I looked at the cited examples but none of them look like “plagiarism”. They look like ordinary sentences and if I had to write them myself, I would come up with similar wordings too!
Like for example take the description of “behavior trees”. There are only so many ways you can describe a behavior tree. If 10 papers out there introduce behavior tree by describing it, some of those descriptions are bound to look very similar.
This is like arguing that my paper on prime numbers is plagiarised because the definition of prime numbers in my paper looks very similar to the definition of prime numbers in another paper.
With the amount of literature on these subjects out there, it is natural that some sentences I write would end up looking similar to some sentences in thousands of literature out there.
Like for example take the description of “behavior trees”. There are only so many ways you can describe a behavior tree. If 10 papers out there introduce behavior tree by describing it, some of those descriptions are bound to look very similar.
This is like arguing that my paper on prime numbers is plagiarised because the definition of prime numbers in my paper looks very similar to the definition of prime numbers in another paper.
With the amount of literature on these subjects out there, it is natural that some sentences I write would end up looking similar to some sentences in thousands of literature out there.