The NIH issued guidance prohibiting grant applications that are significantly developed by AI, emphasizing that such applications cannot be considered original. Consequences for non-compliance may include research misconduct investigations and penalties. The agency has noted a surge in research applications, some suspected to be AI-generated, which could burden its review processes. Typically, scientists submit fewer than six applications annually, but AI usage is pushing some to submit over 40 in a single round, raising concerns about the integrity and efficiency of application evaluations.
NIH will not consider applications that are either substantially developed by AI, or contain sections substantially developed by AI, to be original ideas of applicants.
If the detection of AI is identified post award, NIH may refer the matter to the Office of Research Integrity to determine whether there is research misconduct.
While AI may be a helpful tool in reducing the burden of preparing applications, the rapid submission of large numbers of research applications from a single Principal Investigator may unfairly strain NIH's application review processes.
Few scientists submit an average of more than six applications per year, NIH says, but AI tools have led some to submit more than 40 separate research applications in a single submission round.
Collection
[
|
...
]