academic_integrity
TU/e classifies AI-tool use as fraud if submitted work is no longer sufficiently the student's own or if the student has not included a correct statement about the AI use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Change log
Eindhoven University of Technology
Source-check timeline, source snapshot hashes, claim review state, and a diff-style preview of current source-backed claim evidence.
Change summary
Current public record freshness and review state.
Eindhoven University of Technology currently has 10 source-backed claim records and 4 official source attributions. Latest tracked changed date: May 14, 2026.
This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless a linked source is the university's own official page.
Claim/evidence diff preview
Diff-style preview built from current public claim/evidence records. Full old/new source diffs require paired historical snapshots.
Eindhoven University of Technology current policy evidence
Inserted lines represent current public claim and evidence records in the source-backed dataset.
+20-0
11 # Eindhoven University of Technology AI policy record
2+academic_integrity: TU/e classifies AI-tool use as fraud if submitted work is no longer sufficiently the student's own or if the student has not included a correct statement about the AI use.
3+Evidence (en, 6e8c594a7d29): Using AI tools counts as fraud if... The submitted work is no longer sufficiently the student's own... [or] The student has not included a correct statement about the AI use.
4+ai_tool_treatment: TU/e allows AI tools as aids for general study and teaching functionalities unless an examiner explicitly forbids them, while keeping students and staff responsible for submitted work and educational activities.
5+Evidence (en, 6e8c594a7d29): The use of AI tools is allowed as an aid for general functionalities... unless explicitly forbidden by the examiner... Staff is always responsible... Students are always responsible for the work they submit.
6+academic_integrity: TU/e requires a complete statement when GenAI is used in a way that partially replaces or outsources the student's own work and learning process.
7+Evidence (en, 6e8c594a7d29): When using GenAI functionalities... complete statements about the use are required... when GenAI partially replaces or outsources the student's own work and learning process.
8+research: TU/e states that generating quantitative or qualitative research data with GenAI is fundamentally prohibited unless the examiner gives explicit consent.
9+Evidence (en, 6e8c594a7d29): The generation of quantitative and qualitative research data with GenAI is fundamentally prohibited, unless explicit consent is given by the examiner.
10+teaching: TU/e does not permit automated decision-making or grading based on a GenAI model without human oversight over the assessment process.
11+Evidence (en, 6e8c594a7d29): Teachers are encouraged to use tools in teaching and assessment... However, automated decision-making/grading based on a GenAI model without human oversight over the assessment process is not permitted.
12+privacy: TU/e warns AI users not to enter sensitive information or data and to follow the GDPR because AI tools carry privacy, security, storage, copyright, NDA, intellectual property, and data-processing risks.
13+Evidence (en, 6e8c594a7d29): The use of tools also comes with risks... data processing... privacy, security, and storage of personal, corporate, and research data. Therefore, do not enter sensitive information or data. Follow the GDPR.
14+source_status: TU/e's public Education Guide identifies the AI Rules_TUe.pdf as outlining the key policies for AI use in students' studies.
15+Evidence (en, d72d428796a9): TU/e aims to equip students with the skills and knowledge to use GenAI tools competently and responsibly... TU/e Most Urgent Rules for AI Use in Education outlines the key policies regarding AI in your studies.
16+procurement: TU/e's public Canvas AI-in-education guidance says students cannot be required to use ChatGPT because TU/e has no processor agreement or contract for ChatGPT, and points to Microsoft Copilot as a protected alternative available with a TU/e account.
17+Evidence (en, 50c3cee9ba70): TU/e has no processor agreement or contract for use of ChatGPT. So, students cannot be required to use it. We do offer an alternative for ChatGPT, named Microsoft Copilot.
18+academic_integrity: For TU/e Industrial Design, a reference list showing typical generative-AI faulty-reference patterns is treated as a Category 2 infringement, with repeat offences treated as Category 3.
19+Evidence (en, 5dca90f28d07): The presence of a reference list with the typical patterns of generative AI will be considered a Category 2 infringement. A repeat offence will be considered a Category 3 infringement.
20+academic_integrity: For TU/e Industrial Design students, the department-level Academic Fraud page says AI tools should not be used unless the current semester project Canvas guidelines are followed.
21+Evidence (en, 5dca90f28d07): The department of Industrial Design's position is that these tools should not be used unless the guidelines are followed... the latest version of the guidelines can be found in your current semester's project Canvas page.
Claim changes
10 claim records
ai_tool_treatment
TU/e allows AI tools as aids for general study and teaching functionalities unless an examiner explicitly forbids them, while keeping students and staff responsible for submitted work and educational activities.
Review: Agent reviewed
academic_integrity
TU/e requires a complete statement when GenAI is used in a way that partially replaces or outsources the student's own work and learning process.
Review: Agent reviewed
research
TU/e states that generating quantitative or qualitative research data with GenAI is fundamentally prohibited unless the examiner gives explicit consent.
Review: Agent reviewed
teaching
TU/e does not permit automated decision-making or grading based on a GenAI model without human oversight over the assessment process.
Review: Agent reviewed
privacy
TU/e warns AI users not to enter sensitive information or data and to follow the GDPR because AI tools carry privacy, security, storage, copyright, NDA, intellectual property, and data-processing risks.
Review: Agent reviewed
source_status
TU/e's public Education Guide identifies the AI Rules_TUe.pdf as outlining the key policies for AI use in students' studies.
Review: Agent reviewed
procurement
TU/e's public Canvas AI-in-education guidance says students cannot be required to use ChatGPT because TU/e has no processor agreement or contract for ChatGPT, and points to Microsoft Copilot as a protected alternative available with a TU/e account.
Review: Agent reviewed
academic_integrity
For TU/e Industrial Design, a reference list showing typical generative-AI faulty-reference patterns is treated as a Category 2 infringement, with repeat offences treated as Category 3.
Review: Agent reviewed
academic_integrity
For TU/e Industrial Design students, the department-level Academic Fraud page says AI tools should not be used unless the current semester project Canvas guidelines are followed.
Review: Agent reviewed
Source snapshots
4 source attributions
Academic Fraud
official_guidance checked May 14, 2026
Artificial intelligence in Education: Online Learning & Education
official_guidance checked May 14, 2026
Testing and assessment
official_guidance checked May 14, 2026
TU/e Basic Rules for AI Use in Education
official_pdf checked May 14, 2026