Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Progressive Physics Journal (PPJ) acknowledges the rapid advancement and increasing integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Large Language Models (LLMs), and generative AI technologies in academic research and manuscript preparation. While we support technological innovation that enhances the clarity and accessibility of science, safeguarding the integrity of the scientific record remains our highest priority.

To ensure transparency, accountability, and ethical publishing, PPJ mandates that all authors, peer reviewers, and editors strictly adhere to the following comprehensive guidelines regarding AI and AI-assisted technologies.

1. Authorship and Legal Accountability (AI Cannot Be an Author)

Generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot) and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors or co-authors on any manuscript submitted to PPJ.

  • Lack of Agency: Authorship entails legal and ethical obligations that a non-human entity cannot fulfill. AI tools cannot consent to publication, cannot be held accountable for the accuracy or integrity of a scientific paper, and cannot hold or assign copyright.

  • Total Human Responsibility: The human authors are 100% accountable for all content in their manuscript, including any text, data, code, or images generated or modified with the assistance of AI.

2. Acceptable and Unacceptable Uses for Authors

PPJ distinguishes between routine assistive tools and generative AI.

  • Acceptable Use (No Declaration Required): The use of traditional AI tools strictly for checking grammar, spelling, reference formatting, or basic language translation does not require formal disclosure.

  • Regulated Use (Declaration Mandatory): Using generative AI to draft substantial portions of text, write data analysis code, synthesize literature, or brainstorm research structures is permitted only if explicitly declared and thoroughly fact-checked by the authors.

  • Strictly Prohibited Use: AI must never be used to formulate the core scientific hypothesis, generate fake citations, draw independent scientific conclusions, or synthesize primary experimental data.

3. Mandatory Declaration of AI Use

If generative AI tools were used during the research or writing process, authors must explicitly disclose this in a dedicated section titled "Declaration of AI Use", placed immediately before the References section.

  • The declaration must specify the name of the tool, its version, and its exact application in the manuscript.

  • Standard Template to be used:

    "During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [Name of AI Tool, e.g., ChatGPT 4.0] in order to [Reason, e.g., improve readability / generate Python code for data sorting]. After using this tool, the author(s) thoroughly reviewed, fact-checked, and edited the content as needed, and take(s) full and sole responsibility for the integrity of the publication."

  • If no AI tools were used outside of basic grammar checkers, this section should be omitted.

4. Author Accountability and "Hallucinations"

Authors must be exceptionally vigilant regarding the well-documented tendency of AI to generate plausible-sounding but factually incorrect information ("hallucinations").

  • Citation Integrity: AI-generated outputs often invent non-existent references. Authors must manually verify that all cited sources actually exist, are accurate, and are contextually appropriate. AI-generated text or prompts must not be cited as primary references.

  • Plagiarism and Copyright: Generative AI models are trained on vast datasets and may reproduce copyrighted text without attribution. Authors must utilize plagiarism-detection software on their final drafts to ensure no inadvertent plagiarism has occurred.

5. Data, Image, and Code Integrity

The manipulation of scientific data via AI poses a severe threat to physics research.

  • Data Fabrication: Generative AI must never be used to fabricate, synthesize, or augment experimental data, statistical findings, or observational results.

  • Scientific Imagery: AI tools must not be used to create, alter, or enhance scientific images, micrographs, or data visualizations in any way that obscures, misrepresents, or manipulates the original findings.

  • Code Generation: If AI is used to write or debug code for simulations or data analysis (e.g., MATLAB, Python, Mathematica), the code must be rigorously tested, and the use of the AI tool must be declared in both the methodology section and the Declaration of AI Use.

6. AI in the Peer Review and Editorial Process

The confidentiality of the peer review process is legally and ethically binding.

  • Strict Prohibition for Reviewers: Peer reviewers and editors must never upload submitted manuscripts, in whole or in part, into unauthorized, publicly accessible, or proprietary AI systems (such as public instances of ChatGPT). Doing so constitutes a severe breach of confidentiality and intellectual property rights, as these tools may absorb the unpublished data into their training sets.

  • Evaluation: Reviewers must rely on their own independent expertise to evaluate manuscripts. While specialized, secure AI tools may be used by the journal internally for administrative checks (e.g., iThenticate for plagiarism screening), the final editorial decision regarding acceptance or rejection rests entirely on human judgment.

7. Consequences of Policy Violation

Failure to disclose the use of AI, or the inappropriate use of AI to generate false data or plagiarize content, is treated as scientific misconduct.

  • If discovered before publication, the manuscript will be subject to immediate rejection.

  • If discovered after publication, the journal will initiate a formal investigation following COPE guidelines, which may result in an official correction, expression of concern, or full retraction of the article, alongside notification to the authors' affiliated institutions.