Eck, Nadine2023-03-012023-03-012023978288931517810.58863/20.500.12424/4273122http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/4273122The conclusions of this article are the result of a study conducted over three years, based on the expertise files that the author established as a scientific collaborator of the current IRAFPA. The use of similarity detection software was systematic for each case. The aim of this article is to demonstrate the absurdity of a persistent belief in universities: that it would be sufficient to call on the services of a computer services company specialising in so-called "anti-plagiarism" software to curb such cases. We will show, by example, what can and cannot be expected of them, and then we will compare the two most widespread in France, Urkund and Compilatio.engGlobethics PublicationsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/anti-plagiarism softwareacademic fraudevaluationurkund (software)compilatio (software)Institut International de Recherche et d’Action sur la Fraude et le Plagiat Académiques (IRAFPA)Research ethicsCheating and plagiarismBook chapter