Responsible AI Use Policy

1. Authors

General approach. RAE-EAR does not reject or penalize a manuscript merely because artificial intelligence tools were used in its preparation. The evaluation concerns the quality, originality and honesty of the work, not the instrument used to produce it.

Disclosure. Any use of artificial intelligence tools in preparing the manuscript beyond spelling, grammar or style correction must be briefly disclosed, stating the tool used and its purpose. The disclosure does not in itself determine the outcome of the review.

Location of the disclosure. The disclosure is included in the title page, together with the authors’ other declarations. In the published version of the article, it appears in the footnote on the first page.

Prohibited uses. The following constitute serious misconduct, resulting in the rejection of the manuscript or, if it has already been published, its retraction:

  • attributing authorship, in whole or in part, to an AI system;
  • fabricating data, results or observations;
  • including references that do not exist or that do not support what is attributed to them in the text;
  • inserting hidden text or instructions in the manuscript intended to manipulate the editorial process.

Final responsibility. By signing the manuscript, each co-author confirms having read its full content and having personally verified, before submission, that every reference exists, corresponds to the cited work, supports what is attributed to it and has not been retracted. This verification cannot be delegated to any automated tool, nor is it reduced by their use.

2. Reviewers

Any use of artificial intelligence during the review must be disclosed to the editor in the confidential comments and limited to tools that guarantee that the manuscript will not be used to train AI models. The judgement on the contribution, methodology and relevance of the work rests with the reviewer.

3. Editors

Editors and editorial staff are subject to the same requirements of transparency and human oversight. Substantive decisions (acceptance, revision requests, rejection or retraction) are always made by people: verification tools provide technical evidence but do not make decisions.

4. Integrity checks

RAE-EAR reserves the right to use plagiarism detection or artificial intelligence tools to safeguard the integrity of manuscripts and of its published content.

5. Consequences

Breaches are graded according to their seriousness and to whether they are deliberate or negligent:

  • Minor (omission of a minor disclosure; boilerplate disclosures with no real information; references cited in the text with no entry in the reference list, or vice versa; DOIs with errors; citations of retracted works): resolved through a request for correction during the process, without affecting the decision.
  • Moderate (undisclosed but verifiable AI-generated sections): leads to major revisions or rejection, at the discretion of the handling editor.
  • Serious (attribution of authorship to an AI system, fabrication of data, references that do not exist or that do not support what is attributed to them, hidden text or instructions intended to manipulate the editorial process): the manuscript does not proceed to review or is rejected during the editorial process. If the breach is detected after publication, the Correction, Retraction, and Post-Publication Amendment Policy applies.

6. Effective date and review

This policy takes effect on its publication date and applies to manuscripts submitted from that date. The fabrication or falsification of data or references, plagiarism and impersonation of authorship may lead to the retraction of an article regardless of its publication date, in accordance with the Correction, Retraction, and Post-Publication Amendment Policy. The policy will be reviewed periodically in light of technological developments and international standards (COPE, ICMJE, WAME).