AI Generative Policy

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

This policy is drafted to guide authors, reviewers, and editors regarding the responsible and ethical use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as Large Language Models (LLM) (for example: ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and others), as well as AI image generators (for example: Midjourney, DALL-E) during the scholarly publication process.

I. Policy for Authors (Manuscript Preparation) Authors are permitted to use GenAI tools to enhance their writing in specific and clearly defined ways, provided they maintain full human oversight, responsibility, and transparency.

1. Authorship and Responsibility

• AI Not Accepted As Author in the journal: Generative AI tools should not be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires the capability to bear responsibility for the work, and to approve the final version, which can be done by humans.

• Responsibility: The listed authors are fully responsible for the entire content of the submission, including any unverified content or that the authors generate with AI tools.

2. Permitted Use (With Disclosure) GenAI tools may only be used to assist the writing process, under strict human supervision, for tasks such as:

• Improving the grammar, spelling, and readability of the manuscript.

• Brainstorming ideas or generating high-level summaries.

• Translating text (although professional human verification is still recommended).

• Initial coding assistance or data visualization (if stated in the Methodology section).

3. Content Integrity GenAI tools should not be used for tasks that compromise the integrity or originality of the research:

• Generating Core Content: AI should not be used to generate core scientific interpretations, analyses, or research conclusions.

• Generating/Altering Images or Data: The use of GenAI to CONSTRUCT, alter, enhance, or manipulate any figures, images, or underlying research data is strictly prohibited, unless the AI itself is part of the official research methodology (in this case, it should be fully disclosed and replicable in the Methodology section).

• Fabricating Citations: Authors should verify every citation generated by AI tools, considering these tools frequently generate non-existent or irrelevant references.

4. Mandatory Disclosure (Transparency) Authors should disclose the use of GenAI tools in a special section within the manuscript. Failure to disclose this matter may be considered as academic misconduct.

• Disclosure Location: A specific statement, titled "Declaration of Generative AI Use," should be placed before the References/Bibliography section, or within the Acknowledgements section.

• Required Details: The statement should state:

  • The Name and Version of the AI tool used (for example: ChatGPT-4, Gemini 1.5 Pro).

  • The purpose the tool was used for (for example: "to improve the clarity and flow of the Introduction section").

  • Level of Human Oversight (for example: "All outputs have been critically reviewed and edited by the authors").

• Example of Disclosure Statement: "During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [Tool Name and Version, for example: ChatGPT-4, 2024 Version] solely for [Purpose, for example: minor grammatical corrections and improving the flow of the literature review section]. The author(s) have read, critically reviewed, and edited the text generated by the AI and assume full responsibility for the content, originality, and integrity of the final publication."

II. Policy for Editors and Peer Reviewers Editors and reviewers hold submitted manuscripts in the strictest confidentiality. The use of GenAI by editorial staff is highly restricted due to confidentiality risks.

1. Confidentiality Editors and Reviewers should not upload any part of an unpublished manuscript (text, data, or figures) into publicly available Generative AI tools (for example: ChatGPT, free versions of LLMs) because this does not maintain author confidentiality.

2. Permitted Use (Restricted)

• Reviewers may use GenAI tools for language improvement on their own written review comments (for example: to improve grammar or clarity), provided they verify the final text.

• Editors may use AI tools for internal tasks that do not involve uploading confidential manuscript text (for example: finding potential reviewers based on keywords or journal archives).

3. Responsibility Editors/Reviewers remain fully responsible for the content and integrity of their reviews or decision letters, regardless of the AI assistance used.