Delft University of Technology

ME guidance uses a “Yes, unless” rule of thumb for unsupervised work, subject to written course restrictions and the student’s own reasoning/writing responsibilities. Check the course statement; this is not a university-wide default or an exam permission.

ME2026/27 MSc Article7 treats examination aids not expressly permitted as fraud examples. Check the exact exam authorization; unsupervised coursework guidance does not authorize examination aids.

Where the ME instructor limits AI, students must disclose use for work contributing to a grade using the selected acknowledgement format. End/appendix placement is a recommendation and excluded from word count. Not acknowledging restricted use could be fraud, not automatically a finding.

Teaching guidance advises not sharing personal, internal or highly confidential information with AI. Tool log/retention and procurement approval are not established by that advice.

Teaching Support currently identifies NetID Copilot Chat as the permitted educational GenAI service and says a university-wide policy is in development. ME recommends web Copilot with Delft credentials; service access does not authorize a specific task. Do not substitute AI for personal analysis.

TU Delft OPEN Publishing requires disclosure of generative AI use within its publishing policy. Human-participant research needs HREC approval before engaging participants. These scopes do not establish every thesis/journal rule or assessment permission.

An appealable examiner/Board decision can be challenged before CBE within six weeks starting the day after the decision was announced/sent. Pro-forma appeals and exceptional non-culpable lateness have separate conditions; check the actual decision and appealability.

ME2026/27 BSc/MSc Article7 covers AI output presented as one’s own through deception, carelessness or inadequate referencing. The programme Board of Examiners handles suspected fraud; students can respond orally/in writing before a finding/sanction, except no hearing is required if no fraud is found. No result/annulment normally follows fraud, with exceptional cases; further sanctions are case-specific.

Teaching Support warns that relying on AI detectors to penalise students risks false accusations; use appropriate authenticity checks and Board procedures. This is not a university ban on detectors.