CAJ | 학술논문

选取《重庆医学》编辑部2013—2014年20篇投稿论文，分别采用CNKI科技期刊学术不端文献检测系统(AMLC)和维普——通达论文引用检测系统进行检测，比较2个系统检测结果的差异性。结果发现同一篇论文经过不同检测系统检测存在差异，复制率差异最小为0.31%，最高为40.9%。基于不同学术不端检测系统的检测结果存在一定差异性，编辑部应该探索对投稿稿件进行复制率检测的合理方式。
선취《중경의학》편집부2013—2014년20편투고논문，분별채용CNKI과기기간학술불단문헌검측계통(AMLC)화유보——통체논문인용검측계통진행검측，비교2개계통검측결과적차이성。결과발현동일편논문경과불동검측계통검측존재차이，복제솔차이최소위0.31%，최고위40.9%。기우불동학술불단검측계통적검측결과존재일정차이성，편집부응해탐색대투고고건진행복제솔검측적합리방식。
To compare the differences of detection results from different academic misconduct literature detection systems,both CNKI academic misconduct literature periodical detection system(AMLC)and Vip-Tonda text match-ing system were used to detect 20 papers submitted to Chongqing Medicine. The study showed that there were differ-ent values of replication rate at a range from 0.31%to 40.9%of the same paper’s detection result by different systems and different detection results were demonstrated by different academic misconduct literature detection systems. It is suggested that editorial departments should explore a reasonable way to detect the replication rate of manuscripts sub-mitted.