Policy presence
University of Limerick has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
Limerick, Ireland
University of Limerick has 5 source-backed public claims for policy presence; deterministic analysis status: unclear.
No source-backed public claim about AI disclosure or acknowledgement is present in this profile.
The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about disclosing, acknowledging, citing, or declaring AI use.
University of Limerick has 4 source-backed public claims for coursework; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
University of Limerick has 4 source-backed public claims for exams; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
University of Limerick has 1 source-backed public claim for privacy and data entry; deterministic analysis status: required.
University of Limerick has 2 source-backed public claims for academic integrity; deterministic analysis status: restricted.
University of Limerick has 2 source-backed public claims for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: required.
University of Limerick has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
University of Limerick has 1 source-backed public claim for teaching guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
University of Limerick has 1 source-backed public claim for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.
University of Limerick has 1 source-backed public claim for security and procurement; deterministic analysis status: required.
6 reviewed evidence-backed public claim
Academic Integrity
Normalized value: unauthorized_ai_use_breach_academic_integrity
Original evidence
Evidence 1The Academic Integrity Policy and the Procedures for Managing Allegations of Academic Misconduct, available on the UL Policy hub, indicate that it is a breach of academic integrity if AI is used in an unauthorised manner. In other words, it is the responsibility of the module leader/equivalent to decide and communicate the level of acceptable use of AI to students i.e. to determine what is authorised/unauthorised use.
Academic Integrity
Normalized value: genai_beyond_specifications_academic_misconduct
Original evidence
Evidence 1The use of Gen AI in assessment beyond the specifications of the module lead and/or programme lead is considered to be a form of academic misconduct, as described in the Academic Integrity Policy. Concerns relating to the unauthorised use of GenAI should be managed in accordance with the Procedures for Managing Allegations of Academic Misconduct.
Security Review
Normalized value: university_tool_use_requires_policy_compliance_cloud_governance
Original evidence
Evidence 1The use of any tool within the University must be compliant with the UL Data Protection Policy, IT Security Policy, and the Acceptable Usage Policy. All tools being used within the University must go through the appropriate approval processes. Tools with a cloud aspect must be approved through the Cloud Governance process.
Ai Tool Treatment
Normalized value: microsoft_copilot_preferred_platform
Original evidence
Evidence 1From a security and data integrity standpoint, if Gen AI is to be used by staff or students, the preferred platform is currently Microsoft Copilot, accessed through UL staff or student accounts. UL maintains a contractual agreement with Microsoft, a distinction not shared with other providers.
Research
Normalized value: genai_outputs_must_be_independently_verified
Original evidence
Evidence 1As a result, all outputs from Gen AI tools which we rely on for essential information or which will inform decisions or influence research must be independently verified.
Teaching
Normalized value: module_programme_level_ai_use_limits
Original evidence
Evidence 1Given the variety of offerings, disciplines and courses, the question of legitimate use of AI within academia, will inevitably be a local decision. That is, a module coordinator, programme lead or Head of Department, will dictate the limits of legitimate uses of AI within module or programme design, in keeping with the module or programme aims and content.
0 machine or needs-review claim
5 source attribution
ul.ie
ul.ie
ul.ie
ul.ie
ul.ie