← 政策图谱Atlas 申请环节Admissions 学生规范Guidelines
No.07 / 52 · 52 所大学 AI 使用政策比较研究No.07 of 52 · AI Use Policies at 52 Universities

Columbia

Columbia University哥伦比亚大学

来源层级 · 混合来源Source level · Mixed 6 / 12 项有明文规定6 of 12 provisions addressed 采集于 2026-08-21Accessed 2026-08-21 申请环节 · 仅本人写作/真实性要求Admissions · Authenticity requirement only

原文摘录Excerpt

选取标准:对高中读者最具引用价值的一句原文。Selected as the sentence most quotable for a high-school reader.

Absent a clear statement from a course instructor granting permission, the use of Generative AI tools to complete an assignment or exam is prohibited.

↓ 在原文中的位置↓ Where it appears in the source

十二项条款The twelve provisions

6 / 12

每项附该校原文中的依据语句,以及图谱 52 校中持同一立场的校数。颜色越深,规定越明确、越具约束力(不代表优劣);斜纹表示该来源未作表述。Each provision gives the supporting sentence and how many of the 52 universities in the atlas take the same position. Darker means more explicit and binding (not better); hatching means the source does not address it.

许可Permission使用许可由谁决定who decides whether AI may be used

默认规则Default rule

Default rule默认规则

作业未说明可否使用 AI 时,适用何种规则?When an assignment says nothing about AI, what applies?

默认禁止Prohibited by default主流口径MOST COMMON
Absent a clear statement from a course instructor granting permission, the use of Generative AI tools to complete an assignment or exam is prohibited.

编码说明CODING NOTESilence means no: generative AI on assignments or exams is barred unless the instructor clearly grants permission.

52 校中 19 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:默认禁止(19/45)19 of 52 take this position · most common: Prohibited by default (19/45)

课程规则优先Instructor override

Instructor override课程规则优先

任课教师的规定是否优先于校级规定?Does an instructor's rule take precedence over the institution's?

课程规则优先Course rule supersedes
Absent a clear statement from a course instructor granting permission, the use of Generative AI tools to complete an assignment or exam is prohibited.

编码说明CODING NOTEThe central default yields to the instructor: a clear course statement granting permission is what makes AI use allowed in a class.

52 校中 12 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:教师可定但有底线(33/45)12 of 52 take this position · most common: Instructor rules within limits (33/45)

分级许可Tiered scale

Tiered scale分级许可

是否设有分级的使用许可框架?Is there a graduated permission framework?

未作表述Not addressed

本项目采集的官方来源未就此条款作出表述;这不代表该校没有相关规定。The official source collected here does not address this provision; this does not mean the university has no rule on it.

52 校中 32 所同样未作表述32 of 52 are likewise silent

透明Transparency使用后须说明的内容what must be declared after use

披露要求Disclosure

Disclosure披露要求

使用 AI 是否须予披露?为强制还是建议?Must AI use be disclosed, and is that required or recommended?

建议披露Recommended
If permitted by the course, encourage students to acknowledge and cite any use of AI applications.

编码说明CODING NOTEAcknowledgement and citation appear only as something faculty are urged to encourage where AI is permitted, not as a student obligation.

52 校中 11 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:强制披露(20/46)11 of 52 take this position · most common: Required (20/46)

过程留证Process evidence

Process evidence过程留证

是否须保留草稿、提示词或编辑历史?Must drafts, prompts or edit history be kept?

未作表述Not addressed

本项目采集的官方来源未就此条款作出表述;这不代表该校没有相关规定。The official source collected here does not address this provision; this does not mean the university has no rule on it.

52 校中 33 所同样未作表述33 of 52 are likewise silent

责任Accountability错误与违规的责任归属responsibility for errors and violations

核实责任Verification duty

Verification duty核实责任

AI 输出有误或虚构引注时,由谁负责?Who is responsible when AI output is wrong or a citation is invented?

未作表述Not addressed

本项目采集的官方来源未就此条款作出表述;这不代表该校没有相关规定。The official source collected here does not address this provision; this does not mean the university has no rule on it.

52 校中 14 所同样未作表述14 of 52 are likewise silent

违规定性Integrity framing

Integrity framing违规定性

违规使用在纪律体系中如何定性?How is a violation classified in the disciplinary system?

明确等同抄袭Explicitly plagiarism
The unauthorized use of AI shall be treated similarly to unauthorized assistance and/or plagiarism.

编码说明CODING NOTEPhrased as an analogy — unauthorized AI use is handled like unauthorized assistance and/or plagiarism rather than defined as a separate offense.

52 校中 13 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:学术不端(28/44)13 of 52 take this position · most common: Academic integrity violation (28/44)

检测器证据Detector evidence

Detector evidence检测器证据

AI 检测工具的结果能否作为证据?Can AI-detection results be used as evidence?

不得作为唯一或主要证据Not sole or primary evidence主流口径MOST COMMON
As with other plagiarism detection tools, AI detection should be treated as a guideline and not a grading metric.

编码说明CODING NOTEDetection output is capped as a guideline only; the file also warns of misidentification risk and urges telling students how such tools may be used.

52 校中 8 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:不得作为唯一或主要证据(8/14)8 of 52 take this position · most common: Not sole or primary evidence (8/14)

边界Boundaries数据、版权与工具的限制limits on data, copyright and tools

数据与隐私Data & privacy

Data & privacy数据与隐私

哪些内容不得输入 AI 工具?What must not be entered into an AI tool?

未作表述Not addressed

本项目采集的官方来源未就此条款作出表述;这不代表该校没有相关规定。The official source collected here does not address this provision; this does not mean the university has no rule on it.

52 校中 21 所同样未作表述21 of 52 are likewise silent

机构工具Institutional tools

Institutional tools机构工具

学校是否指定或提供 AI 工具?Does the institution designate or provide AI tools?

未作表述Not addressed

本项目采集的官方来源未就此条款作出表述;这不代表该校没有相关规定。The official source collected here does not address this provision; this does not mean the university has no rule on it.

52 校中 28 所同样未作表述28 of 52 are likewise silent

理由Rationale规则的依据the stated basis for the rules

学习理由Learning rationale

Learning rationale学习理由

规则是否以“不得绕过应习得的能力”为依据?Are the rules grounded in not bypassing the skills to be learned?

一般性表述General statement
honestly presenting our work, respecting authorship, and striving not simply for answers but for understanding in the pursuit of our common scholastic goals

编码说明CODING NOTELearning language appears in the Honor Code pledge about seeking understanding, not as a stated rationale inside the AI policy itself.

52 校中 15 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:明确以学习目标为据(22/37)15 of 52 take this position · most common: Explicit learning-objective rationale (22/37)

补充信息Further detail

要求披露的内容What must be disclosed

正式引注Formal citation

申请环节的 AI 政策AI in the application

admissions/07-Columbia.md

该校招生办公室就申请人使用 AI 的公开表述,以本科新生申请为主。英文为逐字原文,中文为整理者的分析。证据状态描述找到了什么材料,不是宽严等级;未说明不代表允许。What this university's admissions office says about applicants using AI, chiefly for first-year undergraduate applications. English passages are verbatim; the Chinese is the collector's analysis. The evidence status describes what material was found, not how strict the rules are; silence does not mean permission.

证据状态Evidence status 本科本人写作/真实性要求(未证实细化 AI 边界)Own-work and authenticity requirements; no detailed AI boundaries verified

Columbia 本科新生页承认申请人会使用各种工具与支持,但要求全部材料为本人原创、体现本人声音,并提示入学后须遵守校内 Generative AI Policy;本科真实性声明列出撤销录取等可能后果。两页均未逐项规定 AI 用途。(2026-09-25 补充检索取得本科正文)

52 所大学对照 →All 52 compared →

来源信息Source information

  • 访问日期Accessed initial research 2026-09-24; computer-use recheck 2026-09-24–25; supplementary retrieval 2026-09-25 (Asia/Shanghai; per-source timestamps below).
  • 格式说明Format note Verbatim English excerpts are separate from Chinese analysis. Earlier blocked responses are retained as historical records; browser screenshots and accessibility text support the retry.
  • 适用范围Scope note 本科优先;S1/S2 此前为 403,已于 2026-09-25 在浏览器中取得正文。S3 为 GSAS 研究生真实性要求,没有明确 AI 条款。
  • 证据状态Evidence status authenticity-only
  • 校内/课程政策原文(范围不同)Original campus/course research (different scope) 07-Columbia.md

中文结论 / Findings

  • Columbia 本科新生申请页说明:申请人在申请过程中可以使用各种资源、工具和支持;但无论使用何种工具和支持,所有提交的申请材料须为本人原创、体现本人的声音。该页同时提示申请人了解入学后须遵守的 Honor Pledge & Honor Code 与 Generative AI Policy。[S1-Q1]
  • 本科真实性声明要求申请材料准确、真实地代表申请人本人及其成就,提交前须确认同意;提交不完整、不准确或不真实的材料,可能导致拒绝或撤销录取、取消学分、停学、开除或最终撤销学位,申请人可能被要求配合核验。[S2-Q1][S2-Q2]
  • 两页均未逐项列出 AI 的允许或禁止用途,也没有 AI 专门的处分条款,故归为 authenticity-only。S1 提到的 Generative AI Policy 链接至 Columbia 教务长的校内 AI 政策(与本站收录的校内政策为同一来源),适用于入学后的学生,不是申请规则。
  • GSAS 研究生页已核验:须证明材料准确真实,并可能被要求配合核验;不实材料可能导致一系列后果。该页未明确讨论 AI,不外推到本科。[S3]
  • S1/S2 在 2026-09-24 的访问均为 CloudFront 403,当时未取得正文;2026-09-25 在浏览器中正常加载取得正文,据此将证据状态由 no-verified-guidance 更新为 authenticity-only。

Official sources and selected original text

[S1] First-Year Applicants

  • 发布单位Publisher Columbia Undergraduate Admissions
  • 官方链接Official URL https://undergrad.admissions.columbia.edu/apply/firstyear
  • 页面日期Page date Not stated
  • 范围/性质Scope / authority undergraduate / official-admissions-instructions
  • 采集方式Retrieval full-text; accessed 2026-09-25 (Asia/Shanghai; supplementary retrieval, page loaded in a browser)
  • 日期说明Date note The page states no publication date; it announces first-year applications for Fall 2027. The access date is not an effective date.
  • 早先采集记录Earlier retrieval record 2026-09-24 — ordinary requests and the desktop Safari retry both returned CloudFront 403; no text was obtained or quoted at that time. A command-line request without a browser still receives 403, so the page was read only in a browser; no login or verification step was involved.

[S1-Q1] Tools and support; own original work and authentic voice

Students may utilize a wide range of resources, tools and support during the college admissions process. Regardless of the tools and support you may have used, we expect that all submitted application materials are your own original work and reflect your authentic voice. We encourage you to familiarize yourself with Columbia’s Honor Pledge & Honor Code and Generative AI Policy, which all enrolling students are expected to uphold.

中文说明:这是新生申请页 Accuracy & Authenticity 一栏的正文。它承认申请人会使用各种工具,但不区分具体用途,只要求提交材料为本人原创、体现本人声音;所提 Generative AI Policy 链接至 provost.columbia.edu 的校内 AI 政策,约束对象是入学后的学生。

[S2] Accuracy and Authenticity Statement

  • 发布单位Publisher Columbia Undergraduate Admissions
  • 官方链接Official URL https://undergrad.admissions.columbia.edu/accuracy-authenticity
  • 页面日期Page date Not stated
  • 范围/性质Scope / authority undergraduate / policy
  • 采集方式Retrieval full-text; accessed 2026-09-25 (Asia/Shanghai; supplementary retrieval, page loaded in a browser)
  • 日期说明Date note The page states no publication or update date; the access date is not an effective date.
  • 早先采集记录Earlier retrieval record 2026-09-24 — CloudFront 403 in both ordinary requests and the desktop Safari retry; no text was obtained or quoted at that time.

[S2-Q1] Accurate and authentic representation

Your application to Columbia (and all materials submitted as part of that application) must be an accurate and authentic representation of yourself and your accomplishments. Please read the full accuracy and authenticity statement below—you’ll be required to confirm that you understand and agree to these terms before you can submit your application.

[S2-Q2] Possible consequences and verification

Failure to submit complete, accurate, and authentic application documents consistent with these instructions may result in denial or revocation of admission, cancellation of academic credit, suspension, expulsion, or eventual revocation of degree. Applicants may be required to assist admissions staff and faculty involved in admission reviews in the verification of all documents and statements made in documents submitted by students as part of the application review process.

中文说明:本科真实性声明没有提到 AI;它规定的是一般的准确与真实要求、提交前的确认,以及不实材料的可能后果(may result in)。

[S3] Admissions Supporting Materials

  • 发布单位Publisher Columbia Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (GSAS)
  • 官方链接Official URL https://www.gsas.columbia.edu/content/admissions-supporting-materials
  • 页面日期Page date Not stated
  • 范围/性质Scope / authority graduate / official-admissions-instructions
  • 采集方式Retrieval partial; accessed 2026-09-24T15:56:20.655326+00:00
  • 日期说明Date note Not stated in the rendered page; browser acquisition time is not a publication date.
  • 浏览器说明Browser note GSAS 页首总说明成功显示,真实性要求属于研究生范围;该已读段落不含 AI 细则,推荐信等折叠子栏未逐一展开。
  • 早先采集记录Earlier retrieval record preserved in the source JSON retrieval_history; original error snapshots were not overwritten.

[S3-Q1] authenticity attestation

In addition, applicants will be required to attest to the accuracy and authenticity of all information and documents submitted.

[S3-Q2] graduate authenticity consequences

Failure to submit complete, accurate, and authentic application documents consistent with these instructions may result in denial or revocation of admission, cancellation of academic credit, suspension, expulsion, or eventual revocation of degree. Applicants may be required to assist with the verification of application materials.

使用边界(中文解读,非原文)

  • 允许/可用: 本科页承认申请人会使用各种资源、工具和支持,但没有列出哪些 AI 用途获准。[S1-Q1] 不能据此推出任何具体用途(如代写、翻译)被允许。
  • 禁止/不当: 提交非本人原创、不能体现本人声音的材料;提交不完整、不准确或不真实的材料。[S1-Q1][S2]
  • 未说明: 构思、校对、翻译、改写、披露与检测均未逐项说明;Generative AI Policy 约束入学后的学生,不是申请规则。
  • 可能后果: 拒绝或撤销录取、取消学分、停学、开除或最终撤销学位;原文为 may result in。[S2-Q2]

Limitations

  • 本科 S1/S2 于 2026-09-25 取得正文;两页均未标注发布日期,访问日不是生效日。
  • 未登录申请系统查看最终确认条款;研究生 S3 的真实内容不能泛化至本科。
  • 未绕过网站验证或访问控制,未使用课程政策填补申请要求。
  • 未查到或无法读取不等于允许;Common App 平台规则另列。
Search and retry log

以下保留初次搜索结果与本次桌面重试,早先的“受阻”不覆盖后续已成功取得的正文。

  • 检索/操作Query / action site.undergrad.admissions.columbia.edu AI artificial intelligence application essays
    • 结果Result Located the first-year admissions page and secondary summaries; official page fetch was blocked.
  • 检索/操作Query / action site.columbia.edu admissions application "AI" "essays" policy undergraduate authenticity
    • 结果Result Found school-specific and secondary leads, but no additional verifiable undergraduate AI text.
  • 检索/操作Query / action site.undergrad.admissions.columbia.edu application authenticity original work generative AI
    • 结果Result Located the official Accuracy and Authenticity Statement; live fetch and ordinary request both returned 403.
  • 检索/操作Query / action site.columbia.edu GSAS application artificial intelligence materials
    • 结果Result Located GSAS Admissions Supporting Materials; official graduate page also returned 403.
  • 检索/操作Query / action site.columbia.edu "admissions" "AI tools" "application" undergraduate
    • 结果Result Reconfirmed first-year and supplemental-materials leads. Secondary classifications were not adopted as Columbia policy.
  • 检索/操作Query / action Computer-use retry of previously blocked official pages (Safari / Peekaboo, 2026-09-24–25)
    • 结果Result S1: Safari 可见页仍为 CloudFront 403 ERROR;没有取得本科正文。;S2: Safari 可见页仍为 CloudFront 403 ERROR;没有取得本科真实性声明正文。;S3: GSAS 页首总说明成功显示,真实性要求属于研究生范围;该已读段落不含 AI 细则,推荐信等折叠子栏未逐一展开。
  • 检索/操作Query / action Supplementary retrieval of S1 and S2 (2026-09-25, pages loaded in a browser)
    • 结果Result 两页正常加载并取得正文:S1 的 Accuracy & Authenticity 一栏涉及工具使用与本人原创要求,S2 为本科真实性声明全文;引文逐字核对。据此将证据状态由 no-verified-guidance 更新为 authenticity-only。

官方原文The official text

univ/07-Columbia.md

本项目采集的该校官方文本。图谱引用的语句已高亮,句末标签注明对应条款,点击可返回该条款。The official text collected for this university. Sentences the atlas cites are highlighted; the tag after each names the provision it supports and links back to it.

来源信息Source information

  • 访问日期Accessed 2026-08-21
  • 格式说明Format note Relevant text extracted from official university webpages; navigation and site chrome removed. Wording is retained; layout may differ from the webpage.
  • 适用范围Scope note Combines central Provost policy with General Studies and Columbia College undergraduate guidance; unit-specific procedures are not generalized beyond their stated scope.
  • 用途说明Use note This is source material for comparison, not a translation or the school’s final high-school policy.

Columbia University Generative AI Policy — Student Guidance


The University supports the responsible use of AI, while recognizing that these novel tools have notable limitations and present new risks that must be taken into consideration when using these technologies.

For Students

The following guidance is shared to help support students in navigating the appropriate use of AI in their classes.

For Instructors

  • At minimum, it is recommended that faculty share clear expectations at the beginning of each semester through the syllabus, policy distribution, and class discussion on the appropriate use of AI tools. Faculty can encourage students to reach out when they need support rather than risking a potential academic integrity violation. If permitted by the course, encourage students to acknowledge and cite any use of AI applications.披露要求Disclosure
  • It is recommended to develop a course policy about the use of AI tools and what faculty consider to be appropriate and inappropriate in their classes.
  • Important note about AI detection tools: Since the introduction of AI tools, there has been a parallel rise in tools claiming accurate detection of AI-generated work. As with any form of detection software, there are risks of misidentification, which can have consequences in the classroom. These products are best used with careful consideration and as one of many ways to work with students. It is also important to include the use of these tools in any discussion with students around course policies, making clear why and how such services may be used in the course. As with other plagiarism detection tools, AI detection should be treated as a guideline and not a grading metric.检测器证据Detector evidence

Undergraduate Honor Code (related academic-integrity text)

We, the undergraduate students of Columbia University, hereby pledge to value the integrity of our ideas and the ideas of others by honestly presenting our work, respecting authorship, and striving not simply for answers but for understanding in the pursuit of our common scholastic goals学习理由Learning rationale. In this way, we seek to build an academic community governed by our collective efforts, diligence, and Code of Honor.

I affirm that I will not plagiarize, use unauthorized materials, or give or receive illegitimate help on assignments, papers, or examinations. I will also uphold equity and honesty in the evaluation of my work and the work of others. I do so to sustain a community built around this Code of Honor.