Find source-backed university AI policy records

Journal of Zhejiang University - Policy Statement and Author Disclosure Requirements for the Use of Generative AI

American University guidance says students are responsible for course AI policies in syllabi, and misuse of AI or use without permission or disclosure may constitute an Academic Integrity Code violation.

AUTH Library's academic-writing AI tools page frames AI tools as assistants for search, analysis, and writing, while advising responsible use, source verification, academic-integrity respect, disclosure when required, and avoidance of confidential data uploads.

The ANU Library LibGuide references the ARC policy requiring disclosure of generative AI use in grant applications, accuracy verification, and originality compliance.

A BSU library-hosted seminar PDF frames AI use in academic work as an ethics issue, presenting AI as a tool rather than an author and naming transparency and role disclosure as acceptable-use practices; the source is training material, not a binding BSU policy.

Chang Gung University researcher guidance treats AI as a supporting tool, says core arguments and innovative results should be written by researchers, and calls for clear disclosure and verification of AI-generated content.

Teachers College example syllabus statements require citations or disclosure detailing specific AI tools and models used when AI use is permitted.

DLSU's generative AI policy says faculty and students must provide a written disclosure statement when generative AI is used in producing material, presentations, or submissions.

Emory Responsible AI guidance says public-facing AI platforms create disclosure risks for Sensitive Information and directs users to use Emory-approved secure AI tools when handling such information.

Violations of GenAI guidelines such as use of unauthorised aids or non-disclosure of their use are subject to disciplinary action under existing performance assessment rules and the declaration of originality.

The MSc Accounting and Finance master thesis guidelines allow AI tools in writing a master's thesis but require disclosure of advanced AI tools used, while stating that basic proofreading, grammar-checking, and translation tools do not need to be reported.

HSE University states that there is no university-wide prohibition on student use of AI, and students may use generative models in academic work when they follow disclosure requirements.

The Yue Lu Public Governance editorial office states that its journal does not accept manuscripts with generative AI tools as authors, limits generative AI use in submissions to auxiliary research tasks, rejects manuscripts with AI-generated core content or concealed tool use, and requires authors who used generative AI assistance to submit an AIGC tool-use disclosure statement.

The IISc committee report recommends full, precise, and transparent disclosure of generative AI use in research publications, theses, and other Institute documents, with details depending on how the tools were used.

This crawl did not verify a standalone central Jilin University generative-AI policy page; the accessible official sources found were JLU News articles discussing AI-era teaching, academic norms, disclosure, and user responsibility.

Students may not submit content generated with generative AI as their own without disclosure, and using AI in exams, assignments, or academic assessments is treated as cheating unless the course instructor permits it.

Kobe University warns students that entering highly confidential information or personal information into generative AI may lead to information leakage or disclosure.

Use of generative AI tools at MIT must comply with all applicable federal and state laws and orders (including FERPA, HIPAA, Massachusetts Data Protection Standards, export control laws, and the Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of AI), Institute policies (including 10.1 Academic and Research Misconduct, 11.0 Privacy and Disclosure of Personal Information, and 13.0 Information Policies), Information Protection guidelines, and the Institute's Written Information Security Program (WISP), plus any additional policies established by the user's department, lab, center, or institute (DLCI).

National Central University stated that, to reduce plagiarism and academic-integrity issues from AI tool use, it would continue regulation and education on disclosure, citation, and use of AI tools in thesis or program writing.

NSYSU's student generative AI guidance says students may not use generative AI tools for plagiarism or ghostwriting, cheating on exams, or privacy disclosure.

Taiwan Tech's Computer Center tells teachers and staff not to provide generative AI tools with official confidential information, personal information, or information not approved by the university for public disclosure, and not to ask AI questions that may involve confidential business or personal data.

For educator teaching, NTHU's Chinese AI guideline says the university respects instructors' course AI-tool strategies and that instructors should state student AI-use rules in syllabi, especially correct AI citation and disclosure of the use process.

PIEAS states on its website privacy policy that it collects the least personally identifiable information required for its duties or transactions and intends to take reasonable steps against unauthorized access or disclosure.

The HRZ AI services page says the university offers generative AI services via GWDG KI-Cloud and lists usage rules including no prompt/file input of personal, confidential, or security-relevant data and transparent disclosure when the service is used.

PMU's CCES Journal publication policies permit authors to use AI tools for research assistance, data analysis, language editing, and formatting, while requiring transparent disclosure and keeping authors responsible for the work.

The RTU-hosted Scriptus Manet journal policy requires transparent disclosure of AI-tool use in manuscript preparation, prohibits AI tools from generating scholarly content such as ideas, arguments, interpretations, data, or conclusions, and allows auxiliary technical uses such as editing, translation, corpus analysis, and visualization.

RUB's ZfW FAQ says generative AI tools can be used at RUB in research, teaching, and study, but that use can be restricted or tied to disclosure requirements in certain contexts such as written examinations.

Rutgers teaching guidance recommends clear and transparent course policies around generative AI, class discussion of those policies and rationales, and, when GenAI is permissible, student disclosure and reflection on use plus submission of prompts and outputs.

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.

Shenzhen University guidance says serious violations of instructor AI-use rules, concealment, presenting AI-generated content as original work, or failing required disclosure/marking can affect course grades and may be handled under academic misconduct rules.