Page 131 - Read Online

Author Instructions

7.2.4 Ethical Compliance
AI-generated content must adhere to ethical standards, avoiding plagiarism or misrepresentation. Authors must verify the
accuracy of AI-generated content.

7.2.5 Supplementary Files
Authors are encouraged to submit AI prompts and outputs as supplementary files for transparency.

7.2.6 Disclosure in Methods
The use of AI tools should also be disclosed in the methods section if applicable.

7.2.7 Legal Compliance
Authors should ensure AI-generated content complies with copyright and intellectual property laws.

7.3 AI Use in Peer Review
Confidentiality requirements:
• Reviewers must not upload manuscripts/materials to AI platforms, as this:
1. Violates OAE’s confidentiality policies
2. Risks intellectual property infringement
3. May compromise personal data in identifiable content
Review integrity standards:
• Peer review must remain human-driven – AI tools cannot replace critical scholarly judgment.
• Reviewers must not use AI for manuscript evaluation due to risks of:
1. Inaccurate/incomplete assessments
2. Algorithmic bias
Declaration requirement: Reviewers retain full accountability for their reports, if any aspect of the manuscript’s evaluation
was supported in any way by an AI tool, reviewers must explicitly disclose it in their report.
OAE will periodically reassess this policy to align with technological advancements and academic standards.
8. Conflict of Interests
OAE journals require authors to declare any possible financial and/or non-financial conflicts of interest at the end of their
manuscript and in the cover letter, as well as confirm this point when submitting their manuscript in the submission system.
If no conflicts of interest exist, authors need to state “The authors declare no conflicts of interest”. We also recognize that
some authors may be bound by confidentiality agreements, in which cases authors need to sate “The authors declare that
they are bound by confidentiality agreements that prevent them from disclosing their competing interests in this work”.
9. Editorial Process
9.1 Initial check
9.1.1 Initial manuscript check
New submissions are initially checked by the Managing Editor from the perspectives of originality, suitability, structure
and formatting, conflicts of interest, background of authors, etc. Poorly prepared manuscripts may be rejected at this stage.
If your manuscript does not meet one or more of these requirements, we will return it for further revisions.

9.1.2 Publishing ethics
All manuscripts submitted to JMI are screened using CrossCheck powered by iThenticate to identify any plagiarized
content. Your study must also meet all ethical requirements as outlined in our Editorial Policies. If the manuscript does not
pass any of these checks, we may return it to you for further revisions or decline to consider your study for publication.
9.2 Editorial assessment
Once your manuscript has passed the initial check, it will be assigned to the Assistant Editor, and then the Editor-in-
Chief, or the Executive Editor in the case of a conflict of interest, will be notified of the submission and invited to review.
Regarding Special Issue paper, after passing the initial check, the manuscript will be successively assigned to the Assistant
Editor, Guest Editor, and then to the Editor-in-Chief, or the Executive Editor in the case of conflict of interest for the Editor-
in-Chief to review. The Editor-in-Chief, or the Executive Editor may reject manuscripts that they deem highly unlikely to
pass peer review without further consultation. Once your manuscript has passed the Editorial assessment, the Assistant
Editor will start to organize peer-review.
9.3 Process
JMI operates a single-blind review process, which means that reviewers know the names of authors, but the names of
the reviewers are hidden from the authors. The scientific quality of the research described in the manuscript is assessed
by a minimum of three independent expert reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding
acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. For controversial manuscripts, the Editor-in-Chief is responsible for making the
final decision.

Journal of Materials Informatics XV