University AI Policy Tracker

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

API docsGitHub repo

Change log

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

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

Review: Agent reviewedLast checkedMay 15, 2026Last changedMay 15, 2026Claims5Sources4
University pagePublic JSON

Change summary

Current public record freshness and review state.

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona currently has 5 source-backed claim records and 4 official source attributions. Latest tracked changed date: May 15, 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.

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona current policy evidence

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

+10-0
11 # Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona AI policy record
2+research: The UAB Publications Service AI policy for articles says AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author, AI-generated scientific content requires author supervision and validation, and any AI use must be explicitly disclosed in the article.
3+Evidence (en, 5fde60887f65): The IA cannot be listed as author or co-author of an article. AI should not be used to generate hypotheses, interpret data or formulate conclusions without the supervision and validation of the authors. Failure to disclose the use of AI in the article is considered academic misconduct and may result in rejection of the proposal or retraction of the published article.
4+academic_integrity: UAB Libraries' AI authorship and attribution guidance says AI cannot have academic or legal authorship; the person using AI remains intellectually responsible and the AI tool should be indicated as a source, not as an author.
5+Evidence (ca, fdd1ca365044): La IA no pot tenir autoria acadèmica o legal. La IA és una eina, no un subjecte amb intencionalitat ni responsabilitat. L’autoria correspon a la persona que utilitza la IA i decideix què n’incorpora. A la citació, s’indica l’eina com a font, no com a autor.
6+privacy: UAB Libraries' responsible-use guidance for AI says privacy and data security require reviewing service terms, avoiding leakage of institutional information, and ensuring compliance with GDPR and other regulations.
7+Evidence (ca, bfc2aa9fcfd4): Privacitat i seguretat de les dades. La IA es basa principalment en dades obertes d’internet, però també en informació derivada de l’ús de les pròpies eines. Cal: revisar els termes d’ús dels serveis; evitar la filtració d’informació institucional; garantir el compliment del RGPD i altres normatives.
8+teaching: UAB Libraries publishes a UAB positioning page on AI use in teaching that describes the document as a provisional, living document intended to support reflection on AI in university teaching rather than an exhaustive regulation.
9+Evidence (ca, a8a5baaf7729): Aquest document n’és un primer resultat provisional. Un cop constituït el grup de treball amb professorat de diferents centres, s’ha elaborat aquest document, que serà un document viu, perquè la tecnologia a la qual es refereix evoluciona gairebé a temps real i convindrà anar-lo actualitzant regularment.
10+teaching: In its AI-in-teaching positioning guidance, UAB argues that ChatGPT and similar tools require rethinking assessment evidence and that tasks a machine can do quickly and well should not form part of an assessment proposal because they would evaluate artificial production.
11+Evidence (ca, a8a5baaf7729): La irrupció de ChatGPT i altres eines similars obliga a replantejar allò que es demana que provi o evidenciï cada estudiant. En general, tot allò que la màquina pot fer bé i de pressa no hauria de formar part de la proposta avaluativa, perquè s’estaria avaluant, en realitat, una producció artificial.

Claim changes

5 claim records

research

The UAB Publications Service AI policy for articles says AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author, AI-generated scientific content requires author supervision and validation, and any AI use must be explicitly disclosed in the article.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence96%Evidence1Languagesen

academic_integrity

UAB Libraries' AI authorship and attribution guidance says AI cannot have academic or legal authorship; the person using AI remains intellectually responsible and the AI tool should be indicated as a source, not as an author.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%Evidence1Languagesca

privacy

UAB Libraries' responsible-use guidance for AI says privacy and data security require reviewing service terms, avoiding leakage of institutional information, and ensuring compliance with GDPR and other regulations.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%Evidence1Languagesca

teaching

UAB Libraries publishes a UAB positioning page on AI use in teaching that describes the document as a provisional, living document intended to support reflection on AI in university teaching rather than an exhaustive regulation.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%Evidence1Languagesca

teaching

In its AI-in-teaching positioning guidance, UAB argues that ChatGPT and similar tools require rethinking assessment evidence and that tasks a machine can do quickly and well should not form part of an assessment proposal because they would evaluate artificial production.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%Evidence1Languagesca

Source snapshots

4 source attributions

Aspectes etics i deontologics - Intel.ligencia Artificial - Biblioteques UAB

official_guidance checked May 15, 2026

Snapshot hash
bfc2aa9fcfd416bd38f40f642253d09a9f185be1d5f7ec7d9c726548dbb549a5

Autoria i atribucio - Intel.ligencia Artificial - Biblioteques UAB

official_guidance checked May 15, 2026

Snapshot hash
fdd1ca365044265f546fba769665d67e05c7052587032c6383b83d4a475c5489