University AI Policy Tracker
APIGitHub
语言
ENZHFRPL

变更日志

Indian Institute of Science

Source-backed change history with no release-to-release policy diff rows recorded yet; current claims, official sources, review state, and freshness remain visible across 0 public release records.

审核: 智能体已审核最后检查时间2026年5月15日最后更改时间2026年5月15日声明3来源2版本记录0
大学页面公开 JSON月度报告大学索引

变更摘要

当前公共记录的新鲜度与审核状态。

Indian Institute of Science currently has 3 source-backed claim records and 2 official source attributions. Latest tracked changed date: 2026年5月15日. No tracker diff rows are recorded in the latest public release.

此页面汇总了所有针对的公开版本差异记录 Indian Institute of Science。各个版本的发布快照仍可通过其特定发布的 URL 访问。

目前尚未记录该大学的版本间策略差异行。页面仍会追踪当前基于来源的主张、官方来源归属、审核状态、来源时效性以及用于发现和引用的公开JSON。

This tracker 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.

新提取的主张是追踪器的新增项，不一定是大学新发布的。来源快照变更显示了同一来源 URL 的哈希值变化，这本身并不代表政策发生了变化。

差异类别

此版本差异的语义分类。

政策文本0新提取的0证据0源快照0源文本0已添加来源0已移除来源0

组合版本差异

由该大学的所有公开发布快照生成的统一追踪器差异。

Indian Institute of Science combined release 差异

Initial tracked release. Lines represent public claim/evidence records entering the release snapshot.

+6-0
11 # Indian Institute of Science AI policy record
2+privacy: IISc faculty-facing AI guidance says entering data into an open AI tool should be treated like posting it publicly unless there are strong reasons to trust the tool, and says not to input sensitive, confidential, or restricted information into open AI tools.
3+Evidence (en, 704962d44534): Hence, entering data into an AI tool should be regarded as equivalent to posting it in public (unless there are strong reasons to trust that a specific tool will not use your queries). Do not enter, contribute, or otherwise input sensitive, confidential, or restricted information into open AI tools.
4+research: The IISc committee report recommends full, precise, and transparent disclosure of generative AI use in research publications, theses, and other Institute documents, with details depending on how the tools were used.
5+Evidence (en, 711c21895ddd): Use of generative AI should be fully disclosed, with attribution that is precise, transparent, and with adequate details. In particular, when one is using generative AI in publications, one should follow the guidelines of the Journal, Conference, or Publisher. For thesis and other Institute documents, one should follow the guidelines for publications given below.
6+teaching: An IISc committee report recommends 'allowed with attribution' as the default institutional policy for AI tool use in courses, while allowing instructors, departments, divisions, or programmes to tailor the baseline policy.
7+Evidence (en, 711c21895ddd): We recommend allowed with attribution as the default institutional policy. This default policy should be articulated via an appropriate channel, such as the Student Handbook. Furthermore, this default policy can be tailored at each level in the hierarchy: individual course instructor, department, division, or programme.

版本历史

0 public release diffs

声明变更

3 声明 条记录

privacy

IISc faculty-facing AI guidance says entering data into an open AI tool should be treated like posting it publicly unless there are strong reasons to trust the tool, and says not to input sensitive, confidential, or restricted information into open AI tools.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度94%证据1语言en

research

The IISc committee report recommends full, precise, and transparent disclosure of generative AI use in research publications, theses, and other Institute documents, with details depending on how the tools were used.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度93%证据1语言en

teaching

An IISc committee report recommends 'allowed with attribution' as the default institutional policy for AI tool use in courses, while allowing instructors, departments, divisions, or programmes to tailor the baseline policy.

审核: 智能体已审核置信度91%证据1语言en

源快照

2 source attributions