Artificial Intelligence policies

Table of contents

1.   Artificial Intelligence
Current Science Publishing Journals regularly monitor the most recent advancements in this field and pay close attention to issues pertaining to the application of AI in research. Current Science Publishing acknowledges the advantages and drawbacks of the rapid development of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies for scholarly publication, such as ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs). We follow the policies and general recommendations provided by STM and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in their position statements to provide transparency to the scientific community.

2.   Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools in manuscript preparation

This policy refers to the use of AI in writing scientific articles for publication in our journal. This regulation has no implications for AI-assisted data analysis or research methods. During the submission process, authors must disclose whether GenAI was used for data collection, analysis, or interpretation, or for preparing the text, data, images, or study design.

The name, version, model, and source of the AI technology utilized, as well as how it was used, must be specified by the authors in both the cover letter and the submitted paper. In this case, the authors should state in the Acknowledgements section whether AI was utilized to help with the article's drafting. The authors should explain any use of AI for data collection, analysis, or figure creation in the Materials and Methods section. The originality, validity, and integrity of the content of the manuscript, including any content produced by GenAI tools, are entirely the responsibility of the authors. They must thoroughly examine this material to ensure that it conforms to all of the Current Science Publishing's published ethics guidelines, including those pertaining to plagiarism, data fabrication and image manipulation, and intellectual property. However, the author must declare that their article is not influenced by GenAI or plagiarism in the Declaration section. This policy does not cover the use of GenAI tools for text editing (e.g., grammar, structure, spelling, punctuation, and formatting) and does not require declaration.

Editorial decisions will be made in accordance with the editorial process and terms and conditions, and the Current Science Publishing retains the right to provide more information.

Example: Materials and Methods section

The Author (s) used (tool name, version information, year, webpagelink) for (description, time) to prepare the manuscript/study.

Example: Declaration section

The authors accept full responsibility for the content of this article and have reviewed and edited the final version. The authors hereby state that no generative AI tools such as Large Language Models (ChatGPT, Copilot, etc.) and text-to-image generators were utilized in the preparation or editing of this manuscript.

3.   GenAI usage and authorship

Only humans can be listed as authors in accordance with our authorship standards, as well as COPE and ICMJE's stances on authorship, because only humans can currently be held accountable for all parts of their work. The Current Science Publishing does not meet the requirements for such authorship.

4.   Policy on AI-generated or AI-altered figures, images, and artwork

We do not allow the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or change images, figures, or artwork for the submitted article. This process can be used to add, remove, enhance, or obscure parts of an image, among other things. Only minor modifications (such as brightness, contrast, or colour balance) that do not alter or destroy the original data are allowed. Forensic tools can be used to investigate the suspected picture modifications.

Generative AI cannot be used to create graphical abstracts. However, if appropriate rights clearance and attribution are confirmed, limited use in cover art may be permitted with prior consent from the publisher and the journal editor. Unedited source images may also have to be submitted by authors for editorial assessment.

5.   GenAI usage and reviews

The journal editors verify articles for plagiarism and AI usage during the peer-review process. Authorship and respect to journal ethics may be questioned if the use of AI is not disclosed. As a result, it could be considered a reason for rejection. Furthermore, failing to disclose the use of AI could result in a violation of the usage guidelines the AI software.

Reviewers must refrain from conducting reviews with generative AI tools, such as natural language processors, large language models, and so on. The use of these tools may violate confidentiality, proprietary, and data privacy rights, and reviewers are entirely accountable for the content of their report. A review report will be rejected if AI tools are used improperly during its preparation.

Some restricted use to improve the textual quality of a peer review report, such as checking grammar, structure, spelling, punctuation, and formatting, may be permissible, but must be stated at the time of submission.

We request that reviewers follow the requirements aligned with the Australian Research Council’s policy on use of generative artificial intelligence, NIH’s notice on generative AI technologies usage for peer review process,  and COPE.

6.   GenAI usage and editorial assessment

Academic editors play an important role in the peer review process, ensuring its integrity and quality. Academic editors are discouraged from using GenAI tools for editorial reviews or decision-making due to this important regulation.

The publisher's confidential peer-review policy prohibits academic editors from uploading manuscripts, images, figures, tables, or any other correspondence related to manuscripts under review to any GenAI tools.