Policy presence
No source-backed public AI policy or guidance record is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain a source-backed claim that establishes a policy or guidance source.
Gelugor, Malaysia
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM)
Record status
Review: Agent reviewed
Policy profile
Review: Machine candidate
AI disclosure
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) has 2 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Exams
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) has 2 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
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.
Academic integrity
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
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
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Teaching guidance
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) has 1 source-backed public claim for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Research guidance
Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) has 4 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.
AI tools
No tool-level evidence is published for this record yet. Broad AI tool mentions are not expanded into named tool conclusions.
Evidence-backed claims
5 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Research
IJAPS, a Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia journal, requires manuscript authors to note AI software use such as ChatGPT in Materials and Methods or Acknowledgments and not list AI as an author.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: IJAPS requires AI-use disclosure and prohibits AI authorship
Original evidence
Evidence 1Use of artificial intelligence (AI) software, such as ChatGPT, must be noted in the Materials and Methods section (or Acknowledgments, if no Materials and Methods section is available) of the manuscript and may not be listed as an author.
Research
IJAPS states that generative AI and AI-assisted technologies used in scientific writing should only improve readability and language, with human oversight, careful review, and author accountability.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: IJAPS limits GenAI writing assistance to readability and language improvement
Original evidence
Evidence 1Where authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should only be used to improve readability and language of the work.
Research
Kajian Malaysia, a Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia journal, allows AI-assisted tools for language improvement but keeps authors fully responsible for the quality and accuracy of the final text.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: Kajian Malaysia allows AI language assistance with author responsibility
Original evidence
Evidence 1The use of AI-assisted tools for language improvement is allowed, but authors are fully responsible for the quality and accuracy of the final text.
Academic Integrity
The CDAE-hosted guideline says students should use GenAI prudently and ethically under the guidelines set by their higher education provider, while supporting rather than taking over their role as students.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: students should use GenAI ethically and not let it replace their role
Original evidence
Evidence 1Menggunakan KBG secara berhemah dan beretika berdasarkan garis panduan yang telah ditetapkan oleh PPT.
Localized display only
Students should use GenAI prudently and ethically based on guidelines set by the higher education provider.
Teaching
A CDAE-hosted higher-education GenAI guideline advises higher education providers to prepare policies and rules for GenAI use in teaching and learning, research, and scholarly writing.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: higher education providers advised to prepare GenAI policies and rules
Original evidence
Evidence 1PPT disarankan menyediakan polisi dan peraturan penggunaan KBG dalam PdP, penyelidikan dan penulisan ilmiah bagi menyokong pembangunan pengetahuan dan kompetensi.
Localized display only
Higher education providers are advised to prepare policies and rules for GenAI use in teaching and learning, research, and scholarly writing.
Candidate claims
0 machine or needs-review claim
Official sources
3 source attribution
Garis Panduan Penggunaan Teknologi Kecerdasan Buatan Generatif (KBG) dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran (PdP) Pendidikan Tinggi
cdae.usm.my
Journal Policies | IJAPS
ijaps.usm.my
Kajian Malaysia Journal Policies
web.usm.my