AI usage policy

1. General Provisions

The Editorial Office recognizes the potential of AI as a supporting tool but emphasizes the Human-in-the-loop principle: final responsibility for interpreting results, ethical evaluation, and scientific novelty rests with the human author. This policy applies to all stages of manuscript preparation—from data collection to text editing and visualization. AI use is permissible only if originality and academic integrity are preserved. The Editorial Office follows the recommendations of COPE, WAME, ICMJE, EASE, UNESCO, and the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine. Given the rapid development of technology, the Editorial Office reserves the right to update this policy in line with international standards.

2. Authorship and Responsibility

Generative AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Human authors are responsible for data accuracy, avoidance of plagiarism, prevention of “hallucinations,” and consideration of algorithmic bias. Theoretical conclusions and ethical aspects of research must be the author’s own work. Uploading confidential materials into AI systems is prohibited to protect privacy.

3. Permitted and Prohibited Use

AI may be used for:

  • Language and stylistic editing;

  • Technical data processing;

  • Structuring search queries;

  • Generating ideas at the initial stage.

AI must not be used for:

  • Formulating hypotheses or conclusions;

  • Writing substantive sections of the article;

  • Creating fabricated data;

  • Automated paraphrasing of others’ work;

  • Fact verification without consulting primary sources.

Exceptions apply only when AI itself is the subject of research, in which case outputs must be clearly marked as quotations or appendices.

4. Visualization

AI-generated charts or maps based on fabricated data are prohibited. Any image created or modified with AI must include information about the tool, version, date, and generation parameters. AI cannot be used to alter archival sources or artifacts. Authors must ensure compliance with copyright and retain original datasets and prompts for verification.

5. Disclosure

Authors must declare AI use. Undisclosed use is considered a violation of academic integrity. Declarations must appear in relevant sections of the article (methodology or a dedicated “AI Declaration”). Standard tools with integrated AI functions (spell-check, citation managers) do not require separate disclosure.

6. Policy for Reviewers and Editors

Manuscripts are confidential, so reviewers and editors must not upload them to publicly available generative AI services for analysis or review. AI-generated reviews are unacceptable; reviewers who break this rule are removed from the reviewer database. The editors may check manuscripts with licensed AI-detection tools used under contract (such as the StrikePlagiarism module), but detector results alone are never the sole ground for rejection.

7. Violations and Appeals

Undisclosed AI use is treated as plagiarism or fabrication. Confirmed violations result in manuscript rejection, and information may be reported to the author’s institution. If violations are discovered post-publication, the Editorial Office initiates retraction in line with COPE protocols. Authors may appeal within 14 days, providing evidence of text authenticity. Decisions of the Editorial Board after appeal are final.