Atlanta, United States

Emory University

Emory University is listed as QS 2026 rank 182. Emory University has 7 source-backed AI policy claim records from 6 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.

Short answer

v1 public contract

Emory University is listed as QS 2026 rank 182. Emory University has 7 source-backed AI policy claim records from 6 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 Emory University as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 15, 2026 and last changed on May 15, 2026. The record contains 7 source-backed claims, including 7 reviewed claims, from 6 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/emory-university.json. The entity-level confidence is 93%. 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.

Claim coverage7 reviewedSource languageenPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/emory-university.json

Policy signals in this record

  • Evidence includes Privacy claims.
  • Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
  • Evidence includes Teaching claims.
  • Evidence includes Security review claims.
  • Evidence includes Source status claims.
  • Named AI services detected in public claims: ChatGPT, Grammarly.
  • 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.
Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedEvidence-backed claims7Reviewed7Candidate0Official sources6

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.

Coverage score100/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence78%

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.

Research guidance

No source-backed public claim about research AI use is present in this profile.

The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about research use, publication ethics, research data, grants, or human-subjects compliance.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Security and procurement

Emory University has 1 source-backed public claim for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence77%Evidence1Sources1

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

7 reviewed evidence-backed public claim

Privacy

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

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: sensitive_information_requires_emory_approved_secure_ai_tools

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Use of these public-facing AI platforms creates risks of inadvertent disclosure of Sensitive Information. To protect sensitive information, always use Emory approved AI tools.

Academic Integrity

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.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: ai_detection_results_alone_ordinarily_insufficient

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Emory does not currently license an AI detection program. ... The results of a detection program alone would not ordinarily be sufficient to find a student responsible for a violation without the presence of other indicators.

Teaching

Emory Responsible AI guidance says students must review course syllabi, program handbooks, and faculty expectations regarding AI use because instructors may specify whether tools such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, or other generative technologies are permitted for assignments and under what conditions.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%

Normalized value: students_review_course_ai_expectations_and_permissions

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Academic coursework: Students must review course syllabi, program handbooks, and faculty expectations regarding AI use. Many instructors specify whether tools such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, or other generative technologies are permitted for assignments and under what conditions.

Security Review

Emory Responsible AI guidance says AI tools that have not gone through the EASAT review process may not be suitable for handling Confidential or Restricted data, and users should consult the EASAT website for approved tools and use scope.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%

Normalized value: unreviewed_ai_tools_may_not_be_suitable_for_confidential_or_restricted_data

Original evidence

Evidence 1
AI tools that have not gone through Emory’s EASAT review process may not be suitable for handling sensitive information such as Confidential or Restricted data.

Academic Integrity

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.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: unauthorized_ai_use_may_be_honor_code_violation_where_course_disallows_ai

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Using an artificial intelligence program to generate any content for any assignment in this course ... constitutes plagiarism and is a violation of the Honor Code. The use of an artificial intelligence program in this course without permission from the instructor may also constitute seeking unauthorized assistance or violate other provisions of the Honor Code.

Source Status

Emory maintains a public Responsible AI site that presents Emory's Responsible AI Guiding Principles, developed through multiple rounds of input from across the Emory community, with an iterative process over time.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence89%

Normalized value: public_responsible_ai_guiding_principles_site

Original evidence

Evidence 1
This site is Emory’s home for that work. It presents Emory’s Responsible AI Guiding Principles, developed through multiple rounds of input from across the Emory community, a process that will repeat, iterate, and expand over time.

Teaching

For the Rollins School of Public Health, the Rollins Teaching & Learning Core page says Rollins provides general generative AI guidance to help faculty and instructors develop their own course policies, and expects course policies to vary by context.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence87%

Normalized value: rollins_school_scope_course_policy_guidance_varies_by_context

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Rollin's School of Public Health provides general guidance on generative AI to help faculty and instructors develop their own course policies. We expect that courses will vary in their specific policies depending on context.

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

6 source attribution

Home | Emory University | Atlanta GA

responsibleai.emory.edu

Snapshot hash
719f3661473925435dbc81455241ed174ee69a3ea36d6edd32ddc2dd6df29bad

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.

Last checkedMay 15, 2026Last changedMay 15, 2026Open change log

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.

Back to universities