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.
Cologne, Germany
University of Cologne
University of Cologne is listed as QS 2026 rank =272. University of Cologne has 5 source-backed AI policy claim records from 2 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Short answer
v1 public contract
University of Cologne is listed as QS 2026 rank =272. University of Cologne has 5 source-backed AI policy claim records from 2 official source attributions. The public record preserves original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, snapshot hashes, confidence, and review state.
Citation-ready summary
As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists University of Cologne as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 16, 2026 and last changed on May 16, 2026. The record contains 5 source-backed claims, including 5 reviewed claims, from 2 official source attributions. Original-language evidence snippets and source URLs remain canonical, with public JSON available at https://eduaipolicy.org/api/public/v1/universities/university-of-cologne.json. The entity-level confidence is 94%. This tracker is not legal advice, not academic integrity advice, and not an official university statement unless the linked source is the university's own official page.
Policy signals in this record
- Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
- Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
- Evidence includes Teaching claims.
- No specific AI service name is highlighted by the current public claim text.
- Disclosure, acknowledgment, citation, or attribution language appears in the public claim text.
- Teaching, assessment, coursework, or syllabus-related language appears in the public claim text.
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
University of Cologne has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
Coursework
University of Cologne has 2 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.
Exams
University of Cologne has 5 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
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
University of Cologne has 3 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: blocked.
Approved tools
University of Cologne has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: allowed.
Named AI services
University of Cologne has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: allowed.
Teaching guidance
University of Cologne has 1 source-backed public claim for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
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.
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
5 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
The University of Cologne Justitiariat says an exam or significant parts of an exam fully generated by AI are not an independent performance and are prohibited as deception.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_generated_exam_work_prohibited_when_no_independent_performance
Original evidence
Evidence 1Werden die gesamte Prüfung oder bedeutende Teile davon vollständig mittels KI generiert, handelt es sich nicht um eine selbstständige Leistung ... und ist somit verboten. Es liegt eine Täuschung vor.
Localized display only
If an entire exam or significant parts are generated completely by AI, the Justitiariat says it is not independent work and is prohibited as deception.
Academic Integrity
The University of Cologne Justitiariat says current AI text detector software is not sufficient evidence of deception by itself; additional circumstances are needed to prove a deception act.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_detector_results_not_sufficient_alone_for_deception
Original evidence
Evidence 1Aktuell gibt es jedoch keine verlässliche Methode KI-generierte Texte nachzuweisen. ... Diese stellen aber keinen ausreichenden Beleg für eine Täuschungshandlung dar. Für den Nachweis einer Täuschungshandlung müssen daher weitere Umstände hinzukommen.
Localized display only
The source says there is currently no reliable method to detect AI-generated text and detector software alone is not sufficient proof; further circumstances are needed.
Ai Tool Treatment
The University of Cologne Justitiariat says AI use in examinations is not objectionable under examination law when the student still produces their own independent work.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: ai_use_may_be_allowed_when_independent_work_remains
Original evidence
Evidence 1Wird KI hingegen so genutzt, dass noch eine eigene Leistung erbracht wird, spricht prüfungsrechtlich nichts gegen eine Nutzung von KI in Prüfungen.
Localized display only
Where AI is used in a way that still leaves an independent student performance, the Justitiariat says examination law does not speak against AI use in exams.
Academic Integrity
For term papers, theses, take-home exams, papers, and similar work, the University of Cologne Justitiariat says AI use is generally possible if independent work remains, and examiners may require disclosure of both the AI use and the related prompts depending on the use.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: takehome_ai_use_possible_with_independent_work_and_possible_prompt_disclosure
Original evidence
Evidence 1In Haus- und Abschlussarbeiten ist die Nutzung ... grundsätzlich möglich, solange noch eine eigenständige Leistung erbracht wird. ... Je nach Einsatz der KI kann durch die Prüfenden verlangt werden, dass nicht nur die Verwendung, sondern auch die zugehörigen Abfragebefehle (Prompts) offengelegt werden.
Localized display only
For term papers and theses, use is generally possible if independent work remains; depending on use, examiners may require disclosure of use and prompts.
Teaching
On its central teaching page, the University of Cologne says its current teaching-and-learning guidelines for generative AI are to address and explore AI-supported writing proactively and to use AI systems with maximum transparency.
Review: Agent reviewed
Normalized value: teaching_guidelines_proactive_ai_supported_writing_and_maximum_transparency
Original evidence
Evidence 1Mit Blick auf die Rolle von generativer KI im Kontext von Lehren und Lernen folgen wir aktuell zwei Leitlinien: 1. KI-gestütztes Schreiben ... sollte proaktiv platziert, verhandelt und exploriert werden 2. Der Einsatz von KI-Systemen muss mit maximaler Transparenz erfolgen
Localized display only
The central teaching page lists two current guidelines: proactively address AI-supported writing and ensure maximum transparency in AI-system use.
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
2 source attribution
Künstliche Intelligenz
verwaltung.uni-koeln.de
Wie kann ich generative KI im Kontext von Lehre und Lernen produktiv anwenden?
uni-koeln.de
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.