Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy

Kanz Philosophia: A Journal for Islamic Philosophy and Mysticism recognizes the growing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning tools in academic research and scholarly publishing. In response to the increasing availability of generative AI technologies, the journal adopts a responsible, transparent, and ethical approach to AI use, in line with guidance issued by Elsevier and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This policy applies to authors, reviewers, and editorial staff.

1. General Principles

• AI tools cannot be listed as authors.
• All listed authors must be human and remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity, and ethical compliance of the submitted work.
• The journal distinguishes between substantive and non-substantive (technical) uses of AI, as recommended by COPE.

2. Use of AI by Authors

2.1. Substantive Use of AI (Disclosure Required)

Substantive use refers to AI assistance that contributes directly to the intellectual content of a manuscript, including but not limited to:

• Generating or structuring arguments.
• Developing theoretical or conceptual frameworks.
• Interpreting data or sources.
• Drafting analytical sections or conclusions.

If AI tools are used for any of these purposes, authors must disclose:

• The name of the AI tool.
• The version or date of use.
• And the specific function performed by the AI.

The disclosure must be placed in the Acknowledgements section or in a dedicated AI Use Statement.

2.2. Non-Substantive (Technical or Linguistic) Use of AI

Non-substantive use includes AI assistance limited to:

• Language editing and grammar correction.
• Stylistic refinement.
• Translation assistance.
• Reference formatting or citation management.

For such uses, formal disclosure is not mandatory, as these activities are considered editorial or technical assistance rather than scholarly content generation.
However, authors are encouraged to acknowledge such assistance when appropriate.

In all cases, authors remain fully accountable for the content of the manuscript.

3. Limits on AI Use

AI tools must not:

• Fabricate data, references, or sources.
• Replace human scholarly judgment.
• Be used to submit predominantly AI-generated manuscripts.

The journal reserves the right to reject or retract manuscripts where AI violates ethical standards or is not properly disclosed.

4. Use of AI in Peer Review

Peer reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality and integrity in the review process.

• Reviewers must not upload manuscripts or substantial parts of them to AI tools without explicit permission from the editorial office.
• AI tools must not be used to generate peer-review reports or scholarly evaluations.
• If AI is used for minor, non-confidential tasks (e.g., language polishing of the review text), this must be disclosed to the editors.

Any review found to be inappropriately influenced or generated by AI may be rejected.

5. Use of AI by the Editorial Team

The editorial team may use AI tools for limited administrative or technical purposes, such as:

• Plagiarism detection.
• Reference checking.
• Metadata preparation.
• Language screening.

AI tools will not be used to make editorial decisions. Qualified human editors make all decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection.

6. Ethical Considerations and Accountability

All parties involved in the publication process must ensure that AI use does not exist:

• Bias.
• Misinformation.
• Fabricated or misleading content.

Any suspected misuse of AI will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines on publication misconduct.

7. Violations and Consequences

Violations of this policy may result in:

• Rejection of the manuscript.
• Retraction of published articles.
• Notification of affiliated institutions.
• Suspension of future submissions.

8. Policy Review

This policy will be reviewed periodically to reflect developments in AI technology and international publishing standards.