Live data from Hacker News

Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

nature.com

221–230 of 263 posts

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What the authors should have done was ... In the absence of an explicit directive or request from you, given that the authors are from a different culture, how do you expect them to know what was required by them? I don't mean to be snarky or accusative. Your comment was thoughtful, articulate and detailed, which tells me you are a sophisticated communicator.

It's a fair question. They were foreigners submitting to an American journal, so there is always the possibility for some sort of cultural misunderstanding in addition to any language difficulties. Nonetheless, the journal's submission process provides authors with a page listing ethical standards they have to follow, and it says that plagiarism of any form is not allowed. In fact, this journal's particular set of st…

I'm fully on board with fighting plagiarism down to that level.

But that said, I've often times wondered if this requirement of having to "rewrite in your own words" may do a lot of harm too. It obfuscates that things that people are talking about are actually exactly the same, or make it fuzzy what the exact differences are.

In a particular academic CS area I've witnessed people reproduce again and again the essentially identical description of setting and assumptions, but in being afraid of plagiarism accusations, they over and over re-formulate things which made it nonobvious that things are the same as from other authors or even from their own earlier work.

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#222
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I have said in another comment, the authors did not just copy my short definition but my entire paragraph-length explanation of the concept. I might have let the short definition slide but an entire paragraph is just inexcusable. I agree that this is not a school assignment, so the nature of plagiarism is a bit different. But you hit the nail right on the head. We should be worried that they are pretending to know…

>Now maybe they did spend some time learning it and looking into, but there is no way to know for sure Why are you so concerned on this ? Isn't the goal of a paper is to communicate information? >It only proves that they have copy and paste. Yes they copy paste but it doesn't prove that they don't really understand it. They may very well found your definition is the best way to describe it. As long as the reader of t…

"We thank the anonymous reviewers for constructive feedback that we used to improve the article." Standard phrase, credit where credit is due, no need to make some definition worse just to not trip off a plagiarism filter.

Unless this very phrase does the tripping off. Having to rephrase it would be pretty ridiculous though (and illustrates your point).

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you only copied a typical one-sentence dictionary definition verbatim without attribution, that would still clearly be a clear-cut case of plagiarism...

Hardly. Plagiarism is passing someone else idea or work as your own. Most terms especially technical ones have precise agreed upon definition. Calling quoting them plagiarism is stretching the notion to its limits. Thankfully there is no philosophical conundrum to be had when people are lifting complex explanations.

The "precise agreed upon definition" is not mapped to a precise agreed upon sequence of words.

I find it hard to think of any technical terms which have a fixed, well-specified phrase for the definition, much less ones which, if re-used, don't require attribution.

I mean, there are definitional terms like "one meter is the length of the path traveled by light in a vacuum in 1/299 792 458 of a second" or "the discriminant of the quadratic equation is b^2-4ac". Re-use those quoted definitions and no one will blink.

But, what's "evolution", or "electron spin", or "aromaticity"?

Even something as well-defined and concrete as "cosine similarity" has many different variations:

Wikipedia: a measure of similarity between two non-zero vectors of an inner product space. It is defined to equal the cosine of the angle between them, which is also the same as the inner product of the same vectors normalized to both have length 1

SciKit-learn: the normalized dot product of X and Y: K(X, Y) = / (||X||*||Y||)

towardsdatascience.com: the cosine of the angle between the two non-zero vectors

statology.org: For two vectors, A and B, the Cosine Similarity is calculated as: Cosine Similarity = ΣAiBi / (√ΣAi2√ΣBi2)

uchicago.edu: For vectors, it is the cosine of the angle between those vectors.

datadriveninvestor.com: Cosine similarity of two vectors is just the cosine of the angle between two vectors

While certainly equivalent, these definitions show some creative choice in how they are worded, and thus if copied, should be cited.

(I agree that the creativity level is quite low for some of these, and I believe several people might come up with the same description, but that's a different issue than re-using someone else's definition without attribution.)

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#224
post #194
post #62

Some of these tortured phrases are great. My favourites: "flag to clamor" for signal to noise "individual computerized collaborator" for PDA (personal digital assistant) "haze figuring" for cloud computing "information stockroom" for data warehouse "focal preparing unit" for CPU "discourse acknowledgement" for voice recognition "mean square blunder" for MSE (mean square error) "arbitrary right of passage" for random…

Reading this list, it almost seems like these were created by looking up each individual word in a thesaurus, which of course destroys much of the meaning. E.g., Signal -> flag To -> to Noise -> clamor …and… Data -> information Warehouse -> stockroom This would be a lot easier than running through multiple translation steps (as proposed elsewhere here).

This exact process has been used by spammers for a long time now. It's called spinning, and it is basically the kind of thesaurus replacement you're describing here. When I read the OP, my impression was that these authors were running plagiarized portions of their articles through a similar kind of spinner.

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a fair question. They were foreigners submitting to an American journal, so there is always the possibility for some sort of cultural misunderstanding in addition to any language difficulties. Nonetheless, the journal's submission process provides authors with a page listing ethical standards they have to follow, and it says that plagiarism of any form is not allowed. In fact, this journal's particular set of st…

I'm fully on board with fighting plagiarism down to that level. But that said, I've often times wondered if this requirement of having to "rewrite in your own words" may do a lot of harm too. It obfuscates that things that people are talking about are actually exactly the same, or make it fuzzy what the exact differences are. In a particular academic CS area I've witnessed people reproduce again and again the essenti…

They could just cite someone else with proper references.

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Master's thesis I don't doubt this at all, and I have no doubt that GPT-3 with a bit of human editing can spit out something better than the lower third of masters students at corn row colleges. Masters degrees are cash cows, which is why no one in unregulated industries cares about them. People in regulated/unionized industries also don't actually care; even educators, who at least nominally see intrinsic value in…

> Masters degrees are cash cows, which is why no one in unregulated industries cares about them. So, uh, is Business Administration a regulated industry?

...is it even an industry?

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent post to mine was theorizing that the reason the English was so mangled was because it had been translated from English, then back to English. I was replying that, if the researchers didn't use English as a first language, it's ridiculously more likely that they were translating from their native tongue into English. You're misunderstanding where the notion of translating it twice came from. And sure, there…

My wife was a professional translator and I did my master's thesis on the topic. With modern translation engines, there is no way you'll end up with "haze figuring" or "arbitrary timberland" translating one way from any source language into English. I also doubt you could get a very specific word like "timberland" from repeated translation of "forest", intentional synonym replacement is much more likely. Also, they s…

> there is no way you'll end up with "haze figuring" or "arbitrary timberland" translating one way from any source language into English.

Good to know; I've always wondered at the peculiarities of different translation engines, but never really dug into them, as most modern ones seem like neural network black boxes to me. I was pointing out that there are some realistic use cases for doing round trip translations. I've used this technique at a few conferences to help straighten out my hazy understanding of a complex idea in a language I spoke quite poorly. And I do agree it is bad form to use this directly in an academic paper.

> Also, they speak Spanish in Bolivia ;)

To be fair they speak Bolivian Spanish, along with many other native languages! I chose Bolivia as a random target without doing any research, so thanks for the pedantic push to go learn something new; things like this are why I do love HN!

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardly. Plagiarism is passing someone else idea or work as your own. Most terms especially technical ones have precise agreed upon definition. Calling quoting them plagiarism is stretching the notion to its limits. Thankfully there is no philosophical conundrum to be had when people are lifting complex explanations.

The "precise agreed upon definition" is not mapped to a precise agreed upon sequence of words. I find it hard to think of any technical terms which have a fixed, well-specified phrase for the definition, much less ones which, if re-used, don't require attribution. I mean, there are definitional terms like "one meter is the length of the path traveled by light in a vacuum in 1/299 792 458 of a second" or "the discrimi…

> (I agree that the creativity level is quite low for some of these, and I believe several people might come up with the same description, but that's a different issue than re-using someone else's definition without attribution.)

It's funny because I actually find your exemples to be supporting my point more than yours.

All of these sentences are translation in plain English of the absolutly perfectly defined and commonly accepted definition of cosine similarity. SkiKit-Learn is even just writing the formula.

uchicago.edu and datadriveninvestor.com even use exactly the same words. I mean, if you came to see me complaining someone was plagirising for writing "For vectors, cosine similarity is the cosine of the angle between those vectors.", I would find that laughable.

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#229
post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent post to mine was theorizing that the reason the English was so mangled was because it had been translated from English, then back to English. I was replying that, if the researchers didn't use English as a first language, it's ridiculously more likely that they were translating from their native tongue into English. You're misunderstanding where the notion of translating it twice came from. And sure, there…

I love how confident you sound about the Bolivian language. I guess you meant spanish, or maybe aymara/quechua. > This will be familiar to most people who've studied abroad It wasn't to me until now but this explains a lot!

I chose Bolivia because I know next to nothing about it and it seemed neutral; I should have used a notional country, like the Republic of United Swiss Emirates.

You've never had to do that before? Maybe I run into it a lot due to the nature of the conferences I attend. I know just enough of the language for functional conversation, but as soon as a complex idea is put forward, I need to be able to contextualize the familiar scientific portions of it quickly, and the round trip translation usually helps enough that I can parse it correctly.

Re: Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science

#230

I have encountered something similar to this for a submission that I reviewed for a scientific journal. I will not list any names or give much detail past those generalities, but I pointed out that the authors were misusing a particular technical term. In my review I defined the term and explained it briefly. I asked the authors to revise their submission accordingly. The paper was not bad but the authors did not kno…

So you couldn't ask them to attribute this to you as an anonymous reviewer? And instead wanted them to spend their effort using "their own words" because "inexcusable" and what not? Man, are some people stuck up deep in their own ass. Yeah, a copy-paste isn't nice of them, sure, but are you one fragile snowflake.
Post reply on HN