home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!apple!apple!voder!berlioz.nsc.com!desktop!nelson
- From: nelson@desktop.nsc.com (Taed Nelson)
- Newsgroups: comp.edu
- Subject: Re: Plagiarism detection programs sought
- Message-ID: <1992Nov19.172815.18118@berlioz.nsc.com>
- Date: 19 Nov 92 17:28:15 GMT
- References: <1992Nov17.024853.3608@cs.su.oz.au> <92Nov18.045243.22947@acs.ucalgary.ca> <11099@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
- Sender: news@berlioz.nsc.com (UseNet News account)
- Organization: Applications Technology, National Semiconductor (Santa Clara, CA)
- Lines: 19
-
- It was our impression that the majority of programming assignment plagiarism
- took the simple form of simply changing variable names and
- adding/removing/changing comments. Although someone who knew what the
- program should do would do a much better job, the people who just needed to
- get the assignment _done_ would, rather than work with someone on it, just
- ask a friend for their's (or in some cases steal it from someone's account)
- and make cosmetic changes.
-
- The "nice" thing about this is that it would produce identical code. The
- object files (ignoring the symbol table) would be identical.
-
- Therefore, what we would do is ask the students to supply their source and
- executables on a disk (they assumed this was so we could run them ourselves,
- and sometimes we did do this), and then strip everyone's executables and
- write down the eventual size.
-
- Then we would examine the code of any two programs that the size was identical
- or nearly the same. Mind you that the classes had between 30 and 300 people
- in them, so the only way to look for cheating was to automate it...
-