The original meeting will expose the latest progress of the investigation of the plagiarism case of the latest nuclear research institute personnel's paper promotion, including the comparison that has been completed through the paper tool, and is currently being compared manually.
[Reporter Yang Yuanting/Taipei Report] The Nuclear Research Institute of the National Energy Council recently reported a case of collective fraud in the promotion of internal staff. The case was reported to the National Energy Council by a whistleblower who spent two years collecting information. A task force has been set up to investigate, and today (3rd) the latest investigation progress was revealed, including the comparison through the dissertation tool. However, since most of the dissertations are in English, they cannot be compared with the Chinese master's and doctoral dissertations published by the staff of the institute. Start manual comparison.
The Institute of Nuclear Energy stated that at the beginning of this year, the association accepted petitioners to report by name on 80 papers, including 34 people including Chen Changying, director of the Institute of Nuclear Research, suspected of violating the internal promotion regulations of the Institute of Nuclear Research. Organized a special case team to start the investigation, and the chief secretary of the original energy association served as the convener of the internal investigation team. During the preliminary manual comparison process, some of the works were similar to those of the Ph.D. These research reports were first removed from the shelves, and the other three were found to be similar to the master’s and doctoral dissertations of the parties after a preliminary inspection. In order to deal with it prudently, an external expert would have been appointed to conduct a second inspection, but after the appointment of an external expert During the review process, Yuannenghui stated that most of the external experts declined the review due to the controversies arising from plagiarism cases in China at that time, and it was not until the end of September that external experts were recruited for a second review.
Please read on...
In addition, the 80 papers were also compared through the paper comparison tool. The original committee stated that the quantitative data comparison has been completed.
However, during the comparison process, it was found that most of the papers published by the staff of the Institute of Nuclear Research were in English, and there was no comparison result with the Chinese version of the master’s and doctoral dissertations published by these staff. The academic ethics review team that can be organized will make the final judgment.
As for the exposure of the identity of the whistleblower, the original committee stated that there was no exposure of the identity of the whistleblower. It also pointed out that the results of the investigation of the case involved the reputation and rights of the whistleblower. The work unit understands that, on the one hand, it is necessary to compare the research reports one by one, and on the other hand, it is also necessary to contact the petitioner to inform the progress and clarify the evidence.