Unraveling a Mystery: The Plagiarism Accusation That Wasn’t

Recently, I found myself facing a rather unsettling situation: an accusation of plagiarism from a professor regarding a file I submitted during an exam. The professor claimed that my AutoCAD file was created in 2013, which was completely untrue. Let’s explore the circumstances surrounding this incident and some potential explanations for the confusion.

The Examination Scenario

During the exam, I diligently focused on crafting a unique project using the latest version of AutoCAD Electrical, a task I completed just the day before the submission deadline. However, the professor raised concerns when he accessed the file, stating it indicated a creation date of 2013. This was perplexing to me, as I had checked the file’s metadata, which clearly showed it was created on December 11, 2023.

The Metadata Mystery

One aspect that added to the mystery was the time stamps. The metadata reported that the file was created at 9 PM but indicated it had been last modified at 6 PM on the same day. This inconsistency only deepened my confusion. I wondered why the professor saw a 2013 date while my readings were entirely different.

Potential Causes for the Anomaly

In discussions with peers, a few suggestions arose. One theory involved potential bit flipping, a quirk that can occur in digital files, potentially leading to incorrect timestamps. Additionally, I investigated the compatibility of files between versions and discovered that older files created in 2013 would not work with the contemporary software version we used, suggesting that my file couldn’t possibly be a relic from a previous version.

Adding to the complexity, I had completed the exam on a school computer equipped with Windows 11. Given that the C: drive resets after shutdown, I was unsure whether earlier versions of my file could be retrieved. However, I had saved my work to OneDrive, providing a backup should I need it.

Resolution and Reflection

Fortunately, after expressing my concerns and clarifying the situation, things took a positive turn. The professor was willing to investigate further and, to my relief, apologized for the misunderstanding. Upon reopening my file on a different machine, it no longer indicated the erroneous 2013 creation date. However, the problem persisted for a few other students, indicating that this issue was perhaps more widespread than I initially understood.

In the end, I was grateful for how the situation resolved. The professor confirmed my submission