變更紀錄
追蹤器歷史：0 筆發布紀錄。
目前公開紀錄的時效性與審查狀態。
5 條當前主張；4 個官方來源。
此頁面整合了所有公開發布版本差異，適用於 Karl-Franzens-Universitaet Graz。個別發布快照仍可從其特定版本 URL 取得。
此追蹤器歷史紀錄中無已記錄的更新。
本追蹤器並非法律意見，亦非學術誠信建議；除非所連結的來源為大學本身的官方網頁，否則亦不構成大學的正式聲明。
新擷取的主張屬於追蹤器的新增項目，不一定是大學新近發布的內容。來源快照的變更表示同一來源網址的雜湊值有所改變，本身並不等同於政策變動。
此次版本差異的語意分類。
僅顯示具備完全符合 Claim ID 的已記錄比較。
此追蹤器歷史紀錄中無已記錄的更新。
追蹤器歷史：0 筆發布紀錄。
現行主張紀錄：5。
The Vice-Rectorate orientation guidelines say teachers are responsible for deciding which text-generating AI systems may be used in what form, and that the scope and form of use should be stated in the course description before the course starts.
For assessed writing, University of Graz guidance says AI use should be transparent: students should label and document AI use and follow the AI guidelines of the relevant course.
The University of Graz does not set a blanket prohibition on AI technologies for writing assignments; lecturers decide for each course which text-generating AI systems may be used and how.
The University of Graz identifies uniGPT for employees and studiGPT for students as data-protection-friendly university chatbots accessed with a personal Uni Graz account.
University of Graz teacher guidance says that when generative AI is used in assessments, teachers should make the permitted form and extent of use and the documentation form transparent in advance.
官方來源紀錄：4。
official_guidance 追蹤器檢查於 May 18, 2026, 4:25 AM
official_pdf 追蹤器檢查於 May 18, 2026, 4:26 AM
official_guidance 追蹤器檢查於 May 18, 2026, 4:25 AM
official_guidance 追蹤器檢查於 May 18, 2026, 4:25 AM
