AI Policy

Artificial Intelligence Policy (AI Policy)

In accordance with international publication ethics and the official guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding AI tools in scholarly publishing, Jurnal Bali Membangun Bali outlines strict compliance policies for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors.

COPE Standards Alignment

As generative artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) reshape research workflows, the journal adopts COPE’s core position: AI tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot assume legal accountability, copyright obligations, or intellectual responsibility. All human participants in the publishing process must maintain complete integrity, transparency, and oversight.

Stakeholder Provisions (COPE-Aligned)

Stakeholder	COPE Policy Provisions & Requirements
Authors	Ineligibility for Authorship: AI models and tools do not meet authorship criteria, as they lack agency, legal personality, and the capacity to sign licensing documents. Mandatory Transparency & Disclosure: If AI is utilized for drafting, language refinement, or technical data processing, authors must explicitly declare the tool name, version, manufacturer, and specific application sections within the Methods or Acknowledgements. Absolute Accountability: Authors remain fully responsible for the entire content of their manuscript, including text passages generated by AI, guaranteeing freedom from plagiarism, data fabrication, and hallucinations.
Peer Reviewers	Strict Confidentiality Breaches Prevention: Reviewers must not upload unpublished, confidential manuscripts into public AI tools or external cloud platforms, as this violates data security and peer-review integrity. Prohibition of AI-Generated Reviews: Reviewers must apply independent human intellectual critique and expert judgment; generating review reports via AI tools is strictly forbidden.
Editors	Editorial Confidentiality: Editors must safeguard submitted works against unauthorized third-party AI system scraping or training. Human-Centric Decisions: Final screening, review evaluations, and publication decisions must rest exclusively upon professional editorial discretion and collective human oversight.

Stakeholder

COPE Policy Provisions & Requirements

Authors

Ineligibility for Authorship: AI models and tools do not meet authorship criteria, as they lack agency, legal personality, and the capacity to sign licensing documents.

Mandatory Transparency & Disclosure: If AI is utilized for drafting, language refinement, or technical data processing, authors must explicitly declare the tool name, version, manufacturer, and specific application sections within the Methods or Acknowledgements.

Absolute Accountability: Authors remain fully responsible for the entire content of their manuscript, including text passages generated by AI, guaranteeing freedom from plagiarism, data fabrication, and hallucinations.

Peer Reviewers

Strict Confidentiality Breaches Prevention: Reviewers must not upload unpublished, confidential manuscripts into public AI tools or external cloud platforms, as this violates data security and peer-review integrity.

Prohibition of AI-Generated Reviews: Reviewers must apply independent human intellectual critique and expert judgment; generating review reports via AI tools is strictly forbidden.

Editors

Editorial Confidentiality: Editors must safeguard submitted works against unauthorized third-party AI system scraping or training.

Human-Centric Decisions: Final screening, review evaluations, and publication decisions must rest exclusively upon professional editorial discretion and collective human oversight.

The Four Core Pillars of COPE AI Guidelines

Our regulatory framework directly embraces the 4 fundamental pillars defined in COPE's official guidance statement:

1. Accountability & Responsibility Academic publication requires genuine human ownership. Authors must take total responsibility for research design, empirical findings, and ethical standards, attributes that algorithms can never fulfill.	2. Transparency & Open Science Science depends on traceability. Disclosing algorithmic assistance ensures that readers, indexing bodies, and fellow academics can accurately gauge the methodological execution.
3. Data Privacy & Confidentiality Submissions under review are legally privileged documents. Inputting raw manuscripts into open-access commercial models risks leaking proprietary datasets and breaching peer-review trust.	4. Integrity & Bias Mitigation Generative systems are prone to factual inaccuracies ("hallucinations") and citation fabrications. Authors must strictly verify all references to protect scholarly literature from contamination.