AI Usage Policy | GJETA

🤖 AI Usage Policy | Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA)

🎯 Purpose of the AI Usage Policy

The purpose of this AI Usage Policy is to provide clear guidance on the appropriate use of artificial intelligence throughout manuscript preparation, peer review, editorial assessment, and publication. The policy encourages responsible innovation while ensuring that AI technologies do not compromise academic integrity, publication ethics, intellectual property, or the reliability of the scholarly record.

This policy helps GJETA:

• promote transparent and responsible AI use;
• maintain originality and academic integrity;
• protect confidential research information;
• clarify disclosure expectations for AI-assisted content;
• support fair peer review and editorial independence;
• protect authors, reviewers, editors, and readers from inappropriate AI practices.

🌍 Scope of the AI Usage Policy

This policy applies to all individuals involved in the publication process of the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA), including:

• authors and co-authors;
• corresponding authors;
• peer reviewers;
• editors and editorial board members;
• editorial staff;
• guest editors where applicable.

The policy applies to artificial intelligence technologies used before submission, during peer review, throughout editorial processing, and after publication whenever AI-generated or AI-assisted content is relevant to the published work.

📘 Definition of Artificial Intelligence

For the purposes of this policy, artificial intelligence refers to computer systems capable of generating, analysing, transforming, summarising, interpreting, or assisting with text, images, computer code, data analysis, audio, video, software, or other forms of digital content using machine learning, large language models, generative AI, or related technologies.

Examples include AI-assisted writing tools, language editing systems, coding assistants, image-generation tools, data-analysis applications, automated translation services, and other intelligent software designed to support research or publication activities.

⚖️ Guiding Principles for Responsible AI Use

The use of artificial intelligence should always support, rather than replace, responsible scholarly judgement. Human researchers remain accountable for every aspect of the submitted manuscript regardless of whether AI tools were used during its preparation.

The guiding principles of this policy include:

• human responsibility for all published content;
• transparency regarding significant AI assistance;
• protection of confidential information;
• respect for intellectual property rights;
• maintenance of research integrity and originality;
• critical verification of AI-generated output;
• compliance with publication ethics.

✅ Acceptable Uses of Artificial Intelligence by Authors

GJETA recognizes that artificial intelligence may assist authors with appropriate research and publication tasks when used responsibly and under human supervision.

Examples of acceptable AI-assisted activities may include:

• improving grammar, spelling, punctuation, and language clarity;
• enhancing readability and sentence structure;
• assisting with manuscript formatting;
• translating text while preserving the original scientific meaning;
• supporting computer programming or software debugging;
• assisting with data visualisation under researcher supervision;
• generating outlines or organisational suggestions;
• assisting with literature searching where independently verified;
• supporting statistical programming or computational workflows under human validation.

All AI-assisted content should be carefully reviewed, corrected where necessary, and verified by the authors before submission.

👨‍🔬 Human Responsibility for AI-Assisted Content

Artificial intelligence cannot assume responsibility for published scholarly work. Regardless of the technologies used during manuscript preparation, every listed author remains fully accountable for:

• the originality of the manuscript;
• the accuracy of factual statements;
• the validity of scientific and technical conclusions;
• proper citation and attribution;
• ethical approval and regulatory compliance where applicable;
• the authenticity of data, figures, images, software, and research outputs;
• the final version submitted for publication.

Authors should critically evaluate every AI-generated suggestion before incorporating it into the manuscript. Human review is essential because AI systems may generate inaccurate information, unsupported conclusions, fabricated references, misleading technical explanations, or other unreliable content.

📝 AI Assistance Does Not Replace Scholarly Contribution

Artificial intelligence may assist with certain technical or editorial tasks, but it does not replace genuine scholarly contribution. The originality, research design, engineering methods, data interpretation, technical analysis, scientific reasoning, and conclusions presented in a manuscript should remain the intellectual work of the human authors.

Authors should not rely on AI systems to generate original research findings, fabricate experimental data, invent technical results, or produce unsupported scientific conclusions.

📄 Transparency in AI Use

Where AI tools have made a significant contribution to manuscript preparation, authors are encouraged to disclose the nature of the assistance in an appropriate section of the manuscript or during submission, depending on the journal's editorial requirements.

Appropriate disclosure promotes transparency while allowing editors and readers to understand how artificial intelligence contributed to the preparation of the manuscript. Routine grammar or spelling correction using standard software generally does not require detailed disclosure.

🔐 Protection of Confidential Information

Authors should exercise caution before entering unpublished manuscripts, confidential research data, reviewer comments, proprietary software, engineering designs, patent-related information, or personal information into external artificial intelligence systems.

Many AI services process information through remote servers or retain user inputs according to their own terms of service. Authors remain responsible for protecting confidential, proprietary, contractual, institutional, and personal information throughout manuscript preparation.

🚫 Unacceptable Uses of Artificial Intelligence

While artificial intelligence can support legitimate research and publication activities, certain uses are inconsistent with responsible scholarly publishing. The Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) does not permit the use of AI in ways that compromise originality, research integrity, publication ethics, transparency, or accountability.

Examples of unacceptable AI use include:

• fabricating, falsifying, or manipulating research data;
• generating false experimental results or technical findings;
• creating misleading statistical analyses or engineering calculations;
• inventing references, citations, datasets, or source material;
• misrepresenting AI-generated content as original human scholarship;
• using AI to conceal plagiarism or duplicate publication;
• submitting AI-generated manuscripts without adequate human review;
• using AI to bypass peer review, ethical requirements, or editorial standards.

📄 Artificial Intelligence and Originality

The originality of a manuscript should reflect the intellectual contribution of the human authors. AI tools may assist with drafting, editing, summarising, or language refinement, but they should not replace independent scientific reasoning, technical interpretation, or scholarly judgement.

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content:

• accurately represents the research performed;
• contains original scholarly interpretation;
• does not reproduce copyrighted material without permission;
• does not unintentionally duplicate previously published work;
• reflects the authors' own scientific conclusions.

📚 Artificial Intelligence and Plagiarism

The use of AI does not exempt authors from the journal's Plagiarism Policy. AI-generated text may unintentionally reproduce published material, closely paraphrase existing sources, or generate content that lacks proper attribution.

Authors should carefully verify that AI-assisted text:

• does not copy published material without attribution;
• includes accurate and appropriate citations;
• does not misrepresent another author's ideas as original work;
• complies with the journal's originality requirements.

Responsibility for plagiarism remains entirely with the human authors, regardless of the technology used to prepare the manuscript.

🖼️ AI-Generated Figures, Images and Visual Content

Artificial intelligence may assist in creating diagrams, graphical abstracts, illustrations, or image enhancements where appropriate. However, AI-generated visual material should never misrepresent research findings or create false scientific evidence.

Authors should ensure that:

• generated images accurately represent the intended purpose;
• image manipulation does not alter scientific conclusions;
• AI-generated figures are clearly distinguishable from genuine research data where necessary;
• copyright and licensing requirements are respected;
• all visual content is reviewed carefully before submission.

💻 AI-Assisted Programming, Software and Code

Artificial intelligence tools may assist authors in developing software, debugging programs, generating programming suggestions, or improving computational workflows. However, authors remain fully responsible for verifying the correctness, security, functionality, reproducibility, and originality of all code included in the manuscript.

AI-generated source code should be reviewed thoroughly before use because automated systems may introduce logical errors, security vulnerabilities, unsupported functions, or inaccurate implementations.

📖 AI-Generated References and Citations

Some AI systems may generate inaccurate, incomplete, fabricated, or non-existent references. Authors should independently verify every citation before manuscript submission.

Authors should confirm that:

• every cited publication actually exists;
• author names, journal titles, volume numbers, page numbers, and publication years are accurate;
• DOIs and other identifiers are correct where applicable;
• references genuinely support the statements made in the manuscript.

Submission of fabricated or misleading references may result in editorial action under the journal's publication ethics policies.

📢 Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence Use

Where artificial intelligence has contributed substantially to manuscript preparation, authors should disclose the nature of the assistance in accordance with the journal's editorial requirements.

The disclosure may include information such as:

• the general purpose of AI assistance;
• the stage of manuscript preparation where AI was used;
• whether AI supported language editing, programming, data visualisation, or another task;
• confirmation that all AI-assisted output was reviewed and verified by the authors.

Routine spelling or grammar correction using standard editing software generally does not require detailed disclosure.

👥 Artificial Intelligence Cannot Be Listed as an Author

Artificial intelligence systems cannot satisfy the journal's authorship requirements because they cannot accept responsibility for the integrity, originality, ethical compliance, or scientific validity of published research.

AI applications cannot:

• approve the submitted manuscript;
• accept responsibility for the published work;
• respond to reviewer comments;
• declare conflicts of interest;
• provide informed consent or ethical accountability.

Accordingly, AI systems must not be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to GJETA.

🔐 Artificial Intelligence and Confidential Information

Authors should avoid uploading confidential or sensitive material into external AI systems unless they are confident that doing so complies with institutional policies, contractual obligations, applicable laws, and the provider's privacy and security terms.

Examples of confidential material include:

• unpublished manuscripts;
• peer review reports;
• patient or participant information;
• proprietary engineering designs;
• commercial research data;
• patent-related information;
• confidential industrial documentation;
• software source code that is not intended for public release.

Authors remain responsible for protecting confidential information throughout manuscript preparation and submission.

🔬 Artificial Intelligence and Research Data

Artificial intelligence may assist with data analysis, modelling, classification, prediction, visualisation, or statistical workflows. However, AI systems should not generate, modify, fabricate, or selectively manipulate research data in ways that misrepresent the actual observations or experimental findings.

Researchers should retain sufficient documentation to explain how AI tools contributed to the analysis whenever this information is relevant to understanding or reproducing the research.

⚖️ Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property

Authors should ensure that AI-assisted content complies with copyright law, licensing requirements, contractual obligations, and intellectual property rights. Use of AI does not remove the obligation to obtain permissions, provide appropriate attribution, or respect proprietary information.

Any uncertainty regarding ownership or permitted use of AI-generated content should be resolved before manuscript submission.

👨‍⚖️ Use of Artificial Intelligence During Peer Review

Peer reviewers appointed by the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and exercise independent scholarly judgement throughout the review process. Reviewers should not upload unpublished manuscripts, figures, datasets, reviewer comments, author details, source code, or technical information into external artificial intelligence systems that may retain, process, reuse, or disclose the content.

Artificial intelligence may not replace the reviewer’s subject expertise, critical analysis, or professional responsibility. A review report should represent the reviewer’s own evaluation of the manuscript.

Reviewers remain responsible for:

• assessing originality, methodology, technical accuracy, and scholarly significance;
• verifying that reviewer comments are accurate and relevant;
• identifying ethical or research-integrity concerns;
• maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscript;
• disclosing any relevant conflict of interest;
• submitting an independent and constructive review report.

🚫 Unacceptable AI Use by Reviewers

Reviewers must not use artificial intelligence in ways that compromise confidentiality, independent judgement, or the integrity of peer review.

Unacceptable practices include:

• uploading a confidential manuscript to a public or external AI system;
• submitting an AI-generated review without meaningful human evaluation;
• using AI to fabricate technical concerns, citations, or recommendations;
• allowing AI output to determine acceptance or rejection;
• sharing reviewer identities, editorial correspondence, or unpublished findings with an AI service;
• using manuscript information to support personal research, commercial activity, or professional competition.

Any suspected misuse of AI during peer review may result in cancellation of the review, removal of the reviewer, reassessment of the manuscript, or further action under the journal’s publication ethics procedures.

👨‍💼 Use of Artificial Intelligence by Editors

Editors may use approved digital tools to support administrative, technical, or workflow-related activities, but artificial intelligence must not replace editorial independence or scholarly judgement.

Editors remain responsible for:

• initial manuscript screening;
• selection of qualified reviewers;
• evaluation of reviewer reports;
• management of ethical concerns;
• communication with authors;
• final acceptance, revision, or rejection decisions.

Editorial decisions must not be based solely on automated scoring, AI-generated summaries, predictive systems, or machine-generated recommendations.

🔒 Confidentiality Obligations for Editors

Editors and editorial staff should not enter confidential manuscript content into external AI systems unless the technology has been formally approved for secure editorial use and complies with relevant privacy, data-protection, contractual, and institutional requirements.

Confidential information may include:

• submitted manuscripts and supplementary files;
• author identities and contact information;
• reviewer reports and reviewer identities;
• editorial decisions and internal correspondence;
• unpublished data, methods, algorithms, software, or engineering designs;
• ethical complaints and investigation records.

🧠 AI Hallucinations and Factual Verification

Artificial intelligence systems may generate false, misleading, incomplete, outdated, or unsupported information. They may also produce fabricated references, incorrect equations, inaccurate technical explanations, or conclusions that are not supported by evidence.

Authors, reviewers, and editors should independently verify:

• technical claims and factual statements;
• mathematical equations and calculations;
• statistical outputs and interpretations;
• software functions and programming code;
• references, DOIs, and bibliographic details;
• legal, regulatory, or standards-related information;
• scientific conclusions generated or suggested by AI.

AI output should never be treated as an authoritative source without independent verification.

📊 AI-Assisted Data Analysis and Reproducibility

When artificial intelligence plays a substantial role in data analysis, modelling, classification, prediction, simulation, or decision support, authors should describe the relevant methods clearly enough for readers and reviewers to understand how the results were produced.

Where applicable, the manuscript should explain:

• the AI model, software, or computational tool used;
• the purpose of the AI-assisted analysis;
• the input data and preprocessing steps;
• the validation or verification procedures;
• the limitations, assumptions, and potential sources of bias;
• the extent of human oversight and interpretation.

Sufficient documentation should be retained to support reproducibility and respond to editorial questions.

⚖️ Bias, Fairness and Responsible Interpretation

AI systems may reflect limitations or biases in their training data, model design, software configuration, or user instructions. Authors should assess whether AI-assisted methods could introduce systematic bias, discrimination, technical distortion, or unreliable conclusions.

Researchers should avoid presenting AI-generated predictions or classifications as universally valid when the data, model, or validation process does not support such claims.

Relevant limitations should be discussed transparently, particularly when AI-assisted research may influence engineering safety, infrastructure, healthcare technology, public systems, education, employment, or other socially significant applications.

🛡️ Security, Safety and High-Risk Applications

Authors should apply appropriate caution when research involves AI systems connected to critical infrastructure, cybersecurity, autonomous systems, industrial control, surveillance, defence, medical technology, transportation, or other high-risk applications.

Manuscripts should not conceal significant safety limitations, security vulnerabilities, harmful failure modes, or foreseeable risks relevant to the reported technology.

Where appropriate, authors should explain safeguards, testing procedures, limitations, and responsible-use considerations.

🔍 Investigation of Suspected AI Misuse

Concerns regarding inappropriate AI use may be raised by editors, reviewers, readers, institutions, authors, or other stakeholders. Reports should identify the manuscript or article and provide relevant supporting information where possible.

When a credible concern is identified, GJETA may:

• request an explanation from the authors, reviewers, or editors;
• ask for original data, drafts, prompts, code, images, or analytical records where relevant;
• compare AI-assisted content with cited or published sources;
• seek independent technical or ethical evaluation;
• contact the authors’ institution, funder, or research-integrity office where necessary;
• assess whether the AI use affected originality, reliability, confidentiality, authorship, or publication ethics.

The journal will evaluate each case according to the evidence, seriousness, context, and effect on the integrity of the manuscript or published article.

📝 Author Cooperation During an AI-Related Inquiry

Authors may be asked to explain how artificial intelligence was used during research, analysis, writing, coding, image preparation, or manuscript revision.

They may also be asked to provide:

• original research data;
• earlier manuscript drafts;
• software or code documentation;
• image source files;
• details of AI-assisted workflows;
• updated disclosure statements;
• evidence supporting the accuracy of the reported findings.

Failure to cooperate with a reasonable editorial inquiry may influence the journal’s decision.

✏️ Corrections Related to AI Use

A correction may be appropriate when incomplete disclosure, inaccurate wording, citation errors, or limited AI-assisted problems are identified after publication but the main findings remain reliable.

A correction may address:

• omitted AI-use disclosures;
• incorrect references generated during AI-assisted drafting;
• mislabelled AI-generated illustrations;
• minor errors in AI-assisted analysis;
• incomplete methodological descriptions;
• other correctable issues that do not invalidate the research.

⚠️ Expressions of Concern

The journal may publish an expression of concern when serious questions about AI use exist but the available evidence remains incomplete, disputed, or subject to institutional investigation.

An expression of concern informs readers that the article is under review and may later be followed by a correction, retraction, or other editorial update.

⛔ Retraction for Serious AI Misuse

Retraction may be considered when inappropriate AI use makes a published article unreliable or involves serious publication misconduct.

Examples may include:

• fabricated data, results, references, or technical evidence;
• AI-generated content presented as authentic experimental research;
• substantial plagiarism concealed through AI-assisted rewriting;
• manipulated images or figures that misrepresent findings;
• fraudulent authorship or contributor declarations;
• serious breaches of confidentiality;
• unsupported conclusions that materially affect the reliability of the article.

Retraction decisions will be based on the seriousness of the concern and the effect on the integrity of the published record.

📢 Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, editors, or readers may submit a complaint regarding the journal’s handling of AI-related concerns. Complaints should explain the issue clearly and include supporting evidence where available.

An appeal may be considered when an affected party believes that:

• the AI use was misunderstood;
• important technical evidence was overlooked;
• the editorial response was disproportionate;
• a procedural error affected the outcome;
• the manuscript was evaluated using unreliable automated conclusions.

Where appropriate, an appeal may be reviewed independently by an editor or expert who was not involved in the original decision.

🛠️ Enforcement of the AI Usage Policy

The editorial response to inappropriate AI use depends on the seriousness of the issue, the stage of publication, the level of disclosure, the effect on research reliability, and the cooperation of the parties involved.

Possible actions may include:

• requesting clarification or disclosure;
• requiring manuscript revision;
• requesting verification of references, data, images, or code;
• reassigning a reviewer or editor;
• rejecting or withdrawing a manuscript;
• issuing a correction or expression of concern;
• retracting a published article;
• contacting an institution, funder, or research-integrity authority;
• restricting future submission, reviewing, or editorial participation in serious or repeated cases.

Editorial action is intended to protect scholarly integrity, confidentiality, transparency, and the reliability of the published record.

🌟 Why the AI Usage Policy Matters

A clear AI Usage Policy helps authors, reviewers, editors, institutions, and readers understand how artificial intelligence may be used responsibly throughout research and scholarly publishing. It supports technological innovation while ensuring that originality, confidentiality, academic integrity, intellectual property, and human accountability remain protected.

For the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA), responsible AI use is especially important because engineering and technology research increasingly involves machine learning, generative AI, automated data analysis, coding assistants, computer vision, simulation systems, intelligent software, and AI-supported technical writing.

The AI Usage Policy helps GJETA:

• promote transparent and responsible use of artificial intelligence;
• ensure that human authors remain accountable for published content;
• prevent fabricated data, references, images, code, and research findings;
• protect unpublished manuscripts and confidential information;
• maintain originality and proper scholarly attribution;
• support independent peer review and editorial decision-making;
• encourage verification of AI-assisted technical and scientific content;
• protect the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record.

🔗 Related GJETA Editorial and Publishing Policies

Authors, reviewers, editors, and readers are encouraged to review the following policies of the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances for a complete understanding of the journal’s requirements for artificial intelligence, publication ethics, originality, confidentiality, authorship, and research integrity.

🚀 Publish Responsible AI and Technology Research with GJETA

❓ Frequently Asked Questions About the AI Usage Policy

1. What is the AI Usage Policy of GJETA?

The AI Usage Policy of the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) explains how authors, reviewers, and editors may use artificial intelligence responsibly while protecting originality, confidentiality, research integrity, intellectual property, and human accountability.

2. What uses of artificial intelligence are permitted under the AI Usage Policy?

The AI Usage Policy allows authors submitting to the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) to use AI responsibly for language improvement, formatting, coding assistance, data visualisation, translation, and related supportive activities when all outputs are independently reviewed and verified.

3. Does the AI Usage Policy allow artificial intelligence to be listed as an author?

No. The AI Usage Policy of the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) does not permit artificial intelligence systems to be listed as authors because they cannot approve a manuscript, disclose conflicts, or accept responsibility for research integrity.

4. Does the AI Usage Policy require authors to disclose artificial intelligence use?

The AI Usage Policy requires authors submitting to the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) to disclose significant AI assistance where it materially contributed to manuscript preparation, analysis, programming, visualisation, or another scholarly task.

5. How does the AI Usage Policy address AI-generated references?

The AI Usage Policy of the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) requires authors to verify every reference independently because AI tools may generate inaccurate, incomplete, or fabricated citations and bibliographic details.

6. How does the AI Usage Policy protect confidential manuscripts?

The AI Usage Policy requires reviewers, editors, and authors working with the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) to avoid uploading unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, proprietary data, source code, or sensitive information to external AI systems without appropriate authorization.

7. What happens when AI misuse is identified under the AI Usage Policy?

When inappropriate AI use is identified, the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) may request clarification, require revision, verify data or references, reject the manuscript, issue a correction, publish an expression of concern, retract an article, or take other appropriate editorial action.

8. Does the AI Usage Policy permit AI-assisted peer review?

The AI Usage Policy of the Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances (GJETA) does not allow artificial intelligence to replace independent reviewer judgement. Reviewers must also protect manuscript confidentiality and remain fully responsible for every comment and recommendation in their reports.