Learn · Research integrity
Most journals now expect you to say whether you used AI, and their rules conflict. A vague "AI was used for editing" can read like a confession. Here is what a defensible disclosure actually contains, and where the policies disagree.
After this guide you will be able to:
It depends on the venue and on what you used AI for. Most policies exempt basic spelling and grammar tools, but require disclosure once AI touches drafting, images, data work, or a literature search. The catch is that venues disagree on the details, so "do I need to disclose?" has no single answer. The safe habit is to assume you disclose, then check your venue's rule and record it.
A vague statement is the problem, not the use. Name four things, plainly:
Then state that you, the author, checked and take responsibility for the output. That last clause is what turns a confession into a disclosure.
Vague: "AI was used in the preparation of this manuscript."
Specific: "We used [tool, version] for language editing of the Discussion in March 2026. The authors reviewed all edits and are responsible for the final text. No AI was used to generate data, results, or references."
Three recur. A statement so vague it reads as an admission. A co-author's AI session nobody else knew to disclose. And an AI-suggested reference that no one checked, which is the one that actually damages a paper. The fix for all three is a dated record kept while you work, not a statement reconstructed from memory at submission.
This is why it is hard, and it is not your fault. The rules disagree on specifics: some publishers want the tool, version, manufacturer, and dates; some require you to acknowledge any use at all; some exempt copy-editing entirely. General guidance from ICMJE and COPE sets the direction, but your journal's own instructions win. So check your venue's page, on the date you submit, and write down what it said.
The honest version. Disclosure is not a confession of wrongdoing. Used well, AI is a normal tool, and a specific, dated statement reads as competence. What damages a paper is the vague statement, the hidden session, and the unchecked citation, not the honest one.
Stop improvising the statement at submission.
You used AI somewhere, and now you have to disclose it under rules that keep changing across venues. That is not carelessness: the policies are fragmented, and most people write the statement from memory the night before they submit. The AI Disclosure Kit replaces that with a dated AI-use log your statement writes itself from, seven fill-in manuscript statements, thesis and grant templates, and a directory of 12 major publisher and funder policies checked against their own pages. It helps you document and decide. The journal's, funder's, and institution's rules always win, and what you disclose stays yours.
See the AI Disclosure Kit · €29See also how to write a scientific paper and make your analysis code citable. More guides are on the Learn page.