1

MEASUREMENT OF SOFTWARE SIMILARITY

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF PROF. ARITRA PAN
In the Year of 2010

Group NO: 13 SAMRAT GUPTA (ROLL-071531012037) SANJUKTA MITRA (ROLL-071531012009) MOU MONDAL (ROLL- 071531012064) MOITRAYEE MONDAL (ROLL-071531012090) SUSHOVAN POLLEY (ROLL-071531012065

SYAMAPARASAD MANAGEMENT

INSTITUTE

OF

TECHNOLOGY

&

7, Raja Ram Mohon Ray Road Kolkata: 41West Bengal India

Syamaprasad Institute of Technology and Management

SYAMAPARASAD MANAGEMENT

INSTITUTE

OF

TECHNOLOGY

&

7, Raja Ram Mohon Ray Road Kolkata:41 West Bengal, India

Certificate
The work presented in this report is the united effort of Sanjukta Mitra, Samrat Gupta & Mou Mondal, Moitrayee Mondal and Sushovan Polley that any work of others that was used during the execution of the project or is included in the report has been suitably acknowledgement through the, standard practice of citing references and stating appropriate acknowledgements. We hereby forward the project entitled MEASUREMENT OF SOFTWARE SIMILARITY, presented by Samrat Reg. (Roll NO: No: Gupta(Roll : No: 071531012037 & Mou Reg. (Roll NO: No: 071531012101037), Sanjukta Mitra (Roll No: 071531012009 071531012201009) Reg Mondal 071531012064Reg. NO: 071531012201064) & Moitrayee Mondal 071531012090 Polley(Roll No: No: 071531012201090)& Reg. NO: Sushovan 071531012065

071531012101065 ) of 2007-2008 of 6th semester , Bachelor Of Computer Application under the guidance in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Prof. Aritra Pan
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

the degree of Bachelor Of Computer

Application of this college.

(Project Supervisor)Associate Professor.Dept. of BCA, SITM SYAMAPARASAD MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY &

7, Raja Ram Mohon Ray Road Kolkata:41 West Bengal, India

Certificate Of Approval
The forgoing project report is hereby approved as a creditable study of Bachelor in Computer Application in a manner satisfactory to warrant its acceptance as a prerequisite to the degree for which it has been submitted. It is understood that by this approval the undersigned do not necessarily endorse or approve any statement made, opinion expressed or conclusion therein but approve this project report only for the purpose for which it is submitted. . (External Examiners)

Prof. Aritra Pan Goswami (Project Supervisor) Associate Professor

Prof. Manikaustabh Teacher In - Charge SITM

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

Dept. of BCA, SITM University of Technology

West Bengal

Table of contents
Acknowledgements .6 Abstract ..7 1. Introduction..8 1.1 What is MOSS..9 1.2 FEATURES..10 1.3 PLAGIARISM..11 1.3.1 PLAGIARISM PREVENTION.....12 1.3.2 PLAGIARISM DETECTION....13 1.4 WAYS TO HANDLE.14-15 TECHNOLOGY ENHANCED CHEATING 1.5 TEACHING ACTIVITIES TO....16 TO PREVENT CHEATING 1.6ADDITIONAL TECHNIQUES TO PREVENT CHEATING...17-21 2. PLATFORM...22 3. ALGORITHM.23 3.1. ALGORITHM OF THE CHARACTER MATCHING..24-25 3.2. ALGORITHM OF STRING MTCHING..26-27
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

4.FLOW CHART28-29 4.1.FLOW CHART OF THE CHARACTER MATCHING30-31 4.2. PROGRAM OF THE CHARACTER MATCHING....32-33 4.3. FLOW CHART OF THE STRING MATCHING.34-35 4.4. PROGRAM OF THE STRING MATCHING............36-37 5. HARDWARE & SOFTWARE..... 5.1. NECESSITY OF HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE...38 6. ADVANTAGES39 7. FUTURE SCOPE......40 8. PROBLEMS.41 9. REFERENCES.42-54 10. CONCLUSION..55

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to thank our project Supervisor Prof. Aritra Pan for her moral support and guidance to complete our synopsis on time. WE express our gratitude to all our friends and classmates for their support and help in this project. Last, but not the least we wish to express our gratitude to God almighty for his abundant blessings without which this synopsis would not have been successful.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

ABSTRACT
Program assignments are traditionally an area of serious concern in maintaining the integrity of the educational process. Systematic inspection of all solutions for possible plagiarism has generally required unrealistic amounts of time and effort. The Measure Of Software Similarity tool developed by Alex Aiken at UC Berkeley makes it possible to objectively and automatically check all solutions for evidence of plagiarism. We have used MOSS in several large sections of a C programming course. (MOSS can also handle a variety of other languages.) We feel that MOSS is a major innovation for faculty who teach programming and recommend that it be used routinely to screen for plagiarism.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Probably every instructor of a programming course has been concerned about possible plagiarism in the program solutions turned in by students. Instances of cheating are found, but traditionally only on an ad hoc basis. For example, the instructor may notice that two programs have the same idiosyncrasy in their I/O interface, or the same pattern of failures with certain test cases. With suspicions raised, the programs may be examined further and the plagiarism discovered. Obviously, this leaves much to chance. The larger the class, and the more different people involved in the grading, the less the chance that a given instance of plagiarism will be detected. For students who know about various instances of cheating, which instances are detected and which are not may seem (in fact, may be) random. A policy of comparing all pairs of solutions against each other for evidence of plagiarism seems like the correct approach. But a simple file diff would of course detect only the most obvious attempts at cheating. The standard dumb attempt at cheating on a program assignment is to obtain a copy of a working program and then change statement spacing, variable names, I/O prompts and comments. This has been enough to require a careful manual comparison for detection, which simply becomes infeasible for large classes with regular assignments. Thus, programming classes have been in need of an automated tool which allows reliable and objective detection of plagiarism.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

1.1What is Moss
Moss (for a Measurement Of Software Similarity) is an automatic system for determining the similarity of programs. To date, the main application of Moss has been in detecting plagiarism in programming classes. Since its development in 1994, Moss has been very effective in this role. The algorithm behind moss is a significant improvement over other cheating detection algorithms (at least, over those known to us. Measure Of Software Similarity (MOSS) is a tool for determining similarities among software programs, As of now MOSS can be used to detect similarities in C, C++, Java, Pascal, Ado, ML, Lisp and Scheme programs. MOSS is primarily used for detecting plagiarism in programming assignments in computer science and other engineering courses, though several text formats are supported as well. The latest MOSS script can be downloaded from the MOSS site. MOSS can execute on all UNIX, Linux systems which have Perl, Mail etc. After downloading the MOSS script, copy it to the directory consisting of the student programs. Then run the moss script in that directory. After execution, the script sends the data to MOSS server at Berkeley. MOSS server sends back a webpage address, which is displayed at the prompt. This webpage consists of the results. Results are available on the MOSS server for 14 days. The script can also be run with one more options which handle more complicated situations like comparing programs from different directories, excluding Certain part of a program from the comparison etc.Our project namely is developed on C programme code .At first we are developing a C programme based on String Similarity, that checks two strings in two separate array, if they are similar or not. When this is done successfully,

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

10

the same checking is done on two separate files using C programme code.

1.2 FEATURES
This Measure of Software Similarity program can detect the similarity of any program, text, and file. This project can be used in any institute to prevent copy any assignment from other. This program can also applicable in search for any duplicating information from same program is executing in different machine which is connected to the main server. t is also applicable in online duplication. This project can also be used to avoid plagiarism. It can also be used to eliminate redundancy of data. It also helps to reduce the cost of a particular project. This project namely Measurement of Software Similarity, helps to detect data redundancy of any software, programme, text or file. One of the biggest disadvantages of data redundancy is that it increases the size of the database unnecessarily. Also data redundancy might cause the same result to be returned as multiple search results when searching the database causing confusion in the results. This also wastes a lot of space thus incurring extra cost. Another problem that can be met with Plagiarism is the act of taking credit for someone else's work. This particular project helps to eliminate this drawback.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

11

1.3 plagiarism
Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work". Within academia, plagiarism by students, professors, or researchers is considered academic dishonesty or academic fraud and offenders are subject to academic censure, up to and including expulsion. In journalism, plagiarism is considered a breach of journalistic ethics, and reporters caught plagiarizing typically face disciplinary measures ranging from suspension to termination of employment. Some individuals caught plagiarizing in academic or journalistic contexts claim that they plagiarized unintentionally, by failing to include quotations or give the appropriate citation. While plagiarism in scholarship and journalism has a centuries-old history, the development of the Internet, where articles appear as electronic text, has made the physical act of copying the work of others much easier. Plagiarism is not the same as copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author's reputation that is achieved through false claims of authorship.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

12

1.3.1 Plagiarism prevention

Plagiarism cannot be eliminated completely but some preventive measures may reduce plagiarism to minimum. There are three main strategies to prevent plagiarism. First is the Trust Method, wherein the students are told that we trust them and they are mature enough to know that the test is for their benefit and cheating will prohibit their chances to see how well they mastered a particular concept. Thus, the Trust Method trusts the learners to obey the rules and is implemented by making the learners sign a Honor code before appearing for the test. Second is the Fence Method, which aims at making cheating impossible. This is implemented by tightening the security during tests, different questions for different students etc. Third Method is the Threat Method, which threatens the learners with the punishments that they will have to face if plagiarism is detected. This is done, by announcing the penalty before the assignment submissions or tests have started. Ideally one or more of the above methods can be used as a preventive measure. The Instructor has to decide as to which method/methods to adopt based on the purpose of the test. If the test is a part of the final exam of a course or degree, then Fence Method or Threat method or both could be implemented. If the test were a practice test for the self-assessment of learners, Trust Method would be the best. These methods are to be implemented before the commencement of the test/assignment submission. Additionally preventive measures can also be taken while conducting the test. If we have a test running parallel in a number of remote centers, we can have authorised proctors to inspect the exam at respective centers. These proctors can make sure that only authorised students are taking the test at proper time, without any unauthorized
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

13

help. The tests at these centers can also be supervised by observing each center by Video Conferencing from a coordinating center.

1.3.2

Plagiarism Detection
In the previous section we saw the preventive measures for plagiarism. Now, after the test is conducted and the results are out, the tough job starts. The questions becoming increasingly important in this context are can we trust the results that the machine has given us i.e. Does it mean that a student has understood a concept just because his score says so. If not then how do we differentiate between genuine attempts and copies. In other words how to we detect copies among the number of assignments submitted. Detecting plagiarism in a test for which n students had appeared, involves comparing each solution with other n-1 solutions and this is not a trivial task. Let us see some attempts to detect plagiarism in programming tests, which have evolved over time. Traditional attempts to detect plagiarism have been ad-hoc, typically involving manual checking, of programming assignments, for plagiarism. This manual checking too mostly happens only for suspected programs like two programs failing for same testcases, two programs looking very similar by structure etc. Also, the plagiarism detection is limited to programs, which look alike or verbatim copy. Manually checking all the programs in all possible combinations of plagiarism requires fair amount of time and manpower, especially when the number of programs to be tested is large. Inspecting all the possible combinations for more complex attempts of plagiarism (beyond verbatim copy), in such a scenario, is a tougher job. The inconvenience and limitations of traditional attempts for detecting plagiarism led the instructors to exploit some advanced methods to do the same. Instructors eventually started using available

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

14

tools (e.g Unix utilities like diff, cmp, etc) to automate the task of, detecting all possible combinations of plagiarism among a large set of programs. Use of these tools minimized the time and effort, however plagiarism detection was yet limited to verbatim copies.

1.4 Ways to enhanced cheating

handle

technology

Focus on the process of writing - observe and coach the process. Require a thesis statement, an initial bibliography, an outline, notes, a first draft etc. Avoid "choose any topic" papers. Tie the topic to the goals of the course. Use a few papers from "cheat sites" as examples. Provide a grade for these and use as reference material. Students will be hesitant to use a service you know about. Be clear and comprehensive regarding plagiarism policies. The more students know the less likely they will be to attempt plagiarism. Require students to use material from class lectures, presentations, discussions etc in their graded assignments. This makes finding "matching" papers more difficult. Require students to conduct an original survey or interview as part of the assignment. The survey or transcripts of the interview are included as an appendix. Require an annotated bibliography as part of the process of writing the assignment. These are difficult to plagiarize. Require an abstract of the paper where appropriate. Writing an accurate synopsis of a plagiarized paper is difficult. Require a description of the research process with the final draft. Get to know your students. Require a writing sample during the first week of class. Have the students do this in their "best written style"
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

15

and make it personalized and customized to them individually. Keep this on record for comparison purposes. Use Plagiarism.org or Plagiarism.com to check submitted work (links below). Use MOSS (Measure of Software Similarity) which detects plagiarism in programming classes (link below). Make assignments relatively difficult. This makes it more difficult to get casual, though ongoing, help during the semester. Frequent assessments also make getting help logistically difficult. Use master type questions and case studies rather than "memorization" questions. If using online quizzes - give different questions to different students - i.e. use a test bank. Add a short answer question that will be graded by hand. If using online tests or quizzes limit the amount of time the test is available. Use alternate means of assessment, portfolios and multiple measures of mastery. Use proctored exams (only if absolutely necessary).

If you suspect plagiarism, look carefully at the paper and gently confront the student with your concerns. Frequently this is enough to uncover or deter plagiarism. Require raw materials of the research process. For example, copies of the cited works.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

16

1.5 Teaching cheating

activities

to

prevent

Quizzes: Create regular, frequent (weekly or daily) quizzes for students. Discussion: Create discussions and use participation in discussions as an aid in measuring student progress. Request feedback: Randomly e-mail all the students in the class and request a comment or two on some subject. Variance analysis: Check the regular quiz scores to see if there is a sudden change. For example, a student flunks five quizzes and then hires someone to take the final online exam and gets an A. Spot calls: If a teacher has any concerns about a particular individual, she or he can call the student and have a short discussion. It will quickly reveal whether the student knows the course material. Online chat exams: The instructor can conduct an oral chat room exam with each student to interactively test the students knowledge of the course material.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

17

1.6 Additional security techniques

First, many of the same problems regarding the authenticity of a students work and plagiarism exist in the traditional classroom as well. To get someones help through an entire online program would take substantial effort. For most students it is just not possible to have consistent help through many tests at many different times. Besides, who would consent to putting in so much work for someone else and not get credit for it? Use a log-in/password system (but of course, a student could just give the username and password to someone else). Make exercises difficult enough so that the person who hasnt done the previous work in your course will not be able to complete the assignment. Give many short exams that are embedded in class exercises so that it would be difficult for a student to have "help" there all the time. Ask mastery-type questions so that a student must know the material himself/herself in order to answer the question (i.e. case studies Vs memorization questions). Ask students to relate the subject matter to their own personal/professional/life experiences so their answers are personalized and difficult to replicate. Require students to submit an outline and rough draft of term papers and essays before the final paper is due. This way, a professor can see the work in progress.
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

18

Give different questions to different students construct a large set of questions from which an automated testing program can randomly select (i.e. a database of 50 questions with 10 randomly chosen). Limit the times when the online test is available; ensure that the test is taken in a certain amount of time. Some automated testing programs allow this feature. Provide online exam practice sample questions, self-study questions with answers and feedback, and require a proctored, nononline examination for course credit (i.e. on campus, at a testing center, library, etc.) Finally, remember that testing should never be the only means by which you assess the abilities of your students. If they are evaluated with various different methods, you have the best way of ensuring that there is real learning taking place. As with a traditional classroom, the best way to assess student and course progress is to know the student through the student's work and pay attention to student feedback. The American Association of Higher Education has devised nine principles of good practice for assessing student learning. These can also be helpful when thinking about how to avoid plagiarism and cheating in online courses. The principles are: The assessment of student learning begins with educational values. Assessment is not an end in itself but a vehicle for educational improvement. Its effective practice, then, begins with and enacts a vision of the kinds of learning we most value for students and strive to help them achieve. Educational values should drive not only what we choose to assess but also how we do so. Where questions about educational mission and values are skipped over, assessment threatens to be an exercise in measuring what's easy, rather than a process of improving what we really care about. Assessment is most effective when it reflects an understanding of learning as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over time. Learning is a complex process. It entails not only what students know but what they can do with what they know; it involves not only knowledge and abilities but values, attitudes, and habits of mind that affect both academic success and performance beyond the classroom. Assessment should reflect these understandings by
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

19

employing a diverse array of methods, including those that call for actual performance, using them over time so as to reveal change, growth, and increasing degrees of integration. Such an approach aims for a more complete and accurate picture of learning, and therefore firmer bases for improving our students' educational experience. Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have clear, explicitly stated purposes. Assessment is a goal-oriented process. It entails comparing educational performance with educational purposes and expectations -- those derived from the institution's mission, from faculty intentions in program and course design, and from knowledge of students' own goals. Where program purposes lack specificity or agreement, assessment as a process pushes a campus toward clarity about where to aim and what standards to apply; assessment also prompts attention to where and how program goals will be taught and learned. Clear, shared, implementable goals are the cornerstone for assessment that is focused and useful. Assessment requires attention to outcomes but also to the experiences that lead to those outcomes. Information about outcomes is of high importance; where students "end up" matters greatly. But to improve outcomes, we need to know about student experience along the way -- about the curricula, teaching, and kind of student effort that lead to particular outcomes. Assessment can help us understand which students learn best under what conditions; with such knowledge comes the capacity to improve the whole of their learning. Assessment works best when it is ongoing not episodic. Assessment is a process whose power is cumulative. Though isolated, "one-shot" assessment can be better than none, improvement is best fostered when assessment entails a linked series of activities undertaken over time. This may mean tracking the process of individual students, or of cohorts of students; it may mean collecting the same examples of student performance or using the same instrument semester after semester. The point is to monitor progress toward intended goals in a spirit of continuous improvement. Along the way, the assessment process itself should be evaluated and refined in light of emerging insights. Assessment fosters wider improvement when representatives from across the educational community are involved. Student learning is a campus-wide responsibility, and assessment is a way of enacting that responsibility. Thus, while assessment efforts may start small, the aim
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

20

over time is to involve people from across the educational community. Faculty members play an especially important role, but assessment's questions can't be fully addressed without participation by studentaffairs educators, librarians, administrators, and students. Assessment may also involve individuals from beyond the campus (alumni/ae, trustees, employers) whose experience can enrich the sense of appropriate aims and standards for learning. Thus understood, assessment is not a task for small groups of experts but a collaborative activity; its aim is wider, better-informed attention to student learning by all parties with a stake in its improvement. Assessment makes a difference when it begins with issues of use and illuminates questions that people really care about. Assessment recognizes the value of information in the process of improvement. But to be useful, information must be connected to issues or questions that people really care about. This implies assessment approaches that produce evidence that relevant parties will find credible, suggestive, and applicable to decisions that need to be made. It means thinking in advance about how the information will be used, and by whom. The point of assessment is not to gather data and return "results"; it is a process that starts with the questions of decision-makers, that involves them in the gathering and interpreting of data, and that informs and helps guide continuous improvement. Assessment is most likely to lead to improvement when it is part of a larger set of conditions that promote change. Assessment alone changes little. Its greatest contribution comes on campuses where the quality of teaching and learning is visibly valued and worked at. On such campuses, the push to improve educational performance is a visible and primary goal of leadership; improving the quality of undergraduate education is central to the institution's planning, budgeting, and personnel decisions. On such campuses, information about learning outcomes is seen as an integral part of decision making, and avidly sought. 9. Through assessment, educators meet responsibilities to students and to the public. There is a compelling public stake in education. As educators, we have a responsibility to the public that supports or depends on us to provide information about the ways in which our students meet goals and expectations. But that responsibility goes beyond the reporting of such information; our deeper obligation -- to ourselves, our students, and society -- is to improve. Those to whom

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

21

educators are accountable have a corresponding obligation to support such attempts at improvement.

2. Platform
Procedural programming can sometimes be used as a synonym for imperative programming (specifying the steps the program must take to reach the desired state), but can also refer (as in this article) to a programming paradigm, derived from structured programming, based upon the concept of the procedure call. Procedures, also known as routines, subroutines, methods, or functions (not to be confused with mathematical functions, but similar to those used in functional programming) simply contain a series of computational steps to be carried out. Any given procedure might be called at any point during a program's execution, including by other procedures or itself. A procedural programming language provides a programmer a means to define precisely each step in the performance of a task. The programmer knows what is to be accomplished and provides through the language step-by-step instructions on how the task is to be done. Using a procedural language, the programmer specifies language statements to perform a sequence of algorithmic steps. Procedural programming is often a better choice than simple sequential or unstructured programming in many situations which involve moderate complexity or which require significant ease of maintainability. Possible benefits: The ability to re-use the same code at different places in the program without copying it. An easier way to keep track of program flow than a collection of "GOTO" or "JUMP" statements (which can turn a large, complicated program into spaghetti code). The ability to be strongly modular or structured. Emphasis is on doing things algorithm. Employs top-down approach in program design.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

22

Large programs are divided into smaller programs known as functions.

3. What is Algorithm
In mathematics, computer science, and related subjects, an algorithm is an effective method for solving a problem using a finite sequence of instructions. Algorithms are used for calculation, data processing, and many other fields. Each algorithm is a list of well-defined instructions for completing a task. Starting from an initial state, the instructions describe a computation that proceeds through a well-defined series of successive states, eventually terminating in a final ending state. The transition from one state to the next is not necessarily deterministic; some algorithms, known as randomized algorithms, incorporate randomness. If you sit down in front of a computer and try to write a program to solve a problem, you will be trying to do four out of five things at once. These are: ANALYSE THE PROBLEM DESIGN A SOLUTION/PROGRAM CODE/ENTER THE PROGRAM TEST THE PROGRAM 5. EVALUATE THE SOLUTION

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

23

To begin with we will look at three methods used in creating an algorithm, these are STEPPING LOOPING CHOOSING

3.1 ALGORITHM OF THE CHARACTER MATCHING

STEP 1: Begin STEP 2: We take two file names in two pointer variable fn1 and fn2 STEP 3: fopen(fn1) STEP 4: If fn1 not opened then Print Cannot open first file Return Else Print File is open STEP 5: c=0 STEP 6: Repeat 6 TO 16 as long as !feof(f1) STEP 7: str1= fgetc(f1)

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

24

STEP 8: f=0 STEP 9: for i=0; i<c; i=i+1 STEP 10: if matches[i]==str1 then f=1 STEP 11: if(f==0) then match[c]= str1 c=c+1 STEP 12: fopen(fn2)

STEP 13: if fn2 not open then Print cannot open second file Return STEP 14: if (str1==str2 and str1>=0) then Flag=1 i=i+1 STEP 15: if(flag==1) then Print match STEP 16: fclose(f1) STEP 17: fclose(f2) STEP 18: END

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

25

3.2 Algorithm of the string Matching

Step 1: Begin Step 2: We take two files name in two pointer variable fn1 & fn2 Step 3: fopen (fn1) Step 4: If fn1 not opened then Print cannot open first file Return Else Print file is open Step 5: Repeat Steps 6 TO 24 as long as! Feof (f1) Step 6: i =0 Step 7: str1=NULL Step 8: ch= fgetc (f1) Step 9: Repeat Steps 10 to 12 as long as ch! = and ch! = \n and ch!= EOF

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

26

Step 10: str1[i]= ch Step 11: ch=fgetc(f1) Step 12: i=i+1 Step 13: fopen(fn2) Step 14: if fn2 not open then Print cannot open second file exit Step 15: repeat steps 16 to 24 as long as! Feof (f2) Step 16: i=0 Step 17: str2=NULL Step 18: ch=fgetc (f2) Step 19: repeat steps 20 to 22 as long as ch= and ch! \n and ch! =EOF Step 20:str2 [i] =ch Step 21: ch=fgetc (f2) Step 22: i=i+1 Step 23: str1=str2 then Print match Step 24: fclose (f1) Step 25: fclose (f2) Step 26: END

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

27

4. FLOW-CHART
What is Flow-Chart A flowchart is a pictorial representation of an algorithm. It is the layout, in a visual, two-dimensional format, of the plan to be followed when the corresponding algorithm is converted into a program by writing in a programming language. It acts like a roadmap like a programmer and guides him/her on how to go from the starting point to the final point while converting the algorithm into a computer program. Flow Chart is the pictorial representation of separate steps of a process. Using Flow-Chart one can easily design, analyze, prepare documentation or manage a process running in a system Why we use Flow-Chart Normally, an algorithm is first represented in the form of a flowchart and the flowchart is then expressed in some programming language to prepare a computer program. The main advantage of these two step approach in programming writing is that while drawing a flowchart, a programmer is not concern with the details of the elements of programming language. Hence, he/she can fully concentrate on the logic of the procedure. Moreover, since a flowchart shows the flow of operations in pictorial form, any error in the logic of the procedure can be detected more easily than in the case of a program. Once the
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

28

flowchart is ready the programmer can forget about the logic and can concentrate only on coding the operations in each box of the flowchart in terms of the statements of the programming language. This will normally ensure an error-free program.

The symbols used in a Flow-Chart are shown below: SYMBOLNAMEDESCRIPTION TerminatorTo indicate The start or stop of a Flow-Chart Input/Output To take any input or output In th Flow-Chart ProcessTo represent a running process in the Flow-Chart Decision BoxTo make a decision ConnectorTo connect one part of the flow chart to the other, or to continue flow Chart from one page to another.

4.1 Flow chart of Character Matching

Start
Input fn1, fn2

C=0

Fopen (fn1) Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

29

Str 1 = fgetc (f1)

f=0

l=0

If match[i ] =STR 1

Yes Yes

f=1

Yes

I =i+1

No

If i<c

If f= o?

Match [c] = str1

C = c+1

Fopen (f2)

1 1 No
If f= o?

Flag =0, i= 0

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

30

Str2=fgetc (f2)

If (str1 = str2) and (str1 >=0)

No

Flag =1

I = i+1

If? Feof (f2)

Yes No No
If flag ==1?

Yes
Prientf (tMatch = %c: appeared %d times, str1, i)

Fclose (f2)

Yes
4

If! Feof (f1)

Prientf (End of the program..);

Fclose (f1)

4.2 PROGRAM OF THE CHARACTER MATCHING

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

Stop

31

#include <stdio.h> #include <conio.h> #include <string.h> void main() { FILE *f1,*f2; char ch,*fn1,*fn2,str1,str2,*match; int i,len,flag,c,f; clrscr(); printf(\n\t Enter 1st file name with extension: ); gets(fn1); if((f1=fopen(fn1,r))==NULL) { printf(Cannot open first file.\n); getch(); return; } else printf(%s File is opend,fn1); fflush(stdin); printf(\n\tEnter 2nd file name with extension: ); gets(fn2); c=0; while (!feof (f1)) { Str1=fgetc(f1); F=0; For(i=0;i<c;i++) { If(match[i]==str1) F=1; } If(f==0) { Match[c]=str1; C++; } If((f2=fopen(fn2,r+))==null) { printf(cannot open second file.\n);
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

32

getch(); Return; } if(f==0) { Flag=0; i=0; While(!feof(f2)); { str2=fgetc(f2); if(str1==str2 && str1>=0) { flag=1; i++; } } if(flag==1) { printf(\n\n\tMatch = %c; appeared %d times,str1,i); fclose(f2); } } printf(\n\n\t\tEnd of the program.); fclose(f1); fflush(stdin); getch(); }

4.3 Flow chart of the string Matching

Start

Input fn1, fn2

C=0 Fopen (fn1)

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

33

i = o: str1= NULL: ch= fgetc = (f1)

Str1 [i] = ch

=o
ch = fgetc (f1)

i= i+1

If ch! = NULL && ch! =\n && ch! = EOF?

Fopen (f2)

i = o: str1= NULL: ch= fgetc = (f2) Step2[i] =ch : ch=fgetc(f2): I++

=o Yes =o
If ch! = NULL && ch! =\n && ch! = EOF?

1 Yes If STR =st2? No Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

Printf ("\n\n\match = %s", str2);

34

Yes 3

! Feof (f2) ? No Fclose (f2) No

Yes 2

! Feof (f1)?

Printf (End of the program..)

Fclose (f1)

Stop

4.4 Program of the String Matching

#include<stdio.h> #include<conio.h> #include<string.h> void main()
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

35

{ FILE *f1, *f2; char ch,*fn1,*fn2,*str1,*str2; int i,len; clrscr(); printf("\n\tEnter 1st file name with extension : "); i=0; gets(fn1); if ((f1 = fopen(fn1, "r")) == NULL) { printf("Cannot open first file.\n"); getch(); return ; } else printf("%s file is opened",fn1); fflush(stdin); printf("\n\tEnter 2nd file name with extension : "); i=0; gets(fn2); while (!feof(f1)) { i=0; str1=""; ch=fgetc(f1); while(ch!=' ' && ch!='\n' && ch!=EOF) { str1[i]=ch; ch=fgetc(f1); i++; } str1[i]='\0'; printf("\nfile 1 string : %s",str1); if ((f2=fopen(fn2, "r+")) == NULL) { printf("Cannot open second file.\n"); getch(); return ; } while (!feof(f2)) {
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

36

i=0; str2=""; ch=fgetc(f2); while(ch!=' ' && ch!='\n' && ch!=EOF) { str2[i]=ch; ch=fgetc(f2); i++; } str2[i]='\0'; printf("\nFile 2 string : %s ",str2); if(strcmp(str1,str2)==0) printf("\n\n\tMatch = %s",str2); } fclose(f2); } printf("\n\n\t\tEnd of the program...."); fclose(f1); fflush(stdin); getch(); }

5.1 Necessary hardware

The project is designed so that it is compatible with server base machine with operating system Windows (XP, Windows server 2000). Moreover the project is being computerized, as because computerized system are worth-mentioning. The hardware requirements for the project are follows: Motherboard-Intel Original Processor-core 2 Quad Operating System- Windows server 2000 RAM-DDR3 4GB 800 MHz HDD 1 TB

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

37

5.2 Necessary software

Operating System Windows XP Software Compiler. Turbo C++: full installation minimum 5MB C

6. Advantages
Moss (for a Measurement Of Software Similarity) is an automatic system for determining the similarity of programrs. The system allows for a variety of more complicated situations. For example, it allows for a base file. The base file might be a program outline or partial solution handed out by the instructor. MOSS makes it easy to examine the corresponding portions of a program pair. Clicking on a program pair in the results summary brings up side-by-side frames containing the program sources. MOSS just as easily uncovers more sophisticated attempts at cheating. Multiple distinct similar sections separated by sections with differences are still found and given color-coded highlighting. Traditional attempts to detect plagiarism have been ad-hoc, typically involving manual checking, of programming assignments, for plagiarism. There was strongly a need for more sophisticated mechanism, which would automate the task to a large extent as well as detect fairly complex attempts of copies.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

38

7. FUTURE Scope
The future scope of the project is that it enables to detect several software which are very much similar to each other. Hence it helps to increase the efficiency of the project. Hence it helps to prevent the duplicacy of any software. Analogy software estimation is based on assumption. Similar software projects have similar software effort. But incomplete and noisy data, measurement and similarity assessment uncertainty, complex interaction between attributes, data type ordinal and nominal scale.

8.Problems
Two projects that may seem similar may indeed be different in a critical way. The uncertainty in assessing similarities and differences means that two different estimators could significantly develop different views and effort estimates. The uncertainty stem form: Data collection tool. The type of information available. Attribute measurement. Skill of estimator.
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

39

8. REFERENCE
Help with Cheating Plagiarism.org includes software to detect plagiarism and allows a free trial. http://www.plagiarism.org/ Plagiarism.com is more plagiarism software, also has a self detection test (http://www.plagiarism.com/self.detect.htm) to help students spot plagiarism in their work. http://www.plagiarism.com/ Plagiarism Webliography for Faculty An extensive list of the websites, resources and detection tools http://www.utpb.edu/library/plagiarism.html MOSS (Measure of Software Similarity) Detects plagiarism in programming classes http://theory.stanford.edu/~aiken/moss/ 2. Word Check Systems "checks keyword uses and keyword frequencies in electronic documents and presents a "percentage of match" between compared data." http://www.wordchecksystems.com/ Cheat Sites 1.Direct Essays: http://directessays.com/
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

40

A 1 Term Paper: http://www.a1-termpaper.com/ Fast Papers: http://www.fastpapers.com/ Student Network Resources: http://www.snrinfo.com/ Schoolsucks: http://www.schoolsucks.com/ Cheathouse: http://www.cheathouse.com/ EZwrite: http://www.ezwrite.com/ Term Papers on File: http://www.termpapers-on-file.com/ Research Assistance: http://www.research-assistance.com/ ^ J. MacQueen, 1967 ^ Yi Lu, Shiyong Lu, Farshad Fotouhi, Youping Deng, and Susan Brown, "FGKA: A Fast Genetic K-means Algorithm", in Proc. of the 19th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 162-163, Nicosia, Cyprus, March, 2004. ^ Yi Lu, Shiyong Lu, Farshad Fotouhi, Youping Deng, and Susan Brown, "Incremental Genetic K-means Algorithm and its Application in Gene Expression Data Analysis", BMC Bioinformatics, 5(172), 2004. ^ Bezdek, James C. (1981), Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms, ISBN 0306406713 ^ Google News personalization: scalable online collaborative filtering ^ Basak S.C., Magnuson V.R., Niemi C.J., Regal R.R. "Determing Structural Similarity of Chemicals Using Graph Theoretic Indices". Discr. Appl. Math., 19, 1988: 17-44. ^ E. B. Fowlkes & C. L. Mallows (September 1983). "A Method for Comparing Two Hierarchical Clusterings". Journal of the American Statistical Association 78(384): 553584. doi:10.2307/2288117. ^ Alexander Kraskov, Harald Stgbauer, Ralph G. Andrzejak, and Peter Grassberger, "Hierarchical Clustering Based on Mutual Information", (2003) ArXiv q-bio/0311039 ^ David J. Marchette, Random Graphs for Statistical Pattern Recognition, Wiley-Interscience, 2004. ^ Jiyeon Choo, Rachsuda Jiamthapthaksin, Chun-sheng Chen, Oner Ulvi Celepcikay, Christian Giusti, and Christoph F. Eick, "MOSAIC: A
Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

41

proximity graph approach for agglomerative clustering," Proceedings 9th International Conference on Data Warehousing and Knowledge Discovery (DaWaK), Regensbug Germany, September 2007. .Clatworthy, J., Buick, D., Hankins, M., Weinman, J., & Horne, R. (2005). The use and reporting of cluster analysis in health psychology: A review. British Journal of Health Psychology 10: 329-358. Cole, A. J. & Wishart, D. (1970). An improved algorithm for the Jardine-Sibson method of generating overlapping clusters. The Computer Journal 13(2):156-163. Ester, M., Kriegel, H.P., Sander, J., and Xu, X. 1996. A densitybased algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Portland, Oregon, USA: AAAI Press, pp. 226 231. Heyer, L.J., Kruglyak, S. and Yooseph, S., Exploring Expression Data: Identification and Analysis of Coexpressed Genes, Genome Research 9:1106-1115. S. Kotsiantis, P. Pintelas, Recent Advances in Clustering: A Brief Survey, WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, Vol 1, No 1 (73-81), 2004. Huang, Z. (1998). Extensions to the K-means Algorithm for Clustering Large Datasets with Categorical Values. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2, p. 283-304. Wong, W., Liu, W. & Bennamoun, M. Tree-Traversing Ant Algorithm for Term Clustering based on Featureless Similarities. In: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 349381. doi: 10.1007/s10618-007-0073-y. A demo of this term clustering algorithm is available here Jardine, N. & Sibson, R. (1968). The construction of hierarchic and non-hierarchic classifications. The Computer Journal 11:177. The on-line textbook: Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms, by David J.C. MacKay includes chapters on k-means clustering, soft k-means clustering, and derivations including the E-M algorithm and the variational view of the E-M algorithm. MacQueen, J. B. (1967). Some Methods for classification and Analysis of Multivariate Observations, Proceedings of 5-th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1:281-297 Ng, R.T. and Han, J. 1994. Efficient and effective clustering methods for spatial data mining. Proceedings of the 20th VLDB Conference, Santiago, Chile, pp. 144155.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

42

Prinzie A., D. Van den Poel (2006), Incorporating sequential information into traditional classification models by using an element/position-sensitive SAM. Decision Support Systems 42 (2): 508526. Rivera, C. G., Vakil, R. M. & Bader, J. S. NeMo: Network Module identification in Cytoscape. BMC Bioinformatics 2010, 11(Suppl 1):S61.doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-11-S1-S61. The plugin can be downloaded in Cytoscape or here. Romesburg, H. Clarles, Cluster Analysis for Researchers , 2004, 340 pp. ISBN 1-4116-0617-5, reprint of 1990 edition published by Krieger Pub. Co... A Japanese language translation is available from Uchida Rokakuho Publishing Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan. Sheppard, A. G. (1996). The sequence of factor analysis and cluster analysis: Differences in segmentation and dimensionality through the use of raw and factor scores. Tourism Analysis, 1(Inaugural Volume), 49-57. Sergios Theodoridis, Konstantinos Koutroumbas (2009) "Pattern Recognition" , 4th Edition, Academic Press, ISBN: 978-1-59749-272-0. Zhang, T., Ramakrishnan, R., and Livny, M. 1996. BIRCH: An efficient data clustering method for very large databases. Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference, Montreal, Canada, pp. 103114. Nguyen Xuan Vinh, Epps, J. and Bailey, J., 'Information Theoretic Measures for Clusterings Comparison: Is a Correction for Chance Necessary?', in Procs. the 26th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML'09). Jianbo Shi and Jitendra Malik, "Normalized Cuts and Image Segmentation", IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 22(8), 888-905, August 2000. Available on Jitendra Malik's homepage Marina Meila and Jianbo Shi, "Learning Segmentation with Random Walk", Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS, 2001. Available from Jianbo Shi's homepage see referenced articles at Luigidragone.com Kernel MDL to Determine the Number of Clusters , MLDM, pp. 203-217, 2007. Stan Salvador and Philip Chan, Determining the Number of Clusters/Segments in Hierarchical Clustering/Segmentation Algorithms, Proc. 16th IEEE Intl. Conf. on Tools with AI, pp. 576584, 2004. Can, F., Ozkarahan, E. A. (1990) "Concepts and effectiveness of the cover coefficient-based clustering methodology for text databases." ACM Transactions on Database Systems. 15 (4) 483-517 Aldenderfer, M.S., Blashfield, R.K, Cluster Analysis, (1984), Newbury Park
(CA): Sage. Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

43 [edit]External links This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Pleaseimprove this article by removing excessive and inappropriate external links or by converting links intofootnote references. (May 2009)Citeseerx.ist.psu.edu, When Is "Nearest Neighbor" Meaningful? P. Berkhin, Citeseer.ist.psu.edu Survey of Clustering Data Mining Techniques, Accrue Software, 2002. Jain, Murty and Flynn: Citeseer.ist.psu.edu Data Clustering: A Review, ACM Comp. Surv., 1999. for another presentation of hierarchical, k-means and fuzzy c-means see the introduction to clustering on home.dei.polimi.it. It also has an explanation on mixture of Gaussians. David Dowe, csse.monash.edu.au, Mixture Modelling page - other clustering and mixture model links. Gauss.nmsu.edu, A tutorial on clustering. Inference.phy.cam.ac.uk, The on-line textbook: Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms, by David J.C. MacKay includes chapters on k-means clustering, soft k-means clustering, and derivations including the E-M algorithm and the variational view of the E-M algorithm. People.revoledu.com, Numerical example of Hierarchical Clustering. Cran.r-project.org, kernlab - R package for kernel based machine learning (includes spectral clustering implementation) Home.dei.polimi.it - Tutorial with introduction of Clustering Algorithms (k-means, fuzzyc-means, hierarchical, mixture of gaussians) + some interactive demos (java applets) Data Mining Software at the Open Directory Project Machine Learning Software at the Open Directory Project Homepages.feis.herts.ac.ukJava, Competitive Learning Application, a suite of Unsupervised Neural Networks for clustering. Written in Java. Complete with all source code. Factominer.free.fr, FactoMineR (free exploratory multivariate data analysis software linked to R) AI4r.rubyforge.org, Data clustering algorithms implementation in Ruby (AI4R) PMML Representation - Standard way to represent clustering models.

1C. Alexander. Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Harvard U. Press, 1964. 2Edward B. Allen , Sampath Gottipati , Rajiv Govindarajan, Measuring size, complexity, and coupling of hypergraph abstractions of software: An information-theory approach, Software Quality Control, v.15 n.2, p.179-212, June 2007 [doi>10.1007/s11219-006-9010-3] 3Tom Arbuckle, Visually Summarising Software Change, Proceedings of the 2008 12th International Conference Information Visualisation, p.559-568, July 09-11, 2008 [doi>10.1109/IV.2008.58] 4T. Arbuckle, A. Balaban, D. K. Peters, and M. Lawford. Software documents: Comparison and measurement. In Proc. 18th Int. Conf. on Software Eng.&Knowledge Eng., pages 740--745, July 2007. 5C. H. Bennett, P. Gcs, M. Li, P. Vitnyi, and W. H. Zurek. Information distance. IEEE Trans. Information Theory, 44(4):1407--1423, 1998. 6M. Cebrin, M. Alfonseca, and A. Ortega. Common pitfalls using the normalized compression distance: What to watch out for in a compressor. Comms. Info. Sys., 5(4):367--384, 2005. 7Gregory J. Chaitin, On the Length of Programs Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

44 for Computing Finite Binary Sequences: statistical considerations, Journal of the ACM (JACM), v.16 n.1, p.145-159, Jan. 1969 [doi>10.1145/321495.321506] 8Robert Noyes Chanon, On a measure of program structure., Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 1974 9R. N. Chanon, On a measure of program structure, Programming Symposium, Proceedings Colloque sur la Programmation, p.9-16, April 09-11, 1974 10S. R. Chidamber , C. F. Kemerer, A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.20 n.6, p.476-493, June 1994 [doi>10.1109/32.295895] 11R. Cilibrasi. The CompLearn Toolkit. {Online} http://complearn.sourceforge.net/, 2003. 12R. Cilibrasi and P. Vitnyi. Clustering by compression. IEEE Trans. Information Theory, 51(4):1523--1545, April 2005. 13David Clark , Sebastian Hunt , Pasquale Malacaria, Quantitative Information Flow, Relations and Polymorphic Types, Journal of Logic and Computation, v.15 n.2, p.181-199, April 2005 [doi>10.1093/logcom/exi009] 14Norman Fenton, When a software measure is not a measure, Software Engineering Journal, v.7 n.5, p.357-362, Sept., 1992 15Maurice H. Halstead, Elements of Software Science (Operating and programming systems series), Elsevier Science Inc., New York, NY, 1977 16Mark Harman, The Current State and Future of Search Based Software Engineering, 2007 Future of Software Engineering, p.342-357, May 23-25, 2007 [doi>10.1109/FOSE.2007.29] 17Mark Harman, Search Based Software Engineering for Program Comprehension, Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension, p.3-13, June 26-29, 2007 [doi>10.1109/ICPC.2007.35] 18L. Hellerman, A Measure of Computational Work, IEEE Transactions on Computers, v.21 n.5, p.439-446, May 1972 [doi>10.1109/T-C.1972.223539] 19M. Jackson. The Name and Nature of Software Engineering, pages 1--38. LNCS. 2008. 20Dennis Kafura, A survey of software metrics, Proceedings of the 1985 ACM annual conference on The range of computing : mid-80's perspective: mid-80's perspective, p.502-506, October 1985, Denver, Colorado, United States [doi>10.1145/320435.320583] 21Huzefa Kagdi , Michael L. Collard , Jonathan I. Maletic, A survey and taxonomy of approaches for mining software repositories in the context of software evolution, Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, v.19 n.2, p.77-131, March 2007 [doi>10.1002/smr.344] 22T. M. Khoshgoftaar and E. B. Allen. Applications of information theory to software engineering measurement. Software Quality Journal, 3(2):79--103, June 1994. 23A. N. Kolmogorov. Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. Probl. Inform. Trans., 1(1):1-7, 1965. 24G. Kroah-Hartman and K. Sievers. udev. {Online} http://www.kernel.org/, 2003. 25M. Li, X. Chen, X. Li, B. Ma, and P. Vitnyi. The similarity metric. IEEE Trans. Information Theory, 50(12):3250 3264, 2004. 26Rudi Lutz, Evolving good hierarchical decompositions of complex systems, Journal of Systems Architecture: the EUROMICRO Journal, v.47 n.7, p.613-634, July 2001 [doi>10.1016/S13837621(01)00019-4] 27Thomas J. McCabe, A complexity measure, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Software engineering, p.407, October 13-15, 1976, San Francisco, California, United States 28Stephen McCamant , Michael D. Ernst, Quantitative information flow as network flow capacity, Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGPLAN conference on Programming language design and implementation, June 07-13, 2008, Tucson, AZ, USA [doi>10.1145/1375581.1375606] 29Stacy J. Prowell , Jesse H. Poore, Foundations of Sequence-Based Software Specification, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.29 n.5, p.417-429, May 2003 [doi>10.1109/TSE.2003.1199071] 30C. E. Shannon. A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27:379--423 and 623--656, 1948. 31H. A. Simon and A. Ando. Aggregation of variables in dynamic systems. Econometrica, 29:111--138, 1961. 32R. J. Solomonoff. A formal theory of inductive inference. part I and part II. Information and Control, 7(1 and 2):1--22 and 224--254, 1964. 33M. H. van Emden. Hierarchical decomposition of complexity. Machine Intelligence, 5:361--380, 1969. 34M. H. van Emden. An Analysis of Complexity. PhD thesis, Mathematisches Zentrum, Amsterdam, 1971. 35Horst Zuse, Software Complexity: Measures and Methods, Walter de Gruyter & Co., Hawthorne, NJ, 1990

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

45

Conclusion Our project namely is developed on C programme code. At first we are developing a C programme based on String Similarity, that checks two strings in two separate array, if they are similar or not. When this is done successfully, the same checking is done on two separate files using C programme code.

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management

46

Syamaprasad Institute Of Technology & Management