have only one publication so far and you do not have the second one the best thing would be to ask your supervisor to write a letter or a certificate mentioning that the contribution has been equal and there is another work which is in progress where this ladies this girl is suppose has done a significantly more work it is underway and so on it is better to or even all the authors this will be ideal if all the authors of that contribution agree that say your friend yourself your guide all of them state in a paper that both the first and the second author have contributed equally in fact in certain journals you can use this statement as part of your publication just like an acknowledgement section in the last section you can explicitly state say Lila has contributed the to these these experiments summa has contributed to these these experiments Vijay has done these analysis okay and all of them are to be considered as equal contributors so if you state this upfront in the paper itself that is the best thing okay that is the best thing that you can do that you cannot change that fact later if you have not done that what you can do is at least when you go to an interview you get such a statement written and signed by all three authors that all of them agree that you have done equally as the others one more question related to that and so there are certain universities which are using that guidelines of scopus and they do give the list scopus indexed journals and in that case there are n number of journals where there were no publications at all from Indian authors at all and for the last 19 years there were 19 or 20 years for the no Indian author has been recognized for such journal publications at all so even then we do write to them and it's immediately rejected even though we have been using that the broad or out the spectrum of the journal so they have stated that this is not in the scope of the journal they immediately reject that so considering that point and then why why the universities have not come forward to revise that because these journals are meant for only European side are in the American authors alone have been recognized and so why this kind of insisting on that the Indian writers to publish papers in such journals at all so is there any revision at all to be done in the case of that as a high performance institution like IIT why can't IITs can give some certain guidelines that these were the possible journals you can publish so that the universities can take up a model from IITs and they can insist on publishing journals from that list which you have given so I don't think any IIT should do this kind of do this and do that kind of stuff it might be a personal one to one basis that if you know somebody in IIT working in your area you can ask them for the advice but why should IIT come and tell for the all of India that you should publish in this I don't think any IIT will take that stand officially and they should not also but however if you ask me on a personal basis that you and I are working on a similar area I might know some journals which you don't know I might willing to share that as a personal information as a friend or as an advice but I don't think it can be an officially stated that you should publish here and not there and I don't think that that will work of course there are very recent attempts within our own Indian community among this top Indian Academy of Sciences and Engineering to come with come up with Indian journals of high quality the problem which will be mitigated of the kind of problems that you are saying will get mitigated that only foreign unit universities accept this one so problem with many Indian journals the quality is not there so if we are able to ensure a good quality and accept and reject papers as well then I think we will be able to build a community of good publications within India which are respected at least there may be many topics which are not relevant to the US community or to the Western community but something which is here but which is done in a rigorous way so there are efforts to this in this direction but let's it'll take time to manifest okay Excel your question was for the scientific method what are the different passes see scientific method is a methodology or a process of doing research or doing your day-to-day activities the three passes are with respect to reading a paper how to read a paper okay so if you have any more questions please type it out I think that is a better way I will move on to the next institute and come back to you later if you still have questions I will go to MediCAPS Institute of Technology hello so thanks for waiting so I have two questions the first one is related to plagiarism and second related to authorship sir the first thing is one student of mine he had completed his thesis work and I was asked to check for plagiarism that I the guide has been the guide had been shifted to me earlier he had a different guide so when I checked his work for plagiarism it was free of plagiarism but later on when the external came he checked it using turn it in and it contains plagiarism so what is the like correlation between different tools and turn it in because it was showing 0% plagiarism and different tools which were freely available on the net so the second situation is related to authorship one of my students he was placed in a company and so he had to leave early the college so he asked me whether he can publish his paper I said yes he included my name and later on it contain plagiarism so what should I do in such situation okay very good question I will repeat the question for others the first question is the different softwares gave different results and you thought that the first software did not give any plagiarism and you accepted it unfortunately as I said many free softwares have this problem they do not have extensive database search and turn it in has so if your college can afford it at least ask them to get a few licenses of turn it in and then use it for the different classrooms I don't know of any other equivalent it might be there but if it is there I don't know so we have found turn it in to be very good so we just go by experience as I said that something does and something does not there is no such proper study which has given us which is better in which is not in general turn it in has got a very large database of all the research papers of existing of psdpcs and several other documents so that's why turn it in is good your second question of your student putting your name and then later it was found to be plagiarized is precisely the point that I said that each author has to have an ownership now when you agreed to put your name as a author you agreed to put based on ownership of some responsibility now if I go back to the points that I mentioned here did you do some of planning execution maybe you did some analysis did you carefully review the document no you didn't or maybe you did but the plagiarism checker did not catch it and did you approve the final manuscript so when you approve a final manuscript you have taken responsibility that anything that goes wrong also you carry partial responsibility anything that is nice to it you get the credits anything that is bad you lose the credibility so that is why these principles which I have listed here are pretty much time tested and it is recommended that you use these principles very thoroughly and you understand the meaning of this thank you for pointing out this example that others will know that they are also they can also be subject to similar situations then they need to be careful before accepting to be just put as an free author just like that does it answer your question seven more question when you were just telling about the authorship of technical work who is the author of the third point was some publications require identification of contribution this point is not clear can you please elaborate some publications require identification of contribution it means that for example like this now what is your name madam and what is your friend's name there okay when the contribution essentially means putting a statement in the paper like just before the acknowledgement section saying that Pallavi contributed by planning these experiments Akruti executed 50% of the experiments Pallavi also contributed 50% of the experiments and let's say your guide Shankar did the analysis and wrote the paper okay so now let's say Pallavi is the first author and Akruti is the second author you have provided a justification you have provided what you have identified in print what each of you have contributed and since all of you Pallavi Akruti and Shankar have approved the manuscript it means that you have accepted the contribution of each other so that is what it means by identifying the contributions made does it answer your question but you mentioned that some publications require some publications require now what are these publications which require this kind of identity I think it is mostly in medical journals some open access journals and some new journals have this explicitly traditional journals didn't have it but these are principles and ethics that are coming into mainstream now okay thank you sir thank you very much have a nice day so we'll go to symbiosis symbiosis is still waiting there are you there symbiosis thank you for waiting so you have a question while including the name of institute in the paper we should include the name of research institute or the institute where we do the job so there are one is research institute what are the other one other institute where we do the job or okay so you the reason why affiliation is given is for two purposes definitely the let's say you're working in one college and you're doing the experiment in some research institute definitely the research institute contribution should be there because they provided you with the facilities to do it now it is also important that you acknowledge and you give your parent institute the institute which you work because they have provided you with say leave or some other concessions to do your research so given that it is important that you mention both the institutes another question sir in the review paper while writing the review paper the author must be from the expert from that field or should have published number of papers or is it possible to write a new author review paper is it possible in principle it is possible except that it might be difficult to publish first of all it will be difficult to write because somebody who has not worked in a particular area and just coming afresh and writing a review paper is slightly difficult you need to have done it is it is not possible to do it it is itself a research on itself you you work on you look at lot of publications you understand them it cannot be done in six months or one year it probably will take couple of years to do it for a fresh person somebody was already worked on some things it is okay but fresh person it is difficult and publication of that is also little difficult there might be journals which will accept it but normally review papers are done by invitation I mean there are actually suppose let us say one author has given one kind of one algorithm and that is referred by a second author and if I am referring the second author algorithm should I cite to both the author or should I cite to the first author you have to cite so if the second author is not changed anything from the first one you have to cite the first author but if the second author has used say 90% and made 10% change and you are using all the change then you need to cite both of them essentially if there is a significant contribution from a particular work you should cite it. The first question I asked about the research center and job institute is that job institute should be acknowledged in the acknowledgement part of the paper or can I refer both the affiliation in below my name no no it has to be below your name the job institute has given you leave or has been paying you for the time you spent there in the because it is indirectly participating in the research okay they are not giving any facilities to do it but they are indirectly participating in giving you a opportunity to work so it is good to actually acknowledge that in the affiliation itself not as an acknowledgement section because you are actually affiliated to the place you work you are not affiliated to the place you do the research in your affiliation is the college or place of work where you are being paid okay thank you very much let me go to the last couple of institutes there are waiting there waltz and the institute thank you for waiting my work is specifically related to research work that is use of paddy straw for erosion control when finding out one of the properties like the repability of the paddy straws you may have validated I have obtained some results and validated it by using the SPSS software but then also I came to other paper wherein they have used they have found out the repability property on coir geotextile so the steps in the validation analysis are almost same so will it be amount to plagiarism you mean the steps are the same but the material is different I could not get it clearly but then today I have also given his citation reference also so will this be sufficient or because the after using the software the steps are almost same and even interpretation could be also same but the material is different yes material different and form of material is also different for example it is there is coir mesh coir textile geotextile and mine is the paddy straw geomesh and mine is a handmade product there is a machine made product and that is of different material that is coir yeah so so plagiarism here it is not a plagiarism of expression it it it can be called plagiarism of idea but you are not doing a plagiarism of idea in the methodology method or if certain things have to be done by a particular method and it has to be analyzed in a particular way that is not plagiarism now suppose somebody had done the exactly same material as yours and you rewrite it in a different way that is plagiarism in your case the material is different nobody has worked on that material by that method before so certainly it is not plagiarism you need to make sure that the sentences that you choose does not be it is not the same as what is given in that work only then it will be considered as a plagiarism so long as you change the expression the material is certainly different so it is a knowledge which does not exist before and you are providing a new knowledge about this material so it is not plagiarism you need to just take care that you do not express the same sentences or phrases one more question form of the material is different for example as I said it had it been a geotextile of Padishra which is not possible because it cannot be converted into thread or had it been a textile and mine is a form is different for example had my geomagnet would it have been plagiarism in that case no so long as you are doing for a different material it is not it is definitely it does not matter you just see if the same material has been done before if it has not been done it is a new work see whether it is significantly new contribution and all is a different aspect but it is certainly not plagiarism whether your your scientific contribution is significant that only you can say it is not significant scientific contribution I somebody has done for material A I am doing for material B same procedure it is not significant scientific contribution but that is not bad may most of the research in science progresses because there are few people who are doing really really new work and many people who are doing repetitive work repetitive work has its value it is not bad what you are doing is a repetitive work what you have done is a repetitive work but that does not it is not plagiarism because there is a new material which has not been done before the procedure is the same the instrument is the same analysis is the same so what but this material has not been done before you might not find journals which will accept it because it is a small incremental work but that is a different thing it is not plagiarism so Sheila Dhanchand thank you for waiting sir I have two questions to you one is regarding technical details and other is regarding plagiarism I would start with plagiarism you mentioned that there are different softwares and we have been using at the point when the discussion was going on on plagiarism we had a short discussion here in the hall and we were unsure whether no similarities in sentences and some of the words can be considered as plagiarism or is there any mechanism to sort it out I mean when different ideas are if any idea for different author is being stated as our own we consider that that is plagiarism but when you check plagiarism or your text on internet there are number of words and sentences which are similar to the sentences and words you have written so what to do in that case words are similar is okay if it is you should the as I said before if there are technical keywords which are not replaceable then it is okay to have the same words but as a thumb rule you keep it as three words not more than three words at a at a stretch should be same or very similar try to have usually the problem comes with non technical English words normal commonly used English words the problem comes there problem is not with respect to technical words usually technical words you will you will not find more than one or two words two words at a time that is not considered plagiarism what is the other question about grammatical words oh no so any other words in normal English which is used which it is there for more than three words that you have to rewrite you you have to rewrite the whole idea so it see suppose there is a paragraph with five sentences you rewrite each sentence but exactly convey the same idea it is in a sense plagiarism you do not need to actually write all five sentences you can summarize the five sentences in one or two sentences