Artificial intelligence technologies have already become part of the scientific landscape, and we recognise their value – faster information retrieval, convenient tools for text editing, analysis of large datasets, and more. At the same time, we emphasise: scientific writing must remain the result of human reasoning, while AI should serve only as an auxiliary tool.

What we support

We welcome the use of AI for technical and auxiliary tasks, such as:

• improving the style or readability of the text;
• correcting grammatical and technical errors;
• rapid source searches or initial informational screening.

Such practices do not conflict with international principles, including the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), nor with the norms of academic integrity defined in Article 42 of the Law of Ukraine “On Education”.

What we do not accept

We do not accept the use of AI in cases where it effectively replaces the author or produces scientific content independently. It is prohibited to:

• generate an article (or a substantial part of it) using artificial intelligence;
• submit fabricated or automatically generated data as scientific results;
• create graphs, illustrations or tables without the ability to verify their origin;
• use AI to evaluate or review the work of other authors;
• upload unpublished manuscripts to external AI services that do not guarantee confidentiality – in accordance with COPE’s position on protecting author materials.

We uphold a clear principle: scientific thought must belong to a human being.

Transparency first

If AI has been used in the preparation of a manuscript, we ask authors to state this openly and honestly.

At the end of the article, please indicate:

• the name of the tool;
• the stage at which it was used;
• the specific purpose of its use.

This approach aligns with COPE standards on transparency and with the principles of academic integrity under the Law of Ukraine “On Education”.

Author responsibility

AI may assist in the workflow, but full responsibility for the accuracy, correctness and reliability of the work rests solely with the author.

Likewise, reviewers and editors cannot delegate their professional judgement to algorithms.

Use of AI by editors and reviewers

We expect editors and reviewers to handle artificial intelligence technologies responsibly, cautiously, and ethically. They work with unpublished materials, which requires a higher level of confidentiality and accuracy.

Permitted use by editors and reviewers

Editors and reviewers may use AI only for auxiliary tasks that do not involve processing the content of a manuscript. Acceptable uses include:

• improving the style of their own communications (letters to authors, notes, etc.);
• detection of plagiarism or textual overlap using iThenticate;
• organising reference lists or checking formatting accuracy;
• general queries not related to a specific manuscript;
• technical tasks that do not influence scientific evaluation (e.g., drafting internal notes or work plans without copying text from the manuscript).

AI may assist, but must not interact with any materials under review.

Strictly prohibited practices

To protect author materials and comply with COPE recommendations, editors and reviewers are prohibited from:

• uploading any manuscript fragments, tables, illustrations or data into external AI systems;
• using AI to analyse or evaluate the content of an article;
• generating reviews, conclusions or recommendations with the help of algorithms;
• using AI to assess “scientific quality” or “originality” (except for specialised professional tools approved by the editorial office);
• comparing a manuscript with other submissions currently under review.

Such actions violate confidentiality and contradict COPE principles regarding the handling of unpublished materials.

Responsibilities of editors and reviewers

• The reviewer is responsible for their own independent judgement. A review must be based solely on human analysis and professional expertise.
• The editor is responsible for ensuring that no stage of manuscript processing is transferred to algorithms that cannot guarantee confidentiality or accurate scientific interpretation.
• If this policy is violated, the editorial office reserves the right to discontinue cooperation with the reviewer or revise the processing of submissions.

Technologies evolve – and so does the policy

As AI tools continue to develop rapidly, we will update this policy regularly, in line with current international recommendations (COPE, WAME) and the ethical standards established in Ukrainian legislation