AI-Policy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

RESTI recognizes the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini) in scholarly research and publishing. This policy sets out the journal's rules for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers, adapted from the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools and comparable policies at Elsevier and Springer Nature.

Principles That Apply to Everyone

⚠ AI tools must never be listed as an author. Authorship requires accountability, consent, and intellectual contribution — qualities AI does not possess. All named authors must be human.

⚠ AI must not replace scientific judgment or editorial decision-making. Every evaluation, review recommendation, and editorial decision at RESTI must be made by a human, not generated or determined by an AI system.

For Authors

ⓘ Any use of AI or AI-assisted tools in preparing a manuscript must be declared in the cover letter and/or the manuscript declaration, stating which tool was used and how.

Permitted: language editing, grammar and spelling correction, and reference formatting

Not permitted: generating original scientific content, interpreting findings, or drafting conclusions

Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for the entire manuscript, including any AI-assisted portions

For Editors

⛔ Editors must not upload an author's manuscript, or any part of it, into a generative AI tool. Doing so may violate the author's confidentiality and proprietary rights, and — where the manuscript contains personally identifiable information — data-privacy rights.

Editorial decisions (Accept / Minor Revision / Major Revision / Reject) must reflect the editor's own judgment, informed by reviewer reports — never generated or determined by an AI tool

Limited, disclosed use of AI for general administrative wording (not involving manuscript content) is permitted

For Reviewers

⛔ Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading a manuscript, or any part of it, to ChatGPT, Claude, or any similar generative AI tool to assist with their review. The manuscript is a confidential document, and doing so risks violating the author's confidentiality and proprietary rights.

AI must not be used to generate the substantive scientific evaluation of a manuscript — the critical assessment must be the reviewer's own

Permitted: using AI to improve the wording of a reviewer's own review comments, provided no manuscript content is entered into the tool

Any AI assistance used, even for wording only, must be disclosed to the handling editor