A contract without teeth is worthless.
Who in the world is going to sue someone for submitting an AI-generated story to a sci-fi magazine? Who has the time, resources, and motive? You may as well just ask everyone to pinky promise that they didn’t use AI.
I agree, but I'm suggesting more than a contract; I'm also suggesting identity validation. Just the act of requiring legal proof of identity might weed out most of these attempts.
Perhaps most authors wouldn't care, but identity validation would gut the concept of the pen name. And as beneficial as pen names are (allowing early women authors to publish books at all, providing an author an out if their name becomes too associated with one genre, protecting authors from fanatics), eliminating them in an attempt to prove whether a tool was used in a books creation is less than ideal.
And worse, I have my doubts that it would even work. See: counterfeiters on Amazon.
That’s not how pen names work in publishing. Source: I’ve published books both under pen name and legal name.
identity validation would gut the concept of the pen name
as far as i understand clarkesworld submission rules, you may submit and be published under a pen name, but have to reveal your real identity to the magazine, which they will keep to themselves
You could front-load this requirement, of course: provide proof of identity (tech already exists), then legally vouch for authorship at time of submission.
TL;DR: Raise the barrier to entry, instead of scaling the ability to review.