AI & Automated Tools
What authors, reviewers and editors may and may not do with generative AI.
Generative artificial intelligence, including large language models, is now widely available. PRAGYA neither bans it outright nor treats it as neutral. This policy sets out what must be disclosed, what is not permitted, and who remains accountable. It applies to everyone involved in publishing with us.
For Authors
Disclose substantive use
Authors must disclose any use of generative AI in preparing a manuscript that goes beyond straightforward language correction, editing and formatting. Routine spelling, grammar and style checking does not need to be declared.
Disclosures should state which tool was used and for what purpose. They are published in the article's Declarations section, so readers can see them.
Three firm rules
Not an author
AI tools cannot be listed as an author or co-author. Authorship carries responsibility, and a tool cannot be accountable.
Not a source
Generative AI cannot be cited as a source. Claims must be supported by literature or by the authors' own data.
Authors verify
Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy of anything an automated tool produced, including every reference.
Fabricated references are a known failure of language models. Authors must check that every citation exists and says what it is claimed to say. Fabricated references found after publication are handled under our Publication Ethics policy.
For Reviewers and Editors
Manuscripts must not be uploaded to AI services
Reviewers and editors must not paste or upload any part of a manuscript into a generative AI service. Manuscripts are confidential, and uploading one to a third-party tool breaches that confidence regardless of the outcome.
Reviewers and editors must not use generative AI to write their assessments or decision letters. Peer review is a judgement, and the person named as reviewer must be the person who made it.
Using a tool to correct the language of a review you have written yourself is acceptable, provided no manuscript content is submitted to the tool.
Automated Tools Used by the Journal
PRAGYA discloses the automated tools it uses in its own editorial process:
| Tool | Purpose | Human oversight |
|---|---|---|
| Turnitin | Text similarity screening (10% threshold) | An editor reviews every report before any action |
| Grammarly Business | Language and clarity checking | Suggestions are advisory only |
A human always decides
No editorial decision at PRAGYA is made by an automated system. A similarity score, a language warning or any other automated signal is evidence for an editor to weigh, never a verdict. Every rejection, revision and acceptance is decided by a named human editor.
Questions about this policy? Contact: journal@mihe.ac.in