University AI Policy Tracker

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

API docsGitHub repo

Change log

University of Bern

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, 2026Claims4Sources3
University pagePublic JSON

Change summary

Current public record freshness and review state.

University of Bern currently has 4 source-backed claim records and 3 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.

University of Bern current policy evidence

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

+8-0
11 # University of Bern AI policy record
2+privacy: University of Bern IT Services says organization units may procure AI services themselves, but for AI systems not listed on the Generative KIs page, personal data, official or professional-secret data, and especially sensitive personal or research data must not be entered; only information intended for the public or otherwise without legal protection requirements is allowed.
3+Evidence (de, 1c15a0d6836d): Organisationseinheiten (OE) koennen KI Dienstleistungen eigenstaendig beschaffen. Fuer, auf dieser Seite nicht aufgefuehrte Systeme, gelten aber folgende Vorgaben: Es duerfen keine personenbezogenen Daten eingegeben werden. Es duerfen keine Amts- und/oder durch das Berufsgeheimnis geschuetzten Daten eingegeben werden. Es duerfen keine besonders schuetzenswerten Personen- und/oder Forschungsdaten eingegeben werden.
4+academic_integrity: The University of Bern Institute of Art History AI teaching guidelines say student work and exams at the institute must remain students' own work and may not be replaced by AI-tool work; AI tools may support independent work, use must be marked with the tool, prompt, scope, and purpose, and incorrect logging, citation, and referencing of AI-tool use in written work is regarded as plagiarism.
5+Evidence (de, d151094e6d66): Studentische Arbeiten und Pruefungen muessen eigenstaendige Leistungen der Studierenden sein. Diese duerfen nicht durch Arbeiten von KI-Tools ersetzt werden. ... Die Nutzung von KI-Tools muss gekennzeichnet werden. Hierbei muss ... angegeben werden, welches Tool, mit welchem Prompt, in welchem Umfang und zu welchem Zweck eingesetzt wurde.
6+security_review: University of Bern IT Services says that if an organization unit needs to enter and process covered data in AI systems, it must prepare an ISDS concept in advance and have it reviewed by the University of Bern CISO, legal service, and the Canton of Bern data protection supervisory authority; this also applies before processing official/professional-secret data or especially sensitive personal or research data in listed systems.
7+Evidence (de, 1c15a0d6836d): Sollte ein Bedarf zur Eingabe und Verarbeitung einer Teilmenge der oben genannten Daten bestehen, so ist durch die beschaffende Organisationseinheit vorgaengig ein ISDS Konzept zu erstellen und dieses durch den CISO und Rechtsdienst der Universitaet Bern, sowie die Datenschutzaufsichtsstelle des Kantons Bern zu pruefen.
8+research: The University Library Bern GenAI step-by-step guide frames responsible GenAI use as a 14-question decision process that includes checking whether GenAI use is allowed for the task, whether confidential data are protected, whether use is documented for transparent disclosure, whether UniBE procurement and data-protection guidance has been read, and whether the user remains responsible for research output.
9+Evidence (en, 9cd44917e86c): The 14 guiding questions below will help you decide whether using GenAI is appropriate in a given instance. ... Are you allowed to use GenAI for the task? ... If data are confidential, will the GenAI tool keep it protected and secure? ... Are you documenting your GenAI use in sufficient enough detail so you can write honest and transparent disclosure statements?

Claim changes

4 claim records

privacy

University of Bern IT Services says organization units may procure AI services themselves, but for AI systems not listed on the Generative KIs page, personal data, official or professional-secret data, and especially sensitive personal or research data must not be entered; only information intended for the public or otherwise without legal protection requirements is allowed.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%Evidence1Languagesde

academic_integrity

The University of Bern Institute of Art History AI teaching guidelines say student work and exams at the institute must remain students' own work and may not be replaced by AI-tool work; AI tools may support independent work, use must be marked with the tool, prompt, scope, and purpose, and incorrect logging, citation, and referencing of AI-tool use in written work is regarded as plagiarism.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%Evidence1Languagesde

security_review

University of Bern IT Services says that if an organization unit needs to enter and process covered data in AI systems, it must prepare an ISDS concept in advance and have it reviewed by the University of Bern CISO, legal service, and the Canton of Bern data protection supervisory authority; this also applies before processing official/professional-secret data or especially sensitive personal or research data in listed systems.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%Evidence1Languagesde

research

The University Library Bern GenAI step-by-step guide frames responsible GenAI use as a 14-question decision process that includes checking whether GenAI use is allowed for the task, whether confidential data are protected, whether use is documented for transparent disclosure, whether UniBE procurement and data-protection guidance has been read, and whether the user remains responsible for research output.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%Evidence1Languagesen

Source snapshots

3 source attributions