Odense, Denmark

University of Southern Denmark (SDU)

University of Southern Denmark (SDU) is listed as QS 2026 rank =303. University of Southern Denmark (SDU) 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 Southern Denmark (SDU) is listed as QS 2026 rank =303. University of Southern Denmark (SDU) 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 Southern Denmark (SDU) 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-southern-denmark-sdu.json. The entity-level confidence is 92%. 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.

Claim coverage5 reviewedSource languageda, enPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/university-of-southern-denmark-sdu.json

Policy signals in this record

  • Evidence includes Academic integrity claims.
  • Evidence includes AI tool treatment claims.
  • Evidence includes Privacy claims.
  • Evidence includes Teaching claims.
  • Named AI services detected in public claims: Microsoft Copilot.
  • 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.
  • Privacy, sensitive-data, or security language appears in the public claim text.
Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedEvidence-backed claims5Reviewed5Candidate0Official sources2

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.

Coverage score85/100Coverage labelbroad public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence77%

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.

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.

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

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

For the SDU Artificial Intelligence bachelor's programme page, SDU states that students must disclose or clearly mark direct or edited material from generative AI in an assignment, and missing disclosure or marking will be treated as plagiarism.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence92%

Normalized value: generative_ai_material_must_be_disclosed_or_marked_missing_disclosure_treated_as_plagiarism

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Du skal oplyse om, eller markere det tydeligt, hvis du inkluderer materiale fra generativ AI direkte eller i redigeret form i din opgave. Manglende oplysning eller markering vil blive behandlet som plagiat.

Localized display only

Students must disclose or clearly mark direct or edited material from generative AI in an assignment; missing disclosure or marking will be treated as plagiarism.

Ai Tool Treatment

For the SDU Artificial Intelligence bachelor's programme page, SDU states that students may use generative AI when preparing written home assignments, including written home assignments with oral defence, bachelor's projects, final projects and theses, provided the use is clearly stated.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%

Normalized value: generative_ai_allowed_with_disclosure_for_written_home_assignments

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Du må anvende generativ AI, når du udfærdiger skriftlige hjemmeopgaver, herunder skriftlige hjemmeopgaver med mundtligt forsvar, bachelorprojekt, afgangsprojekt og speciale, dog skal du angive det tydeligt

Localized display only

Students may use generative AI when preparing written home assignments, including written home assignments with oral defence, bachelor's projects, final projects and theses, but must state this clearly.

Academic Integrity

For the SDU Artificial Intelligence bachelor's programme page, SDU states that students may not use generative AI for written in-person exams, other supervised exams, or oral exams, unless exceptions appear in the course description.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence91%

Normalized value: generative_ai_not_allowed_for_supervised_or_oral_exams_unless_course_exception

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Du må ikke anvende generativ AI i forbindelse med skriftlige stedprøver, andre prøver under opsyn eller i forbindelse med mundtlige prøver. Eventuelle undtagelser fra de ovenstående generelle regler vil fremgå af fagbeskrivelsen.

Localized display only

Students may not use generative AI for written in-person exams, other supervised exams or oral exams; any exceptions will appear in the course description.

Privacy

For the SDU Artificial Intelligence bachelor's programme page, SDU warns that generative AI tools are not necessarily GDPR compliant and that prompts must never contain sensitive personal or confidential information, including research or business secrets.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

Normalized value: generative_ai_prompts_must_not_contain_sensitive_or_confidential_information

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Generativ AI-værktøjer er ikke nødvendigvis GPDR kompatible. Derfor må prompts aldrig indeholde personfølsomme eller fortrolige oplysninger, herunder forsknings-/forretningshemmeligheder.

Localized display only

Generative AI tools are not necessarily GDPR compliant; prompts must never contain sensitive personal or confidential information, including research or business secrets.

Teaching

SDU Centre for Teaching and Learning says Copilot Chat is available to all students and employees via Microsoft licenses, but use of Copilot Chat for students must not be a prerequisite for passing a subject.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence88%

Normalized value: copilot_chat_available_but_not_required_to_pass_subject

Original evidence

Evidence 1
Copilot Chat is made available to all students and all employees at SDU via the Microsoft licenses. SDU Digital describes Copilot Chat as the counterpart to ChatGPT. Please be note that the use of Copilot Chat for the students must not be a prerequisite for them to be able to pass a subject.

Localized display only

Copilot Chat is available to students and employees via Microsoft licenses, but student use of Copilot Chat must not be a prerequisite for passing a subject.

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

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.

Last checkedMay 16, 2026Last changedMay 16, 2026Open change log

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.

Back to universities