Which universities mention AI detection or detector tools?

Cornell's committee report recommends three policy approaches for generative AI use: prohibit GAI where it interferes with foundational learning, allow with attribution where it supports higher-level thinking, and encourage use where it enables exploration and creative thinking.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Cornell's committee report discourages the use of automatic detection algorithms for academic integrity violations using generative AI, stating they cannot decisively provide evidence and could lead to unfairly identifying violations, including bias against non-native speakers.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Cornell does not recommend using automatic AI detection algorithms for academic integrity violations, citing their unreliability and inability to provide definitive evidence, and the risk of wrongly accusing students.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The university’s public news account of its AI Education Guiding Principles reports: Tsinghua University prohibits students from directly copying or mechanically paraphrasing AI-generated text, code, or other output and submitting it as academic coursework.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The university’s public news account of its AI Education Guiding Principles reports: Tsinghua University prohibits using AI to replace academic training that graduate students are expected to complete independently, and strictly forbids AI-assisted ghostwriting, plagiarism, and fabrication in theses, dissertations, and practical achievements.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The university’s public news account of its AI Education Guiding Principles reports: Tsinghua University requires teachers and students to disclose their use of AI and AI-generated content in accordance with regulations, as part of the 'compliance and integrity' principle.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKU permits GenAI for research ideation and background research only with documentation and acknowledgement, verification of accuracy, fairness and originality, fair representation and citation of primary sources, and protection against inevitable disclosure of patentable inventions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKU permits GenAI-generated research code only with documented and acknowledged use, verification of algorithms and software, and adequate testing that is conducted and reported.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In general, HKU does not allow GenAI-generated text or figures that constitute interpretation of research findings. Unavoidable use should be limited in scope, acknowledged and reported.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Students are responsible for the content of work they submit. Performance assessments must be conducted independently and personally; GenAI may serve a supplementary role but not replace student efforts.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ETH Zurich's teaching guidelines instruct students to be transparent about their use of generative AI and to identify which tools contributed to which parts of their work, in accordance with applicable lecturer instructions and citation conventions. For scientific writing and theses, students should agree in advance with their supervisors on authorised AI use and disclosure requirements. ETH Library guidance recognises an exception where a supervisor has expressly agreed that particular AI use need not be separately declared. In the absence of such an agreement, undeclared use may constitute a breach of academic integrity.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ChatGPT Business access exists in particular Northwestern school workspaces or funded arrangements, including McCormick, Kellogg and Pritzker Law. Its data permissions and seat eligibility are school- and environment-specific, and Level 3 data is not permitted in the McCormick workspace.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kellogg documents a school-provided Claude Team workspace, whereas McCormick offers Claude Enterprise under a university enterprise agreement. Access and data handling must be distinguished by campus unit and exact product.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

All Northwestern students must comply with the academic integrity standards. AI-generated work submitted as one's own without required attribution or authorization may constitute cheating or plagiarism, subject to instructor-level rules.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Under SNU AI Guidelines Chapter 2 §3(2), §3(4), and §3(5), researchers must review AI outputs and cross-validate them against literature, experiments, and expert judgment; must take care to prevent leakage of sensitive research information, should not unnecessarily enter or share research data or confidential information with AI tools, and must strictly observe research security laws; and should record and preserve the AI usage process (prompts, versions, model names, scope) to the extent possible for reproducibility.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

SNU AI Guidelines Chapter 2 §1 sets general ethical principles: members should share and acknowledge AI use to the extent possible (§1(1)), should verify facts and sources (§1(2)), must comply with copyright, privacy, and information security laws and University rules and ensure inputs do not include personal or rights-infringing content (§1(3)), should make diligent efforts to mitigate bias (§1(4)), and must recognize full personal responsibility for submitted AI-assisted outputs (§1(6)).

Evidence records: 5. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

SNU Central Library guidance (and AI Guidelines Chapter 2 §3(7)) states that researchers must check the editorial policies of target journals and publishers from the research planning stage, as publishers vary on disallowing LLM authorship, restricting AI-generated text, or permitting AI only as a supplementary tool.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNSW's student guidance lists six Levels of AI Assistance for Term 3 2026, Semester 2 2026 and Hexamester 5 2026: No Assistance, Simple Editing Assistance, Planning or Design Assistance, Assistance with Attribution, Generative AI Software-based Assessments, and Not Applicable. For Hexamester 6 2026 and Summer Term 2027, the page specifies three AI Assessment Modes: Can't Use AI, Can Use AI and Must Use AI. Students should use the framework for their teaching period and check each assessment's instructions.

Evidence records: 13. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNSW only authorises the use of Turnitin's AI Writing Detection Tool for detecting improper AI use in student work; UNSW IT has not approved other detection tools due to privacy and accuracy concerns.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNSW's formal Student Plagiarism Management Procedure uses the levels Poor scholarship, Minor, Moderate, Significant and Serious, with generative AI misuse assessed according to the applicable rubric. Poor scholarship and Minor/Moderate/Significant cases are managed by the School; Serious cases must be referred to the Conduct & Integrity Office (CIO) as potential student misconduct. For Minor plagiarism, the rubric says a mark reduction should not exceed 10% of the maximum grade available. Listed outcomes for Serious cases include failing the work or course, suspension and permanent exclusion; these are possible outcomes, not automatic consequences of every unauthorised AI use. Actions outside the outcomes available for a level require CIO approval, and repeated instances may also be handled as student misconduct.

Evidence records: 9. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Slack AI is listed in UChicago’s approved/restricted table under these data and purpose conditions: Approved for data that is made publicly available by its source.. AI-generated outputs (e.g., summaries, recaps) may be posted in shared channels or viewed by multiple users. These outputs may surface, rephrase, or summarize others' messages, potentially highlighting content not intended for broader visibility. Slack’s privacy terms also permit use of data to improve AI features. Do not use with sensitive data. AI in Slack can summarize channels and threads and serve up daily recaps. Payment/support label: Paid ( Procurement purchase required ). This listing does not establish coursework or examination permission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At the University of Chicago, AI-generated content may be misleading or inaccurate, and it is the responsibility of the tool user to review the accuracy and ownership of any AI-generated content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Whether AI writing and research tools constitute academic dishonesty depends on the instructor of record’s rules. Students should address doubts about appropriate use to that instructor.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Users of AI at Penn are accountable for AI-generated content and should validate its accuracy with trusted first-party sources, being wary of misinformation or hallucinations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CETLI tells instructors not to upload student work into an AI detector in all cases. It states that uploading without consent violates FERPA and Penn privacy policies, and that detectors are not accurate enough to be treated as evidence of misconduct because of frequent bias.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Penn educators should provide students with clear guidelines on the use of AI within coursework and should disclose to students when course materials have been created with AI or when AI detection software will be used.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Four of the five Teachers College example syllabus statements (Examples1,2,4,5) explicitly include OASID accommodation language; Example3 does not.

Evidence records: 7. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Under Columbia University's Provost Generative AI Policy, a report from an AI detection tool confirming suspected AI use cannot be used as the sole piece of proof in a Dean's Discipline case to find a student responsible for a violation of policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At the University of Edinburgh, presenting AI outputs as your own original work, machine-translating assessed work to English, submitting AI content without acknowledgment, and using AI agents within university learning platforms constitute academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 5. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Edinburgh advises staff not to rely on AI detection tools to confirm authorship, as they misclassify human and AI content and there is no reliable automated provenance method.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Presenting AI-generated content as one's own work is regarded as academic misconduct at Edinburgh; all assessed work must be the student's own original work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Submitting work created by generative AI as one's own, or misrepresenting understanding of the subject, is plagiarism at Manchester and will be dealt with in accordance with the University's Academic Malpractice Procedure.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Tools to detect AI-generated content are unreliable and biased and cannot be relied on to identify academic malpractice in summative assessment at Manchester. Output from such tools cannot currently be used as evidence of malpractice.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Under Academic Malpractice Procedure DocID 639 §3.1.3.6 and Senate Policy DocID 79331 §3.0.2, using content generated by Artificial Intelligence without acknowledgement is explicitly designated as an indicator of academic malpractice and plagiarism.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTokyo states it is unacceptable to present AI-generated text as one's own when submitting class assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTokyo states that submitting AI-generated answers by copy-pasting them entirely provides no learning effect and should basically not be permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTokyo warns faculty not to over-rely on AI detection tools, as they are insufficient evidence of inappropriate student AI use given the rapid evolution of generative tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UC Berkeley Academic Senate states that generative AI detection tools are increasingly less accurate and that there are no validated generative AI detection tools available.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UC Berkeley Academic Senate recommends that for assignments where GenAI is not permitted, instructors should adopt enforcement mechanisms such as in-person proctored exams, an additional oral exam component, or a written statement of academic integrity, since no validated GenAI detection tools exist.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Under Section 102.01 of the Berkeley Campus Code of Student Conduct, academic misconduct includes cheating, fabrication, plagiarism, or facilitating academic dishonesty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UCLA Academic Senate's 2023 teaching guidance explains instructor-specific AI rules and source acknowledgement. The Interim 2026 Conduct Code further expressly defines unauthorized AI composition as cheating and unacknowledged AI-created work as plagiarism; follow the faculty member's course directions.

Evidence records: 17. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCLA DTS prohibits entering FERPA student data, HIPAA health data, personnel data, unpublished research/IP/grants and export-controlled data into AI services unless explicitly approved in a secure environment; use its GRC intake for questions.

Evidence records: 5. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCLA’s Interim2026 Code identifies unauthorized or prohibited AI assignment composition as cheating and AI-composed work without attribution as plagiarism. Follow the actual instructor’s directions; the2026–27 resource memo establishes no new academic policy or course permission.

Evidence records: 8. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

U-M does not recommend the use of AI-detection technology given their high error rate. False positives and negatives are possible, and even likely.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

U-M guidance calls for human review of AI-generated code and professionally trained peer code reviews for all new or significantly changed applications, particularly those handling Restricted or High data.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

U-M guidance gives instructors flexibility to allow or disallow GenAI by course and assessment, with clear syllabus and assignment expectations; course policies should align with applicable school or college misconduct policies.

Evidence records: 6. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Yonsei’s 2024 guideline discourages entering confidential, sensitive or personal data into generative AI; the August 2025 researcher guideline specifically warns against entering personal, patent, confidential and unpublished research data into external cloud-based AI services.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Yonsei’s May 2024 guideline asks students to clearly cite generative AI use; the August 2025 instructor guideline requires instructors to specify permissible course uses and choose and announce appropriate disclosure or prompt-record submission methods.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The2025 teacher guideline generally prohibits GenAI in supervised exams and limits electronic devices. In unproctored/open assessments, any permitted uses must be decided and announced beforehand. Preserve the “in principle” qualification and actual exam instructions.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At École polytechnique, an Institut Polytechnique de Paris member school, the Teaching & Learning Center publishes an AI resource page for instructors that includes AI-detection tools such as Turnitin, AI Text Classifier, and GPTZero.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For IP Paris M1/M2 students in 2026–27, AI use in any examination is prohibited unless the instructor explicitly authorizes it in their instructions; unauthorized use constitutes fraud. Outside examinations, AI may support information searches, knowledge deepening or reasoning checks with systematic, precise, detailed disclosure, subject to explicit instructor bans stated in course instructions and plagiarism restrictions.

Evidence records: 5. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For IP Paris 2026–27 Masters, reproducing AI-generated text, code or other output beyond short excerpts appropriately cited is treated as plagiarism. Instructors may explicitly ban AI use in a given task, submission or entire course unit.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTU states that not citing or acknowledging the use of generative AI could be considered plagiarism (a form of research misconduct), especially if GenAI was used to generate ideas or for literature reviews.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTU Library’s public summary of the 2025 Academic Integrity Handbook states that misrepresenting AI-generated content as one’s own work is academic misconduct. The complete internal handbook was not independently obtained.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTU requires AI-generated research images, figures and videos to be clearly labelled and the methods, tools and parameters documented sufficiently for reproducibility.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UQ has disabled the Turnitin AI writing indicator functionality for all assessments from Semester 2, 2025, citing that AI detection tools are flawed and unreliable.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At UQ, the use of AI outputs without attribution, and contrary to any direction by teaching staff, is a form of plagiarism and constitutes academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UQ Library advises coursework students to acknowledge AI use, including summarising, brainstorming, planning and editing. Assessment instructions and discipline-specific practices determine the required form and relevance of disclosure; students must check each task and course profile.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Gothenburg study-rules PDF states that, for take-home examinations, written tasks, or equivalent, AI-generated content may not be presented as one’s own work and examiners should specify the limits for permitted use of generative AI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Gothenburg student guidance on cheating says generative AI use counts as cheating when it is used to complete an examination task the student is expected to do independently, to present AI-generated material as the student’s own work, or in other ways prohibited in the course or programme.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Gothenburg PIL guidance says all staff and students have access to Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat, employees have access to ChatGPT Edu, and Microsoft 365 Copilot can be requested with manager approval because its cost is charged to the department or equivalent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Staff setting summative assessment must: declare whether/how students can use AI; review assessment design for alignment with permitted AI use; ensure equality of baseline AI tool provision where authorised; specify declaration forms for student AI use; only identify suspected unauthorised AI use through marking or university-endorsed detection tools (the public page says none had received endorsement at its last update); and handle misconduct under usual disciplinary regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Students undertaking summative assessment must: complete assessment in line with the AI use declaration for each assignment; acknowledge their AI use via a formal declaration in the prescribed format; and understand that submitting work breaching AI specifications constitutes cheating and may constitute plagiarism, handled under usual disciplinary regulations.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MPLS postgraduate research guidance prohibits substantive AI-written thesis content, including close paraphrases, and producing plots or data visualisations directly from prompts. It distinguishes refining plotting code from generating research results. Confidential/private data use remains subject to applicable University data rules and approved institutional services.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The ZUJ Journal of Legal Studies AI-tool policy permits AI use only for language editing, proofreading, grammar or spelling correction, rephrasing without changing meaning, and summarizing researcher-written text; it prohibits using AI to generate scientific content, manipulate data or figures, invent references, write conclusions or analysis, or submit unverified AI-generated content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The ZUJ Journal of Legal Studies AI-tool policy sets an AI-generated-content limit of 35%, a similarity-index limit of 30%, requires authors to disclose AI use and assume responsibility for AI errors or plagiarism, and says the journal uses Turnitin AI Detector with possible sanctions including rejection, author bans, notifying the author's institution, or retraction.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Al-Zaytoonah University Journal of Business ethics page requires authors to disclose AI-tool use in manuscript preparation and says AI-generated content should be reviewed and verified by the authors.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Submitting AI-generated content as one's own work constitutes a breach of ANU's academic integrity rules (academic misconduct or poor academic practice).

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Using AI-generated content when not permitted and claiming authorship without acknowledgment constitutes a breach of academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Generative AI is a permissible learning tool in higher education and can be cited as an information source, but it is not a replacement for student critical thinking, original arguments, and creative output.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 5. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 10. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 6. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

EPFL guidance specifies that submitting AI-generated content as one's own work without proper attribution is considered AI plagiarism. Tools specifically aiming to detect AI-generated content are not admissible as stand-alone evidence of AI plagiarism due to a high risk of false positives. Under continuous assessment procedures, where unauthorized AI use or non-disclosure is suspected, the course teacher writes a report and submits it with evidence to the section director and Legal Service (Affaires juridiques) for formal evaluation, which constitutes a referral of suspected misconduct rather than an adjudication of cheating.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The French LEX1.3.3 directive, originally effective1 January2013 and revised1 September2026 as version2.2, requires scientific and academic work to distinguish borrowed material from the author's personal and original contribution under Article4. Article4 says that failing to identify borrowed material presents it as a personal and original contribution and constitutes plagiarism, referring to Article8. The official Polylex directory states that only the French version is legally binding and that the English version is for information and has no legal force.

Evidence records: 5. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

EPFL Library guidance for manuscripts intended for publication states that the LLM used, what it was used for, and how it was used must be disclosed in the manuscript, while adhering to the policies on AI-generated content of the specific journal or publisher chosen for submission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Harvard meeting guidance says AI assistants should not be used except approved tools with contractual protections or applicable approved pilots/accommodations. Participants must be informed and all must consent before recording/transcription begins. The guidance says not to use assistants when participants object (with a disability-accommodation consultation route), and to disable them in meetings involving Level 3 or higher information. Summaries must be reviewed before limited sharing; retention and litigation holds also apply.

Evidence records: 6. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Harvard guidance says users are responsible for any content they publish or share that includes AI-generated material, which may be inaccurate, fabricated or copyrighted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HMS responsible-use guidance advises users to verify AI outputs, follow applicable faculty/student handbook rules, be transparent about acceptable use and cite AI contributions appropriately. It separately requires attention to confidential data, regulations, sponsor requirements and DUA restrictions; it does not establish assessment permission.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Johns Hopkins guidance says generative AI implementation in higher education should be approached carefully, including attention to bias detection, mitigation, fairness, inclusivity, and human intervention.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Engineering for Professionals (EP) student guidance requires students to adhere to instructor standards regarding the disclosure of generative AI use. Disclosure may encompass full chat transcripts, citations of specific models or websites, short descriptions of use, single citations per assignment, or visual highlighting of AI-generated content. Students remain fully responsible for verifying accuracy, identifying bias, and ensuring the quality of final submissions. Students must save GenAI outputs or interaction records if disclosure or verification is requested by the course or instructor, and failure to disclose GenAI use when required may constitute academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Johns Hopkins Center for Teaching Excellence and Innovation (CTEI) does not recommend incorporating AI detection software into student evaluations because the technology is unreliable, often reports a vague probability of AI use, lacks clear evidence of copying, and generates false positives. This advice serves as instructional guidance rather than a statutory university-wide ban; individual courses (such as Engineering for Professionals Course 605.203.81, Fall 2026 syllabus) state that all submitted work must represent the student's own reasoning and that available technologies—including AI detection software, stylometric analysis, mathematical consistency checks, version-history analysis, and oral follow-ups—may be used to evaluate authenticity of student work. Instructor suspicion or reporting under course syllabi is distinct from an official university finding of misconduct.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McGill's Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures (current version effective November 12, 2025) states that no student may use generative AI in an assessment in a manner not authorized by the relevant instructor or supervisor, or that violates the course's AI requirements (Article 25(b)), and that using any tool, including generative AI, that has been disallowed in the course outline or written assessment instructions is cheating (Article 26(f)). AI-detection software is not sufficient by itself to substantiate an allegation under Article 25. Permission is therefore set by the instructor, supervisor and course, not university-wide.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McGill's Principles on Generative AI in Teaching and Learning state (fifth principle) that students remain responsible for academic rigour: verifying the accuracy of AI-generated information, acknowledging the use of generative AI tools where applicable, informing themselves about and complying with instructors' explicit expectations, and respecting limits set on AI use in assessment tasks. Whether AI is allowed or prohibited is not set university-wide.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McGill teaching guidance (August 2026) states that McGill does not support the use of generative AI detection tools to determine whether student work was generated using AI, because they can produce unreliable results and should not be relied on as evidence of unauthorized use. This teaching position complements, but is distinct from, the Code rule that detector output alone cannot substantiate an Article 25 allegation.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McMaster's student generative AI coursework tip sheet tells students not to use generative AI unless a course syllabus or professor explicitly allows it, and to disclose and cite AI-generated content when allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McMaster's teaching and learning guidelines say generative AI tools should not provide letter or numeric grades for student work, while AI-generated feedback may be used only under stated conditions such as syllabus inclusion and an opt-out ability.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

McMaster's Provost academic integrity page says McMaster has not activated Turnitin's AI Detector, while privacy/security and reliability assessment work is underway and activation may allow retroactive submissions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PNU students must uphold academic integrity when using generative AI, follow instructor guidance, acknowledge allowed AI use, and not claim AI-generated work as their own.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PNU researchers must not use generative AI to misrepresent research, fabricate data, plagiarize, present AI-generated content as human-created content, or use generative AI in sensitive activities such as peer reviews or evaluations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PNU faculty must avoid using AI-generated-content detection tools to check student work and instead use authentic assessment and trusting relationships with students.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A high AI score in Turnitin's writing detection report is not proof of misconduct and does not on its own constitute grounds for making an allegation of academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Turnitin AI writing detection is listed for The University of Melbourne in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: conditionally allowed. Derived endorsement type: institutionally_licensed_or_procured.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Melbourne academic misconduct framework explicitly categorizes unauthorized or undisclosed use of technology (including GenAI) as a breach type under academic integrity procedures.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UFSC's resolution treats presentation of plagiarized work generated by generative artificial intelligence or equivalent technology as 'plagio por uso de inteligencia artificial' for purposes of characterization, investigation, and sanction.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UFSC's resolution characterizes as academic misconduct the improper presentation of a work made wholly or partly with generative AI or equivalent technology when original authorship is required or such tools are expressly prohibited, and also characterizes nondisclosure of generative AI use as misconduct where disclosure is expressly required.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UFSC's Normative Resolution 217/2025/CUn covers plagiarism and academic misconduct in literary, technical, artistic, and scientific works produced within UFSC and applies to cases involving students, faculty, technical-administrative staff, visiting or invited researchers, scholarship holders, interns, volunteers, and others with a formal university link.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Mississippi CETL syllabus guidance states that there are currently no university-supported AI detection tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Mississippi Libraries guidance tells students to use and cite AI according to the syllabus, assignment description, or other instructor communication, noting that instructor requirements may vary by class.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Mississippi CETL guidance warns instructors that AI detection tools are unreliable and that AI detection software not protected by FERPA may violate student privacy or intellectual property rights.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Utah State University's AI Use & Compliance guidance says AI-generated content must be reviewed for accuracy, bias, and copyright compliance before use in coursework, research, or administrative communications.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Utah State University's teaching guidance says positive AI detection reports should be approached with skepticism and should not be the only point of evidence or suspicion in an accusation of student cheating.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Utah State University's student AI resources say ChatGPT and other generative AI tools should be treated like other sources for plagiarism and academic integrity, and students should check each professor's policies for when and how AI tools may be used in assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Yale academic integrity guidance treats inserting AI-generated text into an assignment without proper attribution as an academic integrity violation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Yale Poorvu Center says it does not endorse AI detection software or enable such features in Canvas.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Yale guidance tells users to review and verify AI-generated outputs, especially before publication.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Anna University's Centre for Research plagiarism policy defines plagiarism as unacknowledged use of another person's work and includes copying from the internet or another online source without proper reference or citation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Anna University's Centre for Research plagiarism policy lists UGC-guideline penalty levels for plagiarism in research publications and thesis submissions, including withdrawal, revision delay, debarment, or cancellation depending on similarity level and context.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

This staged crawl did not verify a central Anna University generative-AI use policy; the official policy surface verified here was the Centre for Research research-policy menu and research-integrity documents, while official AI-specific hits were event or curriculum materials.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In the undergraduate thesis and design process, Beijing Normal University prohibits using artificial intelligence to commit ghostwriting, plagiarism, fabrication, and similar academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Beijing Normal University states that AIGC detection results for 2026 undergraduate theses and designs are probabilistic and serve only as an auxiliary reference for academic norms, not as the basis for judging thesis originality.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2026 undergraduate theses and designs, Beijing Normal University says it will conduct comprehensive plagiarism detection and AIGC detection through the undergraduate thesis module of its teaching administration service platform.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Beijing University of Technology's 2025 undergraduate graduation design/thesis work, directly using AI-generated content in thesis writing was prohibited and, if verified, treated as thesis ghostwriting and academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Beijing University of Technology's 2025 undergraduate graduation design/thesis work, all undergraduate graduation projects/theses were required to undergo academic misconduct checks that included AIGC detection.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Beijing University of Technology's 2025 undergraduate thesis detection notice said all 2025 undergraduate theses had to undergo plagiarism checking, content review, AIGC detection, and formatting-standard checks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

BRAC University's plagiarism policy treats representing another person's idea, expression, or work as one's own in exams, term tests, or other academic work as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

BRAC University's plagiarism policy says students should properly cite and give credit when using another person's ideas, information not generated by the student, quotations, paraphrases, words, phrases, or citations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

BRAC University's plagiarism policy says faculties and departments are expected to notify students that papers are required to be submitted electronically and plagiarism detection software will be applied.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) requires graduate degree theses applying for degrees to undergo text-similarity and AIGC detection before blind review and before the post-defense degree evaluation subcommittee meeting, with strict implementation from the Fall 2025 semester onward.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2025 full-time undergraduate thesis and design work, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) conducts schoolwide plagiarism and AIGC detection, prohibits replacing student writing with AIGC, and states that high-risk AIGC detection prevents defense unless the student revises or provides an accepted explanation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) Graduate School instructed graduate training units to organize supervisors and graduate students to study AI-tool-use guidance and, under that guidance and the school's trial graduate thesis AI-use specification, manage and review theses or practice outcomes and conduct AIGC detection.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ECU's academic-misconduct guidance states that plagiarism includes unacknowledged use of a generative artificial intelligence tool such as ChatGPT.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ECU tells students that the same academic-integrity rules that apply to traditional study also apply to generative AI, and that submitting AI-generated work without permission is an academic-integrity breach.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ECU Library guidance says students who use generative AI as a study or research tool must acknowledge that use in their assessment, and that not giving credit to GenAI tools counts as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Emory College Honor Council AI information sheet says Emory does not currently license an AI detection program, detection tools can produce false positives or negatives, and detection results alone would not ordinarily be sufficient to find a student responsible for a violation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Emory College Learning Design guidance cites Honor Council language stating that, where AI is not allowed, using an AI program to generate assignment content constitutes plagiarism and an Honor Code violation, and unauthorized AI use may also constitute unauthorized assistance or other Honor Code violations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Emory Responsible AI guidance says users should review AI-generated content before adopting it in clinical, administrative, or organizational settings.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The MSc Accounting and Finance master thesis guidelines warn that AI outputs may be inaccurate or hallucinated, say students remain responsible for evaluating AI outputs and appropriate use, and state that Turnitin plagiarism checking is mandatory before final manuscript submission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Faculty of Economics and Management bachelor thesis guidelines state that students remain responsible for evaluating AI outputs and warn that AI-generated text may create plagiarism risks; they also say Turnitin plagiarism checking is mandatory before final manuscript submission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Free University of Bozen-Bolzano Library academic integrity page defines plagiarism as failing to give proper credit or using text incorrectly, and says the Library offers Turnitin to check originality against online sources.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Unless explicitly authorised, using artificial intelligence to create assessed work may be treated as an offence such as contract cheating under Imperial's Plagiarism, Academic Integrity & Exam Offences regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the 2026–27 academic year, Imperial states that it does not use Turnitin's AI-writing detection functionality as part of its assessment processes. Academic-integrity concerns are evaluated by staff using academic judgement and evidence. This statement does not exclude authenticity interviews or other permitted investigative methods.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Imperial states that Turnitin's proposed July 2026 changes concerning AI-related processing of student submissions have been deferred until at least the 2027–28 academic year. The university reports no corresponding change to its Turnitin usage arrangements during 2026–27.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The guidelines state that authors remain fully responsible for verifying the accuracy of AI-assisted work, rigorously fact-checking it and proactively confirming it is free from plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IIT Delhi's committee holds that outright restriction of GenAI tools is neither enforceable nor desirable and recommends that each course instructor develop their own plagiarism policy governing AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Course-level plagiarism policies are expected to set differentiated consequences for AI misuse while rewarding honest, responsible engagement with AI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Keio's generative AI usage guideline strongly recommends verifying AI-generated information against primary sources because generative AI may produce hallucinated information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Keio's generative AI usage guideline warns that using AI-generated information as-is may unintentionally constitute research misconduct and says researchers remain responsible for transparency, reproducibility, and research outcomes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Keio's guideline says generative AI is a tool to support learning, research, and work, and that users are solely responsible for final judgment and use of AI-generated content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King's Academic Misconduct Policy states that using generative AI tools to produce output that is then copied as part of a submission is not appropriate, that any work submitted must genuinely demonstrate the student's own work, skills and knowledge and follow the assessment guidelines, and that generative AI writing programmes are third-party technologies to be used only in accordance with College guidance. The King's guidance adds that submitting AI-generated text as one's own without written departmental permission is considered misconduct (third-party involvement or text manipulation) where it gives undue advantage or interferes with assessment of the student's own understanding. A written permission or acknowledgement does not by itself make substantive AI content creation acceptable.

Evidence records: 5. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King's College London states it took the decision not to enable the AI-writing detection percentage in Turnitin because of concerns about reliability and false positives. This is not the same as switching off similarity checking: the Academic Misconduct Policy still allows staff to use TurnitinUK or other means to help detect academic misconduct. The current back-end Turnitin configuration was not independently tested.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King's College London doctoral examiners must not upload any part of a student's thesis into a generative AI tool or use external AI detection software when assessing the thesis.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Korea University states that submitting AI-generated content as one’s own, or using it without permission, is academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Korea University says AI-detection and plagiarism-prevention tools should be used only as supplementary references and not as the sole basis for misconduct findings.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Korea University tells learners to disclose the AI tool name, timing, and scope of use, distinguish their own work from AI contributions, and cite AI-generated content according to the required format.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2025 undergraduate graduation design/thesis work, NUAA says AI tools may only assist research and writing, may not replace independent thinking, and AI-generated content should be separated from personal academic contribution and clearly marked.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2025 undergraduate graduation design/thesis work, NUAA prohibits fully relying on AI for thesis/design writing or research and prohibits using unverified AI-generated content to fabricate data, alter results, or evade plagiarism checks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2025 undergraduate graduation design/thesis work, NUAA says colleges should conduct AIGC spot checks of at least 10% after plagiarism checks, and a detected AI-generated-content proportion not higher than 40% is treated as passing before final defense.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Nankai University's undergraduate AI tool norm prohibits AI use for confidential or sensitive-content creation, uploading confidential content to AI platforms, generating or altering core arguments or research data, academic misconduct such as ghostwriting, plagiarism, or copying, and AI use in listed midterm and final assessment formats unless a teacher explains a special-use case in advance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Nankai University's undergraduate AI tool norm says students should clearly explain and mark specific AI-generated content in coursework, graduation theses or designs, and lab reports, and should keep complete AI tool use records such as prompts, outputs, and selected use for checking.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Nankai University's undergraduate AI tool norm states that the university will provide an AIGC detection tool for teaching units to check AI tool use in coursework, graduation theses or designs, and lab reports, with results for teacher and supervisor reference; students who violate the norm may receive lower course or thesis grades, lose defense eligibility, or be handled under academic misconduct rules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NSYSU's teacher guidance says teachers should not use AI-detection tools as the sole basis for handling academic-ethics violations, and should assess suspected misuse according to academic-ethics rules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NSYSU's student guidance says students using generative AI tools should observe academic ethics and properly cite or explain the motivation, scope, sources, and AI-generated portions when teacher permission allows AI-assisted learning.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTU DFLL guidance says instructors may decide whether students may use generative AI; if permitted, students should clearly label AI-generated content and follow academic ethics.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

National Taiwan University guidance says students using ChatGPT for assignments or reports should clearly label AI-generated content, fact-check it, and comply with academic ethics and academic-integrity requirements.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

National Taiwan University guidance says AI-detection tools have limited accuracy and are not sufficient evidence by themselves to confirm student AI use; it recommends caution before accusing students based only on such tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University's Academic Affairs Office and Teaching Development Center issued a notice for all colleges on regulating AI use in undergraduate theses and designs, effective from the 2025 graduating undergraduate thesis/design work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University's undergraduate thesis/design AI notice states that students bear final responsibility for AI-generated content and that AI tools may not be listed as authors or collaborators.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When students use AI tools to assist undergraduate thesis or design work, Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University requires them to disclose the tool name, version, and specific purpose in relevant thesis sections and keep pre- and post-AI-use original materials as appendix materials for review; the school will randomly select some theses or designs for AI-generated-content detection.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Panjab University's plagiarism policy applies to the university community, including staff and students, and treats plagiarism as academic misconduct subject to disciplinary and punitive action.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Panjab University's plagiarism policy lists preventive measures including originality declarations for relevant submissions, electronic-file submission for plagiarism checks, plagiarism-detection software, and plagiarism-check certificates for dissertations and theses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Panjab University's central PU Policies page lists anti-plagiarism and IT policy documents, but this crawl did not identify a central generative-AI policy in that official policy list.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Peking University lists 北大问学 (Beida Wenxue) as an AI-assisted teaching and learning service for its faculty and students. Its listing does not establish permission to use AI-generated work in coursework, examinations or degree assessments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For undergraduate assignments, papers, reports and other works, PKU prohibits plagiarism, alteration, fabrication and other specified integrity violations; borrowed viewpoints, materials and data must identify their sources. This is not a separately verified universal AI declaration requirement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PKU’s 2025 degree regulations provide for degree denial or revocation for specified misconduct including ghostwriting, plagiarism or fabrication after the required findings and degree-committee decision. Article 37 allocates academic-misconduct findings to the academic committee and the degree decision to the degree committee. AI use or a detector score alone is not established here as an automatic sanction.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Princeton's Office of the Dean of the College requires faculty to set clear expectations for whether, when and how generative AI can be used and to state them in the course syllabus; all students are expected to disclose their generative AI use and not pass off AI-generated content as their own, and faculty may provide their own disclosure template or use the standard one.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Princeton's McGraw Center for Teaching and Learning recommends against using AI detection tools to determine whether students have violated an instructor's AI policy. This is teaching guidance, not a disciplinary evidence rule.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Princeton's Department of Art and Archaeology prohibits using AI as a text-generation tool in coursework, final examinations and independent projects: students may not submit AI-generated text, use AI-generated text as a draft they then modify or paraphrase, or use generative AI to edit and revise their work. Instructors may grant exceptions for a course assignment with written disclosure, but exceptions will never be made for the junior paper or senior thesis. This department rule is stricter than general course-by-course permission.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sapienza's final-paper originality declaration requires students who used AI, automatic translators, grammar checkers, or data-analysis software to transparently declare the tool function and specific use, and says AI was not used to generate substantial content or automate any section.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Sapienza CAD Psychology undergraduate final papers, the guidance treats uses such as relying on AI for bibliographic discovery, unverified citations, article summaries, critical analysis, delegated writing, automatic responses to supervisor feedback, data manipulation, fake results, or uncited AI content as illicit.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Sapienza CAD Psychology final-paper guidance says students must attach a dated and signed Declaration of Originality and Academic Integrity to the final paper.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2026 undergraduate theses, Sichuan University's Academic Affairs Office notice says colleges may choose AIGC detection tools, should detect 100% of theses, and should refer to AI-generated content proportions of no more than 20% for humanities/social-science theses and no more than 15% for science, engineering, and medical theses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sichuan University's Academic Affairs Office notice says 2026 undergraduate thesis AIGC detection work runs from April 9 to mid-May and that colleges set detailed arrangements for graduates and supervisors.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the 2026 undergraduate thesis detection process, Sichuan University's Academic Affairs Office notice says violations arising during AI tool use are handled according to 四川大学本科教育教学人工智能工具应用规范（试行）（川大教〔2025〕28号）.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stanford's BCA issued guidance on generative AI use, and the Office of Community Standards recommends that instructors give advance notice to students when using AI detection software.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stanford School of Medicine MD and MSPA programs have a formal AI policy: students may use AI for learning, clarification, and grammar/style editing unless contrary to assignment instructions. AI use for closed-book exams or assignments where internet is restricted is prohibited unless explicitly authorized by faculty. Students are responsible for all AI-generated content they submit, must disclose and cite substantial AI contributions, and violations may result in disciplinary action.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stanford Law School instructors set their own AI policies; in the absence of a course-specific policy, students may use generative AI to support learning and develop or refine their own ideas, but may not use AI to generate content presented as their own work. Using AI during an exam or to draft/revise submitted work is not permitted unless disclosed in advance and explicitly authorized in writing by the instructor. Unauthorized use may result in an F grade and/or referral to Stanford's Office of Community Standards.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stony Brook's Academic Integrity Policy lists representing work generated by artificial intelligence as one's own work as an example of academic dishonesty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stony Brook DoIT maintains an AI Tools directory that identifies available tools such as Copilot, Gemini, NotebookLM, Turnitin, and Zoom AI Companion, while noting that listed tools may not be used with HIPAA data.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stony Brook CELT guidance says users should review AI-generated content for accuracy because AI tools can produce biased, illogical, false, or nonexistent-source outputs.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ITSO recommends acknowledging or labelling AI-generated content when appropriate. Mandatory coursework attribution and permitted GenAI assistance depend on the course policy.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKUST research-integrity rules govern university-related scholarly work, while student plagiarism related to university awards follows academic-integrity regulations; research data must follow privacy and ethical rules.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKUST CEI recommends designing assessments that account for GenAI instead of relying solely on AI-text detectors; the guidance is not an institutional ban on detectors.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Auckland's student AI advice states that AI has no agency, treats the student prompting an AI tool as the author, and says students are ultimately responsible for work submitted for assessment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Auckland TeachWell two-lane assessment guidance says the University does not endorse third-party AI detection tools, citing unreliability, false positives, and possible student-data training risks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Auckland Law School's student AI guidelines for taught courses state that using AI to generate, draft, or assist in creating content for graded assignments is prohibited unless the instructor explicitly permits it in writing.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sydney guidance states that misusing AI can breach the Academic Integrity Policy, with examples including submitting AI-generated work without appropriate acknowledgment, using AI where it has been prohibited in a secure assessment such as a secure exam, and inputting University teaching or course materials, other students' content, external partners' intellectual property or any person's personal or health information. Citing non-existent references because AI output was not verified is not acceptable and risks an academic integrity breach.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Sydney advises that Turnitin's AI detection tool may be used if a marker suspects AI-generated work where its use was not permitted or not acknowledged, but the AI detector score would not be the only evidence relied upon for an academic integrity case.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At the University of Sydney, minor academic integrity breaches may be handled locally by unit coordinators, more serious ones are investigated by the faculty Educational Integrity team, and the most serious suspected cheating is handled by the Registrar under the Student Discipline Rule. Students may bring a support person to an integrity meeting.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Université Lumière Lyon 2's règlement intérieur prohibits using an artificial-intelligence tool in university work without explicit mention, and prohibits presenting AI-generated content as personal human work, under disciplinary proceedings.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Lyon 2 SPS guidance warns that generative-AI text detectors have limited reliability, provide only a degree of presumption, and cannot identify a source like similarity detectors, making their results unusable in appeals.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Lyon 2 SPS guidance tells students to follow instructor instructions for citing AI-generated text; if no instruction is provided, it suggests noting the software publisher, software name, and initial prompt.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For postgraduate theses, UPM's generative AI guideline requires students to clearly explain and appropriately attribute where and why generative AI was used, and to identify areas influenced by AI-generated content versus the student's direct contribution.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UPM's postgraduate thesis generative AI guideline says postgraduate students must demonstrate that thesis intellectual contributions are predominantly their own despite AI assistance, and must ensure accuracy, references, originality, mastery, and control over the research process.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For UPM postgraduate viva sessions, the guideline says the chairperson must ensure that the student declares AI use in the research, specifies the areas assisted, and affirms that the originality and novelty of the research are the student's own work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University states that generative AI detection tools are not currently allowable and that student work should not be uploaded to generative AI detection software.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The student guidance allows use of generative AI tools as study aids for personal learning and research, while distinguishing that from submitting AI-generated output as the student's own assessment work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For PGT dissertations, students should not submit AI-generated material or content unless the School specifically permits it, and permitted use must follow the University framework and be referenced.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The use of applications to detect AI-generated content is strongly discouraged at UBC due to concerns about effectiveness, accuracy, bias, privacy, and intellectual property. Turnitin AI detection is not enabled.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UBC strongly discourages use of AI-generated-content detectors because of concerns about effectiveness, accuracy, bias, privacy, and intellectual property.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UBC says instructors should not submit student work or personal information to AI detectors unless the detector has undergone UBC Privacy Impact Assessment review.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A student using any unacknowledged content generated by artificial intelligence within a summative assessment as though it is their own work constitutes academic misconduct, unless explicitly stated otherwise in the assessment brief.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Staff should not rely on AI detection software as it is not proven to be accurate or reliable and provides no evidence to support investigations into the use of GenAI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Cambridge reports its existing Turnitin terms/EULA are extended until 30 July 2027 and no EULA change will be implemented in 2026/27. The notice says student/staff data has not been used to develop GenAI/LLMs and Turnitin has no current plan to use student essays that way; this is not an unlimited future contractual guarantee. Turnitin similarity screening is available under University course-use conditions, while Cambridge separately advises not relying on AI-authorship detectors as evidence.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Regulation 32 states that assessed student work should not contain content produced by another person, website, software, or AI tool except where AI use is explicitly permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Regulation 32 says use of websites or generative AI software that generates answers or references is prohibited, while some Schools may allow AI tools for specific purposes and any AI use must be referenced.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Glasgow assessment-design guidance says GenAI use in assessment should not always be treated as plagiarism and encourages assessment design that lets students demonstrate skills beyond knowledge recall.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Guelph guidelines for fall 2026 mandate that substantive academic evaluations must never be made independently by AI as grading is a human decision requiring instructor discretion, and explicitly prohibit the use of AI detection tools to support allegations of academic integrity breaches.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Guelph states that submitting AI-completed materials without instructor permission constitutes an offence under its academic misconduct policies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Guelph Office of Teaching and Learning says generative AI plagiarism detection software is not currently approved for use at U of G and instructors should not submit student work to generative AI detection tools while more is being understood.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNM Student Rights and Responsibilities lists using generative AI where it is not allowed, and submitting AI-generated content without acknowledgment when originality is required, as improper use of AI or technology in academic integrity guidance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNM AI Resources guidance states that AI-generated output should be closely reviewed and verified by a human because AI tools can generate inaccurate, incomplete, or biased responses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNM student-facing AI guidance tells students to check with their instructor about permitted AI uses before using AI for an assignment and to provide citations for AI-generated content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

USC’s Office of Academic Integrity states that work authored by another, including material created by ChatGPT or other generative AI tools, is considered plagiarism when represented as the student’s own work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

USC’s Generative AI General Policy states that covered individuals are responsible for checking generative AI outputs for accuracy and completeness and are responsible for AI-generated output used in USC work product.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

USC’s Office of Academic Integrity advises instructors to use caution with AI detection tools and says evidence created by AI detection tools is insufficient to determine responsibility without additional analysis or supporting elements.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UT Austin AI detection guidance prohibits third-party AI detection software from being used to evaluate student work or assignments unless a university contract or purchase order is in place.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UT Austin AI detection guidance says submitting student work into AI detection or other third-party software without a university contract or purchase order may violate student copyright, intellectual property, or FERPA privacy rights.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UT Austin CTL teaching-policy guidance says using generative AI tools to create course-assignment responses in a way the instructor does not accept may be considered academic dishonesty by the university.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the doctoral thesis specifically, the University of Toronto School of Graduate Studies requires that the use of generative AI tools in any aspect of researching or writing the thesis be done with the prior approval of the supervisor(s) and supervisory committee. Students remain responsible for any AI-generated content in the thesis and must be able to describe and defend any AI use at the final oral examination.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Toronto FAQ (updated October 2026) says undergraduate and graduate students may use generative AI tools as learning aids, for example to summarize information or test their understanding, in a manner similar to consulting books, peers or a tutor. Such uses are generally acceptable even if an instructor has said AI is not otherwise permitted in the course, and typically do not need to be cited or disclosed. If students use AI-generated information that would normally require citation (quoting, paraphrasing or reproducing text or ideas), they must cite it according to U of T Libraries guidance or the instructor's directions. Learning-aid use is distinct from using AI to complete marked work.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Toronto does not support the use of AI-detection software on student work, because none has been found sufficiently reliable and sharing student work with such programs without permission raises privacy and ethical concerns. Instructors are encouraged to use traditional methods instead, such as meeting with the student to discuss their work.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Westminster student guidance says students must disclose any use of GenAI for assessed coursework and remain responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Westminster's student GenAI rules identify using AI to write essays, reports, or code on a student's behalf, using AI to carry out analysis or arguments, and submitting AI-generated content without declaring it as not permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Westminster doctoral researcher guidance says doctoral assessments and research outputs must be the researcher's own original work, and that using GenAI to generate doctoral research content without agreement and disclosure is academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Wrocław academic-integrity standards treat content generated with natural-language processing tools and other AI algorithms as non-author content that must be clearly marked.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Wrocław Anti-Plagiarism Support Team says AI tools may be used in research work for theses or term papers within arrangements with the supervisor or adviser, but their use must be ancillary and must not replace the author's critical thinking.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Wrocław Anti-Plagiarism Support Team FAQ tells students that all AI-tool use in university work must be agreed with the instructor or supervisor, and that AI should not be treated as a generator that creates a thesis instead of the student.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Wyoming Regulation 2-114 says submissions generated in whole or in part by an Artificial Intelligence-based application without attribution to the application will be treated as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UW Libraries AI Support guidance says users should cite AI tools and AI-generated outputs when quoting, paraphrasing, or incorporating AI-generated ideas into their own work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UW Libraries AI Support student guidance advises students to use generative AI chatbots as supplementary tools, avoid copy-pasting chatbot responses into work, and check with instructors before using AI chatbots for assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Uppsala University's central guidelines say a person who has used AI-generated material is responsible for how it is used, and that academic probity, a critical attitude to the reliability of the material, and ethical considerations must guide the use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For courses offered by Uppsala University's Faculty of Law from the spring term of 2026, the Faculty guidelines say AI-generated material is not permitted in assessment components unless course documentation explicitly states otherwise; AI-based proofreading tools may be used without reporting, but not for generating new content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Uppsala University's research AI introduction states that it is practical support rather than a rulebook; its quickstart guidance tells researchers to use Copilot Chat via UU login, never share sensitive or confidential information in an AI tool, double-check AI-generated material, and document how AI tools are used.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

WUR's student GenAI rules tell students to check the course guide for whether and how GenAI is permitted; if the guide has no information, using GenAI to generate assignment content is not allowed and may be irregularity or fraud, including for theses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

WUR's student GenAI rules say students are never allowed to submit work entirely generated by GenAI as their own or fabricate research data, and they must be transparent about GenAI's role in submitted work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

WUR Library guidance says AI use should be documented, AI should not be cited as a source or author, publisher policies should be checked for writing and publishing, and peer reviewers should not upload non-published manuscripts into externally hosted tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

WUT recommendations say students, doctoral students, academic staff, and administrative staff are not authors of content generated by GenAI tools, so such materials must be clearly marked with the source of information, and GenAI should be used consistently with scientific integrity and good academic practice.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

WUT recommendations say generative AI systems may support education and other university work, but users are responsible for how GenAI-generated content is used and are advised to verify and critically assess AI-generated materials.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

An official WUT news item says each diploma thesis created at WUT is automatically checked through the national anti-plagiarism system and USOS/APD for both plagiarism and use of artificial intelligence.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADU's Academic Integrity Policy treats using AI software to support writing without a clear declaration in the student's paper as a plagiarism example.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADU announced ChatGPT guidelines for students and faculty, describing responsible and ethical use, revision of generated content, avoiding plagiarism, and faculty training.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADA University's Honor Code treats violating exam, test, and assignment rules, accepting unauthorized help, and using someone else's intellectual work without proper credit as unacceptable behavior.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ADA University's Student Assessment Regulations say assignments are to be designed and conducted to minimize plagiarism and cheating risk, including contract cheating, and that students are to receive clear instructions on avoiding academic-integrity breaches.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Adelaide University's Academic Integrity Policy treats inappropriate use of AI that subverts an assignment or gives unfair academic advantage as an example of academic misconduct, including submitting AI-produced work as the student's own or using AI-generated information without acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Adelaide University's Academic Misconduct Procedure lists inappropriate use of Artificial Intelligence with plagiarism in its outcome table, with a standard outcome of mark reduction up to and including zero for the assignment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ABU's Research Policy is described as university-wide for research practice and defines plagiarism as research ethical misconduct; this is adjacent research-integrity context and not AI-specific guidance.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

An official ABU conference news page reports a keynote statement that tools like ChatGPT can complete assignments instantly and challenge assessment and originality, but it does not state an ABU rule permitting or prohibiting student AI-tool use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Freiburg research policy says researchers remain responsible for the correctness of generated data, texts, and results even when they are AI-generated or AI-based.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Freiburg research policy says AI-generated data and derived results must be identified, and the methods, AI systems, and data sources used must be fully documented.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AUS policy says students are responsible for the accuracy of AI-generated output in their work and must ensure use complies with syllabus, iLearn updates, academic integrity policy, and IT acceptable use policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AUS policy says the institution does not prohibit generative AI detection software in academic integrity adjudication but recognizes detection output cannot provide a definitive judgment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Beirut Arab University states that plagiarism is a serious matter, that instructors or supervisors report student plagiarism incidents to the Faculty Dean, and that investigated penalties may include rewriting work, Dean or President warnings, course withdrawal, or preventing thesis defense.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Beirut Arab University Libraries describe Turnitin as a tool for checking plagiarism percentages in scholarly papers and assignments, and say students use a BAU email plus a class ID and enrollment key from the instructor to create an account and submit work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Boston University student guidance tells students to disclose GenAI use and states that submitting GenAI-generated or GenAI-assisted output without attribution is plagiarism that an instructor will treat as academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Boston University AIDA classroom guidance tells faculty to be very cautious with accusations of GenAI misuse because AI detection tools are highly fallible, and to apply enforcement policies uniformly.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Caltech admissions prohibits applicants from copying and pasting directly from an AI generator, relying on AI-generated content to outline or draft essays, replacing their unique voice with AI-generated content, or translating essays via AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Caltech Undergraduate and Graduate Deans, CTLO, and the Hixon Writing Center strongly discourage the use of AI-detection tools for student writing due to false positives, false negatives, bias, and unreliability.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chandigarh University's Student Code of Conduct tells students to submit original work, avoid plagiarism, cheating, and misrepresentation, be transparent in assessments, and seek assistance ethically.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chandigarh University's Research Policy says final thesis or dissertation reports are submitted with a Turnitin-generated Overall Similarity Index report, and describes target similarity thresholds for master's students and Ph.D. scholars.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chang Gung University student guidance tells students to follow course AI-use rules, clearly mark AI use when permitted, avoid directly copying AI-generated content, and not use AI in exams unless specifically allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

China Medical University's Academic Affairs guidance tells teachers and students to consider academic-ethics concerns before using generative AI and to avoid plagiarism and copyright violations in assignments, exams, and research papers.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

China Medical University's R&D reference guidance frames generative AI as a research-assistance tool and says researchers should verify AI-generated content, understand related policies, disclose use where required, and remain responsible for research outputs.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chungnam National University's learner guidance says learners should follow instructor-provided generative-AI criteria, use AI as a learning support tool, verify AI outputs against reliable sources, and clearly mark the source, generation method, and scope of AI-generated materials.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chungnam National University's instructor guidance says that when generative AI is used in class, instructors should state its purpose and scope in the syllabus, explain correct use and standards for cheating or plagiarism, and guide students to cite AI-generated outputs.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

COMSATS unfair-means regulations treat intentionally or knowingly representing another person's words or ideas as one's own in an academic exercise, and failing to attribute quoted, paraphrased, or borrowed material, as unfair means.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

COMSATS University Islamabad's library describes Turnitin as a plagiarism-detection service used by teachers and students to help avoid plagiarism and ensure academic integrity, and says CUI policy makes faculty members and advisors eligible for Turnitin access.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The CUT AI guide says students must submit their own work and disclose any use of AI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The CUT AI and Academic Integrity guide warns that uncited AI-generated text can be plagiarism and that false citations generated by AI can violate academic integrity standards.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNDIP Library guidance tells students that submitted assignments remain their own responsibility, and that using AI software without acknowledgement is treated seriously under academic misconduct procedures.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNDIP Library guidance says AI use in data analysis, writing, or draft preparation should be explicitly disclosed in publications, and AI-generated results should be manually reverified.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Duy Tan University's Graduate School thesis/project/dissertation presentation standards instruct authors to cite sources used in academic work and describe citation as part of avoiding plagiarism and preserving research integrity; this source is not AI-specific.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

This official-source crawl found Duy Tan University AI curriculum/training material and general citation/plagiarism guidance, but did not verify a central public university-wide policy governing student or staff use of generative AI tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Edinburgh Napier University's generative AI position states that the university does not permit Gen AI detection tools on student assessment submissions, and academic staff are not permitted to use external detection tools on student work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Edinburgh Napier University's generative AI position says undergraduate and taught postgraduate students who use Gen AI tools in learning or assessments must follow university guidance and acknowledge AI-generated content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Essex student guidance states that AI-generated work should not be presented as a student's own assignment work and that using AI or other automated technology to produce material submitted as one's own original work is an academic offence.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Essex Zoom AI Companion guidance says hosts should inform attendees when AI Companion will be used, review and edit AI-generated meeting summaries before sharing, and check errors before sharing.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

FIU CAT states that SCAI handles academic misconduct cases under the Student Conduct and Honor Code, including cheating or plagiarism based on how a student may have used AI or automated tools in the classroom.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

An official FIU Syllabi sample AI-use PDF includes sample academic integrity language stating that AI-generated content without proper attribution or authorization is another form of plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PCD Journal's publication policy prohibits AI-generated arguments, substantive text, intellectual conclusions, literature reviews, bibliographies, fabricated data, and sensitive un-anonymized human-subject data entered into public AI platforms.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UGM's official news coverage frames AI and plagiarism as academic-integrity challenges and reports a rector statement supporting zero tolerance for plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ghent University student guidance treats irresponsible GenAI use such as plagiarism, fake data, or outsourcing the thinking process as irregularities that lead to an exam disciplinary procedure.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ghent University teaching guidance says responsible GenAI use is always permitted unless a lecturer explicitly prohibits it for parts of an assignment that take place in a controlled environment, and it cautions that detection tools are unreliable.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the ISC Expo 2026 essay writing competition hosted on GCUF's event site, copying from AI-generated content is listed as strictly prohibited plagiarism and plagiarism or misrepresentation leads to instant disqualification.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For at least one ISC Expo 2026 art/photography competition in the GCUF-hosted rules PDF, AI generation is not allowed and plagiarism or AI-generated content results in immediate disqualification.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKBU student academic-integrity guidance treats copying AI-generated output without acknowledging that use as improper use of generative AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HKBU student academic-integrity guidance says academic dishonesty can lead to disciplinary actions, including reduced or failing grades, suspension, or academic dismissal.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Hunan University's 2026 National Natural Science Foundation application notice, applicants who use generative AI to track research, collect literature, or organize references are instructed to verify AI-generated information and references, take responsibility for generated content, truthfully declare use, label relevant content under cited national rules, and not use directly AI-generated or unverified generated application content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The HSS IIT Bombay AI policy says AI use without human verification is not permissible for tasks involving evaluation or assessment of students, staff, or researchers, and AI detection tools cannot be the sole criterion for disciplinary action without human verification.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The HSS IIT Bombay AI policy says permissible AI use should be acknowledged with proper citation in teaching materials and research outputs, including prompts, AI tools used, and clear demarcation of AI-generated or AI-aided content; HSS dissertations and research reports submitted for evaluation must include an AI use or non-use declaration.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For IIT Madras BS Degree program assignments, including any course or OPPE, the Honour Code says students are expected to produce original work based on individual understanding, and using LLMs such as ChatGPT or Gemini to generate any portion of code is considered plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The IIT Madras BS Degree Honour Code says use of LLMs without explicit permission is a violation of the honour code.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IIUM permits AI tools to support learning and research when use is declared and ethically compliant, and treats undisclosed or unapproved AI-generated assignments, theses, or exam responses as academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IIUM's AI policy says research involving AI requires prior ethics approval, AI-generated publication content must be acknowledged, and AI research must comply with IIUM ethics, data, and IP policies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Iowa State guidance says generative AI use must comply with applicable laws, institutional requirements, and listed university policies, and users are responsible for AI-generated content they publish.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Iowa State Student Conduct guidance says suspected AI-generated coursework referrals will be reviewed similarly to other forms of academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IPB guidance says AI-generated publication content should be thoroughly reviewed for factual accuracy, validity, originality, academic standards, and copyright compliance, and that IPB AI users are fully responsible for content they publish or share.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For research writing, IPB guidance says lecturers and students must not use AI outputs as-is without re-editing, content evaluation, and proper references; directly copying AI text risks academic-ethics violations and plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Jadavpur University's Faculty of Engineering and Technology anti-plagiarism procedure for thesis handling states that thesis similarity is checked with iThenticate, verified by supervisors, and submitted with originality and plagiarism-check documentation at Level 0, maximum 10% similarity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Jadavpur University's thesis Statement of Originality form asks a doctoral candidate to declare that the thesis contains original research, that non-original materials and results have been fully cited, and that the thesis was checked under the university's Anti Plagiarism Policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Jamia Millia Islamia's plagiarism policy covers students, faculty, researchers, and staff, and sets objectives to promote academic integrity, detect plagiarism, and punish plagiarism after due process.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Jamia Millia Islamia's Zakir Husain Library provides similarity detection services for faculty and research scholars using Original and Turnitin software, and organizes awareness programmes about avoiding plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kaohsiung Medical University's student generative AI guidance says students must not use generative AI tools for plagiarism or ghostwriting, cheating during exams, or privacy leakage.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kaohsiung Medical University's student generative AI guidance says students should cite or explain AI use when permitted by instructors and should critically check AI-generated information before using it in assignments or reports.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kyushu University's teacher-facing guidance says AI writing detector results should be treated only as a reference, and suspected AI writing should be judged after giving the student a chance to explain and investigating the situation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kyushu University's student first report warns that submitting copied-and-pasted AI-generated text as a report assignment may constitute misconduct, depending on class or practical-training rules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2025 undergraduate thesis work, Lanzhou University's Teaching Affairs Office notice supports teaching units in conducting AI-generated content detection and in guiding students to avoid over-reliance on AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For 2025 undergraduate thesis work, Lanzhou University's Teaching Affairs Office notice links thesis checks with preventing academic misconduct and ensuring thesis independence and originality.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The eLUT AI tools guideline says students must not submit AI-generated text, images, code, or other output as their own, and using AI against teacher instructions or concealing its use may be academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The LUT citation guide gives citation formats for large language model outputs and AI-generated images, including AI developer, year, prompt or task, tool and version if known, citation date, and URL.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LPU's research Code of Ethics says plagiarism in any form is not permissible, is serious misconduct subject to strict disciplinary action, and is covered by a zero-tolerance policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LPU's ICSS-2026 abstract-guidelines page states that manuscript submissions must have plagiarism below 10% with 14 consecutive words and that no AI-content is allowed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Manchester Metropolitan University's teaching guidance says it has opted out of enabling AI-generated text detection software for the foreseeable future and tells colleagues not to upload student work into online AI detection services because they are unreliable and the uploaded data is not secure.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Manchester Metropolitan University library guidance says some generative AI uses do not need citation, but documented AI-assisted search strategies, approved research-project AI use, AI-generated media in submitted assessments, and AI-generated code or Excel formulas must be cited or referenced.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MIT's August 13, 2026 committee report states that COD does not consider AI-detector output alone sufficient for an AI-related academic integrity case. This records the committee's description of COD practice, not a blanket detector ban.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MIT TLL strongly recommends against using AI-detection tools. This is teaching guidance, not a university-wide statutory prohibition.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For METU's GENE 433 term project reports, the course manual says AI usage is encouraged but the written report must respect a Turnitin AI detection limit, with AI similarity at or below 25 percent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

METU Library announced a 2026 training session on the use of artificial intelligence in research covering publisher AI policies, citing generative AI outputs, AI detection software, AI-related legal and ethics topics, AI literacy, prompt engineering, and selected AI tools used in academic research.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Middlesex guidance tells students to consult their module tutor before using AI for studies or assignments and says submitting AI-generated work as their own is a breach of academic integrity.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Middlesex copyright guidance says AI-generated references should be authenticated before being requested or cited, and that fake AI references can result in academic misconduct proceedings if used in coursework assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

No commercial AI detection tools have been approved by eSolutions or the University Data Protection and Privacy Office, and AI detectors absolutely cannot be used as evidence for reporting student breaches of assessment conditions. Text-based assignments remain subject to similarity-detection systems (Turnitin/MOSS) under Student Academic Integrity Procedure §2.7, where markers must apply academic judgement rather than relying on raw scores.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

No AI detection tools have been approved by eSolutions or the University Data Protection and Privacy Office, and AI detectors absolutely cannot be used as evidence for reporting a student for suspected breach of assessment conditions. Staff marking assessments must submit text work through similarity-detection systems (Turnitin/MOSS) under Student Academic Integrity Procedure §2.7 and must apply academic judgement rather than relying on raw scores.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

National Tsing Hua University (NTHU) Center for Teaching and Learning Development guidance advises faculty against relying on third-party AI detection tools as primary evidence of student AI use, citing false positive risks, privacy and data leakage concerns, and equity disparities for non-native English speakers.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTHU's Chinese AI collaboration and literacy guideline says faculty and students should be able to check the accuracy of AI-generated content and take responsibility for content they produce.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For NUST Journal of Natural Sciences submissions, GenAI use is restricted to readability and linguistic-quality improvements; authors remain responsible for accuracy and originality and must disclose AI-assisted tool use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NUST SADA's plagiarism policy expects students to maintain academic integrity, discourages and penalizes plagiarism, and says design work should be original and not violate another person's work or idea.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NUS policy states that submitting AI-generated work without acknowledging AI use constitutes academic dishonesty and plagiarism, punishable under university disciplinary processes assuming the case can be made.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NUS Press prohibits submitting manuscripts containing wording from AI models (including AI polishing/streamlining) and requires detailed tool declarations upon submission; AI images and diagrams are not accepted.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NJIT states that students must follow instructor expectations, uphold academic honesty when using AI tools, and not use AI tools to conduct or support cheating or plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NJIT says that if students have not received explicit instructor authorization to use AI, submitting AI-generated work may constitute a violation of the Code of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity policies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Department of Cytology and Genetics page says students remain responsible for originality, accuracy, authorship of ideas, and academic honesty when using generative models.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Department of Cytology and Genetics page says final qualification works undergo Antiplagiat checking, including automatic detection of generated text fragments, and that such fragments may be grounds for not admitting a student to defense.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PMU's academic catalog expects students to maintain academic honesty and integrity and identifies cheating, plagiarism, collusion, and abuse of resource materials as forms of academic dishonesty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Purdue teaching guidance warns that an AI-detection positive result should not be the sole determining factor for an academic-integrity violation and subsequent consequences.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Purdue teaching guidance says instructors should include specific syllabus guidance on allowable AI-tool use, learning-process use, detection approaches, and potential consequences.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Pusan National University's AI utilization guideline says instructors should communicate permitted or prohibited AI use for assessments, and it warns against deciding a student's grade solely from an AI plagiarism or AI-detection tool result.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Pusan National University's AI utilization guideline says AI-generated text or materials used in research plans or reports should be disclosed in footnotes or references, and states that AI is recognized only as a tool rather than as a coauthor.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Queen's responsible AI research guidance expects material AI use in research to be clearly documented and acknowledged, with researchers validating AI-generated content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Queen's assessment guidance says text-based AI detectors are not recommended because current tools cannot definitively identify AI-authored content and can produce false positives.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Royal Holloway academic misconduct regulations list requesting or engaging an artificial intelligence tool to write or rewrite work for unfair advantage, and presenting AI-generated content as one’s own unless authorised and acknowledged, as examples of assessment offences.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Royal Holloway Doctoral School guidance for postgraduate researchers says AI may not author or generate research claims, thesis prose, or other academic content, and that researchers are responsible for every output they submit.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sorbonne University's 2024-2025 assessment rules treat unauthorized AI-generated work presented as one's own, or authorized AI use without source mention, as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Sorbonne University's CAPSULE resources page lists Compilatio Magister+ with CAS SU access as a resource for plagiarism prevention and detection of AI-generated content.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For assessment, Stellenbosch guidance says AI-generated content may not form a substantial part of an assessment unless permitted, and interim guidelines advise that students should know whether AI use is allowed for each assessment task.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Stellenbosch Library guidance frames AI as a learning aid that should be used ethically, not copied word-for-word or claimed as a student's own work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Centre for Preparatory Studies guide states that incorrect use of AI tools is considered academic misconduct and that suspected incorrect AI use for an assignment is handled under the SQU Academic Misconduct Policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Centre for Preparatory Studies guide tells students who use generative AI to carefully check its facts and claims and to read, understand, and critically evaluate AI-generated content before using it for ideas, information, structure, or language.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A Sunway University Explore teaching article advises that AI should complement traditional teaching methods and that students should question and analyse AI-generated content and outcomes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A Sunway Online article advises postgraduate students to critically evaluate AI-generated information and to take care to attribute AI-generated work, understand content risks, and consider privacy and intellectual-property laws.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Swansea University's AI assessment policy says staff and students should not enter identifiable information into any AI application, and are not permitted to upload student assessment or identifiable data without explicit written consent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Swansea University's student AI guidance says AI-generated work submitted for assessment when not expressly authorised and declared could be investigated for academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Technion Library guidance says that using AI-generated text as-is, without rephrasing and without verifying information reliability, is considered plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Technion Library guidance recommends that users follow links supplied by AI tools and verify that the citation appears in the source and that the source is academically valid.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Wien's student guidance says ChatGPT and other large language models must be documented as aids in written work, AI-used passages must be marked, and undisclosed generative-AI use in student work is treated as equivalent to plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

TU Wien's teacher handout says reliable technical identification of AI-tool use is hardly possible and recommends adapting exam formats so they cannot be solved exclusively by AI outputs.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Texas A&M strongly advises against sole reliance on AI detection tools because of limitations including inaccuracy, bias, ease of circumvention, and rapid AI evolution.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Texas A&M guidance says generative AI users must acknowledge nontrivial AI-generated content and avoid plagiarism, while faculty should provide clear course instructions about permissible AI uses.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Texas Tech's recommended AI syllabus language says AI-generated content should not be submitted as a student's own work and may constitute an academic integrity violation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Texas Tech TLPDC academic misconduct guidance says AI detection tools are not sufficient as sole evidence of academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

At CUHK, improper or unauthorized use of AI tools in learning activities and assessments constitutes academic dishonesty (including plagiarism or unauthorized third-party assistance) under Senate policy (effective from AY2025-26, updated July 2026), subject to penalties ranging from zero marks to demerits, suspension, or termination of studies, adjudicated by the course-offering faculty/college or the Faculty of Medicine Fitness to Practice (FTP) Committee.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In General Education course GECC4130 (AY2026/27), students must submit a signed academic honesty declaration with each assignment confirming awareness of university regulations, and acknowledging that submissions may be investigated by AI content detection software (VeriGuide AWD). A university-wide declaration or prompt-logging rule has not been established in public evidence because the Student Guide to Academic Honesty remains restricted behind ADFS SSO; students follow individual course instructions.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UWA's Academic Integrity Policy includes using material generated by Artificial Intelligence, including generative AI and related tools, in assessments as a type of plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UWA askUWA guidance tells students to reference all AI-generated content used in assessments and says they may be asked to show the AI tools and prompts used.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences exams, tests, and assignments, Tilburg University states that AI use is not permitted unless a lecturer explicitly states otherwise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Tilburg University's TSHD fraud guidance includes submitting work that is partially generated by AI without permission among examples of fraud-related conduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCSI's Tan Sri Musa Mohamad Library provides Turnitin as an academic tool for plagiarism detection, citation practices, and encouraging authentic student work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCSI's postgraduate handbook treats repeated plagiarism as an academic-integrity offence that can lead to fail grades, suspension, and termination after repeated offences.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNIST Library provides Turnitin to UNIST members for similarity checking of writings such as journal manuscripts, theses, dissertations, and assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNIST Library describes Turnitin's AI Writing Detection as a tool that can help instructors see how much of a student's submission is authentic human writing versus AI-generated text from ChatGPT or other tools; the AI indicator is visible only to instructor accounts.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Resolution 13/2025 says AI use at UNESP should not justify plagiarism, fraud, or other practices that violate academic honesty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Resolution 13/2025 says AI use that significantly affects authorship and creation of intellectual or academic production should be publicly communicated, and non-observance may eventually be considered plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Faculty of Engineering guide says significant AI-contributed content should be declared, and presenting AI-generated content as one's own may be treated as a violation under the faculty's current regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Faculty of Engineering guide warns that AI-detection tools have very limited effectiveness and identifies manual review and technical interviews as effective methods for checking understanding and authorship.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UnB-hosted Revista de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre as Americas states that generative AI cannot be considered an author, and that only a natural person can take responsibility for and sign the submitted contribution.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UnB-hosted journal Sociedade e Estado says it does not currently use AI resources in publication evaluation and editing, and tells authors that any material or content generated by an AI application should be reported in the abstract and methods section or equivalent.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Biotechnology bachelor's thesis guideline says students should not insert automatically generated scientific text into the thesis, replace bibliographic research with AI, or use AI-generated text without critical and personal reworking.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Biotechnology bachelor's thesis guideline says non-compliance with its AI-use indications is treated as comparable to plagiarism and may lead to disciplinary sanctions under the university regulation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For scientific writing, UI academic community members using Generative AI must acknowledge its use, verify each writing stage including references, paraphrase, run similarity checks to prevent plagiarism, and maintain confidentiality.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

When using Generative AI, UI academic community members are prohibited from making Generative AI an author and from violating plagiarism policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UAB Publications Service AI policy for articles says AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author, AI-generated scientific content requires author supervision and validation, and any AI use must be explicitly disclosed in the article.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In its AI-in-teaching positioning guidance, UAB argues that ChatGPT and similar tools require rethinking assessment evidence and that tasks a machine can do quickly and well should not form part of an assessment proposal because they would evaluate artificial production.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universitat de Valencia's UVdocencia integrity-focused GenAI course frames GenAI use in relation to academic and research integrity, including guidance on assessment activities, regulation of GenAI use in teaching instruments, and detection of inappropriate student use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Universitat de Valencia's UVdocencia staff training includes GenAI uses for teaching support, including preparation of teaching materials, solved exercises, questionnaires, support images, plagiarism identification, and ethical GenAI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

URV's student guide treats AI use in coursework as valid and recommended when it supports learning, while telling students to use it with teacher consent, declare its use, cite it, and verify AI-generated information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

URV's assessment guidance warns about academic-fraud concerns from AI but advises evolving assessment design rather than relying on AI-detection tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Unistra's general exam regulations state that individual or collective university work must be personal and that plagiarism is excluded, including from documents generated by conversational or writing tools based on artificial intelligence.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Unistra's AI guidelines say authors should indicate when content was partially or fully produced by AI and identify AI-generated passages unambiguously like any borrowed material or external-source citation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UGA's AI reference framework says students using generative AI must mention the use of generative AI and its name, identify the parts generated by or with AI, and cite sources correctly to avoid plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UGA's AI reference framework says researchers using generative AI must verify whether generated ideas come from existing sources, add appropriate references, mention the use and name of the generative AI, and identify parts generated by or with AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For theses or assessed work, USPN treats use of artificial intelligence for writing as not personal student work and as a form of plagiarism unless evaluators expressly state otherwise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The same USPN fraud provisions say students who used AI may be referred to the disciplinary commission, after prior information about the risks and detection means.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Université PSL's Règlement de la scolarité for 2026-2027 (adopted by the Board on 25 June 2026, replacing the June 2025 version with the same AI wording) states that, where an instructor authorises AI-based tools such as ChatGPT, their use must be explicitly disclosed like any source citation, and failure to disclose AI use is treated as plagiarism and sanctioned as such; a disciplinary procedure may follow, with sanctions up to exclusion (not automatic exclusion). The 2026 version applies to programmes operated directly by PSL (such as the Collège Sciences, Humanités et Société and the Paris School of AI); member institutions apply their own regulations, so it does not set course permissions across ENS, Dauphine, Mines Paris and other members.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Dauphine-PSL library's research-integrity guidance states that personal data are not meant to be shared with third parties and that generated text should be checked so it is neither plagiarism nor contains personal data. This is member-institution library guidance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCC's academic integrity policy says the University does not sanction use of GenAI detection software for detecting or investigating alleged academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCC's GenAI academic integrity toolkit advises educators not to run student work through external AI detector tools that have not been institutionally approved.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCD's Academic Integrity Policy says AI-generated content may not be submitted without explicit permission and attribution, and that generative AI outputs must be used critically, ethically, cited, and acknowledged.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCD Library guidance for the UCD community advises users to disclose generative AI use in academic work, follow school citation style, keep records of AI interactions, and fact-check AI-generated information.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCL Library guidance requires acknowledgement where GenAI has functionally contributed to the creation of academic work (e.g. drafting, planning, structuring), subject to discipline and assessment instructions. Minimum acknowledgement includes tool name and version, publisher, URL, and single-sentence context of use. Prompts, generation dates, and tracked-changes are additional requirements that apply only when stipulated by departments or assignment briefs. Preparatory reading, search summaries, and basic grammar assistance may not require acknowledgement. While UCL advises treating AI output as a work with no author, students and researchers must follow required departmental guidelines and standardised referencing styles (such as APA or Chicago), which may require citing the GenAI tool as an author.

Evidence records: 6. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCL does not invest in GenAI detection software. Staff must not submit student work into GenAI detection tools or GenAI services themselves, as this compromises students' intellectual property and personal data rights. Furthermore, due to lack of evidence that GenAI can mark effectively and without bias, staff should not use GenAI to mark student work. UCL markers do not use AI detector scores to establish academic misconduct. Initial informal discussions do not replace the formal Student Academic Misconduct Procedure; suspected inappropriate GenAI use or authorship issues may proceed through Stage 1 and an Investigatory Viva.

Evidence records: 4. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Microsoft Copilot is listed for University of Bath in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: allowed. Derived endorsement type: not specified.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Bath two-lane FAQ guidance says GenAI misuse in open-lane assessments is not misconduct by itself, but can contribute to plagiarism, fabrication, or collusion.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Calcutta IP Policy says the university is not responsible for copyright/IP violations when generative AI is used to generate content for publication, thesis, dissertation, or course material, and says faculty members, students, researchers, and staff will be held accountable for AI authorship associated with LLMs.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Calcutta IP Policy says generative AI tools may be allowed for checking spelling and grammar, improving readability, checking plagiarism, and conducting research on AI itself.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCR's student-facing AI announcement says students should discuss generative-AI expectations with professors, use AI to assist or enhance rather than replace original work, avoid generating entire deliverables, and cite AI-generated content or data when used.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UCR's general academic-integrity page defines academic misconduct to include using prohibited or inappropriate materials, plagiarism without appropriate credit, and unauthorized collaboration without instructor permission.

Evidence records: 3. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UCAS Nanjing College Library AI academic service trial notice asks users to comply with academic ethics, verify AI-generated data and content, and not directly copy it.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A UCAS Nanjing College Library AI academic service trial notice states that AI-generated content is only for research reference and inspiration, and cannot replace the researcher's independent thinking and verification.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UET Lahore's official plagiarism page states that the university adopts the Higher Education Commission Pakistan plagiarism policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The UET-hosted HEC plagiarism policy applies to students, teachers, researchers, and staff who are involved in writing or publishing work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The accessible official University of Karachi-hosted policy source found in this run is the Imtezaaj Urdu Research Journal plagiarism policy, which is scoped to manuscript submissions and does not establish a university-wide AI-use policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The Imtezaaj Urdu Research Journal plagiarism policy says manuscripts are checked with HEC Pakistan-recommended software and manual review, with Turnitin similarity thresholds; this is adjacent academic-integrity source context and not AI-specific guidance.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Malta guidance says unacknowledged work generated by AI tools is considered plagiarised work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Malta academic-staff guidelines discourage use of AI writing detection tools at this stage and state that Generative AI detection software cannot be used as proof for disciplinary procedures.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UMN OIT guidance says AI outputs should be closely reviewed and verified by a human, and AI-generated code for institutional IT systems and services should not be used unless reviewed by a qualified technologist.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UMN Libraries' student guidance says students should check each course syllabus, ask instructors when unsure, keep track of GenAI use, and cite or acknowledge AI-generated material when permitted.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UMONS prohibits presenting AI-generated content, including text, images, code, or music, as one's own creation in academic work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UMONS states that when submitted work incorporates AI-generated elements, those elements must be cited according to appropriate bibliographic standards.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

An official University of Mumbai Vice Chancellor profile says the VC plans to draft an AI policy for the University of Mumbai covering teaching-learning, assessment, and academic integrity or plagiarism handling; this is evidence of a planned policy effort, not a published university-wide AI policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A University of Mumbai digital-ethics syllabus includes responsible use of Artificial Intelligence in research alongside data privacy, digital plagiarism, plagiarism-check tools, and reliability of digital information; this is course-level teaching content, not a university-wide AI-use rule.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For students, unless course objectives or explicit instructor authorization allow it, UNamur proscribes delegating reflective analysis to generative AI, submitting work entirely or mostly generated by AI, and using copied, paraphrased, translated, or AI-generated material without indicating the source.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For students, UNamur permits use of AI-generated content in work only when it is consistent with course objectives, remains accessory, and is clearly referenced with how it was produced.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For students and similar figures, the guidelines say AI may be used only as support for study and learning, and AI-generated content for assessments or theses is not permitted without explicit declaration and authorization from the responsible teacher.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For research, the guidelines say AI can support research activities, but researchers remain fully responsible for originality, content, methodological quality, accuracy, ethics, and integrity, and an AI system cannot be considered an author or co-author of scientific publications.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNR teaching guidance says AI detection tools are not fully reliable and should not be used as the sole determining factor for deciding whether an AI-related academic standards violation occurred.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNR Library's APA guide says AI-generated works must be cited when used as a quoted, paraphrased, or otherwise incorporated source, while process uses such as brainstorming or proofreading should be acknowledged rather than cited.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNE's HDR generative AI guidance warns that failure to reference generative AI content may be considered academic or research misconduct, and lists risks including unacknowledged AI output, inaccurate AI-generated references, substantive AI-generated thesis or publication content, peer review or ethics-clearance use, and disclosure of sensitive or confidential material to generative AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNE's public Learning Online academic integrity myLearn section states that a Generative AI and Academic Integrity at UNE module exists and lists module topics including general principles for use of generative AI, Turnitin detection and AI, and referencing generative AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNH's Academic Integrity policy treats unauthorized use or attempted use of AI tools as cheating, and treats computer-generated text or work submitted as one's own without proper citation or attribution as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UNH Provost syllabus guidance says generative-AI detection tools should not be used to make definitive academic-integrity judgments, and says uploading documents containing student names, emails, or ID numbers violates FERPA; faculty using AI-enabled tools to evaluate student work must disclose that use and keep student data protections in mind.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The University of Oregon Student Conduct Code's plagiarism definition includes submission of material generated by others, including AI content generators and generative AI tools such as ChatGPT.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Oregon academic-integrity guidance says UO does not currently support AI detection tools and that detector percentages alone are not dispositive.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The guidelines treat generative AI as support for teaching, learning, and research, not a replacement for human work; AI-generated content should be examined, approved, modified, and supervised by a human author.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The guidelines list non-appropriate or non-permitted academic uses of AI, including creating entire written content with AI, using unrevised AI-generated code, using AI-generated code in university exams, and using AI to evaluate exam or selection materials.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Pittsburgh Teaching Center guidance says it does not endorse or support the use of any AI-detection tools.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Pittsburgh Teaching Center suggested syllabus language says broader generative-AI use may be permitted or encouraged within specified guidelines, but AI-generated material that informed student work should be cited and unattributed AI-generated content qualifies as academic dishonesty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Regina CTL guidance says Turnitin is the only institutionally adopted plagiarism- and AI-detection tool, the AI-detection report is not conclusive proof of academic misconduct, and instructors are not permitted to use non-approved tools for AI detection.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Archer Library's GenAI citation guide says AI-generated materials should generally be treated as a non-recoverable source and/or akin to personal communication, while students should check with their instructor if in doubt about when to cite AI and which style to use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sussex student misconduct guidance includes unauthorized or inappropriate use of digital technologies including AI, and gives examples including AI use where prohibited and submitting permitted AI-generated work without required acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Sussex staff guidance suggests telling students that AI detection tools are fallible and cannot be relied upon.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTSA's faculty guide warns that AI detection tools are imperfect and recommends using established university conduct processes and evidence-based evaluation rather than relying solely on AI-detection results.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UTSA Libraries' Artificial Intelligence guide says AI-generated information should be fact-checked and that AI used as a source or content generator needs to be cited in submitted work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UFS announced that it will discontinue the use of AI detection software across all faculties and academic activities from 1 July 2026.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UFS reaffirmed that students remain responsible for producing original work and using generative AI tools honestly and appropriately within institutional guidelines.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For assignments and examinations, University of Tsukuba's student guidelines tell students to follow faculty instructions on generative AI use and distinguish their own ideas from AI-generated ideas in report assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

University of Tsukuba's basic policy states that the university actively utilizes new technologies, including generative AI, while respecting originality and novelty in education and research.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UOW's Assessment and Feedback Policy says staff are not permitted to upload student work to third-party tools, including GenAI or misconduct detection software, in the context of privacy and data policies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UOW's Academic Integrity Policy lists misuse of generative artificial intelligence technology as academic misconduct when work is generated by an unauthorised AI tool without subject coordinator permission, or when permitted AI-generated work lacks appropriate acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For education, creative activity, and research, VSB-TUO's AI rules say users must properly state when a result was achieved using AI, including the scope of use; presenting AI-generated outputs as one's own work is considered fraud.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

VSB-TUO Central Library guidance describes AI-generated outputs as comparable to grey literature and advises users not to rely on a single source, model, or tool, but to cross-check AI responses against other models, web information, archived websites, and scientific perspectives.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Waseda University's university-wide April 2023 statement warns students that submitting a paper created by generative AI as-is is treated as misconduct similar to cheating, and that plagiarism, inappropriate citation, or fabrication in submitted work can expose the student to disciplinary action.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For students in Waseda University's School of Commerce and Graduate School of Commerce, the July 2023 school-level notice says generative AI tools are not uniformly prohibited, each course instructor decides whether they may be used, and students are not permitted to entrust all submitted work to generative AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For submissions to Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE, AI and LLM systems cannot be manuscript authors or co-authors. Authors retain responsibility for AI-assisted content, must disclose substantive generative-AI use explicitly and in detail in the manuscript, and follow the journal’s permitted-use and prohibited-use conditions. This journal-specific policy is not a university-wide coursework or thesis rule.

Evidence records: 6. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

JZUS manuscript authors must disclose substantive GenAI use explicitly and in detail, retain human responsibility and never list AI as author. The journal limits permitted assistance and prohibits AI-generated original contributions or fabricated data/images. This is a journal policy, not campus coursework permission.

Evidence records: 6. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ZHAW's declaration annex requires incorporated generative-AI output to be cited, requires listed tools and purposes for text creation or editing uses, and generally requires a method-section description of AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For evaluating assessments, ZHAW says teaching staff may use generative AI only as an aid for open-ended task formats and should refrain from using software to detect AI-generated text for assessment purposes.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aalto student guidance says students should contact the course teacher if AI use is unclear, mark AI-generated content in their text, and not present AI-generated content as their own.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Aarhus University staff guidance says staff may not use GAI for trade secrets, confidential or sensitive data or copyrighted material; staff are responsible for the accuracy and quality of GAI-generated content they use or share; and GAI use should be credited where relevant.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AMU classroom guidance says that, in course contexts where permission or marking is required, use of generative AI tools without permission or without appropriate marking is treated in the same way as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The AAU reform documents feedback portal privacy notice says visitor comments collect form data, IP address, and browser user agent for spam detection, and says users who left feedback can request export or erasure of personal data subject to administrative, legal, or security retention needs.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ahlia University's student academic integrity policy includes use of AI-generated text from tools such as ChatGPT, when used for rephrasing with the intent of circumventing detection, among its listed academic misconduct categories.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Alexandria University's Faculty of Education AI research framework identifies privacy, result falsification, plagiarism, and overreliance on AI technologies as ethical and legal risks in research use of AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Alfaisal University's College of Business MBA Handbook says AI-generated content is permitted for MBA students only when it is clearly identified, properly cited, and used to supplement rather than replace original student work; misuse of AI tools may be treated as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

American University research guidance says researchers should be transparent about AI use, verify AI-generated content against trusted sources, protect data privacy, and not list AI systems as co-authors.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AUD's 2025-2026 Student Handbook includes material, text, images, or designs from generative artificial intelligence tools within its plagiarism definition when the work is used without proper acknowledgement.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AUCA's student conduct code states that AI use is addressed in the AUCA AI Policy for plagiarism and lists AI among prohibited resources whose use during a proctored exam constitutes cheating.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

AAU's AI instructions prohibit graduate students from using AI to generate ready-made chapters, results, or hypotheses, to generate questionnaires or fictitious data, or to rewrite paragraphs to hide plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Bauman Moscow State Technical University's public Antiplagiat help page says the Antiplagiat system shows text matches and that a system check result cannot be treated as proof of plagiarism or have legal force.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

BGU Library academic-integrity guidance says sources must be clearly attributed and that presenting others' ideas or texts without appropriate attribution is a serious breach of academic ethics.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Bilkent's GenAI guideline says students should attribute AI-generated content and should not submit AI-generated content without proper attribution.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Brown OIT research guidance says researchers should deeply review AI-generated code for quality and efficiency.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Cairo University's responsible AI policy identifies academic-staff risks that include plagiarism or failing to attribute AI tools, privacy-compromising data sharing, hallucinations and biases, and over-reliance on AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CMU Eberly Center guidance recommends extreme caution when using AI-detection tools because no such tools have been established as accurate.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CWRU's Writing Program does not recommend AI detection services and prefers classroom expectations, assignment design, and discussion with students when concerns arise.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Chalmers Library's student guidance connects AI use to plagiarism or ghostwriting risk and says students need to be fully transparent, describe what they did, and cite the AI tool used.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CDU's academic integrity guidance identifies inappropriate or unsanctioned GenAI use as academic misconduct and says CDU will not tolerate misrepresenting AI-generated content as a student's own work or failing to disclose AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

China University of Mining and Technology Library's 2025 spring lecture program included an AI literacy session focused on AI tool norms and academic integrity, including AI ghostwriting, fabricated literature, plagiarism-detection signals, compliant use for literature review and idea organization, and boundaries for academic innovation.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For the Artificial Intelligence College undergraduate research training plan, the notice says plagiarism or other academic misconduct will be handled under the university's academic ethics rules for participating students and supervising teachers.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CUNY's Academic Integrity Policy includes unauthorized use of AI-generated content, including paraphrased AI-generated content without citing AI as the source, as an example of plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Mines sample syllabus language says students who include AI-generated ideas, text, code, or images in submitted work must document and credit the source, and that failure to properly cite AI tools would be considered academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CSU's Student Resolution Center defines cheating to include unauthorized sources or assistance and instructor-prohibited behavior, and defines plagiarism as representing another's language, structure, images, ideas, or thoughts as one's own without proper acknowledgment.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

An official Comenius-hosted appendix recommends that work using artificial intelligence tools begin with an originality declaration indicating that AI tools were used.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Comillas states that using AI to create complete works or relevant parts without citing the source or tool, or without express permission in the assignment description, will be considered plagiarism under the university's general regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Concordia CTL guidance says Concordia has not approved or acquired online AI detectors and therefore staff or faculty use of them is not permitted because of privacy laws and regulations.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

CTU's graduation-thesis ethics guideline treats failure to acknowledge and document AI-tool text or other AI outcomes in a thesis, while presenting them as one's own, as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

A Dalhousie CLT generative AI teaching handout says current detection tools that claim to identify AI-generated work are not reliable and are not recommended.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

DLSU's policy treats prohibited generative AI use and failure to disclose generative AI use as generative AI-related academic dishonesty, while also stating that AI detector results cannot be the sole basis for establishing such dishonesty.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Dhofar University's Centre for Preparatory Studies citation guide includes AI-generated work as a source category for APA-style citation and identifies fields such as AI company, AI tool, access details, format type, and human contributor role.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

DCU's Teaching Enhancement Unit asks staff to consider assessment design for GenAI by designing tools in or redesigning assessment to avoid possible academic integrity breaches, and says DCU is not employing GenAI detectors for student assessments at this time.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Duke CTL assignment-design guidance advises that personal information should not be shared when using AI in assignments, to minimize privacy threats to students and instructors.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ECNU's graduate academic morality regulation applies to degree-seeking graduate students and requires them to follow academic norms, cite sources, and avoid fabrication, plagiarism, and other academic misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The IFÉ Édurevue n°154 discusses generative AI in relation to plagiarism, cheating, assessment design, and academic integrity; it cites examples of other universities' AI charters but does not establish an ENS Lyon AI-use charter.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Effat University's library AI guide says using generative-AI text without proper citation is considered plagiarism according to Effat University, while policies for using and crediting AI tools may vary by class.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

ELTE's rector instruction treats unattributed AI-generated results or content presented as a student's own work as equivalent to plagiarism, and prohibits AI use during in-class tests and examinations unless the task description expressly permits or requires AI use.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

EUR's central GenAI guidelines state that students must create and submit their own work, that GenAI-generated work submitted as one's own is fraud, and that GenAI use in exams or evaluations where it is not permitted is fraud.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ewha's class-stage AI-use guidance cautions that AI-detection programs can be used to check whether assignments used generative AI, but that such tools are not yet perfect and ethical use should be discussed with students.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Far Eastern Federal University's official continuing education site lists a 2025 artificial-intelligence course available only to FEFU staff and students, with topics including large language models, ChatGPT/Qwen/YandexGPT comparison, prompting, AI ethics and policy of AI use, hallucinations, AI-generated text identification, and local language models.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UFMG's recommendations state that students using AI tools should ensure submitted work reflects their own analysis and intellectual creation, not a full or partial copy of AI-generated output.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

GJU's AI principles say misuse of AI tools, including plagiarism, cheating, and violations of academic integrity principles, will be handled under the disciplinary procedures in relevant university regulations and instructions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Goethe University Frankfurt's teacher-facing assessment guidance recommends defining clear rules for AI use, making AI use transparent, and using AI detection software only as supporting evidence rather than as the sole basis for proof.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Griffith's academic integrity page states that uncited content created using generative artificial intelligence software is conduct that always constitutes Academic Misconduct, and that representing AI-generated assessment content as a student's own work is Academic Misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

GIST's research misconduct reporting page lists reportable targets including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, improper authorship, duplicate publication, investigation obstruction, serious departures from accepted academic norms, and coercing or proposing misconduct.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HBKU's Code of Honor requires students to follow university policies and regulations and frames academic misconduct to include plagiarism and dishonest use or supply of course or research material.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Where generative AI use is allowed, Hiroshima University's policy says students should be told that using AI output as-is may amount to copyright infringement or plagiarism, and that any use or quoted output should be made clear in reports and similar assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Hokkaido University's notes warn students that ChatGPT-like outputs may unknowingly plagiarize internet text, may contain inaccuracies, and may have unclear or inaccurate sources.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

HSE University has an official university-scope regulation page for checking written student work for plagiarism and generative-model use; the page identifies the regulation as adopted on May 8, 2024, effective May 13, 2024, and indefinite.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IE University's admissions integrity policy welcomes AI such as ChatGPT in the admissions process when candidates clearly identify AI-generated content, use quotation marks, and include sources and details.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IAU states that student and staff AI-tool use is subject to approved academic-integrity and plagiarism rules.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IIT Gandhinagar's Honour Code lists plagiarism, including submitting material wholly or substantially identical to another person's created or published work without adequate authorship credit, as an example of conduct that might violate the Honour Code.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IIT Guwahati's Students' Affairs Code of Conduct pledge is an official general academic-integrity source covering unfair means, unpermitted aid, and plagiarism, including internet-sourced work; it is not an AI-specific institutional policy.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IIT Hyderabad's academic handbook treats plagiarism, whether intended or not, as academic dishonesty that will be penalized, and directs students with doubts to consult instructors.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IITK's 2025-26 academic guide discusses writing down assignments from GPTs as a malpractice alongside plagiarism and copying.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

IIT Roorkee's Academic Ethics Policy states that plagiarism is unacceptable, that the institute observes zero tolerance against plagiarism, and that students must check reports, papers, and theses for plagiarism using dedicated software before submission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Official JLU News articles report university-leader statements that teachers and students should follow academic norms, truth-seeking scientific spirit, disclose use of AI tools when using AI-generated content, and retain user responsibility.

Evidence records: 2. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

K-State's Teaching and Learning Center sample syllabus language ties unattributed AI-generated assignment content to a violation of the K-State Honor Pledge.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For assessed writing, University of Graz guidance says AI use should be transparent: students should label and document AI use and follow the AI guidelines of the relevant course.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KTU describes academic honesty as regulated by its Code of Academic Ethics and says students commit to honestly prepare written, oral, project, and research assignments; the same source describes penalties for academic dishonesty and plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Khon Kaen University's Graduate School allows moderate-risk AI use in thesis or independent study work only when explicitly disclosed and supervised by the advisor, while strictly prohibiting high-risk AI use that generates entirely new content in place of student-authored writing.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

King Saud University's assessment policy says the university supports using generative AI tools in education while emphasizing knowledge, skills, and awareness needed to regulate use and understand AI-generated information or data.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kingston University's 2025/26 Academic Integrity procedure defines unacceptable use of generative AI as presenting AI-generated content as one's own without proper acknowledgement, except when the assessment brief explicitly permits it.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Kobe University tells students that using text created by generative AI unchanged as part or all of a report or similar work may be regarded as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For students, Kuwait University's GenAI policy says students should follow faculty instructions, and GenAI use without explicit faculty permission is considered cheating or plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

La Trobe student guidance says AI rules may vary by school, subject, or task, and students should check with lecturers and acknowledge AI-generated content when they use it.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For examinations, LUH limits any mandatory AI use to centrally provided LUH systems, permits student choice of AI systems for independently written work only where exam rules allow and AI-generated content is identified, and prohibits automated correction or full/partial entry of exam work into an AI system.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Leiden Law School's research guidance says its researchers are responsible for correct genAI use, must review genAI-generated output, and must use genAI responsibly and transparently.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

LMU IfKW guidance treats verbatim or minimally changed AI-generated text without proper attribution as plagiarism, and says significant unattributed AI-generated text in assessed work can receive grade 5 (failed).

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Lund University's student guidance says students who want to use GenAI for a compulsory assignment or examination must check whether it is permitted and how to report its use; presenting GenAI-generated work as one's own may be treated as cheating.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Maastricht University warns that using GenAI to generate content and present it as one’s own constitutes academic dishonesty.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Macquarie Library student guidance lists several MQ-accessible AI-enabled tools and tells students in AI-Open assessments to check AI output carefully and acknowledge AI use.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

For Mahidol graduate-level thesis, thematic paper, and independent-study writing, the Faculty of Graduate Studies states that advisors may allow student AI use, but not for generating or drafting main content, analysis, research results, or main conclusions, and both advisor and student must disclose AI usage transparently.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MLU guidance prohibits automated grading or assessment of student examination work by AI; assessment remains the responsibility of examiners.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Masaryk University's AI-in-teaching statement says AI use must be transparent and consistent with academic and personal moral integrity, and compares unacknowledged AI use to ghostwriting as a form of plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Maynooth University student GenAI guidance says using GenAI in an assignment beyond what is permitted is a breach of academic integrity, including plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Memorial Libraries' AI academic work guide says students must acknowledge any AI-generated content used in academic work and are not permitted to present work created through unauthorized generative AI tools as their own original work.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

MSU guidelines generally discourage generative AI detection tools and say detection outputs should be treated as potential indicators rather than conclusive evidence or the sole basis for academic or grading decisions.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Missouri S&T's Dean of Students academic-integrity resource says using AI tools like ChatGPT in coursework requires instructor approval, and unauthorized AI use may violate university regulations and be considered plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

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.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NCKU academic-integrity guidance says faculty, students, and researchers should verify generative-AI outputs, and that using generative AI for plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification breaches academic integrity; students should follow course rules and should not submit AI-generated content as their own without permission.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In a 2025 official Parliament QA PDF, NITT described ChatGPT-like generative AI use in higher education and said related policies were being evolved, including Turnitin checks for plagiarism and auto-generated content and plagiarism validation for code.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NTUT guidance advises students not to over-rely on AI tools, to evaluate AI output, to label AI-generated results when used, and not to submit generated output directly as their own reports or assignments.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Turnitin AI writing detection is listed for National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU) in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: conditionally allowed. Derived endorsement type: officially endorsed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Taiwan Tech's student academic-ethics case-handling rules are an official general academic-ethics source defining violations such as plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, ghostwriting, intellectual-property infringement, and other cheating; the checked rule is not AI-specific.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

KPI recognizes presenting AI-generated text or AI-paraphrased content from other sources as one's own work without proper source indication as academically dishonest and as plagiarism.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NYCU's research-use reference guidelines tell researchers not to over-rely on or fully accept GenAI output, to verify AI-generated arguments, and to disclose GenAI assistance when required by research, funder, journal, or conference policies.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NYU does not license or endorse AI detection tools due to accuracy and reliability concerns.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

NMBU's Norwegian cheating and plagiarism page warns that incorrect or improper use of AI tools such as ChatGPT can create suspicion of attempted cheating and/or plagiarism, with possible consequences including annulment and exclusion.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Obuda University's student requirements state that thesis, diploma, or final-work preparation requires independent work and prohibits misuse of another person's intellectual product as plagiarism; this source did not contain AI-specific wording in the extracted text.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Ocean University of China's graduate academic misconduct rules apply to doctoral and master's degree applicants whose academic activities involve fabrication, plagiarism, or other conduct that violates accepted academic norms.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Oregon State University Student Community Standards states that misuse of GenAI on an assignment could violate the university's Academic Integrity Policy, including plagiarism, cheating, or fabrication.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

In a message to students, Osaka University says generative AI can be useful when used appropriately, but students should recognize that AI-generated text can contain errors and that presenting AI answers as one's own without judging truth carries risks.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

PIEAS PhD thesis rules require the thesis to make a distinct contribution to knowledge and provide evidence of originality, and they exclude work already used for another person's degree.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

UP's recommendations state that generative AI use in professional texts and other creative work must be declared, and that staff and students may not claim authorship of texts or other creative outputs generated using AI.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Penn State ORP guidance says researchers using generative AI must document process inputs, outputs, and prompts, verify AI-generated content, data, and references, and disclose use transparently in proposals, manuscripts, and publications.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

The central teaching-and-AI orientation recommends that, for written work, AI-generated text parts be marked as such as a matter of good scientific practice.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.

Oxford University Press Journals AI Discovery Assistant (Beta) is listed for Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH) in an official university AI tools source. Derived availability: not mentioned. Derived endorsement type: officially endorsed.

Evidence records: 1. Original evidence remains canonical on the linked university record and public JSON.