Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools Policy

Ecosystem Intelligence supports the responsible and transparent use of artificial intelligence while maintaining human responsibility for research, authorship, peer review, and editorial decision-making.

This policy applies primarily to generative AI and AI-assisted tools used in research communication, manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial processes. It does not prohibit the legitimate use of artificial intelligence, machine learning, intelligent agents, computational models, or related technologies as research methods, analytical tools, experimental systems, or objects of study.

1. Human Responsibility and Authorship

Human authors, reviewers, and editors remain fully responsible and accountable for their contributions and decisions.

Generative AI systems, large language models, chatbots, and other automated tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, or ethical conduct of scholarly work, approve the final published version, disclose competing interests, or respond to questions concerning the work.

Use of AI or automated tools does not transfer responsibility from the individuals using them. Authors must verify the accuracy, validity, originality, and appropriateness of all content included in their manuscripts, including text, references, analyses, code, data interpretations, figures, or other material produced or assisted by AI.

2. Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools by Authors

Authors may use generative AI and AI-assisted tools to support research and manuscript preparation where such use is lawful, ethical, scientifically appropriate, and consistent with this policy.

Disclosure

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI in preparing a manuscript when its use goes beyond straightforward spelling, grammar, language correction, formatting, or similar technical assistance.

Where disclosure is required, authors should identify:

  • the AI tool or system used;
  • the purpose for which it was used; and
  • the nature and extent of its contribution.

The disclosure should be included in an appropriate part of the manuscript, such as the Methods section when AI forms part of the research methodology or a dedicated disclosure statement when it has been used in manuscript preparation.

Authors remain responsible for all AI-assisted content and must critically review, verify, and where necessary revise it before submission.

AI as a Research Method or Object of Study

Where artificial intelligence or machine learning forms part of the research method, analysis, experiment, intervention, system design, simulation, or object of study, its use should be reported with sufficient methodological detail to permit appropriate scholarly evaluation and, where reasonably possible, reproducibility.

Relevant information may include the system or model used, version or configuration where applicable, prompts or procedures where scientifically relevant, input and output handling, validation procedures, and the role of human judgement.

Such methodological use should not be treated merely as manuscript-preparation assistance.

Accuracy and References

Authors must independently verify factual statements, calculations, references, quotations, data interpretations, and other outputs generated or suggested by AI tools. Authors are responsible for identifying and correcting fabricated, misleading, biased, incomplete, or inaccurate outputs.

Generative AI must not be cited as an authoritative or evidentiary source. Authors should cite the original scholarly, empirical, legal, policy, data, or other appropriate sources supporting their claims.

This does not prevent authors from identifying and documenting an AI system where the system itself is a research instrument, method, experimental subject, or object of analysis.

Research Integrity

Generative AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or misrepresent data, evidence, results, citations, images, research participants, or other elements of the scholarly record.

AI-generated or AI-assisted material must not be presented in a way that obscures its origin or materially misrepresents the research conducted by the authors.

Authors must also respect copyright, intellectual-property rights, privacy, confidentiality, data-protection requirements, contractual obligations, and applicable laws when providing information or materials to AI systems.

3. Use of Generative AI by Peer Reviewers

Peer review requires independent scholarly judgement and must remain the responsibility of the invited reviewer.

Reviewers must not use generative AI to evaluate the scientific or scholarly content of a manuscript or to generate the substantive peer-review assessment.

Submitted manuscripts and associated files are confidential. Reviewers must not upload a manuscript, manuscript extract, unpublished data, figures, supplementary materials, confidential editorial correspondence, or other protected submission content to an external generative AI service where confidentiality, intellectual-property protection, and appropriate data handling cannot be assured.

A reviewer may use an AI-assisted tool for limited language correction or editing of a review that the reviewer has independently written, provided that:

  • no manuscript content or other confidential information is disclosed to the tool;
  • the tool does not generate the scholarly assessment or recommendation;
  • the reviewer independently verifies and accepts responsibility for the final review; and
  • the use is disclosed to the handling editor where generative AI has materially assisted the preparation or rewriting of the review.

Reviewers remain solely responsible for the accuracy, fairness, originality, confidentiality, and scholarly judgement contained in their reports.

AI systems must not be used to substitute for the expertise of the reviewer to whom the manuscript was entrusted.

4. Use of AI and Automated Tools in Editorial Processes

Editorial evaluation and publication decisions must remain under meaningful human control.

Editors must not use generative AI to generate substantive assessments of submitted manuscripts or to make, determine, or replace editorial decisions.

Submitted manuscripts and associated editorial information are confidential. Editors must not upload manuscript content, unpublished research, reviewer reports, author correspondence, or other confidential submission materials to external generative AI systems where confidentiality, intellectual-property protection, privacy, and appropriate data handling cannot be assured.

Limited AI-assisted language or administrative support may be used only where it does not compromise confidential information, replace editorial judgement, or determine editorial outcomes.

The journal or its publishing infrastructure may use automated or computer-assisted tools to support functions such as manuscript processing, similarity checking, research-integrity screening, metadata processing, or reviewer identification where appropriate. Such tools support rather than replace editorial judgement.

Automated findings that could affect a manuscript or an individual—for example, indications of text similarity, image manipulation or duplication, potentially undeclared AI use, or automated reviewer suggestions—must not by themselves determine an editorial outcome. Relevant findings must be evaluated by an editor or other appropriately qualified person.

Any routine use of AI or automated tools that materially affects the journal’s editorial or publishing workflow will be appropriately disclosed. Such tools should be subject to appropriate evaluation and human oversight.

Final editorial responsibility and all decisions to accept, revise, reject, correct, or retract scholarly content remain with human editors.

Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to comply with this policy throughout the submission, peer-review, editorial, and publication processes.

Failure to disclose required use of generative AI does not automatically constitute research misconduct. The journal will consider the nature, extent, intention, and consequences of the omission. However, deceptive use of AI, fabrication, falsification, manipulation, breach of confidentiality, false attribution, or other conduct affecting the integrity of the scholarly record may result in editorial or post-publication action.

Suspected inappropriate use of AI or automated tools will be considered in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies.

This policy should be read together with the journal’s:

Because artificial intelligence technologies and scholarly-publishing standards continue to develop, Ecosystem Intelligence may revise this policy when necessary to maintain appropriate standards of transparency, research integrity, confidentiality, accountability, and human oversight.