International Journal Of Molecular Sciences AI Policy: ChatGPT and Generative AI Disclosure Rules for IJMS Authors

IJMS authors should check four policy areas under MDPI's current AI framework before submission:

Rule 1: Disclose every AI tool used in manuscript preparation

Authors who use generative AI to generate text, data or graphics, or in study design, data collection, analysis or interpretation, must declare this during the submission process, describe how the tool was used in the Materials and Methods section, and give the tool's product details in the Acknowledgments section. MDPI's recommended acknowledgment statement is: "During the preparation of this manuscript/study, the author(s) used [tool name, version information] for the purposes of [description of use]. The authors have reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of this publication." Examples that REQUIRE disclosure at IJMS:

• For IJMS-targeted manuscripts addressing molecular biology research with reproducible methodology and adequate statistical power: using ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or similar to generate manuscript text passing through IJMS editorial review (MDPI exempts text editing such as grammar, structure, spelling, punctuation and formatting)

• For IJMS submissions: using AI to generate boilerplate text for limitations, ethics statements, or IJMS-specific response-to-reviewers letters that cite MDPI's framework

• For International Journal of Molecular Sciences submissions: using AI to translate manuscript text into English from another language; MDPI's policy does not name translation, so describe the use in the Materials and Methods if it goes beyond the text editing the policy exempts

• For IJMS literature reviews: using AI for citation discovery or summarizing prior IJMS work; MDPI's policy covers generative AI used to generate text or in data collection, analysis or interpretation

• For IJMS 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 IJMS, using grammar/spell checkers (Word) for line-level edits, when used without generative AI features for new manuscript content

• For IJMS submissions, using reference managers (Zotero, EndNote) for citation formatting against MDPI's style guide

• For International Journal of Molecular Sciences statistical analysis, using established statistical software (R, Stata, SPSS) where the algorithm is the established tool documented in IJMS'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 IJMS paper, particularly for molecular biology research with reproducible methodology and adequate statistical power-class submissions. Under MDPI'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 IJMS's editorial framework. This rule is consistent across all MDPI-published journals and applied at IJMS's desk-screen.

Rule 3: Declare AI-generated graphics and never present fabricated data

MDPI's AI policy requires authors to declare generative-AI use to generate data or graphics, and MDPI's research-integrity rules say presented data must be original and not fabricated, and that image files must not be manipulated or adjusted in any way that could lead to misinterpretation of the original image. In practice, figures that represent original research data should come from the actual research: 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) fall under the declaration requirement, and stating that the diagram is conceptual helps readers.

Rule 4: Peer review and editorial decisions are AI-free

MDPI states that generative AI tools should not be used by reviewers in the preparation of review reports, that limited use to improve the written quality of a report (grammar, structure, spelling, punctuation and formatting) may be acceptable but should be disclosed, and that reviewers must not upload manuscripts, in whole or in part, to any GenAI tool. Academic Editors must not use GenAI tools during the editorial review or decision-making process. A review report prepared with inappropriate AI use will be discarded.