Advanced Functional Materials AI Policy: ChatGPT and Generative AI Disclosure Rules for AFM Authors
Advanced Functional Materials requires AI disclosure under Wiley rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for AFM submissions.
Readiness scan
AI policy covered? See what Advanced Functional Materials reviewers are likely to push back on.
The AI policy governs disclosure, not how the science is judged. Run the Free Readiness Scan with Advanced Functional Materials as your target to see desk-rejection risk, likely reviewer concerns, and journal fit.
Advanced Functional Materials at a glance
The figures Advanced Functional Materials publishes about speed, selectivity and cost, each linked to the page we read it on. They describe the journal, not your manuscript's chances.
Quick answer: The Advanced Functional Materials AI policy follows Wiley's rules calibrated to functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration submissions.
AI tools can be used for manuscript preparation but substantive generative-AI use must be disclosed in the location the publisher requires; basic copy editing may be treated differently, and the journal may request documentation if a disclosure is not provided. AI cannot be listed as an author of any AFM paper. AI-generated figures and schematics representing original research data are prohibited under AFM's image-integrity standard.
Advanced Functional Materials editors can treat undisclosed substantive AI use as a publication-ethics problem, with the response depending on the publisher policy, the timing, and whether the scientific record is affected.
Run the AFM submission readiness check which includes an automated AI-disclosure audit, or work through this guide manually. Need broader context? See the AFM journal overview.
The Manusights AFM readiness scan. This guide tells you what Advanced Functional Materials's editors look for when verifying AI disclosure at desk-screen. The scan tells you whether your manuscript has the disclosure language required by the current journal policy before you submit. We have reviewed manuscripts targeting Advanced Functional Materials and peer venues; the named patterns below are patterns we check against the publisher's public AI policy and common editorial-screening risks.
60-day money-back guarantee. Your manuscript is not used for model training, and access is limited to the review workflow.
Editorial detail (for desk-screen calibration). Verify the current Editor-in-Chief and handling-editor list on the journal's editorial-team page before quoting any name in a submission cover letter. Submission portal: Wiley journal page. Manuscript constraints: 200-word abstract limit; AFM publishes no hard main-text cap (a typical Research Article is around 3000 to 8000 words including 3 to 8 display items, and submitted manuscripts can be any length).
We reviewed Wiley's AI policy framework against current AFM author guidelines (accessed 2026-10-08); evidence basis includes both publicly documented Wiley policy and our internal anonymized submission corpus. The applicable limits at AFM are shown below: 200-word abstract limit and no hard main-text cap.
Authors weighing Small as the alternative can read the AI policy for Small side by side with this one.
AFM does not publish a main-text word limit: a typical Research Article is around 3000 to 8000 words including 3 to 8 display items, and a typical Review is 10 000 to 20 000 words, but submitted manuscripts can be any length. The named editorial-culture quirk: AFM editors require device-level demonstration or quantified property comparison to state-of-the-art.
What does Advanced Functional Materials's AI policy require?
AFM authors should check four policy areas under Wiley's current AI framework before submission:
Rule 1: Disclose every AI tool used in manuscript preparation
Authors should document substantive generative-AI use with the tool name, version or access date, and how it was used. Use the disclosure location specified by the current publisher policy, often Methods, the Acknowledgements or a dedicated AI-use statement, rather than burying it in the cover letter. Examples that REQUIRE disclosure at AFM:
- For AFM-targeted manuscripts addressing functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration: using ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or similar to draft, polish, or edit manuscript text passing through AFM editorial review
- For AFM submissions: using AI to generate boilerplate text for limitations, ethics statements, or AFM-specific response-to-reviewers letters that cite Wiley's framework
- For Advanced Functional Materials submissions: using AI to translate manuscript text into English from another language, since Wiley's guidance lists translation as a use that requires disclosure
- For AFM literature reviews: using AI for citation discovery or summarizing prior AFM work; Wiley's policy applies regardless of citation context
- For AFM analytical pipelines: AI-assisted code generation requires Methods or code disclosure under the current publisher policy, particularly when code affects analysis
Examples that do NOT require AI disclosure:
- At AFM, using grammar/spell checkers (Word) for line-level edits, when used without generative AI features for new manuscript content
- For AFM submissions, using reference managers (Zotero, EndNote) for citation formatting against Wiley's style guide
- For Advanced Functional Materials statistical analysis, using established statistical software (R, Stata, SPSS) where the algorithm is the established tool documented in AFM's methodological norm, not a generative AI
Rule 2: AI cannot be an author
No AI tool can be listed as an author of a AFM paper, particularly for functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration-class submissions. Under Wiley's policy: authorship requires the ability to take responsibility for the content, agree to be accountable for accuracy, and to consent to publication. AI tools cannot do any of these in AFM's editorial framework. This rule is consistent across all Wiley-published journals and applied at AFM's desk-screen.
Rule 3: AI-generated figures are prohibited for original research data
Advanced Functional Materials editorial team does not accept AI-generated images, figures, or schematics that represent original research data in functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration-class submissions. AI tools may assist with figure layout (axis labeling, color schemes) but the underlying data visualization must come from the actual research. AI-generated diagrams used for conceptual illustrations (e.g., a schematic of a hypothesized mechanism) require explicit disclosure and a statement that the diagram is conceptual.
Rule 4: Disclose AI use in peer review participation
Reviewer AI-use rules are publisher-specific and can change quickly. Reviewers must follow the journal's confidentiality and AI-use policy; authors should not assume that reviewer-side AI rules are identical across journals in the same portfolio.
How does Advanced Functional Materials's AI policy compare to peer journals?
Rule | AFM stance | Wiley default | Policy basis |
|---|---|---|---|
AI authorship | Prohibited | Prohibited | Authorship/accountability |
Disclosure location | Methods section, Acknowledgements or a disclosure statement, as applicable | Acknowledgements for drafting and editing help, Methods for research use, figure captions for visuals | Journal policy and Wiley AI guidelines |
AI-generated figures | Prohibited for original data | Prohibited | Image-integrity guidance |
Reviewer AI use | Disclosure required | Disclosure required | Peer-review confidentiality guidance |
Documentation | Journal may request documentation if disclosure is not provided | Journal may request documentation if disclosure is not provided | Wiley AI guidelines |
Source: Wiley AI guidelines (accessed 2026-10-08) plus AFM author guidelines.
What does AI disclosure look like in a AFM Methods section?
Acceptable disclosure language for AFM submissions (the journal allows the Methods section, a disclosure or the Acknowledgements, as applicable; Wiley places drafting and editing help in the Acknowledgements and research-methodology use in the Methods):
"For our functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration-focused manuscript at AFM, we used ChatGPT-4o (OpenAI, version dated October 2024) to polish English-language phrasing in the Introduction and Discussion sections. We did not use generative AI for data analysis, figure generation, or substantive manuscript content. All authors reviewed and edited the AI-assisted text and take responsibility for the final manuscript."
Or, for AI-assisted code:
"For this AFM submission addressing functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration, initial Python code for the Bayesian regression analysis was drafted with Claude 3.5 Sonnet (Anthropic, version dated December 2024). All code was reviewed, modified, and validated by the authors before use; the final version is available at [repository URL]. Statistical inference was performed using the established R package brms."
What does NOT pass AFM's desk-screen:
- For AFM addressing functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration: "AI tools were used in manuscript preparation." Too vague; Wiley's guidance asks for the tool name and version, the date or year of use, the tool's role, and the author's role in reviewing the output
- "We acknowledge AI assistance." (The Acknowledgements are an acceptable location for drafting and editing help, but the statement still needs the tool name, version or date, and role.)
- "ChatGPT helped write this paper." (Insufficient detail on use case)
- No disclosure when AI was used (publication-ethics violation)
Desk-screen risks we see before submission
For AFM-targeted manuscripts, the patterns below are common AI-policy risk areas to check against the publisher's current guidance before submission.
AI disclosure missing despite obvious AI-assisted phrasing. Substantive AI-assisted drafting without a required disclosure can trigger an editorial query. Check whether your manuscript reads as AI-assisted
AI disclosure placed in the wrong manuscript location. This is a common mistake in functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration submissions we see. Publisher policies differ on whether AI disclosure belongs in Methods, a dedicated AI-use statement, acknowledgments, or another manuscript section. A misplaced disclosure can create an avoidable submission query. Check whether your AI disclosure is in the right section
Generic disclosure language without tool name and version. Wiley's guidance asks for the tool name and version, the date or year of use, and the tool's role. "AI tools were used" without specifics is the gap we see most often. Check whether your AI disclosure has the required specificity
What is the AFM AI-policy compliance timeline?
Stage | Duration | What happens |
|---|---|---|
Author drafts AI disclosure | 30-60 minutes | Identify all AI use, gather tool versions, write Methods paragraph |
Co-author review of disclosure | 1-2 days | All authors confirm the disclosure is complete and accurate |
Editorial desk-screen check | 1-2 weeks | AFM's editorial team checks the disclosure against the manuscript when policy review is triggered |
Editorial query (if disclosure incomplete) | 5-10 days | Editor requests revision before sending to peer review |
Reviewer AI-disclosure check | During peer review | Reviewers verify the disclosure matches the manuscript style |
Source: Manusights internal review of AFM-targeted submissions, 2025 cohort.
Submit If
- For Advanced Functional Materials submissions on functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration: the manuscript documents substantive generative-AI use with the tool name, version or access date, specific use case, and disclosure location required by the current journal policy
- For AFM: no AI tool is listed as an author; all listed authors meet authorship criteria and take responsibility for the final manuscript
- For Advanced Functional Materials: figures and schematics representing original research data come from the actual research, with any AI-assisted image or figure workflow checked against the current journal image policy
- For AFM submissions: the disclosure makes clear that human authors reviewed the AI-assisted material and take responsibility for the final manuscript
Readiness check
Run the scan while the topic is in front of you.
See score, top issues, and journal-fit signals before you submit.
Think Twice If
- The manuscript contains substantive AI-assisted drafting but no disclosure; this can trigger an editorial query if the journal requires disclosure for that use case.
- The AI disclosure is placed in a section the current journal policy does not recognize.
- The disclosure language is generic without naming the tool, version or access date, and use case; journals may query or return manuscripts with this gap.
- Any figure, schematic, or image workflow used generative AI without being checked against the current journal image policy.
Manusights submission-corpus signal for Advanced Functional Materials.
Of the manuscripts our team screened before submission to AFM and peer venues in 2025, the AI-policy compliance gap most consistent across the cohort is generic disclosure language without tool-version specificity. In our analysis of anonymized AFM-targeted submissions, manuscripts with complete AI disclosure (tool name, version, specific use case, all-author confirmation) clear desk-screen at the same rate as manuscripts without AI use; manuscripts with incomplete or missing disclosure trigger editorial queries that add 1-2 weeks to the timeline.
Advanced Functional Materials follows the publisher's public AI policy, but authors should verify the current journal page before submission because AI-use rules, disclosure locations, and image guidance continue to change.
What can AFM authors do to stay ahead of AI policy changes?
Wiley's AI policy framework continues to evolve as 2026 brings new ICMJE recommendations, COPE guidance refinements, and journal-specific clarifications. AFM authors targeting functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration submissions should track three signals throughout 2026:
Quarterly policy updates from Wiley. The publisher's public AI policy guidance is updated over time. AFM authors who pre-register their disclosure language at submission time tend to face fewer revisions during the 2026 transition period than authors who write boilerplate disclosures.
Field-specific clarifications for functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration. Different research domains see different AI use patterns. AFM's editorial team has been refining what counts as "substantive AI use" versus "ancillary AI assistance" for functional-materials advance with quantified property metrics and device-level demonstration work. Authors who err on the side of more disclosure rather than less avoid the publication-ethics gray zone.
Reviewer disclosure norms. As Wiley extends AI-disclosure rules to peer reviewers, the response rate from AFM reviewers may shift. Authors should expect that reviewers' use of AI tools to draft review feedback is now also subject to disclosure under Wiley's guidance.
- Manusights internal preview corpus (2025 cohort)
Competitor pricing and feature claims on this page reflect publicly listed information as of 2026-05-14. Pricing and features may change; verify against each vendor's current product page before decision-making.
Frequently asked questions
Yes, with policy-required disclosure. Advanced Functional Materials follows Wiley's current AI policy and broader publication-ethics guidance. AI tools can be used for language editing, manuscript preparation, and analysis support, but substantive generative-AI use must be disclosed in the location the publisher requires; basic copy editing may be treated differently. AI cannot be listed as an author, and human authors bear full responsibility for the content.
Use the disclosure location required by the current journal policy. For substantive generative-AI use, name the tool, version or access date, and use case, and make clear that human authors reviewed the final content. The journal may check this during submission screening, peer review, or production.
No. Advanced Functional Materials prohibits AI-generated figures, schematics, and images intended to represent original research data. AI tools may assist with figure layout and labeling, but the underlying data and visualizations must come from the actual research. This rule is part of Wiley's broader image-integrity policy.
AFM can treat undisclosed substantive AI use as a publication-ethics problem. The response depends on the publisher policy, the timing, and whether the scientific record is affected.
The shared publisher-level policy usually covers AI authorship, disclosure, and image or figure restrictions. Journal-specific guidance can differ in disclosure location, article-type expectations, and how the policy is checked during screening.
Sources
- Wiley AI guidelines (accessed 2026-10-08)
- AFM author guidelines (accessed 2026-10-08)
- ICMJE recommendations on AI use (accessed 2026-05-08)
- COPE guidance on AI in research publication (accessed 2026-05-08)
Free guide
AI cannot be an author. None of the 49 policies we checked allows it.
Not a co-author, not an acknowledged contributor with a byline, not "with assistance from". What they do require is a disclosure, and the wording matters. The guide has the statement filled in, with what each publisher asks for beside it.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Private API processing. Your manuscript is not used to train models.
Put the guidance to work
Choose the practical next step for your research.
Start with the question in front of you, or use the guided learning path when you want a clearer view of the full publishing process.
Where to go next
Same journal, next question
- Advanced Functional Materials Submission Guide: Requirements & Editorial Fit
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Advanced Functional Materials
- Is Advanced Functional Materials a Good Journal? Function Over Composition
- Advanced Functional Materials APC and Open Access: Current Wiley Fee, Agreement Coverage, and the Real Submission Question
- Is Your Paper Ready for Advanced Functional Materials? Function Over Novelty
- Rejected from Advanced Functional Materials? The 7 Best Journals to Submit Next