Generative AI Policy

Jurnal Absis: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Matematika recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies may support scholarly work when used responsibly. This policy establishes requirements for transparency, human accountability, confidentiality, and research integrity in the use of such technologies by authors, editors, and peer reviewers. It applies to manuscripts submitted to and processed by Jurnal Absis.

1. Use of Generative AI by Authors

Authors may use generative AI tools for limited supporting purposes, such as checking grammar, improving language clarity, and enhancing readability, provided that all AI-assisted output is critically reviewed and verified by the authors. The following requirements apply:

• Human accountability. Authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, reliability, citations, conclusions, and ethical integrity of the submitted manuscript.
• No AI authorship. Generative AI tools must not be named as authors or co-authors because they cannot assume responsibility for scholarly work.
• Accuracy and verification. Authors must independently verify AI-assisted text, factual claims, references, and other outputs. Fabricated citations, unsupported claims, and misleading content are unacceptable.
• Research integrity. AI must not be used to fabricate or falsify research data, results, participant responses, images, or other evidence, or to misrepresent the research process.
• Research-method transparency. If AI forms part of the research methodology, data collection, data processing, or analysis, the authors must explain the tool, its purpose, and the relevant procedures in the Methods section or another appropriate part of the manuscript.
• Privacy and intellectual property. Authors must respect confidentiality, research-participant privacy, copyright, and institutional or legal requirements when entering information into AI systems.

2. Mandatory Artificial Intelligence Statement

Every submitted manuscript must include an Artificial Intelligence Statement, whether or not generative AI was used. Where AI was used, the statement must identify the tool and describe its specific purpose and scope. Authors must review and verify the outputs and remain responsible for the final manuscript. Where no AI was used, the statement must explicitly say so.

The statement must appear after the Acknowledgment section, if any, and before the Author Contribution Statement, Funding Statement, Conflict of Interest Statement, and References. For wording examples and placement instructions, see the journal's Declaration Statements Guidelines.

3. Use of Generative AI by Editors

Editors may use AI-assisted technologies only for limited technical or administrative support, such as preparing general correspondence templates, reviewing publicly available policy wording, or assisting routine workflows that do not disclose confidential manuscript content. Such use must remain subject to human supervision.

• No automated editorial judgment. AI must not replace an editor's assessment of the scholarly merit, methodology, originality, or suitability of a manuscript, nor make acceptance, revision, or rejection decisions.
• Protection of unpublished manuscripts. Editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, unpublished data, or confidential editorial correspondence to external generative AI services. Any exceptional processing arrangement must have appropriate authorization and demonstrable confidentiality and data-protection safeguards.
• Editorial responsibility. Editors are fully accountable for editorial communications, manuscript handling, ethical assessments, and the final publication decision.

4. Prohibition of Generative AI in Peer Review

Peer reviewers are prohibited from using generative AI or AI-assisted systems to conduct the peer-review assessment. Reviewers must personally evaluate assigned manuscripts using their own expertise and independent scholarly judgment. The prohibition includes using AI to summarize or analyze manuscripts, assess methods or findings, identify strengths and weaknesses, prepare substantive review comments, or generate recommendations to the editor.

Reviewers must not upload or disclose any part of an unpublished manuscript, its figures, tables, supplementary materials, or confidential review correspondence to AI platforms. Reviewers remain personally responsible for the confidentiality, accuracy, fairness, and integrity of their assessments.

5. Non-Compliance and Ethical Oversight

Undisclosed, misleading, or inappropriate use of generative AI may be treated as a publication-ethics concern. The editorial team will assess relevant evidence and seek clarification when necessary. Depending on the nature and seriousness of the issue, the journal may request a corrected declaration or manuscript revision, reject a submission, or take appropriate post-publication action in accordance with its Publication Ethics policy.

This policy may be reviewed as AI technologies, scholarly publishing standards, and applicable journal-accreditation requirements evolve. The final responsibility for academic judgment and publication integrity always remains with the relevant human authors, editors, and reviewers.

Related policies: Declaration Statements  |  Peer Review Process  |  Publication Ethics