Introduction

The Editorial Board of the journal "Reliability: Theory & Applications" (hereinafter – the Journal) recognizes the increasing role and potential of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies in scientific research and the scholarly publishing process. This policy establishes clear ethical principles and guidelines for the use of GenAI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Midjourney, Copilot, and similar) by authors, reviewers, and editors to uphold the integrity, transparency, and credibility of the Journal's published content.

1. Policy for Authors

Authors who use GenAI tools in the preparation of their manuscripts for submission to the Journal must adhere to the following rules:

1.1. Prohibition on Authorship: GenAI tools must not be listed as an author or co-author. Authorship entails responsibility for the intellectual content, the ability to approve the final version of the manuscript, and accountability for all aspects of the work, which AI systems cannot assume.

1.2. Author Responsibility: Authors bear full and sole responsibility for the entire content of the submitted manuscript, including any portions generated, edited, or refined with the assistance of GenAI. This responsibility encompasses verifying the work for factual accuracy, absence of plagiarism, validity of data, and freedom from defamatory statements or copyright infringement.

1.3. Mandatory Disclosure: Authors must explicitly disclose the use of GenAI in a dedicated section within the manuscript (e.g., in the "Acknowledgments," "Methods," or a separately titled "Use of Generative AI" section). The disclosure must include:

• The name and version of the AI tool/model used (e.g., GPT-4, Claude 3).

• The name of the tool's provider (e.g., OpenAI, Anthropic).

• A description of how the tool was applied (e.g., for literature review assistance, text drafting, language polishing, code generation, data analysis, image creation).

• The date(s) on which the tool was used.
  
  Example disclosure statement: "During the preparation of this work, the author(s) utilized [Name of AI tool] by [Provider] for [specific purpose, e.g., improving language and readability]. Following the use of this tool, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as necessary and take full responsibility for the entire publication's content."

1.4. Confidentiality: Authors are strictly prohibited from entering confidential, unpublished research data, or substantial portions of their manuscript into publicly available GenAI tools. Such actions may compromise confidentiality and violate intellectual property rights. If GenAI must be used for sensitive information, authors should employ secured, corporate versions with robust privacy guarantees or avoid its use altogether.

2. Policy for Reviewers

Peer reviewers are essential in maintaining the scientific quality and trustworthiness of the Journal's publications.

2.1. Confidentiality: Reviewers are strictly forbidden from uploading the assigned manuscript or any significant excerpts from it into public GenAI platforms to assist in their review. Manuscripts are confidential documents, and their disclosure to third-party AI services constitutes a breach of confidentiality.

2.2. Intellectual Contribution: The peer review report must be the original intellectual product of the reviewer, reflecting their own critical assessment and expert judgment. Generating the entirety or the substantive reasoning of a review using GenAI is prohibited.

2.3. Permissible Use: Reviewers may use GenAI tools for limited, auxiliary tasks related to their own review text, such as checking grammar, spelling, or phrasing, provided that no confidential information from the manuscript is entered into the AI system.

3. Policy for the Editorial Board

3.1. Editorial Processing: Editors and editorial staff may employ GenAI tools to assist in administrative and editorial tasks, such as improving the clarity of correspondence, checking grammar in non-confidential documents, or initial manuscript categorization. However, all final editorial decisions, including acceptance, revision, or rejection, must be made by human editors based on expert peer review.

3.2. Screening for Misconduct: The Editorial Board reserves the right to use specialized software and tools to screen submitted manuscripts for plagiarism, image manipulation, and potential undisclosed AI-generated content.

Policy Violations

Failure to comply with this policy will be treated as a serious breach of publication ethics. Manuscripts found to have improper or undisclosed use of GenAI will be subject to immediate rejection. If a violation is identified after publication, it may result in the retraction of the article and notification of the authors' affiliated institution(s).

This policy is subject to periodic review and revision in response to the rapid evolution of AI technologies and the corresponding regulatory environment.
 

 

---------------------------

Effective Date: 02/11/2025
Policy Version: 1.0