Munich, Germany

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Last checkedMay 12, 2026Last changedMay 12, 2026Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

Public JSON Change log Monthly report Citation rules Dataset access Analysis JSON Submit correction

Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedClaim coverage6 reviewedEvidence-backed claims6Reviewed6Candidate0Official sources3Source languagede, enPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/ludwig-maximilians-universitat-munchen.json

Coverage score100/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence80%

Policy presence

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.

UnclearMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence5Sources2

Claim claim-lmu-001 Claim claim-lmu-004 Claim claim-lmu-002

AI disclosure

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 3 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence3Sources2

Claim claim-lmu-002 Claim claim-lmu-005 Claim claim-lmu-003

Coursework

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence4Sources2

Claim claim-lmu-001 Claim claim-lmu-002 Claim claim-lmu-005

Exams

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence79%Evidence4Sources2

Claim claim-lmu-001 Claim claim-lmu-002 Claim claim-lmu-003

Privacy and data entry

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence81%Evidence1Sources1

Claim claim-lmu-004

Academic integrity

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence2Sources1

Claim claim-lmu-002 Claim claim-lmu-003

Approved tools

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence81%Evidence1Sources1

Claim claim-lmu-001

Named AI services

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 3 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence3Sources2

Claim claim-lmu-001 Claim claim-lmu-004 Claim claim-lmu-006

Teaching guidance

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 2 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence79%Evidence2Sources2

Claim claim-lmu-005 Claim claim-lmu-006

Research guidance

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 1 source-backed public claim for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence80%Evidence1Sources1

Claim claim-lmu-005

Security and procurement

No source-backed public claim about AI security review or procurement is present in this profile.

The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about security review, procurement, vendor approval, risk assessment, authentication, SSO, or enterprise licensing.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Derived tool records0

No tool-level evidence is published for this record yet. Broad AI tool mentions are not expanded into named tool conclusions.

Evidence-backed claims

6 reviewed evidence-backed public claim

Normalized value: Assessment AI use requires explicit teacher permission in the IfKW guidance

Last checked: May 12, 2026
Last changed: May 12, 2026

Original evidence

Evidence 1

Therefore, in general terms, the use of AI may be allowed in assessments only with the explicit permission of the teacher. If no explicit permission is given, then the students must assume the use of AI is not allowed.
Source: The use of AI by students

Localized display only

IfKW assessment guidance requires explicit teacher permission for AI use.

Source language: English (en)
Snapshot hash: a82c2400f28677a71a66c6bf7b2eef43ca4e4f926f415eeef75b7ae853647cee
Retrieved: May 12, 2026
Evidence locator: Section: Whether use of AI is permitted for assessed work

Normalized value: Personal information requires consent and German/EU data-protection compliance before AI upload

Last checked: May 12, 2026
Last changed: May 12, 2026

Original evidence

Evidence 1

Material containing personal information must not be entered into AI systems without consent and unless German or EU standards of data protection are met. Providers of LLMs may reside in countries where rules of data protection do not follow the same standards as in Germany or the EU.
Source: The use of AI by students

Localized display only

IfKW guidance restricts uploading personal information to AI systems without consent and data-protection compliance.

Source language: English (en)
Snapshot hash: a82c2400f28677a71a66c6bf7b2eef43ca4e4f926f415eeef75b7ae853647cee
Retrieved: May 12, 2026
Evidence locator: Section: The uploading of material to AI systems

Normalized value: Unattributed AI-generated text is treated as plagiarism in the IfKW guidance

Last checked: May 12, 2026
Last changed: May 12, 2026

Original evidence

Evidence 1

To include AI-generated text verbatim — or with small changes — into one’s texts without proper attribution constitutes plagiarism comparable to the use of text written by others without citing the source. If it can be established that a student has submitted work that includes a significant amount AI-generated text without proper attribution (see below), the corresponding assessment will be evaluated with the grade 5 (failed).
Source: The use of AI by students

Localized display only

IfKW guidance treats unattributed AI-generated text as plagiarism and says significant cases can fail.

Source language: English (en)
Snapshot hash: a82c2400f28677a71a66c6bf7b2eef43ca4e4f926f415eeef75b7ae853647cee
Retrieved: May 12, 2026
Evidence locator: Section: The use of AI as (comparable to) plagiarism

Normalized value: Medical Faculty GWP page requires disclosure and marking of AI use in dissertations

Last checked: May 12, 2026
Last changed: May 12, 2026

Original evidence

Evidence 1

Geben Sie an, wann, wo und in welchem Umfang Sie KI im Rahmen Ihrer Dissertation genutzt haben! In Ihrer eidesstattlichen Versicherung (Affidavit) erklären Sie, dass Sie Ihre Dissertation selbständig verfasst haben und alle verwendeten Hilfsmittel benannt haben. KI ist ein solches Hilfsmittel und muss daher benannt werden. Machen Sie Abschnitte in denen Sie KI beim Erstellen oder Editieren genutzt haben kenntlich.
Source: Umgang und Nutzung von künstlicher Intelligenz

Localized display only

Medical Faculty GWP guidance requires disclosure of AI use in dissertations.

Source language: de
Snapshot hash: 99c44e197380c05b23bdfbfbfe10f5b8cfd3b2725483f55a8d259432cc6bdda0
Retrieved: May 12, 2026
Evidence locator: Section: Umgang und Nutzung von künstlicher Intelligenz

Normalized value: Permitted AI use must be documented in assessed work under IfKW guidance

Last checked: May 12, 2026
Last changed: May 12, 2026

Original evidence

Evidence 1

The use of AI (if permitted) in assessed work, including for preliminary tasks, must be completely and appropriately documented. In addition, students should document: How the tool was used in their work (e.g., generation of stimuli, translation, summary of previous research, formulation of research questions etc), the prompt, and if required by the teacher, the original output.
Source: The use of AI by students

Localized display only

IfKW guidance requires documentation of permitted AI use, including tool use and prompts.

Source language: English (en)
Snapshot hash: a82c2400f28677a71a66c6bf7b2eef43ca4e4f926f415eeef75b7ae853647cee
Retrieved: May 12, 2026
Evidence locator: Section: The attribution of the use of AI

Normalized value: Teaching handout recommends adapting e-exam question formats around ChatGPT limitations

Last checked: May 12, 2026
Last changed: May 12, 2026

Original evidence

Evidence 1

Bei E-Klausuren gelten folgende Empfehlungen: Stellen Sie andere Aufgaben als vor der Einführung von ChatGPT. Sie müssen davon ausgehen, dass ChatGPT zum Einsatz kommen könnte. Es wäre deshalb sinnvoll, dass Sie Aufgaben stellen, bei denen Studierende die Limitationen von ChatGPT kritisch reflektieren müssen. Einfache Wissens- und Verständnisfragen sind unter Einsatz von KI nicht sinnvoll.
Source: Handreichung zum Umgang mit KI

Localized display only

LMU teaching guidance recommends adapting e-exam questions and avoiding simple knowledge questions when AI may be used.

Source language: de
Snapshot hash: e572e056a5eb30a5e00a7d1a90ce5d4c1b7531bfe6c198c87e0b1933d153eeba
Retrieved: May 12, 2026
Evidence locator: Kapitel 5.4 Umgang mit ChatGPT bei E-Klausuren

Candidate claims

0 machine or needs-review claim

Official sources

3 source attribution

Handreichung zum Umgang mit KI

cms-cdn.lmu.de

Source URL: https://cms-cdn.lmu.de/media/44-ub/universitaetsbibliothek/downloads/handreichung_ki.pdf
Snapshot hash: e572e056a5eb30a5e00a7d1a90ce5d4c1b7531bfe6c198c87e0b1933d153eeba

The use of AI by students

cms-cdn.lmu.de

Source URL: https://cms-cdn.lmu.de/media/15-sw/ifkw/downloads/ai-use-for-students-ifkw-lmu-2025.pdf
Snapshot hash: a82c2400f28677a71a66c6bf7b2eef43ca4e4f926f415eeef75b7ae853647cee

Umgang und Nutzung von künstlicher Intelligenz

med.lmu.de

Source URL: https://www.med.lmu.de/de/promotion/gwp/kuenstliche-intelligenz/
Snapshot hash: 99c44e197380c05b23bdfbfbfe10f5b8cfd3b2725483f55a8d259432cc6bdda0

Last checkedMay 12, 2026Last changedMay 12, 2026Open change log

Open contribution paths Review workflow

Back to universities

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Record status

Policy profile

Policy presence

AI disclosure

Coursework

Exams

Privacy and data entry

Academic integrity

Approved tools

Named AI services

Teaching guidance

Research guidance

Security and procurement

AI tools

Evidence-backed claims

LMU IfKW student guidance says AI may be used in assessments only with explicit teacher permission; if no explicit permission is given, students must assume AI use is not allowed.

LMU IfKW guidance says material containing personal information must not be entered into AI systems without consent and unless German or EU data-protection standards are met.

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).

LMU Medical Faculty dissertation guidance says doctoral authors must disclose when, where, and to what extent AI was used, name AI as an aid in the affidavit, and mark sections where AI was used for creation or editing.

LMU IfKW guidance says permitted AI use in assessed work, including preliminary tasks, must be completely and appropriately documented.

LMU teaching guidance recommends adapting e-exam questions for ChatGPT-era assessment, including tasks that require critical reflection on ChatGPT limitations rather than simple knowledge or comprehension questions.

Candidate claims

Official sources

Handreichung zum Umgang mit KI

The use of AI by students

Umgang und Nutzung von künstlicher Intelligenz

Change log

Corrections