This policy sets out the rules of Engineering Perspective regarding the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies by authors, reviewers, and editors. It is based primarily on the STM classification framework for AI use in manuscript preparation, and guided by COPE principles on authorship, accountability, transparency, confidentiality, and publication ethics. This journal adopts a stricter approach than the general publisher baseline in certain areas, including the use of AI for writing or drafting manuscript content.
This policy applies to submitted manuscripts, revised files, supplementary materials, figures, tables, code shared with the manuscript, peer-review reports, editorial correspondence, and decision letters. It covers AI use in manuscript preparation as well as in peer review and editorial handling. Where AI is used as part of the research design, research methods, data analysis, image analysis, visualization, or code-related workflow, such use must be described appropriately in the manuscript,.
Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, citations, permissions, analyses, interpretations, and conclusions of their submissions. AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Routine spelling, grammar, punctuation, and limited language-polishing assistance may be used without formal disclosure, provided that such use does not generate new scientific content, new interpretations, or new scholarly claims. All other permitted AI uses listed in Table 1 require disclosure where indicated.
This journal does not permit the use of generative AI to write or draft manuscript content. It also does not permit the use of generative AI to create or alter illustrative images, figures, or artwork submitted with a manuscript. AI-assisted visual processing may be considered only where it is itself part of the research design or research methods, is scientifically justified, and is disclosed transparently and reproducibly in the manuscript.
Table 1. Classification of AI Use in Manuscript Preparation
| No. | Use of AI in the preparation of academic manuscripts | Description of the activity | Examples of the activity | Activity does NOT include | Permitted in this journal? | Disclosure required if used? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Refine, correct, edit, or format the manuscript to improve clarity of language | Automated tools are used to suggest language improvements in author-written text | Spell-checking, grammar-checking, wording improvement, readability enhancement | Prompt-based generation of new text, machine-generated summaries, AI analysis or summarization of documents as part of the research process | Yes | No, if limited to routine language assistance only |
| 2 | Writing or drafting manuscript content | AI is used to generate part or all of the manuscript text | Prompt-based drafting of sentences or paragraphs, expansion or rewriting of text, machine-generated summaries for inclusion in the manuscript | Simple spelling or grammar correction, or AI use confined to the research process rather than manuscript writing | No | Not applicable |
| 3 | Translation of manuscript text for the purpose of publishing | AI is used to assist translation of an author’s original text into another language for publication | AI-assisted translation of a manuscript draft | Translation of source materials during the research process and unrelated to manuscript preparation | Yes | Yes |
| 4 | Refining or formatting data reported in the submitted manuscript | AI is used to improve the presentation, readability, or formatting of data already reported in the manuscript or supplementary files | Formatting tables, polishing data presentation, improving readability of already existing reported data | Data generation, substantive data manipulation, or alteration of research results | Yes, with restrictions | Yes |
| 5 | Generation, refinement, correction, editing, or formatting of images, diagrams, or other figures for illustrative purposes only | AI is used to create or alter figures or images for illustrative, aesthetic, or decorative purposes | Conceptual illustrations, decorative figures, stylized non-data visuals | Visualization of actual research data or results, or methodologically justified research-stage image processing disclosed in the manuscript | No | Not applicable |
| 6 | Generation, refinement, correction, editing, or formatting of visualizations of research data or results | AI is used to generate or alter graphs, charts, figures, or visualizations based on research data or results | AI-assisted graph generation, AI-assisted figure modification, AI-assisted visualization of real research outputs | Conventional non-generative software used in ordinary data-visualization workflows, or undisclosed alteration of submitted figures | No, unless it is part of the research design or methods and is fully disclosed | Yes, if exceptionally permitted |
| 7 | Refinement or formatting of code reported in the submitted manuscript | AI is used to improve the presentation of code reported in the manuscript, without changing its scientific function | Improving readability, formatting, commenting, or presentation of already existing code | AI-generated new research code, or AI-altered code functionality affecting the research without proper methodological disclosure | Yes, with restrictions | Yes |
| 8 | Assisting with compilation of reference lists | AI is used to suggest or organize references for possible inclusion in the manuscript | Suggesting related literature, helping identify potentially relevant sources | Fabricated references, hallucinated citations, or traditional non-generative reference managers used only in their standard organizational functions | Yes | Yes, where AI is used to select, collate, generate, or edit references |
| 9 | Presentation of AI-generated content as though it were original research data or results from non-machine sources | AI-generated text, data, images, graphs, spectra, or other outputs are presented as if they were original findings obtained from non-machine sources | AI-generated content presented as original experiments, observations, measurements, or analyses | Transparent research on AI outputs themselves, or properly disclosed AI use within the research methods | No | Not applicable |
The activity classes in Table 1 are adapted from the STM classification framework, while the permission and disclosure columns reflect this journal’s editorial position.
Where disclosure is required under Table 1, authors must state: the tool or service used; the model and version, where available; the purpose of use; the part of the manuscript, figure, table, code, or reference process affected; and the extent of human review and verification. The journal may request supporting materials such as raw files, pre-adjustment figures, earlier versions, prompts, settings, logs, or code history for editorial assessment.
Authors who used AI or AI-assisted technologies in a manner that requires disclosure under this policy must include a declaration at the end of the manuscript, immediately before the references.
Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process
Authors who used generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in a manner that requires disclosure under the journal’s GENAI Policy must include a declaration at the end of the manuscript, immediately before the References section. Authors are requested to check the GEN-AI Policy carefully before completing this statement.
If no generative AI or AI-assisted technology was used in the preparation of the manuscript, please state:
The author(s) declare that no generative AI or AI-assisted technologies were used in the preparation of this manuscript.
If generative AI or AI-assisted technology was used in a manner that requires disclosure under the GENAI Policy, please state:
During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL / SERVICE] for [PURPOSE]. All AI-assisted output was subsequently reviewed and, where necessary, edited by the author(s), who take full responsibility for the final content of the manuscript.
A manuscript submitted for peer review is a confidential document. Reviewers must not upload a manuscript, any part of it, supplementary materials, figures, tables, data, reviewer forms, or review reports into public or external generative AI or AI-assisted tools. This restriction also applies where the intended use is language editing, summarization, drafting assistance, or any other form of automated support.
Reviewers must not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to evaluate the scientific merit, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, novelty, clarity of argument, or publication suitability of a submission. Reviewers must not use such tools to generate, draft, expand, rewrite, or justify the core reasoning of a peer-review report. Peer review requires independent human judgment, critical assessment, subject expertise, and accountability, all of which remain the responsibility of the reviewer.
Reviewers are expected to prepare their reports personally and to ensure that all comments, criticisms, recommendations, and publication advice reflect their own scholarly evaluation. Reviewers must not rely on AI-generated assessments, AI-generated recommendations, or AI-generated interpretations in place of their own expert judgment.
If a reviewer suspects that a manuscript contains undisclosed or inappropriate use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies, including possible fabrication, falsification, image alteration, or undisclosed AI-generated text, the reviewer should report the concern confidentially to the handling editor. Such concerns should be raised through the journal’s editorial process rather than addressed directly to the authors within the review in an accusatory manner.
Any breach of confidentiality or inappropriate use of AI during peer review may result in the reviewer being removed from the review process and, where appropriate, excluded from future reviewing activities for the journal.
Editors must treat all submitted manuscripts and all editorial communications as strictly confidential. Editors must not upload manuscripts, revised files, supplementary materials, reviewer comments, author responses, editorial notes, decision letters, or any related confidential content into public or external generative AI or AI-assisted tools. This restriction applies even where the intended use is limited to language improvement, summarization, drafting assistance, or administrative convenience.
Editors must not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to assess the scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, ethical acceptability, or publication suitability of a manuscript. Editors must not use such tools to make, shape, justify, or finalize editorial decisions regarding peer review, revision, acceptance, rejection, retraction, or expressions of concern. Editorial evaluation and decision-making require independent human judgment, subject expertise, fairness, and accountability, which remain solely the responsibility of the editor.
Editors may use secure, journal-approved, confidentiality-preserving tools for limited technical or administrative support, such as plagiarism screening, completeness checks, image-integrity assessment, reference-format checks, or reviewer identification, provided that such tools do not replace editorial judgment or compromise manuscript confidentiality.
Editors should ensure that authors, reviewers, and editorial board members comply with the journal’s GEN-AI Policy. Where undisclosed or inappropriate use of AI is suspected, editors may request clarification, additional disclosure, revised files, raw data, original images, or other supporting materials. Where necessary, the matter should be handled in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics and misconduct procedures.
Editors remain responsible for maintaining the integrity, transparency, fairness, and confidentiality of the editorial process. Any inappropriate use of AI by an editor that affects editorial independence, confidentiality, or decision-making may be treated as a serious breach of editorial responsibility.
Failure to comply with this policy may lead to clarification requests, mandatory correction of disclosures, requests for supporting files, rejection, withdrawal during review, post-publication correction, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the seriousness of the case and the journal’s publication-ethics procedures.