EPFL – École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne

EPFL rules (Lex 1.3.3, Article 4) require that all assessment material that is not the student’s personal and original contribution must be recognizable as such. Therefore, the use of AI tools should be disclosed in a statement. Check your course’s specific AI policy or ask your instructor how to formulate this statement.

证据定位: lines 89-89; Transparency

Submitting AI-generated content as your own work without proper attribution is considered AI plagiarism.

证据定位: lines 90-90; Transparency / What you should avoid

Tools that specifically aim to detect whether content was AI-generated (e.g., turnitin) are not admissible as stand-alone evidence of AI plagiarism due to their high risk of false positives (e.g., Farrelly & Baker, 2023). Other irrefutable evidence must be presented to substantiate claims of academic dishonesty.

证据定位: lines 98-98; AI plagiarism

Use of AI tools in ways that are not authorized or failure to attribute their use will be treated as a potential case of cheating and will be forwarded to the EPFL Legal Affairs team

证据定位: lines 53-53; Setting clear expectations

In the case of any suspected fraud and/or cheating, the teacher writes a report which they then send to the section director and Legal Service together with evidence of the compromising or suspected item or behaviour.

证据定位: lines 87-87; Fraud and cheating

Always check your course’s specific AI policy. If none exists, ask your instructor. You should not use AI during exams or assessments unless explicitly allowed.

证据定位: lines 73-73; How to use AI in coursework

EPFL rules (Lex 1.3.3, Article 4) require that all assessment material that is not the student’s personal and original contribution must be recognizable as such. Therefore, the use of AI tools should be disclosed in a statement. Check your course’s specific AI policy or ask your instructor how to formulate this statement.

证据定位: lines 89-89; Transparency

Directive concernant l’utilisation, la citation et la référence des sources LEX 1.3.3 du 1er janvier 2013, état au 1er septembre 2026

证据定位: physical page 1; lines 1-3; Header p. 1

Article 4 Emprunts et apport personnel 1 Tout travail scientifique et académique doit impérativement distinguer : a. les emprunts faits à d’autres travaux (art. 5), de b. l’apport personnel et nouveau de l’autrice ou de l’auteur. 2 La réutilisation de données ou de code élaborés par des tiers doit être explicitement mentionnée. 3 Tout emprunt (y compris les publications, les données de recherche et les codes) doit être reconnaissable comme tel dans le travail, par une citation directe et/ou une paraphrase appropriée, ainsi que par les références nécessaires à la source. 4 Si les emprunts ne sont pas clairement indiqués dans le travail, l’autrice ou l’auteur laisse à penser qu’il s’agit de

证据定位: physical page 2; lines 60-80; Article 4; excerpt offset 0–700

son apport personnel et nouveau. Cela constitue un plagiat (art. 8).

证据定位: physical page 2; lines 60-80; Article 4; excerpt offset 700–769

Article 9 Entrée en vigueur La présente directive entrée en vigueur le 1er janvier 2013 et a été révisé au 1er septembre 2026 (version 2.2). Au nom de la Direction de l'EPFL : La Présidente : Anna Fontcuberta I Morral Le Directeur des Affaires juridiques Simon Brunschwig

证据定位: physical page 3; lines 174-187; Article 9

The english version is provided for information purposes only and has no legal force. Only the French version is legally binding.

证据定位: lines 49-49; Polylex search preamble

LLMs do not have the ability to be accountable for the content they generate. Thus, they cannot be listed as authors/co-authors on a manuscript, according to Swiss law (Swiss Copyright Act, Chapter 2 Art. 6 – https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1993/1798_1798_1798/en)

证据定位: lines 82-82; Writing and publishing / Authorship

The LLM you used, what you used it for, and how, must be disclosed in the manuscript. Make sure you adhere to the policies on the use of AI-generated content of your publisher of choice (e.g. Nature Editorial Policies – AI).

证据定位: lines 83-83; Writing and publishing / Disclosure

Elsevier “Open access publications with a CC-BY license can be used with any kind of available AI tool, may be used for the development and training of any AI tool and the results including the content can be freely shared. Licensed content (closed publications) or Open Access publications with a restrictive CC-BY-NC-ND license, where Elsevier owns all rights or some key rights such as the right to create derivatives, may be used with closed versions of AI tools that do not train the algorithm, do not learn from the input or incorporate the input in the AI tool (e.g. Open AI “non-learning” subscription version ChatGPT Team). The use of the closed version may be subject to a fee and / or rest

证据定位: lines 94-99; Using licensed electronic resources with AI / Elsevier agreement; excerpt offset 0–700

rictions. with open versions of learning AI tools or to develop your own AI tool or platform, provided that it is used in a secure, user-controlled environment (i.e. self-hosted in an on-premises environment or in an environment hosted externally solely for use by Participating Institutions or Authorised Users). Results generated or platforms developed with the help of AI may be published and made available for research and teaching, provided that they do not contain or reproduce content from closed or CC-BY-NC-ND publications. Links to closed publications are permitted. The commercial use of AI-generated content or platforms is prohibited.”

证据定位: lines 94-99; Using licensed electronic resources with AI / Elsevier agreement; excerpt offset 700–1349

There are two ways of opposing a grade or notified failure: a procedure at EPFL, called request for reassessment, and a procedure outside of EPFL, through the Commission de recours interne des EPF, called appeal.

证据定位: lines 58-58; Reassessment request and appeal

The deadline to start these procedures is within 10 days for the request for reassessment and within 30 days for the appeal. Both deadlines are calculated from the reception, at the address given by the student, of the grade or notified failure (transcripts sent by post).

证据定位: lines 61-61; Reassessment request and appeal / Deadlines

If a mark is contested on the grounds of an error in correction or assessment, the teacher responsible will be asked to check the correction. He/she is the only person authorized to make any corrections. If he/she modifies the mark, he/she must justify the modification to the program’s direction, who will check whether the reason is justified. If the result is contested on the grounds of a formal defect, the matter is referred to Legal Affairs, who can only conclude that the examination should be cancelled if the formal defect is significant and has been shown to have had an impact on the result.

证据定位: lines 59-59; Reassessment request and appeal / Grounds

The costs are charged ahead of the procedure by EPFL and the appeals authority. They are refunded only if the student’s claim succeeds.

证据定位: lines 60-60; Reassessment request and appeal / Costs

Since there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ rule regarding the use of AI in assessment, it is recommended that teachers make explicit to students what kind of use is not legitimate in their course, and what rules accompany the use of AI tools.

Never input confidential, private or personal information about yourself or others into these tools. Always reflect first on the nature of the information you are using, because once you enter it into one of these tools, it’s no longer confidential.

However, enterprise licenses such as Microsoft 365 Copilot via your EPFL account are currently not a secure solution for processing regulated data, because no data processing agreement has been signed by EPFL that would guarantee that data protection measures align with institutional needs or with Swiss legislation on personal data protection.

证据定位: lines 89-89; Data Protection

aiaiapps are cristallized prompts for teachers that facilitate the generation of quizzes, exercises and image descriptions.

证据定位: lines 76-76; Tools / aiaiapps

A collection of crystalized prompts in the form of user-friendly apps for education.

证据定位: lines 8-8; Home apps

The Center for Digital Education (CEDE) develops tools to facilitate the process of EPFL teachers adopting genAI for their teaching.

证据定位: lines 71-71; Tools

Always check your course’s specific AI policy. If none exists, ask your instructor. You should not use AI during exams or assessments unless explicitly allowed.

证据定位: lines 73-73; How to use AI in coursework

AI powered chatbot and semantic search of EPFL’s academic content. Ask it to help you solve and exercise and it will suggest relevant video lectures and relatred excercises.

证据定位: lines 72-74; Tools / EPFL Chatbot card

Always check your course’s specific AI policy. If none exists, ask your instructor. You should not use AI during exams or assessments unless explicitly allowed.

证据定位: lines 73-73; How to use AI in coursework

EPFL's guidance says enterprise Microsoft 365 Copilot is available via an EPFL account, but is not currently secure for regulated data because EPFL has no signed data-processing agreement.