The most dominant scientific publishers, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and IEEE, reached an agreement about the guidelines put forward by the Committee on Publication Ethics in 2026. Although the ethics are common to all of the policies put forward by different publishers, there are some operational conditions set forth for each.
The 2026 Editorial Consensus: COPE Core Principles
As generative artificial intelligence tools proliferated across higher education and research institutions, scientific journals faced an urgent policy challenge: how to distinguish between legitimate language polishing and fraudulent content fabrication. In response, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), together with major publishing houses, formulated unified editorial guidelines in 2026.
These guidelines establish three fundamental pillars:
- Accountability Resides Solely with Humans: Authors are 100% accountable for all submitted text, data, and conclusions.
- Transparency Through Mandatory Disclosure: Authors must state if and how AI tools were used during manuscript preparation.
- Strict Integrity of Primary Data and Imagery: Generative AI must never be used to fabricate experimental results or scientific figures.
Universal Rule: The Absolute Prohibition on AI Authorship
For all leading publishers of scholarly work, one underlying consensus prevails with respect to AI technology – this cannot be counted upon to become an author. The very act of authorship carries with it liabilities that can be assumed by none but humans.
All four major publishers—Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, and IEEE—strictly prohibit naming AI systems or tools as co-authors. Authorship confers legal copyright, patent eligibility, and accountability for academic misconduct. Because AI models cannot be sued, cannot sign copyright transfer agreements, and cannot defend findings before an ethics panel, they cannot be authors.
Permitted Use: Language Polishing and Clarity Enhancement
Still, all major publishers without exception allow the use of automated means for achieving linguistic precision, grammatical correctness, and comprehensibility, recognizing the value of language improvement for the international academic community. Publishers’ only demand is that the involvement of AI in writing should be clearly disclosed.
Crucially, publishers explicitly recognize that tools enhancing readability and linguistic precision provide significant value, particularly for international scholars whose primary language is not English. Language polishing, grammatical correction, and syntax humanization are universally permitted, provided that the underlying scientific data and authorial concepts originate with human researchers.
Comparative Publisher Matrix: Elsevier, Nature, Wiley, and IEEE
| Publisher | AI Authorship Rule | Language Polishing Rule | Synthetic Images Rule | Disclosure Requirement |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elsevier | Strictly Prohibited | Permitted (Readability & Grammar) | Strictly Prohibited (Except explicit AI research) | Mandatory dedicated "Declaration of Generative AI" section before References |
| Springer Nature | Strictly Prohibited | Permitted (Grammar & Phrasing) | Strictly Prohibited (Zero synthetic artwork) | Mandatory statement in Methods or Acknowledgments section |
| Wiley | Strictly Prohibited | Permitted (Human Supervised) | Strictly Prohibited (Unless part of experimental protocol) | Mandatory disclosure in Acknowledgments or Data Availability Statement |
| IEEE | Strictly Prohibited | Permitted (Clarity Enhancement) | Permitted with Declaration (Full prompt & version metadata) | Explicit footnote disclosure on Title Page / Section 1 or Acknowledgments |
| Taylor & Francis | Strictly Prohibited | Permitted (Language Improvement) | Strictly Prohibited (Unless declared and verified) | Formal AI acknowledgment statement required in manuscript front-matter |
Copy-Paste Compliant AI Declaration Templates
It is recommended for authors going through the process of peer review to include detailed statements regarding the extent of their usage of tools. By applying changes through the use of HumanDoc changes, authors are enabled to provide an adequate audit history for the editor in preparation for publication.
To ensure full compliance when submitting your paper, use the following standardized disclosure statement recommended by editorial boards:
Declaration of Generative AI Assistance:
"During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors utilized HumanDoc to refine linguistic clarity, sentence rhythm, and grammatical flow in draft sections. Following automated text refinement, the authors thoroughly reviewed, edited, and verified all text, and take full responsibility for the content, citations, and conclusions of the publication."
