Basic Principles and Responsibilities for the Use of Generative AI for Authors
Author Responsibilities:

Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors under any circumstances.
The entire content, accuracy, and originality of articles belong entirely to the authors.
The use of AI tools does not exempt authors from their scientific and ethical obligations.

Transparency and Disclosure:

All instances where AI tools are used must be clearly and explicitly stated in the article.
This statement should be included in the ‘Methods’ or ‘Acknowledgements’ section of the article.
The statement should detail the full names of the tools used, their version numbers, how they were used, and for what purposes.
Permitted Areas of Use

1. Language and Readability Improvements:

The use of AI may be appropriate for improving grammar, spelling, punctuation, and fluency in texts produced by authors themselves.
Such edits should not alter the content of the original text, but only improve its readability.

2. Idea Development and Research Planning:

It can be used as a helpful tool in the processes of formulating research questions, generating ideas, and planning research.
However, the conceptual basis and methodological framework of the research should essentially be shaped by the researcher's original scientific perspective.

3. Code Assistance and Data Analysis:

Tools can be used to assist in the process of creating codes for data analysis, but the consistency and appropriateness of statistical analyses are the responsibility of the author.

4. Organising Literature Reviews:

Tools can be used to assist in organising and categorising existing literature. However, the depth and accuracy of the literature review are the responsibility of the author.

Restricted or Prohibited Areas of Use

1. Content Creation:

It is not acceptable for AI to write the entire article, including the abstract, introduction, literature review, or discussion sections.
Outputs generated by AI should only be considered as drafts and should be thoroughly revised, improved, and checked by the authors.

2. Production and Interpretation of Results:

AI cannot be used to generate, report, or interpret research results.
All responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and validity of data analysis results lies solely with the authors.

3. Source Creation and Citation:

It is strictly prohibited to create fabricated or unverifiable sources or to cite non-existent works using AI tools.
All sources must be approved by the authors and cited correctly.

4. Academic Writing and Argument Development:

The development of the article's argument, theoretical contributions, and main theses is the responsibility of the author.
AI can only play a supporting role in these processes.
Procedures to be Applied in Case of Policy Violation:

If the use of AI is not disclosed or is used in violation of the rules, the article may be rejected.
If a rule violation is found in published articles, procedures such as retraction of the article or publication of a correction may be applied.
Repeated violations may result in the author's future submissions to our journal being rejected.

Policies for Editors Regarding the Use of Generative AI
Privacy and Intellectual Property Responsibility:
Editors should not upload unpublished articles or related files, images, and information to AI tools.
It is the editors' fundamental responsibility to protect the confidentiality of article content and the author's intellectual property rights.
Use of AI in the Review Process:
Editors may only use AI tools during the article review process (e.g., eligibility checks, reviewer selection) in ways authorised by the journal management.
Any use of AI requires that authors be notified.
Evaluation of Authors' AI Declarations:

Editors must carefully review authors' declarations regarding AI use and request additional information when necessary.
It is the editors' responsibility to assess the compliance of AI usage with our journal policies.
Management of Suspicious Cases:

In cases of uncertainty regarding AI usage, editors should address the issue openly with the authors and request additional evidence if necessary.
Cases requiring detailed review should be referred to the journal management.
Monitoring Policy Updates:

Editors should periodically monitor developments in generative AI technologies and updates to our journal's policies.

Policies for Reviewers Regarding the Use of Generative AI
Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibility:
Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or related files provided to them for review to generative AI tools in any way.
Such actions may constitute a breach of confidentiality and put intellectual property rights at risk.
Use of AI in the Review Process:

Reviewers should refrain from using generative AI tools in the article review process.
The evaluation process should be carried out based on the reviewer's own expertise and knowledge.
Detection of AI Use:

Reviewers should attempt to detect any unreported potential AI use in the articles they review and report any suspicious cases to the editors.
However, these detections should be based on objective evaluation criteria.
Evaluation Ethics:

Referees should evaluate authors fairly in terms of AI use and keep the journal's rules separate from their personal preferences and biases.
Criticisms regarding AI use in evaluations should be presented in a constructive manner and in accordance with the journal's policies.

Policy on the Use of AI in Creating Visuals, Graphics, and Tables
As Düzce University Journal of Technical Sciences, we take an open approach to technological developments. We are aware of the potential of generative AI technologies in the processes of creating visuals, graphics, and tables, and we believe that these tools can add value to academic work. However, in order to protect scientific integrity and ethical principles, we adopt the following basic principles and policies regarding the use of these technologies:

1. Transparency and Disclosure:

If AI tools have been used to create visuals, graphics, and tables, this must be clearly stated in the caption below the relevant visual, along with the name and version of the AI tool used and the purpose for which it was used.

2. Scientific Accuracy and Responsibility:

The scientific validity and appropriateness of visuals produced using AI are the sole responsibility of the authors.
All published visual materials must fully reflect the authors' own research results and scientific understanding.
Permitted Areas of Use

1. Conceptual Diagrams and Explanatory Visuals:

Generative AI can be used to visualise theoretical structures, conceptual models, or processes.
Visuals created in this way should accurately reflect the author's own interpretations and explanations.

2. Data Visualisation:

Authors are encouraged to use AI tools to present their research data visually.
These tools can be used to enhance the visual quality of graphs, diagrams, and tables.

3. Illustrations and Representative Visuals:

AI can be used to create representative visuals or illustrations to simplify and explain complex concepts.
These visuals should help readers easily understand the concepts and should not mislead them.