Usage Guidelines for Generative AI Tools
Generative AI (GenAI) tools
                have brought significant convenience to academic research and paper writing. However, while enjoying
                the benefits of technology, authors must assume corresponding ethical responsibilities to ensure the
                authenticity, accuracy, and originality of the generated content. Transparently disclosing the use of
                these tools and adhering strictly to academic standards is key to avoiding ethical risks and ensuring
                publication quality.
 Statement on the Ethical Use and Publication Guidelines for Authors Using
                Generative AI (GenAI) Tools
 Authors should be fully responsible for the content in their
                manuscripts. If the manuscript contains content generated by AI tools, the author must be held
                accountable for any violations of publishing ethics arising therefrom. To ensure compliance with
                ethical standards in academic publishing, we provide the following guidelines for the use of GenAI
                tools:
 1. Language and Format Editing: Authors are allowed to use GenAI tools (such as GPT and
                Grammarly) to improve the spelling, grammar, and general formatting of manuscripts. However, GenAI
                tools may introduce new grammatical errors, logical issues, or content biases. Therefore, after using
                these tools, authors must carefully review and edit the generated content to ensure accuracy and
                consistency.
 2. Review of Content Accuracy and Originality: For content generated with the
                assistance of GenAI tools (such as paragraphs, citations, and abstracts), authors must carefully check
                the accuracy of the generated content, including the authenticity of references, correctness of
                formatting, and consistency of data. Additionally, authors must confirm that the generated content
                does not incur plagiarism issues to avoid copyright infringement, and plagiarism detection tools
                should be used to further verify the originality of any AI-generated content.
 3. Review of
                Charts and Data: Authors using GenAI tools to generate charts or other scientific artwork must ensure
                that the visualized presentation of data accurately reflects the real data provided in the manuscript.
                AI-generated artwork may present risks such as unclear data labelling, misleading design, or data
                manipulation; therefore, manual review of AI-generated artwork is required.
 4. Transparency
                and Disclosure of Tool Usage: Authors using GenAI tools in manuscript writing, image or graphic
                element creation, data collection, and analysis must ensure content accuracy and meanwhile disclose
                the specific usage of these tools in the Methodology or Acknowledgement sections of the manuscript.
                The disclosure should specify the tool's name, version, functionality, and specific application in the
                manuscript. For example, authors should clearly state how the tool has contributed to spelling
                correction, data analysis, or image processing.
 5. Prohibition of Data Synthesis and
                Manipulation: GenAI tools must not be used to synthesize data to make up for missing data, alter or
                manipulate original images, charts, or other data in a way that affects the presentation of the
                original data and research results. Any behavior involving the manipulation or fabrication of data
                generated by AI violates academic integrity and may lead to serious ethical issues.
 6.
                Limitations on the Reasonable Use of GenAI Tools: GenAI tools cannot be used to initiate an original
                research project without human guidance, nor can they be used to complete the entire research process
                of writing a paper. GenAI tools should only serve as auxiliary tools and cannot replace the author in
                conducting independent academic research. Additionally, GenAI tools cannot be listed as authors of the
                paper, as they do not possess the capability to create knowledge or assume academic responsibility.
                COPE has already provided detailed guidance on this matter, which is available here: [COPE Position
                Statement on AI and
                Authorship](https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author).
