Artificial Intelligence (AI) use policy

1. Purpose and Scope

De Computis acknowledges that artificial intelligence (AI) tools—including generative AI applications, large language models (LLMs), machine translation systems, AI-assisted writing tools, automated data analysis systems, and other AI-enabled technologies—may provide valuable support for research, academic writing, peer review, and editorial activities.

However, such tools must be used responsibly, transparently, proportionately, and in accordance with the principles of research integrity, originality, confidentiality, copyright protection, data protection, traceability of the research process, and human accountability for all published content.

This policy applies to all individuals involved in the journal's editorial process, including authors, reviewers, Editors-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board, guest editors of special issues, editorial staff, technical personnel, and any other individuals participating in the evaluation, editing, proofreading, production, or dissemination of the journal's content.

2. General Principles

The use of AI tools within the context of the journal shall be governed by the following principles:

• Human responsibility. AI tools cannot assume intellectual, ethical, legal, or editorial responsibility. All scientific, interpretative, analytical, and editorial decisions must always remain the responsibility of human beings.
• Any significant use of AI shall be clearly and explicitly disclosed. Such disclosure should identify the tool used, its intended purpose, the extent of its use, and the manner in which its outputs have been reviewed and validated.
• Human oversight and verification. Any AI-generated or AI-assisted output must be critically reviewed by the individual using the tool. Users are responsible for verifying the accuracy of the information, the validity of references, and the absence of fabricated content, factual errors, bias, plagiarism, or improper attribution.
• Manuscripts, peer-review reports, editorial correspondence, and any personal or sensitive information related to the editorial process must not be uploaded to AI systems that store, reuse, index, or employ submitted content for model training, unless such systems operate within a secure environment expressly authorized by the journal.
• Academic integrity. AI must not be used to fabricate data, generate fictitious references, simulate literature reviews, produce scholarly arguments without expert validation, manipulate images, conceal plagiarism, or circumvent the ethical responsibilities associated with authorship, peer review, or editorial decision-making.
• AI should serve solely as an auxiliary tool. It must not replace original research, historical analysis, source interpretation, expert peer review, or editorial judgment.

3. Authorship and Responsibility for Published Content

AI tools may not be credited as authors or co-authors of any work published in the journal. Authorship requires the capacity to assume public responsibility for the content of a manuscript, approve its final version, respond to questions regarding its accuracy and integrity, disclose conflicts of interest, and accept the journal's editorial and licensing conditions. These responsibilities can only be fulfilled by natural persons.

Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, validity, integrity, and ethical compliance of all submitted content, including any material that has been generated, revised, translated, summarised, corrected, or otherwise assisted by AI tools. This responsibility includes, in particular, the verification of data, quotations, bibliographic references, transcriptions, translations, chronologies, proper names, archival materials, primary and secondary sources, images, tables, and any other elements incorporated into the manuscript.

The use of AI does not exempt authors from complying with the journal's requirements concerning originality, citation practices, attribution of sources, copyright, data protection, informed consent, permissions for the reproduction of images or documents, or any other applicable ethical and legal obligations.

4. Permitted Uses of AI by Authors

The following uses of AI are considered acceptable, provided that they remain subject to human oversight and are disclosed where appropriate:

• linguistic, grammatical, spelling, or stylistic improvement of manuscripts;
• assistance in translating titles, abstracts, keywords, sections of the manuscript, or editorial correspondence, provided that all translations are reviewed and approved by the authors;
• support in the preliminary organisation of ideas, outlines, or manuscript structure, provided that the intellectual development, analysis, and interpretation remain the responsibility of the authors;
• assistance with exploratory literature searches, preliminary identification of relevant publications, thematic mapping, or research trend analysis, provided that all references are verified against the original sources and that no unverified citations are incorporated into the manuscript;
• assistance in data analysis, corpus processing, text mining, document classification, data visualisation, or programming, provided that such use forms part of the research methodology and is described in sufficient detail to allow its evaluation and replication;
• verification of formal consistency, detection of typographical errors, reference standardisation, or other auxiliary formatting tasks;
• use of similarity-detection software, reference-checking tools, or bibliographic management systems incorporating AI functionalities, provided that all outputs are critically assessed by the authors.

Where AI forms part of the research methodology, source analysis, data processing, or the generation of research results, its use shall also be described in the Methods section of the manuscript with sufficient detail to enable editorial assessment and readers' understanding.

5. Prohibited Uses of AI by Authors

The following practices are not permitted:

• attributing authorship, co-authorship, or intellectual responsibility to an AI system;
• submitting as original work any text that has been substantially generated by AI without significant intellectual contribution, critical review, and explicit disclosure by the authors;
• using AI to generate hypotheses, historical interpretations, conclusions, or critical evaluations without appropriate human supervision, verification, and scholarly validation;
• incorporating AI-generated citations, references, data, documents, archival materials, testimonies, images, or other sources without direct verification and appropriate attribution;
• using AI to fabricate, alter, distort, or manipulate research data, sources, images, transcriptions, historical documents, or research evidence;
• employing AI to paraphrase the work of others for the purpose of concealing plagiarism, self-plagiarism, redundant publication, or the misappropriation of ideas;
• uploading documents, personal data, copyrighted materials, unpublished sources, or confidential information to AI systems without appropriate authorisation and adequate privacy safeguards;
• intentionally failing to disclose the significant use of AI where it has materially contributed to writing, translation, analysis, image generation, data processing, research outputs, or literature review.

Failure to disclose a significant use of AI may constitute a breach of publication ethics and may result in requests for clarification, return of the manuscript, rejection of the submission, or—where the article has already been published—the publication of a correction, editorial note, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the seriousness of the case.

6. Disclosure of AI Use by Authors

Authors shall disclose the use of AI at two stages of the submission process. First, during manuscript submission, through the ethical declaration or dedicated disclosure form required by the journal. Second, within the manuscript itself, in a separate section entitled "Declaration of Artificial Intelligence Use", placed at the end of the text, before the references or alongside the statements on funding, conflicts of interest, and acknowledgements.

Where applicable, the disclosure should include: the name of the AI tool used; the developer or provider; the version, model, or configuration employed, where known; the approximate date or period of use; the specific purpose for which the tool was used; the sections of the manuscript, stages of the research process, or editorial tasks in which it was employed; the extent of subsequent human intervention; the measures adopted to verify accuracy, references, bias, copyright compliance, confidentiality, and data protection; and, where AI formed part of the research methodology or analytical process, sufficient information concerning prompts, parameters, input data, validation criteria, and quality-control procedures.

Disclosure is not required where AI has been used solely for routine spelling, grammar, punctuation, or minor stylistic corrections that do not involve the substantive generation of content or contribute to the analysis, interpretation, methodology, or research findings, unless the tool has processed sensitive, unpublished, or otherwise protected information.

 

7. Recommended AI Disclosure Statements

Where AI has been used for language or stylistic assistance

During the preparation of this manuscript, [name of the AI tool, including version if known] was used to improve language, grammar, and readability. The authors critically reviewed, revised, and validated all AI-generated outputs and accept full responsibility for the final version of the manuscript.

Where AI has been used for translation

[Name of the AI tool, including version if known] was used to assist in the translation of [title, abstract, keywords, or specified sections of the manuscript]. The translation was subsequently reviewed and validated by the authors, who accept full responsibility for its accuracy and suitability.

Where AI has been used for literature review

[Name of the AI tool, including version if known] was used as an exploratory aid to identify potentially relevant literature and research themes relating to [topic]. All references, citations, and information included in this manuscript were independently verified by the authors against the original sources.

Where AI has been used as part of the research methodology

During the research process, [name of the AI tool, version, and developer] was used for [describe the task, e.g., document classification, text analysis, information extraction, modelling, visualisation, programming, etc.]. The methodology section describes the procedure in sufficient detail, including input data, principal prompts or instructions, validation criteria, and quality-control measures. The authors have reviewed all outputs and accept full responsibility for their interpretation.

Where AI has not been used in any significant way

The authors declare that no generative artificial intelligence tools or AI-assisted technologies were used in any substantial way during the preparation, analysis, writing, or revision of this manuscript.

8. AI Use in Images, Figures, Tables, and Supplementary Materials

AI must not be used to create, alter, enhance, reconstruct, colourise, complete, remove, relocate, replace, or otherwise modify images, documents, photographs, maps, figures, historical sources, facsimiles, or any other visual materials in a manner that could mislead readers regarding their nature, provenance, authenticity, or evidential value.

Routine technical adjustments—such as modifications to brightness, contrast, sharpness, or cropping—are acceptable, provided that they do not conceal, introduce, or distort relevant information and remain consistent with accepted scholarly publishing practices.

Where AI forms an explicit component of the research methodology—for example, in image analysis, optical character recognition (OCR), AI-assisted transcription, document classification, experimental restoration, or data visualisation—its use shall be fully disclosed and described in sufficient detail within the Methods section. The journal may request access to original files, previous versions, input data, prompts, processing records, or any additional documentation necessary to assess the integrity of the research process.

9. AI Use by Reviewers

Manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not upload, copy, summarise, translate, analyse, or otherwise process complete manuscripts or portions thereof using external AI tools that cannot guarantee confidentiality, privacy, and the non-retention or non-reuse of submitted content for model training or system improvement.

Likewise, reviewers shall not submit peer-review reports, draft reports, or editorial correspondence to AI systems where such materials contain confidential information relating to the manuscript, its authors, the review process, or editorial deliberations.

Peer review requires expert judgement, critical interpretation, disciplinary expertise, and personal responsibility. Consequently, AI must not replace the reviewer's independent assessment, evaluation, or reasoning. AI may only be used in a limited auxiliary capacity—for example, to improve the linguistic clarity of a review report drafted by the reviewer—provided that no confidential information or manuscript content is disclosed to insecure AI systems.

Where a reviewer uses AI in any capacity to support the review process, this shall be disclosed to the journal, indicating the tool employed, the purpose of its use, and the measures taken to preserve confidentiality. The journal reserves the right to determine whether such use is compatible with this policy and, where appropriate, to request a new review or disregard the submitted report.

10. AI Use by the Editorial Team

The Editors-in-Chief, editorial office, Editorial Board members, guest editors, and editorial staff shall treat all manuscripts, peer-review reports, editorial correspondence, and associated information as strictly confidential.

Manuscripts, peer-review reports, editorial decision letters, personal data, or editorial communications shall not be uploaded to external AI systems that may retain, reuse, index, or employ such materials for model training unless the journal has expressly authorised their use and adequate guarantees of privacy, security, and regulatory compliance are in place.

The editorial team may use AI tools or AI-assisted technologies for auxiliary purposes, including technical checks, metadata verification, similarity detection, reviewer identification, reference standardisation, language editing, or workflow optimisation, provided that such tools do not replace editorial judgement or compromise the confidentiality of the editorial process.

All editorial decisions—including initial screening, peer-review assignment, reviewer selection, acceptance, requests for revision, rejection, publication of corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions—shall always be made by the journal's responsible editors. No editorial decision may be based exclusively on AI-generated outputs.

Where the journal makes significant use of AI within its editorial workflows, authors shall be informed of the purpose, scope, and safeguards associated with such use.

11. Confidentiality, Data Protection, and Copyright

All individuals involved in the editorial process shall refrain from uploading confidential information, personal data, unpublished manuscripts, peer-review reports, unpublished documents, editorial correspondence, copyrighted materials, or unauthorised source materials to AI systems where adequate guarantees of privacy, security, and data governance are not available.

Before using any AI tool, users should, whenever reasonably possible, review its terms of use, privacy policy, data retention practices, rights granted over uploaded content, and whether submitted materials may be retained or used for model training or system improvement.

The use of AI shall not justify or excuse any infringement of copyright, moral rights, image rights, database rights, licensing agreements, archival restrictions, or conditions governing access to documentary sources.

12. Procedures in Cases of Doubt, Non-disclosure, or Misuse

Where the editorial team identifies, or receives credible indications of, undeclared, inappropriate, or otherwise non-compliant use of AI, it may request from authors, reviewers, guest editors, or any other individual involved in the editorial process any explanations or supporting documentation necessary to clarify the matter.

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the case, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

• request an additional AI disclosure statement;
• require the revision, correction, or reformulation of the affected sections of the manuscript;
• request verification of references, data, sources, or factual claims;
• require additional methodological documentation, including prompts, parameters, software versions, screenshots, interaction logs, or original research materials;
• return the manuscript to the authors before initiating or continuing the peer-review process;
• temporarily suspend the editorial process until the matter has been satisfactorily resolved;
• disregard a peer-review report where its preparation is considered incompatible with confidentiality requirements or fails to demonstrate adequate expert judgement;
• reject the manuscript where the use of AI compromises its originality, reliability, integrity, or ethical acceptability;
• publish a correction, editorial note, expression of concern, or retraction where the issue is identified after publication;
• where appropriate, notify the relevant affiliated institutions, funding bodies, or competent authorities, particularly in cases involving research misconduct, data fabrication, plagiarism, breaches of confidentiality, or serious infringements of legal or ethical obligations.

In all cases, the journal shall ensure that the individuals concerned are given the opportunity to provide explanations and supporting evidence before any final decision is made, except where immediate action is necessary to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record, the confidentiality of the editorial process, or the rights of third parties.

13. Relationship with Other Editorial Policies

This policy shall be read in conjunction with the journal's Instructions for Authors, Peer Review Policy, Publication Ethics and Research Integrity Policy, Plagiarism and Originality Policy, Conflict of Interest Policy, Corrections and Retractions Policy, Preservation Policy, and Open Access Policy.

In the event of any inconsistency between this policy and any other editorial policy of the journal, the Editorial Team shall interpret and apply the relevant provisions in accordance with the principles of research integrity, transparency, human accountability, protection of rights, and preservation of trust in the published scholarly record.

14. Review and Updating of the Policy

Given the rapid technological, legal, and editorial developments in the field of artificial intelligence, this policy will be reviewed periodically by the journal's Editorial Team. Any revisions will be published on the journal's website and will indicate the date of approval or latest revision.