Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Journal: Journal of Materials for the Built Environment (JMBE)
Policy Version: 1.0
Effective Date: September 2026

1. Purpose

Journal of Materials for the Built Environment (JMBE) recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies are increasingly used in research, scholarly writing, data analysis, editorial work, and peer review.

The journal supports the responsible use of AI while maintaining research integrity, transparency, confidentiality, authorship accountability, and independent editorial judgment.

This policy applies to authors, editors, reviewers, Guest Editors, Editorial Board members, and other participants involved in the submission, evaluation, or publication of manuscripts.

2. General Principles

The use of AI-assisted tools is not, by itself, a reason for rejection.

JMBE distinguishes between:

• legitimate use of AI as an assistive tool;

• substantive use of AI that should be disclosed;

• inappropriate or misleading use of AI; and

• use of AI that compromises research integrity, confidentiality, or editorial independence.

Regardless of the use of AI, human authors, reviewers, and editors remain responsible for their work and decisions.

AI systems cannot assume authorship, accountability, or final editorial authority.

3. Authors: Use of AI Tools

3.1 Disclosure Requirement

Authors should disclose the use of generative AI or other AI-assisted tools when the use is material to the preparation, analysis, interpretation, or presentation of the manuscript.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

• ChatGPT;

• Claude;

• Gemini;

• Microsoft Copilot;

• Grammarly or other AI-based writing assistants;

• AI-based image-generation or image-editing tools;

• AI-assisted coding tools;

• AI systems used for data analysis or interpretation; and

• other large language models or generative AI systems.

Routine use of conventional spelling, grammar, reference-management, or formatting software does not normally require disclosure unless the software uses generative AI in a substantive way.

When in doubt, authors should disclose the use.

3.2 Permitted Uses

AI tools may be used to assist with activities such as:

• language improvement and proofreading;

• grammar and style refinement;

• manuscript organization;

• translation assistance;

• literature exploration or information retrieval;

• coding assistance;

• data processing or analytical support;

• brainstorming or development of research questions;

• reference-management assistance; and

• preparation of non-substantive administrative material.

Such use is acceptable only where the authors maintain appropriate human oversight and verify the resulting content.

3.3 AI-Generated Text and Substantive Content

Authors remain responsible for verifying any AI-assisted text, analysis, interpretation, references, figures, tables, code, or other content incorporated into a manuscript.

Authors must independently verify:

• factual accuracy;

• references and citations;

• mathematical or statistical reasoning;

• research interpretations;

• technical claims;

• quotations;

• descriptions of methods; and

• other substantive content.

AI systems may generate inaccurate, fabricated, incomplete, biased, or misleading information.

Authors should not present AI-generated content as independently verified research evidence.

3.4 AI-Generated References

Authors must verify all references generated or suggested by AI tools.

Fabricated, inaccurate, or unverifiable citations are not acceptable.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy and relevance of the reference list.

3.5 AI-Assisted Analysis and Research

Where AI tools materially contribute to research analysis, authors should describe their use sufficiently to allow readers and editors to understand the role of AI in the research.

Where appropriate, authors should disclose:

• the AI tool or system used;

• the version or model where reasonably available;

• the purpose of the use;

• how the AI output was incorporated into the research; and

• the human verification or validation applied.

AI should not be used to fabricate, alter, or selectively manipulate research data or results.

3.6 AI-Generated or AI-Edited Images

AI-generated or AI-assisted images must not be used to misrepresent scientific or scholarly evidence.

For research involving experimental images, microscopy, photographs, architectural documentation, maps, diagrams, or other evidence-bearing visual material, any AI-assisted alteration must not distort or obscure the underlying research information.

Where AI contributes materially to an image, figure, illustration, visualization, or other published content, authors should disclose its use.

AI-generated images should not be presented as authentic photographs, experimental observations, or original research evidence when they are not.

3.7 Authorship

AI systems, chatbots, language models, and other AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.

Authorship requires human accountability for the work, including responsibility for its accuracy, integrity, and response to editorial or post-publication questions.

AI tools may be acknowledged as tools where appropriate, but acknowledgment does not constitute authorship.

3.8 Author Responsibility

Regardless of whether AI tools are used, authors remain fully responsible for:

• originality of the work;

• accuracy of the manuscript;

• validity of analyses and interpretations;

• accuracy of citations;

• compliance with copyright and licensing requirements;

• appropriate disclosure of AI use;

• research and publication ethics;

• protection of confidential information; and

• integrity of the submitted and published record.

Use of AI does not transfer responsibility from the authors to an AI system.

3.9 Recommended Disclosure Statement

Where disclosure is required, authors may use wording such as:

“During the preparation of this work, the authors used [TOOL NAME] for [PURPOSE]. The authors reviewed and edited the output as necessary and take full responsibility for the content of this publication.”

Where AI was used in data analysis, coding, image generation, or another substantive research activity, authors should provide a more specific description of the use where appropriate.

4. Editors: Use of AI Tools

4.1 Confidentiality

Editors must protect the confidentiality of:

• submitted manuscripts;

• reviewer reports;

• author information;

• editorial correspondence;

• unpublished data; and

• other confidential editorial materials.

Editors must not upload confidential manuscript or editorial content to public, unsecured, or otherwise unauthorized AI systems.

4.2 Permitted Editorial Use

Editors may use approved AI-assisted tools for limited administrative or operational purposes where:

• confidentiality is maintained;

• sensitive or confidential information is not improperly disclosed;

• applicable privacy and data-protection requirements are respected;

• the use does not replace human judgment; and

• the editor remains responsible for the resulting work.

Examples may include general administrative drafting, non-confidential communication support, or organizational assistance.

4.3 Academic Editorial Judgment

AI tools must not replace the independent judgment of qualified human editors.

Decisions concerning:

• editorial screening;

• peer-review requirements;

• reviewer selection;

• revision requests;

• acceptance;

• rejection;

• appeals;

• corrections;

• expressions of concern; and

• retractions

must be made by qualified human editors.

AI-generated recommendations must not be treated as independent evidence or as an editorial decision.

4.4 AI-Assisted Manuscript Assessment

Editors should not rely on AI systems to determine:

• whether a manuscript is scientifically valid;

• whether research is novel;

• whether data are credible;

• whether a manuscript should be accepted or rejected; or

• whether research misconduct has occurred.

AI-based detection tools may produce false positives and false negatives and should never be used as the sole basis for an editorial decision.

Where an AI-assisted tool identifies a potential concern, a qualified human editor must assess the issue independently.

5. Reviewers: Use of AI Tools

5.1 Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat manuscripts and all review-related materials as confidential.

Reviewers must not upload:

• manuscript text;

• figures;

• tables;

• datasets;

• supplementary materials;

• reviewer reports;

• author information; or

• other confidential materials

to public or unsecured AI systems without explicit authorization from the journal.

5.2 Reviewer Independence

A peer-review report must represent the reviewer's own independent scholarly assessment.

Reviewers may use AI tools for limited non-substantive assistance, such as general language editing of their own review, provided that confidentiality is fully protected.

AI must not replace the reviewer's intellectual assessment of the manuscript.

5.3 Academic Assessment

Reviewers must personally evaluate, as appropriate:

• originality and significance;

• methodological rigor;

• validity of evidence;

• data interpretation;

• technical quality;

• relevance to the journal;

• research ethics; and

• overall suitability for publication.

These judgments must not be delegated to an AI system.

5.4 AI-Generated Review Reports

Reviewers should not submit AI-generated review reports as though they were their own independent assessment.

Where AI-assisted tools are used in preparing a review, reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy, relevance, confidentiality, and fairness of the final report.

6. Editorial Office and Peer Review Coordinator

The Editorial Office may use AI-assisted tools for limited administrative purposes where appropriate safeguards are in place.

Examples may include:

• drafting routine non-confidential correspondence;

• organizing non-confidential information;

• workflow assistance;

• formatting support; and

• administrative data processing.

The Editorial Office must not use AI tools to independently determine:

• manuscript suitability;

• reviewer eligibility;

• peer-review outcomes;

• acceptance or rejection;

• research misconduct findings; or

• other academic decisions.

The Editorial Office remains responsible for ensuring that any AI-assisted administrative process is subject to appropriate human review.

7. AI and Research Integrity

The use of AI may raise research-integrity concerns when it involves:

• fabrication of data or results;

• falsification;

• fabricated references;

• misleading image generation or manipulation;

• plagiarism or unattributed reuse;

• undisclosed substantive AI-generated content;

• false representation of research procedures;

• manipulation of peer review; or

• other conduct that compromises the integrity of the scholarly record.

Suspected cases will be handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics Policy and Research Misconduct Policy.

8. AI Detection Tools

JMBE may use AI-detection or other automated screening tools as part of its research-integrity procedures.

Such tools are treated as screening aids rather than definitive evidence.

A high or unusual AI-detection score does not, by itself, establish misconduct.

Where concerns arise, the journal may request clarification or additional information from the authors and may conduct further assessment using appropriate editorial and research-integrity procedures.

9. Copyright and Intellectual Property

Authors, editors, reviewers, and Editorial Office staff must consider applicable copyright, licensing, confidentiality, and intellectual-property requirements when using AI tools.

Users should not submit third-party copyrighted material or confidential information to AI systems unless they have the appropriate rights and authorization to do so.

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content does not unlawfully reproduce protected material.

10. Privacy and Confidential Information

All participants in the publication process must protect:

• personal information;

• unpublished research;

• confidential datasets;

• proprietary information;

• reviewer identities;

• editorial correspondence; and

• other information subject to confidentiality restrictions.

AI tools must not be used in a manner that compromises these protections.

11. Transparency and Accountability

JMBE supports responsible and transparent use of AI in scholarly communication.

The journal may ask authors, reviewers, or editors to clarify how AI tools were used where such information is necessary to assess:

• authorship;

• research integrity;

• originality;

• reproducibility;

• confidentiality; or

• compliance with this policy.

Failure to provide a reasonable explanation of substantive AI use may be considered when assessing compliance with journal policy.

12. Undisclosed or Inappropriate AI Use

Where AI use is found to be undisclosed or inappropriate and materially affects the integrity of the work, the journal may take proportionate action, including:

• requesting clarification or correction;

• requiring additional disclosure;

• rejecting a manuscript;

• withdrawing an accepted manuscript before publication;

• publishing a correction;

• publishing an Expression of Concern;

• retracting an article; or

• taking other appropriate editorial action.

The action taken will depend on the nature, significance, and consequences of the issue.

13. Human Responsibility

AI-assisted technologies may support scholarly communication, but they do not replace human accountability.

The following remain human responsibilities:

Authors
Responsible for their research and submitted work.

Reviewers
Responsible for their independent peer-review assessments.

Editors
Responsible for editorial judgments and decisions.

Editorial Office
Responsible for accurate and confidential administration of the publication process.

Publisher
Responsible for maintaining appropriate publishing infrastructure, policies, and safeguards.

14. Policy Development

JMBE recognizes that AI technologies, capabilities, and scholarly publishing practices are evolving rapidly.

This policy may therefore be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect:

• developments in AI technology;

• research-integrity standards;

• copyright and data-protection requirements;

• scholarly publishing practices; and

• guidance from relevant professional and publication-ethics organizations.

The current version of the policy will be maintained on the journal website.

15. Contact

Questions regarding the use of AI in manuscript preparation, peer review, or editorial processes may be directed to:

Editorial Office
Journal of Materials for the Built Environment (JMBE)
Sunlit Grove Publishing
Email: contact@sunlitpub.com