使用 MS Word 中的修订保存标识符编号检查和检测书面文件中的学术不端行为,并通过多种情景加以说明

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Forensic Science International-Digital Investigation Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1016/j.fsidi.2024.301821
{"title":"使用 MS Word 中的修订保存标识符编号检查和检测书面文件中的学术不端行为,并通过多种情景加以说明","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.fsidi.2024.301821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Deliberate academic misconduct by students often relies on the use of segments of externally authored text, generated either by commercial contract authoring services or by generative Artificial intelligence language models. While revision save identifier (rsid) numbers in Microsoft Word files are associated with edit and save actions of a document, MS Word does not adhere to the ECMA specifications for the Office Open XML. Existing literature shows that digital forensics using rsid requires access to multiple document versions or the user's machine. In cases of academic misconduct allegations usually only the submitted files are available for digital forensic examination, coupled with assertions by the alleged perpetrators about the document generation and editing process This paper represents a detailed exploratory study that provides educators and digital forensic scientists with tools to examine a single document for the veracity of various commonly asserted scenarios of document generation and editing. It is based on a series of experiments that ascertained whether and how common edit and document generation actions such as copy, paste, insertion of blocks of texts from other documents, leave tell-tale traces in the rsid encoding that is embedded in all MS Word documents. While digital forensics can illuminate document generation processes, the actions that led to these may have innocuous explanations. In consequence, this paper also provides academic misconduct investigators with a set of prompts to guide the interview with alleged perpetrators to glean the information required for cross-correlation with observations based on the rsid data.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48481,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science International-Digital Investigation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666281724001458/pdfft?md5=1c46f6d9d5928150f3f10e0b2c0b28f0&pid=1-s2.0-S2666281724001458-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining and detecting academic misconduct in written documents using revision save identifier numbers in MS Word as exemplified by multiple scenarios\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.fsidi.2024.301821\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Deliberate academic misconduct by students often relies on the use of segments of externally authored text, generated either by commercial contract authoring services or by generative Artificial intelligence language models. While revision save identifier (rsid) numbers in Microsoft Word files are associated with edit and save actions of a document, MS Word does not adhere to the ECMA specifications for the Office Open XML. Existing literature shows that digital forensics using rsid requires access to multiple document versions or the user's machine. In cases of academic misconduct allegations usually only the submitted files are available for digital forensic examination, coupled with assertions by the alleged perpetrators about the document generation and editing process This paper represents a detailed exploratory study that provides educators and digital forensic scientists with tools to examine a single document for the veracity of various commonly asserted scenarios of document generation and editing. It is based on a series of experiments that ascertained whether and how common edit and document generation actions such as copy, paste, insertion of blocks of texts from other documents, leave tell-tale traces in the rsid encoding that is embedded in all MS Word documents. While digital forensics can illuminate document generation processes, the actions that led to these may have innocuous explanations. In consequence, this paper also provides academic misconduct investigators with a set of prompts to guide the interview with alleged perpetrators to glean the information required for cross-correlation with observations based on the rsid data.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48481,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic Science International-Digital Investigation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666281724001458/pdfft?md5=1c46f6d9d5928150f3f10e0b2c0b28f0&pid=1-s2.0-S2666281724001458-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic Science International-Digital Investigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666281724001458\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science International-Digital Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666281724001458","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学生蓄意的学术不端行为往往依赖于使用外部撰写的文本片段,这些片段由商业合同撰写服务或生成式人工智能语言模型生成。虽然 Microsoft Word 文件中的修订保存标识符(rsid)编号与文档的编辑和保存操作相关联,但 MS Word 并不遵循 Office Open XML 的 ECMA 规范。现有文献表明,使用 rsid 进行数字取证需要访问多个文档版本或用户机器。在学术不端指控案件中,通常只有提交的文件可供数字取证检查,再加上被指控的肇事者对文档生成和编辑过程的断言,本文是一项详细的探索性研究,为教育工作者和数字取证科学家提供了检查单个文档的工具,以确定各种常见的文档生成和编辑情况的真实性。该研究基于一系列实验,以确定常见的编辑和文档生成操作(如复制、粘贴、插入其他文档中的文本块)是否以及如何在嵌入所有 MS Word 文档的 rsid 编码中留下蛛丝马迹。虽然数字取证可以揭示文档的生成过程,但导致这些过程的操作可能有无害的解释。因此,本文还为学术不端行为调查人员提供了一套提示,用于指导对涉嫌犯罪者的访谈,以收集所需的信息,并与基于 rsid 数据的观察结果进行交叉关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Examining and detecting academic misconduct in written documents using revision save identifier numbers in MS Word as exemplified by multiple scenarios

Deliberate academic misconduct by students often relies on the use of segments of externally authored text, generated either by commercial contract authoring services or by generative Artificial intelligence language models. While revision save identifier (rsid) numbers in Microsoft Word files are associated with edit and save actions of a document, MS Word does not adhere to the ECMA specifications for the Office Open XML. Existing literature shows that digital forensics using rsid requires access to multiple document versions or the user's machine. In cases of academic misconduct allegations usually only the submitted files are available for digital forensic examination, coupled with assertions by the alleged perpetrators about the document generation and editing process This paper represents a detailed exploratory study that provides educators and digital forensic scientists with tools to examine a single document for the veracity of various commonly asserted scenarios of document generation and editing. It is based on a series of experiments that ascertained whether and how common edit and document generation actions such as copy, paste, insertion of blocks of texts from other documents, leave tell-tale traces in the rsid encoding that is embedded in all MS Word documents. While digital forensics can illuminate document generation processes, the actions that led to these may have innocuous explanations. In consequence, this paper also provides academic misconduct investigators with a set of prompts to guide the interview with alleged perpetrators to glean the information required for cross-correlation with observations based on the rsid data.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
15.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
76 days
期刊最新文献
Forensically analyzing IoT smart camera using MAoIDFF-IoT framework Examining and detecting academic misconduct in written documents using revision save identifier numbers in MS Word as exemplified by multiple scenarios Editorial Board Navigating the digital labyrinth: Forensics in the age of AI Forensic analysis and data decryption of tencent meeting in windows environment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1