◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys5.dxiong.com)(www.xinyusi.info)(xys2.dropin.org)◇◇

IEEE机器人与自动化大会（ICRA 2011）程序委员会弄虚作假与上海交通大学陈卫东等ICRA2011论文剽窃

方先生，您好，

　　新语丝于2011年5.21 上刊登了《明目张胆的剽窃论文竟然能在IEEE 机器人
与自动化大会上获奖！？》，
（http://www.xys.org/xys/ebooks/others/science/dajia12/chenweidong.txt）
后，我将举报信发到IEEE 机器人与自动化协会，负责ICRA2011会议的是大会总
主席李泽湘，大会程序委员会主席郑元芳，大会评奖委员会主席傅立成，以及
IEEE机器人与自动化协会资深元老谈自忠。

　　首先李泽湘回信说：剽窃不成立，因为被剽窃的文章是在2011年发表，而剽
窃文章在2010年投稿的。

　　傅立成也回信说：评审程序如何严格，如何公正（详细邮件见后。）

　　对于李泽湘的回复，主要是由于被抄袭的作者在文章没有录用之前已经把论
文放到网上，这样文章被广泛的访问，而且从研究的连续性（被抄袭作者以前的
积累的工作）也可以验证这点。

　　而抄袭论文的作者（陈卫东等）基本上没什么前期工作可谈，基本上打一枪
换一个地方。

　　对于傅立成的回复，下面被抄袭论文作者西班牙的Cristina Urdiales教授
在邮件中给出了比较完整的回答。我们主要关心的是：如果评审真的“很严格”
（傅立成语），对于剽窃手段如此低级和愚蠢，怎么都没被那些国际专家教授发
现？可能性之一：大会审稿质量太差,可能性之二大会程序委员会暗箱操作!!!

　　特别地，被抄袭论文的作者西班牙的Cristina Urdiales教授发了封邮件来
说明这件事（原文见后）。

　　全文翻译如下：

　　尊敬的Kosuge（IEEE 机器人与自动化协会主席），

　　首先获奖文章和我们今年发表在《自主机器人》上的文章非常相似，而且我
也参加了最后的评奖论文宣读会，发现这篇文章和我们的工作相关的，但是在10
分钟的宣读过程中，我基本上无法知道这篇工作在做什么（注：言外之意，宣读
质量很差，不知所云），而且我问了几个问题，宣读者也不能回答，只是说是个
测试。（注：如此质量差的工作在傅教授所说的“严格评审程序”中居然力压群
雄而”获奖”？令人匪夷所思啊！）然后我被叫停说时间到。此后，我再没有兴
趣读该文章，因为这个工作看起来一点都不solid（扎实）。此后，我接到这篇
文章与我们工作相似的邮件，在认真对比后，足够认为他们是剽窃我们的工作，
事实上，唯一的区别与我们的工作是，作者用最大最小方法来修正我们优化函数，
而优化函数是我们提出的。作者不能说他们不知道我们的工作（注：排除巧合的
可能性），因为他们甚至还包括在我们的参考文献中。他们没有提及是去年我们
ICRA的贡献，我们也被提名为KUKA 最佳论文奖，但没有获胜，尽管我们一直与
医生，真正的病人在家庭环境中包含“去厨房”真正的运动轨迹，而不是“移动
的门”（注：可能是陈等的文章实验环境）。我还附上本文所要的邮件。不用说，
我们非常失望，他们剽窃行为使得我们的工作看起来似乎是复制，而且他们的剽
窃工作还获得了奖，虽然他们工作描述的性能还比我们差。然而，我们主要关注
的是，如果我们不出来指责他们剽窃，那就变成我们是剽窃的人。我们可以证明
很多，我们已经提到，多年来一直与工作方法，所以我们想恳请你们启动适当的
措施来解决它。


　　在事实面前，IEEE 机器人与自动化协会为了仅存的一点面子和遮羞布，还
是不情愿的进行了“表面的调查”。 

　　一个月后，令人可悲和可笑的是，IEEE 机器人和自动化大会的会议活动副
主席，昨天发了封极其不负责任的邮件说了“调查结果”：“我们没有发现剽窃，
如果您有新证据请提供。”没有提供任何解释和支持理由。这位副主席把广大科
研工作者当作小学生了，以为随便骗骗哄哄就行了。

　　在如此清楚的事实面前，这些所谓的“国际大牌教授、专家”竟然无耻到可
以不负责任，当众掩耳盗铃，装看不见，着实令人愤怒和愤慨！同时也可以看出，
所谓的国际IEEE机器人与自动化大会（ICRA2011）组委会毫不掩饰地公然欺诈广
大科研工作者。

　　ICRA是国际机器人领域顶级会议，2011年首次在中国上海召开，由于有群好
大喜功的蛀虫，但是没想到没为中国争光，反而成了丢人现眼的会议。

　　我希望方先生能在网络上曝光这件事的始末，特别是其中的猫腻，让那些见
不得人的事情也暴露在阳光下。

附件：

1. 李泽湘的回复：

TJ, Kosugue and Lichen,

I took a look at both papers, and noted the following:

  The electronic version of the other  paper appeared on Oct. 21, 2010, 
which was after the closing date of  paper submission for  ICRA'2011. 
It is extremely difficult, if possible at all,  for  an author of 
ICRA'11 to plagiarize on something that appeared  after  Sept. 15, 2010.

If needed, we can also ask Lichen, our Award Chair,  to write a  reply 
letter, explaining   how  each   award  of ICRA'11 is arrived.   He 
appeared to make wild speculations on the award selection process in 
the Chinese website.

 Best,

Zexiang

2. 傅立成的回复：

To whom it may concern :

It is a great regret to hear that one of our Award papers was accused 
of plagiarism. As the Award Chair of ICRA 2011, I would like to make 
two points here : 

1) The hard closing deadline of paper submission to ICRA 2011 is Sept. 
15, 2010. Since the paper to be plagiarized on appeared on Oct. 21, 
2010, it is impossible for the plagiarism to stand. 

2) The accused paper has been reviewed by several reviewers for the 
1st round, and got excellent review results. Later, it was selected 
into the candidate pool for the award. Then, one of our Awards 
Committee members chaired a specially formed selection committee for 
this award. They chose four finalist papers from the candidate pool, 
and then reviewed those four papers based on their presentation on 
spot during the conference. This is how this award paper got selected 
out.  

As you can see that the selection process is very strict, and the 
authors of the accused paper have to be well adept to the ideasof the 
paper. Despite IEEE & RAS will undertake some measuresfor further 
investigation, I personally believe this accusation held  no ground 
for it. 

Best

Li-Chen Fu
Awards Chair of ICRA 2011

3. 西班牙的Cristina Urdiales教授的邮件全文：

Dear Dr Kosuge, 

    It's been called to our attention that the paper awarded this year 
   with the KUKA award is too similar to one of ours, published this   
 year in Auton. Robots. I attended the presentation myself thinking    
that it would be related to our work, but in the 10 minutes speech I   
 did not catch the basics of their method and after I made a few    
questions that the presenter failed to answer, commenting that it    
was just a test case, I was asked to stop due to time limits. After    
that, I did not read the paper because it did not seem solid    
research to me, but I received a mail this week (attached below)    
commenting how similar it was to our work and, after checking it    
throughfully, I think there is solid reason to think of plagiarism.    
Indeed, the only difference to our work is that the authors use a    
max-min to fix the indexes that we proposed (the optimization    
function is basically ours). The authors can not state that they do    
not know of our work, because they even include us in the    references. 
What they fail to refer is our contribution to ICRA last    year, that 
was also nominated to KUKA but did not won, even though    we have 
worked with doctors, real patients, in a home environment    and with 
real trajectories like "go to the kitchen" rather than    "move 
through that door". I'm also attaching this paper to the mail.    
Needless to say, we are very upset that not only our work seems to    
be copied, but they even received an award for a work that seems    
poorer than ours, while we did not win last year. However, our main    
concern is that, as explained in the mail sent to us by this person,   
 it could be ourselves accused of plagiarism. We can prove with many   
 references that we've been working with that methodology for years,   
 so we would like to kindly ask of you to take part in this problem    
and initiate the proper actions to solve it. 

    Thank you very much for your attention, looking forwards to 
hearing    from you soon,

    Cristina Urdiales

    PhD Robotics

    PhD Artificial Intelligence

    ISIS group, University of Malaga (Spain)

4. IEEE 机器人和自动化大会的会议活动的副主席Nikos Papanikolopoulos的来
信：

Dear XYZ,

 IEEE investigated the claims that you submitted and they cannot find 
a  basis for plagiarism. If you  have other evidence, please submit it 
to IEEE (Mr. Tony Vengraitis who is cc'ed in this message) and cc' me. 
IEEE also does not get involved in anonymous submissions/allegations.

******************************************************

Nikos Papanikolopoulos

Distinguished McKnight University Professor

Director of Undergraduate Studies

IEEE RAS VP for Conferences

Department of Computer Science and Engineering

University of Minnesota

4-192 EE/CS, 200 Union Street SE

Minneapolis, MN 55455

email: npapas@cs.umn.edu phone: 612-625-0163

fax: 612-625-0572

URL: http://www.cs.umn.edu/~npapas

(XYS20110621)

◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys5.dxiong.com)(www.xinyusi.info)(xys2.dropin.org)◇◇