Use of large language models (LLMs) and other artificial intelligence tools (e.g. ChatGPT)

Declaration

Use of AI should be declared, minimally, in the Acknowledgement. It may also be suitable to explain the use of such tools in the Materials and methods. However, the use of an LLM for copyediting purposes (e.g. to eliminate spelling and grammatical errors in human-generated text or to make human-generated text more concise) need not be declared.

Reference

During the review process, use of AI-hallucinated reference and/or citation is detected, the manuscript will be rejected without the possibility of reconsideration, unless the authors can demonstrate that the reference in question was not, in fact, hallucination. If the discovery is made after acceptance, during editing, copyediting, or proof-correction, the paper will not be published. If the discovery is made after publication, the article will be retracted.

Authorship for AI

Large language models cannot be credited as authors because these cannot be held accountable for the work. Editors assume that submission to Clinical Theriogenology guarantees human accountability for every aspect of the manuscript and is an accurate presentation of authors’ work.

Generative AI images

Submissions should not include still or moving images produced by generative AI tools unless there is a necessity for the work, in which case the use of generative AI must be declared and discussed with the editor. Use of nongenerative image-editing tools (e.g. to combine still or moving images and to modify brightness, tone, or hue) is permitted unless the intention is to deceive.

AI use by peer reviewers

Peer reviewers have a vital role in the quality control of scientific publications. Their expertise is irreplaceable and their willingness to apply it to improve the work of others is very highly valued by editors. Peer reviewers are accountable for the accuracy and views expressed in their reports. Considering the confidentiality of the submission, the hallucinations that LLMs can produce, and the lawsuits brought by authors in response to the unauthorized use of their work to train LLMs, peer reviewers should not upload submissions into LLMs.