Purposes Explore the boundaries of rights and responsibilities between publishers and data users in AI model training scenarios， providing a reference for improving copyright protection and circulation rules for scientific journal-published data in China. Methods This study examines stakeholders in scientific journal publishing，including publishing institutions， industry associations， and government bodies，by analyzing publicly available copyright agreements， technical terms， position statements， policies， and regulatory documents. It aims to characterize the features of copyright clauses， technical restrictions， and obligation terms in these materials. A case study approach is adopted， focusing on the practices of five leading publishing institutions： Elsevier， Springer Nature， Sage， Wiley， and Taylor & Francis. The study compares copyright infringement risks associated with different models of using published data for AI training. Findings At the scientific journal level， copyright transfer agreements for AI model training have yet to be substantially updated. As key players in protecting published data copyrights， leading publishers have only a small number of copyright agreements explicitly address various scenarios related to AI training. Publishing institutions may adopt technical restriction clauses， maintain a neutral stance， or implement data management models better suited for AI training scenarios. Publishers with a higher proportion of open-access papers are more inclined to proactively provide data access. When utilizing published data for AI model training， publishing institutions typically adopt two strategies：independent development under “internal fair use” provisions or licensing content to third parties. These two approaches differ in terms of data circulation scope. The key copyright boundary disputes involved are the definition of “fair use” and completeness of the authorization chain. Conclusions To address the needs of AI model training， copyright agreements should be supplemented with provisions clarifying the applicability of “fair use” or adding “sublicensing” clauses. Publishing institutions should develop copyright management frameworks tailored to AI training requirements. Data holders in publishing institutions and AI model developers must clearly define data permissions and delineate responsibility boundaries， thereby providing a foundation for establishing market-oriented mechanisms for data circulation revenue distribution and dispute resolution. Academic associations and government departments should issue specialized copyright guidelines for the use of published data in AI training， regulate the compliant and efficient circulation of such data， explore the establishment of equitable revenue-sharing mechanisms， and guide the orderly development of the industry.

Purposes The aim of this study is to systematically investigate how academic journals in China’s humanities and social science fields respond to artificial intelligence generated content （AIGC）， to reveal the phased characteristics of policy development， the core consensus and the practice differences， and to provide recommendations for improving the governance ecosystem of AIGC in these journals. Methods A three tier analysis framework of normative strategies for academic journal AIGC was proposed. Using a mixed methods approach that combined manual coding with large language model techniques， we quantitatively assessed the AIGC usage policy texts of 106 Chinese humanities and social science journals. Findings The study found that the development of AIGC norms in Chinese humanities and social science journals follows a phased pattern， from an initial response in early 2023 to routine follow up by 2025. The current policy system has established a consensus framework centered on author agency， reflected mainly in four areas： identifying the sole responsible author， prohibiting AI authorship， positioning AIGC as an auxiliary tool， and establishing basic handling measures. However， in practice there is differentiation， manifested by varying depths of information disclosure， differences in review methods and the intensity of handling measures， and a limited scope of normative subjects. Conclusions Domestic humanities and social science journals’ AIGC policies are progressing from basic norms toward systematic governance. Future efforts should aim to build a process governance system that covers the entire academic publishing workflow and involves multiple stakeholders， promote a proactive and standardized review mechanism， enhance the depth and traceability of information disclosure， explore integrating AIGC governance effectiveness into journal evaluation systems， and develop differentiated discipline norms， thereby fostering a healthy and sustainable academic publishing ecosystem.

Purposes To explore the potential of large language models （LLMs） in assisting peer review and to establish a pathway for their localized private deployment. Methods We conducted literature searches in Web of Science， Scopus， CNKI， Wanfang Data， and preprint platforms to combine evidence on the feasibility of using LLMs for manuscript review. After weighing the advantages and disadvantages， we decided to rent a virtual server from "Mobile Cloud" to achieve local and privatized deployment of an LLM. Using the locally deployed DeepSeek-R1 model， we performed a retrospective review of 10 review articles （5 published papers and 5 rejected papers）， repeating the process five times for each manuscript， and compared the results with human reviews. Findings Literature evidence indicates that LLMs possess capabilities in error checking and guideline adherence comparable to humans； however， risks such as hallucinations， data security and privacy leakage， and insufficient transparency and explainability persist. The proposed pathway for Chinese journals to implement LLM-assisted peer review includes： local privatized model deployment， building personalized models， exploring model operational patterns， standardizing usage protocols， and mitigating ethical risks. The locally deployed DeepSeek-R1 recommended “accept after minor/major revision” for all 10 reviews， with no rejections， but exhibited poor stability across repeated trials. Its critical feedback focused primarily on formal and methodological aspects， whereas human reviewers emphasized clinical and diagnostic details. Conclusions The local privatized deployment of a peer review model at West China Journal Press proves to be a feasible practice. Future efforts should focus on enhancing efficacy and reducing risks through technological improvements and ethical-standard development.

Purposes This study systematically analyzes author feedback behavior in peer review interactions， providing practical references for authors to strategically respond and deepening our understanding of the mechanisms of peer review interaction. Methods Taking the open peer review platform F1000Research as the research object， a quantitative analysis was conducted on author feedback behavior under different peer review decision-making scenarios. Machine learning and statistical analysis methods were used to conduct in-depth analysis of author feedback content from three aspects： linguistic features， text content， and the focus of author feedback. A logistic regression model is constructed to further analyze the potential mechanisms by which author feedback behavior influences reviewer decision-making. Findings The results indicate that positive revisions have a significant potential to reverse reviewer attitudes. The author’s sentiment and politeness in the response have a significant impact on the reviewers’ attitude change. In author responses that reverse reviewers’ decision， improvements related to research design and research subjects emerge as the most influential factors in persuading reviewers. Conclusions Analyzing author feedback behavior reveals the relationship between feedback characteristics and peer review decisions under different review decision-making scenarios. This not only provides authors with effective feedback strategies but also offers practical guidance for journals to optimize their review processes and improve review efficiency.

Purposes This study systematically presents the structural characteristics and data storage status of academic papers by Chinese authors published by international publishers， and provides empirical evidence for China’s independent OA strategy selection. Methods Combining policy analysis and empirical research， this study selects the policy window period of plan S implementation from September 2018 to 2024. Based on data analysis of the Web of Science （WoS） core collection from 2018 to 2024， it focuses on the structural and geographical distribution impacts of international OA policies on the publishing models of three major international publishers （Springer Nature， Elsevier， Wiley）. Findings The study reveals the dual challenges faced by China in the international publishing landscape： on the one hand， being constrained by the structural system of international publishers’ publishing models， and on the other hand， limited by international publishers’ control over publishing and research data storage. Conclusions China’s independent OA strategy should be formulated based on the characteristics of publishing models， storage mechanisms， and cost-sharing of academic papers by Chinese authors published by international publishers. The strategy focuses on building an “independent diamond OA platform + green OA clustered platform” system with Chinese characteristics. Externally， two propositions should be clearly put forward to international publishers： the DOI of all internationally co-published journal papers should link to domestic OA publishing platforms； China's independent Green OA clustered platforms only accept version of record （VoR） storage. Internally， it is necessary to promote the implementation of an institutional guarantee system： formulate strict compliance standards for OA journals and platforms； improve data storage policies for independent green OA clustered platforms； establish a procedural linkage mechanism among publishing policies， data storage policies， and fund funding policies； and improve copyright-related laws and policies （including secondary publishing rights， rights retention strategies， etc.）.

Purposes To measure the development level of think tank journals and provide data references for their construction. Methods Taking the journals included in the “China Think Tank Journal Cluster （2.0）” as research subjects， a comprehensive evaluation system was established by comprehensively considering index representativeness， data availability， decision-making relevance， and social serviceability. A quantitative index system was constructed， and the entropy method was used for weighting to calculate the comprehensive scores. Findings The index system consists of 4 first-level indicators （e.g.， decision-making attention）， 12 second-level indicators （e.g.， forward-looking index）， and 18 third-level indicators （e.g.， forward-looking Literature）. For the samples， the mean values of the four specific scores and the comprehensive score were all greater than the medians， indicating that the “critical few” journals elevated the sample averages.Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences ranked first in both comprehensive score and decision-making attention； while Journal of Management World， Economic Research Journal， and Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice ranked first in academic radiation， social dissemination， and international visibility， respectively. The above journals provided case studies for the development of think tank journals. Conclusions The imbalancedevelopment of think tank journals is evident. It is recommended to establish a physical “Expert Committee for Think Tank Journal Construction”， which will publicly select evaluation indicators to provide more specific directions for journal development.

Purposes To explore the intrinsic correlation between the application of AI-assisted tools and the occupational stress of scientific journal editors，and to provide data support and feasible countermeasures for alleviating editors’occupational stress and improving their AI literacy. Methods A questionnaire survey was conducted among frontline editors of scientific and technical journals in Henan Province who were directly engaged in editorial tasks such as manuscript reception， initial review， editorial processing， proofreading，topic planning，and author communication.Statistical analyses were performed to examine the occupational pressure faced by these editors and their cognitive levels regarding AI applications in their work. Findings Among the editors of scientific journals，work load pressure and skill renewal pressure were found to be the most prominent.Their overall AI literacy was at a medium level， with clear technical cognition of AI applications but vague ethical cognition.AI literacy was strongly positively correlated with skill renewal pressure（ρ=0.781） and strongly negatively correlated with work load pressure（ρ=-0.744）. Educational background had a positive effect on editors’ AI literacy， while work load pressure and ethical cognition of AI applications had negative effects （β=0.130，-0.343，-0.396）.Editors’ AI literacy and technical cognition of AI applications had negative effects on work load pressure（β=-0.481，-0.341）.Ethical cognition of AI applications had a negative effect on skill renewal pressure，while technical cognition of AI applications had a positive effect（β=-0.368，0.364）.Three clusters of editor profiles were identified via cluster analysis：senior traditional type，young high-knowledge type，and basic operation type. Conclusions A bidirectional correlation is identified between the application of AI-assisted tools and the occupational stress of scientific journal editors.High AI literacy alleviates workload but intensifies anxiety over skill renewal，while vague ethical cognition of AI application restricts the improvement of AI literacy and the relief of occupational stress.Comprehensive measures for classified and stratified AI literacy promotion and occupational stress alleviation are proposed to reduce the occupational stress of scientific journal editors.

Purposes To analyze the major barriers to scientific data publishing in China and propose corresponding responses， thereby providing practical guidance for the sustainable development of scientific data publishing. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight researchers and eight journal editors. Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis （IPA）， this study systematically examined the value perceptions， practical challenges， and response strategies of authors， reviewers， and journal editors in the process of scientific data publishing. Findings Scientific data publishing in China faces five major barriers in terms of incentive mechanisms， institutional frameworks， collaborative governance， publishing workflows， and repository collaboration. Accordingly， this study proposes several response strategies， including optimizing the data publishing ecosystem， establishing and improving ethical norms for data publishing， expanding the scope of collaborative governance within the academic community， refining details in data publishing workflows， and promoting stable cooperation between journals and high-quality disciplinary data repositories. Conclusions From a micro-level perspective， this study reveals the practical experiences and cognitive differences among responsible actors， providing empirical evidence for science and technology journals to optimize data publishing mechanisms and enhance governance capacity. It also offers references for improving China’s data publishing system and advancing the sustainable development of scientific data publishing.

Purposes The establishment of an “Academic Communication Efficacy Evaluation Framework” in an open science environment， together with the systematic measurement of the enhancing effect of preprints on the academic communication efficacy of OA journal articles， helps promote the coordinated development of preprints and OA journals，and contributes to the optimization of open science ecosystem practices. Methods Guided by the underlying logic of the connotation and objectives of “academic communication”， an “Academic Communication Efficacy Evaluation Index System” was constructed， and by comprehensively applying propensity score matching and quantile regression analysis as methods to quantify the enhancement effect on academic communication efficacy， subgroup analyses were conducted from three aspects： temporal dynamics， journal influence， and paper topics. This process led to the formation of the “Academic Communication Efficacy Evaluation Framework”， which systematically measures the enhancement effect of preprints on the academic communication efficacy of OA journal articles. Findings Across the three dimensions of academic communication efficiency， intensity， and breadth， preprints have significantly enhanced the academic communication efficacy of OA journal articles. This enhancement is substantiated by quantitative results obtained at five key quantile points and across three distinct analytical groupings. Conclusions This confirms that preprint self-archiving and OA journals develop synergistically to form a systemic effect， jointly promoting the formation and evolution of the open science ecosystem. Preprint self-archiving can， to some extent， alleviate the Matthew effect in the dissemination of academic achievements， thereby enhancing and expanding the communication efficacy of articles with slower citation growth， limited disciplinary and national diffusion breadth， or those published in non-top-tier journals yet possessing high potential communication value， also encouraging the sound development of clusters of scientific and technological journals. The “Academic Communication Efficacy Evaluation Framework” provides a referential framework and methodology for the systematic evaluation and measurement of the academic communication efficacy of OA journal articles in an open science environment.

Purposes To analyze the issues in the copyright agreements and licenses of gold OA and diamond OA journals， and bring forward the solutions to these journals， in order to provide reference for the development of comprehensive copyright transfer agreements and license for OA scientific， technical and medical （STM） journals in China. Methods We selected the gold OA and diamond OA journals from the member journals of Researching Journals’ Group and the Committee of Biomedical Periodicals Journals’ Group of Shanghai Society for Scientific and Technical Periodicals， and evaluate their language， CC license， publisher and APC. Then we visualized and analyzed the content of copyright agreements and licenses after statistical analysis. The issues in the copyright transfer agreement and license agreement were organized and analyzed. Findings There are many incorrect expressions or applications in the copyright agreements of the sample journals in this study， such as incorrect naming of the right of communication through information network， mistakenly applying the rental rights， exhibition rights abuse， and incorrect application， the missing of payment agreement and authorization on the right to disseminate information through online commercial databases （excluding CC BY journals） as well. Moreover， there was also a lack of provisions on liability for breach of contract and dispute-resolution methods， as well as an absence of clauses defining the temporal and territorial scope of the copyright. In addition， the priority of publishing on CNKI （paid download） earlier than on the journal’s website conflicts with the features of OA （instant and free）. Conclusions The copyright agreements of gold OA and diamond OA journals should be drafted in a manner consistent with the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on the Protection of the Right of Communication through Information Network， taking into account the practical realities of journal publishing so as to safeguard the legitimate interests of all parties.

Purposes This study investigates the current construction status of phase II clusters under the “Excellence Program”， so as to provide suggestions for further accelerating the development of journal clusters in China. Methods A questionnaire survey was adopted to examine the scale， marketization level， platform construction， and international communication of the phase II clusters. Findings The phase II clusters have taken initial shape， but still suffer from the problems of “one shortage and four insufficiencies”； independent platforms have been basically established， yet deficiencies remain in knowledge service， data integration and other aspects； the clusters have preliminarily moved toward enterprise operation， but the degree of marketization is low； international communication has achieved certain progress but is still in the initial stage. Conclusions To achieve the construction goals of the phase II clusters under the “Excellence Program”， collaborative efforts can be made in the following aspects： expanding cluster scale and enhancing influence； accelerating platform construction to realize digital transformation and knowledge services； deepening market-oriented transformation and improving competitiveness； optimizing policy supply and stimulating the internal impetus of clusters. Through the above measures， the three major tasks of scale expansion， digital transformation and knowledge services will be promoted simultaneously， so as to realize the parallel leapfrog development of cluster construction.

Purposes This study explores how the first-class scientific journals cluster boosts the development of high-level academic conferences. A practical model is proposed for domestic scientific journals to strengthen brand building and promote discipline development through journal-conference integrated cluster operations. Methods Taking Chinese Laser Press as the research object， this study systematically analyzes the practical path of exploring the large-scale development of academic conferences based on its world?class scientific journals cluster. Findings A positive ecosystem of “organizing conferences based on journals and promoting journals through conferences” is created， and a standardized operation process for academic conferences is presented， covering early preparation， content planning， on-site execution and post-conference summary. Its core operation strategies include prioritizing academic quality， organizing conferences by optimizing multi-party resources， building a digital conference system， constructing a multi-media publicity matrix， and promoting editors’ full-process participation. Conclusions Chinese Laser Press has built an academic ecosystem where journals and conferences coexist and develop synergistically. This practice achieves market-oriented operation， significantly enhances its brand influence and academic communication efficiency， and provides strong support for optical scientific innovation， industrial integration and talent cultivation.

Purposes This study explores pathways for enhancing the influence and achieving sustainable development of top-tier Chinese academic journals based on their unique strengths and resources within the globalized and digital academic competitive landscape， particularly under the dominant context of English， demonstrating its decisive significance in enhancing the influence and brand building of Acta Metallurgica Sinica， with the aim of providing theoretical reference and practical insights for the strategic innovation of similar journals. Methods Building on the 70-year legacy of Acta Metallurgica Sinica， the editorial board， under the direct guidance of the editor-in-chief， pioneered the Classic of the master column in 2025. This initiative strategically invites renowned scholars in the field of metallic materials to deeply refine， retrospectively analyze， and prospectively discuss their representative or classic work. This study provides an in-depth analysis of the column’s conceptual logic and practical implementation as a core journal development strategy. It systematically elaborates on the column’s top-level design， characterized by “invitation-only contributions， high-end authorship， unique author perspectives， and in-depth content”. The study also details the strategies employed to overcome challenges such as “securing commitments from leading scholars” and “avoiding content homogenization”. This study analyzes the download counts and citation rates of articles in this column， as well as the readership and forwarding volumes of their corresponding WeChat promotions， and comparing these metrics with those of articles published in the same year. Findings The Classic of the master column integrated fourfold mechanism—“gathering masters， refining classics， building the brand， and leading future research”—and its positive impact on the journal’s influence and development. Compared with articles published in the same year， the papers in this column have far exceeded the average download count per article， with most of them receiving more citations than the average per article. Moreover， the readership and forwarding volumes on the WeChat public account have also significantly surpassed the corresponding averages. Conclusions Amid the current trends in journal development， Chinese-language journals can achieve high-quality and sustainable growth by continuously updating their development strategies， grounding themselves in local academic foundations， and deeply exploring their own advantageous resources. The establishment of the Classic of the master column represents not only a revolutionary leap in the publishing practices of Acta Metallurgica Sinica but also embodies core strategic value for the journal’s growth. It provides a strategic model worthy of reference for other Chinese scientific journals exploring paths to high-quality and distinctive development.

Purposes The clustering publishing model has proven highly effective in enhancing the academic influence of scientific journals， yet its efficacy in science popularization activities has fallen short of expectations. This study aims to explore the institutional barriers behind this contrast. Methods Based on a questionnaire survey of 303 scientific journals nationwide， methods including T-test， chi-square test， and regression analysis were employed to compare clustered journals and standalone journals across four key dimensions： human resources for popularization， financial resources， adoption of high-cost content formats， and external collaboration tendencies. Findings The study finds that clustering journals do not significantly outperform standalone journals in the four key dimensions examined. The academic resource advantages of clustering journals have not been effectively translated into enhanced science popularization capabilities. Conclusions The “breakdown” of the clustering model in science popularization stems from the dual constraints of strategic priority misallocation and organizational inertia. Under the prevailing evaluation framework and reliance on established success paths， journal clusters tend to concentrate core resources heavily on enhancing academic competitiveness， leading to institutional neglect of science popularization activities. This study provides theoretical insights and empirical support for re-evaluating the social service functions of journal clusters and optimizing the synergistic development of academic communication and science popularization.