Pharaonic Journal of Science (PJS) follows the declarations on the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies, produced by WAME, Recommendations on Chatbots and Generative Artificial Intelligence concerning Scholarly Publications:

(Click here to view WAME recommendations) 

These policies aim to provide greater transparency and guidance to authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and contributors:

For authors

• Chatbots cannot be authors: Chatbots do not meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria, particularly that of being able to give “final approval of the version to be published” and “to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.” No AI tool can “understand” a conflict-of-interest statement, and it does not have the legal standing to sign a statement. Chatbots have no affiliation independent of their developers. Since authors submitting a manuscript must ensure that all those named as authors meet the authorship criteria, chatbots cannot be included as authors.
• Authors should be transparent when chatbots are used and provide information about how they were used.The extent and type of use of chatbots in journal publications should be indicated. This is consistent with the ICMJE recommendation of acknowledging writing assistance and providing, in the Methods, detailed information about how the study was conducted and the results generated.
• Authors are responsible for the material provided by a chatbot in their paper (including the accuracy of what is presented and the absence of plagiarism) and for appropriate attribution of all sources (including original sources for material generated by the chatbot).
• The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images, and artwork: We do not permit the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Image forensics tools or specialized software will be applied to submitted manuscripts to identify suspected image irregularities.
• The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artwork, such as for graphical abstracts, is not permitted. The use of generative AI in the production of cover art may, in some cases, be allowed if the author obtains prior permission from the journal editor and publisher.

 

For reviewers

1. When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s paper, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool, as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
2. This confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their peer review report into an AI tool, even if it is just to improve language and readability.
3. Reviewing a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the scientific review of a paper, as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for peer review are outside of the scope of this technology, and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.

For editors

1. A submitted manuscript for PJS is treated as a confidential document. Editors of PJS do not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool, as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
2. This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the manuscript, including any notification or decision letters, as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, editors do not upload their letters into an AI tool, even if it is just to improve language and readability.
3. Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem. Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript, as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for this work are outside of the scope of this technology, and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The editor is responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision, and the communication thereof to the authors.