Heritage Technology and Applied Science (HTAS) recognizes that Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and AI-assisted technologies, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Microsoft Copilot, DeepSeek, Perplexity AI, and similar tools, can support scholarly communication when used responsibly.

This policy establishes principles governing the ethical, transparent, and responsible use of Generative AI throughout the editorial and publication process. It applies to authors, editors, reviewers, and editorial staff involved in manuscripts submitted to HTAS.

01 Purpose

The primary objectives of this policy are to:

• Maintain the integrity and reliability of scholarly publications.
• Ensure transparency regarding the use of AI-assisted technologies.
• Protect confidentiality during editorial and peer-review processes.
• Uphold recognized standards of publication ethics.
• Promote responsible use of AI in heritage technology and applied science research.

02 Policy for Authors

2.1 Permitted Uses

Authors may use Generative AI as a supportive tool for activities such as:

• Improving grammar, spelling, and language clarity.
• Enhancing readability.
• Organizing ideas or manuscript structure.
• Formatting references or text.
• Supporting preliminary exploration of literature or research ideas.

The use of Generative AI must never replace the authors' scientific reasoning, interpretation, methodology, data analysis, or conclusions.

2.2 Author Responsibility

Authors remain fully responsible for:

• The originality of the manuscript.
• The accuracy of all statements, data, and citations.
• Compliance with publication ethics.
• The validity of research findings and interpretations.
• Ensuring that AI-generated content has been critically reviewed and verified before submission.

The use of Generative AI does not transfer academic, ethical, or legal responsibility from the authors.

2.3 Disclosure Requirement

If Generative AI has been used during manuscript preparation beyond basic spelling or grammar correction, authors must disclose its use within the manuscript.

The disclosure should identify:

• The name of the AI tool.
• The purpose of its use.
• Confirmation that the generated content has been reviewed and validated by the authors.

2.4 Prohibited Uses

• Listing any AI system as an author or co-author.
• Attributing copyright or authorship to AI.
• Fabricating or manipulating research findings using AI.
• Generating fictitious references, citations, datasets, images, or experimental results.
• Submitting AI-generated content without appropriate human verification.

03 AI-Generated Images, Figures, and Multimedia

Authors must ensure that every image, figure, illustration, graphical abstract, visualization, or multimedia element accurately represents the underlying research.

If AI-assisted image generation or modification has been used:

• Its use must be transparently disclosed.
• Authors must possess the legal rights to publish the material.
• Authors remain responsible for authenticity and scientific accuracy.
• AI-generated or modified visuals must not misrepresent research findings.

This requirement is particularly important for research involving cultural heritage documentation, digital heritage, 3D reconstruction, conservation assessment, remote sensing, scientific visualization, and other forms of research evidence.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to request original source files, raw data, or additional documentation whenever necessary.

04 Policy for Reviewers

Peer review is a confidential process. Reviewers must not upload any submitted manuscript, figures, tables, supplementary files, reviewer comments, or correspondence into publicly available AI systems or external AI services.

This prohibition exists because:

• Manuscripts are confidential intellectual property.
• AI services may retain or process uploaded information.
• Confidential research must not be disclosed to third-party systems.

Generative AI must not be used to perform, replace, or substantially generate scientific peer-review judgments. Reviewers remain solely responsible for all review reports submitted to HTAS.

05 Policy for Editors

Editors may use AI-assisted technologies only for limited administrative or language-related purposes, including:

• Language refinement.
• Grammar checking.
• Formatting assistance.
• Workflow support.

Editors must not use Generative AI to evaluate scientific quality, determine manuscript acceptance or rejection, generate editorial decisions, or replace independent editorial judgment.

All editorial decisions shall be made exclusively by qualified human editors.

06 Confidentiality

All unpublished manuscripts are confidential documents. Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted materials throughout the editorial process.

Any use of AI technologies must comply with applicable privacy regulations, copyright requirements, and ethical standards for scholarly publishing.

07 Ethical Compliance

The use of Generative AI does not exempt authors from compliance with:

• Publication ethics.
• Plagiarism policies.
• Copyright regulations.
• Research integrity requirements.
• Data availability and research transparency requirements.

Any misuse of Generative AI resulting in fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, citation manipulation, or other forms of research misconduct will be handled according to the applicable HTAS publication ethics and research misconduct policies.

08 Editorial Authority

HTAS reserves the right to:

• Request additional disclosure regarding the use of Generative AI.
• Require revisions when AI-generated material is considered inappropriate.
• Reject manuscripts that violate this policy.
• Investigate suspected misuse of AI according to established publication ethics procedures.

09 Policy Review

Because AI technologies continue to evolve rapidly, this policy may be reviewed and revised periodically to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, technological practices, ethical standards, and applicable regulations.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to update this policy whenever necessary.

References

This policy has been developed with consideration of recognized guidance on the responsible use of artificial intelligence in scholarly publishing, including:

• STM Association – Recommendations for a Classification of AI Use in Academic Manuscript Preparation.
• Elsevier – The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Writing and Peer Review.
• World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) – Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts.
• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) – Artificial Intelligence and Authorship Guidance.