对于发表论文被抄袭怎么办？ 第1页

2021/7/24更新

有朋友问到结局怎么样？已经一年了，我没时间给他耗，青椒非升即走压力很大。我后续联系了对方的杂志主编，主编找了另外一个人审了一下。审的人认为两篇论文类似，但有区别，够不上抄袭。

然后给对方主编发邮件，提到需要考虑到”他是我的审稿人“这一条，再比较这两篇文章：A slight difference is not sufficient to free them from plagiarism, considering the possibility that one of authors is the reviewer of my paper.

然而对方主编非常不友好：Sorry , that is absolutely not true; and that I can absolutely assure you .The authors of the other paper had no knowledge or access to your paper at all. Your’s is a mistaken and inaccurate statement and is completely false.

加上我的主编也劝我it is better to lay this matter to rest.

对方主编是我这个领域排名第一的杂志的主编，如果我的主编给不了我足够的支持的话，我个人不敢螳臂当车。

后续就不了了之了，我没时间和资源跟他耗，但我又不甘心。我把详细的过程和邮件都放到我的researchgate上面了。以下是链接：

(PDF) Peridynamics Boundary Condition Treatments via Pseudo-layer Enrichment Method and Variable Horizon Approach

我不怕曝光，但是怕报复，这件事情的处理上我没有任何一点违背学术道德和规范，但我确实没有精力再去处理这个事情，太累了。。。。。。

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2020/10/05 凌晨三点更新：

确认对方已经投稿，我已经征得我的主编的支持，然后联系对方的杂志主编了，静等结果。

以下是原答案：

-------------------------------------------------

我一定要答一下，因为我的文章就是在审稿期间，被审稿人抄袭了。幸亏我通过google alert发现了对方上传到arXiv上面的文章，然后主动跟编辑申诉。编辑经过调查之后，跟副编辑一起商量直接接收了我的文章。

以下是与编辑交流的邮件原文：（这封邮件原文的大意是发现了arXiv上面有篇文章与我在审文章及其相似，我怀疑审稿人泄露了我的文章，或者arXiv的作者就是审稿人。邮件发送时间是2020年8月29号晚11点）

Dear Prof. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I just received a google alert regarding a paper uploaded to http://arXiv.org entitled "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx". This paper discussed two boundary condition approaches which are extremely identical to our manuscriptXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. The title of our manuscript is "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX".

As I quote from the abstract of the uploaded arxiv file "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX." The abstract of our manuscript stated "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX."

The title of the section 3 in the uploaded arxiv file is "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX". The derivation in this section is extremely identical to our derivation from equation (36) to equation (39).

The discretized equation in figures (3) and (4) of the uploaded arxiv file is identical to our matrix equation (24) and (44) of our manuscript.

There are more similarities and I did not list all of them.

I can not make sure that the authors of the uploaded arxiv file plagiarize our research. However, I strongly doubt that our manuscript has been released during the review process. Therefore, we really need your help to protect our research.

As you can see from the record of our manuscript submission system, our original manuscript has been submitted on April 04, 2019. Actually, the ideas of our manuscript was worked out during my Ph.D study at XXXXXXXX supervised by Prof. XXXXXXXXXXX. As I quote from the acknowledgement of our manuscript “XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.” Also, I attached my Ph.D thesis for your reference. The ideas of our manuscript were also discussed in chapter 4 of my Ph.D thesis. The subtitle of the chapter 4 of my thesis is “XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.” My Ph.D thesis was defended on April 14, 2017.

The authors of the uploaded arxiv file are

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Department of Mathematics and Industrial Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, C. P. 6079, succ. Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3A7, Canada

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX@polymtl.ca

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Center for Computation and Technology, Louisiana State University, Digital Media Center, 340 E. Parker Blvd, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I have no information about the reviewer of our manuscript. However, if the anonymous reviewer has close relation to the above two authors or above two institutes, that would be the disaster of our research or even my career as a young researcher.

Therefore, we beg your assistance on protecting our research. We spent over 4 years developing the ideas of our manuscript. And we spent additional one year improving our manuscript. As you can see from our re-revised manuscript, we clearly response to the reviewer’s comments, which is almost 200 comments. The reviewer has spent for over 4 months on our re-revised manuscript. We ask PLEASE evaluate our manuscript or invite other experts to evaluate our manuscript as soon as possible.

The attached files are our re-revised manuscript, the response to reviewer’s comments, my Ph.D thesis submitted to XXXXXXX and the uploaded arXiv file.

Please contact us for any questions and we are looking forward to hearing from you.

With Our Kindest Regards and Highest Respect,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

然后当晚凌晨编辑迅速给我回复说会调查，让我放心。以下是邮件原文：

Dear Dr. XXXX,

Please have no concern about your paper as far as XXX is concerned. It is in the hands of a very reputable and honorable editorial board member. In the unlikely event of any conflict of interest, I will personally investigate and resolve the matter.

Kind regards, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

之后我耐心等结果，因为这是我第二遍返修论文了，原始提交日期是2019年4月，第一次修回是在2019年11月，最近的修回的时间是2020年4月20号。因为一直没有审稿结果，期间我跟编辑发了三次邮件询问结果，编辑每次都积极回复我，并给我一个deadline，一共给了我两个deadline都错过了。最后询问是在8月中旬，然后编辑说收到审稿人的邮件，说大约一周左右的时间差不多能返回修改意见。然后在我等结果的过程中收到了Google alert，发现一篇arXiv上的文章跟我的文章极度类似，所以才有上述邮件。

一直等到今天凌晨，也就是美国时间2020年9月3号。编辑给我回邮件，说跟副编辑调查清楚了，我的审稿人确实是跟arXiv的作者有关系，至于什么关系，是不是本人，我不清楚，没有详细说。给的处理结果是直接接受了我的文章。以下是编辑给我的邮件内容：

03-Sep-2020

Dear Dr. XXXX:

It is a pleasure to accept your manuscript entitled "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX" in its current form for publication in XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.

Thank you for your fine contribution. On behalf of the Editors of Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids, we look forward to your continued contributions to the Journal.

Sincerely,
Dr. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Editor's comment:

The handling editor investigated your concern about the duplicate paper published on Arxiv. He discovered that the referee is indeed affiliated with at least one of the offending authors. He and I therefore agree that immediate acceptance of your revised paper is appropriate, despite not having received the referee's report. Rest assured that your priority as authors of this paper is protected by the submission date of your manuscript, which will be recorded in the published version of the paper. I deeply regret the apparent dishonesty of the referee in this matter and hope that this action faithfully addresses your concerns. Thank you for submitting your paper to XXX, and rest assured that we will take stronger precautions in the future.

以上是我的论文被审稿人抄袭的经历。我总结了下原因：

其一，因为我人微言轻，看起来是个软柿子。如果作者里面有领域的大牛，他没有胆量抄袭。

其二，杂志只有一个审稿人。如果我没有发现这篇arXiv文章的话，最有可能的结果就是审稿人随便找个理由把我的文章拒掉，而他抄袭我的文章已经投稿，那我再投时间在在他之后，估计就没有机会了。只有一个审稿人，那他自己就对我有生杀大权，方便操作。如果是多个审稿人的话，他应该也不敢。

其三，可能是我自己急于发文章，对审稿人的问题知无不言的回答。第一次审稿意见提了50多条，很有深度，我还挺感动的，对文章质量提高很有帮助。第二次审稿意见180多条，你没有看错，审稿意见就写了15页之多，将文章从头到尾每一个细节都问了一遍，每一个公式的推导都让我详细推导了一遍。那么他根据我第二次的回复，可以很轻易的重复我的论文内容。

经验和教训是什么呢？这种情况真的很难有避免的方法，我也是第一次遇到这种情况。我能想到的就是下次再发表文章的时候，submit的同时上传一份到arXiv上面占坑。arXiv网站建立的初衷就是为了防止你的工作在未正式发表之前被别人窃取。

至于后续怎么处理，我要看审稿人是不是继续发表抄袭我的文章。他如果主动撤回了还则罢了，如果他的文章见刊了，那就实锤了。我会联系他的工作单位处理他，同时联系他发表期刊的主编，撤回他的论文。因为我有充分的证据，即使他们是美国和加拿大知名大学的大教授。