Policy presence
Aarhus University has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Aarhus, Denmark
Aarhus University
Aarhus University is listed as QS 2026 rank 131. Aarhus University has 9 source-backed AI policy claim records from 4 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
Aarhus University is listed as QS 2026 rank 131. Aarhus University has 9 source-backed AI policy claim records from 4 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists Aarhus University as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 14, 2026 and last changed on May 14, 2026. The record contains 9 source-backed claims, including 9 reviewed claims, from 4 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/aarhus-university.json. The entity-level confidence is 97%. This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless the linked source is the university's own official page.
Policy signals in this record
- Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Evidence includes Privacy claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- Evidence includes Procurement claims.
- Named AI services detected in public claims: ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot.
- Disclosure, acknowledgment, citation, or attribution language appears in the public claim text.
- Teaching, assessment, coursework, or syllabus-related language appears in the public claim text.
Review: Agent reviewed
This reference record summarizes visible public data only. Official sources and original-language evidence remain canonical; confidence is separate from review state.
This page is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless a linked source is the university's own official page.
Policy profile
Deterministic source-backed dimensions derived from this record's public claims.
Review: Machine candidate
Policy profile rows are machine-candidate derived metadata. They are not final policy conclusions; inspect the linked claim evidence before reuse.
Analysis page-quality metadata is available at /api/public/v1/analysis/page-quality.json.
AI disclosure
Aarhus University has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
Aarhus University has 1 source-backed public claim for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Exams
Aarhus University has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
Aarhus University has 4 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Academic integrity
Aarhus University has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Approved tools
Aarhus University has 3 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Named AI services
Aarhus University has 5 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
Aarhus University has 1 source-backed public claim for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
Aarhus University has 1 source-backed public claim for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Security and procurement
Aarhus University has 1 source-backed public claim for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coverage score measures breadth of public, source-backed coverage only. It is not a policy quality, strictness, legal adequacy, safety, or compliance score.
Evidence-backed claims
9 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
Aarhus University student guidance says students who use GAI in an exam project must submit a declaration naming the applications and explaining how they were used, and unchanged GAI output used in an exam project must be cited like other secondary-source quotations.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: gai_exam_project_declaration_and_unchanged_output_citation_required
Original evidence
Evidence 1If you use part of a text or another output generated by a GAI application in your exam project without changing it, you must cite it in the same way you cite quotations from other secondary sources. If you use GAI in your exam project, you must submit a declaration that contains the following: 1) confirmation you used GAI, 2) the name of the GAI applications you used (ChatGPT, Copilot, Bing etc. and 3) an explanation of how you used the applications in your paper.
Localized display only
Students must cite unchanged GAI output used in an exam project and submit a declaration confirming GAI use, naming the applications, and explaining their use.
Ai Tool Treatment
Aarhus University student guidance says the main rule is that students are allowed to use GAI unless their academic regulations or the course catalogue explicitly state that GAI is not allowed.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: student_gai_allowed_unless_academic_regulations_or_course_catalogue_disallow
Original evidence
Evidence 1The main rule is that you are allowed to use GAI if your academic regulations or the course catalogue doesn’t explicitly state that using GAI is not allowed.
Localized display only
AU student guidance states that GAI is allowed by default unless academic regulations or the course catalogue explicitly disallow it.
Privacy
Aarhus University student guidance says students should never upload confidential or sensitive personal data covered by GDPR rules to a GAI application.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: students_never_upload_confidential_sensitive_gdpr_data_to_gai
Original evidence
Evidence 1Never upload confidential or sensitive personal data (in other words, data covered by the GDPR rules) to a GAI application: you can’t be sure what will happen to the texts you upload. Make sure you understand the data protection rules, and follow them.
Localized display only
AU student guidance tells students never to upload confidential or sensitive personal data covered by GDPR to GAI applications.
Privacy
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.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: staff_no_confidential_sensitive_copyrighted_material_verify_quality_credit_gai
Original evidence
Evidence 1This means that you may not use GAI for anything involving trade secrets, confidential or sensitive data or copyrighted material. When you use GAI to generate a text or an image, you are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and quality of the content. Generally speaking, you should always consider whether crediting your use of GAI is relevant when you use GAI to generate a text, an image, a video or another product.
Localized display only
AU staff guidance bars GAI use with trade secrets, confidential/sensitive data, or copyrighted material, and requires users to verify quality and consider crediting GAI use.
Academic Integrity
Aarhus University student guidance says that when GAI is not allowed for an exam, students are not allowed to use GAI for proofreading or feedback on the exam text, and for internet-allowed exams where GAI is not allowed students may do regular web searches but may not actively use AI functions.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: when_gai_disallowed_no_gai_proofreading_feedback_or_active_ai_functions
Original evidence
Evidence 1If you’re not allowed to use GAI for the exam in question, you are not allowed to use GAI to proofread and give you feedback on your exam text. Exams where the internet is allowed, but AI is not allowed, you are allowed to do regular web searches, but you are not allowed to actively use AI functions.
Localized display only
When GAI is disallowed for an exam, AU bars GAI proofreading/feedback on exam text and active use of AI functions even if regular internet search is allowed.
Teaching
AU Educate guidance for teaching staff says that from fall 2024 students are allowed to use GAI in all AU exams unless academic regulations or the course description explicitly state that they may not, and it advises teachers to read those rules for their courses.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: teaching_staff_guidance_fall_2024_gai_allowed_unless_rules_disallow
Original evidence
Evidence 1From the fall of 2024, students are allowed to use generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in all exams at AU unless it is explicitly stated in the academic regulations or course description that they may not. The new rules have been implemented in the individual academic regulations and course descriptions, therefore it might be beneficial to read these and understand how it applies to your course(s).
Localized display only
AU Educate tells teaching staff that GAI is allowed in all AU exams from fall 2024 unless programme or course rules explicitly disallow it.
Procurement
Aarhus University staff guidance says all students and staff have access to a Microsoft Copilot version similar to free ChatGPT, that no university-wide guidelines for which GAI applications are allowed have been adopted, and that purchases of systems and licences must be handled with the unit, AU IT and AU Finance.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: copilot_access_no_university_wide_allowed_app_guidelines_purchases_with_unit_it_finance
Original evidence
Evidence 1In addition to access to all free GAI applications, all students and staff have access to the version of the Microsoft Copilot which is similar to the free version of ChatGPT. No university-wide guidelines for which GAI applications staff and students are allowed to use have been adopted. However, any purchases of systems and licenses must be carried out in collaboration between the individual unit and AU IT and AU Finance.
Localized display only
AU staff guidance notes Copilot access for students and staff, no adopted university-wide list of allowed GAI applications, and central handling of purchases with AU IT and AU Finance.
Privacy
AU Library guidance for students says many library-provided materials such as e-books and articles may not be shared with AI tools, students should never upload confidential information to AI, and AI text mining of a larger text corpus is only permitted in an academic context if the library agreement with the publisher allows it.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: library_e_resources_ai_sharing_restricted_confidential_info_never_upload_text_mining_if_agreement_allows
Original evidence
Evidence 1For many of the materials that the library provides access to, such as electronic books and articles, you are not permitted to share them with AI tools. It is only permitted to use AI for text mining of a larger text corpus in an academic context, if the library's agreement with the publisher allows it. You should never upload confidential information to an AI technology.
Localized display only
AU Library warns that many e-resources may not be shared with AI tools, text mining depends on publisher agreements, and confidential information should never be uploaded to AI.
Privacy
AU Library guidance says students using AI to transcribe interviews should consider legality and good academic practice, including responsibility for personal and confidential data, informant consent, GDPR compliance, secure storage and deletion when data is no longer needed.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_interview_transcription_requires_personal_data_responsibility_consent_gdpr_secure_storage_deletion
Original evidence
Evidence 1As a student, you are responsible for your use of AI in your work. If you want to use an AI tool to transcribe your interviews, you should carefully consider the entire process in relation to legality and good academic practice. Always be aware of: As a student, you are responsible for data when processing personal data and confidential information. Have your informants given consent to the processing? Consider which AI technology you are using and whether it complies with GDPR legislation.
Localized display only
AU Library tells students to treat AI interview transcription as a data-protection and consent workflow, not just a technical tool choice.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Candidate claims are not final policy conclusions. They preserve source URL, source snapshot hash, evidence, confidence, and review state so the record can be audited before review.
Official sources
4 source attribution
AI and copyright
library.au.dk
GAI and chatbots
educate.au.dk
Generative artificial intelligence (GAI)
studerende.au.dk
Your guide to using GAI responsibly
medarbejdere.au.dk
Change log
Source-check timeline and diff-style claim/evidence preview.
View the public change record for this university, including source snapshot hashes, claim review states, and a diff-style preview of current source-backed evidence.
Corrections and missing evidence
Corrections create review tasks and do not directly change this public record.
If an official source is missing, stale, moved, blocked, or incorrectly summarized, submit a source URL, policy change report, or institution correction for review. Corrections must preserve source URLs, source language, original evidence, review state, and audit history.