Change log

Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB)

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.

Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) currently has 5 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.

Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) current policy evidence

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

+10-0
11 # Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) AI policy record
2+research: VUB's research AI guidelines say researchers must provide the greatest possible degree of transparency on AI tool use in scientific activities.
3+Evidence (en, 87abaed132b7): Researchers must provide the greatest possible degree of transparency on the use of AI tools in their scientific activities. This means that the way AI tools are used often needs to be described in detail in the Materials & Methods section and/or Supplementary Data, including prompts, output, name and version of the AI tool.
4+academic_integrity: VUB's 2025-2026 Education and Examination Regulations classify as an irregularity fraud involving statements or texts produced by generative AI applications without reference to original sources.
5+Evidence (en, 9c36448fe92b): Any form of fraud that constitutes a breach of scientific integrity, including the use of statements or texts produced by generative AI applications without reference to original sources, or the simulation or falsification of research data, is deemed an irregularity as referred to in this article.
6+research: VUB's public AI guidelines are scoped to generative AI use in research processes and explicitly state that they do not apply to education.
7+Evidence (en, fd15157c660d): The purpose of these guidelines is to assist researchers in the appropriate use of generative AI in their day-to-day research activities. They are applicable to use of generative AI in research processes. They do not apply to education.
8+research: For research processes, VUB says it supports and encourages researchers' use of AI tools while also warning about limitations and risks.
9+Evidence (en, 87abaed132b7): The VUB supports and encourages the use of AI tools by researchers. Our university would also like to point out to researchers the limitations and risks that the use of AI tools in research processes can entail.
10+privacy: VUB's research AI guidelines say researchers should not enter personal data into AI tools.
11+Evidence (en, 87abaed132b7): Researchers serve not to enter the following data in AI tools : o Personal data: data that can (directly or indirectly) lead to the identification of persons

Claim changes

5 claim records

academic_integrity

VUB's 2025-2026 Education and Examination Regulations classify as an irregularity fraud involving statements or texts produced by generative AI applications without reference to original sources.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence96%Evidence1Languagesen

privacy

VUB's research AI guidelines say researchers should not enter personal data into AI tools.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%Evidence1Languagesen

research

VUB's research AI guidelines say researchers must provide the greatest possible degree of transparency on AI tool use in scientific activities.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence96%Evidence1Languagesen

research

For research processes, VUB says it supports and encourages researchers' use of AI tools while also warning about limitations and risks.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence94%Evidence1Languagesen

research

VUB's public AI guidelines are scoped to generative AI use in research processes and explicitly state that they do not apply to education.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%Evidence1Languagesen

Source snapshots

3 source attributions