Wednesday, 7 September 2011

ANNA WORLD '11 - The 2011 World Congress & Expo in Chennai, India, accepted a fake paper. See http://annaworld.000space.com/ for further information.

ANNA WORLD '11 - The 2011 World Congress & Expo in Chennai, India, accepted a fake paper. See http://annaworld.000space.com/ for further information


ANNA WORLD '11 - The 2011 World Congress & Expo in Chennai, India also listed the fake paper entitled "Tropist Method for Sequence Analysis" on their main home page as being accepted. A copy of this home page is archived below:

.

4 comments:

  1. I too have sent my paper and got it accepted last week. I'm beginning to the doubt the credibility of the conference as my review report also looks similar to the fake one. I think some action needs to be taken to find out if this is indeed a fraudulent conference.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It has already been proven that ANNA WORLD '11 - The 2011 World Congress & Expo in Chennai, India is a fraudulent conference. THEY ACCEPTED A FAKE PAPER. That's what a fake or fraudulent conference is. What more proof do you need? What more proof could there possibly be?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I realize this is an old post but it seems to be among the first Google results so I thought I'd share some of my experience.

    In short: I have worked in academia until about 8 months ago, eventually decided it simply wasn't for me and quit. I do not intend to pursue an academic career so I guess I can be fairly objective. I also don't have much experience in academia (it's only been about two years), so I might not be entirely spot on; I'll just try to describe what I've seen. If you folks need it, I can provide some verification data about the papers I've published so that you can ensure I'm not posting bogus stuff.

    In short:

    - One of the professors I worked with on a side-project had some papers published at IEEE conferences. They actually take place -- as in people actually gather and hold their presentations.

    - The overall quality of the material is laughable at best. The paper we published included absolutely no experimental or simulation data; in short, there was no proof that our approach was valid. Given my position, I couldn't just tell my professor to take my name out of that crap -- all I could do was drop one of my names from it (my parents blessed me with two besides my family name) and list another e-mail address, so that it wouldn't get indexed as such.

    - There seems to be an entire network of research activity around IEEE; and again, its quality is deplorable. Some of the people involved are actually of good quality and at least try to hold some decent standards. Most of them are simply incredibly incompetent and the money getting shoved into them is utterly wasted.

    - There is no reviewing process. Simple as that. The paper we submitted was full of editing and grammar mistakes because the two main contributors didn't speak English too well. It claimed things for which it offered no proof and basically brought nothing new. If I had reviewed it, I'd have rejected it without much consideration.

    - People also help each other; my professor actually told me that some of the people simply agree to publish each others' work in the conferences they chair in exchange for a place on the author list. This probably explains the incredible productivity of some of the people involved with IEEE.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The IEEE did not give the registration back to a disabled person
    The IEEE did not give the registration back to a disabled person. Read more:
    http://www.qualityofconferences.com/2011/12/ieee-refused-to-give-money-back-in.html

    ReplyDelete

Follow by Email