Monday, 20 February 2012

The fake conferences is a typical rule of IEEE

We received a comment now from some colleague with the nick name "Mechatronics 2012"

He/she says

The fake conferences is a typical rule of IEEE
One more example is the
They claim that they have:
"Review duration: 15-20 days after submission"
Check it

How can a serious conference with hundred of papers to make review of all these papers within 15 days?

Our conclusion that seems to be the standard for the majority of IEEE is:

The IEEE conferences do not have any review. They work only for money
Google: IEEE fake papers
or IEEE Junk Conferences or IEEE bogus or IEEE scam

You might visit immediately these sites (and several others)

Friday, 17 February 2012

SCIgen (fake) Papers appeared in the IEEE Memory Stick

In spite of the several SCIgen Papers appeared in a Memory Stick distributed in this conference,

IEEE continues having this laughable conference in its portal
Check it

Would IEEE really sponsor a fake scientific conference?

Would IEEE really sponsor a fake scientific conference?

See a comment in this blog from an anonymous commentor: "The IEEE did not give the registration back to a disabled person. Read more:"

Wednesday, 1 February 2012

IEEEXplore e-library has published from time to time more than 50 fake SCIgen papers.

As you could see here
an anonymous commentor of our blog reports that the IEEEXplore library does not have a tool to check the plagiarism. Our commentor has the evidence of this.

We agree with our commentor. IEEEXplore e-library has published from time to time more than 50 fake SCIgen papers.

John Walz: , Reisman, Sorel" ,,,
date Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 4:03 AMsubject Confidential: Important CPS Message Regarding Fraudulent Machine-Generated Paper Submissions

TO: CPS Clients FROM: Evan Butterfield, Director of Products and Services RE: Fraudulent Machine-Generated Paper Submissions (CONFIDENTIAL) DATE: 16 January 2009
The IEEE Computer Society (CS) has evidence that multiple (IEEE) conferences are receiving machine-generated papers. In two cases, conferences have actually accepted an obviously fraudulent submission. This is a serious issue that threatens the credibility of your conference, the quality of the digital library, and the reputation of both the IEEE and CS. It requires your immediate attention. Please take this opportunity to ensure that your peer review processes are being followed, and adapt to any new requirements that may be communicated by the IEEE or the Computer Society. No conference published by CPS should rely on an abstract review. It is very important that you review carefully the full text of all papers submitted to your conference. If you have already accepted papers, your program committee should review the full text again. While CPS staff will be conducting random spot-checks of conference papers in the publishing queue, we are relying on you to authenticate the content of your proceedings. Any papers that were not actually presented at your conference need to be brought to our attention, and should receive close review. In known cases, the machine-generated origin is obvious from a reading of the first few paragraphs of the paper; the abstracts are human-generated and do not indicate the quality of the paper itself. In the past, papers have been submitted by “Herbert Schlangemann,” but be mindful that the perpetrator of this fraud will change the approach over time. In the event you discover any evidence of questionable content or behavior, please communicate that to us immediately along with an action plan for addressing the problem. Thank you for your help in maintaining the quality of our products.


Follow by Email