Using ChatGPT and other AI‐assisted tools to improve manuscripts readability and language

In this editorial, as Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology (IMA), I would like to share with authors and reviewers my take on the potential use of ChatGPT and other similar AIassisted tools to improve readability and language of submitted manuscripts. This question is being increasingly present in recent communications with authors, and hence it needs clarification from the editorial team. The publisher Wiley has recently updated its Guidelines on Research Integrity and Publishing Ethics concerning the use of any type of Artificial Intelligence Generated Content (AIGC) tools. The guidelines stipulate that “these tools cannot fulfill the role of, nor be listed as, an author of an article”, and “tools that are used to improve spelling, grammar, and general editing are not included in the scope of these guidelines”. These guidelines also offer some flexibility for editors to decide about this issue in the best way that serves the interest of their journals, that is, “the final decision about whether use of an AIGC tool is appropriate or permissible in the circumstances of a submitted manuscript or a published article lies with the journal's editor or other party responsible for the publication's editorial policy”. Accordingly, this editorial presents my position about the use of AI-assisted tools during manuscript preparation. It has two parts: a call to embrace current AI-assisted technologies to remove any language barriers in research dissemination, but at the same time a request to adhere to good practice guidelines regarding the use of AI tools like ChatGPT. I could have used ChatGPT to proofread this editorial, that is, to lead by example, but I preferred not to do so at this stage. I'm still not happy with the existing language bias in the current version of ChatGPT, but this only engages myself!