Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud?

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport › Konferencebidrag i proceedings › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud? / Braud, Chloé Elodie; Søgaard, Anders.

Proceedings of the Workshop on Stylistic VariationAssociation for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2017. s. 37-42.

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport › Konferencebidrag i proceedings › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Braud, CE & Søgaard, A 2017, Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud? i Proceedings of the Workshop on Stylistic VariationAssociation for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, s. 37-42, Workshop on Stylistic Variation, Copenhagen, Danmark, 08/09/2017. <http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W17-4905>

APA

Braud, C. E., & Søgaard, A. (2017). Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud? I Proceedings of the Workshop on Stylistic VariationAssociation for Computational Linguistics (s. 37-42). Association for Computational Linguistics. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W17-4905

Vancouver

Braud CE, Søgaard A. Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud? I Proceedings of the Workshop on Stylistic VariationAssociation for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics. 2017. s. 37-42

Author

Braud, Chloé Elodie ; Søgaard, Anders. / Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud?. Proceedings of the Workshop on Stylistic VariationAssociation for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2017. s. 37-42

Bibtex

@inproceedings{c27620069386466989ed625a86feaa6f,
title = "Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud?",
abstract = "The problem of detecting scientific fraudusing machine learning was recently introduced,with initial, positive results froma model taking into account various generalindicators. The results seem to suggestthat writing style is predictive of scientificfraud. We revisit these initial experiments,and show that the leave-one-outtesting procedure they used likely leads toa slight over-estimate of the predictability,but also that simple models can outperformtheir proposed model by some margin.We go on to explore more abstractlinguistic features, such as linguistic complexityand discourse structure, only to obtainnegative results. Upon analyzing ourmodels, we do see some interesting patterns,though: Scientific fraud, for examples,contains less comparison, as well asdifferent types of hedging and ways of presentinglogical reasoning.",
author = "Braud, {Chlo{\'e} Elodie} and Anders S{\o}gaard",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-1-945626-99-9",
pages = "37--42",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the Workshop on Stylistic VariationAssociation for Computational Linguistics",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
note = "Workshop on Stylistic Variation ; Conference date: 08-09-2017 Through 08-09-2017",

}

RIS

TY - GEN

T1 - Is writing style predictive of scientific fraud?

AU - Braud, Chloé Elodie

AU - Søgaard, Anders

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - The problem of detecting scientific fraudusing machine learning was recently introduced,with initial, positive results froma model taking into account various generalindicators. The results seem to suggestthat writing style is predictive of scientificfraud. We revisit these initial experiments,and show that the leave-one-outtesting procedure they used likely leads toa slight over-estimate of the predictability,but also that simple models can outperformtheir proposed model by some margin.We go on to explore more abstractlinguistic features, such as linguistic complexityand discourse structure, only to obtainnegative results. Upon analyzing ourmodels, we do see some interesting patterns,though: Scientific fraud, for examples,contains less comparison, as well asdifferent types of hedging and ways of presentinglogical reasoning.

AB - The problem of detecting scientific fraudusing machine learning was recently introduced,with initial, positive results froma model taking into account various generalindicators. The results seem to suggestthat writing style is predictive of scientificfraud. We revisit these initial experiments,and show that the leave-one-outtesting procedure they used likely leads toa slight over-estimate of the predictability,but also that simple models can outperformtheir proposed model by some margin.We go on to explore more abstractlinguistic features, such as linguistic complexityand discourse structure, only to obtainnegative results. Upon analyzing ourmodels, we do see some interesting patterns,though: Scientific fraud, for examples,contains less comparison, as well asdifferent types of hedging and ways of presentinglogical reasoning.

M3 - Article in proceedings

SN - 978-1-945626-99-9

SP - 37

EP - 42

BT - Proceedings of the Workshop on Stylistic VariationAssociation for Computational Linguistics

PB - Association for Computational Linguistics

T2 - Workshop on Stylistic Variation

Y2 - 8 September 2017 through 8 September 2017

ER -

ID: 195014790