University AI Policy Tracker

Open, evidence-backed AI policy records for public reuse.

API docsGitHub repo

Change log

Technical University of Darmstadt

Source-check timeline, source snapshot hashes, claim review state, and a diff-style preview of current source-backed claim evidence.

Review: Agent reviewedLast checkedMay 16, 2026Last changedMay 16, 2026Claims4Sources3
University pagePublic JSON

Change summary

Current public record freshness and review state.

Technical University of Darmstadt currently has 4 source-backed claim records and 3 official source attributions. Latest tracked changed date: May 16, 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.

Technical University of Darmstadt current policy evidence

Inserted lines represent current public claim and evidence records in the source-backed dataset.

+8-0
11 # Technical University of Darmstadt AI policy record
2+teaching: TU Darmstadt provides a generative AI handreichung as orientation for students and lecturers, covering reflected, transparent use, good scientific practice, and context-specific rules for examinations.
3+Evidence (de, cad835304582): Die TU Darmstadt stellt mit der Handreichung zu generativer KI eine Orientierungshilfe für Studierende und Lehrende bereit. Sie unterstützt dabei, KI-Hilfsmittel reflektiert, transparent und im Sinne guter wissenschaftlicher Praxis einzusetzen.
4+academic_integrity: TU Darmstadt's HDA guidance says students remain responsible for submitted work, while lecturers decide whether and how AI may be used in an examination task.
5+Evidence (de, cad835304582): Wichtig ist: Die Verantwortung für eingereichte Arbeiten bleibt immer bei den Studierenden. Ob und wie KI in einer Prüfungsleistung genutzt werden darf, legen die jeweiligen Lehrenden fest.
6+privacy: TU Darmstadt's data protection page says personal data may be used in AI-related teaching only under data protection rules and identifies prompt submitters as responsible for AI-generated data protection violations.
7+Evidence (de, 20ed682206aa): Personenbezogene Daten dürfen nur mach den Regeln des Datenschutzes eingesetzt werden. Daten sind dann personenbezogen, wenn sie die Identifikation einer Person ermöglichen, Art. 4 Nr. 1 DSGVO. Verantwortlich für Datenschutzverletzungen in der Hochschullehre sind diejenigen, die durch Eingabe von Prompts das Erzeugen der KI-Ergebnisse anstoßen und formen.
8+academic_integrity: TU Darmstadt's Computer Science department treats AI tools as examination aids under APB section 22(7), says they must be listed in written work when used, and warns that undisclosed or prohibited use can trigger suspected deception under APB section 38.
9+Evidence (de, 671ab03bd950): KI-Hilfsmittel sind im Sinne des §22 (7) APB als Hilfsmittel zu verstehen und müssen deshalb immer als solche in den Quellenangaben einer schriftlichen Arbeit angegeben werden. Sollten KI-Hilfsmittel trotz Verwendung nicht als Hilfsmittel angegeben oder trotz Untersagung als Hilfsmittel eingesetzt worden sein, droht die Feststellung eines Täuschungsversuchs nach §38 APB.

Claim changes

4 claim records

teaching

TU Darmstadt provides a generative AI handreichung as orientation for students and lecturers, covering reflected, transparent use, good scientific practice, and context-specific rules for examinations.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%Evidence1Languagesde

academic_integrity

TU Darmstadt's HDA guidance says students remain responsible for submitted work, while lecturers decide whether and how AI may be used in an examination task.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%Evidence1Languagesde

privacy

TU Darmstadt's data protection page says personal data may be used in AI-related teaching only under data protection rules and identifies prompt submitters as responsible for AI-generated data protection violations.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence88%Evidence1Languagesde

academic_integrity

TU Darmstadt's Computer Science department treats AI tools as examination aids under APB section 22(7), says they must be listed in written work when used, and warns that undisclosed or prohibited use can trigger suspected deception under APB section 38.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence87%Evidence1Languagesde

Source snapshots

3 source attributions