Generative AI Policy

We acknowledges the rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies (e.g., Large Language Models like ChatGPT, Copilot, Cloude, emini, Grok, etc). We aim to provide clear guidelines for their use in manuscripts submitted to our journal. Our policy is guided by the core principles of scientific integrity, transparency, and author accountability. This policy applies to all authors, editors, and reviewers.

1. Purpose

This statement outlines the ethical use, disclosure, and oversight of Generative AI (GenAI) in the submission, peer review, and editorial processes of this journal. It aligns with the principles and best practices established by leading organizations in academic publishing, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

2. Definition

Generative AI refers to computational systems capable of producing text, images, data analysis, or other content in response to prompts. These tools may assist in writing, editing, summarizing, coding, or data processing.

3. Principles and Standards

Authors may use generative AI tools only as supportive instruments, not as substitutes for scholarly responsibility. Permitted uses include:

- Language editing (grammar, clarity, readability)
- Summarization of content
- Assistance in coding or data visualization
- Idea organization (not idea generation without critical evaluation)

4. Disclosure Requirement

Any use of generative AI must be clearly disclosed in the manuscript. Authors should include a statement such as:

“The authors used generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) to assist with [describe purpose, e.g., language editing or structuring]. All outputs were reviewed and verified by the authors, who take full responsibility for the content.”

Failure to disclose AI use may result in rejection or retraction.

5. Prohibited Uses

The following uses are strictly prohibited:

- Listing AI as an author
- Using AI to generate entire manuscripts without substantial human contribution
- Fabricating data, citations, or results using AI
- Using AI to manipulate peer review processes

6. Use of AI by Reviewers

Peer reviewers must:

- Not upload confidential manuscripts into AI tools that store or reuse data
- Not use AI to generate full review reports without critical judgment

Limited use (e.g., language refinement of review comments) may be acceptable if confidentiality is preserved.

7. Use of AI by Editors

Editors may use AI tools for:

- Initial screening (e.g., language clarity, formatting checks)
- Detecting inconsistencies or potential ethical concerns

However:

- Editorial decisions must remain human-driven
- AI must not replace peer review or editorial judgment

8. Ethical Considerations

The journal emphasizes:

- Transparency in AI usage
- Protection of intellectual property
- Avoidance of bias and misinformation
- Compliance with publication ethics standards

9. Enforcement

Non-compliance with this policy may lead to:

- Manuscript rejection
- Retraction of published articles
- Notification to authors’ institutions (in severe cases)

10. Policy Updates

This policy will be periodically updated to reflect evolving standards in scholarly publishing and AI technology usage.