Policy on AI. Retraction Policy

The journal adheres to the “Recommendations on the Use of AI in Scholarly Communication” developed by the European Association of Science Editors. The policy on the use of AI is closely related to compliance with the principles of publication ethics and plagiarism prevention. The editors expect each author to voluntarily declare the use of AI in the preparation of materials for our journal.

AI technologies should be used only to improve readability and correct grammatical errors in a paper. It is prohibited to list AI and AI-supported technologies as an author or co-author, as well as to cite AI as an author. Authors bear full responsibility for the content, accuracy, and originality of all materials created with the use of AI.

Authors must disclose in their manuscripts any use of AI and AI-supported technologies. The use of AI must be indicated in the published work in the section “Declaration on Generative AI,” specifying the name of the tool and the nature of its use. A statement on the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust among authors, readers, reviewers, and editors, and also facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant tool or technology.

The use of AI and AI-supported technologies in figures, images, and illustrations may include enhancement, obscuring, moving, removing, or adding a particular feature to an image or figure. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable provided that they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original.

The only exception is when the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (for example, in AI-assisted visualization approaches used to generate or interpret core research data, such as in the field of biomedical imaging). If such tools are used, this must be properly indicated and described in the manuscript text. It is necessary to add an explanation of how AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the process of creating or modifying the image, as well as the name of the model or tool, version number and extension, and the manufacturer.

Failure to comply with this policy may serve as grounds for rejection or retraction of the article.

Recommendations for Reviewers

Reviewers must not upload the submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool, as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, if the article contains personal information, may also infringe data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement also applies to the reviewer’s report (review), as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers must not upload their review into an AI tool, even if only for the purpose of correcting grammatical errors and improving readability or assisting in the scholarly review of the article, because the critical thinking and original assessment required for peer review go beyond the capabilities of this technology, and there is a risk that such technology may lead to incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions regarding the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible for the content of the review.

Recommendations for Editors

A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Journal editors do not upload the submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool, as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, if the article contains personal information, may also infringe data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement applies to all communications concerning the manuscript, including any messages or decision letters, as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, editors must not upload their letters into an AI tool, even if this is done solely to improve language and readability.

If an editor suspects that an author or reviewer has violated the Policy on the Use of AI, they must inform the editorial board thereof.

Retraction Procedure

The journal adheres to COPE recommendations on publication retraction.

The grounds for retraction are as follows:

  1. Detection of serious errors or inaccuracies affecting the conclusions of the study
  2. Plagiarism or duplicate publication
  3. Fabrication or falsification of data
  4. Violation of research ethics
  5. Improper authorship
  6. Other serious violations of publication ethics

Initiators of retraction:

  • The author(s) of the article
  • The editorial board
  • The institution where the author works
  • A third party (with supporting evidence)

Retraction procedure:

  1. Identification of the problem and preliminary review
  2. Investigation (establishment of a commission, request for explanations)
  3. Providing the author with an opportunity to respond (10–15 days)
  4. Decision-making by the editorial board
  5. Publication of a retraction notice

The retraction notice contains:

  • The title and DOI of the retracted article
  • All authors of the article
  • The date of publication of the article
  • The grounds for retraction
  • Who initiated the retraction
  • The date of retraction

Technical implementation:

  • The article remains accessible with the label "RETRACTED" in the PDF and HTML versions.
  • The DOI remains active with redirection to the retraction notice.
  • Information about the retraction is transmitted to all databases in which the journal is indexed.
  • A link to the retraction notice is added to the journal archive.
  • Time frame: the entire process must not exceed 60 days from the moment the problem is identified.