This policy governs the use of AI in Academic and Research Contexts. While a complete glossary is maintained in Section 4 (Definitions), the following core concepts are defined here to establish the immediate scope of this Policy:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) refers to a technology family that enables computers to perform a variety of advanced functions, including the ability to process visual cues, understand and translate spoken and written language, analyze data, and make complex recommendations. This technology family includes, but is not limited to, Generative AI (GenAI), Large Language Models (LLMs), and Machine Learning (ML).

AI Tools refer to any software, platform, device, or cloud service – whether Institute licensed, open-source, embedded within another product, or publicly accessible on the web – whose core functionality relies on an AI technology as defined above. This definition does not include Incidental AI or other categories of use that the AI Tool Approval Standard designates as excluded from review. This categorization may be updated by the Standard from time to time and does not require amendment of this Policy.

2.1 Guiding Ethical Principles and Safeguards

This policy is guided by the following ethical principles and safeguards:

• Accountability
• Safeguarding Protected Data
• Human Oversight and Safety
• Safeguards against Hallucination
• Fairness and Bias Mitigation
• Transparency
• Accessibility
• Protection against Prompt Injection Attacks

GT Community Members who employ AI tools in Academic and Research Contexts must act in a manner consistent with these guiding ethical principles, including measures to reduce the risk of misleading or adversarial outputs.

2.2 Responsible Use and Accountability

Through this policy and supporting artifacts, Georgia Tech maintains a standard for responsible AI use in Academic and Research Contexts. Because AI use can implicate additional Georgia Tech requirements and expectations, GT Community Members must comply with this policy in conjunction with all other relevant Policies, including but not limited to the Academic Honor Code, Faculty Handbook, AI in Administrative and Employment Contexts, and various information technology policies.

2.2.1 Accessing AI Tools

For work in Academic and Research Contexts, GT Community Members must use AI tools that are either an (1) Institutionally Approved AI Tool or a (2) Limited Use AI Tool as designated by a Local AI Point of Contact. GT Community Members can find approved tools and the process for requesting tool approval at the following URL: https://oit.gatech.edu/governance/ai/

This requirement does not apply to categories of use designated as Generally Permitted under the AI Tool Approval Standard, which may be used without individual approval; uses designated as Generally Prohibited under that Standard require a formal exception. For research activity conducted within a Georgia Tech controlled research computing environment (e.g., an on-premises cluster, air-gapped system, or GT-licensed cloud tenancy), review may occur at the level of that environment rather than for each individual AI model used within it, as further described in the AI Tool Approval Standard.

Please note that use of an approved AI tool must remain within its approved scope and for its intended, approved purpose.

A student’s use of free or personally licensed AI Tools in Academic and Research Contexts must be consistent with this policy and accompanying guidance. Institute review, approval, and inclusion in the Institute or a Local AI Registry are not required for a student’s personal, non-project exploration of free or personally licensed AI Tools using data the student is not otherwise obligated to protect under Institute policy, a funder or sponsor requirement, an IRB protocol, export control regulations, or a research data management plan. This exception turns on the nature of the data and the purpose of the use, not on the student’s employment status — a Graduate Research Assistant’s personal exploration on their own time qualifies on the same basis as any other student’s. Use of Georgia Tech-owned equipment does not, on its own, affect eligibility for this exception. Where a student’s personal exploration leads to a tool or model being proposed for use in a funded or advisor-directed research project, that use becomes subject to the Institute or Local AI Registry process, or the research environment clearance described in the AI Tool Approval Standard, from that point forward.

2.2.2 Safeguarding Protected Data

Consistent with other Georgia Tech policies and legal requirements, GT Community Members must safeguard any information that includes personally identifiable information (PII) or is categorized by the Institute as Protected Data.

GT Community Members must not submit any data categorized by the Institute as Protected Data or any data including personally identifiable information that can directly or indirectly identify another individual (for example, the combination of major, GPA, and academic term) into an AI Tool unless it is an approved scope for an approved AI Tool.

Even when using institutionally approved tools, GT Community Members must adequately safeguard this data from improper disclosure. Further discussion of safeguarding protected data and personally identifiable information (PII) may be found in the Guidance on the Use of AI in Academic and Research Contexts.

The obligations governing Protected Data apply whenever Protected Data is used as an input to AI, including where the resulting work product is the GT Community Member’s own intellectual property and including where a personal or personally licensed AI Tool is used.

2.2.3 Respecting Intellectual Property (IP) and Regulatory Requirements

Any AI usage that violates applicable laws, regulations, intellectual property rights, or employment standards and Policies is prohibited. GT Community Members must not use AI Tools to infringe upon third-party copyrights or expose the proprietary or protected information of Georgia Tech or any third parties.

2.2.4 Verifying the Accuracy After AI Use

GT Community Members should verify the accuracy of information generated by AI tools before using or relying on the information because AI output can be inaccurate, biased, hallucinated, or contain copyrighted material.

GT Community Members are responsible for the accuracy of any information they use or publish that includes AI-generated material.

Guidance on methods to verify AI-generated material for accuracy is addressed in the accompanying Guidance on the Use of AI in Academic and Research Contexts (to be linked).

2.2.5 Disclosure of AI Use

GT Community Members using AI tools in their academic, scholarly, and research products may need to disclose that AI has been used in their creation. Disclosure turns on the extent to which a work product reflects the GT Community Member’s own thoughts and judgment, rather than AI’s. Where AI interacts directly with a person without a human GT Community Member as an intermediary — such as an AI-based advising or teaching chatbot — disclosure of its machine-generated nature is required. Where a GT Community Member authors the substance of their academic, scholarly, or research work and uses AI only to assist with its expression, phrasing, or formatting, disclosure is generally not required. Where a GT Community Member remains substantively engaged in the work but AI’s contribution goes beyond such assistance, the magnitude of that use and the significance of the work product are factors to determine the necessity and appropriateness of disclosure. GT Community Members should not create the impression that output generated by AI tools is their own. GT Community Members should cite any quotations or paraphrasing derived from AI tools, and, consistent with the considerations above, should also disclose when AI has substantively contributed ideas to their work. The Institute may treat a failure to do so as a violation of the Academic Honor Code, an infringement of another’s IP rights, or an act of scientific or scholarly misconduct. Disclosure is discussed more fully in the accompanying Guidance for the Use of AI in Academic and Research Contexts.

For more information on academic integrity, GT Community Members should refer to the Academic Honor Code and resources maintained by the Office of Student Integrity.

For more information on research integrity, GT Community Members should refer to the Faculty Handbook provisions governing Scientific or Scholarly Misconduct and resources for the responsible conduct of research maintained by the Office of Research Integrity Assurance and the Office of Graduate and Postdoctoral Education.

2.2.6 AI in Academic Instruction

The Center for Teaching and Learning provides guidance and sample language to support instructors in communicating expectations regarding AI use. Instructors should provide students with clear guidance about permissible and impermissible uses of AI in their courses and assignments. Instructors should refer to the current Georgia Tech Catalog for requirements regarding syllabus content describing acceptable student conduct as it relates to the use of AI. Before instructors may use AI outputs to inform grades, provide formal feedback, or create any official record, instructors should use Human Oversight to verify the appropriateness and correctness of the use.

The disclosure and citation obligations described in Section 2.2.5 apply to scholarly and research products and do not extend to course administration or instructional materials, such as syllabi, schedules, rubrics, assignments, and exams. This exclusion does not affect the obligation to verify the accuracy of AI-generated content and to apply Human Oversight before such materials inform grades, feedback, or official records.

2.2.7 AI in Research Practices and Scholarly Communication

GT Community Members should use independent Human Oversight and validation appropriate to the discipline and context in their research when using any AI Tools.

GT Community Members should verify any AI outputs before they inform research processes or data analysis.

GT Community Members and their teams should use the Guidance on the Use of AI in Academic and Research Contexts (to be linked) to inform the use and disclosure of AI contributions to research. GT researchers must also comply with applicable funder and publisher policies relevant to the work.

GT Community Members should not create the impression that output generated by AI tools is their own. Accordingly. GT Community Members should appropriately disclose the use of AI to produce or substantively inform Scholarly Communications consistent with the Guidance on the Use of AI in Academic and Research Contexts and applicable funder and publisher policies relevant to the work.

2.3 Data Protection and Privacy

In addition to the provisions noted above in section 2.2.2, GT Community Members using AI in Academic and Research Contexts must comply with applicable laws, regulations, and Institute policies governing student and institutional information. Collection, use, storage, and transmission of such information in connection with AI must be authorized and limited to the purposes of instruction or research. Additional information about data protection and privacy at Georgia Tech may be found on the pages for Data Governance, Cybersecurity, and Privacy.

GT Community Members should promptly report any suspected AI misuse or ethical concerns, but must immediately report any associated data incidents or breaches to the Georgia Tech Cybersecurity team (email soc@gatech.edu or call 404-385-2927).

2.4 Education and Awareness

Georgia Tech provides ongoing education on AI risks, ethics, responsible use, compliance, and policy awareness. The AI Governance Program, in conjunction with the academic and research divisions, coordinates education offerings and participation expectations.

GT Community Members must maintain compliance with any required training.

2.5 Institutional Oversight and Accountability

This policy establishes the Institute AI Governance Program to coordinate AI governance for Academic and Research Contexts. The AI Governance Program is led by an AI Governance Officer appointed by the AI Governance Committee. The members of the AI Governance Committee shall be appointed annually by the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and the Executive Sponsors, which include the Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs (EVPAA), Executive Vice President for Research (EVPR), the Executive Vice President for Administration and Finance (EVPAF). The AI Governance Officer will collaborate with designees of the Executive Sponsors and together, provide Institute-wide coordination, alignment, and escalation for AI governance within the boundaries of this policy.

The AI Governance Program maintains a published process to receive and route questions and complaints related to AI use in Academic and Research Contexts, coordinating resolution through existing Institute mechanisms. The AI Governance Program coordinates and enables AI governance across the enterprise, while decisions that only impact academics and research remain under the authority of the EVPAA and EVPR and their designees, respectively.

2.5.1 Unit Oversight, Accountability, and AI Points of Contact

Executive Sponsors, members of the President's Cabinet, and Deans must designate one or more Local AI Points of Contact for their division, college, or library. School chairs, vice provosts, and other unit leaders may also designate one or more Local AI Points of Contact to support their unit, or utilize the support network provided by the unit to which they report.

Local AI Points of Contact serve as a support network and local liaisons to help GT Community Members navigate the Institute's AI requirements. For faculty and researchers, these contacts act as a resource to assist in evaluating proposed AI tools in accordance with the AI Tool Approval Standard. They help determine whether a tool can be quickly approved locally as a Limited Use AI Tool, or if its proposed academic use requires routing for an enterprise-level Institute review.

The formal authorization, registration, and administrative management of AI Tools by Local AI Points of Contact are governed by the AI in Administrative and Employment Contexts Policy.

2.5.2 Monitoring for Compliance

The Institute maintains appropriate monitoring and compliance processes consistent with existing policies. The administrative responsibilities for monitoring and maintaining AI audit trail records are governed by the AI in Administrative and Employment Contexts Policy.

2.5.3 Policy Maintenance and Review

The AI Governance Program shall establish a regular schedule to formally review and update all institutional AI governance Policies and supporting artifacts. The AI Governance Program must review this AI Policy annually, or more frequently as needed, to reflect emerging legal, technological, or organizational changes.