<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Source Retrieval Plagiarism Detection based on Noun Phrase and Keyword Phrase Extraction</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>ICT Research Institute, Academic Center for Education</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Culture and Reseach (ACECR)</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="IR">Iran</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Javad Rafiei</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Salar Mohtaj, Vahid Zarrabi, Habibollah Asghari</addr-line>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2015</year>
      </pub-date>
      <abstract>
        <p>This paper describes an approach for source retrieval task of PAN 2015 competition. We apply two methods to extract important terms, namely weighted noun phrases and keyword phrases which are extracted from long sentences in terms of word count. Queries are constructed from top marked sentences. The prepared system tries to gather a complete dataset of downloaded sources and employ it in query filtering operations. The ChatNoir search API is used for submitted queries. Each query is split into two sub-queries and the system extract one snippet for each of sub-queries and exploits them in downloading operation. The evaluation results show high scores for three measures: recall, total queries number and no detection.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Plagiarism Detection</kwd>
        <kwd>Source retrieval</kwd>
        <kwd>Keyword phrase extraction</kwd>
        <kwd>Noun phrase extraction</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        The advent and rapid development of the World Wide Web facilitate public access to
digital information, so that everybody can easily read and alter the content of web
pages for personal use. There can be considered two aspect of information generation.
First, using the existing information with their references as input and extending them
with new innovation as output, and second, taking information and altering the
content while maintaining the concept without any reference to source which is called
plagiarism. In simple terms, plagiarism is the unreferenced use of other's ideas or text.
Plagiarism detection in PAN [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] is divided into source retrieval and text alignment
subtasks. The former task uses two search engines [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2 ref3">2, 3</xref>
        ] to retrieve all plagiarized
sources for input suspicious documents. In this paper we focus on source
retrieval task at PAN 2014 and present a simple solution for keyword extraction and query
building with regard to high quality of query‟s terms and minimum use of web search
API. We have used ChatNoir API to retrieve candidate source documents.
      </p>
      <p>The rest of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 describes our approach
that includes document segmentation, keyword extraction methods, query formulation
and query and document filtering. Section 3 presents the results of our method and a
discussion on the results. Conclusion and steps for future works will be explained in
section 4.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Our Methodology</title>
      <p>
        Our approach has been divided into five steps as follows:
 Suspicious Document Chunking,
 Noun phrase and keyword phrase Extraction,
 Query Formulation,
 Search Control,
 Document Filtering and Downloading
These steps are equal to those described in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. Before these main steps, raw
suspicious documents are passed through a preprocessing block that includes stop words
removal and punctuation deletion.
2.1
      </p>
      <sec id="sec-2-1">
        <title>Suspicious Document Chunking</title>
        <p>After the preprocessing step, the documents are prepared for suspicious document
chunking. Each document is segmented into some parts called chunks. These chunks
are separately used for keyword phrase and noun phrase extraction and also query
construction. Therefore, their length should be long enough to extract meaningful
queries. On the other hand, these chunks may contain unknown numbers of
plagiarism cases from source documents. Suspicious documents are divided into chunks of
500 words length and then each chunk is tokenized into individual sentences. As a
result, we have some sentences that are used to extract appropriate keywords.
2.2</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-2">
        <title>Noun phrase and keyword phrase Extraction</title>
        <p>
          This step has the main role in source retrieval task. Extracting appropriate keywords
help us to efficiently perform the next steps. There are many previous studies that
have tried to extract the keywords by investigating the contents [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4 ref5">4, 5</xref>
          ]. We have used
two types of keyword extraction in our approach: 1) Keyword phrase extraction. 2)
Noun phrase extraction.
        </p>
        <p>The input to this step is a series of sentences that are extracted from a specific
chunk at the chunking step. Before starting extraction process, sentences with low
information content are discarded: We rank the input sentences based on their length
and the number of nouns, and then discard the lower 20% of the sentences in the
ranking. The resulting sentences are long enough and have rich content for keyword
extraction.</p>
        <p>In this stage, two different types of tf.idf weighting scheme are used for rating
important words in the sentences:
 Type #1 (tf.idf1): In this type, Tf = term frequency in the chunk, and Idf = inverse
term frequency in the whole suspicious document
 Type #2 (tf.idf2): in this type, Tf = term frequency in the chunk, and Idf = inverse
document frequency in PAN 2011 corpus
Keyword phrase Extraction. Keyword phrases are considered as a collection of
keywords with high tf.idf weights in a sentence. The number of keywords that can be
used as input to ChatNoir search engine is limited, so the number of query words
should be restricted in such a way to maximize the information content. The process
of keyword phrase extraction is done in four steps as follows: In the first step, for
each type of tf.idf weighting scheme that mentioned above, ten words with highest
tf.idf value are selected from the whole chunk. In the second step, the sentences that
contain words with high values of tf.idf1 AND tfidf2 are selected. In the next step,
among the selected sentences, those that contain words with highest tf.idf1 and tfidf2
are selected for keyword phrase extraction. As a result, three sentences are selected in
this step. Finally, in the fourth step, the keywords are extracted from the resulting
sentences as follows:
 Nouns with high tf.idf values
 Remaining nouns in the sentence
 Adjective and verbs with high tf.idf1 values
It should be noted that the selection process is done based on the above mentioned
priority. When we reach the maximum number of keywords in each stage, then the
process would be stopped.</p>
        <p>The four steps mentioned above are repeated for each chunk and the extracted
keyword phrases are passed to the next step for query building.</p>
        <p>
          Noun phrase Extraction. Noun phrase extraction is accomplished by processing the
remaining sentences. The formulation has been deployed based on the formal English
noun phrase structure [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          ]. For each noun phrase, a score is calculated based on tf.idf1
values. This score is the average of tf.idf1 values. Next, the noun phrases are ranked
based on their scores. From the three top ranked noun phrases, the top tf.idf2
weighting words are passed to query formulation step.
        </p>
        <p>As a result, the implemented system uses two different scenarios applied to
sentences for keyword extraction. After dividing a suspicious document into some
chunks, the following scenarios are used based on operations depicted in Table 1.
Scenario1: Operation 1 Operation 2 Operation 3 for noun phrase extraction
Scenario2: Operation 1 Operation 2 Operation 4 for keyword phrase extraction
Operation
number
1
2
3
4</p>
        <p>The outputs of these scenarios are also passed through a filter that removes some
terms with low weight to reach the word count limitation of ChatNoir API. The
remaining terms formulate a query and in the next step we can select top weighted
sentence for query formulation.
2.3</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-3">
        <title>Query Formulation</title>
        <p>For top sentences selected from previous step, the extracted keywords are simply
placed next to each other based on their order in sentence and are passed to next step
as a query. According to ChatNoir limitations, the threshold for the number of words
in each query is limited to 10.
2.4</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-4">
        <title>Search Control</title>
        <p>In this step, we filtered the constructed queries based on the possibly previous
downloaded documents. The input query is compared against the downloaded documents
that are gathered from previous rounds of source retrieval steps. If there is at least one
downloaded document that contains at least 60% words of the query, then the query is
dropped from passing to the next step. This threshold was achieved based on
experiments.
2.5</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-2-5">
        <title>Document Filtering and Downloading</title>
        <p>We have used ChatNoir API for applying the input queries into the search engine.
Then 14 top ranked results returned for each query. Input query is divided into two
sub-queries and for each of them, one snippet with the length of 500 characters is
extracted per returned document. These snippets are combined with one another and
make a passage. If the resulted passage contains at least 50% words of the query, then
the related document is downloaded and maintained for search control operation. This
threshold was achieved based on experiments.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Evaluations and Discussion</title>
      <p>
        We have implemented our approach using python programming language and NLTK
package for text processing operations [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]. At first, the prepared software for source
retrieval was run on training dataset [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ] and after getting feedback from the results,
the following parameters were optimized:
 Chunk length
 Number of queries in each chunk
 Returned results for each query
 Similarity threshold between a query and resulted snippets
 Similarity threshold between a query and downloaded documents
Then, the software was placed on a dedicated virtual machine and was run on test
dataset through TIRA [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ]. Table 1 shows achieved results of our software on the PAN
2015 test dataset. The bold cases show highest rank for our software between all
participants. According to “No Detection” score, our software has achieved highest rank
in this measure. In other words, for only one plagiarized document, the “no true
positive detection” was made. However, the number of downloads is relatively high. One
of our main objectives was to deploy a method for query building with special
keywords to get a high recall. Our algorithm has reached second highest rank in recall
score among all participants. In download filtering step, the software gathers a
complete set of suitable source documents and uses them with a simple query filtering
method. As a result, the number of queries that we use as input to APIs search engine
in our software is lowest among other participants. Since that we used a simple
approach in download filtering, so we achieved the best rank in software runtime
measure among the participants.
In this paper, we have described an approach for source retrieval task of PAN
competition. This process has achieved second highest rank in recall and first in “No
Detection” score. Because of high detection power of the system, the collected documents
cover most of the relevant sources. Extra queries have been filtered using a simple
method by making a union between query terms and collected documents. As a result
we have achieved the highest rank in terms of „number of queries‟. Moreover, we also
achieved the first rank in „runtime‟.
      </p>
      <p>For future works, we will try to decrease the number of downloaded source
documents while keeping the complete set of related documents for query filtering.
This work has been accomplished in ICT research Institute, ACECR, under the
support of Vice Presidency for Science and Technology of Iran - grant No. 1164331. The
authors gratefully acknowledge the support of aforementioned organizations. Special
thanks go to the members of ITBM research group for their valuable collaboration.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Potthast</surname>
            , Martin,
            <given-names>Tim Gollub</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Matthias Hagen, Jan Graßegger, Johannes Kiesel, Maximilian Michel, Arnd Oberländer, Martin Tippmann, Alberto Barrón-Cedeño, Parth Gupta, Paolo Rosso, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Benno</given-names>
            <surname>Stein</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Overview of the 4th International Competition on Plagiarism Detection</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Working Notes Papers of the CLEF 2012 Evaluation Labs</source>
          ,
          <year>September 2012</year>
          .
          <source>ISBN 978-88-904810-3-1. ISSN</source>
          <year>2038</year>
          -
          <volume>4963</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Potthast</surname>
            , Martin,
            <given-names>Matthias Hagen</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Benno Stein, Jan Graßegger, Max imilian Michel, Martin Tippmann, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Clement</given-names>
            <surname>Welsch</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>"ChatNoir: a search engine for the ClueWeb09 corpus."</article-title>
          <source>In Proceedings of the 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>1004</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1004</lpage>
          . ACM,
          <year>2012</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Strohman</surname>
            , Trevor, Donald Metzler, Howard Turtle, and
            <given-names>W. Bruce</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Croft</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>"Indri: A language model-based search engine for complex queries."</article-title>
          <source>In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Analysis</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>2</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>6</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>2</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>6</lpage>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Matsuo</surname>
            , Yutaka, and
            <given-names>Mitsuru</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ishizuka</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>"Keyword extraction from a single document using word co-occurrence statistical information."</article-title>
          <source>International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools</source>
          <volume>13</volume>
          , no.
          <volume>01</volume>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          ):
          <fpage>157</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>169</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Witten</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Ian H.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gordon</surname>
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paynter</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Eibe Frank, Carl Gutwin, and Craig G.
          <article-title>NevillManning. "KEA: Practical automatic keyphrase extraction."</article-title>
          <source>In Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Digital libraries</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>254</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>255</lpage>
          . ACM,
          <year>1999</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Abney</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Steven Paul.
          <article-title>"The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect." PhD diss</article-title>
          ., Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
          <year>1987</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bird</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Steven.
          <article-title>"NLTK: the natural language toolkit."</article-title>
          <source>In Proceedings of the COLING/ACL on Interactive presentation sessions</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>69</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>72</lpage>
          . Association for Computational Lingu istics,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Potthast</surname>
            , Martin,
            <given-names>Benno Stein</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Alberto Barrón-Cedeño, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Paolo</given-names>
            <surname>Rosso</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>"An evaluation framework for plagiarism detection."</article-title>
          <source>In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on computational linguistics: Posters</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>997</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1005</lpage>
          . Association for Computational Linguistics,
          <year>2010</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gollub</surname>
            , Tim, Martin Potthast, Anna Beyer, Matthias Busse, Francisco Rangel, Paolo Rosso, Efstathios Stamatatos, and
            <given-names>Benno</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stein</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>"Recent trends in digital text forensics and its evaluation." In Information Access Evaluation</article-title>
          . Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Visualization, pp.
          <fpage>282</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>302</lpage>
          . Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
          <year>2013</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>