Policy presence
Seoul National University has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Seoul, South Korea
Seoul National University
Seoul National University has 16 source-backed AI policy claims from 7 official source attributions. Review state: agent reviewed; 16 reviewed claims. Last checked May 10, 2026.
Seoul National University AI policy short answer
v1 public contract
Seoul National University has 16 source-backed AI policy claims from 7 official source attributions, including 16 reviewed claims. The record review state is agent reviewed; original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, confidence, and public JSON are preserved for citation. Last checked May 10, 2026. Discovery context: Seoul National University is listed as QS 2026 rank =38.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists Seoul National University as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 10, 2026 and last changed on May 17, 2026. The record contains 16 source-backed claims, including 16 reviewed claims, from 7 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/snu.json. The entity-level confidence is 90%. This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless the linked source is the university's own official page.
Policy signals in this record
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- Evidence includes Research claims.
- Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes Procurement claims.
- Evidence includes Privacy claims.
- Evidence includes Source status claims.
- Named AI services detected in public claims: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini.
Review: Agent reviewed
This reference record summarizes visible public data only. Official sources and original-language evidence remain canonical; confidence is separate from review state.
This page 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.
Policy profile
Deterministic source-backed dimensions derived from this record's public claims.
Review: Machine candidate
Policy profile rows are machine-candidate derived metadata. They are not final policy conclusions; inspect the linked claim evidence before reuse.
Analysis page-quality metadata is available at /api/public/v1/analysis/page-quality.json.
AI disclosure
Seoul National University has 5 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
Seoul National University has 5 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Exams
Seoul National University has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
Seoul National University has 5 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Academic integrity
Seoul National University has 4 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Approved tools
Seoul National University has 3 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Named AI services
Seoul National University has 4 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Teaching guidance
Seoul National University has 1 source-backed public claim for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
Seoul National University has 5 source-backed public claims for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Security and procurement
Seoul National University has 1 source-backed public claim for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Coverage score measures breadth of public, source-backed coverage only. It is not a policy quality, strictness, legal adequacy, safety, or compliance score.
Evidence-backed claims
16 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Ai Tool Treatment
SNU's AI Guidelines do not uniformly restrict or prohibit AI use; they establish standards to support rational judgment and ethical, creative use based on autonomy and trust.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1이번 가이드라인은 AI 활용을 일률적으로 제한하거나 금지하는 규범이 아니라, 자율성과 신뢰를 바탕으로 한 합리적 판단과 윤리적·창의적 활용을 지원하기 위한 기준이다.
Widok lokalny only
This guideline is not a norm that uniformly restricts or prohibits AI use, but rather a standard to support rational judgment and ethical/creative use based on autonomy and trust.
Teaching
SNU requires instructors to communicate AI tool usage policies (permitted/prohibited scope and reporting methods) through syllabi, and students must comply.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1교육·학습 영역에서는 교수자는 강의계획서를 통해 AI 도구 활용의 허용·금지 범위와 보고 방식을 안내하고, 학생은 해당 정책을 준수하여야 한다.
Widok lokalny only
In the education/learning domain, instructors must guide students on the scope of permitted/prohibited AI tool use and reporting methods through the syllabus, and students must comply with that policy.
Research
SNU's AI Guidelines for research require cross-verification of AI outputs for errors/bias, protection of research data and confidential information, and documentation of AI use for research reproducibility.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1연구·개발 영역에서는 AI 결과물의 오류·편향 가능성에 대비한 교차 검증, 연구데이터 및 기밀정보 보호, 활용 과정의 기록·보존 등 연구 재현성 확보를 위한 절차를 포함하였다.
Widok lokalny only
In the research/development domain, the guidelines include procedures for cross-verification against AI output errors/bias, protection of research data and confidential information, and record-keeping for research reproducibility.
Academic Integrity
SNU's AI Guidelines require transparent disclosure of AI use, fact and source verification, copyright/privacy/information security compliance, bias correction, and awareness of accountability.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1투명한 활용 공개, 사실·출처 확인, 저작권·프라이버시·정보보안 준수, 편향성 교정, 책임소재의 인지 등 구성원이 유의해야 할 공통 윤리 기준을 명시하였다.
Widok lokalny only
The guidelines specify common ethical standards members must observe: transparent disclosure of use, fact/source verification, copyright/privacy/information security compliance, bias correction, and awareness of accountability.
Research
SNU Library cites COPE's position that AI tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for research results and lack legal personality.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1AI 도구는 제출된 연구결과물에 대한 책임을 지지 못하기 때문에 저자로서의 요건을 충족시킬 수 없다. AI 도구는 법인격이 없기 때문에 이해충돌 유무를 주장하거나 저작권과 라이센스 계약을 관리할 수도 없다.
Widok lokalny only
AI tools cannot meet authorship requirements because they cannot take responsibility for submitted research results. AI tools lack legal personality and cannot assert conflicts of interest or manage copyright and license agreements.
Research
SNU Library cites COPE requiring authors to clearly disclose in their methods section which AI tools were used and how, covering manuscript writing, image creation, and data analysis.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1논문의 원고 작성, 이미지 또는 그래픽 요소 제작, 데이터 수집 및 분석 등에서 AI 도구를 사용한 저자는 논문의 재료 및 방법론(또는 유사한 섹션)에서 어떤 AI 도구가 어떻게 사용되었는지 명확히 공개해야 한다.
Widok lokalny only
Authors who use AI tools in manuscript writing, image/graphic creation, data collection and analysis must clearly disclose in the methods section which AI tools were used and how.
Procurement
SNU Library warns that uploading subscribed e-resources to ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini or similar AI services, or performing bulk downloads, may exceed publisher license terms and could result in access being blocked for the entire university.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1구독 전자자료를 ChatGPT·Claude·Gemini 등 생성형 AI 서비스에 업로드하거나 대량 다운로드 또는 호출, 전문(全文)을 입력하는 행위는 출판사의 이용 허락 범위를 초과할 수 있습니다.
Widok lokalny only
Uploading subscribed e-resources to generative AI services like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or performing bulk downloads/calls or full-text input may exceed publisher license terms.
Privacy
SNU Library states that most e-resource subscription agreements only permit viewing, downloading, and printing; using resources for AI training/analysis or uploading to third-party AI services requires separate authorization.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1대부분의 구독 계약은 열람(viewing)·다운로드(download)·인쇄(printing) 용도의 이용만을 허용하며, AI 학습·분석 목적의 입력 또는 제3자 서비스로의 업로드는 별도 허락 없이는 허용되지 않음을 명시하고 있습니다.
Widok lokalny only
Most subscription agreements only permit viewing, downloading, and printing; input for AI training/analysis or uploading to third-party services is not permitted without separate authorization.
Source Status
SNU hosts official Korean and English PDF versions of the SNU AI Guidelines on its downloads page.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1「서울대학교 AI 가이드라인」 제정 전문 국·영문 PDF 파일입니다.
Widok lokalny only
This is the Korean/English PDF file set for the full text of the enacted Seoul National University AI Guidelines.
Ai Tool Treatment
SNU's AI Guidelines establish basic principles requiring members to understand AI tool purposes and characteristics, apply critical thinking, and balance creativity with social responsibility.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1AI 도구의 목적 및 특성을 이해하고 비판적 사고를 바탕으로 창의성과 사회적 책임이 균형있게 확보되도록 활용하는 기본 원칙 제시
Widok lokalny only
Presents basic principles for AI use ensuring creativity and social responsibility are balanced, based on understanding AI tool purposes and characteristics and critical thinking.
Academic Integrity
SNU's AI Guidelines require compliance with core ethical standards (transparency, accuracy, privacy, information security, accountability) throughout the entire AI use process, with domain-specific considerations for education, research, and administration.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1AI 활용의 전 과정에서 투명성, 정확성, 프라이버시 · 정보보안, 책임성 등 핵심 윤리 기준을 준수하도록 하고, 교육/학습 · 연구/개발 · 행정 영역별로 요구되는 윤리적 고려 사항 제시
Widok lokalny only
Requires compliance with core ethical standards throughout the AI use process: transparency, accuracy, privacy/information security, accountability, and presents domain-specific ethical considerations for education, research, and administration.
Research
SNU Library guidance states that researchers should use AI to improve research efficiency while maintaining research ethics and practicing responsible AI use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1연구자들은 변화하는 시대에 맞게 학술 연구를 함에 있어 새로운 기술(AI)을 활용하여 연구 효율을 상향시키는 동시에, 연구 윤리를 지키며 책임 있는 AI 사용을 해야 합니다.
Widok lokalny only
Researchers should use new AI technology to improve research efficiency while maintaining research ethics and responsible AI use.
Academic Integrity
SNU Library provides an AI ethics checklist requiring researchers to cite AI sources, avoid rights infringement, not input sensitive information, cross-verify AI outputs, and use AI only as a supplementary tool.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1생성형 AI의 결과물을 활용할 때 출처를 명확하게 표기했나요? 생성형AI를 활용할 때 타인의 권리가 침해될 수 있는 텍스트, 오디오, 이미지 등을 사용하지 않았나요?
Widok lokalny only
Checklist: Did you clearly cite sources when using generative AI outputs? Did you avoid using text, audio, images that could infringe others' rights?
Research
SNU Library advises researchers to check target journal editorial policies from the planning stage, as policies vary on whether LLMs can be listed as authors and whether AI-generated text is permitted.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1연구 진행 단계에서부터 논문 투고를 고려하는 저널 및 출판사의 편집 정책을 반드시 확인해야 합니다. 저널·출판사에 따라 ChatGPT와 같은 LLMs를 저자로 인정하지 않으며, AI가 생성한 텍스트를 논문에 사용할 수 없다고 제한하거나 오로지 보조적인 기능으로서의 AI 활용만 인정한다는 입장을 편집 정책에 명시하고 있습니다.
Widok lokalny only
From the research planning stage, researchers must check the editorial policies of target journals. Some journals do not recognize LLMs as authors, restrict AI-generated text in papers, or only permit AI as a supplementary function.
Academic Integrity
SNU Library warns that not citing generative AI use in papers risks plagiarism charges; researchers must cite AI use according to journal-specific styles (MLA, APA, Chicago).
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1논문 작성시 생성형 AI의 사용을 인용하지 않는 경우 표절로 간주될 위험이 있습니다. 따라서 연구자들은 각 저널의 스타일에 맞춰 생성형 AI의 사용을 적절하게 인용해야 합니다.
Widok lokalny only
Not citing generative AI use when writing papers risks being considered plagiarism. Researchers must cite AI use appropriately according to each journal's style.
Source Status
SNU Library notes that many research institutions lack clear AI policies, and researchers operate in uncertainty or within extremely limited scope.
Review: Agent reviewed
Oryginalny dowod
Evidence 1다수의 연구 기관에서는 아직 AI 활용에 관한 명확한 정책을 도입하지 않고 있습니다. 연구자들은 이러한 불확실성 속에서 AI 도구를 사용하거나 극히 제한된 범위 내에서만 사용할 수밖에 없습니다.
Widok lokalny only
Many research institutions have not yet introduced clear policies on AI use. Researchers must use AI tools in this uncertainty or within extremely limited scope.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Candidate claims are not final policy conclusions. They preserve source URL, source snapshot hash, evidence, confidence, and review state so the record can be audited before review.
Official sources
7 source attribution
「서울대학교 AI 가이드라인」 제정 안내 - 보도자료
snu.ac.kr
「서울대학교 AI 가이드라인」 제정 전문,국문/영문 - 자료실
snu.ac.kr
AI 도구의 활용 (Use of AI Tools) - SNU Library
libguide.snu.ac.kr
AI와 연구 활동 (AI and Research Activities) - SNU Library LibGuide
libguide.snu.ac.kr
AI와 연구·출판 윤리 (AI and Research/Publishing Ethics)
libguide.snu.ac.kr
서울대학교 AI 가이드라인 SNU AI Guidelines
snurnd.snu.ac.kr
중앙도서관 구독 전자자료의 생성형 AI활용 관련 유의사항 안내
health.snu.ac.kr
Change log
Source-check timeline and diff-style claim/evidence preview.
View the public change record for this university, including source snapshot hashes, claim review states, and a diff-style preview of current source-backed evidence.
Corrections and missing evidence
Corrections create review tasks and do not directly change this public record.
If an official source is missing, stale, moved, blocked, or incorrectly summarized, submit a source URL, policy change report, or institution correction for review. Corrections must preserve source URLs, source language, original evidence, review state, and audit history.