Nano Letters AI Policy: ChatGPT and Generative AI Disclosure Rules for Nano Letters Authors
Nano Letters (ACS) requires AI disclosure under the publisher rules. AI cannot be an author. This guide covers where to disclose, what to disclose, and the consequences of non-compliance for Nano Letters submissions.
Readiness scan
AI policy covered? See what Nano Letters reviewers are likely to push back on.
The AI policy governs disclosure, not how the science is judged. Run the Free Readiness Scan with Nano Letters as your target to see desk-rejection risk, likely reviewer concerns, and journal fit.
Quick answer: The Nano Letters AI policy is the ACS-wide policy that appears in every ACS journal's author guidelines. The use of AI tools for text or image generation should be disclosed in the manuscript within the Acknowledgments section with a description of when and how the tools were used, and more substantial use should be described in full in the Methods or another appropriate section.
AI cannot be listed as an author of any Nano Letters paper. AI-generated images must be disclosed (for graphics, with a brief description in the figure caption) and should not be used in Table of Contents graphics. Nano Letters (ACS) 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 Nano Letters submission readiness check which includes an automated AI-disclosure audit, or work through this guide manually. Need broader context? See the Nano Letters journal overview.
The Manusights Nano Letters readiness scan. This guide tells you what the ACS AI policy asks Nano Letters authors to disclose. 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 Nano Letters (ACS) 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: ACS Publishing Center. Manuscript constraints: 150-word abstract limit; the author guidelines give a preferred Letter length of 1,500 to 4,000 words and 3 to 6 figures, and also say less than 3,000 words and no more than 5 figures.
We reviewed the publisher's AI policy framework against current Nano Letters author guidelines (accessed 2026-10-09); evidence basis includes both publicly documented the publisher policy and our internal anonymized submission corpus. The applicable limits at Nano Letters are shown below: 150-word abstract limit, and a preferred Letter length of 1,500 to 4,000 words with 3 to 6 figures (the guidelines also say less than 3,000 words and no more than 5 figures).
The manuscript length guidance at this journal is a preferred 1,500 to 4,000 words for Letters (verify article-type-specific lengths in the latest author guidelines).
What does Nano Letters (ACS)'s AI policy require?
Nano Letters authors should check four policy areas under the publisher's current AI framework before submission:
Rule 1: Disclose every AI tool used in manuscript preparation
ACS asks authors to disclose the use of AI tools for text or image generation in the Acknowledgments section, with a description of when and how the tools were used. For more substantial use cases, give full details within the Methods or another appropriate section. Naming the tool and its version or access date makes the description specific. Examples where disclosure applies at Nano Letters:
- For Nano Letters-targeted manuscripts addressing nanoscale advance: using ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or similar to draft, polish, or edit manuscript text passing through Nano Letters editorial review
- For Nano Letters submissions: using AI to generate boilerplate text for limitations, ethics statements, or Nano Letters-specific response-to-reviewers letters that cite the publisher's framework
- For Nano Letters (ACS) submissions: using AI to translate manuscript text into English from another language; describe when and how the tool was used
- For Nano Letters literature reviews: using AI for citation discovery or summarizing prior Nano Letters work; the ACS policy lets the editor decide that AI use for extensive literature reviews is too extensive
- For Nano Letters analytical pipelines: AI-assisted code generation that affects the analysis is the kind of substantial use the ACS policy asks authors to describe in the Methods
Examples that do NOT require AI disclosure:
- At Nano Letters, using grammar/spell checkers (Word) for line-level edits, when used without generative AI features for new manuscript content
- For Nano Letters submissions, using reference managers (Zotero, EndNote) for citation formatting against the publisher's style guide
- For Nano Letters (ACS) statistical analysis, using established statistical software (R, Stata, SPSS) where the algorithm is the established tool documented in Nano Letters'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 Nano Letters paper, particularly for nanoscale advance-class submissions. Under the publisher'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 Nano Letters's editorial framework. This rule is consistent across all ACS journals.
Rule 3: AI-generated graphics must be disclosed and kept out of TOC graphics
ACS asks authors to disclose the use of AI tools for image generation in the Acknowledgments, and for graphics a brief description of the AI use should be included in the figure caption so readers know how the image was created. AI-generated images should not be used within Table of Contents graphics, because those graphics have no adjacent caption where the use of AI can be explained. AI use in journal cover artwork is permitted but should be disclosed in the cover art caption, naming the specific tool(s). Because authors are responsible for all submitted content, any figure that represents original research data should come from the actual research, and AI-generated conceptual diagrams (e.g., a schematic of a hypothesized mechanism) should be disclosed as such.
Rule 4: Reviewers must not put manuscripts into AI tools
ACS expects the opinions of consulted reviewers to be solely those of the reviewer. Disclosing any part of a submission or the peer review report itself to a text generation service (or any other third-party tool) is a breach of peer review confidentiality and a violation of the ACS Ethical Guidelines. Reviewer-side rules at other publishers can differ.
How does Nano Letters (ACS)'s AI policy compare to peer journals?
Rule | Nano Letters stance | the publisher default | Policy basis |
|---|---|---|---|
AI authorship | Prohibited | Prohibited | Authorship/accountability |
Disclosure location | Acknowledgments, with substantial use described in Methods | Acknowledgments, with substantial use described in Methods | Transparency (ACS AI policy) |
AI-generated figures | Allowed with disclosure in the figure caption; not in TOC graphics | Allowed with disclosure in the figure caption; not in TOC graphics | Graphics (ACS AI policy) |
Reviewer AI use | Reviewers may not share manuscripts with AI tools | Reviewers may not share manuscripts with AI tools | Peer-review confidentiality guidance |
Editorial discretion | Editor may reject or request revision if AI use is too extensive | Editor may reject or request revision if AI use is too extensive | Editorial Discretion (ACS AI policy) |
Source: ACS AI Best Practices and Policies plus Nano Letters author guidelines (accessed 2026-10-09).
What does AI disclosure look like in a Nano Letters Methods section?
Example disclosure language (ACS asks for a short note in the Acknowledgments, with fuller detail in the Methods for substantial use):
"For our nanoscale advance-focused manuscript at Nano Letters, 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 Nano Letters submission addressing nanoscale advance, 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 meet the ACS disclosure expectation:
- For Nano Letters addressing nanoscale advance: "AI tools were used in manuscript preparation." Too vague; ACS asks for a description of when and how the tools were used
- "We acknowledge AI assistance in the Acknowledgments." (The Acknowledgments are the right place, but the note still needs a description of when and how the tools were used.)
- "ChatGPT helped write this paper." (Insufficient detail on use case)
- No disclosure when AI was used (contrary to the ACS policy that all use of AI tools be disclosed within the submission)
Desk-screen risks we see before submission
For Nano Letters-targeted manuscripts, the patterns below are common AI-policy risk areas to check against the publisher's current guidance before submission. Of the manuscripts we screened in 2025 targeting Nano Letters and peer venues, the patterns below are the ones we check against the ACS AI policy.
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. ACS asks for the disclosure in the Acknowledgments section, with fuller detail in the Methods or another appropriate section for substantial use; other publishers place it elsewhere. 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. ACS asks for a description of when and how the tools were used; naming the tool and its version or access date makes that description specific. "AI tools were used" without specifics is likely to draw a query. Check whether your AI disclosure has the required specificity
What is the Nano Letters 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 | Nano Letters'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 Nano Letters-targeted submissions, 2025 cohort.
Submit If
- For Nano Letters (ACS) submissions on nanoscale advance: 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 Nano Letters: no AI tool is listed as an author; all listed authors meet authorship criteria and take responsibility for the final manuscript
- For Nano Letters (ACS): 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 Nano Letters 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 Nano Letters (ACS).
Of the manuscripts our team screened before submission to Nano Letters 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 Nano Letters-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.
Nano Letters (ACS) 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 Nano Letters authors do to stay ahead of AI policy changes?
The publisher's AI policy framework continues to evolve as 2026 brings new ICMJE recommendations, COPE guidance refinements, and journal-specific clarifications. Nano Letters authors targeting nanoscale advance submissions should track three signals throughout 2026:
Policy updates from the publisher. The ACS AI policy page carries a last-updated date (December 13, 2024 when we checked) and can change, so check it before each submission. Authors who write their disclosure language early avoid last-minute rewrites.
Field-specific clarifications for nanoscale advance. Different research domains see different AI use patterns. ACS leaves it to the editor to decide whether AI use in a given submission is too extensive. Authors who err on the side of more disclosure rather than less avoid the publication-ethics gray zone.
Reviewer confidentiality rules. ACS tells reviewers that disclosing any part of a submission or the review report to a text generation service or other third-party tool is a breach of confidentiality. Authors should expect reviewers not to run their manuscript through AI tools.
- Manusights internal preview corpus (150+ Nano Letters-targeted manuscripts, 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 disclosure. Nano Letters (ACS) follows the ACS AI policy that appears in every ACS journal's author guidelines: the use of AI tools for text or image generation should be disclosed in the manuscript within the Acknowledgments section with a description of when and how the tools were used, and more substantial use should be described in full in the Methods or another appropriate section. AI cannot be listed as an author, and the authors are responsible for all submitted content. The editor may decide that AI use is too extensive, which can lead to rejection or a request to reduce the AI-generated portions.
Disclose it in the Acknowledgments section with a description of when and how the tools were used; for more substantial use, give full details in the Methods or another appropriate section. For graphics, ACS asks for a brief description of the AI use in the figure caption. Naming the tool and its version or access date makes the description specific, and the disclosure should make clear that the human authors reviewed the final content.
ACS does not state a blanket ban, but it requires disclosure. Use of AI tools for image generation should be disclosed in the Acknowledgments, with a brief description of the AI use in the figure caption, and AI-generated images should not be used in Table of Contents graphics. The editor may decide that AI use is too extensive. Because authors are responsible for all submitted content, any figure that represents research data should come from the actual research.
Nano Letters 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.
Nano Letters follows the same ACS-wide policy as other ACS journals, whose author guidelines carry the same disclosure sentence (Acknowledgments, with substantial use described in the Methods). Other publishers may differ in disclosure location and in how they treat AI-generated images.
Sources
- ACS AI Best Practices and Policies (accessed 2026-10-09)
- Nano Letters author guidelines (accessed 2026-10-09)
- 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
Start here
Same journal, next question
- Nano Letters Submission Guide
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Nano Letters
- Is Nano Letters a Good Journal? JIF, Scope & Fit Guide
- Nano Letters Review Time: What Authors Can Actually Expect
- Nano Letters Impact Factor 2026: 9.1, Q1, Rank 10/79
- Nano Letters 'Under Review': What Each Status Means and When to Expect a Decision