According to Princeton University's Rights, Rules, Responsibilities (2.4 Academic Regulations), Princeton University students must confirm AI is permitted by an instructor and disclose the use of AI in any academic work:
As defined in section 2.4.7, generative artificial intelligence (AI) is not a source, since its output is not produced by a person. If generative AI is permitted by the instructor (for brainstorming, outlining, etc.), students must disclose its use rather than cite or acknowledge the use, since it is an algorithm rather than a source. Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with and adhering to course and departmental policies regarding the use of generative AI. Inappropriate uses of the results of generative AI on any work submitted to fulfill an academic requirement, such as directly copying the output, representing output generated by or derived from generative AI as their own, exceeding the parameters specified by the instructor, or failing to disclose its use, would constitute violations of academic integrity.
Disclosure format and content may vary based on instructor instructions. In an article for the Chronicle of Higher Education, for example, Marc Watkins proposes the following disclosure templates:
A template: “AI Usage Disclosure: This document was created with assistance from AI tools. The content has been reviewed and edited by a human. For more information on the extent and nature of AI usage, please contact the author.”
Or with more specifics: “AI Usage Disclosure: This document [include title] was created with assistance from [specify the AI tool]. The content can be viewed here [add link] and has been reviewed and edited by [author’s full name]. For more information on the extent and nature of AI usage, please contact the author."
In some current Princeton courses, permitted use of AI must be disclosed with a description of how and why AI was used. Students might also be required to keep any recorded engagement they had with the AI tool (such as chat logs).
When in doubt, students should confirm with an instructor whether AI is permitted and how to disclose its use.
Princeton's AI disclosure policy aligns with broader conversations about AI and authorship in academic publishing. AI tools do not meet the criteria for authorship for many publishers, and many prohibit the use of AI-generated sources. The use of disclosure, rather than citation, of AI and AI-assisted technologies is increasingly required by publishers.
Science states that AI does not meet its standards for authorship and that it cannot be used as a source. Rather, this information must be disclosed in a cover letter and acknowledgements section. Science Journals: Editorial Policies state:
Authors who use AI-assisted technologies as components of their research study or as aids in the writing or presentation of the manuscript should note this in the cover letter and in the acknowledgments section of the manuscript. Detailed information should be provided in the methods section: The full prompt used in the production of the work, as well as the AI tool and its version, should be disclosed. Authors are accountable for the accuracy of the work and for ensuring that there is no plagiarism. They must also ensure that all sources are appropriately cited and should carefully review the work to guard against bias that may be introduced by AI. Editors may decline to move forward with manuscripts if AI is used inappropriately.
Elsevier similarly prohibits AI and AI-assisted tools as authors. Elsevier's policy on the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies lists AI tools permissible for use without disclosure (e.g., grammar checkers) and requires that the AI tools used for research be described "as part of the methodology of the work, with details provided in the Methods section, if relevant, or in a separate section preceding references or bibliography."
Many publishers post their guidance for AI in their documentation for authors. If this information is not available for a specific publisher, authors should reach out to the publisher or editor to confirm their expectations for the use of AI in their publications.
While disclosure of AI use is becoming more common, it is possible that some publications will still require citation for an AI tool or prompt. Different citation styles take different approaches, so check with the citation style preferred by your field and the publisher. For example, APA defines the tool's creator, the company that made the tool, as the "author," while MLA defines the creator as the "publisher."
When citing secondary sources (sources referenced by the generative AI tool), researchers should verify the original source. It is common for generative AI tools to "hallucinate" information, and even to fabricate entire bibliographies.