This policy governs the use of generative AI systems by all participants in the editorial and publishing process, including authors, reviewers, and editors.

The journal “Architecton: Proceedings of Higher Education” adheres to a policy of fair, transparent, and responsible AI use in scholarly texts and the preparation of manuscripts for publication. Given the rapid evolution of AI technologies, the editorial board will periodically review and update its policy in this area.

Policy for Authors

General Principles:

AI cannot be listed as an author of a scholarly article. Authorship entails agency, creativity, critical thinking, scientific rigor, professional expertise, ethical conduct, and full accountability for the accuracy of the data presented, the absence of plagiarism or factual errors, and any other information generated or processed by AI. AI systems cannot be included in the list of authors, as these systems are unable to provide consent for publication, declare conflicts of interest, or respond to reviewers' comments.

Transparency and Disclosure: Authors must openly declare the use (or non-use) of AI-based systems, services, or chatbots. They bear full responsibility for the content of their work and must disclose such use in the "Methods" section or in a dedicated section at the end of the manuscript titled "AI Usage Statement." For example:

"The authors declare that no artificial intelligence-based systems, services, or chatbots were used in the preparation of this manuscript."

"During the preparation of this article, the authors used the following AI services [specify the name, version/model] for the purpose of [purpose]. All results have been verified by the authors; no confidential or previously unpublished data were shared with public AI services."

If AI was used as part of the research methodology (e.g., for big data processing, pattern recognition, or statistical modeling), this must be described in detail in the "Methods" section to ensure the reproducibility of the results.

Failure to comply with these requirements is considered a breach of publication ethics.

Prohibition on generation of false data.. It is prohibited to use AI to falsify experimental results, sources, citations, graphs, or bibliographic references.

Confidentiality and data protection. It is prohibited to upload unpublished manuscripts, restricted experimental data, or information that violates personal data protection to publicly accessible neural networks.

Permitted uses:

– collecting and studying scientific information;

– searching for and organizing literature (with mandatory verification of the authenticity of all sources suggested by the AI);

– analysis of the results of previously conducted fundamental and applied scientific research;

– collection, processing, and analysis of data;

– scientific forecasting;

– preparation of scientific results, including their visualization;

– improvement of style, spelling, and punctuation;

– image processing to adjust brightness, contrast, or color balance, provided that the original data remains undistorted;

– creation of complex graphs, schemes, and diagrams that cannot be produced using the built-in tools of a word processor.

AI technologies may be used solely as an auxiliary tool for specific tasks and must remain under constant human supervision; they cannot replace the creative research activities of the authors.

Authors are responsible for verifying the accuracy of all factual, statistical, textual, and graphical data, and must ensure that any materials generated by AI systems are used in a legitimate and authorized manner.

Prohibited uses:

– passive or covert generation of content presented as one’s own original, authored text;

– presentation of AI-generated data analysis or interpretation without disclosing or specifying the role of AI in detail;

– use of AI in sections concerning the description of the research, its methodology, the presentation of results, or the statement of conclusions;

– fabrication or falsification of data and results using AI, presented as authentic;

– paraphrasing of text for the purpose of bypassing anti-plagiarism detection systems;

– creation of illustrations exclusively through AI tools, unless such illustrations are the subject of the research itself (e.g., an analysis of generative art);

– manipulation of images (requires a declaration specifying the type of modifications—such as retouching or restoration – along with a justification for the methods used);

– use of AI for the automated compilation of text and images;

– compilation of the article’s bibliography.

If any issues are suspected – such as inaccurate citations, non-existent sources, or portions of the manuscript that suggest the undisclosed use of AI – the journal’s editorial office reserves the right to request a version of the manuscript from before it was processed by AI systems, as well as the prompts used when interacting with such systems. If it is not possible to provide these, the article may be rejected without further consideration.

Policy for Reviewers

Manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential documents. Uploading them—or any parts thereof—into AI-based systems, services, or chatbots is strictly prohibited, as doing so may compromise author confidentiality and intellectual property rights.

Peer review must be professional, independent, and grounded in human expertise. The reviewer (a human individual) is responsible for formulating final judgments and recommendations regarding a manuscript, and bears full responsibility for the content, completeness, accuracy, and ethical standards of the review.

The use of generative AI systems to assist in the peer review process is prohibited; the review process requires critical thinking and independent assessment – capabilities that, in the view of the journal’s editorial board, lie beyond the scope of AI.

Policy for Editors

All submitted manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents. Uploading manuscripts – or any parts thereof – into AI-based systems, services, or chatbots is strictly prohibited, as this may infringe upon the authors' rights and compromise confidentiality. Consequently, the use of generative AI systems to assist in editorial decision-making is not permitted. The evaluation of manuscripts requires critical thinking and an objective approach – qualities that only human editors can provide. Editors bear full responsibility for the editorial process, the final decision regarding a manuscript, and the communication of that decision to the authors.

The journal permits editors to use AI systems for plagiarism detection and the identification of potential reviewers, provided that such systems adhere to strict confidentiality standards and do not disclose confidential information to third parties.