AI Policy

Fundamental Scientific Reports in Multidisciplinary Areas (FSRMA) recognizes the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI), generative artificial intelligence, large language models (LLMs), machine-learning systems, and other automated tools in research and scholarly communication.

FSRMA supports the responsible and transparent use of such technologies where they assist scholarly work without replacing human accountability, academic judgment, research integrity, confidentiality, or authorship responsibility.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and journal staff.

Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted or automated tools in the preparation of a manuscript where such use is lawful, ethical, transparent, and consistent with academic integrity.

Authors remain fully responsible for all content submitted to and published by FSRMA, including content produced or modified with the assistance of AI tools.

Authors must independently verify the accuracy, validity, originality, and reliability of AI-generated or AI-assisted content.

AI tools must not be relied upon as a substitute for scholarly judgment, appropriate research methods, critical analysis, or verification of evidence.

Disclosure of Generative AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or other automated tools when those tools have contributed materially to the preparation, analysis, interpretation, or presentation of the manuscript.

Disclosure is expected when AI has been used for activities such as:

  • Generating or substantially rewriting text.

  • Assisting with data analysis or interpretation.

  • Generating code used in the research.

  • Producing or modifying figures, images, tables, or graphical content.

  • Assisting with literature synthesis.

  • Translating substantial scholarly content.

  • Producing research materials, simulations, or analytical outputs.

  • Supporting methods or procedures that materially affect the research.

Routine use of tools solely for basic spelling correction, grammar checking, formatting, or minor language polishing normally does not require detailed disclosure unless the tool substantially alters the intellectual content of the manuscript.

When disclosure is required, authors should identify:

  • The name of the tool.

  • The provider or developer, where relevant.

  • The purpose for which the tool was used.

  • The stage of the research or writing process in which it was used.

The journal may request additional information about AI-assisted methods when necessary to evaluate research integrity or reproducibility.

AI Tools Cannot Be Authors

Artificial intelligence systems, chatbots, language models, or other automated tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors.

Authorship requires responsibilities that AI systems cannot fulfil, including:

  • Approving the final manuscript.

  • Accepting accountability for the work.

  • Responding to questions concerning accuracy and integrity.

  • Managing conflicts of interest.

  • Holding or transferring legal rights.

  • Taking responsibility for ethical compliance.

All listed authors must be human individuals who meet the journal's authorship requirements.

Generative AI Is Not a Scholarly Source

Generative AI tools should not be cited as authoritative scholarly sources or used as substitutes for original research literature.

Authors are responsible for locating, reading, and citing the original and reliable sources that support their claims.

AI-generated references must be independently verified before inclusion in a manuscript.

Fabricated, inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable references produced by AI tools are unacceptable.

Accuracy and Verification

Authors are fully responsible for verifying all information produced with the assistance of AI tools.

This includes:

  • Facts.

  • Statistical results.

  • Data interpretation.

  • Citations and references.

  • Quotations.

  • Equations.

  • Computer code.

  • Literature summaries.

  • Images and figures.

  • Methodological descriptions.

  • Analytical conclusions.

Authors must not assume that AI-generated output is accurate merely because it appears credible or well written.

Any error introduced through the use of an AI tool remains the responsibility of the authors.

AI-Generated or AI-Modified Images

AI-generated or AI-modified images, figures, graphical data, or visual materials must not be used in a misleading or deceptive manner.

Authors must disclose material AI-based manipulation or generation of images where relevant.

AI tools must not be used to fabricate, obscure, remove, duplicate, or alter research findings in a manner that misrepresents the original data.

Where image enhancement is used for legitimate technical purposes, it must preserve the integrity of the underlying research information.

The journal may request original image files or supporting data where concerns regarding image integrity arise.

AI in Research Methods and Data Analysis

When AI or machine-learning systems form part of the research methodology, authors should describe their use sufficiently to support transparency, evaluation, and reproducibility.

Where applicable, authors should report:

  • The tool, system, model, or software used.

  • Version information where available.

  • Relevant parameters or settings.

  • The role of the AI system in the research.

  • The extent of human supervision.

  • Relevant limitations or validation procedures.

AI-generated analytical results must be critically evaluated by the authors.

Confidential and Sensitive Information

Authors must not upload confidential, proprietary, personally identifiable, unpublished, restricted, or sensitive research information into external AI systems unless they have appropriate authorization and the tool's privacy, confidentiality, and data-use terms permit such use.

Authors are responsible for complying with relevant laws, institutional requirements, ethical approvals, participant-consent conditions, and data-protection obligations.

Use of AI by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must not use generative AI tools to create substantive peer-review reports or to make independent judgments about the scholarly quality of a manuscript.

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts, supplementary material, unpublished data, or identifiable manuscript content into public or third-party generative AI systems where doing so could compromise confidentiality, intellectual property, or data protection.

Reviewers remain personally responsible for the content, accuracy, fairness, and originality of their review reports.

Limited use of automated tools for language editing or improving clarity of a review may be acceptable where confidentiality is protected and such use is appropriately disclosed when required.

Reviewers must not rely on AI-generated assessments as substitutes for their own expert evaluation.

Use of AI by Editors

Editors and editorial board members must not use generative AI to create substantive editorial assessments or publication decisions.

Editors must not upload confidential submissions, review reports, author correspondence, or unpublished research data into external generative AI systems where confidentiality cannot be assured.

Editorial decisions must be made by qualified human editors on the basis of scholarly merit, peer-review evidence, ethical considerations, and journal policy.

AI tools must not independently determine whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected.

Automated Tools Used by the Journal

FSRMA may use appropriately tested automated tools to support administrative, technical, integrity, or editorial processes.

Such tools may assist with activities including:

  • Text-similarity screening.

  • Reference checking.

  • Language or formatting checks.

  • Image-integrity screening.

  • Metadata validation.

  • Identification of potential integrity concerns.

  • Reviewer discovery or recommendation.

Automated outputs do not independently determine editorial outcomes.

Where automated systems identify possible plagiarism, image manipulation, duplication, undeclared AI use, fabricated references, or other integrity concerns, the results must be reviewed by an editor or appropriately qualified journal staff member before action is taken.

Human Oversight

FSRMA follows a human-in-the-loop approach to the use of automated tools.

No automated system should independently make final decisions regarding:

  • Manuscript acceptance or rejection.

  • Research misconduct.

  • Plagiarism.

  • Image manipulation.

  • Authorship disputes.

  • Retractions.

  • Corrections.

  • Reviewer suitability.

Qualified human editorial judgment remains central to all significant editorial and publication decisions.

Bias and Responsible Use

Authors, reviewers, and editors should recognize that AI systems may produce biased, incomplete, misleading, or fabricated outputs.

Users of AI-assisted tools are responsible for critically evaluating outputs and ensuring that their use does not introduce discrimination, unsupported assumptions, or misleading conclusions into scholarly work.

Research Integrity and Misconduct

Use of AI tools does not reduce or transfer an author's responsibility for research integrity.

AI must not be used to:

  • Fabricate or falsify data.

  • Invent participants, experiments, results, references, or sources.

  • Conceal plagiarism.

  • Manipulate images deceptively.

  • Generate fraudulent peer reviews.

  • Misrepresent authorship or scholarly contribution.

  • Circumvent journal integrity checks.

  • Create false or misleading research records.

Evidence of deceptive or unethical AI use may be investigated under the journal's Publication Ethics and Research Integrity Policy.

Depending on the circumstances, editorial action may include manuscript rejection, correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other appropriate measures.

Undisclosed AI Use

If material use of generative AI should have been disclosed but was not, the journal may request clarification from the authors.

Where necessary, FSRMA may require:

  • Addition or correction of an AI-use declaration.

  • Revision of affected manuscript content.

  • Supporting documentation.

  • Further editorial or integrity assessment.

Undisclosed AI use alone will be evaluated according to its nature and impact rather than through an automatic penalty.

Serious deceptive use may result in further action under the journal's publication-ethics procedures.

Responsibility and Accountability

Human authors remain fully accountable for their research and manuscript, irrespective of whether AI-assisted tools were used.

Reviewers remain accountable for their peer-review reports.

Editors remain accountable for editorial judgments and decisions.

The use of AI does not transfer responsibility from individuals to the technology provider, software, model, or automated system.

Relationship with Other Journal Policies

This policy should be read together with FSRMA's:

  • Publication Ethics and Research Integrity Policy.

  • Peer Review Policy.

  • Plagiarism and Text Similarity Policy.

  • Authorship and Contributorship Policy.

  • Conflict of Interest Policy.

  • Data Sharing Policy.

  • Copyright and Licensing Policy.

  • Corrections and Retractions Policy.

FSRMA will periodically review this policy as AI technologies, publication-ethics standards, and scholarly communication practices continue to evolve.