The journal Cultura giuridica e diritto vivente adopts a policy on the use of artificial intelligence consistent with international standards of research integrity, transparency, and scholarly responsibility.

Use of artificial intelligence in manuscript preparation

Authors may use generative artificial intelligence tools solely as support in the preparation of manuscripts (for example to improve language clarity or text organization). Such tools must not replace the authors’ scholarly contribution, critical analysis, or intellectual responsibility.

Authors remain fully responsible for the content of their work and must verify the accuracy, reliability, and correctness of any information generated or assisted by artificial intelligence tools.

Authorship and scholarly responsibility

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of a scholarly work.
Authorship implies academic and ethical responsibilities that can only be attributed to human authors.

Authors are responsible for the originality of their work, the accuracy of references, and compliance with research ethics standards.

Transparency and disclosure

If artificial intelligence tools are used in the preparation of a manuscript, authors must disclose this use at the time of submission, specifying:

• the tool used;
• the purpose of its use;
• the extent of its involvement.

Such disclosure ensures transparency towards readers, reviewers, and editors.

Use of artificial intelligence in peer review

Peer review requires independent critical evaluation and must be carried out exclusively by human reviewers. Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, or parts of them, to generative AI tools in order to protect the confidentiality of the editorial process and the rights of the authors.

Use of artificial intelligence in the editorial process

Editors should not use artificial intelligence tools to analyze or evaluate submitted manuscripts, nor upload such documents to AI platforms. Editorial decisions must rely exclusively on the scholarly judgment of editors and reviewers.