Policy presence
Lund University has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Lund, Sweden
Lund University
Lund University is listed as QS 2026 rank =72. Lund University has 10 source-backed AI policy claim records from 5 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
Lund University is listed as QS 2026 rank =72. Lund University has 10 source-backed AI policy claim records from 5 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
No source-backed public claim about AI disclosure or acknowledgement is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about disclosing, acknowledging, citing, or declaring AI use.
Coursework
Lund University has 5 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: allowed.
Exams
Lund University has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: required.
Privacy and data entry
Lund University has 3 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Academic integrity
Lund University has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: required.
Approved tools
Lund University has 4 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Named AI services
Lund University has 5 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Teaching guidance
Lund University has 3 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
Lund University has 2 source-backed public claims for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Security and procurement
Lund University has 2 source-backed public claims for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: allowed.
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
10 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Ai Tool Treatment
Lund University's Swedish generative AI policy encourages staff and students to explore and use generative AI responsibly and creatively within the stated policy principles.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: encourages_responsible_creative_genai_use_within_policy_principles
Original evidence
Evidence 1Lunds universitet uppmuntrar alla medarbetare och studenter att utforska och använda generativ AI på ett ansvarsfullt och kreativt sätt inom de ramar som framgår av här angivna principer.
Localized display only
Lund University encourages all staff and students to explore and use generative AI responsibly and creatively within the stated principles.
Teaching
Lund University's Swedish policy says generative AI use is to support learning and research and does not replace basic skills, critical thinking, or scientific method.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: genai_supports_learning_research_not_core_skills
Original evidence
Evidence 1Stöd i lärande och forskning. Användning av generativ AI ska stödja lärande och forskning och ersätter inte grundläggande färdigheter, kritiskt tänkande eller vetenskaplig metod.
Localized display only
Use of generative AI is to support learning and research and does not replace basic skills, critical thinking, or scientific method.
Academic Integrity
Lund University's Swedish policy says staff and students are responsible for all content they produce, including when generative AI has been used as support.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: staff_students_responsible_for_ai_supported_content
Original evidence
Evidence 1Medarbetare och studenter är ansvariga för allt innehåll de producerar, oavsett om generativ AI har använts som stöd. Det är den enskildes ansvar att säkerställa att materialet uppfyller krav på korrekthet och akademisk integritet.
Localized display only
Staff and students are responsible for all content they produce, including when generative AI has been used as support.
Procurement
Lund University's Swedish policy says generative AI use is to comply with privacy and security laws and that procured tools or existing licensing agreements should be used in the first instance.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: privacy_security_compliance_and_procured_tools_first
Original evidence
Evidence 1Användning av generativ AI ska följa lagar om integritet och säkerhet. Vid användning av generativ AI ska i första hand upphandlade verktyg användas eller avropade inom befintliga licensavtal.
Localized display only
Use of generative AI is to comply with privacy and security laws, and procured tools or existing licensing agreements are to be used in the first instance.
Academic Integrity
Lund University's student guidance says students who want to use GenAI for a compulsory assignment or examination must check whether it is permitted and how to report its use; presenting GenAI-generated work as one's own may be treated as cheating.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: students_check_permission_reporting_for_compulsory_work_and_exams
Original evidence
Evidence 1If you wish to use GenAI for a compulsory assignment or in an examination, you must always double-check with the teacher whether it is permitted and, if so, how you should report its use. Even if it is not clearly stated in the course materials that GenAI is prohibited, it may still be considered cheating if you make it appear as though you have created something yourself that a GenAI tool has generated for you.
Privacy
Lund University's staff AI page says users may not write or upload sensitive material or sensitive personal data to ChatGPT, and may never upload medical information regardless of confidentiality status.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: no_sensitive_personal_data_or_medical_information_in_chatgpt
Original evidence
Evidence 1You may not write or upload sensitive material or sensitive personal data according to GDPR, such as: health information; ethnic origin; political opinions; religious beliefs; trade union membership; sex life or sexual orientation; biometric or genetic data. You may also never upload medical information regardless of confidentiality status.
Teaching
Lund University's GenAI Q&A says generative AI tools are permissible in education when teachers believe they contribute to or facilitate learning, with teachers responsible for informing students about course or programme rules.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: genai_permissible_when_supports_learning_and_rules_are_communicated
Original evidence
Evidence 1At Lund University, it is permissible to use generative AI tools in education if you believe they can contribute to or facilitate learning. However, there are some important things to consider. As a teacher, you need to: be able to confirm that students have achieved the program's and course's learning objectives; be aware that sharing students' work with GAI tools is not allowed; ensure that every student has equal access to the GAI tools you recommend; inform students about the risks of sharing personal information or copyrighted material with the tools; inform students about the rules for using GAI tools in the course or program.
Teaching
Lund University's teacher guidance says teachers should inform students after deciding how GenAI products may be used in teaching and should explain whether and how students can use GenAI products in their work.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: teachers_inform_students_how_genai_may_be_used
Original evidence
Evidence 1Once you have reviewed learning objectives and made decisions about the use of GenAI products in teaching, you must inform your students. Be clear about whether and, if so, how students can use GenAI products in their work. It is also important to inform students about the consequences of unauthorized use of GenAI products:
Privacy
Lund University's student guidance says students should primarily use Lund-licensed tools such as Microsoft Copilot Chat and Google Gemini, and must not upload other students' work, sensitive personal data, or copyright-protected material.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: students_use_licensed_tools_and_do_not_upload_sensitive_or_copyright_material
Original evidence
Evidence 1When studying, you should primarily use the tools for which Lund University holds licences. As a student at Lund University, you can use Microsoft Copilot Chat and Google Gemini by logging in with your student account. However, even if you are logged in with your student account, you must never upload, for example, other students' work, sensitive personal data or copyright-protected material - this applies to text as well as images, audio or video.
Procurement
Lund University's staff AI page says ChatGPT is available free of charge to teachers and researchers for one year through ChatGPT Edu.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: chatgpt_edu_available_to_teachers_researchers_for_one_year
Original evidence
Evidence 1ChatGPT is available free of charge to the university's teachers and researchers for one year via ChatGPT Edu. This provides access to powerful generative AI support for analysis, problem-solving, and development work - within a more secure environment tailored for academic activities.
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
5 source attribution
AI at Lund University
staff.lu.se
Guidance for teachers in five steps
education.lu.se
How to use generative AI responsibly
campusonline.lu.se
Policy med principer för användning av generativ AI inom Lunds universitet
medarbetarwebben.lu.se
Questions and answers on GenAI tools
education.lu.se
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.