Singapore, Singapore

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NTU Singapore)

Record status

Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedClaim coverage7 reviewedEvidence-backed claims7Reviewed7Candidate0Official sources3Source languageenPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/nanyang-technological-university.json

Policy profile

Coverage score90/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence79%

Policy presence

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NTU Singapore) has 1 source-backed public claim for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.

UnclearMachine candidateConfidence77%Evidence1Sources1

Privacy and data entry

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NTU Singapore) has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence81%Evidence1Sources1

Approved tools

No source-backed public claim identifying approved or licensed AI tools is present in this profile.

The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence that identifies institutionally approved, licensed, procured, or enterprise AI tools.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Named AI services

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NTU Singapore) has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: restricted.

RestrictedMachine candidateConfidence81%Evidence1Sources1

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

AI tools

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

7 reviewed evidence-backed public claim

Research

NTU states that generative AI should not be listed as an author of any paper with NTU affiliation, or as a Principal Investigator, Co-PI, or collaborator in research proposals.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence97%

Original evidence

Evidence 1
GenAI (e.g. ChatGPT) should not be listed as an author of any paper with an affiliation to NTU; or listed as a Principal Investigator (PI), Co-PI, or collaborator in any research proposals.

Research

NTU states that the use of generative AI beyond basic spelling and grammar checks should be acknowledged and cited in research outputs, publications, and presentations.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence96%

Original evidence

Evidence 1
In the interests of transparency and integrity, the use of GenAI beyond basic spelling and grammar checks should be appropriately acknowledged and cited. This would include acknowledging the use of any AI tools in their research proposals, manuscripts, and scholarly works through a statement specifying the tool's full name and version, its purpose of use, and how it was used.

Academic Integrity

NTU states that not citing or acknowledging the use of generative AI could be considered plagiarism (a form of research misconduct), especially if GenAI was used to generate ideas or for literature reviews.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Not citing or acknowledging the use of GenAI could be considered plagiarism (i.e. a form of research misconduct), especially if GenAI was used to generate ideas or for literature reviews.

Privacy

NTU prohibits uploading confidential, sensitive, or personal data to external generative AI platforms unless specific conditions are met: legal compliance, restricted access, no data retention, and written permission from data owners.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Any confidential or sensitive information, and/or personal data must not be uploaded to any external GenAI software, system, or platform unless: The activity does not contravene any applicable laws, regulations, or institutional policies; Access to the GenAI is controlled and restricted to only authorised study members; The data is not retained in or by the GenAI; and Where applicable, written permission has been explicitly provided by the data owner.

Academic Integrity

NTU states that misrepresenting AI-generated content as one's own work is considered academic misconduct under the 2025 NTU Academic Integrity Handbook.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%

Original evidence

Evidence 1
AI tools can assist your thinking but should not replace it; misrepresenting AI-generated content as your own work is considered academic misconduct.

Teaching

NTU guidelines state that AI detector tools should be used with caution due to frequent false positives and negatives, ease of bypass, and bias against non-native English writing patterns.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Research shows that the use of AI detector tools should be used with caution due to the following reasons. Unreliable Detection: Frequent false positives (human text flagged as AI) and false negatives (AI text missed). ... Discrimination: Bias against non-native writing patterns (e.g. ESL/EFL students).

Teaching

NTU requires students to disclose the use of AI tools in their submissions and to always refer to their module's AI use policy for specific expectations.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Use AI tools to support tasks such as brainstorming, outlining, or checking grammar, but ensure you disclose their use in your submissions. Always refer to your module's AI use policy and seek guidance from your instructor regarding specific expectations for acceptable AI usage in your courses.

Candidate claims

0 machine or needs-review claim

Official sources

3 source attribution

Change log

Last checkedMay 5, 2026Last changedMay 6, 2026Open change log

Corrections

Back to universities