Monday, March 26, 2012

we received this comment by email

Almost all the IEEE Conferences are WITHOUT review.
It is enough for the organizers to ensure the Co-sponsorship of IEEE and then it is enough to start advertisements by email or in the local scientific magazines of their country that they are authorized to run an "IEEE" conference (or "IEEE" multiconference). They print out great advertizing posters with a very big picture of IEEE logo. Sometimes they make several phone calls. They know that the personal phone calls are better than the Email Spam. I was called by a colleague last December to participate in his IEEE conference. I told him that I am not an expert in the field of this conference, but he insisted that I am inside the scopes of the meeting. I sent them 5 papers. All of them passed without review.
When I asked them why I did not took any review, he told me "your papers were really excellent". I do not say that my papers were bad, but at least, I wanted to have some opinions, some comments, some ideas. I was waiting for them, but nothing. Finally, we made some negotations with registration fees. With 5 accepted papers I had to pay 2000 Dollars. Fortunately, my "good" colleague made a generous discount for me and I paid only 1500 Dollars providing that I would say good comments and positive opinion for his IEEE conference to my friends. I did it. However, I am writing you now the truth for this bogus IEEE conference.

Thursday, March 22, 2012

SIAM and IEEE work in the same way.

SIAM and IEEE work in the same way. They sell their (bad) name to dubious conference organizers for some royalties. To accept papers based on a quick review in their abstracts is unacceptable, unethical and quite risky. This is the reason that IEEE and SIAM conferences have accepted so many SCIgen fake papers. So, the book of Abstracts especially of many SIAM conferences is a real festival of fake papers that can be classfied as follows

a) fake papers (like SCIgen or like the paper: "mathematical psychology of insects" that published in SIAM last year) that are submitted intentionally

b) wrong papers from suckers that believed that they discovered a new theory of relativity or they believe that they will correct Einstein's theorems or will resolve the last theorem of Fermat. These are not SCIgen papers, but are papers of suckers. They pay 300-500 USD and then
they cock in their family or in their neighborhood that they have proved the ... Fermat's last theorem.

c) some ideas of some people in their Abstract without any implementation of the main part of their paper. For example: "plantations on the moon or on the Mars", or "on a new medicament for the cancer therapy" and many other "good things" in the Abstract (sounds good) but without any real implementation in the real part of the articles.

Saturday, August 13, 2011

IEEE racism

Googling "IEEE racism" you will several interesting posts about IEEE racism.
IEEE racism is defined the easy way that you can publish a paper in IEEE Journals if you are from USA while you are banned if you are from Islamic World or Africa

Now, the IEEE officers know that the phenomenon of IEEE racism is great abd for this reason
they declare: "IEEE Policy of non-discrimination" while the correct was to declare

IEEE Policy on discrimination

Ridiculous! Isn't it?

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

15 computers of our office has been victims of this terrible IEEE Spam

Yesterday, we have discovered an IEEE junk multiconference, a group of IEEE bogus papers.

These fake IEEE conferences are organized by the central administration of IEEE
(known sources for fake multiconferences)

Today, we received a bulk email of IEEE. 15 computers of our office has been victims
of this terrible IEEE Spam

IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems (JETCAS)

We are honored to welcome readers and authors to the inaugural issue of the IEEE Journal on Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems (JETCAS for short), which is sponsored by the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society (CAS-S.)

The journal, which is freely accessible on-line to all CAS-S members, aims to build a platform for the broad and timely dissemination of key innovative results and findings in rapidly-growing and/or emerging topic areas within the scope of the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society. Such potentially interdisciplinary emerging topics will be selected as long as, first, they are clearly situated at the forefront of current scientific and technological developments and, second, they are expected to grow over time in scientific and professional importance and, therefore, in the number of active practitioners. From this point of view, JETCAS is expected to create new communities interested in the long-term development of the most promising subjects presented in the journal. The editorial strategy followed by JETCAS will be the publication of Special Issues on the selected topics. These issues will include research contributions from leading experts and presentations geared towards a wide audience of scientists and practitioners in the form of overview and tutorial-style articles and multidisciplinary research papers.

MASSOUD PEDRAM, Editor-in-Chief (EiC)


ENRICO MACII, 2010-2011 VP Publications, IEEE CAS-S


Volume 1, Issue 1 - Inaugural Edition

Pedram, M.; Delgado-Restituto, M.; Macii, E.; Setti, G., Inaugural Editorial

Saturday, February 26, 2011

The site of the Junk Conferences published today a new series of fake academic journals and bogus conferences

The site of the Junk Conferences published today a new series of fake academic journals and bogus conferences

Monday, August 16, 2010

Plagiarism Lines Blur for Students in Digital Age

Plagiarism Lines Blur for Students in Digital Age

At Rhode Island College, a freshman copied and pasted from a Web site’s frequently asked questions page about homelessness — and did not think he needed to credit a source in his assignment because the page did not include author informatio

At DePaul University, the tip-off to one student’s copying was the purple shade of several paragraphs he had lifted from the Web; when confronted by a writing tutor his professor had sent him to, he was not defensive — he just wanted to know how to change purple text to black.

And at the University of Maryland, a student reprimanded for copying fromWikipedia in a paper on the Great Depression said he thought its entries — unsigned and collectively written — did not need to be credited since they counted, essentially, as common knowledge.

Professors used to deal with plagiarism by admonishing students to give credit to others and to follow the style guide for citations, and pretty much left it at that.

But these cases — typical ones, according to writing tutors and officials responsible for discipline at the three schools who described the plagiarism — suggest that many students simply do not grasp that using words they did not write is a serious misdeed.

It is a disconnect that is growing in the Internet age as concepts of intellectual property, copyright and originality are under assault in the unbridled exchange of online information, say educators who study plagiarism.

Digital technology makes copying and pasting easy, of course. But that is the least of it. The Internet may also be redefining how students — who came of age with music file-sharing, Wikipedia and Web-linking — understand the concept of authorship and the singularity of any text or image.

“Now we have a whole generation of students who’ve grown up with information that just seems to be hanging out there in cyberspace and doesn’t seem to have an author,” said Teresa Fishman, director of the Center for Academic Integrity at Clemson University. “It’s possible to believe this information is just out there for anyone to take.”

Professors who have studied plagiarism do not try to excuse it — many are champions of academic honesty on their campuses — but rather try to understand why it is so widespread.

In surveys from 2006 to 2010 by Donald L. McCabe, a co-founder of the Center for Academic Integrity and a business professor at Rutgers University, about 40 percent of 14,000 undergraduates admitted to copying a few sentences in written assignments.

Perhaps more significant, the number who believed that copying from the Web constitutes “serious cheating” is declining — to 29 percent on average in recent surveys from 34 percent earlier in the decade.

Sarah Brookover, a senior at the Rutgers campus in Camden, N.J., said many of her classmates blithely cut and paste without attribution.

“This generation has always existed in a world where media and intellectual property don’t have the same gravity,” said Ms. Brookover, who at 31 is older than most undergraduates. “When you’re sitting at your computer, it’s the same machine you’ve downloaded music with, possibly illegally, the same machine you streamed videos for free that showed onHBO last night.”

Ms. Brookover, who works at the campus library, has pondered the differences between researching in the stacks and online. “Because you’re not walking into a library, you’re not physically holding the article, which takes you closer to ‘this doesn’t belong to me,’ ” she said. Online, “everything can belong to you really easily.”

A University of Notre Dame anthropologist, Susan D. Blum, disturbed by the high rates of reported plagiarism, set out to understand how students view authorship and the written word, or “texts” in Ms. Blum’s academic language.

She conducted her ethnographic research among 234 Notre Dame undergraduates. “Today’s students stand at the crossroads of a new way of conceiving texts and the people who create them and who quote them,” she wrote last year in the book “My Word!: Plagiarism and College Culture,” published by Cornell University Press.

Ms. Blum argued that student writing exhibits some of the same qualities of pastiche that drive other creative endeavors today — TV shows that constantly reference other shows or rap music that samples from earlier songs.

In an interview, she said the idea of an author whose singular effort creates an original work is rooted in Enlightenment ideas of the individual. It is buttressed by the Western concept of intellectual property rights as secured by copyright law. But both traditions are being challenged.

“Our notion of authorship and originality was born, it flourished, and it may be waning,” Ms. Blum said.

She contends that undergraduates are less interested in cultivating a unique and authentic identity — as their 1960s counterparts were — than in trying on many different personas, which the Web enables with social networking.

“If you are not so worried about presenting yourself as absolutely unique, then it’s O.K. if you say other people’s words, it’s O.K. if you say things you don’t believe, it’s O.K. if you write papers you couldn’t care less about because they accomplish the task, which is turning something in and getting a grade,” Ms. Blum said, voicing student attitudes. “And it’s O.K. if you put words out there without getting any credit.”

The notion that there might be a new model young person, who freely borrows from the vortex of information to mash up a new creative work, fueled a brief brouhaha earlier this year with Helene Hegemann, a German teenager whose best-selling novel about Berlin club life turned out to include passages lifted from others.