Policy presence
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Munich, Germany
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München is listed as QS 2026 rank =58. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 6 source-backed AI policy claim records from 3 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München is listed as QS 2026 rank =58. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 6 source-backed AI policy claim records from 3 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
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
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 3 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Exams
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Academic integrity
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
Approved tools
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Named AI services
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 3 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Teaching guidance
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 2 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München has 1 source-backed public claim for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
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.
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
6 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Ai Tool Treatment
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.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: Assessment AI use requires explicit teacher permission in the IfKW guidance
Original evidence
Evidence 1Therefore, 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.
Localized display only
IfKW assessment guidance requires explicit teacher permission for AI use.
Privacy
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.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: Personal information requires consent and German/EU data-protection compliance before AI upload
Original evidence
Evidence 1Material 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.
Localized display only
IfKW guidance restricts uploading personal information to AI systems without consent and data-protection compliance.
Academic Integrity
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).
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: Unattributed AI-generated text is treated as plagiarism in the IfKW guidance
Original evidence
Evidence 1To 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).
Localized display only
IfKW guidance treats unattributed AI-generated text as plagiarism and says significant cases can fail.
Research
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.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: Medical Faculty GWP page requires disclosure and marking of AI use in dissertations
Original evidence
Evidence 1Geben 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.
Localized display only
Medical Faculty GWP guidance requires disclosure of AI use in dissertations.
Academic Integrity
LMU IfKW guidance says permitted AI use in assessed work, including preliminary tasks, must be completely and appropriately documented.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: Permitted AI use must be documented in assessed work under IfKW guidance
Original evidence
Evidence 1The 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.
Localized display only
IfKW guidance requires documentation of permitted AI use, including tool use and prompts.
Teaching
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.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: Teaching handout recommends adapting e-exam question formats around ChatGPT limitations
Original evidence
Evidence 1Bei 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.
Localized display only
LMU teaching guidance recommends adapting e-exam questions and avoiding simple knowledge questions when AI may be used.
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
3 source attribution
Handreichung zum Umgang mit KI
cms-cdn.lmu.de
The use of AI by students
cms-cdn.lmu.de
Umgang und Nutzung von künstlicher Intelligenz
med.lmu.de
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.