ChatGPT and Generative AI

Framework: Formulated in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) guidelines.

1. Rationale and Scope

Journal of Digital and Information Computing acknowledges the value of Large Language Models (LLMs)—such as ChatGPT—and generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) as tools to enhance productivity during manuscript preparation. These technologies can assist authors in brainstorming, structural formatting, text summarization, and language refinement.

However, generative AI cannot replicate human creativity, critical thinking, or ethical accountability. Human oversight remains indispensable to guarantee the accuracy, integrity, and appropriateness of the published scholarly content.

2. Limitations and Risks of Generative AI

Authors must recognize the inherent limitations of LLMs, which include but are not limited to:

  • Bias and Underrepresentation: AI-generated text may inadvertently perpetuate systemic biases (e.g., racism, sexism, or cultural prejudices) present in its training data, often underrepresenting minority perspectives due to decontextualized outputs.

  • Inaccuracy and Hallucination: LLMs are prone to generating false, fabricated, or misleading information, particularly outside their domain expertise. They can produce linguistically coherent but scientifically incorrect claims, including fake facts and fabricated citations.

  • Lack of Contextual and Real-Time Awareness: These models frequently struggle with nuances, metaphors, idioms, and sarcasm, which can lead to misinterpretations. Furthermore, some models lack access to real-time or post-training datasets.

3. Guidelines for Authors

A. Prohibition of AI Authorship

AI tools, including LLMs, do not meet the criteria for authorship as they cannot take ethical or legal responsibility for the submitted work. No AI tool shall be listed as a co-author on any manuscript submission.

B. Mandatory Disclosure

Authors are required to declare the use of generative AI tools in the writing or preparation of their manuscript.

  • In-Text Mention: The specific model used, version, and purpose should be briefly noted in the Methods or Acknowledgments section, where applicable.

  • Formal Declaration Section: Authors must insert a dedicated statement at the very end of the manuscript file (immediately preceding the References section) under the heading: "Declaration of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process".

Statement Template: "During the preparation of this work, the author(s) utilized [NAME OF TOOL/SERVICE] for the purpose of [SPECIFIC PURPOSE]. Following the use of this tool/service, the author(s) rigorously reviewed, verified, and edited the content as necessary, and accept full responsibility for the ultimate integrity and accuracy of the published work."

(Note: This declaration is not required for basic, non-generative tools used solely for standard grammar, spelling, or reference formatting checks. If no generative AI tools were utilized, this statement is omitted).

C. Verification and Quality Assurance

Authors bear sole responsibility for the final output. They must:

  • Verify the validity, accuracy, and relevance of all data, claims, and citations generated by AI, correcting any anomalies or inconsistencies.

  • Cross-check all AI-generated citations against original sources to eliminate plagiarism, as LLMs may inadvertently reproduce substantial blocks of text from copyright-protected works.

  • Explicitly acknowledge the limitations of the AI tools utilized within the manuscript if it directly impacts the research methodology.

D. Non-Disclosure Penalties

If the undisclosed use of generative AI tools is discovered post-publication, the editorial board reserves the right to enforce corrective measures, including formal corrections or article retraction, in line with journal policy and COPE guidelines.

4. Responsibilities of Editors and Reviewers

Editors and peer reviewers are tasked with critically evaluating the appropriateness of AI utilization in submitted manuscripts. They must remain vigilant in assessing the validity of AI-assisted content to preserve the academic rigor of Journal of Digital and Information Computing.

5. Policy Updates

As generative AI technologies rapidly evolve, this policy will be periodically updated in collaboration with our publishing partners to ensure it continuously supports ethical research practices. Authors are encouraged to review this page frequently for the latest updates.