Brilliant Engineering

Plagiarism Policy

ISSN 2687-5195  |  ACA Publishing

Brilliant Engineering (BEN) requires authors to acknowledge the sources of their work and describe its original contribution accurately. This policy applies to submissions, revisions, supplementary material and published content, including invited articles, special issues and conference-derived papers. It is applied together with BEN’s Ethics and Policies and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Plagiarism

Plagiarism occurs when another person’s words, ideas, methods, data or other intellectual contributions are presented without appropriate acknowledgement. It includes copying text without identifying the source, closely paraphrasing a source without attribution, translating another work and presenting it as original, or claiming another researcher’s results as one’s own. It can affect published and unpublished material.

In engineering and architecture, the same responsibilities apply to drawings, photographs, figures, tables, software, model files, distinctive derivations and experimental or numerical results. Redrawing a figure or rewording an explanation does not remove the need to credit its source. Established terminology and standard mathematical notation are assessed in context; their use alone does not demonstrate plagiarism.

Author Responsibilities

All authors are responsible for the integrity and attribution of the work they approve. The corresponding author coordinates the required disclosures and responses to editorial queries. Authors must cite the sources they actually used, clearly mark verbatim quotations and explain any reuse or adaptation of previously available material. Adding a citation does not, by itself, justify extensive copying or establish an original contribution.

Attribution and permission are separate requirements. Authors must obtain permission when reuse is not covered by a licence or applicable exception, retain supporting records and provide them when requested. They must disclose related manuscripts and publications, including their own, and identify material shared between them. Claims of originality must remain accurate after revision.

Authors are encouraged to check attribution and overlap before submission. BEN does not require authors to purchase a particular checking service or submit a commercial similarity certificate. An author-supplied report does not replace the journal’s assessment. Authors remain accountable for material produced with translation, editing or generative AI tools and must meet BEN’s disclosure requirements.

Similarity Screening

BEN screens manuscripts using Crossref Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, before external peer review. Screening may be repeated after revision, before publication or when a concern arises. The same requirements apply to standard and Rapid Review submissions. Accelerated handling does not waive an originality check or the examination of a credible concern.

Similarity screening identifies matching text for editorial examination. It does not establish ownership, detect every form of unattributed reuse or certify originality. Editors may compare the manuscript with the original sources and examine figures, data, code or other supporting material separately. Reports and related correspondence are handled as confidential editorial records and shared only as needed for assessment, author response or an appropriate investigation.

Interpreting Similarity Reports

BEN does not use a fixed overall similarity percentage, or a percentage from one source, as an automatic acceptance or rejection rule. Editors assess what has been reused, its location and extent, its attribution and its significance for the manuscript’s contribution. A low score may conceal a serious problem, while a high score may reflect ... Show all

Brilliant Engineering

Plagiarism Policy

ISSN 2687-5195  |  ACA Publishing

Brilliant Engineering (BEN) requires authors to acknowledge the sources of their work and describe its original contribution accurately. This policy applies to submissions, revisions, supplementary material and published content, including invited articles, special issues and conference-derived papers. It is applied together with BEN’s Ethics and Policies and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Plagiarism

Plagiarism occurs when another person’s words, ideas, methods, data or other intellectual contributions are presented without appropriate acknowledgement. It includes copying text without identifying the source, closely paraphrasing a source without attribution, translating another work and presenting it as original, or claiming another researcher’s results as one’s own. It can affect published and unpublished material.

In engineering and architecture, the same responsibilities apply to drawings, photographs, figures, tables, software, model files, distinctive derivations and experimental or numerical results. Redrawing a figure or rewording an explanation does not remove the need to credit its source. Established terminology and standard mathematical notation are assessed in context; their use alone does not demonstrate plagiarism.

Author Responsibilities

All authors are responsible for the integrity and attribution of the work they approve. The corresponding author coordinates the required disclosures and responses to editorial queries. Authors must cite the sources they actually used, clearly mark verbatim quotations and explain any reuse or adaptation of previously available material. Adding a citation does not, by itself, justify extensive copying or establish an original contribution.

Attribution and permission are separate requirements. Authors must obtain permission when reuse is not covered by a licence or applicable exception, retain supporting records and provide them when requested. They must disclose related manuscripts and publications, including their own, and identify material shared between them. Claims of originality must remain accurate after revision.

Authors are encouraged to check attribution and overlap before submission. BEN does not require authors to purchase a particular checking service or submit a commercial similarity certificate. An author-supplied report does not replace the journal’s assessment. Authors remain accountable for material produced with translation, editing or generative AI tools and must meet BEN’s disclosure requirements.

Similarity Screening

BEN screens manuscripts using Crossref Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, before external peer review. Screening may be repeated after revision, before publication or when a concern arises. The same requirements apply to standard and Rapid Review submissions. Accelerated handling does not waive an originality check or the examination of a credible concern.

Similarity screening identifies matching text for editorial examination. It does not establish ownership, detect every form of unattributed reuse or certify originality. Editors may compare the manuscript with the original sources and examine figures, data, code or other supporting material separately. Reports and related correspondence are handled as confidential editorial records and shared only as needed for assessment, author response or an appropriate investigation.

Interpreting Similarity Reports

BEN does not use a fixed overall similarity percentage, or a percentage from one source, as an automatic acceptance or rejection rule. Editors assess what has been reused, its location and extent, its attribution and its significance for the manuscript’s contribution. A low score may conceal a serious problem, while a high score may reflect properly attributed material or a match with the authors’ disclosed preprint.

References, quotations, standard terminology and descriptions of established methods can generate legitimate matches. Any exclusions or report filters must be justified and recorded; they must not conceal relevant overlap. Authors may be asked to explain specific passages or materials. Revision must resolve attribution and originality concerns, rather than merely lower the reported percentage.

AI-detection scores are separate from text-similarity findings. Neither score alone establishes plagiarism or justifies a misconduct finding. Concerns about AI-assisted content are examined under BEN’s Generative AI Policy and the same evidence-based procedures used for other submissions.

Text Recycling and Prior Dissemination

Text recycling, sometimes called self-plagiarism, concerns reuse of an author’s own earlier wording. Editors consider the amount, purpose and location of the overlap, the disclosure and citation of the earlier work, and the applicable rights. Limited repetition in a methods description may be acceptable when it accurately describes the present study and is transparent. Reused results, interpretations or conclusions must not be represented as new.

Redundant publication is a separate concern: substantially the same findings must not be republished without disclosure, a valid scientific justification and appropriate attribution. Changing the title, language or wording does not create a new study. Authors must identify previously reported datasets and results, explain the new contribution and provide related papers when requested. A manuscript must not be under active consideration by another journal.

A disclosed preprint, thesis or conference abstract does not by itself prevent consideration by BEN. A journal article developed from a full conference paper must cite that paper and provide a substantial, identifiable scientific contribution, with any necessary permissions resolved. Neither cosmetic rewriting nor a fixed percentage of new text establishes sufficient novelty. Similarity with an earlier version is assessed after verifying its authorship and provenance.

Assessment of Suspected Plagiarism

An editor with no relevant conflict of interest examines the evidence and the original sources. The Editorial Office may pause review or production while the matter is assessed. Authors normally receive a clear description of the concern, sufficient supporting information to respond and a reasonable response period. The journal may request source files, primary data, permissions or an explanation of related work.

The assessment considers the nature and significance of the reuse, its attribution, the authors’ explanation and its effect on the research record. An allegation is not treated as an established finding. If the corresponding author does not respond, the journal may contact the other authors and proceed on the available evidence after reasonable attempts to obtain a response.

BEN may consult independent specialists or refer concerns to an institution, funder or other competent body. Institutions conduct formal misconduct investigations within their authority; BEN determines the editorial action needed for its submissions and publication record. Decisions and their reasons are documented. Conflicted editors, including authors of the material under examination, take no part in deciding the case.

Editorial Actions

Before publication

Where overlap is legitimate or adequately explained, assessment may continue. A limited attribution or quotation problem may be returned for correction when this can resolve the concern without misrepresenting the work’s contribution. Substantial plagiarism, deceptive reuse of results or unjustified redundant publication warrants rejection after assessment. Rewording copied content does not remedy an underlying false claim to data, ideas or originality. Withdrawal of a submission does not stop an integrity inquiry.

After publication

For published work, the response depends on the established problem. A correction may address limited unattributed text when the article otherwise remains reliable and its contribution is sufficiently original. Serious plagiarism, unjustified duplicate publication or another breach that undermines the article’s integrity may require retraction. An expression of concern may alert readers to a serious unresolved issue while further evidence is sought.

Publication notices must explain the reason for action, identify the affected article and provide reciprocal links. Retraction notices are freely accessible, receive a DOI and identify who is issuing the retraction. The article normally remains available with a prominent retraction label. Author agreement is not required for justified editorial action. Published content must not be silently replaced or deleted to conceal a problem. Detailed procedures follow BEN’s policy on corrections, retractions, expressions of concern and post-publication discussion.

Reporting Concerns and Appeals

Concerns should be sent to info@acapublishing.com, identifying BEN, the manuscript or article, the original source and the passages or material at issue. Evidence-based anonymous reports are considered. Information is handled confidentially to the extent compatible with a fair assessment, and good-faith reporting must not disadvantage the person raising the concern.

The Editorial Office aims to acknowledge complaints within seven working days and provide a reasoned response within thirty calendar days. If more time is needed, the complainant receives an update. Authors may appeal within thirty calendar days of a decision, specifying a factual error, overlooked evidence or procedural failure. An editor who did not make the original decision assesses the appeal under BEN’s Complaints and Appeals policy.

Related Policies and Editorial Guidance

This policy should be read with BEN’s Ethics and Policies. Relevant guidance includes Crossref’s guidance on interpreting similarity reports; COPE guidance on plagiarism in submitted manuscripts; COPE guidance on plagiarism in published articles; text recycling guidance endorsed by COPE; COPE Retraction Guidelines.