Pasadena, United States

California Institute of Technology (Caltech)

California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has 9 source-backed AI policy claims from 2 official source attributions. Review state: agent reviewed; 9 reviewed claims. Last checked May 5, 2026.

California Institute of Technology (Caltech) AI policy short answer

v1 public contract

California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has 9 source-backed AI policy claims from 2 official source attributions, including 9 reviewed claims. The record review state is agent reviewed; original-language evidence snippets, source URLs, confidence, and public JSON are preserved for citation. Last checked May 5, 2026. Discovery context: California Institute of Technology (Caltech) is listed as QS 2026 rank 10.

Citation-ready summary

As of this public record, University AI Policy Tracker lists California Institute of Technology (Caltech) as an agent-reviewed AI policy record last checked on May 5, 2026 and last changed on May 6, 2026. The record contains 9 source-backed claims, including 9 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/california-institute-of-technology.json. The entity-level confidence is 95%. 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 coverage9 reviewedSource languageenPublic JSON/api/public/v1/universities/california-institute-of-technology.json

Policy signals in this record

  • Evidence includes Teaching claims.
  • Named AI services detected in public claims: Grammarly.
  • Teaching, assessment, coursework, or syllabus-related language appears in the public claim text.
Policy statusReviewed evidence-backed recordReview: Agent reviewedEvidence-backed claims9Reviewed9Candidate0Official 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 score70/100Coverage labelmoderate public coverageReview: Machine candidateAnalysis confidence79%

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.

AI disclosure

California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has 1 source-backed public claim for ai disclosure; deterministic analysis status: required.

RequiredMachine candidateConfidence77%Evidence1Sources1

Privacy and data entry

No source-backed public claim about privacy or data-entry restrictions is present in this profile.

The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about personal, confidential, sensitive, regulated, or student data entry into AI tools.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Academic integrity

No source-backed public claim about academic-integrity treatment of AI use is present in this profile.

The current public tracker record does not contain claim evidence about AI use under academic integrity, misconduct, dishonesty, plagiarism, or cheating rules.

Not MentionedMachine candidateConfidence0%Evidence0Sources0

Approved tools

California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has 1 source-backed public claim for approved tools; deterministic analysis status: conditionally_allowed.

Conditionally AllowedMachine candidateConfidence77%Evidence1Sources1

Named AI services

California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has 1 source-backed public claim for named ai services; deterministic analysis status: unclear.

UnclearMachine candidateConfidence81%Evidence1Sources1

Research guidance

California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has 1 source-backed public claim for research guidance; deterministic analysis status: recommended.

RecommendedMachine candidateConfidence81%Evidence1Sources1

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

9 reviewed evidence-backed public claim

Teaching

Caltech admissions requires all Fall 2026 applicants to review its admissions guidelines on the ethical use of AI before submitting supplemental essays. Failure to comply may result in rescission of admission.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

原始证据

Evidence 1
All Fall 2026 applicants must review Caltech's guidelines on the ethical use of AI before submitting their supplemental essays. Failure to comply with the Ethical Use of AI guidelines may result in the rescission of your admission to Caltech.

Teaching

Caltech admissions prohibits applicants from copying and pasting directly from an AI generator, relying on AI-generated content to outline or draft essays, replacing their unique voice with AI-generated content, or translating essays via AI.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

原始证据

Evidence 1
What are some examples of unethical uses of AI for Caltech admissions essays? - Copying and pasting directly from an AI generator - Relying on AI generated content to outline or draft an essay - Replacing your unique voice and tone with AI generated content - Translating an essay written in another language

Teaching

Caltech admissions permits applicants to use AI tools like Grammarly or Microsoft Editor for grammar and spelling review of completed essays, to generate brainstorming questions or exercises, and to research the college application process.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

原始证据

Evidence 1
What are some examples of ethical uses of AI for Caltech admissions essays? - Using AI tools, like Grammarly or Microsoft Editor, to review grammar and spelling of your completed essays - Generating questions or exercises to help kick start the brainstorming process - Using AI to research the college application process

Teaching

In Caltech's Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) division, students may use generative AI tools only in ways explicitly allowed by the course instructor in the course materials. Any usage not specifically allowed should be assumed to be disallowed.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

原始证据

Evidence 1
At present, students submitting work for HSS courses may use generative AI tools only in ways that are explicitly allowed by the course instructor in the course materials. Any usage that is not specifically allowed should be assumed to be disallowed.

Teaching

The Caltech HSS generative AI policy applies to all assignments including major papers, exams, discussion board posts, reflections, and problem sets.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence95%

原始证据

Evidence 1
This policy applies to all assignments, including major papers and exams as well as smaller assignments like discussion board posts, reflections, and problem sets.

Teaching

Caltech admissions AI guidelines were approved by the Undergraduate Faculty Admissions and Graduate Studies committees for the Fall 2026 application cycle, and may evolve for future cycles.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

原始证据

Evidence 1
The Undergraduate Faculty Admissions and Graduate Studies committees convened and have approved of the following ethical guidelines for the use of AI in the Fall 2026 application cycle. As access to AI continues to grow and the technology evolves, so will our recommendations and expectations for future application cycles.

Teaching

Caltech HSS students are expected to follow specific course guidance for documenting any permitted use of generative AI tools.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence90%

原始证据

Evidence 1
Students will also be expected to follow specific course guidance for documenting any permitted use of these tools.

Teaching

At Caltech, AI use policies for student coursework are determined by individual departments and/or individual faculty, not by a university-wide policy.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence85%

原始证据

Evidence 1
Caltech students, faculty, and staff are guided by the Honor Code and policies of AI use as an academic tool by students will be determined by individual departments and/or individual faculty.

Teaching

The Caltech HSS generative AI policy states that generative AI may promote learning in some contexts and impede it in others, and instructors prioritize student learning in setting these policies.

Review: Agent reviewedConfidence85%

原始证据

Evidence 1
In our teaching, HSS instructors prioritize student learning, and this commitment drives our policies on the use of generative AI in the classroom. Generative AI may promote learning in some contexts and impede it in others.

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 5, 2026Last changedMay 6, 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