American Council of Learned Societies AI policy

For applicants

• You may use an AI tool to research or write your proposal. ACLS treats this like other grant writing support, which has always been allowed.[1]
• You are responsible for any errors, omissions, hallucinations, or plagiarism in what you submit for peer review.[1]
• As a best practice, ACLS encourages you to note in your proposal where and how you used AI tools. This is encouraged, not required.[1]

For reviewers

• ACLS peer reviewers are not allowed to use generative AI tools to read applications or write reviews, including inside an AI-assisted coworking environment. ACLS cites the confidentiality of applicants' personal information and intellectual property.[2]

Sources

1. [1]

   FAQ: ACLS Fellowships (AI Guidelines)

   American Council of Learned Societies

   “Yes, from ACLS’s perspective, the use of an AI tool to research or write a proposal is not much different from seeking established research and grant writing support, which has always been allowed.”

   “The applicant is, and always has been, responsible for any errors, omissions, hallucinations, or acts of plagiarism that are submitted for peer review.”

   “As a best practice, we encourage applicants to indicate in their proposal where and how they used AI tools to provide full transparency to ACLS and our reviewers.”

2. [2]

   FAQ: Luce/ACLS Dissertation Fellowships in American Art (Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy)

   American Council of Learned Societies

   “Thus, as a policy, ACLS peer reviewers are not allowed to use generative AI tools to read applications or write reviews. This includes a prohibition on reading applications or writing reviews within an AI-assisted coworking environment.”

   “ACLS applications contain both personal information and intellectual property, and must be kept confidential by both ACLS staff and reviewers.”