Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

The Malaysian Journal of Computing and Engineering Technology (MJCET) recognises that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies can support research, data analysis and scholarly communication. The journal permits responsible use of these technologies where appropriate, provided that their use does not compromise research integrity, originality, confidentiality, accuracy or ethical publication practices.

This policy establishes the requirements for authors, reviewers, editors and Editorial Board members regarding the use and disclosure of generative AI throughout the submission, peer review and publication process. It is informed by recognised publication ethics principles, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) position on AI authorship and the transparency and editorial accountability principles relevant to journal evaluation.

1. Use of Generative AI by Authors

Authors may use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies to support appropriate research and manuscript preparation activities, including language editing, grammar correction, translation, summarisation, idea development, coding assistance and the preparation of explanatory materials.

Authors must exercise independent judgement and verify all AI-generated or AI-assisted content before submission. They remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, validity and integrity of the entire manuscript, including any content produced or modified using AI.

Authors must ensure that the use of AI does not result in plagiarism, fabricated information, inaccurate citations, misleading interpretations, undisclosed manipulation of research findings or infringement of intellectual property rights.

Generative AI must not replace the authors’ substantive scholarly contribution, critical analysis or responsibility for the research. Authors must not use AI-generated content to misrepresent research activities, qualifications, findings or contributions.

2. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI when it contributes substantively to the development of the submitted manuscript, including the generation or substantial rewriting of text, the production of images or graphical materials, or the collection, processing, analysis or interpretation of research data.

The disclosure must identify the AI tool or system used, its purpose and the relevant aspects of the work in which it was used. Where applicable, authors should identify the tool version and explain how AI-generated outputs were verified.

Routine spelling, grammar and punctuation checks or basic reference-formatting assistance do not ordinarily require disclosure, provided that these activities do not involve substantive content generation.

The disclosure should appear in a dedicated Declaration of Generative AI Use section or, where appropriate, in the Materials and Methods section. If no disclosure is required because AI was not used or its use was limited to routine language correction, authors should follow the submission system’s declaration requirements.

Suggested disclosure statement:

“During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool and version, where available] for [specific purpose]. The authors reviewed and verified the generated content and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality and integrity of the published work.”

Authors who did not use generative AI for substantive manuscript preparation may state:

“The authors did not use generative AI tools to generate or substantively modify the content of this manuscript.”

Disclosure does not automatically imply misconduct or affect the editorial assessment adversely. MJCET may request further information where clarification is necessary.

3. AI and Research Data, Images and Results

Authors must not use generative AI to fabricate, falsify or deceptively manipulate research data, experimental results, images, figures, photographs or other evidence presented as authentic research outputs.

AI-assisted methods used in data collection, processing, analysis or interpretation must be scientifically justified and described sufficiently for readers to understand and, where appropriate, reproduce the research. Authors must identify relevant tools and methods and explain the verification procedures applied.

AI-generated illustrations or other synthetic visual materials must not be presented as authentic experimental observations, documentary evidence or original research data. Where synthetic images or materials are used for legitimate research or explanatory purposes, their nature and method of production must be disclosed clearly.

Authors must ensure that AI-assisted analyses and interpretations are supported by valid evidence and appropriate methods. The use of AI does not exempt authors from applicable research ethics requirements, data protection obligations or accepted standards of scientific reporting.

4. AI and Authorship

Generative AI tools, large language models and other AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to MJCET.

Authorship is reserved for individuals who can make a meaningful scholarly contribution and accept responsibility for the integrity of the work. AI systems cannot assume authorship accountability, approve the final manuscript in the human sense or fulfil the responsibilities associated with authorship.

Authors must ensure that all listed authors meet the journal’s authorship requirements, have approved the submitted manuscript and accept responsibility for their contributions. AI assistance must not be used to misrepresent authorship or conceal the contributions of individuals who meet the journal’s authorship criteria.

5. Use of Generative AI by Reviewers

MJCET treats submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports and related editorial correspondence as confidential.

Reviewers must not upload, submit or otherwise disclose unpublished manuscripts or any part of a manuscript to publicly accessible or third-party generative AI systems where doing so could compromise confidentiality, author rights or data protection. This restriction also applies to reviewer reports, editorial correspondence and other confidential material.

Reviewers must not delegate the substantive evaluation of a manuscript to generative AI. Peer review requires independent expert judgement concerning originality, methodological rigour, validity, significance and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy, fairness and confidentiality of their reports. Any permitted use of AI-assisted tools must not compromise manuscript confidentiality or replace the reviewer’s independent assessment. Reviewers should disclose material AI assistance to the handling editor when it is relevant to the integrity or preparation of their review.

6. Use of Generative AI by Editors and Editorial Board Members

Editors and Editorial Board members must exercise independent professional judgement when assessing manuscripts and making editorial decisions.

They must not upload submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports or confidential editorial correspondence to generative AI systems unless the journal has explicitly authorised a secure and appropriate system and the use complies with applicable confidentiality, privacy and data protection requirements.

Generative AI must not replace editorial judgement, reviewer selection, the assessment of research integrity or the final decision on acceptance or rejection. Editors remain accountable for the fairness, confidentiality and integrity of the editorial process.

Any authorised AI-assisted editorial activity must be conducted with appropriate safeguards and must not introduce bias, disclose confidential information or compromise the independence of editorial decisions.

7. Accuracy, References and Intellectual Property

Authors must independently verify all facts, quotations, citations, references, statistical claims, equations, code and other outputs generated or assisted by AI.

AI systems may generate inaccurate information, non-existent references, incorrect quotations or misleading interpretations. Authors must check cited sources against the original publications and ensure that references are genuine, relevant and accurately represented.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their use of AI complies with applicable copyright, licensing, confidentiality, privacy and intellectual property requirements. They must not submit AI-generated material that infringes the rights of others or disclose confidential or personal information without appropriate authorisation.

8. Editorial Assessment and Verification

MJCET may request clarification, supporting information or an explanation of AI use when concerns arise regarding authorship, originality, research methods, data integrity, citations or disclosure.

The journal may assess suspected misuse using appropriate methods, including examination of the manuscript, verification of cited sources, review of relevant research materials and consultation with appropriate experts.

AI-detection tools, where used, must not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct on their own. Any concern must be assessed in context and supported by appropriate evidence before an editorial action is taken.

The journal reserves the right to request revisions or additional disclosures where necessary to ensure transparency and research integrity.

9. Breaches and Sanctions

MJCET takes breaches of this policy seriously. Breaches may include undisclosed substantive AI use, fabricated or manipulated research outputs, false declarations, inappropriate disclosure of confidential material, fabricated references or the use of AI to misrepresent authorship or research activities.

Where a potential breach is identified, MJCET will assess the available evidence, request an explanation from the individuals concerned where appropriate and determine a proportionate response.

Depending on the severity and circumstances, actions may include:

• requesting clarification, additional disclosure or manuscript revision;
• suspending editorial consideration while concerns are investigated;
• rejecting a manuscript where serious or unresolved integrity concerns remain;
• publishing a correction or expression of concern where appropriate;
• retracting a published article when the integrity or reliability of the scholarly record is materially compromised;
• removing a reviewer or editor from the relevant assignment or restricting future participation; and
• notifying the relevant institution, employer or funder where justified and appropriate.

The journal will distinguish between inadvertent errors and deliberate or reckless misconduct. Individuals concerned will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond before a final decision is made, where appropriate. Actions will be proportionate to the evidence and consistent with MJCET’s publication ethics and post-publication correction procedures.

10. Policy Review and Compliance

All authors, reviewers, editors and Editorial Board members are expected to comply with this policy. Authors are responsible for declaring relevant AI use during submission, while reviewers and editors are responsible for protecting confidentiality and maintaining independent professional judgement.

MJCET may revise this policy in response to developments in AI technology, research integrity standards and scholarly publishing practices. Any revision will be communicated through the journal’s official website.

The journal’s governing principle is that generative AI may support scholarly work but must not replace human responsibility, independent judgement, transparent reporting or accountability for the integrity of published research.