Journals are advising authors how to use generative AI for papers, but typically advocate their own novel approach. The result is a babel tower, where there are no common standards understood by all.
Giovanni Cacciamani (Uni Southern California) and colleagues scoped academic publishers and scientific journals’ guidance for authors last year – their findings are in the British Medical Journal.
They report variations in what publishers and journals advise authors they can and cannot do with AI, including research, writing, image generation, disclosure and blanket bans on including generative artificial intelligence as an author. But while almost all journals have guidelines, less than a quarter of publishers do.
Sorry, we couldn't find any posts. Please try a different search.