[1] "Superpotential from black holes" by Renata Kallosh, Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996) Pg. R4709-R4713.

[2] "Axion-dilaton black holes with SL(2,Z) symmetry through APT-FGP model" by S.C. Joshi and B.S. Rajput, Europhys. Lett. 57 (2002), Pg.639-643.

Summary: Comparison of the later paper [2] clearly indicates that its content is entirely copied from paper [1] which was published 6 years earlier.

The detailed evidence is as follows:

(i) Starting with "the central charge defining the mass.." on Pg. 640 of [2], and ending with "...given in the beginning of this paper' of Pag. 642, every single sentence is identical to some sentence of Ref.[1]. Thus, effectively the entire content of [2] (minus the Introduction and Conclusions, where some extraneous material is included) is lifted from Ref.[1].

(ii) Ref.[2] has 22 equations. Of these, the first 4 equations are very well-known and standard material in the theory of monopoles and dyons. The remaining equations, (5) to (22), are all taken from Ref.[1] with absolutely no change. There is not even any change of notation, aside from a few trivial mistakes in Ref.[2]. The identification of equations is as follows:

Paper [1] (Kallosh)	Paper [2] (Joshi and Rajput)
(1)	(5)
(2)	(6)
(3)	(7)
(4)	(8)
(5)	(9)
(6)	(10)
(7)	(11)
(23)	(12)
(24)	(13)
(25)	(14)
(26)	(15)
(27)	(16)
(28)	(17)
(29)	(18)
(30)	(19)
(31)	(20)
(32)	(21)
(33)	(22)

Interestingly, in Eq.(7), Paper [2] uses "Im" instead of "ln i" in the corresponding Eq.(3) of Paper [1]. Evidently the authors of [2] did not read Paper [1] carefully enough to understand that the quantity inside "Im" is already imaginary! Indeed, one has to make it real by multiplying with i and then take the log to get a Kahler potential, as Paper [1] did. This is something quite well known to practitioners in the field, but the authors of [2] are unaware of this. So, even the errors of transcription indicate ignorance of the authors.

(iii) Note that Ref.[1] has 38 equations, of which 18 are lifted in Ref.[2]. Ref.[1] is a longer paper and only about half of it has been used in [2]. The important thing is that there is no content in Ref.[2] that is not lifted from [1], besides some very general introductory and concluding comments based on older and well-known material.

The copying is certainly deliberate and intentional. One clear example (out of many) is the following sentence: "At the moment, from the black-hole side we do not have information on the field-dependent part of the potential and in what follows we will compare the APT-FGP field-dependent part of the potential with the black-hole central charge." This sentence is identically worded in both papers under discussion. There is no possibility of a coincidence, nor is a review of other work involved.