AI agents can now run sequences of research tasks with little human input. The question is who answers for the results. The European Commission has published the fourth version of its ERA Living Guidelines on the responsible use of generative AI in research, and its answer is clear: researchers remain accountable, no matter how much work they hand to an AI agent.
Published on 15 October 2026, this is the most comprehensive update since the guidelines first appeared in March 2024. It adds guidance on agentic AI and expands advice on AI use in peer review and proposal evaluation. The previous revision came in May 2026.
What Changes for Generative AI in Research
The biggest addition covers agentic AI, systems that can pursue complex goals and act with some degree of autonomy. The guidelines state that using AI agents may never be treated as a delegation of control or responsibility.
Researchers are asked to build checkpoints into agent-driven work so that critical decisions, such as methodological choices, are validated by humans. Any hypothesis generated, data processed or conclusion drawn by an AI agent requires human validation. The document also warns that researchers are not exempt from legal responsibility because an agent acted on their behalf.
The guidelines repeat that AI systems cannot be authors, co-authors or owners of research, since authorship implies agency and responsibility.
New Rules of Thumb on AI Disclosure
On AI disclosure, the guidelines draw a clearer line. Researchers should disclose AI tools used substantially, such as for literature reviews, identifying research gaps, developing hypotheses or interpreting data. Minor uses like spellchecking, grammar correction or formatting generally do not need disclosure. In case of doubt, disclosure is advised.
Researchers are also asked to consider that generative AI can produce different outputs from the same input, which may affect reproducibility. Authors decide whether prompts, logs and model versions should be kept or shared.
The document notes that a global reporting standard for AI disclosure is being developed at the World Conference on Research Integrity 2026 in Vancouver, which will inform future versions.
Peer Review and Hidden Prompts in Generative AI in Research
The guidelines say peer review remains a fundamentally human process. AI should not be used to assess novelty, originality, significance or whether a manuscript should be accepted or rejected. Confidentiality is described as non-negotiable, and unpublished material should not be uploaded to tools that cannot guarantee it won’t be used for training.
For funding bodies, the update flags a new risk: hidden prompts. These are instructions secretly embedded in documents, through invisible text, formatting tricks or metadata, designed to steer an AI tool toward a more favourable assessment. Funders are advised to set clear rules prohibiting such manipulation and add safeguards in the IT systems that process applications.
The guidelines also note that AI-polished proposals are increasing application volumes and overloading evaluators, and suggest the evaluation process may need to be redesigned to be more AI-resilient.
Security and Confidentiality Remain Central
Research organisations are encouraged to deploy locally hosted or self-governed AI tools so staff can work with scientific data while protecting confidentiality and research security. They are also told to ensure appropriate cybersecurity for these systems, especially those connected to the internet.
The document identifies systemic risks too, including dependence on proprietary AI systems and the concentration of AI capabilities and infrastructure outside the EU.
Non-Binding, but Built on Research Integrity
The guidelines are non-binding and do not replace existing laws or institutional rules. They rest on four principles: consider whether AI is the right tool, accountability stays with researchers and institutions, confidentiality is non-negotiable, and transparency builds trust. These draw on established research integrity frameworks, including the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity.
The guidelines were developed with countries and stakeholders across the European Research Area. The next revision is planned for the third quarter of 2027, and an open feedback process remains available for contributions.
