AI and Generative AI Policy

Emergent Life Sciences Research (ELSR) recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI, large language models, and other AI-assisted technologies are increasingly used in scientific research and scholarly communication.

ELSR supports the responsible, transparent, and accountable use of AI-assisted tools where such use does not compromise scientific integrity, originality, confidentiality, authorship responsibility, or the reliability of the published scientific record.

AI tools may assist researchers during manuscript preparation or research-related activities. However, AI systems cannot assume responsibility for scientific work.

Authors, reviewers, and Editors remain personally and professionally responsible for their use of AI-assisted technologies.

 

1. Scope of This Policy

This policy applies to the use of artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies in activities related to manuscripts submitted to ELSR.

Such technologies may include:

  • Generative AI systems.
  • Large language models.
  • AI-assisted writing tools.
  • AI-based language-editing tools.
  • AI-assisted translation systems.
  • AI image-generation or image-modification tools.
  • AI-assisted data analysis systems.
  • AI-supported coding tools.
  • Automated literature or information-synthesis tools.
  • Other systems that generate, transform, summarize, analyze, or modify scholarly content.

The application of this policy depends on the nature and extent of the AI assistance provided.

 

2. General Principle

AI-assisted tools may be used responsibly to support scientific work and manuscript preparation.

However, the use of AI does not transfer responsibility from the authors to the AI system or its provider.

Authors remain fully responsible for:

  • The accuracy of the manuscript.
  • The originality of the submitted work.
  • The integrity of the research.
  • The reliability of data and analyses.
  • The accuracy of citations and references.
  • The scientific interpretation of findings.
  • Compliance with ethical and legal requirements.
  • Appropriate disclosure of AI use.
  • All content submitted to ELSR.

Authors should critically review and verify AI-assisted content before manuscript submission.

 

3. AI Tools and Authorship

Artificial intelligence systems, generative AI tools, large language models, chatbots, and other automated technologies must not be listed as authors or co-authors.

AI systems cannot:

  • Approve the final manuscript.
  • Accept responsibility for the research.
  • Be accountable for the accuracy or integrity of the work.
  • Respond independently to scientific or ethical concerns.
  • Declare conflicts of interest.
  • Agree to publication terms.
  • Enter into copyright or licensing agreements.

Only individuals who meet the requirements of the ELSR Authorship Policy may be listed as authors.

The use of an AI tool does not constitute authorship.

 

4. Permitted Uses of AI in Manuscript Preparation

Authors may use AI-assisted tools for appropriate supporting activities.

Examples may include:

  • Grammar improvement.
  • Language editing.
  • Spelling correction.
  • Improvement of sentence clarity.
  • Manuscript organization.
  • Formatting assistance.
  • Translation assistance.
  • Development of non-scientific structural outlines.
  • Assistance with improving readability.
  • Technical assistance with coding or data-processing workflows.

Such use is acceptable only when the authors carefully review, verify, and take responsibility for the resulting content.

AI assistance should not replace the authors' scientific reasoning, interpretation, or professional judgment.

 

5. AI-Assisted Writing

Authors may use AI-assisted tools to support the preparation or revision of manuscript text.

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted text:

  • Is scientifically accurate.
  • Reflects the authors' intended meaning.
  • Does not contain fabricated information.
  • Does not misrepresent research findings.
  • Does not contain inappropriate text reuse or plagiarism.
  • Uses accurate citations.
  • Does not introduce unsupported conclusions.
  • Complies with ELSR publication policies.

Authors should not assume that AI-generated text is factually correct.

All AI-assisted manuscript content should be critically evaluated before submission.

 

6. Scientific Reasoning and Interpretation

AI tools must not replace the scientific responsibility of the authors.

The authors should independently evaluate:

  • Research questions.
  • Experimental design.
  • Methodological decisions.
  • Data interpretation.
  • Statistical conclusions.
  • Scientific arguments.
  • Biological or technical significance.
  • Limitations of the study.
  • Conclusions and recommendations.

AI-generated interpretations should not be accepted without critical scientific evaluation by the authors.

The final scientific conclusions of a manuscript must represent the judgment and responsibility of the human authors.

 

7. AI-Assisted Literature Searches and Summaries

AI-assisted tools may be used to support literature discovery, organization, or preliminary synthesis.

Authors should independently verify the original scholarly sources.

Authors must not rely solely on an AI-generated literature summary when preparing a scientific manuscript.

Where scientific claims are based on published research, authors should consult and cite the relevant original or appropriate scholarly source.

AI-generated summaries may contain:

  • Incorrect interpretations.
  • Incomplete information.
  • Outdated information.
  • Fabricated references.
  • Incorrect author names.
  • Incorrect article titles.
  • Incorrect DOI information.

Authors are responsible for verifying all literature-related information included in their manuscript.

 

8. AI-Generated or AI-Suggested References

Authors must verify every reference included in a manuscript.

AI-generated, AI-suggested, or automatically generated references should not be included without confirmation that the cited source exists and accurately supports the relevant scientific statement.

Authors should verify, where applicable:

  • Author names.
  • Publication year.
  • Article title.
  • Journal title.
  • Volume and issue information.
  • Page range or article number.
  • DOI.
  • Scientific relevance of the source.

Fabricated or unverifiable references are not acceptable.

Generative AI tools should not be cited as primary scholarly references for scientific claims.

Reference requirements are described in the ELSR Guide for Authors and the official ELSR Reference Style.

 

9. AI-Assisted Data Analysis

AI-assisted or machine-learning tools may be used in data analysis when scientifically appropriate.

Authors should ensure that the analytical approach is valid, transparent, and sufficiently described.

Where AI or machine-learning methods form a substantive part of the research methodology, authors should report relevant information such as:

  • The tool, model, or system used.
  • The version, where relevant and available.
  • The purpose of the analysis.
  • Relevant analytical procedures.
  • Important parameters or settings.
  • Validation procedures.
  • Human oversight.
  • Limitations of the approach.

The level of reporting should be sufficient to allow readers and reviewers to understand the role of the AI-assisted method in the research.

AI-assisted analysis does not remove the authors' responsibility for the validity and interpretation of the results.

 

10. AI-Assisted Coding and Computational Work

AI-assisted coding tools may be used to support programming, script development, debugging, or computational workflows.

Authors are responsible for reviewing and validating AI-assisted code before using it in scientific analysis.

Authors should ensure that:

  • The code performs the intended analysis.
  • Computational outputs are verified.
  • Errors introduced by AI-assisted coding are identified and corrected.
  • The analytical workflow is scientifically appropriate.
  • Relevant software and computational methods are reported.

Where AI-assisted code materially affects the research results, authors should provide appropriate methodological transparency.

 

11. AI-Generated Data

Authors must not present fabricated AI-generated data as experimentally, observationally, or computationally obtained research data.

Synthetic or simulated data may be used when scientifically justified.

Where synthetic, simulated, or AI-generated data are used as part of the research methodology, the manuscript should clearly identify:

  • The nature of the data.
  • How the data were generated.
  • Why the data were used.
  • How the data were evaluated or validated.

Synthetic data must not be presented in a manner that could reasonably lead readers to believe that the data were obtained from actual experiments or observations.

 

12. AI-Generated or AI-Modified Images

AI-generated or AI-modified images require particular care in scientific publishing.

Authors must not use AI tools to create, alter, remove, add, or obscure scientific features in research images in a manner that misrepresents the original observations.

This applies to scientific images, including, where relevant:

  • Microscopy images.
  • Gel images.
  • Blots.
  • Histological images.
  • Field or experimental photographs.
  • Diagnostic images.
  • Instrument-generated images.
  • Other images used as scientific evidence.

AI-based enhancement, reconstruction, or modification should not change the scientific meaning of the original image.

Where AI-based image processing forms part of the scientific methodology, the procedure should be clearly described and scientifically justified.

The Editorial Office may request original, unprocessed image files.

Image integrity concerns are handled under the ELSR Publication Ethics Policy.

 

13. Illustrative and Graphical AI-Generated Content

AI-generated graphical or illustrative content that does not represent primary scientific evidence may be considered when its use is transparent and does not mislead readers.

Examples may include:

  • Conceptual illustrations.
  • Graphical representations.
  • Non-data-based visual elements.

Authors should disclose substantial use of generative AI in the creation of such material.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that AI-generated visual content:

  • Is scientifically appropriate.
  • Does not misrepresent research findings.
  • Does not violate copyright or other rights.
  • Is not presented as original experimental evidence.
  • Is appropriately identified where necessary.

ELSR may request clarification regarding the origin or preparation of visual material.

 

14. AI and Plagiarism

The use of an AI tool does not exempt authors from plagiarism or originality requirements.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content does not:

  • Reproduce unattributed text.
  • Inappropriately imitate published material.
  • Present another person's ideas as original.
  • Reuse copyrighted material without appropriate permission.
  • Introduce fabricated quotations or sources.

AI-assisted content may be evaluated under the ELSR Plagiarism Policy.

Authors should critically review AI-generated text and verify the originality and attribution of submitted content.

 

15. AI Disclosure Requirement

Authors should disclose the use of AI-assisted tools when such tools have been used in the preparation of manuscript content or have made a substantive contribution to the research or manuscript.

The disclosure should identify the nature of the assistance provided.

The disclosure should be included in an AI Disclosure Statement in the manuscript.

An appropriate statement may identify:

  • The type or name of the AI-assisted tool, where relevant.
  • The purpose for which the tool was used.
  • The nature of the assistance provided.
  • Confirmation of author review and responsibility.

The purpose of disclosure is transparency.

Disclosure of responsible AI use does not, by itself, negatively affect editorial evaluation.

 

16. Example AI Disclosure Statements

Authors may adapt the following statements to reflect their actual use of AI-assisted tools:

Language Editing

“The authors used an AI-assisted language editing tool to improve grammar and readability. All scientific content was reviewed and verified by the authors.”

Manuscript Organization

“The authors used an AI-assisted tool to support manuscript organization and improve textual clarity. The authors reviewed and approved all content and remain fully responsible for the manuscript.”

Coding Assistance

“An AI-assisted coding tool was used to support script development and debugging. All code and analytical outputs were reviewed and validated by the authors.”

AI-Assisted Analysis

“AI-assisted computational methods were used as described in the Materials and Methods section. The analytical procedures and outputs were evaluated and interpreted by the authors.”

Authors should not use a generic disclosure statement when it does not accurately describe the AI assistance provided.

 

17. Minor Automated Tools and Disclosure

Routine use of basic automated functions does not normally require an AI Disclosure Statement.

Examples may include:

  • Standard spelling checkers.
  • Basic grammar correction functions.
  • Reference-management software.
  • Standard formatting tools.
  • Conventional statistical software.
  • Standard database search functions.

However, where a tool generates, substantially rewrites, interprets, summarizes, or analyses scholarly content, disclosure may be appropriate.

When uncertain, authors are encouraged to provide transparent disclosure or contact the Editorial Office.

 

18. Responsibility for AI-Assisted Content

Authors remain fully responsible for all AI-assisted content submitted to ELSR.

This responsibility includes:

  • Accuracy.
  • Originality.
  • Scientific validity.
  • Ethical compliance.
  • Citation accuracy.
  • Data integrity.
  • Image integrity.
  • Copyright compliance.
  • Confidentiality.
  • Appropriate disclosure.

Statements such as “the AI generated the error” or “the AI provided the reference” do not remove author responsibility.

Authors should use AI-assisted tools with appropriate scientific oversight.

 

19. Confidential and Sensitive Information

Authors should exercise caution before uploading confidential, restricted, unpublished, personal, or sensitive information to external AI systems.

Authors should consider the terms, data-retention practices, privacy conditions, and security arrangements of the AI system being used.

Authors should not upload information to an external AI system when doing so would violate:

  • Participant confidentiality.
  • Informed consent requirements.
  • Data protection obligations.
  • Institutional requirements.
  • Research agreements.
  • Intellectual property restrictions.
  • Confidentiality agreements.

The responsibility for protecting research information remains with the authors.

 

20. Use of AI by Reviewers

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts submitted to ELSR.

Reviewers should not upload unpublished manuscripts, manuscript sections, figures, tables, supplementary files, or confidential editorial information to publicly accessible generative AI systems or other external AI tools when confidentiality, data retention, or secondary use of the content cannot be adequately controlled.

AI tools must not replace the reviewer's independent scientific assessment.

Reviewers remain fully responsible for:

  • The scientific evaluation of the manuscript.
  • The accuracy of reviewer comments.
  • The recommendation provided to the Editor.
  • Compliance with confidentiality requirements.

If AI-assisted use creates a potential confidentiality or integrity concern, the reviewer should not use the tool.

 

21. AI-Generated Peer Review Reports

Reviewers should not delegate the substantive scientific evaluation of a manuscript to an AI system.

Reviewer reports should reflect the reviewer's own scientific assessment and professional judgment.

AI-assisted tools should not be used to generate a review report that the reviewer has not independently evaluated and verified.

The reviewer remains responsible for every comment submitted to the journal.

ELSR may discontinue the use of a reviewer where inappropriate AI use compromises confidentiality, scientific evaluation, or the integrity of the peer-review process.

 

22. Use of AI by Editors and Editorial Office Staff

Editors and Editorial Office staff must protect manuscript confidentiality.

Unpublished manuscripts or confidential editorial information should not be uploaded to publicly accessible AI systems when confidentiality, data retention, or secondary use cannot be adequately controlled.

AI-assisted tools may support appropriate administrative or editorial activities where confidentiality and data protection requirements are maintained.

AI tools must not make autonomous final editorial decisions regarding manuscript acceptance or rejection.

The final editorial decision must remain under the responsibility of the appropriate human Editor.

 

23. AI Detection Tools

ELSR may use available tools or other editorial methods to examine concerns relating to AI-assisted content.

However, the output of an AI-detection tool should not normally be treated as conclusive evidence of inappropriate AI use by itself.

Editorial assessment may consider:

  • The manuscript content.
  • Author disclosures.
  • Supporting documentation.
  • Scientific inconsistencies.
  • Reference accuracy.
  • Data or image concerns.
  • Explanations provided by the authors.
  • Other relevant information.

Editorial decisions should be based on the overall available evidence and context.

 

24. Undisclosed or Inappropriate AI Use

Potential concerns may include:

  • Failure to disclose substantive AI assistance.
  • Fabricated references generated through AI.
  • Submission of scientifically inaccurate AI-generated content.
  • AI-generated data presented as genuine experimental data.
  • Inappropriate AI manipulation of scientific images.
  • Use of AI to fabricate or misrepresent research findings.
  • AI-assisted plagiarism or inappropriate text reuse.
  • Breach of manuscript confidentiality through external AI systems.
  • Delegation of substantive peer review to an AI system.
  • Misrepresentation of the role of AI in the research.

The seriousness of a concern will depend on its nature, extent, and effect on the integrity of the work.

 

25. Editorial Assessment of AI-Related Concerns

When a potential AI-related concern is identified, the Editorial Office may:

  • Request clarification from the authors.
  • Request an AI Disclosure Statement.
  • Request correction or revision of the manuscript.
  • Request original data or images.
  • Request analytical or methodological information.
  • Request verification of references.
  • Suspend editorial evaluation while the concern is examined.

ELSR will seek to assess AI-related concerns fairly and in context.

The use of AI alone does not establish publication misconduct.

The central considerations are transparency, scientific reliability, author responsibility, confidentiality, and the integrity of the scientific record.

26. Editorial Actions

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, ELSR may:

  • Request disclosure of AI use.
  • Request manuscript revision.
  • Request correction of inaccurate content.
  • Request removal or replacement of inappropriate material.
  • Reject the manuscript.
  • Suspend editorial evaluation.
  • Refer serious concerns to an appropriate institution or authority.
  • Publish a correction.
  • Publish an Expression of Concern.
  • Retract a published article.

Post-publication actions will be handled in accordance with the ELSR Corrections & Retractions Policy.

 

27. Appeals Concerning AI-Related Decisions

Authors may appeal an editorial decision relating to AI use when they believe that a significant factual, scientific, or procedural issue affected the decision.

The appeal should clearly explain the basis of the disagreement and provide relevant supporting information.

Appeals are handled according to the ELSR Appeals & Complaints Policy.

Submission of an appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original editorial decision.

 

28. Development of AI Technologies

ELSR recognizes that artificial intelligence technologies and scholarly publishing practices continue to develop.

The journal may revise this policy when necessary to address:

  • New AI technologies.
  • Changes in research practices.
  • Developments in scholarly publishing.
  • Emerging ethical or confidentiality concerns.
  • New standards for transparency and research integrity.

Authors, reviewers, and Editors are expected to follow the version of the policy applicable during the relevant editorial or publication process.

 

29. AI and Generative AI Policy Oversight

The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Office are responsible for overseeing the implementation of this AI and Generative AI Policy.

ELSR may request additional information when the role of AI in a submitted or published work requires clarification.

All authors, reviewers, Editors, and other participants in the publication process are expected to use AI-assisted technologies responsibly, transparently, and with appropriate human oversight.