Edinburgh, United Kingdom Last checked

The University of Edinburgh

Independent · Open access · Not an official university page

What would you like to check?

Search universities

Explore the current record by topic

Coursework & Learning

Restricted

Edinburgh sets AI permissions at course and assessment level. Presenting AI output as own work is academic misconduct. AI translation into English for assessed work is prohibited as false authorship.

Official source ↗

Exams & Timed Assessments

Course-level rules apply (Gap)

Reviewed guidance identifies misconduct in assessed work and requires course-level instructions. A separate exam-specific AI permission rule was not established in this review.

Official source ↗

Transparency & Acknowledgment

Required

Students must acknowledge permitted use of generative AI before submitting assessed work. Check course instructions for any specific format or placement requirements.

Official source ↗

Data Security & Privacy

Restricted

Staff data guidance instructs protecting copyright, confidentiality, and personal data by assuming anything put into third-party tools is shared externally. For the University's ELM platform, staff and researchers must not use ELM with identifiable patient/clinical data or any identifiable research participant data.

Official source ↗

Available AI Tools

Available with Conditions

ELM (Edinburgh access to Language Models) is the University of Edinburgh's AI innovation platform and a central gateway providing safer access to generative AI through large language models. The University of Edinburgh provides access to the Copilot chat service within Edge by signing in with University credentials, while full Microsoft 365 Copilot Office suite integration licenses are not currently provided. The University of Edinburgh encourages students to use ELM over external commercial AI platforms because its guidance states that data is not retained by third-party services to train models or for other purposes. March 2026 student guidance describes ELM as free to staff and students; another published entitlement page states discretionary School approval. Whether that approval condition still applies universally is not established by these sources. The full Microsoft 365 Copilot suite is not provided under the University's current institutional license agreement, and ISG currently has no plans to make the full Copilot for MS365 license available, though free Copilot chat within Edge is supported.

Official source ↗

Research & Publication

Restricted

Postgraduate research students who choose to use generative AI for aspects of assessed research (such as doctoral theses, MScR dissertations, or annual review submissions) should include a brief acknowledgment in the Declaration of Own Work at the start of the thesis or submission.

Official source ↗
More reviewed record topics

Academic Integrity & Appeals

Enforced

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. An appeal cannot be lodged until the Board of Examiners or decision-maker publishes its final decision in EUCLID Student View (as results on LEARN may not yet be ratified or moderated); appeals against academic decisions must be submitted promptly within 10 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate non-final years, and within 30 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate final year and all postgraduate taught and research students. Appeals against decisions of Student Discipline Officers or the Student Discipline Committee, and appeals against decisions of Fitness to Practise Panels, must be submitted within 10 working days of the receipt of the decision. Late appeals will only be considered in extraordinary circumstances explaining and evidencing why the deadline could not be met; appeals submitted over one year after the ratified or publication date of the original decision will not be considered under any circumstances.

Official source ↗

Teaching & Assessment Guidance

Recommended

GenAI permissions at Edinburgh are set at assessment and course level; restrictions should be stated in the assessment task and students must consult their Course Organiser when unclear. 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.

Official source ↗

Security Review & Ethics Approval

Approval Required

For systematic or large-scale non-research adoption of AI or introduction of AI into existing platforms, staff must follow the approval process via the ISG Ethics Board, frame decisions using AI Impact Assessment guidance, and complete required impact assessments, including DPIA (Data Protection Impact Assessment) and EQIA (Equality Impact Assessment) where appropriate / as required (while research AI uses follow College Research Ethics Boards).

Official source ↗

Before you submit

Do

  • Check this course or assessment's AI rule before using any generative AI.
    Source guidance
  • Before handing in your assessed work, make sure you acknowledge the use of GenAI, where used.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Access protected institutional tools such as Edge Copilot chat or ELM (noting ELM access is subject to School discretionary approval vs student guidance) for safer AI use.
    Source guidance

Don’t

  • Don't present generative AI outputs as your own original work in assessed submissions.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Staff must protect confidentiality assuming third-party tools share data externally; staff and researchers must not use ELM with identifiable patient/clinical or research participant data.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Don't omit recommended AI acknowledgments in thesis declarations when generative AI is used for assessed research.
    Site advice

AI use questioned?

The University of Edinburgh

Audience and activity scope varies strictly by source: taught coursework assessments govern student GenAI acknowledgement; postgraduate research guidelines govern doctoral thesis declarations; staff data guidance governs third-party tool assumptions; special data rules restrict staff and researchers from entering clinical/participant data into ELM; institutional ELM entitlement remains subject to School discretionary approval versus central student guidance.

Investigation & response

Suspected academic misconduct at Edinburgh is investigated by School and College Academic Misconduct Officers (SAMOs / CAMOs), while formal grade penalties are determined by Boards of Examiners; allegations relating to research undertaken by students are investigated using the Academic Misconduct Investigation Procedure rather than staff research misconduct procedures.

Original evidence and scope

Suspected academic misconduct at Edinburgh is investigated by School and College Academic Misconduct Officers (SAMOs / CAMOs), while formal grade penalties are determined by Boards of Examiners; allegations relating to research undertaken by students are investigated using the Academic Misconduct Investigation Procedure rather than staff research misconduct procedures.

draft-edinburgh-investigation-roles-samo-camo
All forms of academic misconduct are regarded as an offence and are punishable under the University’s Code of Student Conduct. Suspected cases are investigated by one of the University’s network of School and College Academic Misconduct Officers ( SAMOS / CAMOS ) who are responsible for the investigation at School or College level, and for determining appropriate penalties.

Academic misconduct procedure > Investigation procedures; Extracted text SHA256 157d5c1a665f9c07050431f1aaf5a8075ec7e710593161458d9a347c86940dd4; original binding lines 5–5; characters 80–456; excerpt offset 0–376

Official university source ↗
Allegations relating to the research undertaken by University students will be investigated using the Academic Misconduct Investigation Procedure.

Research misconduct > Student research scope; Extracted text SHA256 d1aa45798dd1bc56b39d85ae559f8c247cc47775ef88d761f0d14066aa5cd692; original binding lines 15–15; characters 1199–1345; excerpt offset 0–146

Official university source ↗

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.

Original evidence and scope

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.

CL-002
The following uses of generative and agentic AI are not acceptable and constitute misconduct: if you use them you risk investigation and penalties.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Preamble; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 25–25; characters 3748–3895; excerpt offset 0–147

Official university source ↗
Presenting AI outputs as your own, original work.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 1; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 26–26; characters 3896–3945; excerpt offset 0–49

Official university source ↗
Using an AI translator to convert assessed work to English before submission: English is the language of teaching and assessment at Edinburgh – machine translation is treated as false authorship and is not acceptable.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 2; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 27–27; characters 3946–4163; excerpt offset 0–217

Official university source ↗
Submitting an assessment which includes elements of AI-generated text without acknowledgment.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 3; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 28–28; characters 4164–4257; excerpt offset 0–93

Official university source ↗
Using an AI agent or AI browser to complete any type of work – assessed or not – within your virtual learning environment.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 7; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 32–32; characters 4565–4687; excerpt offset 0–122

Official university source ↗

Possible outcomes

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.

Original evidence and scope

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.

CL-002
The following uses of generative and agentic AI are not acceptable and constitute misconduct: if you use them you risk investigation and penalties.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Preamble; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 25–25; characters 3748–3895; excerpt offset 0–147

Official university source ↗
Presenting AI outputs as your own, original work.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 1; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 26–26; characters 3896–3945; excerpt offset 0–49

Official university source ↗
Using an AI translator to convert assessed work to English before submission: English is the language of teaching and assessment at Edinburgh – machine translation is treated as false authorship and is not acceptable.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 2; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 27–27; characters 3946–4163; excerpt offset 0–217

Official university source ↗
Submitting an assessment which includes elements of AI-generated text without acknowledgment.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 3; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 28–28; characters 4164–4257; excerpt offset 0–93

Official university source ↗
Using an AI agent or AI browser to complete any type of work – assessed or not – within your virtual learning environment.

Student guidance > Unacceptable uses of generative AI for assessment > Item 7; Extracted text SHA256 9be0bc084bb1fdfc67816d352bc4d8beaad9d262b04beb6ef5a72f7fd21afa65; original binding lines 32–32; characters 4565–4687; excerpt offset 0–122

Official university source ↗

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.

Original evidence and scope

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.

claim-edinburgh-registry-02-20260727
All work submitted for assessment should be your own original work. Some assessments may require you to sign a declaration to state this – please check with your Course Organiser on this point. It is not acceptable to present AI-generated content as your own work. If you do, this will be regarded as academic misconduct.

Registry PDF October 2024 > Page 5 > GenAI and academic misconduct; Extracted text SHA256 0b83d13d721b28d93a3548cbcdbcb27966073abc4231ca2defa45ee8a54912da; original binding lines 203–207; characters 10176–10497; excerpt offset 0–321

Official university source ↗

Review & appeal

An appeal cannot be lodged until the Board of Examiners or decision-maker publishes its final decision in EUCLID Student View (as results on LEARN may not yet be ratified or moderated); appeals against academic decisions must be submitted promptly within 10 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate non-final years, and within 30 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate final year and all postgraduate taught and research students.

Original evidence and scope

An appeal cannot be lodged until the Board of Examiners or decision-maker publishes its final decision in EUCLID Student View (as results on LEARN may not yet be ratified or moderated); appeals against academic decisions must be submitted promptly within 10 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate non-final years, and within 30 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate final year and all postgraduate taught and research students.

draft-edinburgh-appeals-timescales-academic
Submission deadlines An appeal cannot be lodged until the Board of Examiners or decision-maker has published its final decision. For course marks or degree outcomes, you will be notified of final decisions in EUCLID Student View. Please note that results on LEARN may not yet be ratified or moderated so please check EUCLID. You must submit your appeal promptly and within the timescales below. Appeals against Academic decisions Year of study Appeal timescale Undergraduate Final Year within 30 working days of the result being issued Undergraduate other years within 10 working days of the result being issued Postgraduate taught and research students – all years within 30 working days of th

Registry Timescales > Submission deadlines > Academic decision appeals table (UG Non-final 10 days, UG Final 30 days, PGT/PGR 30 days; EUCLID decision notice); Extracted text SHA256 a38dc7e240f5adfd4a9757a4337f1394f08ca6bba99a49ee6a875a74b8f4e5e0; original binding lines 5–22; characters 90–811; excerpt offset 0–700

Official university source ↗
e result being issued

Registry Timescales > Submission deadlines > Academic decision appeals table (UG Non-final 10 days, UG Final 30 days, PGT/PGR 30 days; EUCLID decision notice); Extracted text SHA256 a38dc7e240f5adfd4a9757a4337f1394f08ca6bba99a49ee6a875a74b8f4e5e0; original binding lines 5–22; characters 90–811; excerpt offset 700–721

Official university source ↗

Appeals against decisions of Student Discipline Officers or the Student Discipline Committee, and appeals against decisions of Fitness to Practise Panels, must be submitted within 10 working days of the receipt of the decision.

Original evidence and scope

Appeals against decisions of Student Discipline Officers or the Student Discipline Committee, and appeals against decisions of Fitness to Practise Panels, must be submitted within 10 working days of the receipt of the decision.

draft-edinburgh-appeals-timescales-discipline
Appeals against decisions of Student Discipline Officers or the Student Discipline Committee All - within 10 working days of the receipt of the decision. Appeals against decisions of Fitness to Practise Panels All - within 10 working days of the receipt of the decision.

Registry Timescales > Submission deadlines > Student Discipline and Fitness to Practise Panels (10 working days); Extracted text SHA256 a38dc7e240f5adfd4a9757a4337f1394f08ca6bba99a49ee6a875a74b8f4e5e0; original binding lines 24–27; characters 813–1083; excerpt offset 0–270

Official university source ↗

Late appeals will only be considered in extraordinary circumstances explaining and evidencing why the deadline could not be met; appeals submitted over one year after the ratified or publication date of the original decision will not be considered under any circumstances.

Original evidence and scope

Late appeals will only be considered in extraordinary circumstances explaining and evidencing why the deadline could not be met; appeals submitted over one year after the ratified or publication date of the original decision will not be considered under any circumstances.

draft-edinburgh-appeals-late-cutoff
Late appeals will only be considered in extraordinary circumstances that explain and evidence why the appeal could not be submitted on time . The decision as to whether or not extraordinary circumstances exist for acceptance of an appeal is taken by an appeal committee. For late appeals, students are expected to include any explanation or evidence for lateness in the appeal submission. Appeals submitted over 1 year after the ratified/publication date of the original decision being challenged will not be considered under any circumstances.

Registry Timescales > Late appeals; Extracted text SHA256 a38dc7e240f5adfd4a9757a4337f1394f08ca6bba99a49ee6a875a74b8f4e5e0; original binding lines 35–36; characters 1403–1947; excerpt offset 0–544

Official university source ↗

AI tools & access

  • Copilot chat within EdgeOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Sign in to Microsoft Edge browser using University of Edinburgh credentials; verified by a green shield icon.

  • ELM (Edinburgh access to Language Models)Official recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Access via the University ELM portal using university credentials; March 2026 guidance describes ELM as free to all staff and students, while another published entitlement page states discretionary School approval, an administrative condition whose universal applicability remains unestablished.

  • Llama in ELMUniversity-hosted serviceRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Select Llama model within the ELM platform.

  • Microsoft 365 Copilot (full integration)Not endorsed by the universityRestricted in the source scope

    Not available via University of Edinburgh institutional licensing agreement.

Record updatesLast 90 days · Recorded updates: 2

Updates to this site's reviewed record, not confirmation that the university changed its policy.

  1. Page update

    Other records · Page update

    View revision

    Loading revision…

  2. Held / removed from current conclusions · Record addition · Site correction

    Exams · Disclosure · 11 more topics · Records involved: 35 (19 corrected / adjusted · 15 added · 1 held)

    View revision

    Loading revision…

Reviewed claims

34

Official sources

11 official URLs; 11 source attributions and their captured versions retained.

Using generative AI in your studies: guidelines for students

information-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Information Services

Hash and captured version

Using generative AI in your studies: guidelines for students · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

7e0f3ccfd9cdcd56f0ca38efa942f15ed2ad7d3da99fb4ad03d63bbe5a1da64e

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

ELM - Edinburgh access to Language Models

information-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Information Services

Hash and captured version

ELM - Edinburgh access to Language Models · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

cd2457a558a4be87470504e4965ed5b15b0fe95808c3ff54ee59b6c59e9a788f

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Generative AI Guidelines for Postgraduate Research Students

information-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Information Services

Hash and captured version

Generative AI Guidelines for Postgraduate Research Students · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

2e2a5bf43a8a847d95a38979d2b4d928b06b715189c01cf4d26894c5a359541e

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Using Generative AI in Your Work: Guidance for Staff

information-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Information Services

Hash and captured version

Using Generative AI in Your Work: Guidance for Staff · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

6dae552827a3bd8c8a0b6f53c02512003c95051a2dd7fdd16c3823109a765173

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

AI in Microsoft 365

information-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Information Services

Hash and captured version

AI in Microsoft 365 · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

9f516873189de0ea7f095056dd4dd3dae1acefd26047972fff83e8860e221469

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Generative AI guidelines for students (Hub)

information-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Information Services

Hash and captured version

Generative AI guidelines for students (Hub) · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

f0767cdac21215813524c158a8170fc07dffb8e9465bf57cd2b8b80abb907720

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Generative AI Guidance for Students (October 2024 PDF)

www.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Academic Services / Registry

Hash and captured version

Generative AI Guidance for Students (October 2024 PDF) · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

959c56f9c375e4be5c80cc8e8286c40d16a8686fc064a70d438549d8f4a4e952

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Deadlines for appeal submission and timescales for consideration of appeals

registryservices.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Registry Services / Academic Services

Hash and captured version

Deadlines for appeal submission and timescales for consideration of appeals · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

c506249b173986119d0cad2d690fa37a7b2eea26f59b6a9301062644fd74d36f

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Academic Misconduct Procedures overview

academic-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Academic Services

Hash and captured version

Academic Misconduct Procedures overview · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

048d937b5278a031cec1ee0c9970247978eae635834f4ccf064ff4596a5d9108

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

ELM - Availability and Entitlement Policy

information-services.ed.ac.uk

University official source

University of Edinburgh Information Services

Hash and captured version

ELM - Availability and Entitlement Policy · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

fc42c3503348bf086bb8e302c72b329cc840936aaa5a9ee3f35871a2d2a0e08e

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Edinburgh Research Office: Research Misconduct Policy

research-office.ed.ac.uk

University official source

Edinburgh Research Office

Hash and captured version

Edinburgh Research Office: Research Misconduct Policy · 2026-10-20T23:08:45Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

39891cfee9686afccfad8df3f2ef8b000c5b4b57b99ac5a8ef2f678ed122437a

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗
Record information, JSON & citation

Review layers: claim review applies to the claims only. Analysis is a separate machine-generated summary awaiting review. Coverage scores do not establish complete policy knowledge.

Claim review state
agent_reviewed
Analysis review state
machine_candidate
Record revision
v6-target-r7-candidate-20261021
Dataset release
public-release-20260924-002
Correction published
Student snapshot
Not published
Current reviewed JSON · Historical baseline

Published V6 presentation; JSON and MCP retain the existing public record. Supplementary quotations and scope notes remain pending review. Local candidate corrections, tools and student summaries are not approved for publication. Institution-wide audit remains PARTIAL.

  • The detailed Academic Misconduct Investigation Procedures document (post-16 September 2024) is hosted on SharePoint and requires University login. High-level SAMO/CAMO investigation structure and Registry appeals timescales are verified publicly, but internal investigation workflow details remain restricted behind authentication.
  • March 2026 student guidance describes ELM as free to all staff and students, whereas the currently published ELM Availability and Entitlement policy states current staff and student access remains subject to discretionary School approval; unconditional student access remains an unconfirmed administrative gap.
  • Legacy Claim claim-edinburgh-registry-03-20260727 claimText specifies providing a brief statement at the end of the submission in accordance with course instructions, but underlying raw official evidence snippet ("Before handing in your assessed work, make sure you acknowledge the use of GenAI, where used.") does not establish statement format or end-of-work placement. Presentation removes unsupported placement/format from new actions while preserving raw Claim text intact.
  • Draft claim draft-edinburgh-staff-privacy-external claimText states staff are strictly prohibited from uploading personal or confidential data to external AI tools, whereas underlying raw official evidence snippet is advisory staff guidance: "Protect copyright, confidentiality and personal data. Assume anything put into third-party tools is shared externally." Presentation distinguishes staff guidance from hard prohibitions while preserving raw Claim text intact.
        Current reviewed JSON
        Questions students ask

        Questions students ask

        Can I use AI for my coursework?

        Edinburgh sets AI permissions at course and assessment level. Presenting AI output as own work is academic misconduct. AI translation into English for assessed work is prohibited as false authorship.

        View evidence →
        Do I need to disclose AI use?

        Students must acknowledge permitted use of generative AI before submitting assessed work. Check course instructions for any specific format or placement requirements.

        View evidence →
        Can I upload sensitive data?

        Staff data guidance instructs protecting copyright, confidentiality, and personal data by assuming anything put into third-party tools is shared externally. For the University's ELM platform, staff and researchers must not use ELM with identifiable patient/clinical data or any identifiable research participant data.

        View evidence →
        Which tools can I access?

        ELM (Edinburgh access to Language Models) is the University of Edinburgh's AI innovation platform and a central gateway providing safer access to generative AI through large language models. The University of Edinburgh provides access to the Copilot chat service within Edge by signing in with University credentials, while full Microsoft 365 Copilot Office suite integration licenses are not currently provided. The University of Edinburgh encourages students to use ELM over external commercial AI platforms because its guidance states that data is not retained by third-party services to train models or for other purposes. March 2026 student guidance describes ELM as free to staff and students; another published entitlement page states discretionary School approval. Whether that approval condition still applies universally is not established by these sources. The full Microsoft 365 Copilot suite is not provided under the University's current institutional license agreement, and ISG currently has no plans to make the full Copilot for MS365 license available, though free Copilot chat within Edge is supported.

        View evidence →
        What are the examination rules?

        Reviewed guidance identifies misconduct in assessed work and requires course-level instructions. A separate exam-specific AI permission rule was not established in this review.

        View evidence →
        What rules apply to research and publication?

        Postgraduate research students who choose to use generative AI for aspects of assessed research (such as doctoral theses, MScR dissertations, or annual review submissions) should include a brief acknowledgment in the Declaration of Own Work at the start of the thesis or submission.

        View evidence →
        What counts as academic misconduct?

        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. An appeal cannot be lodged until the Board of Examiners or decision-maker publishes its final decision in EUCLID Student View (as results on LEARN may not yet be ratified or moderated); appeals against academic decisions must be submitted promptly within 10 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate non-final years, and within 30 working days of the result being issued for undergraduate final year and all postgraduate taught and research students. Appeals against decisions of Student Discipline Officers or the Student Discipline Committee, and appeals against decisions of Fitness to Practise Panels, must be submitted within 10 working days of the receipt of the decision. Late appeals will only be considered in extraordinary circumstances explaining and evidencing why the deadline could not be met; appeals submitted over one year after the ratified or publication date of the original decision will not be considered under any circumstances.

        View evidence →
        What guidance applies to teaching?

        GenAI permissions at Edinburgh are set at assessment and course level; restrictions should be stated in the assessment task and students must consult their Course Organiser when unclear. 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.

        View evidence →
        What security and procurement requirements apply?

        For systematic or large-scale non-research adoption of AI or introduction of AI into existing platforms, staff must follow the approval process via the ISG Ethics Board, frame decisions using AI Impact Assessment guidance, and complete required impact assessments, including DPIA (Data Protection Impact Assessment) and EQIA (Equality Impact Assessment) where appropriate / as required (while research AI uses follow College Research Ethics Boards).

        View evidence →
        When was this record checked?

        Record checked:

        Record version →
        Which official sources support these rules?Official source →
        Where can I read the full evidence?

        34 · Full policy evidence

        Full policy evidence →
        The University of Edinburgh AI Policy