NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS CLOSEOUT MEMORANDUM In November 2005, we received allegations of plagiarism against the subject.' The complainant broke his allegations into three parts: (I) potential self-copying; (2) potential copying without referencing; and (3.) potential inappropriate copying. By definition, NSF does not consider self-copying (1) to be Research s is conduct.^ With regard to (2), the complainant alleged plagiarism (intellectual theft) in (a) two of the subject's published papers,3 (b) the subject's NSF proposal,4 and (c) an unpublished manuscript the complainant said was rejected by the journal to which it was submitted. Specifically, the complainant alleged the subject used another scientist's methodology5 without citation. The subject has not received an NSF grant and his papers (a), not surprisingly, do not acknowledge NSF support. We conclude we have no &uisdiction over allegation (a). The subject's proposal (b) appears to have made significant use of the scientist's methodology. While the subject did not cite the scientist's methodology at the equations wher-e he utilized it, he referenced seven of the scientist's papers a total of eight times in the Introduction and in Related Work, including mentioning the scientist by name when describing the scientist's methodology he planned to utilize. We conclude there was no failure on the part of the subject to indicate to the reader he is aware of, makes use of, and credits the scientist's methodology. As noted, the unpublished manuscript (c) was rejected, so there is no publication to review, and if there were, we would not have jurisdiction because it would not have been done with NSF support. The complainant alleged potential inappropriate copying (3) by the subject in a paper.6 AS noted above, the subject has not received NSF support, and we do not have jurisdiction over the allegation. Since the allegation was plagiarism, we ran the proposal through our plagiarism software. It identified no significant coping. Given the subject's lack of previous NSF funding, most of the allegations were not within our 111 ' The subject i s . NSF OIG Form 2 (1 1/02) . NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS CLOSEOUT MEMORANDUM - - - - 3ase Number: A \, o, ,+ 11 Page 2 of 2 jurisdiction. As described above, our review of the proposal did not raise any intellectual theft issues. Therefore, we conclude there is no substance to this allegation and, accordingly, this case is closed.
Intellectual Theft Plagiarism (Verbatim)
Published by the National Science Foundation, Office of Inspector General on 2006-02-01.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)