Coursework
Read scoped evidence; review pending
The IAG working group discusses university work; its discussion does not establish permission for your coursework.
Gif-sur-Yvette, France Last checked
Université Paris-Saclay
Compare universities
Selected universities1/4
Université Paris-Saclay
Independent · Open access · Not an official university page
What would you like to check?
Explore the current record by topic
Exams
Read scoped evidence; review pending
The retained 2025–26 exam records are historical. Current exam permission is unresolved here; check the rules for your exam.
Disclosure
Read scoped evidence; review pending
The historical 2025–26 disclosure provisions do not establish today’s requirements. Current acknowledgement conditions remain a gap.
Privacy and data
Read scoped evidence; review pending
The retained working-group Claims provide no specific data-upload rule. This gap does not mean uploading sensitive material is permitted.
Tools and eligibility
Read scoped evidence; review pending
No tool entitlement is established by the retained Claims. A working-group initiative is not an account or licence offer.
Research and publication
Read scoped evidence; review pending
The working group aims to support good practices in research and discusses academic dissertations; no specific thesis-use permission is established.
More reviewed record topics
Academic integrity
Read scoped evidence; review pending
The working-group article does not establish a current misconduct procedure, sanction or appeal deadline. Historical exam records remain separately traceable.
Teaching guidance
Read scoped evidence; review pending
The IAG group supports teaching and research practices. Its law-faculty guide is described as being drafted, not as an adopted assessment rule.
Security and procurement
Read scoped evidence; review pending
No specific security or procurement process is established by the retained Claims. Consult the responsible university service for your use case.
Before you submit
Do
- Check the applicable assessment instructions instead of treating the working-group discussion as permission.
- For law teaching, verify whether the draft guide has an adopted successor before relying on it.
Don’t
- Do not treat the working group’s good-practice objective as approval for assessed AI use.
- Do not present the law guide described as being drafted as a current university-wide rule.
Tool discovery records: scope pending review
Tool discovery information and cited sources are retained. Current account eligibility, cost, endorsement and assessment permission are not confirmed.
Record updates
Updates to this site's reviewed record, not confirmation that the university changed its policy.
Records cover only part of this period, starting 2026-10-25.
Other records · Page update
View revision
Loading revision…
Other records · Record maintenance
View revision
Loading revision…
Other records · Record maintenance
View revision
Loading revision…
Reviewed claims
3
Teaching 3 reviewed claims
Université Paris-Saclay's official IAG working-group article says the group aims to familiarize teacher-researchers and students with generative AI and orient them toward good practices in teaching and research.
Reviewed
Scope: Read each original source audience and year; currentness and completeness remain unverified.
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1Ce groupe de travail a pour un double objectif d'acculturer les enseignants-chercheurs et étudiants et d'orienter vers de bonnes pratiques de l'Intelligence artificielle générative (IAG) dans l'enseignement et la recherche.Localized display only
The working group has the dual objective of familiarizing teacher-researchers and students with generative AI and orienting them toward good practices in teaching and research.
Evidence locator: Introductory paragraph
The Université Paris-Saclay IAG working-group article describes ongoing reflections on student competencies at the end of first and second cycles, the academic dissertation in the generative-AI era, and how generative AI should be integrated or controlled in university work.
Reviewed
Scope: Read each original source audience and year; currentness and completeness remain unverified.
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1Les réflexions en cours portent notamment sur : Les compétences attendues des étudiants en fin de premiers et seconds cycles L’évolution du concept de mémoire académique à l’ère de l’IA générative La manière dont l’IA générative doit être intégrée ou contrôlée dans les travaux universitairesLocalized display only
Ongoing reflections include expected student competencies at the end of first and second cycles, the academic dissertation in the generative-AI era, and how generative AI should be integrated or controlled in university work.
Evidence locator: Les réflexions en cours portent notamment sur
In the Graduate School Droit context, the Université Paris-Saclay IAG working-group article says a guide of good practices and evaluation support for law teacher-researchers is being drafted.
Reviewed
Scope: Read each original source audience and year; currentness and completeness remain unverified.
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1Le groupe de travail mène une réflexion sur les compétences d'un futur juriste dans ce nouveau contexte d'Intelligence artificielle générative et sur leurs évaluations. Un guide de « bonnes pratiques » et d’aide à l’évaluation destiné aux enseignants-chercheurs en Droit est en cours de rédaction.Localized display only
The working group is reflecting on future jurist competencies and assessment in the context of generative AI, and a guide of good practices and evaluation support for law teacher-researchers is being drafted.
Evidence locator: Graduate School Droit working-group paragraph
Historical and pending public Claims (2)
These original public records and sources remain traceable. They are excluded from current topics, FAQ, submission and Analysis conclusions and do not establish current permission.
claim-upsaclay-first-cycle-ai-disclosure-sanction · historical_only
2025–26 undergraduate first-cycle exam regulations; 2026–27 replacement requires new ID and source/version review.
2025–26 first cycle only; newer 2026–27 teacher-authorisation condition cannot be inferred from old disclosure wording.
Record historyAcademic Integrity 1 reviewed claim
Université Paris-Saclay's 2025-2026 first-cycle exam rules say that, for Licence professionnelle, Licence, and Licence double-diplôme students covered by the rules, use of ChatGPT or another AI tool must be explicitly mentioned when it is not prohibited, and failure to mention AI as a source will be sanctioned.
Reviewed
Scope: 2025–26 undergraduate first-cycle exam regulations; 2026–27 replacement requires new ID and source/version review.
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1Les règles présentées dans ce document s'appliquent à tous les étudiants inscrits en Licence professionnelle, Licence et Licence double-diplôme de l'Université Paris-Saclay. L'utilisation de ChatGPT ou tout autre outil ayant recours à l'IA (Intelligence Artificielle) devra être mentionnée de façon explicite (quand elle n'est pas interdite), comme n'importe quel emprunt ou citation d'une source externe. Le non-respect de la mention de l'IA comme source se verra sanctionné.Localized display only
The rules apply to Licence professionnelle, Licence, and Licence double-diplôme students; ChatGPT or other AI use must be explicitly mentioned when not prohibited, and failure to mention AI as a source will be sanctioned.
Evidence locator: Partie II scope; Partie III - Charte des examens, 2. Plagiat et fraude
claim-upsaclay-master-ai-disclosure-sanction · historical_only
2025–26 masters exam regulations; separate 2026–27 examination version.
2025–26 masters only; do not turn acknowledgement into present assessment permission.
Record historyAcademic Integrity 1 reviewed claim
Université Paris-Saclay's 2025-2026 master exam rules say that use of ChatGPT or another AI tool must be explicitly mentioned when it is not prohibited, like any external source borrowing or citation, and failure to mention AI as a source will be sanctioned.
Reviewed
Scope: 2025–26 masters exam regulations; separate 2026–27 examination version.
Last checked
Original evidence
Evidence 1Règlement des études, MCC et charte des examens des formations de master de l’Université Paris-Saclay 2025-2026. L’utilisation de ChatGPT ou tout autre outil ayant recours à l’IA (Intelligence Artificielle) devra être mentionnée de façon explicite (quand elle n’est pas interdite), comme n’importe quel emprunt ou citation d’une source externe. Le non-respect de la mention de l’IA comme source se verra sanctionné.Localized display only
For master formations, ChatGPT or other AI use must be explicitly mentioned when not prohibited, like any external-source borrowing or citation, and failure to mention AI as a source will be sanctioned.
Evidence locator: Partie III - Charte des examens, 2. Plagiat et fraude
Official sources
3 official URLs; 3 source attributions and their captured versions retained.
Groupe de travail Intelligence artificielle générative (IAG)
www.universite-paris-saclay.fr
University official source
universite-paris-saclay.fr
Hash and captured version
Groupe de travail Intelligence artificielle générative (IAG) · 2026-05-12T18:10:00.000Z
Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.
dac655c6b64abc55ae559fefc65ed6376d6bed2e14d762f272eeb33c85e3f273
Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.
Règlement des études, MCC et charte des examens des formations de 1er cycle de l'Université Paris-Saclay 2025-2026
www.faculte-sciences-sport.universite-paris-saclay.fr
University official source
faculte-sciences-sport.universite-paris-saclay.fr
Hash and captured version
Règlement des études, MCC et charte des examens des formations de 1er cycle de l'Université Paris-Saclay 2025-2026 · 2026-05-12T18:12:00.000Z
Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.
7903b0c55e2e9f0e9e7767e13fd83982d9b72941d0301fc334ae7373e88bc7da
Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.
Règlement des études, MCC et charte des examens des formations de master de l'Université Paris-Saclay 2025-2026
www.faculte-sciences-sport.universite-paris-saclay.fr
University official source
faculte-sciences-sport.universite-paris-saclay.fr
Hash and captured version
Règlement des études, MCC et charte des examens des formations de master de l'Université Paris-Saclay 2025-2026 · 2026-05-12T18:13:00.000Z
Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.
1ae3590206bb232349583c96445c44bd006ad0ec4539b166e28d1e5e02edde65
Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.
Explore
Related university AI policy records
4 records
Record information, JSON & citation
Review layers: claim review applies to the claims only. Analysis is a separate machine-generated summary awaiting review. Coverage scores do not establish complete policy knowledge.
- Claim review state
- agent_reviewed
- Analysis review state
- machine_candidate
- Record revision
- qs71-90-v6-completeness-r3-20261025
- Dataset release
- public-release-20260924-002
- Correction published
- Student snapshot
- Not published
Published V6 presentation; JSON and MCP retain the existing public record. Supplementary quotations and scope notes remain pending review. Local candidate corrections, tools and student summaries are not approved for publication. Institution-wide audit remains PARTIAL.
- Institution audit PARTIAL. Official raw HTML/PDF originals and full version/context verification remain incomplete.
- Original public records remain unchanged. Excluded records are historical or pending scope review, not current permissions.
- New corrections, tools, student interpretations and snapshots remain unapproved.
Questions students ask
Questions students ask
Can I use AI for my coursework?
The IAG working group discusses university work; its discussion does not establish permission for your coursework.
View evidence →Do I need to disclose AI use?
The historical 2025–26 disclosure provisions do not establish today’s requirements. Current acknowledgement conditions remain a gap.
View evidence →Can I upload sensitive data?
The retained working-group Claims provide no specific data-upload rule. This gap does not mean uploading sensitive material is permitted.
View evidence →Which tools can I access?
No tool entitlement is established by the retained Claims. A working-group initiative is not an account or licence offer.
View evidence →What are the examination rules?
The retained 2025–26 exam records are historical. Current exam permission is unresolved here; check the rules for your exam.
View evidence →What rules apply to research and publication?
The working group aims to support good practices in research and discusses academic dissertations; no specific thesis-use permission is established.
View evidence →What counts as academic misconduct?
The working-group article does not establish a current misconduct procedure, sanction or appeal deadline. Historical exam records remain separately traceable.
View evidence →What guidance applies to teaching?
The IAG group supports teaching and research practices. Its law-faculty guide is described as being drafted, not as an adopted assessment rule.
View evidence →What security and procurement requirements apply?
No specific security or procurement process is established by the retained Claims. Consult the responsible university service for your use case.
View evidence →