Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies Policy

The Journal recognizes that Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies may provide useful support during the preparation of scholarly manuscripts. These technologies may assist authors with language improvement, technical tasks, visualization, or other limited aspects of manuscript development. Nevertheless, AI tools must not replace human intellectual judgment, scientific reasoning, originality, or responsibility.

The use of AI must remain under meaningful human supervision. Authors are responsible for reviewing, verifying, and approving all material included in their manuscripts, regardless of whether AI-assisted technologies have been used. To maintain transparency, research integrity, and accountability, the Journal establishes the following policy on the use of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies.

1. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors are required to transparently declare the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies when such tools have contributed to the preparation of the manuscript.

Examples may include, but are not limited to, ChatGPT, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Claude, DALL·E, Midjourney, Grammarly, and other comparable AI-enabled applications.

When AI tools have been used beyond routine spelling or basic grammar correction, authors should provide a statement entitled “Declaration of AI Use” at the end of the manuscript. The declaration should clearly identify:

  • the name of the AI tool or platform used;

  • the purpose for which the tool was employed; and

  • the extent of its contribution to the manuscript.

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that such disclosure accurately represents the role of AI in the research and writing process. Failure to disclose substantial use of Generative AI may be treated as a publication ethics concern.

2. AI Tools Do Not Qualify for Authorship

Generative AI systems and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors, co-authors, corresponding authors, or independent contributors.

Authorship is reserved for individuals who have made identifiable intellectual contributions to the work and who are able to take responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and ethical compliance of the published article.

Because AI systems cannot independently assume responsibility, provide informed consent, manage conflicts of interest, or respond to questions regarding research integrity, they do not satisfy the requirements for scholarly authorship.

3. Author Responsibility for AI-Assisted Content

Authors retain full responsibility and accountability for all content submitted to the Journal, including material created, modified, suggested, or supported by AI technologies.

Authors must carefully verify AI-assisted outputs to ensure that the manuscript does not contain:

  • inaccurate or misleading statements;

  • fabricated information or unsupported claims;

  • fictitious, incorrect, or unverifiable references;

  • biased or inappropriate interpretations;

  • copyright-infringing material; or

  • content that compromises research or publication ethics.

The use of AI does not transfer responsibility from the author to the technology provider. Manuscripts containing fabricated, unverifiable, or misleading research information generated through AI may be rejected or subject to further ethical investigation.

4. Permitted Uses of Generative AI

Generative AI or AI-assisted tools may be used as supporting technologies when authors maintain full intellectual control over the final manuscript. Appropriate uses may include:

  • improving grammar, readability, and linguistic clarity;

  • assisting with sentence restructuring or language refinement;

  • supporting computer programming, coding, or debugging activities;

  • assisting with preliminary data-processing tasks where all outputs are independently verified by the authors;

  • improving the technical quality or presentation of figures without changing their scientific meaning; and

  • supporting administrative or technical aspects of manuscript preparation.

Any AI-generated or AI-assisted content included in a manuscript must be critically reviewed, verified, and revised by the authors before submission.

5. Prohibited or Unacceptable Uses of Generative AI

Authors must not use Generative AI technologies in ways that compromise the authenticity, accuracy, or integrity of scholarly work.

Unacceptable practices include using AI to:

  • fabricate or artificially generate research data;

  • create experimental observations or results that were not actually obtained;

  • invent statistical findings or alter research outcomes;

  • generate false, nonexistent, or misleading references;

  • produce literature reviews or scholarly claims without verifying the original sources;

  • create or manipulate scientific images in a manner that changes, obscures, or misrepresents research findings;

  • generate substantial manuscript content without meaningful intellectual review and revision by the authors; or

  • conceal plagiarism, data manipulation, fabrication, or other forms of research misconduct.

AI-generated material must never be presented as genuine empirical evidence unless the generation of such material is itself part of the research methodology and is transparently explained, scientifically justified, and ethically appropriate.

6. Research Data, Images, and Figures

The integrity of research data, images, graphs, and figures must be preserved at all stages of manuscript preparation.

When AI-based image-processing or enhancement tools are used, such modifications must not add, remove, conceal, relocate, or distort scientific information. Adjustments intended to improve visibility, brightness, contrast, resolution, or presentation are acceptable only when they do not affect the interpretation of the underlying research findings.

Authors should disclose substantial AI-assisted image generation or modification when it is relevant to the scientific content of the manuscript.

Any image or figure suspected of having been manipulated in a misleading manner may be subject to editorial investigation.

7. Use of AI by Reviewers

Manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential documents. Reviewers must therefore protect all unpublished information contained in the manuscript.

Reviewers must not upload, reproduce, summarize, analyze, or otherwise submit confidential manuscript content to publicly accessible Generative AI platforms or other AI systems when doing so may compromise confidentiality, intellectual property, or data protection.

Generative AI must also not replace the reviewer's own critical evaluation, subject expertise, and scholarly judgment.

Limited use of AI-assisted tools for non-confidential purposes, such as improving the grammar or readability of a reviewer's own comments, may be acceptable provided that no confidential manuscript information is disclosed to the AI system.

8. Use of AI by Editors

Editors are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality and integrity of the editorial process. Therefore, unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, author correspondence, or other confidential editorial materials must not be entered into Generative AI systems when such use could expose protected information.

Editorial decisions must be based on human academic judgment and must not be delegated to AI systems.

AI-assisted tools may be used for limited administrative or linguistic purposes when confidentiality, data protection, impartiality, and editorial responsibility are fully maintained.

9. Ethical Violations and Editorial Actions

The Journal considers inappropriate or undisclosed use of Generative AI to be a potential publication ethics issue when it affects the originality, reliability, transparency, or integrity of scholarly work.

Depending on the nature and severity of the violation, editorial actions may include:

  • requesting clarification or correction from the authors;

  • requiring revision of the manuscript;

  • rejecting the submission;

  • correcting or retracting a published article;

  • notifying the authors' institution or relevant authority when serious misconduct is identified; and

  • restricting future submissions in cases of serious or repeated violations.

Each case will be evaluated according to the principles of research integrity, publication ethics, transparency, and due process.

10. Final Responsibility

Generative AI should be regarded as a supporting tool rather than an autonomous creator of scientific knowledge. Human authors, reviewers, and editors remain responsible for the intellectual quality, factual accuracy, ethical compliance, confidentiality, and integrity of scholarly communication.

The Journal may revise this policy periodically in response to developments in Generative AI technology, scholarly publishing standards, and publication ethics.