Logo PTI Logo FedCSIS

Communication Papers of the 18th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems

Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 37

Research Paper Blockchain (RPB)

,

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2023F9346

Citation: Communication Papers of the 18th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki, D. Ślęzak (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 37, pages 201–206 ()

Full text

Abstract. Thousands of technical conferences and peer reviewed journals around the world, each annually solicit hundreds of newly authored papers for indexing and publishing. Since no central indexing and publishing authority exists, each conference and journal maintains its own database of papers. It is thus relatively easy for authors to submit their papers to more than one conference or journal simultaneously despite being strictly prohibited by the various indexing authorities and publishers. A manual or even automated check of the hundreds of databases is unrealistic. Blockchain technology, however, provides a viable solution to this long standing problem. This paper explores a potential implementation of a Research Paper Blockchain (RPB) which stores encrypted copies of all papers submitted for publication to participating indexing and publishing authorities. Conference and journal publication chairs would attempt to add the submitted paper as a new block to RPB (uploaded through a graphical web front-end or an automated back-end interface) and thus check for the uniqueness of the submission. Based on the uniqueness, the system would either add the paper to or reject it from RPB and report a uniqueness score for the paper back to the publisher. If a paper was added, it would be time stamped as well as stamped with a percentage of uniqueness for future reference. Publishers could set their own uniqueness threshold for acceptance and thus guarantee the originality and freshness of a new paper submitted before wasting reviewer time and accepting that paper.

References

  1. A. A. McCook, “Authors retract much-debated blockchain paper from f1000,” May 2017.
  2. H. Schulzrinne, “Double submissions: Publishing misconduct or just effective dissemination?,” SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., vol. 39, p. 40–42, June 2009.
  3. U. Cem, “Multiple submission, duplicate submission and duplicate publication,” Balkan medical journal, vol. 30, no. 1, p. 1, 2013.
  4. S. Pressman, “Simultaneous multiple journal submissions: The case against,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 316–333, 1994.
  5. P. Samuelson, “Self-plagiarism or fair use,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 21–25, 1994.
  6. J. M. Morse, “Duplicate publication,” 2007.
  7. S. S. Khadilkar, “The plague of plagiarism: Prevention and cure!!!,” 2018.
  8. J. Wei, “The countermeasures and thinking on redundant publication and duplicate submission,” Journal of Liaoning Normal University (Natural Science Edition), no. 3, p. 26, 2012.
  9. S. Nakamoto et al., “Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” 2008.
  10. R. Wottenhofer, Blockchain Science. Inverted Forest Publishing, 3 ed., 2019.
  11. T. D. Washington, Blockchain Technology. Content Arcade Publishing, 2019.
  12. “How does bitcoin work?.”
  13. Quorum, “Enterprise ethereum client.”
  14. K. Cruz, “Blocksign: Signing documents on the blockchain,” 2014.
  15. S. Kansal, “Develop a blockchain application from scratch in python,” Jan 2020.
  16. “7.4. difflib - helpers for computing deltas.”
  17. M. Iansiti and K. R. Lakhani, “The truth about blockchain,” Aug 2019.