How to Write AI Disclosure Statements for Research Papers With Examples

Many journals now ask authors to report how they used generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, while preparing a manuscript. An AI disclosure statement explains how AI contributed to your research or manuscript. A clear statement identifies the tool, describes its role, and explains how the authors reviewed the output. The wording should reflect your actual workflow. Translating an abstract, revising sentences, and generating analysis code are different activities. Describing all three as “language assistance” would leave out information a journal editor may need.

This guide provides sample AI disclosure statements for common use, a step-by-step process for adapting them to your needs, and answers to frequently asked questions. For help determining whether a specific use is permitted or requires disclosure, read the first article in this series, “Journal AI Policies in 2026: What Authors Must Disclose and Where”

The official sources were checked on October 14, 2026. The examples below are original examples rather than official publisher templates. Follow your target journal’s current instructions and describe only activities and checks that were performed.

AI Disclosure Statement Examples

Select an example that matches the work the tool performed. Replace the bracketed information with specific details and remove statements that do not apply. Include the model or version, developer, and dates of use when the journal requests them or when they help identify the system used. Use only details that your records support.

Language Editing of Author-Written Text

Use this example when an AI tool suggested revisions to text you wrote. If the tool also drafted new explanations, translated material, or suggested references, describe those activities separately.

The authors used [tool name (model/version)] to suggest revisions to the wording and sentence structure of the author-written [sections]. [Author initials] compared the accepted revisions with the original text to check that the scientific meaning and strength of the claims were preserved. The authors approved the final wording and take responsibility for the manuscript.

Whether this use requires disclosure depends on the journal’s policy. For example, Elsevier exempts basic spelling, grammar, and punctuation checks but requires disclosure of substantive changes to sentence structure or organization. See Elsevier’s generative AI policy.

Translation of Author-Written Material

Identify the source and target languages, translated section, and who checked the translation.

[Author initials] used [tool name (model/version)] to translate the author-written [section] from [source language] into English. [Reviewer name], who is proficient in both languages and familiar with the research, compared the translation with the original to check the accuracy of the terminology, numerical information, and scientific meaning. The authors revised the translation where necessary, approved the final English text, and take responsibility for its content.

Do not describe translation as grammar checking because translation can alter terminology and meaning in ways that grammar checks do not. Taylor & Francis requires the declaration to identify the author responsible for checking the translation accuracy. Other people or organizations who helped verify the translation must be acknowledged where applicable. See Taylor & Francis’s author guidance.

Drafting New Manuscript Text

Check the journal’s policy before using a drafting example. Taylor & Francis does not permit generative AI to create the first draft of a manuscript or its sections, and adding a disclosure does not remove that restriction (Taylor & Francis author guidance).Where the target journal permits this specific use, a statement could read as follows:

[Tool name (model/version)] produced an initial draft of [specific passage] using [author-prepared notes or other supplied material]. The authors revised the passage and checked its factual statements and citations against [the study records and original sources]. The final text reflects the authors’ interpretation of the research.

Specify the generated material. “An initial draft of the Introduction” and “alternative wording for two existing sentences” describe different contributions.

Literature-Search or Summarization Assistance

Distinguish finding candidate sources from summarizing papers you had already selected.

[Author initials] used [tool name (model/version)] to suggest candidate publications concerning [topic]. The authors retrieved the publications selected for citation, checked their bibliographic details, and assessed whether they supported the relevant statements in the manuscript.

If the tool summarized supplied papers, the description could instead state the following:

[Tool name (model/version)] was used to prepare preliminary summaries of [specified papers]. [Author initials] checked the summaries against the original publications before using them to prepare [section].

These examples describe limited assistance. If AI contributed to screening, extraction, or other parts of a systematic review, report its role within the review methods and applicable reporting requirements. Taylor & Francis requires additional methodological disclosure for AI use in literature reviews, meta-analyses, and bibliometric studies. See Taylor & Francis’s author guidance.

Code Generation or Research Assistance

Describe the task that the code performed, who checked it, and how it was checked. Avoid a general statement that the tool “helped with analysis” if it only suggested plotting code.

[Tool name (model/version)] was used to suggest code for [specific task]. [Author initials] reviewed and modified the code and validated its outputs using [specified validation method]. The final code and relevant settings are provided in [Supplementary File X].

A short disclosure statement may need to be accompanied by the methodological details. Elsevier requires AI use in the research process to be described in detail in the Methods section (Elsevier’s generative AI policy).

How to Write an AI Disclosure Statement from Your Records

Before drafting the disclosure statement, collect the facts from all contributors to the manuscript. A simple record, such as that below, can prevent omissions and help distinguish different uses of the same tool.

Information to record	What to include
Tool identity	Product name and model or version, if available
Timing	Date or period of use
Activity	Editing, translating, drafting, searching, coding, or another specific task
Affected material	Sections, figures, files, datasets, or scripts
Contribution	What the tool produced and how it influenced the work
Human review	Who checked the output, what they checked, and how they checked it
Supporting records	Relevant drafts, prompts, outputs, code, or validation records

This preparation checklist is not a universal requirement for publishing in every field. The journal determines what disclosures must appear in the manuscript or accompanying materials.

Example: Two Tools Used for Different Tasks

Suppose one author used an AI tool to revise the Introduction section, whereas another used a coding assistant to prepare a figure.

Recorded activity	Review performed
Tool A suggested changes in wording in the Introduction section	The author compared the accepted changes with the original claims and cited sources
Tool B suggested code for Figure 2	The author inspected the code and compared the plotted values with the source dataset

Based on these records, the manuscript-preparation statement might read:

[Tool A (model/version)] was used to suggest changes in wording in the Introduction section. [Author initials] checked the accepted changes against the original claims and cited sources. The authors approved the revised text.

The Methods section description could separately explain:

[Tool B (model/version)] assisted with the code used to produce [visual] from [dataset]. [Author initials] reviewed the code and compared the plotted values with the source data. The code is available at [repository URL], and the relevant methodological details are described in [section or supplementary file].

These examples are hypothetical. The final location and wording must follow the journal’s instructions. Separating the tasks makes each contribution and its review clear.

Revise Vague or Inaccurate Wording

A useful disclosure statement describes identifiable actions. Broad assurances can obscure the extent of AI involvement in a manuscript and prompt follow-up questions from editors. The table below lists common vague phrases and the information each omits.

Wording to reconsider	What needs clarification
“AI helped with the paper.”	Which tool, which task, and which part of the paper?
“AI was used only for editing.”	Did the work also include translation, drafting, or reference suggestions?
“All outputs were verified.”	What checks were performed and by whom?
“AI had no influence on the findings.”	Can the authors support this claim, particularly if AI assisted with the analysis or interpretation?

For example, “AI was used to improve the manuscript” is too vague. A more informative, specific version would be “[Tool] suggested shorter wording for the Abstract. [Author initials] checked that the revised text retained the reported sample size, results, and limitations.” Use the specific version only if those checks were performed. If a necessary check has not been completed, complete the check before reporting it as finished.

Match the Statement to the Journal Requirements

Once the description is accurate, adapt its format and location to the target journal. Elsevier provides a recommended declaration format for manuscript preparation. If submitting to an Elsevier journal, authors should consult that format directly (Elsevier’s declaration guidance).

Other policies may require information in more than one place. For instance, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends describing AI use in the cover letter and submitted work, in the appropriate section where applicable. Therefore, a cover-letter statement should not automatically be treated as a substitute for disclosure in the manuscript (ICMJE recommendations).Check the required heading, location, fields, and any submission-system questions. Ensure each account describes the same activities.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I need a statement if I used AI only for grammar?

Not always. Check the target journal’s definition of exempt AI editing. Describe the activity accurately before applying an exemption. A request to “improve the English” can result in anything from punctuation corrections to substantial rewriting.

What if I do not know the model version?

Check your saved records and the tool interface information from the time of use. Do not substitute or guess the current version. If the journal requires unrecoverable information, explain what is known and ask the editorial office how to report the missing details.

Should I list every tool separately?

Generally, yes. Identify each tool whose use falls within the journal’s reporting requirements and connect it to its task. Separate entries are especially useful when different tools were used to support the writing and research methods.

Must I publish all prompts and outputs?

Not necessarily. Follow the journal’s requirements. Retaining records and publishing them are separate actions. For example, Taylor & Francis requires authors to retain prompt records for specified research uses and supply them upon request (Taylor & Francis author guidance).

What if none of the generated text appears in the manuscript?

Disclosure may still be required. Consider what the tool contributed, even if none of its wording was retained. The use of AI may have contributed to searching, coding, or other tasks without supplying the final prose. Check whether the policy covers that AI use.

Do I need to declare that no AI was used?

Only if the journal asks for such a statement. Follow the journal’s instructions and confirm the relevant scope with your coauthors. Do not make a manuscript-wide statement based only on your own workflow.

Review Your Disclosure Statement Before Submission

Compare the statement with your records and confirm that it covers the activities the journal asks you to report. Check the tool details, affected sections, review claims, and consistency with the cover letter and submission form.

For a final language review, Wordvice Academic Editing can help improve clarity, grammar, consistency, and academic style. As with any editing service, authors remain responsible for the accuracy of the AI-use disclosure statement and compliance with the target journal’s requirements.