Generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Copilot, are now part of how many researchers draft, translate, and analyse. IJMEIR does not forbid these tools, but they must never replace human judgement, accountability, or intellectual contribution. This policy applies to authors, reviewers, and editors at every stage of the publication process and follows the guidance of COPE, ICMJE, and WAME.

Core Principles

• Human accountability: authors, reviewers, and editors remain fully responsible for every word, figure, dataset, and decision, whether or not an AI tool helped produce it.
• Transparency: any substantive use of AI must be declared.
• Integrity of the record: fabricated data, invented references, and unverifiable claims are not acceptable, whatever their origin.
• Confidentiality: unpublished manuscripts and review reports must not be exposed to tools that may store, reuse, or train on them.

Policy for Authors

AI cannot be an author. AI tools cannot take responsibility for the work, respond to queries, declare conflicts of interest, or sign a copyright or licence agreement. No AI system may be listed as an author or co-author.

Permitted use. Authors may use AI tools to improve the readability, grammar, and language of their own text, to translate their own drafts, or to assist with routine tasks such as code debugging and formatting. All output must be carefully reviewed and edited by the authors.

Disclosure is mandatory when AI is used for:

• Generating or substantially rewriting manuscript text (abstract, literature review, discussion, or conclusions)
• Generating, processing, or analysing data, simulation results, or code that contributes to the findings
• Producing figures, diagrams, tables, or other visual content
• Supporting research design, methodology, or interpretation of results

Disclosure is encouraged, but not required, when AI is used only for basic language editing or spell checking.

Prohibited Use

• Listing an AI tool as an author or including it in the author byline
• Using AI to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate research data, experimental results, or CFD and simulation outputs
• Using AI to generate references without verifying that each cited source exists and supports the claim made
• Submitting AI-generated or AI-altered images that misrepresent experimental or numerical results (clearly labelled conceptual illustrations are allowed with disclosure)
• Using AI to paraphrase other people's work in order to disguise plagiarism
• Uploading confidential or third-party proprietary material into AI tools in breach of its licence or confidentiality terms

Verification Duty

Authors must verify the accuracy, originality, and appropriateness of all AI-assisted content, including every equation, value, unit, citation, and technical claim.

How to Disclose

Place a statement at the end of the manuscript, before the References section, under the heading Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies. It should name the tool and version, describe how and why it was used, and confirm human review. Example:

During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [tool name, version] to [specific purpose]. After using this tool, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.

If no AI tools were used beyond basic spell checking, authors may state: "No generative AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript."

Policy for Reviewers

• Reviewers must not upload any part of a submitted manuscript, or their own review report, into a generative AI tool, as this breaches the confidentiality of the authors' unpublished work.
• Reviewers must not rely on AI to produce or substantially draft their evaluation. The assessment must reflect their own expertise.
• A reviewer who wishes to use AI solely to polish the language of their own report, without exposing manuscript content, should declare this to the handling editor.
• A reviewer who suspects undeclared AI use in a manuscript should report the concern to the editor.

Policy for Editors

• Editors must not upload submissions, decision letters, or correspondence into generative AI tools that lack guaranteed confidentiality.
• Editorial decisions are made by humans. AI may support administrative tasks only, never the evaluation of scientific merit or the final decision.
• AI-detection software is an indicator only. No accusation or rejection may rest on a detector score alone, since such tools can produce false positives, particularly for non-native English writers.

Confidentiality and Data Protection

AI services often retain prompts and may use them to train future models. Anyone handling IJMEIR manuscripts, review reports, author identities, or editorial correspondence must assume that content entered into a public AI tool can leave their control. Personal data of authors or reviewers must never be entered into such tools.

Handling Suspected Violations

• The handling editor reviews the concern and may ask the authors for an explanation, raw data, source files, or the prompts and outputs involved.
• Authors are given a reasonable opportunity to respond.
• Outcomes may include a request for a corrected disclosure, revision, rejection, or, for published articles, a correction, expression of concern, or retraction in line with COPE guidelines.
• Serious or repeated breaches may be reported to the authors' institutions.

Cases are handled confidentially and proportionately. An honest omission is treated differently from deliberate misconduct.

Important Notes

This policy will be reviewed regularly and updated as publishing standards, legal requirements, or community practice change. Authors, reviewers, and editors should consult the version in force at the time of submission or review. If you are unsure whether a specific use of AI needs to be declared, please contact the Editorial Office before submission. When in doubt, disclose.