  The problems of estimating the similarity index of mathematical and other
scientific publications containing equations and formulas are discussed for the
first time. It is shown that the presence of equations and formulas (as well as
figures, drawings, and tables) is a complicating factor that significantly
complicates the study of such texts. It is shown that the method for
determining the similarity index of publications, based on taking into account
individual mathematical symbols and parts of equations and formulas, is
ineffective and can lead to erroneous and even completely absurd conclusions.
The possibilities of the most popular software system iThenticate, currently
used in scientific journals, are investigated for detecting plagiarism and
self-plagiarism. The results of processing by the iThenticate system of
specific examples and special test problems containing equations (PDEs and
ODEs), exact solutions, and some formulas are presented. It has been
established that this software system when analyzing inhomogeneous texts, is
often unable to distinguish self-plagiarism from pseudo-self-plagiarism (false
self-plagiarism). A model complex situation is considered, in which the
identification of self-plagiarism requires the involvement of highly qualified
specialists of a narrow profile. Various ways to improve the work of software
systems for comparing inhomogeneous texts are proposed. This article will be
useful to researchers and university teachers in mathematics, physics, and
engineering sciences, programmers dealing with problems in image recognition
and research topics of digital image processing, as well as a wide range of
readers who are interested in issues of plagiarism and self-plagiarism.
