AI Policy (Use of Artificial Intelligence Technologies)
General Provisions
The growing use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies by authors of scientific publications has led the Editorial Board of the journal to establish a dedicated AI usage policy. These rules are intended to ensure greater transparency and improve the quality of publications for authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. The Editorial Board will continuously monitor the development of AI technologies and update or refine these rules accordingly.
The use of AI within the research process (e.g., data analysis, modeling, simulations, etc.) is not restricted by this policy; however, it must be clearly and properly described in the methodology section of the manuscript.
For authors
The use of generative artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence-enabled technologies in scientific writing.
NOTE THAT THESE RULES APPLY ONLY TO THE WRITING PROCESS, NOT TO THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS TO ANALYSE AND EXTRACT INFORMATION FROM DATA AS PART OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS.
If authors use generative artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should be used only to improve readability and correct grammatical errors in the paper. The use of AI technology should be supervised and controlled by a human, and authors should carefully review and edit the result, as AI can produce authoritative results that may be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. Authors are ultimately responsible for the content of the paper.
Authors should disclose in their manuscripts the use of artificial intelligence and technologies supported by artificial intelligence. The use of AI should be indicated in the published work in the section "Declaration on generative AI", indicating the name of the tool and the nature of its use. A statement on the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, and editors, and promotes compliance with the terms of use of the respective tool or technology.
Authors should not list artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence-supported technologies as an author or co-author, nor should they cite artificial intelligence as an author. Authorship involves duties and tasks that can only be assigned and performed by humans. Each (co-)author is responsible for ensuring that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are properly investigated and resolved, and authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission. The authors are also responsible for ensuring that the work is original and does not infringe the rights of third parties. All authors should read our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement before submitting.
Using generative artificial intelligence and AI-powered tools in drawings, images and illustrations.
We do not permit the use of generative artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, darkening, moving, deleting, or adding a specific feature to an image or figure. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or colour balance are acceptable as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original.
The only exception is when the use of artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (e.g., in artificial intelligence-assisted visualisation approaches to create or interpret the underlying research data, e.g., in biomedical visualisation). If these tools are used, this should be indicated and described appropriately in the text of the manuscript. An explanation of how artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence-assisted tools were used in the process of image creation or modification should be included, as well as the name of the model or tool, version and extension number, and manufacturer. Authors must comply with specific rules for the use of AI-based software and ensure that the content is properly referenced. Where possible, authors may be asked to provide AI-adjusted versions of images and/or composite raw images used to create the final submitted versions for editorial review.
The use of generative artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence-supported tools in the creation of artistic works, such as graphical annotations, is prohibited. The use of generative artificial intelligence in the creation of covers may in some cases be permitted if the author obtains prior permission from the editor and publisher of the journal, can demonstrate that all necessary rights to use the relevant material have been obtained, and guarantees the correct link to the content.
Failure to comply with this policy may be grounds for rejection or withdrawal of the article.
For reviewers
When a researcher is invited to review an article by another researcher, the manuscript should be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload the submitted manuscript or any part of it to a generative artificial intelligence tool, as this may violate the confidentiality and property rights of the authors, and if the article contains personal information, may violate data privacy rights.
This confidentiality requirement applies to the reviewer's report (review), as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their review to an artificial intelligence tool, even if it is only for the purpose of correcting grammatical errors and readability.
Peer review is the foundation of the scientific ecosystem, and the Editorial Board adheres to the highest standards of integrity in this process. Reviewing a scientific manuscript involves a responsibility that can only be entrusted to humans. Reviewers should not use generative artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence-assisted technologies to facilitate the scientific review of an article, as the critical thinking and original evaluation required for reviewing are beyond the scope of this technology, and there is a risk that this technology will lead to incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible for the content of the review.
The editorial board's policy on the use of artificial intelligence states that authors are allowed to use generative artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence-assisted technologies in the writing process before submitting an article, but only to improve readability and correct grammatical errors in their article and with appropriate disclosure.
For editors
The submitted manuscript should be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload the submitted manuscript or any part of it to a generative artificial intelligence tool, as this may violate the confidentiality and property rights of the authors, and, if the article contains personal information, may violate the rights to data privacy.
This confidentiality requirement applies to all communications about a manuscript, including any notifications or decision letters, as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or authors. For this reason, editors should not upload their letters to an artificial intelligence tool, even if it is only for the purpose of improving language and readability.
Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript involves a responsibility that can only be assigned to humans. Generative artificial intelligence or artificial intelligence-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the evaluation process or decision-making about a manuscript, as the critical thinking and original evaluation required for this work is beyond the scope of this technology, and there is a risk that the technology will lead to incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The editor is responsible for the editorial process, the final decision and its communication to the authors.
The Editorial Board's policy on authors states that authors are allowed to use generative artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence-assisted technologies in the writing process before submitting an article, but only to improve readability and correct grammatical errors in their article and with appropriate disclosure. If an editor suspects that an author or reviewer has violated the Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence, he or she should notify the Editorial Board.
Guidelines for the Use of Generative AI
Recommendation 1
Chatbots cannot be authors. Chatbots do not meet authorship criteria, in particular the ability to give final approval of the version to be published and to take responsibility for all aspects of the work in ensuring proper research integrity and resolving issues related to the accuracy or completeness of any part of the work. No artificial intelligence tool can “understand” a conflict of interest statement or has the legal status to sign such a statement. Chatbots do not have institutional affiliation, regardless of their developers. Since submitting authors must ensure that all listed authors meet authorship criteria, chatbots cannot be included as authors.
Recommendation 2
Authors must be transparent when using chatbots and provide information on how they were used. The extent and type of chatbot use in scientific publications must be specified. This aligns with the recommendation to acknowledge writing assistance and to provide detailed information on how the research was conducted and how results were obtained.
Recommendation 2.1
Authors submitting a manuscript in which a chatbot/AI was used to develop new text must disclose such use in the Acknowledgements section; all prompts used to generate new text or to transform text or text prompts into tables or illustrations should be specified.
Recommendation 2.2
If an artificial intelligence tool, such as a chatbot, was used to perform or generate analytical work, assist in reporting results (e.g., creating tables or figures), or write computer code, this must be stated both in the abstract and in the main text of the article. In order to enable scientific verification, including replication and detection of falsification, the full prompt (query operator) used to generate research results, the time and date of the query, and the AI tool and its version must be provided.
Recommendation 3
Authors are responsible for material provided by chatbots in their article (in particular, for the accuracy of the presented material and the absence of plagiarism) and for proper citation of all sources (including original sources for materials generated by chatbots). Authors are responsible for ensuring that the content of the article reflects their own data and ideas and is not plagiarized, fabricated, or falsified material. Otherwise, submitting such material for publication, regardless of how it was written, constitutes a violation of academic standards. Likewise, authors must ensure that all cited materials are properly referenced, including full citations, and that cited sources support the text generated by the chatbot. Since chatbots may be designed not to use sources that contradict viewpoints expressed in their outputs, authors are responsible for identifying, reviewing, and including such opposing perspectives in their articles. Authors must indicate what they have done to reduce the risk of plagiarism, provide a balanced view, and ensure the accuracy of all references.
Recommendation 4
Editors and reviewers must disclose, to both authors and each other, any use of chatbots in manuscript evaluation, peer review reports, or correspondence. Editors and reviewers are responsible for any content or citations generated by chatbots. They should be aware that chatbots store submitted prompts, including manuscript content, and providing a manuscript to a chatbot violates the confidentiality of the submitted work.
Recommendation 5
Editors should, where possible, apply appropriate tools to help detect content generated or modified using AI. Such tools should be used, where feasible, for the benefit of science and the public.