GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY

The Polaris Global Journal of Scholarly Research and Trends (PGJSRT) recognizes that Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) creates important questions concerning authorship, originality, accountability, confidentiality, data integrity, and the reliability of scholarly content.

1. AI AUTHORSHIP

Artificial intelligence systems cannot satisfy scholarly authorship requirements.

AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors.

Human authors remain fully responsible for all content submitted to PGJSRT.

2. AUTHOR RESPONSIBILITY

Authors are responsible for:

• Accuracy
• Originality
• References
• Data
• Analysis
• Interpretation
• Ethical compliance
• Conclusions
• All submitted manuscript content

The use of an AI tool does not transfer responsibility away from human authors.

3. PROHIBITED AI-RELATED PRACTICES

PGJSRT prohibits:

• Fabricated references
• Fabricated data
• Invented quotations
• Misleading AI-generated evidence
• AI-generated or AI-manipulated images that misrepresent research findings
• Undisclosed use of AI where journal policy requires disclosure
• Use of AI to create fraudulent scholarly content

4. AI DISCLOSURE

Where Generative AI has been used in a manner permitted by journal policy, authors must transparently disclose:

• The name of the tool
• The purpose for which it was used
• The extent of its use

Basic tools used solely for spelling, grammar, formatting, or conventional reference-management assistance do not normally require disclosure unless they substantially generate or alter scholarly content.

5. PEER-REVIEW CONFIDENTIALITY

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts, unpublished findings, author information, supplementary material, or review correspondence into public or third-party Generative AI systems where doing so may compromise confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, or research integrity.

6. EDITORIAL CONFIDENTIALITY

Editors must protect confidential manuscript information and must not upload unpublished manuscripts into external AI systems in ways that compromise confidentiality, intellectual property, or data protection.

7. AI DETECTION

Automated AI-detection tools may be considered as screening information, but their outputs must not by themselves establish misconduct.

Suspected violations should be evaluated using evidence, context, author explanation, and appropriate editorial investigation.

8. ACCOUNTABILITY

Authors, reviewers, and editors remain personally accountable for their scholarly and professional responsibilities regardless of whether AI-assisted tools are used.

Suspected violations will be handled under PGJSRT's Publication Ethics and Research Integrity Policy.