privacy
UCP guidance says copyright-protected material, personal data, and confidential information should be respected and not exported to externally managed platforms, servers, or cloud services that are not licensed by UCP.
审核: 智能体已审核
变更日志
Universidade Católica Portuguesa
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.
变更摘要
当前公共记录的新鲜度与审核状态。
Universidade Católica Portuguesa currently has 5 source-backed claim records and 1 official source attribution. Latest tracked changed date: 2026年5月20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 Universidade Católica Portuguesa。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。
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。
Universidade Católica Portuguesa combined release 差异
Initial tracked release. Lines represent public claim/evidence records entering the release snapshot.
+10-0
11 # Universidade Católica Portuguesa AI policy record
2+privacy: UCP guidance says copyright-protected material, personal data, and confidential information should be respected and not exported to externally managed platforms, servers, or cloud services that are not licensed by UCP.
3+Evidence (pt, 5670a767386b): Respeito pelo material protegido por direitos de autor, dados pessoais e informacoes confidenciais (incluindo propriedade intelectual nao protegida), nao os exportando para plataformas geridas por entidades externas (servidores e servicos cloud nao licenciados pela UCP).
4+academic_integrity: For theses, essays, or other documents submitted for evaluation or discussion, UCP guidance says the work should result from personal work and that text entirely produced by AI from simple prompts cannot be considered one's own work.
5+Evidence (pt, 5670a767386b): Os documentos (teses, ensaios ou outros) apresentados para avaliacao ou discussao devem resultar do trabalho pessoal, apresentando as suas ideias, argumentos e pontos de vista. E evidente que um texto que e inteiramente produzido pela IA atraves de uma simples serie de instrucoes nao pode ser considerado como trabalho proprio.
6+ai_tool_treatment: UCP guidance says professors, students, and researchers are obliged to be transparent about their use of generative AI in academic materials, including materials used for assessment and academic progression.
7+Evidence (pt, 5670a767386b): Os professores, estudantes e investigadores tem a obrigacao de serem transparentes quanto a utilizacao que fazem da IA generativa na producao de materiais academicos, por exemplo, em materiais utilizados para efeitos de avaliacao e progressao academica.
8+academic_integrity: UCP guidance states that professors, students, and researchers are responsible for materials they produce with AI tools and are obliged to verify that information and sources used in those materials are reliable and true.
9+Evidence (pt, 5670a767386b): Os professores, estudantes e investigadores sao responsaveis pelos materiais que produzem utilizando ferramentas de IA e, por conseguinte, tem a obrigacao de verificar se as informacoes e as fontes utilizadas nos seus materiais sao fiaveis e verdadeiras.
10+teaching: In teaching contexts, UCP guidance says students should explain, in an appendix to written work, the process that produced AI-induced elements or reasoning; if that is not possible in the text, an oral discussion is recommended as a complementary assessment element.
11+Evidence (pt, 5670a767386b): No contexto do ensino os estudantes devem, em apendice ao trabalho escrito, explicar o processo que deu origem aos elementos ou raciocinios induzidos pela IA. Caso nao seja possivel incluir esta explicacao no proprio texto, recomenda-se uma discussao oral do texto como elemento complementar de avaliacao.
版本历史
0 public release diffs
声明变更
5 声明 条记录
academic_integrity
For theses, essays, or other documents submitted for evaluation or discussion, UCP guidance says the work should result from personal work and that text entirely produced by AI from simple prompts cannot be considered one's own work.
审核: 智能体已审核
ai_tool_treatment
UCP guidance says professors, students, and researchers are obliged to be transparent about their use of generative AI in academic materials, including materials used for assessment and academic progression.
审核: 智能体已审核
academic_integrity
UCP guidance states that professors, students, and researchers are responsible for materials they produce with AI tools and are obliged to verify that information and sources used in those materials are reliable and true.
审核: 智能体已审核
teaching
In teaching contexts, UCP guidance says students should explain, in an appendix to written work, the process that produced AI-induced elements or reasoning; if that is not possible in the text, an oral discussion is recommended as a complementary assessment element.
审核: 智能体已审核
源快照
1 来源归属
Politica de integridade academica e cientifica: Carta de Principios no uso de IA
official_pdf Tracker checked at 2026年5月20日 02:00