Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The Editorial Board of the journal "Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Biology" fully adheres to the "Recommendations on the Use of AI in Scholarly Communication" developed by the European Association of Science Editors. We acknowledge the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies and the possibilities of their application in the scientific sphere, support the use of AI tools to improve the quality of scientific data presentation, language editing, and analysis, but we emphasize the necessity of strict adherence to the principles of academic integrity, transparency, and authorial responsibility. Below are the rules for all participants in the editorial process.

1. Use of AI by Publication Authors

Authors have the right to use AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini, DeepL, image generation tools, etc.) to improve the readability of the manuscript or data processing, but under the following conditions:

Authorship and responsibility. AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of a publication, as they do not bear responsibility for the content of the work. The author bears full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and validity of the entire content of the manuscript, including parts generated or edited using AI.

Use for data analysis generative AI must be fully transparent. Authors are required to clearly indicate this in the manuscript: if AI was used for data analysis or statistical processing, the methodology should be described in detail in the "Methods" section; if AI was used for text editing or translation, this should be noted at the end of the article specifying the tool name, version, and purpose of use.

Visual materials. When using AI to create or process images/graphs, this must be clearly indicated in the captions to the corresponding figures. Authors should avoid creating images that distort scientific data.

Prohibition of plagiarism. The use of generated text without proper critical processing and verification may be considered as plagiarism or a violation of scientific ethics.

2. Use of AI by Reviewers

The use of AI to write the text of a review is unacceptable if it replaces the reviewer's own expert opinion. The reviewer bears personal responsibility for the substantiation and impartiality of their conclusion. Reviewers may use AI to improve the efficiency of the review process, but subject to the following conditions:

data confidentiality. Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading full texts of manuscripts, unpublished data, or figures into generative AI models (e.g., ChatGPT) that do not guarantee data protection, as this may lead to copyright infringement and leakage of confidential information.

objectivity and impartiality of the review. The reviewer bears full responsibility for the content of their review.

3. Use of AI by the Editorial Board and Editorial Staff

The Editorial Staff may use specialized AI-based tools for technical screening of manuscripts (checking for AI generation, plagiarism, compliance with formatting, searching for reviewers). However, the final decision on acceptance or rejection of an article is made exclusively by the editor (human), relying on the reviewers' opinion regarding the scientific value of the work, and not solely on the indicators of automated systems. The Editorial Staff guarantees non-disclosure of manuscript content to third parties through the use of AI tools.

Policy Violations

In case of detection of undisclosed use of AI that led to data fabrication, plagiarism, or misleading the reader, the Editorial Staff acts in accordance with the general rules of publication ethics (COPE). This may include rejection of the manuscript, a request for correction, or retraction of an already published article.

Policy Updates

This policy may be reviewed and updated by the Editorial Board of the journal taking into account the development of AI technologies and changes in standards within the scientific community.