To standardize the application of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in academic research and publication, uphold academic ethics, enhance research integrity, and ensure the authenticity, reliability, and transparency of academic research, the editorial department of Scientific Research Management has formulated this code of conduct.
1. Author's responsibility and norms
In the process of writing a paper,, authors may use GenAI to a limited extent in scenarios such as assisting data analysis, literature review, and case analysis.
If authors utilize GenAI for research assistance, they should clearly indicate the use of GenAI in their papers, including but not limited to the following details: the specific tool or model name and version used; and the usage scenarios of GenAI (such as data analysis, literature review, etc.).
Authors are prohibited from relying solely on GenAI to generate the main content of their papers (such as the theoretical framework, analysis section, etc.); they are also prohibited from using GenAI-generated content as the core innovation of their papers; they are not allowed to use GenAI to generate false data or fabricate research results; they cannot use GenAI as an author for attribution; they must not conceal the use of GenAI and evade labeling obligations; and they are not allowed to cover up the traces of GenAI usage in any form.
The author is responsible for the originality of the paper and ensures that the use of GenAI does not violate academic ethics. If any errors in data, literature, methods, conclusions, etc. arise from the use of GenAI, the author shall bear full responsibility.
If the author discovers that the reviewer has used GenAI in violation of the requirements of this regulation, they may report it to the editorial department.
II. Responsibilities and Norms of Reviewers
During the paper review process, reviewers are prohibited from uploading the author's original manuscript and supplementary materials to the publicly available GenAI platform and relying on the content generated by it as paper review comments and modification suggestions. Reviewers may use locally deployed GenAI tools to assist in the review process to a limited extent.
If the reviewer finds any non-standard or irregular use of GenAI in the manuscript during the review process, they should promptly provide feedback to the editorial department, provide corresponding evidence, and offer clear opinions.
III. Rights and Obligations of the Editorial Department
The editorial department promises not to use publicly available GenAI for the initial review, re-review, and final review of papers.
The editorial department has the right to verify the content related to GenAI in submitted papers and make decisions on rejection, modification, or acceptance based on this specification. The editorial department has the right to request authors to provide detailed descriptions of the use of GenAI, including tool names, application scenarios, etc.
For authors who violate this code, the editorial department reserves the right to take the following measures: rejecting the manuscript; retracting published papers; and reporting the violations to relevant units.
This specification shall come into effect from the date of its issuance, and the final interpretation right shall remain with the editorial department of Scientific Research Management.
This specification will be dynamically updated in accordance with the normative requirements of the academic community and the development of AI technology.
Editorial Department of Science Research Management
December 31st, 2025