Editorial Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence

Aligned with CNPq Ordinance No. 2,664/2026, good practices in scientific integrity, and international editorial guidelines on the use of Artificial Intelligence in research, submission, and manuscript evaluation.

Revista da ANPEGE recognizes that Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, especially generative AI systems, have become part of different stages of scientific work, including bibliographic research, writing, translation, language revision, data analysis, and the preparation of editorial materials. The use of these tools, however, must be guided by principles of transparency, human responsibility, scientific integrity, confidentiality, and traceability.

This policy establishes guidelines for authors, reviewers, and the editorial team regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence tools in manuscripts submitted to the journal, during peer review, and in subsequent editorial stages.

1. Introduction and purpose

This policy aims to guide the responsible use of Artificial Intelligence tools within Revista da ANPEGE, preventing practices that may compromise authorship, originality, the confidentiality of the evaluation process, data integrity, the reliability of references, and scientific responsibility for published content.

This policy is based on two main pillars:

  • the provisions of CNPq Ordinance No. 2,664, of March 6, 2026, which establishes the Policy on Integrity in Scientific Activity of CNPq, especially regarding the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in research and scientific publication;
  • good editorial practices recommended by international organizations and scientific publishers, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), SciELO, and scientific publishers with specific guidelines on AI, authorship, peer review, and editorial integrity.

The central principle of this policy is non-negotiable human responsibility. AI tools may be used as support when permitted and declared. Still, they do not replace authorship, critical analysis, ethical responsibility, legal responsibility, or scientific validation by authors, reviewers, or editors.

Mandatory legal basis — CNPq Ordinance No. 2,664/2026

For this policy, Revista da ANPEGE especially considers the provisions of CNPq Ordinance No. 2,664/2026 concerning the obligation to declare the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence tools, the prohibition of submitting AI-generated content as if it were human-authored, the prohibition of inserting third-party manuscripts or content into generative AI tools for the preparation of scientific reviews, and the full responsibility of authors for the final content of the research.

2. Authorship and Artificial Intelligence tools

2.1 Prohibition of AI authorship

Generative Artificial Intelligence tools, including large language models and similar systems, may not be listed as authors or coauthors of manuscripts submitted to Revista da ANPEGE.

Scientific authorship requires intellectual, ethical, and legal responsibility for the submitted and published content. Since AI tools cannot assume responsibility for content, address potential errors, declare conflicts of interest, approve the final version of the manuscript, or respond to the scientific community before publication, they do not meet authorship criteria.

2.2 Full responsibility of authors

Authors are fully responsible for the final content of the manuscript, including when AI tools are used at any stage of the research, writing, analysis, translation, revision, or submission.

This responsibility includes:

  • individually verifying bibliographic references, data, and information suggested or organized with AI support;
  • validating all data, results, analyses, interpretations, and conclusions presented in the manuscript;
  • critically reviewing all text produced, translated, summarized, or reformulated with AI support;
  • ensuring that there is no plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification of information, nonexistent references, conceptual distortions, or unverified claims;
  • assuming full responsibility for any inaccuracies, omissions, errors, or ethical violations resulting from the use of AI tools.

2.3 Obligation to declare the use of AI

The use of generative Artificial Intelligence tools must be declared whenever it occurs at any stage of the development of the research or preparation of the manuscript. This declaration must be clear, specific, and sufficient to allow the editorial team, reviewers, and readers to understand how the tool was used.

Among others, the following uses of AI must be declared:

  • research conception, problem delimitation, organization of hypotheses, or identification of bibliographic gaps;
  • writing, rewriting, language revision, translation, or improvement of textual fluency;
  • analysis, organization, visualization, or interpretation of data;
  • production of codes, scripts, tables, graphs, maps, diagrams, or images;
  • preparation of the cover letter, responses to reviewers, or supplementary submission documents.

The declaration must be inserted in the manuscript in a specific section immediately before the references, under the title “Use of Artificial Intelligence”, as provided in the current Revista da ANPEGE template. The declaration must state: the name of the tool used, its version when available, the purpose of use, the stage of the research or manuscript preparation in which it was employed, and the type of human supervision performed.

The section “Use of Artificial Intelligence” is mandatory in the manuscript already at the submission stage for evaluation, even when no AI was used. In this case, the negative declaration must be used as indicated in this policy.

The same information must be declared in the Cover Letter, in a specific mandatory field, where authors must indicate whether an AI tool was used. If so, all tools used must be described, as well as the purpose of each use and the excerpts or stages in which they were employed. The information provided in the Cover Letter and in the manuscript must be consistent with each other.

Basic spelling or grammar checking tools integrated into word processors, when used only for punctual corrections of typing, spelling, or agreement, do not need to be described in detail. However, the use of generative AI tools for spelling revision, textual revision, reformulation, translation, style improvement, synthesis, content generation, or research support must be declared in the Cover Letter and in the section “Use of Artificial Intelligence” of the manuscript.

When the use of AI is relevant to the research, data analysis, production of images, maps, graphs, codes, scripts, or substantial preparation of the manuscript, the information must also appear in the methodological section or in an equivalent section, according to the nature of the work.

2.4 Permitted and non-permitted uses by authors

Permitted uses, provided they are declared in the Cover Letter and in the manuscript

  • Grammar, spelling, and style revision of the text, with full human review.
  • Improvement of fluency, clarity, and readability, with full human review.
  • Translation of excerpts or of the manuscript, provided the authors review it.
  • Support for bibliographic search, provided that sources are verified in databases and original documents.
  • Support for the organization, analysis, or visualization of real data, with methodological validation by the authors.
  • Support for the preparation of schematic figures, flowcharts, or illustrations that are not presented as primary data.
  • Support for the production of codes or scripts, provided they are tested, documented, and, when applicable, made available for verification.

Non-permitted uses

  • Listing AI tools as authors or coauthors.
  • Submitting AI-generated content as if it were human-authored, without declaring its use and without critical validation.
  • Generating results, conclusions, or scientific discussion without human validation.
  • Including nonexistent, incomplete, or unverified bibliographic references.
  • Fabricating, altering, hiding, or distorting research data.
  • Modifying images, maps, graphs, tables, or visual records to favor hypotheses or alter the interpretation of results.
  • Using AI to conceal plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, citation manipulation, or ghost authorship.

3. Use of AI by reviewers

3.1 Prohibition of sharing manuscripts with AI tools

Reviewers are prohibited from inserting, uploading, copying, pasting, summarizing, or sharing manuscripts submitted to Revista da ANPEGE, or any part of them, in generative Artificial Intelligence tools. This prohibition includes full or partial text, tables, figures, maps, data, attachments, supplementary documents, cover letters, and other materials submitted by authors.

This prohibition aims to protect:

  • the confidentiality of the peer review process;
  • the anonymity of authors and reviewers, when applicable;
  • the rights of authors over unpublished data, arguments, and results;
  • the integrity and reliability of the editorial process.

3.2 Auxiliary uses permitted for reviewers

Reviewers may use AI tools only for auxiliary purposes that do not involve sharing the manuscript, parts of the manuscript, or confidential information about the submission.

Examples of permitted auxiliary uses include:

  • grammar revision or improvement of clarity of the review report itself, provided that the reviewer wrote the report and does not contain confidential excerpts from the manuscript;
  • consultation of databases, academic search engines, or tools supporting the verification of public and already available information;
  • organization of personal notes without inserting manuscript content into external systems.

3.3 Responsibility of the reviewer

The evaluation of scientific merit, methodological analysis, editorial recommendation, and critical argumentation of the review must be produced by a qualified human reviewer. Automated, generic reviews, reviews lacking an analytical basis, or reviews incompatible with the content of the manuscript may be disregarded by the editors.

Revista da ANPEGE may disregard reviews that indicate improper use of generative AI, breach of confidentiality, lack of specialized analysis, conflict of interest, or noncompliance with the ethical standards adopted by the journal.

4. Images, maps, figures, tables, and data

The integrity of data, images, maps, figures, and visual representations is a fundamental condition for the reliability of research published in Revista da ANPEGE.

The use of AI tools to alter, fabricate, hide, replace, distort, or manipulate data, maps, images, tables, graphs, or any visual representation to modify the interpretation of results, favor hypotheses, or mask research limitations is prohibited.

The following are permitted:

  • basic technical adjustments of brightness, contrast, sharpness, framing, or resolution, provided they are applied uniformly and do not alter the informational content of the image;
  • use of AI or computational tools for the graphic visualization of real data, provided that data, methods, and procedures are described and verifiable;
  • use of AI to prepare schematic figures, conceptual diagrams, or illustrations, provided that such elements are not presented as primary data and are properly identified in the caption;
  • use of scripts, codes, or automated tools for data processing, provided that the methodology is described transparently.

When images, maps, figures, or graphs are produced or modified with AI support, this information must appear in the caption, in the methodology, or in the AI use declaration, as applicable.

5. Models of Artificial Intelligence use declarations

The following models are suggested wording and may be adjusted by authors to accurately reflect the reality of Artificial Intelligence use in the submitted manuscript. Adapting the text does not waive the obligation to clearly and verifiably inform the tool used, its version when available, the purpose of use, the stage of the research or manuscript preparation in which it was employed, as well as the human supervision performed.

5.1 Model A — Use of AI in writing, revision, or translation of the text

Example of an Artificial Intelligence use declaration to be inserted in the manuscript

During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used the tool [NAME OF THE TOOL, VERSION, WHEN AVAILABLE] for [DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE: grammar revision, improvement of fluency, translation, textual standardization, etc.]. After using the tool, all content was critically reviewed, edited, and validated by the authors, who assume full responsibility for the submitted manuscript.

5.2 Model B — Use of AI in data analysis, methodology, or script production

Example of an Artificial Intelligence use declaration to be inserted in the manuscript

At the stage of [INDICATE THE STAGE: data analysis, image processing, script production, database organization, data visualization, etc.], the authors used the tool [NAME OF THE TOOL, VERSION, WHEN AVAILABLE] for [DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE]. All results were verified and validated by the authors. When applicable, the data, codes, and materials used were made available at [INFORM REPOSITORY, DOI, OR LINK] to support the traceability and reproducibility of the research.

5.3 Model C — Use of AI in the conception of the research

Example of an Artificial Intelligence use declaration to be inserted in the manuscript

At the conception stage of this research, the authors used the tool [NAME OF THE TOOL, VERSION, WHEN AVAILABLE] for [DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE: support in identifying bibliographic gaps, preliminary organization of hypotheses, initial delimitation of the topic, etc.]. The hypotheses, objectives, theoretical-methodological framework, and final version of the research were defined, reviewed, and validated exclusively by the authors, who assume full responsibility for the scientific content presented.

5.4 Model D — Absence of generative AI use

Example of an Artificial Intelligence use declaration to be inserted in the manuscript

The authors declare that no Artificial Intelligence tool was used in the research or in the preparation of the manuscript, including conception, writing, revision, translation, data analysis, image production, table preparation, submission preparation, or responses to reviewers.

6. Compliance, violations, and editorial consequences

Failure to comply with this policy may constitute a violation of scientific integrity. The editorial team will analyze it according to the seriousness of the case, the stage of the editorial process, and the ethical principles adopted by Revista da ANPEGE.

At the editorial level, consequences may include:

  • request for correction or supplementation of the AI use declaration;
  • return of the manuscript for adjustment before it is sent for evaluation;
  • interruption of editorial processing;
  • rejection of the submission;
  • disregard of reviews that violate this policy;
  • opening of editorial inquiry in case of suspected misconduct;
  • publication of a correction, expression of concern, or retraction when the violation is identified after publication;
  • communication to the institution of origin, funding agency, or competent body, when applicable.

Revista da ANPEGE may use technological tools to assist in identifying undeclared AI use, textual inconsistencies, nonexistent references, image manipulation, or other indications of misconduct. Such tools will always be used as support, under the supervision of the editorial team, without replacing human analysis.

7. Normative basis and editorial references

7.1 National regulation

7.2 International editorial guidelines and references

Editorial credit and adaptation: this policy was prepared by the editorial team of Revista da ANPEGE, based on the adaptation, reorganization, and editorial adjustment of a model structured by Édipo Henrique Cremon and the editorial team of Revista Brasileira de Geomorfologia, considering the editorial, ethical, and operational needs of Revista da ANPEGE.