跳转到主内容

非常抱歉,我们不完全支持您的浏览器。如果您可以选择,请升级到较新版本或使用 Mozilla Firefox、Microsoft Edge、Google Chrome 或 Safari 14 或更高版本。如果您无法进行此操作且需要支持,请将您的反馈发送给我们。

全新设计的官网为您带来全新体验,期待您的反馈在新的选项卡/窗口中打开

Elsevier
通过我们出版

Generative AI policies for journals

Generative AI* and AI-assisted technologies (“AI tools”) have been rapidly adopted in research and scholarly publishing, offering significant benefits while requiring clear standards for responsible and transparent use.

These policies aim to provide transparency and guidance to journal authors, reviewers and editors. Elsevier will continue to monitor developments in this area and will update these policies as practices, technologies and standards evolve.

For authors

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation - an overview

Elsevier recognizes the potential of AI tools, when used responsibly, to help researchers work efficiently, gain critical insights fast and achieve better outcomes.

Increasingly, these tools, including AI agents and deep research tools, are helping researchers to synthesize complex literature, provide an overview of a field or research question, identify research gaps, generate ideas and provide tailored support for tasks such as content organization and improving language and readability. Authors preparing a manuscript for an Elsevier journal can use AI tools to support them in these tasks. However, these tools must never be used as a substitute for human critical thinking, expertise and evaluation.

AI tools should always be applied with human oversight and control. Ultimately, authors are responsible and accountable for the contents of their work. This includes accountability for:

  • Carefully reviewing and verifying the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and impartiality of all AI-generated output (including checking the sources, as AI-generated references can be incorrect or fabricated).

  • Editing and adapting all material thoroughly to ensure the manuscript represents the author’s authentic and original contribution and reflects their own analysis, interpretation, insights and ideas.

  • Ensuring the use of any tools or sources, AI-based or otherwise, is made clear and transparent to readers — for the use of AI tools we require a disclosure statement upon submission.

  • Ensuring the manuscript is developed in a way that safeguards data privacy, intellectual property and other rights, by checking the terms and conditions of any AI tool that is used.

Responsible use of AI tools

Authors must check the terms and conditions of any AI tool that they use to ensure that the privacy and confidentiality of their data and input, including their unpublished manuscripts, is maintained. Particular care should be taken with any personally identifiable data Authors should check for factual errors and for any potential bias.

Authors should also check the terms and conditions of any AI tool they wish to use to ensure that, they only grant to the AI tool the right to use their materials to provide the service to them and that they do not grant to the AI tool any other rights to the materials that they input into the AI tool (including without limitation the right to train the AI tool on those materials). They must also ensure that the AI tool does not impose constraints on the use of outputs from the AI tool in a way that could restrict the subsequent publication of the relevant article.

Disclosure

Authors should disclose the use of AI tools for manuscript preparation in a separate AI declaration statement included in their manuscript upon submission. This statement will appear in the published article to ensure transparency. Authors should document their use of AI, including the name of the AI tool used, the purpose of its use, and the extent of their oversight. Declaring the use of AI tools supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant AI tool. Please note: Basic checks of grammar, spelling and punctuation do not need a declaration statement. However, when an AI tool makes substantive changes to sentence structure or organization of a part of the text, this should be disclosed.

In addition, authors are not required to disclose the use of AI tools or features within specialist disability-related assistive technology, provided these are used solely for accessibility purposes.

Where AI tools are used as part of the research process rather than manuscript preparation, this use should be described in detail in the Methods section.

Authors are recommended to use the following format for their declaration:

Title of section: Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process

Statement: During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the published article.

Authorship: Authors should not list AI tools as an author or co-author, nor cite AI tools as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Each (co-) author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved and authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission. Authors are also responsible for ensuring that the work is original and has not been previously published, that the stated authors qualify for authorship, and the work does not infringe third party rights, and should familiarize themselves with Elsevier’s Ethics in Publishing policy before they submit.

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images and artwork

The use of AI tools for the creation of figures, images and artwork is only permitted in specific circumstances.

Images generally fall into three categories, and the permitted use of AI tools differs for each of these categories, as described below.

(1) Explanatory images

Explanatory images illustrate concepts, processes or relationships (such as flow charts, decision trees, timelines or schematic conceptual illustrations).

Authors may use AI tools to support the creation of certain types of explanatory images for publication, such as flow charts, decision trees, timelines, schematic conceptual illustrations, or experimental workflow diagrams.

Where AI tools are used for this purpose, the principles of responsible use, human oversight, transparency, disclosure and authorship, as described in the section on “Authorship” apply.

The use of AI tools should be disclosed in the caption of each image (including the specific tool, version, and how the tool was used) and in the general AI disclosure statement in the article.

(2) Research and data images

Research and data images present research data or results. These include (a) data visualizations, which are generated from underlying datasets through analytical, computational, or statistical workflows (such as plots, charts, graphs, or heatmaps) and (b) primary research images, which represent primary observed or experimental data (such as microscopy, histology, western blots, radiology scans, or patient images).

2a) Data visualizations

Data visualizations present results derived from underlying datasets through analytical, computational, or statistical workflows (such as plots, charts, graphs, or heatmaps).

AI tools must not be used to fabricate results, invent or alter underlying data, or generate figures that are not faithfully derived from the underlying data and methods used in the research.

AI tools may be used to support the creation of data visualizations only when the visual output is directly derived from underlying data. Such visualizations must be created via reproducible analytical, computational, or statistical methods that are clearly reported within the Methods section. Where AI tools are used in the generation of data visualizations, authors should disclose the name of the model or tool, the version used, and the developer or manufacturer, in the Methods section. Authors should adhere to the AI tools’ usage policies and ensure proper attribution where required. Authors may be asked to provide documentation of their AI use and the original, unprocessed images for editorial assessment.

2b) Primary research images

Primary research images represent primary observed or experimental data (such as microscopy, histology, western blots, radiology scans, or patient images).

AI tools must not be used to create or alter images that represent primary observed or experimental data that were not directly obtained in the research. This includes adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance, which should only be done using established image processing software. Please refer to our artwork instructions for more information.

Use of AI tools in research methods

This policy does not prevent the use of AI tools in formal research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches used for collection and/or interpretation of the underlying research data or predictive modelling of clinical outcomes based on patient data). Where the use of AI tools forms part of the research design or research methods, the use of the tools must be described in a reproducible manner in the Methods section. This should include the name of the model or tool, the version used, and the developer or manufacturer, where applicable. Authors should adhere to the tools’ usage policies and ensure proper attribution where required.

(3) Graphical abstracts and cover art

Graphical abstracts and cover art are created to visually summarize or represent the article rather than form part of the scientific content of the manuscript.

General-purpose generative AI image tools must not be used to create graphical abstracts. Graphical abstracts are often complex visual summaries that combine multiple graphical elements, icons, and design components.

Authors are encouraged to use dedicated scientific illustration tools when preparing graphical abstracts. Dedicated illustration tools offer well-defined licensing terms which support responsible use of copyrighted and intellectual property.

The use of AI tools in the creation of journal cover art may in some cases be permitted. Authors must obtain prior permission from the journal editor and publisher before submitting AI-generated cover art. Authors must also demonstrate that all necessary permissions have been obtained for any third-party material used and ensure that appropriate content attribution is provided.

Author responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and originality of all images submitted for publication. This includes verifying that the concepts presented are accurate and that all images reflect the author’s own work and ideas. Where images are based on existing artwork or graphics, appropriate attribution must be provided and permission from any relevant rights holder must be obtained before submission. Images that duplicate or refer to existing copyrighted images, real people, or others’ identifiable products or brands must not be generated, nor any likeness of an individual’s voice.

For further information please refer to the section on “Responsible use of AI tools” above.

For reviewers

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal peer review process

Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem and Elsevier upholds the highest standards of integrity in this process (see Duties of Reviewers). When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s manuscript, it must be treated as a confidential document.

Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into an AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

Reviewers are responsible for the scientific assessment and judgement of the manuscripts they are evaluating. AI tools cannot replace a reviewer’s critical thinking or independent evaluation as there is a risk that the technology may generate incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions. Reviewers remain fully responsible and accountable for the content of their review reports.

AI tools may therefore only be used in a supportive capacity, for example to improve the language and structure of a review report, or to assist with a background literature search, provided that confidentiality is maintained and human control and oversight are exercised.

Furthermore, reviewers should only use private AI tools to assist in the review process, as explained below.

Disclosure

Reviewers should disclose AI use in their review reports, including the tool used and purpose of the use. Basic checks for spelling and grammar do not need to be disclosed.

Suggested disclosure statement:

During the preparation of this report, I used [NAME OF TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, I reviewed and edited the content as needed and I take full responsibility for its content.

What is a private AI tool?

When we refer to a "private" AI tool, we mean a version of an AI tool that does not retain, re-use, share, or learn from the content you submit to it. This means that when you paste or upload any content into the tool, that content should not be retained beyond what is necessary to provide the service, and must not be used to train or improve the AI model or shared with any third party.

Before using any AI tool, you should verify the following:

  • Read the privacy policy and terms of service. Look specifically for statements about data retention and model training. A private tool will clearly state that user inputs are not retained beyond what is necessary to provide the service and are not used for training. In addition, users should ensure that the tool they use provides the necessary rights for publication.

  • Prefer paid or enterprise versions over free tools. Many AI tools that are free to use are not private by default. We recommend checking whether your institution offers an enterprise version of a tool or a locally hosted model. Enterprise versions or locally hosted models are more likely to include privacy protection, although this is not guaranteed and should still be verified.

For editors

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the editorial process

Academic editors play a vital role in representing and upholding the journal’s profile and reputation. Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans (see Duties of Editors).

When managing the evaluation of a manuscript, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document.

Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into an AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

Editors are responsible for the editorial assessment and decision-making process. AI tools cannot replace an editor’s critical thinking, independent evaluation or final decision-making. Editors remain fully responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision and its communication to authors.

Editors may therefore only use AI tools in a supportive capacity, for example to improve the language or structure of their decision letters, or to assist with a background literature search, provided that confidentiality is maintained and human control and oversight are exercised.

Editors should only use private AI tools to assist in the editorial process, as explained above. Journals will inform authors, through the Guide for Authors and editorial communications, that AI tools may be used in a supportive capacity in the editorial process.

How Elsevier currently uses AI in the publication process

  • Our editors have access to AI tools that assist in identifying relevant reviewers, matching the scope of submissions, and detecting duplicate submissions.

  • Our authors are supported with tools such as our Journal Finderopens in new tab/window, which help them identify suitable journals for their work. Additionally, if a paper is not accepted by the preferred journal, our Article Transfer Service may suggest alternative publication options using expert recommendations or matching algorithms.

  • Our teams use AI tools to support them in:

    • Conducting technical checks of submitted papers, such as checking for adherence to submission guidelines and assessing for completeness.

    • Performing research integrity checks to ensure compliance with our policies.

    • Supporting the post-acceptance stage of publication, including proof preparation, copy editing, and identifying inconsistencies or inaccuracies in the final paper.

We are committed to ensuring that human oversight remains at the core of decision-making. Our AI tools conform to the RELX Responsible AI Principlesopens in new tab/window and serve as a valuable support mechanism which empowers our experts to make informed decisions. Our technologies are subject to rigorous evaluation of bias and are compliant with data privacy and data security requirements.

*Please note that the range of AI use varies depending on the journal. If you have any questions, please contact the specific journal directly.

Frequently asked questions

Authors

FAQ for authors about our generative AI policies

Images and artwork

FAQ about our generative AI policies for images and artwork

Reviewers

FAQ for reviewers about our generative AI policies

Editors

FAQ for editors about our generative AI policies

* Generative AI is a type of artificial intelligence technology that can produce various types of content, including text, images, audio, and synthetic data. Examples include ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini, Claude, and DALL·E.

Policy updated June 2026.