Rsc Advances AI Policy: ChatGPT and Generative AI Disclosure Rules for RSC Advances Authors

Acceptable disclosure language for RSC Advances submissions:

"For our chemistry research-focused manuscript at RSC Advances, 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 RSC Advances submission addressing chemistry research, 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 RSC Advances's desk-screen:

• For RSC Advances addressing chemistry research: "AI tools were used in manuscript preparation." Too vague for RSC editorial review of RSC Advances submissions; the RSC Advances editorial team needs the specific tool name, version, and specific use case

• "We acknowledge AI assistance in the Acknowledgments." (RSC asks for the tool name and version in the Acknowledgements, but that line alone is not enough: the declaration goes in the cover letter and the use is described in the Experimental or Materials and Methods section.)

• "ChatGPT helped write this paper." (Insufficient detail on use case)

• No disclosure when AI was used (publication-ethics violation)

For RSC Advances-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 RSC Advances and peer venues, the patterns below are common policy-risk areas we see in submissions and check against the publisher's current guidance.

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. RSC Advances editorial team flags this as a common mistake against chemistry research submissions. 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. RSC requires the tool name, its specific model or version, and a statement of how the tool was used. "AI tools were used" without specifics is not enough. Check whether your AI disclosure has the required specificity

Source: Manusights internal review of RSC Advances-targeted submissions, 2025 cohort.

RSC's AI policy framework continues to evolve as 2026 brings new ICMJE recommendations, COPE guidance refinements, and journal-specific clarifications. RSC Advances authors targeting chemistry research submissions should track three signals throughout 2026:

Policy updates from RSC. The publisher's public AI policy guidance is updated over time. RSC Advances 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 chemistry research. Different research domains see different AI use patterns. RSC separates AI-assisted copy editing, which does not need to be declared, from other uses such as drafting text, translating content, creating or editing figures, refining code or compiling references, which must be declared. Authors who err on the side of more disclosure rather than less avoid the publication-ethics gray zone.

Reviewer disclosure norms. RSC's reviewer guidance already bars reviewers from uploading manuscripts to GenAI tools or using them to generate report content, and asks them to disclose copy-editing use to the editor. A report from a reviewer suspected of undisclosed AI use will not be used.

• Manusights internal preview corpus (150+ RSC Advances-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.