To Admit chaos, Does Not Suffice to Justify.
A caricature of research, If That.

copycat82 is worse than trivial. Its plagiarism leaves it as a subset of each of those prior art sources, which copycat82 attempts to imitate. Even when it admits some grave problem/need, copycat82 does not provide the solution.

Every single statement of copycat82, is such that, it is either trivial (in presence of prior art by others), or commits some major ignorance, and/or neglect:

If that were any method of research, we could even write arbitrary "research work" in some foreign language, even if we ourselves do not understand. Simply cut-and-paste published research papers in that language, and/or draw words from dictionary, at random, and submit that junk-pile to people speaking that language well. They tell you the errors, and you may attach the replies to the initial mess, you had cut-and-pasted.

admits problems, but next, advertises only fake solace

Is that research? Whether others or oneself find some problems, it is the responsibility of the author to

copycat82 utters some vague statement, which may mean a variety of things. And even if that were about the problem which exists, given that no solution is published, it is admitted only. As such, it is only another type of self-contradiction. i.e: If you would admit such a grave problem (even if with vague sentences), what does it mean still to publish that text the way it is, with such grave, unsolved problems? How is that serious?

O.K. The prior art had workable solutions to similar questions, but if we assume copyat82's problems away, with our knowledge of such prior art, then no new content is left in copycat82. How is that a Ph.D. text? It is only a trade-off between plagiarism, and grave-mess (faultfull examples and fault-prone "method").

The [admitted] problems of copycat82 include:

Guess: Patchwork ...

copycat83 (the published paper, associated with copycat82) was first submitted in 1981 (as footnote tells). Presumably, copycat82 only transcribes the commentary (as responded by the reviewers) - with a single sentence, or two.

Forum: . . (Fair Menu . . . . . Fault Report? . . . . . Remedy for your case . . . . . Noticed Plagiarism?)

Referring#: 0.0.1
Last-Revised (text) on Nov. 3, 2004 . . . that was
revised/new links, on Nov. 6, 2004 & June 16, 2009
mirror to, on June 16, 2009
Written by: Ahmed Ferzan/Ferzen R Midyat-Zila (or, Earth)
Copyright (c) 2004, 2009 Ferzan Midyat. All rights reserved.