Usage Guidelines for Generative AI Tools
Generative
AI (GenAI) tools have brought significant convenience to academic
research and paper writing. However, while enjoying the benefits of
technology, authors must assume corresponding ethical responsibilities
to ensure the authenticity, accuracy, and originality of the generated
content. Transparently disclosing the use of these tools and adhering
strictly to academic standards is key to avoiding ethical risks and
ensuring publication quality.
Statement on the Ethical Use and Publication Guidelines for Authors Using Generative AI (GenAI) Tools
Authors should be fully responsible for the content in their
manuscripts. If the manuscript contains content generated by AI tools,
the author must be held accountable for any violations of publishing
ethics arising therefrom. To ensure compliance with ethical standards in
academic publishing, we provide the following guidelines for the use of
GenAI tools:
1. Language and Format Editing:Authors
are allowed to use GenAI tools (such as GPT and Grammarly) to improve
the spelling, grammar, and general formatting of manuscripts. However,
GenAI tools may introduce new grammatical errors, logical issues, or
content biases. Therefore, after using these tools, authors must
carefully review and edit the generated content to ensure accuracy and
consistency.
2. Review of Content Accuracy and Originality: For
content generated with the assistance of GenAI tools (such as
paragraphs, citations, and abstracts), authors must carefully check the
accuracy of the generated content, including the authenticity of
references, correctness of formatting, and consistency of data.
Additionally, authors must confirm that the generated content does not
incur plagiarism issues to avoid copyright infringement, and plagiarism
detection tools should be used to further verify the originality of any
AI-generated content.
3. Review of Charts and Data: Authors
using GenAI tools to generate charts or other scientific artwork must
ensure that the visualized presentation of data accurately reflects the
real data provided in the manuscript. AI-generated artwork may present
risks such as unclear data labelling, misleading design, or data
manipulation; therefore, manual review of AI-generated artwork is
required.
4. Transparency and Disclosure of Tool Usage: Authors
using GenAI tools in manuscript writing, image or graphic element
creation, data collection, and analysis must ensure content accuracy and
meanwhile disclose the specific usage of these tools in the Methodology
or Acknowledgement sections of the manuscript. The disclosure should
specify the tool’s name, version, functionality, and specific
application in the manuscript. For example, authors should clearly state
how the tool has contributed to spelling correction, data analysis, or
image processing.
5. Prohibition of Data Synthesis and Manipulation: GenAI
tools must not be used to synthesize data to make up for missing data,
alter or manipulate original images, charts, or other data in a way that
affects the presentation of the original data and research results. Any
behavior involving the manipulation or fabrication of data generated by
AI violates academic integrity and may lead to serious ethical issues.
6. Limitations on the Reasonable Use of GenAI Tools:GenAI
tools cannot be used to initiate an original research project without
human guidance, nor can they be used to complete the entire research
process of writing a paper. GenAI tools should only serve as auxiliary
tools and cannot replace the author in conducting independent academic
research. Additionally, GenAI tools cannot be listed as authors of the
paper, as they do not possess the capability to create knowledge or
assume academic responsibility. COPE has already provided detailed
guidance on this matter, which is available here: [COPE Position
Statement on AI and Authorship](https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author).