Change log

Université de Montréal

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.

Université de Montréal currently has 7 source-backed claim records and 5 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.

Université de Montréal current policy evidence

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

+14-0
11 # Université de Montréal AI policy record
2+academic_integrity: UdeM's teaching-integrity guidance says course plans should explicitly state when generative AI tools are permitted; without explicit authorization, the tools are deemed prohibited.
3+Evidence (fr, ff9aa8baf664): Les plans de cours doivent indiquer explicitement lorsque l’utilisation de tels outils est permise ; sans autorisation explicite, ces outils sont réputés interdits.
4+privacy: UdeM Directive 10.70 tells administrative staff that confidentiality level 3 and 4 information must never be entered into a generative AI tool.
5+Evidence (fr, 0a38067da3dd): Les informations de niveaux de confidentialité 3 et 4 « Information confidentielle ou hautement confidentielle à risque élevé, critique ou majeur » ne doivent en aucun cas être saisies dans un outil d’IA générative;
6+research: For UdeM graduate directed work, master's theses, doctoral essays, and dissertations, the graduate-studies guidance says generative AI use in research and writing must be transparent, and non-transparent use could be considered a disciplinary offence.
7+Evidence (fr, 0937ba21a747): l’utilisation d’outils d’IA générative dans le processus de recherche et de rédaction des travaux dirigés, des mémoires de maitrise, des essais doctoraux et des thèses de doctorat doit toujours se faire en toute transparence. ... L'utilisation non transparente d'outils d'IA générative pourrait être considérée comme une infraction au règlement disciplinaire
8+privacy: UdeM's graduate-studies guidance says graduate students working with human-participant research data must not submit personal or identifying participant information, or information that could identify an individual or group, to generative AI tools.
9+Evidence (fr, 0937ba21a747): la personne étudiante travaillant avec des données provenant de participants humains à une recherche ne doit soumettre aucune information personnelle ou d'identification sur les participantes et participants, ni aucune information qui pourrait être utilisée pour identifier un individu ou un groupe à des outils d'IA générative.
10+ai_tool_treatment: For administrative staff, UdeM Directive 10.70 says generative AI use should be disclosed, and use in a decision-making process should be disclosed to affected persons with consent obtained before use.
11+Evidence (fr, 0a38067da3dd): Si l’IA générative est utilisée dans le cadre d’un processus décisionnel, divulguez-le aux personnes concernées et obtenez leur consentement avant d’y avoir recours.
12+security_review: UdeM's TI page for administrative staff says some generative AI tools are permitted if Directive 10.70 principles are respected, but identifies READ.AI and DeepSeek as proscribed tools.
13+Evidence (fr, 8a6b4c370f4e): L’utilisation de certains outils d’IA générative est permise dans la mesure où les principes énoncés dans la Directive pour l’utilisation de l’intelligence artificielle (IA) générative (10.70) sont respectés. ... L’utilisation des outils d’IA générative suivants est proscrite. READ.AI ... DeepSeek
14+teaching: UdeM's teaching-integrity guidance cautions teaching staff that AI-generated-content detection tools can vary in reliability and their results should be considered carefully.
15+Evidence (fr, ff9aa8baf664): la fiabilité des outils de détection de contenu produit par l’IAg peut être variable, ce qui oblige à considérer avec beaucoup de prudence leurs résultats.

Claim changes

7 claim records

academic_integrity

UdeM's teaching-integrity guidance says course plans should explicitly state when generative AI tools are permitted; without explicit authorization, the tools are deemed prohibited.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%Evidence1Languagesfr

privacy

UdeM Directive 10.70 tells administrative staff that confidentiality level 3 and 4 information must never be entered into a generative AI tool.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%Evidence1Languagesfr

research

For UdeM graduate directed work, master's theses, doctoral essays, and dissertations, the graduate-studies guidance says generative AI use in research and writing must be transparent, and non-transparent use could be considered a disciplinary offence.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%Evidence1Languagesfr

privacy

UdeM's graduate-studies guidance says graduate students working with human-participant research data must not submit personal or identifying participant information, or information that could identify an individual or group, to generative AI tools.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%Evidence1Languagesfr

ai_tool_treatment

For administrative staff, UdeM Directive 10.70 says generative AI use should be disclosed, and use in a decision-making process should be disclosed to affected persons with consent obtained before use.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%Evidence1Languagesfr

security_review

UdeM's TI page for administrative staff says some generative AI tools are permitted if Directive 10.70 principles are respected, but identifies READ.AI and DeepSeek as proscribed tools.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence89%Evidence1Languagesfr

teaching

UdeM's teaching-integrity guidance cautions teaching staff that AI-generated-content detection tools can vary in reliability and their results should be considered carefully.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence89%Evidence1Languagesfr

Source snapshots

5 source attributions