Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday April 09 2017, @02:27AM   Printer-friendly
from the research-is-plagiarism-but-with-more-sources dept.

Étienne Klein may lose a science/philosophy post months after allegations of plagiarism surfaced:

Étienne Klein, a celebrated French physicist and popularizer of science, seems set to lose his post as president of the Institute for Advanced Studies for Science and Technology (IHEST) in Paris after allegations that he plagiarized more than a dozen scientists, philosophers, and writers in books and articles. A source at France's science and education ministry yesterday confirmed to ScienceInsider that a decree ending Klein's tenure has been signed by Minister Najat Vallaud-Belkacem and State Secretary Thierry Mandon and is now awaiting the signature of French President François Hollande.

But Klein says he refuses to leave. In an open letter published last week, he wrote that an investigative panel that looked into the matter at Mandon's request has found no evidence of misconduct and that he sees no reason to step down. "My scientific integrity is absolute," Klein wrote to ScienceInsider in an email. The report has not been made public.

Klein leads a small group studying science itself at the Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) near Paris, but rarely publishes in the scientific literature; his fame stems from books and articles in popular magazines, mostly about physics. He also hosts a weekly radio show about science. Hollande appointed Klein president of IHEST—which seeks to build trust in science and to reflect on its social, economic, and political aspects—in September 2016.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 09 2017, @07:10AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 09 2017, @07:10AM (#491107)

    Usually with these plagiaism cases we get to have a good laugh when they do a side by side comparison of the texts. Where is the data? If it's so blatent then why don't we have any examples?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 09 2017, @10:04AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 09 2017, @10:04AM (#491128)
    Here [lexpress.fr] are some examples, from an older article (in french).
    • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Sunday April 09 2017, @08:53PM

      by FakeBeldin (3360) on Sunday April 09 2017, @08:53PM (#491314) Journal

      My view:
      1-3: The first three to me seem indeed to point to inappropriate behaviour. The phrases are too long and too particular to accidentally copy.
      4: This is similar to 1-3, except the one claimed as original and the one claimed as copy were published very close to each other (1 month difference).
            It seems that either one author was inspired by the other, or that the two authors discussed the matter and mutually arrived at an expression.
            which was first is impossible to say based upon that link - a slight delay in one publication or the other would change the matter around.
          The turn-around time is rather short for the suspect to have read it and then used it, but it may have happened.
      5,6: These seem homages to the source material. The suspected part of 5 is even in quotes, which in English writing at least indicates that you're quoting.
            Similarly, 6 seems to take a nice expression (by someone else) and apply it.
      7: Hrrms. Very short, but basically taking an elegant phrasing by someone else. The "spirale" part is not something I'd expect when writing a 'zoom-in' to atomic level. So: suspect.

      Some of this might've been done in good faith, but there's (in this one article already) too many that, upon casual examination, cannot be easily explained away.