The academic cheaters you read about in these articles are always obvious cheats! I believe those to be in the minority, but who knows. In OP's example, they c

The academic cheaters you read about in these articles are always obvious cheats! I believe those to be in the minority, but who knows. In OP's example, they copied the exact same lines to get the effect. With some more work they could've hidden their tracks far better. Now if you build ML that detected good cheats you have a huge mess at your hand: the false-positives won't be zero! Are you OK to raise potentially career-destroying accusations based on a black box model? I am not. (I could raise my usual point and say 'academia runs after pointless measurements, numbers of papers produced etc., and as long as you have those pointless goals you'll have cheats, so the system itself should be changed', but the older I get the less that change seems possible, wanted, or even considered.)