University AI Policy Tracker
APIGitHub
Language
ENZHFRPLESNLMSJAKOPTARRUDEITCSTRFISVDANBHULTIDVITHFAHEHIURBNUKELZH-HANT

New Haven, United States Last checked

Yale University

Independent · Open access · Not an official university page

What would you like to check?

Search universities
Can I use AI for my coursework?Conditionally AllowedDo I need to disclose AI use?RequiredCan I upload sensitive data?RestrictedWhich tools can I access?Conditionally Allowed
Use in ChatGPT ↗Before you submitAdvice and precautionsRecord updates ↓

Explore the current record by topic

Coursework

Conditionally Allowed

Instructors specify permitted AI use in course syllabi. Students must not use AI tools in coursework or evaluations unless explicitly authorized.

Official source ↗

Exams

Conditionally Allowed

Permissibility of generative AI during exams is determined by individual instructors in course policies and syllabi; AI use is not permitted unless authorized by the instructor. There is no university-wide blanket permission or mandatory in-writing format unless specified in the course syllabus.

Official source ↗

Disclosure

Required

GSAS students must properly attribute AI-generated text used in submitted work and follow faculty-specific rules for other AI assistance. They must be able to explain their research and writing process, including providing draft history when requested. This is a GSAS rule, not a uniform disclosure rule for every Yale student.

Official source ↗

Privacy & sensitive data

Restricted

Yale's September 2023 Provost guidance says not to enter confidential, legally restricted, Moderate-risk or High-risk Yale data into an AI tool. The current institutional directory separately lists service-specific data classifications, including Clarity for High-risk data with special ePHI and DUA conditions, while Radiate web search is limited to Low-risk data. Follow the service's access restrictions and applicable data agreements; these classifications do not settle authorization for every dataset.

Official source ↗

Institutional tools

Conditionally Allowed

Yale provides institutional tools including Microsoft Copilot, Clarity, and Claude Enterprise, and permits Zoom AI Companion with account controls. Tool availability does not confer academic assessment permission.

Official source ↗

Research & publication

Restricted

Yale Library guidance requires that use of generative AI with licensed electronic resources must comply with vendor license agreements, which often prohibit commercial text and data mining or feeding content into external AI models.

Official source ↗
More reviewed record topics

Academic integrity & procedures

Restricted

Inserting AI-generated content into submitted work without proper attribution constitutes an academic integrity violation. Under GSAS 2026–2027 standards, graduate students must consult relevant faculty before using AI in coursework or research and must be prepared to articulate and demonstrate their drafting process if requested, but there is no universal requirement for all students to log every prompt. Disciplinary responses are managed by the Committee on Regulations and Discipline; written student statements are ordinarily due within two weeks.

Official source ↗

Teaching guidance

Recommended

Yale Poorvu Center guidance and Provost directives affirm that instructors have full authority within each course to determine whether and how students may use AI when completing assignments. Faculty members are expected to provide clear instructions on permitted AI use and requirements for attribution, and instructors are encouraged to adapt Yale model policies for their specific course and learning goals.

Official source ↗

Security & procurement

Review required

Yale Provost guidance asks that individuals considering acquiring an AI product please conduct an initial review of the tool to ensure it conforms to institutional security requirements. Poorvu Center guidance specifies that classroom AI use must comply with FERPA, and instructors cannot require students to create external accounts for tools Yale does not directly license.

Official source ↗

Before you submit

Do

  • Review each course syllabus and consult instructors regarding permitted AI writing assistance before submission.
    Requirement in this scope
  • For GSAS academic work, acknowledge and attribute permitted generative AI assistance as required by the applicable GSAS standards and course rules.
    Requirement in this scope
  • GSAS standards expect students to be able to demonstrate and articulate the process behind their work, including research, drafting and composition history; this is not a requirement to retain every AI chat log.
    Source guidance

Don’t

  • Do not use generative AI tools in coursework or examinations unless explicitly authorized by the instructor.
    Requirement in this scope
  • Read Yale's September 2023 Provost warning about entering protected Yale data into any AI tool alongside the current institutional directory's service-specific restrictions; do not treat directory access as authorization for every dataset.
    Source guidance
  • Do not use Clarity Radiate for Moderate or High Risk data, as search queries are transmitted to external models.
    Source guidance
AI use questioned?Investigation, possible outcomes and appeal

AI use questioned?

Yale University

Provost Generative AI Guidance; GSAS Personal Conduct and Academic Integrity Standards; GSAS Disciplinary Committee Procedures; Yale Library Electronic Resource Licensing Advice. Institution audit remains PARTIAL.

Investigation & response

Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.

Original evidence and scope

Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.

draft-claim-yale-gsas-discipline-committee-procedure
Student statement. Students will be asked to respond in writing to the allegation. Providing a written statement allows the student to present their perspective on events and any broader context or other information that will help the Coordinating Group and committee to better understand the situation. Written statements will ordinarily be due to the secretary two weeks after the student receives notification of the charge. In their statement, students should admit or deny allegations against them. In some cases, the student may admit responsibility for some portion of the allegations and deny others.

Procedures: Student statement response deadline

Official university source ↗
A hearing panel will have a minimum of four members, including the secretary (or dean’s designate) who does not typically vote. Voting members of the panel must include the chair or vice chair, one faculty member and/or dean of the graduate school, and one student member. The presence of three voting members will constitute a quorum, provided that at least one student member is present. A majority vote will decide questions before the hearing panel. In the event of a tie vote, the secretary or other committee designee will cast a deciding vote.

Procedures: Section A.2.c Hearing panel & quorum

Official university source ↗
Determination. At the conclusion of the hearing, the committee will meet in an executive session to decide whether the conduct reported in fact occurred and whether it contravened the standards cited in the charge. The committee’s decision will be made by a simple majority of voting members present. The secretary will vote only in the event of a tie. This decision will be made by a preponderance of the evidence, voted on by secret ballot, and will be final.

Procedures: Section C.8 Determination & quorum voting

Official university source ↗
If the committee decides that the conduct reported occurred and that it contravened the standards cited in the charge, based on the seriousness of the contravention, the committee will also recommend a sanction, if any, to the dean. The dean may either impose the recommended sanction or a lesser or greater one at their discretion.

Procedures: Section C.8 Sanction recommendation to dean

Official university source ↗
The Committee of Review will receive written appeals from a student or students who have been assigned a penalty. An appeal must be received by the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the decision of the committee and may be sent to the secretary. To review such appeals, the Committee of Review will have access to all the written records of the committee.

Procedures: Section C.10.2 Appeal deadline to Committee of Review

Official university source ↗

Possible outcomes

Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.

Original evidence and scope

Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.

draft-claim-yale-gsas-discipline-committee-procedure
Student statement. Students will be asked to respond in writing to the allegation. Providing a written statement allows the student to present their perspective on events and any broader context or other information that will help the Coordinating Group and committee to better understand the situation. Written statements will ordinarily be due to the secretary two weeks after the student receives notification of the charge. In their statement, students should admit or deny allegations against them. In some cases, the student may admit responsibility for some portion of the allegations and deny others.

Procedures: Student statement response deadline

Official university source ↗
A hearing panel will have a minimum of four members, including the secretary (or dean’s designate) who does not typically vote. Voting members of the panel must include the chair or vice chair, one faculty member and/or dean of the graduate school, and one student member. The presence of three voting members will constitute a quorum, provided that at least one student member is present. A majority vote will decide questions before the hearing panel. In the event of a tie vote, the secretary or other committee designee will cast a deciding vote.

Procedures: Section A.2.c Hearing panel & quorum

Official university source ↗
Determination. At the conclusion of the hearing, the committee will meet in an executive session to decide whether the conduct reported in fact occurred and whether it contravened the standards cited in the charge. The committee’s decision will be made by a simple majority of voting members present. The secretary will vote only in the event of a tie. This decision will be made by a preponderance of the evidence, voted on by secret ballot, and will be final.

Procedures: Section C.8 Determination & quorum voting

Official university source ↗
If the committee decides that the conduct reported occurred and that it contravened the standards cited in the charge, based on the seriousness of the contravention, the committee will also recommend a sanction, if any, to the dean. The dean may either impose the recommended sanction or a lesser or greater one at their discretion.

Procedures: Section C.8 Sanction recommendation to dean

Official university source ↗
The Committee of Review will receive written appeals from a student or students who have been assigned a penalty. An appeal must be received by the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the decision of the committee and may be sent to the secretary. To review such appeals, the Committee of Review will have access to all the written records of the committee.

Procedures: Section C.10.2 Appeal deadline to Committee of Review

Official university source ↗

Review & appeal

Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.

Original evidence and scope

Under GSAS Committee on Regulations and Discipline procedures, students are asked to respond in writing to an allegation ordinarily within two weeks. Hearings are conducted by a panel of at least four members (including a usually non-voting secretary; three voting members including at least one student form a quorum). Decisions are made by secret ballot on a preponderance of the evidence; the committee recommends a sanction to the dean, who determines the penalty. Disciplinary decisions take immediate effect. Students may submit a written appeal to the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the committee decision. The Committee of Review (three members) may decline action or request reconsideration; on reconsideration, the committee cannot find culpability if previously exonerated or impose a more severe penalty. Scope is restricted to GSAS; research misconduct is referred under Research Misconduct procedures; undergraduate cases follow separate Yale College Executive Committee procedures.

draft-claim-yale-gsas-discipline-committee-procedure
Student statement. Students will be asked to respond in writing to the allegation. Providing a written statement allows the student to present their perspective on events and any broader context or other information that will help the Coordinating Group and committee to better understand the situation. Written statements will ordinarily be due to the secretary two weeks after the student receives notification of the charge. In their statement, students should admit or deny allegations against them. In some cases, the student may admit responsibility for some portion of the allegations and deny others.

Procedures: Student statement response deadline

Official university source ↗
A hearing panel will have a minimum of four members, including the secretary (or dean’s designate) who does not typically vote. Voting members of the panel must include the chair or vice chair, one faculty member and/or dean of the graduate school, and one student member. The presence of three voting members will constitute a quorum, provided that at least one student member is present. A majority vote will decide questions before the hearing panel. In the event of a tie vote, the secretary or other committee designee will cast a deciding vote.

Procedures: Section A.2.c Hearing panel & quorum

Official university source ↗
Determination. At the conclusion of the hearing, the committee will meet in an executive session to decide whether the conduct reported in fact occurred and whether it contravened the standards cited in the charge. The committee’s decision will be made by a simple majority of voting members present. The secretary will vote only in the event of a tie. This decision will be made by a preponderance of the evidence, voted on by secret ballot, and will be final.

Procedures: Section C.8 Determination & quorum voting

Official university source ↗
If the committee decides that the conduct reported occurred and that it contravened the standards cited in the charge, based on the seriousness of the contravention, the committee will also recommend a sanction, if any, to the dean. The dean may either impose the recommended sanction or a lesser or greater one at their discretion.

Procedures: Section C.8 Sanction recommendation to dean

Official university source ↗
The Committee of Review will receive written appeals from a student or students who have been assigned a penalty. An appeal must be received by the Committee of Review no later than five business days after the decision of the committee and may be sent to the secretary. To review such appeals, the Committee of Review will have access to all the written records of the committee.

Procedures: Section C.10.2 Appeal deadline to Committee of Review

Official university source ↗

AI tools & access

  • Claude EnterpriseOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    Faculty and staff submit request via Software at Yale with charging COA. Students cannot request directly; school or department must sponsor license.

  • Copilot ChatOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Log in with a Yale email address; students use the student Copilot entry point.

  • GitHub CopilotOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    Request access through Yale ServiceNow.

  • Microsoft 365 CopilotOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    Request access through Yale ServiceNow.

  • Microsoft 365 Copilot StudioOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    Requires a Yale ServiceNow access request for Microsoft 365 Copilot.

  • Power BI CopilotOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Follow Yale's Power BI Copilot access path.

  • Google Gemini for EducationOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Log in with a Yale Google Workspace (EliApps) account.

  • NotebookLMOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Log in with a Yale Google Workspace (EliApps) account.

  • Azure AIOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    Submit an AI request review through Yale Data.

  • BeaconAIOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    YaleSites users request BeaconAI for their eligible site.

  • Clarity PlatformOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Use the Clarity Platform Chat service.

  • ConsensusOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Create an account with an eligible Yale email or Yale Google Workspace account.

  • PortkeyOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Use Yale's Portkey overview and access path.

  • Teams PremiumOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    Request access through Yale ServiceNow.

  • Zoom AI CompanionOfficial recommendationRecorded as allowed in the source scope

    Enabled by default for users with a Zoom account.

  • AWS BedrockOfficial recommendationConditions apply

    Submit an AI request review through Yale Data.

  • ChatGPTTool mentioned; institutional access not establishedAvailability not established
  • Microsoft Copilot ChatTool mentioned; institutional access not establishedAvailability not established
Record updatesLast 90 days · Recorded updates: 6

Updates to this site's reviewed record, not confirmation that the university changed its policy.

Some records have no verified date. See the full history.

  1. Page update

    Other records · Page update

    View revision

    Loading revision…

  2. Record maintenance

    Other records · Record maintenance

    View revision

    Loading revision…

  3. Site correction

    Academic integrity · Records involved: 1 (1 corrected / adjusted)

    View revision

    Loading revision…

Reviewed claims

31

Official sources

11 official URLs; 12 source attributions and their captured versions retained.

Academic Dishonesty - Handbook for Instructors

catalog.yale.edu

University official source

catalog.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

Academic Dishonesty - Handbook for Instructors · 2026-05-10T12:22:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

6c6927aa24affa230b5ceb4af47b3a08a59066c510d1513e0dce0673d3266c71

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Academic Integrity and Detection

poorvucenter.yale.edu

University official source

poorvucenter.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

Academic Integrity and Detection · 2026-05-10T12:20:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

bbac849b9594a8b457ebd0c8224ec47bebaf0c91521ec2c599bf202c7faeff14

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

AI Guidance for Students

poorvucenter.yale.edu

University official source

poorvucenter.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

AI Guidance for Students · 2026-05-10T12:18:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

d1e2823bce0f284b85c61bdc815a4681c5a623d73b9a0e856aac9941b498942f

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

AI Guidance for Teachers

poorvucenter.yale.edu

University official source

poorvucenter.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

AI Guidance for Teachers · 2026-05-10T12:17:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

a3ce5f7b43936c954d51d5f07634d49a5e05b4eff8d060d9d98b82dd99ccc91c

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Guidelines for the Use of Generative AI Tools

provost.yale.edu

University official source

provost.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

Guidelines for the Use of Generative AI Tools · 2026-05-10T12:15:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

cf53048e544a5a3db3804780e6f5dee6ac15d4c8dc4fadf2ade6fbb0d858019c

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Guiding Principles for Teaching and Learning with AI

poorvucenter.yale.edu

University official source

poorvucenter.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

Guiding Principles for Teaching and Learning with AI · 2026-05-10T12:16:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

2cd0d46503913e910859a794afe1c351afa0cde76be5e070238fab0f331128a7

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Protecting Student Privacy and Your Data

poorvucenter.yale.edu

University official source

poorvucenter.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

Protecting Student Privacy and Your Data · 2026-05-10T12:21:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

43854432f3c071ffabf46609ad4e79ebe87c3e9a6cd35e1ec63d8872fe38900c

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Yale's AI Tools and Resources

ai.yale.edu

University official source

ai.yale.edu

Hash and captured version

Yale's AI Tools and Resources · 2026-05-10T12:19:00.000Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

688e40fe08017e2e91008e9857dbd02a5828c7093f086e0d9eb4a1e517de516d

Yale’s AI Tools and Resources | AI at Yale · 2026-07-15T20:04:43.896Z

Representation unspecified in this historical record; do not assume an original-file hash.

529ab9fe322c198cc342617552a496d0a19b6c299f365139c6556e93d7a0f3e5

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Now Available: Claude Enterprise Licenses at Yale | AI at Yale

ai.yale.edu

University official source

AI at Yale / Yale Information Technology Services (ITS)

Hash and captured version

Now Available: Claude Enterprise Licenses at Yale | AI at Yale · 2026-10-18T22:44:09Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

cf97813121b444bfef3b9930bacab4de3df8f5c86ca60a8da14b16d122a2c045

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Personal Conduct and Academic Integrity Standards < Yale University

catalog.yale.edu

University official source

Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (GSAS), Yale University

Hash and captured version

Personal Conduct and Academic Integrity Standards < Yale University · 2026-10-18T22:44:09Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

60a34db804984939b942a115805a86e92e807df6117fff835519f322dff20acd

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗

Introduction - AI Guidance for Library Resources - Research Guides at Yale Library

guides.library.yale.edu

University official source

Yale University Library

Hash and captured version

Introduction - AI Guidance for Library Resources - Research Guides at Yale Library · 2026-10-18T22:44:09Z

SHA-256 of the retained capture file bytes.

e82ee378da39deef132e51ff4bad7dfb04160da5fc4953c173494e2862293588

Hashes identify a captured version; they do not establish current policy or review approval.

Official source ↗
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
qs20-24-v6-r7-20261020
Dataset release
public-release-20260924-002
Correction published
Student snapshot
Not published
Current reviewed JSON · Historical baseline

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.

          Current reviewed JSON
          Questions students ask

          Questions students ask

          Can I use AI for my coursework?

          Instructors specify permitted AI use in course syllabi. Students must not use AI tools in coursework or evaluations unless explicitly authorized.

          View evidence →
          Do I need to disclose AI use?

          GSAS students must properly attribute AI-generated text used in submitted work and follow faculty-specific rules for other AI assistance. They must be able to explain their research and writing process, including providing draft history when requested. This is a GSAS rule, not a uniform disclosure rule for every Yale student.

          View evidence →
          Can I upload sensitive data?

          Yale's September 2023 Provost guidance says not to enter confidential, legally restricted, Moderate-risk or High-risk Yale data into an AI tool. The current institutional directory separately lists service-specific data classifications, including Clarity for High-risk data with special ePHI and DUA conditions, while Radiate web search is limited to Low-risk data. Follow the service's access restrictions and applicable data agreements; these classifications do not settle authorization for every dataset.

          View evidence →
          Which tools can I access?

          Yale provides institutional tools including Microsoft Copilot, Clarity, and Claude Enterprise, and permits Zoom AI Companion with account controls. Tool availability does not confer academic assessment permission.

          View evidence →
          What are the examination rules?

          Permissibility of generative AI during exams is determined by individual instructors in course policies and syllabi; AI use is not permitted unless authorized by the instructor. There is no university-wide blanket permission or mandatory in-writing format unless specified in the course syllabus.

          View evidence →
          What rules apply to research and publication?

          Yale Library guidance requires that use of generative AI with licensed electronic resources must comply with vendor license agreements, which often prohibit commercial text and data mining or feeding content into external AI models.

          View evidence →
          What counts as academic misconduct?

          Inserting AI-generated content into submitted work without proper attribution constitutes an academic integrity violation. Under GSAS 2026–2027 standards, graduate students must consult relevant faculty before using AI in coursework or research and must be prepared to articulate and demonstrate their drafting process if requested, but there is no universal requirement for all students to log every prompt. Disciplinary responses are managed by the Committee on Regulations and Discipline; written student statements are ordinarily due within two weeks.

          View evidence →
          What guidance applies to teaching?

          Yale Poorvu Center guidance and Provost directives affirm that instructors have full authority within each course to determine whether and how students may use AI when completing assignments. Faculty members are expected to provide clear instructions on permitted AI use and requirements for attribution, and instructors are encouraged to adapt Yale model policies for their specific course and learning goals.

          View evidence →
          What security and procurement requirements apply?

          Yale Provost guidance asks that individuals considering acquiring an AI product please conduct an initial review of the tool to ensure it conforms to institutional security requirements. Poorvu Center guidance specifies that classroom AI use must comply with FERPA, and instructors cannot require students to create external accounts for tools Yale does not directly license.

          View evidence →
          When was this record checked?

          Record checked:

          Record version →
          Which official sources support these rules?Official source →
          Where can I read the full evidence?

          31 · Full policy evidence

          Full policy evidence →