Policy presence
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Taipei, Taiwan
National Taiwan University (NTU)
National Taiwan University (NTU) is listed as QS 2026 rank =63. National Taiwan University (NTU) has 9 source-backed AI policy claim records from 4 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
National Taiwan University (NTU) is listed as QS 2026 rank =63. National Taiwan University (NTU) has 9 source-backed AI policy claim records from 4 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
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 2 source-backed public claims for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.
Coursework
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 5 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Exams
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
Privacy and data entry
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 2 source-backed public claims for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Academic integrity
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 3 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
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.
Named AI services
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 3 source-backed public claims for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Teaching guidance
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 5 source-backed public claims for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
National Taiwan University (NTU) has 3 source-backed public claims for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
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
9 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
NTU DFLL guidance says instructors may decide whether students may use generative AI; if permitted, students should clearly label AI-generated content and follow academic ethics.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: DFLL guidance makes AI use instructor-permission based with labeling and ethics duties
Original evidence
Evidence 1教師於授課及指導學生時，得自行決定是否同意學生使用生成式 AI。如經教師同意，學生應明確標註使用生成式 AI 產出之內容，並遵守學術倫理。學生使用時應註明應用動機、範圍及出處，標註或說明 AI 產生內容於作業、報告或論文之段落。
Localized display only
DFLL says instructors decide whether AI is allowed and permitted use must be labeled.
Academic Integrity
NTU DFLL guidance says student-submitted theses, works, written reports, technical reports or professional-practice reports should be personally written and created by the student; generative-AI cheating is subject to NTU Academic Regulations Articles 88 and 88-1.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: DFLL guidance treats generative-AI cheating in submitted work as punishable under NTU academic regulations
Original evidence
Evidence 1學生所繳交之論文、作品、書面報告、技術報告或專業實務報告，應由學生親自撰寫且自行創作，如有使用生成式 AI 之舞弊情事，將依國立臺灣大學學則第八十八條及第八十八條之一懲處。
Localized display only
DFLL says submitted work must be personally created and AI cheating is subject to NTU regulations.
Teaching
National Taiwan University guidance says it takes a positive and constructive view of AI tools, encourages teachers to adjust course planning and learning assessment, and says students should understand AI-tool limitations for future learning.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: NTU central teaching guidance encourages course and assessment adjustment around AI tools
Original evidence
Evidence 1針對 AI 工具，臺大採取正面看待與善加利用的態度，鼓勵教師將其視為精進教學的契機，因應新工具的發展適時調整課程規劃，設計出更能反映課程獨特性、且更符合課程目標的教學內容及學習評量；而學生也應該瞭解 AI 工具之使用限制，學習如何妥善運用這些工具以輔助未來的學習。
Localized display only
NTU encourages teachers to use AI as a teaching-improvement opportunity while students learn AI-tool limits.
Teaching
National Taiwan University guidance recommends that instructors clarify AI-use principles and rules early in the course, preferably in the syllabus, including which activities and assignments may or may not use AI tools.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: NTU central teaching guidance recommends syllabus-level AI-use rules
Original evidence
Evidence 1教師應該先釐清在課程中使用 AI 生成工具的原則和規範，除了透過口頭的說明和提醒讓學生清楚瞭解相關規定，最好也在課程一開始就把相關規定明白標示於課程大綱內，藉以和學生達成共識避免爭議。教師同時需要思考，哪些課堂活動和作業可以或不可以使用 AI 生成工具？
Localized display only
NTU recommends clearly communicating course AI rules, preferably in the syllabus.
Academic Integrity
National Taiwan University guidance says students using ChatGPT for assignments or reports should clearly label AI-generated content, fact-check it, and comply with academic ethics and academic-integrity requirements.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: NTU central guidance requires labeling, fact-checking and academic-integrity compliance for AI-generated content
Original evidence
Evidence 1使用 ChatGPT 來撰寫課堂作業或報告，應明確標註使用 ChatGPT 產出的內容，讓讀者瞭解作者使用哪些資源來支持自己的論點。使用 AI 生成內容時一定要進行資訊查核，並確保遵守學術倫理及學術誠信的要求，不涉及抄襲或違反著作權。
Localized display only
NTU says ChatGPT-assisted assignments should label AI output, fact-check, and follow academic integrity.
Teaching
National Taiwan University guidance says AI-detection tools have limited accuracy and are not sufficient evidence by themselves to confirm student AI use; it recommends caution before accusing students based only on such tools.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: NTU central guidance warns against relying solely on AI-detection tools
Original evidence
Evidence 1目前市面上有多種能夠辨識生成式 AI 內容的工具，例如 GPTZero、Turnitin AI Detection、Writer.com AI Detector、Copyleaks 等。然而，這些工具的準確率仍有相當限制，難以作為確認學生是否使用 AI 工具的充分依據。教師若考慮使用 AI 偵測工具，應格外謹慎，避免單憑工具判斷便對學生提出指控。
Localized display only
NTU says AI-detection tools have limited accuracy and should not be the sole basis for accusations.
Privacy
NTU Health Policy and Management conduct rules allow AI tools according to teaching and research needs, but require users to clearly explain the content and scope of use, respect privacy, disclose assistance sources, verify AI output, and take responsibility for results.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: HPM conduct rules require disclosure, privacy respect, verification and responsibility for AI tool use
Original evidence
Evidence 1師生可視教研需求使用 AI 工具，然應清楚說明使用內容與範圍，尊重隱私並揭示協助來源。不論教學、作業或研究，AI 所產內容須由使用者自行查核並負責結果，未揭示使用者視為違反誠信。
Localized display only
HPM rules require AI-use scope disclosure, privacy respect, source disclosure, checking and responsibility.
Research
NTU Social Work journal publication ethics states that AI tools cannot assume responsibility for submitted research; authors remain fully responsible, must disclose AI use in the relevant section, and may not list or cite AI as an author.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: NTU Social Work publication ethics requires author responsibility and disclosure for AI tool use
Original evidence
Evidence 1人工智慧（AI）工具無法對所提交的研究成果承擔任何責任。故即使部分內容由 AI 工具產生，作者仍須對整篇稿件內容負完全責任。若作者在論文撰寫、圖像或圖形元素製作，或資料蒐集與分析過程中使用 AI 工具，必須在該章節中揭露其使用方式與所使用的 AI 工具名稱。作者不得將 AI 或 AI 輔助技術列為作者或共同作者，也不得將 AI 作為作者進行引用。
Localized display only
NTU Social Work publication ethics requires author responsibility and AI-use disclosure.
Privacy
NTU Social Work journal publication ethics says reviewers must not input manuscript content or review-related material into generative AI tools to help write review comments, in order to protect manuscript confidentiality and author rights.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: NTU Social Work publication ethics bars reviewers from putting manuscript or review material into generative AI tools
Original evidence
Evidence 1審查者不得將稿件內容與審查相關之資料輸入或提供予生成式人工智慧工具協助撰寫審查意見，以確保稿件內容之機密性與作者權益。審查者不得將稿件圖表和表格上傳至生成式人工智慧工具，避免AI技術將輸入的資料用於訓練或其他目的，侵犯同儕審查過程的保密性、作者和審查者的隱私，以及稿件的版權。
Localized display only
NTU Social Work publication ethics bars reviewers from uploading manuscript or review material to generative AI tools.
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
4 source attribution
國立臺灣大學健康政策與管理研究所教學研究行為守則
emha.coph.ntu.edu.tw
國立臺灣大學外國語文學系學生使用生成式AI 參考指引
forex.ntu.edu.tw
臺大社會工作學刊出版倫理聲明
ntusw.ntu.edu.tw
臺大針對生成式 AI 工具之教學因應措施
dlc.ntu.edu.tw
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.