Using AI Policy
LUMEN respects and considers the novelty of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools and the impact these tools have in the informational world. We understand these tools keep on developing and evolving; therefore, we accept their application with responsibility in the overall scientific and editorial activities.
We issue these generative artificial intelligence (AI) policies in order to respect and support our authors, peer-reviewers, editors, readers, and collaborators. We aim at providing greater transparency and guidance to all our collaborators.
AI using Policy for Authors and the Scientific writing process
In scientific writing, the term "using AI and AI tools" refers solely to the manuscript writing process and does not include the use of AI tools for data analysis or interpretation during the research process.
When using AI and AI tools in the process of writing is acceptable in exploring ideas, improving readability and language, online search with large language models (LLM) enhanced search engines, literature categorizing.
While applying AI technologies in any of these actions, authors are fully accountable and responsible for their work. AI could be used with human supervision and control by paying great attention to reviewing and editing the results. AI can generate incorrect, incomplete, or biased output, even in an accurate-sounding manner.
Full disclosure of using AI. When submitting their manuscript for evaluation, authors should disclose in their work the use of AI and AI tools. To do so, they will insert a statement in their published work.
Prior publication authors will consent, on their own responsibility, that they have not used Generative Artificial Intelligence for generating the manuscript; even certain research applications may and were allowed to use Artificial Intelligence for purposes such as: exploring ideas; improving readability and language; online search with large language models (LLM)-enhanced search engines; literature categorizing; data collection and statistical analysis of collected data.
Authorship and AI. According to the Vancouver Convention regarding scientific authorship, AI-assisted technologies and AI should not be listed as authors or co-authors by authors, nor should they be cited as such. Only human beings can be credited with the responsibilities and tasks of the authorship. Each co-author is responsible for the ensurance of originality, validity, accuracy, and integrity of the content of the submitted manuscript. When using generative AI tools, each author is expected to use them responsibly and in accordance with the journal's editorial policies on authorship and principles of publishing ethics.
AI and AI tools for creation of figures, images, and artwork. We do not allow for authors using AI or AI-assisted tools in generating or adjusting images in manuscripts submitted for evaluation. When referring to adjustment, it may include improving, covering, or inserting details within an image or figure. Brightness, contrast, and color balance adjustments are permissible as long as they don't obscure or eliminate any information from the original.
We allow using AI or AI-assisted tools when these tools are part of the research design or research methods. When using AI tools as a part of research design or methods, the author must describe the AI tool in an easy-to-reproduce manner in the methodology chapter. In the methodology, authors should provide the following information: explaining how these tools were utilized in the image creation; exposing the name of the model or tool; the version and extension numbers; and the producer.
Regarding these, authors should make sure they credit the material attribution and follow the particular usage guidelines of the AI software. Our editors may ask writers to share versions of their photographs before AI changes or the composite raw images they used to create the final submitted versions for editorial review.
When creating artwork for a submitted work, we do not allow the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools.
AI using Policy for Reviewers and the journal peer-review process
The manuscript must be handled as a confidential document when a researcher is asked to assess another researcher's work. A submitted manuscript or any portion of it should not be uploaded by reviewers to a generative AI tool because doing so could infringe upon the authors' proprietary and confidentiality rights and, in cases where the work includes personally identifiable information, violate data privacy rights.
The peer review report is also subject to this confidentiality requirement because it can include private information about the authors or the work. Therefore, even if reviewers only want to make their peer review report more readable and linguistically correct, they should not send it to an AI tool.
The act of reviewing a scientific publication has obligations that are unique to human beings. Reviewers should avoid using AI or AI-assisted technologies to help with the scientific review of a paper because they are not capable of the critical thinking and original evaluation required for peer review, and there is a chance that the technology will produce biased, inaccurate, or incomplete conclusions about the manuscript. The review report's content is the reviewer's responsibility and accountability.
According to our AI author policy, authors may employ generative AI and AI-assisted technologies throughout the writing process prior to submission, but only if doing so enhances the paper's language and readability and is disclosed appropriately in the manuscript. Such disclosure is located at the bottom of the work, in a distinct part that comes before the references list, so the reviewers may find it.
AI using Policy for editors and the Journal editorial process
A manuscript that has been submitted needs to be handled with confidentiality. A submitted manuscript or any portion of it should not be uploaded by editors to a generative AI tool because doing so could infringe upon the authors' proprietary and confidentiality rights and, in cases where the paper includes personally identifiable information, violate data privacy rights.
All correspondence regarding the manuscript, including notification or decision letters, is subject to this confidentiality rule since they can include private information about the authors or the manuscript. For this reason, even if editors want to improve the language and readability of their letters, they shouldn't upload them to an AI program.
The responsibility of overseeing the editorial review of a scientific publication is exclusive to humans. Editors should not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to help with the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript because the technology is not capable of performing the critical thinking and original assessment required for this work, and there is a chance that the technology will produce biased, inaccurate, or incomplete conclusions about the manuscript. The editorial process, the final decision, and informing the authors of it are all under the editor's control and accountability.
According to our AI author policy, authors may employ generative AI and AI-assisted technologies throughout the writing process prior to submission, but only if doing so enhances the paper's language and readability and is disclosed appropriately in the manuscript. Such disclosure is located at the bottom of the work, in a distinct part that comes before the references list, so the editors may find it.