Nancy, France

Université de Lorraine

Record status

Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedClaim coverage3 reviewedEvidence-backed claims3Reviewed3Candidate0Official sources3Source languagefrPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/universite-de-lorraine.json

Policy profile

Coverage score85/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence78%

AI disclosure

Université de Lorraine has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence79%Evidence1Sources1

Privacy and data entry

No source-backed public claim about privacy or data-entry restrictions is present in this profile.

The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about personal, confidential, sensitive, regulated, or student data entry into AI tools.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Academic integrity

Université de Lorraine has 1 source-backed public claim for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.

Conditionally AllowedMachine candidateConfidence82%Evidence1Sources1

Approved tools

Université de Lorraine has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence79%Evidence1Sources1

Named AI services

Université de Lorraine has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence79%Evidence1Sources1

Teaching guidance

Université de Lorraine has 1 source-backed public claim for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence75%Evidence1Sources1

Research guidance

No source-backed public claim about research AI use is present in this profile.

The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about research use, publication ethics, research data, grants, or human-subjects compliance.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

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

3 reviewed evidence-backed public claim

Academic Integrity

Universite de Lorraine's 2025 exam charter states that use of tools, including generative artificial intelligence, is fraud when it is not explicitly authorized.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence96%

Normalized value: unauthorized_generative_ai_tools_constitute_exam_fraud

Original evidence

Evidence 1
L'utilisation d'outils, notamment d'intelligence artificielle generative, non explicitement autorisee constitue une fraude.

Localized display only

Use of tools, including generative AI, that is not explicitly authorized constitutes fraud.

Ai Tool Treatment

For the Master Urbanisme et Amenagement, parcours Intelligence Territoriale, the SHS Metz AI-use charter requires students to clearly indicate any AI use in submitted work and provide an AI-use declaration in an appendix.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence93%

Normalized value: program_ai_use_must_be_disclosed_with_appendix_declaration

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Tout usage d'IA dans un travail doit etre clairement indique dans le document rendu, selon les modalites suivantes : Dans le corps du texte : Mentionner explicitement les passages ou elements generes ou modifies par l'IA. En annexe : Fournir une declaration d'usage de l'IA.

Localized display only

Any AI use in submitted work must be clearly indicated, including explicit marking in the text and an AI-use declaration in an appendix.

Teaching

Universite de Lorraine DACIP teaching guidance recommends favoring sovereign and secure generative AI, training on ethical issues, and transparency with students in pedagogical and assessment processes.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence88%

Normalized value: teaching_guidance_recommends_secure_sovereign_iag_training_and_transparency

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Recommandations des expert-es : Favoriser une IAG souveraine et securisee plutot qu'un outil externe qui peut aller a l'encontre des obligations professionnelles de l'enseignant-e entre autres en termes de respect du RGPD ; Se former aux enjeux deontologiques specifiques aux usages des technologies, dont les systemes d'IAG ; Etre transparent-e vis-a-vis des etudiant-es dans les processus pedagogiques et d'evaluation afin de soutenir leurs apprentissages.

Localized display only

Expert recommendations favor sovereign and secure generative AI, training on ethical issues, and transparency with students in pedagogical and assessment processes.

Candidate claims

0 machine or needs-review claim

Official sources

3 source attribution

Change log

Last checkedMay 19, 2026Last changedMay 19, 2026Open change log

Corrections

Back to universities