← 政策图谱Atlas 申请环节Admissions 学生规范Guidelines
No.05 / 52 · 52 所大学 AI 使用政策比较研究No.05 of 52 · AI Use Policies at 52 Universities

Cornell

Cornell University康奈尔大学

来源层级 · 院系或项目级Source level · Unit or school 7 / 12 项有明文规定7 of 12 provisions addressed 采集于 2026-08-21Accessed 2026-08-21 申请环节 · 本科 AI 明文边界Admissions · Explicit undergraduate rules

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.

Document your writing process by keeping copies of drafts before, during, and after use of GenAI.

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

十二项条款The twelve provisions

7 / 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?

交由教师决定Instructor decides, no default
Before using GenAI for writing a course paper or a thesis or dissertation, ask your professor/advisor for their policy. You can use this ELSO handout listing ways GenAI can be used when writing to ground the conversation.

编码说明CODING NOTEStudents are told to ask the professor or advisor for their policy before using GenAI in writing; no fallback rule is stated for a silent syllabus.

52 校中 14 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:默认禁止(19/45)14 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?

教师可定但有底线Instructor rules within limits主流口径MOST COMMON
The Center for Teaching Innovation has created guidance to help faculty clearly communicate their expectations around the use of generative AI and what would constitute a violation in their classes.

编码说明CODING NOTEFaculty define what counts as a violation in their own classes, but the quoted Code of Academic Integrity and the lecture written-permission rule still apply.

52 校中 33 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:教师可定但有底线(33/45)33 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 you used GenAI during the writing process, when submitting the paper, include a written statement disclosing your use of GenAI.

编码说明CODING NOTEA submission disclosure statement is stated in imperative form, but the entire list is framed as steps to protect yourself, not as an institutional requirement.

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?

建议留证Recommended主流口径MOST COMMON
Document your writing process by keeping copies of drafts before, during, and after use of GenAI. To do this, number each draft and save it as a separate file.

编码说明CODING NOTEStudents are told to keep numbered drafts, saved chat links or screenshots, and notes on GenAI use, as steps to protect themselves rather than a mandate.

52 校中 18 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:建议留证(18/19)18 of 52 take this position · most common: Recommended (18/19)

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?

须自行核实Verification required主流口径MOST COMMON
Check any references and any quotes, paraphrases, and summaries provided by GenAI before using them in your paper.

编码说明CODING NOTEStudents are told to check every reference, quote, paraphrase and summary GenAI supplies before it enters the paper.

52 校中 17 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:须自行核实(17/38)17 of 52 take this position · most common: Verification required (17/38)

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?

学术不端Academic integrity violation主流口径MOST COMMON
steps to take if they are charged with an academic integrity violation for use of generative AI.

编码说明CODING NOTEMisuse of GenAI runs through the academic integrity process up to a primary hearing; unpermitted lecture recording is explicitly named a violation.

52 校中 28 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径:学术不端(28/44)28 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?

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 38 所同样未作表述38 of 52 are likewise silent

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?

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 15 所同样未作表述15 of 52 are likewise silent

补充信息Further detail

要求披露的内容What must be disclosed

使用范围与程度Extent of use原始草稿Original drafts提示词PromptsAI 输出内容AI output

申请环节的 AI 政策AI in the application

admissions/05-Cornell.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 本科申请 AI 明文边界(效力见来源)Explicit AI boundaries for undergraduate applicants (force as stated in the source)

Cornell 本科明确允许 AI 查学校、构思文书题目、检查已完成文书的语法拼写;明确不接受 AI 列提纲、起草/代写、翻译另一语言的文书及生成必需作品集内容。一般撤录政策另行适用。

52 所大学对照 →All 52 compared →

来源信息Source information

  • 访问日期Accessed 2026-09-24 (Asia/Shanghai)
  • 格式说明Format note Short, verbatim English excerpts from live official webpages; whitespace and layout may be normalized. Chinese analysis is separate. Saved readable source bodies may retain some menus or comments; URL and retrieval metadata are in research/group1.json, not inserted into source text.
  • 适用范围Scope note Cornell undergraduate admissions. The official AI FAQ, Receiving Help policy and general revocation policy are considered together. No graduate rule is generalized to undergraduate applicants.
  • 证据状态Evidence status explicit-undergraduate-ai — official undergraduate FAQ and application-help policy give specific allowed and unacceptable AI uses.
  • 校内 AI 政策原文Original campus-AI source file 05-Cornell.md (separate scope; not an admissions rule).
  • 用途说明Use note 本文件供来源比较与核验,不构成学校新增规定;未说明不代表许可。

关键发现(中文)

  • 本科 FAQ 明确允许 AI 调研学校、头脑风暴文书题目、检查已经写完文书的语法和拼写。[S1]
  • AI 列提纲、起草或代写文书、将另一种语言写成的文书翻译过来、生成必需作品集图像,均被 FAQ 列为不合伦理;正式 Receiving Help 政策进一步以申请回答及作品集作品表述禁止范围。[S1][S2]
  • 选题建议不等于由别人替你决定题目;Receiving Help 也不接受他人写/重写回答、替选题目或套用网上文书模板。提交申请即确认没有采用不可接受的帮助。[S2]
  • 一般撤录政策允许因欺诈、虚假陈述、重大遗漏等撤销录取,甚至在到校后;这是一般规则,不是“凡用 AI 就自动撤录”。[S3]

Official sources

1. [S1] Can prospective students use generative AI to help with their application to Cornell?

[S1-Q1]

If you choose to use generative AI in your application process, we expect you to do so ethically. Ethical uses of generative AI include researching colleges, brainstorming essay topics, and reviewing the grammar and spelling of your completed essays. Unethical uses include (but are not limited to) using generative AI to outline, draft, or write your essays; translating an essay written in another language; and creating images for a required portfolio.

中文说明:FAQ 出版单位明确为 Cornell Undergraduate Admissions,并链接正式 Receiving Help 政策。保存正文时删除了 HTML 中 display:none 的浏览器提示和 preview-mode 通用横幅;不是把真实政策正文删掉,也没有把隐藏模板当作页面尚未发布的证据。

2. [S2] Receiving Help with Your Application

[S2-Q1]

Help that is ethical and acceptable to utilize in your application process includes: Using AI tools to research specific colleges or help you build your college list. Working with your college counselor or a community-based organization staff member to brainstorm essay topics. Asking a friend or family member to read your essays and give feedback or check for grammatical errors.

[S2-Q2]

However, there are unethical – and therefore unacceptable – forms of application assistance as well. These include: Having AI tools outline, draft, or write your application responses, translate your responses from another language, or create works for a required portfolio. Having any person write or rewrite your essays/responses. Having someone else choose your essay topics. Using a template you found online to write your essay.

[S2-Q3]

When you hit “submit” on your Common Application, you’re agreeing that you have not used unacceptable, unethical support resources to complete your application.

中文说明:正式本科政策页。允许清单里只有查学校明确提到 AI,构思和校对例子以真人为主体;AI 构思与语法检查的明确许可来自 [S1],不能只凭 [S2] 自行换成 AI。禁止清单则直接点名 AI 列提纲、写作、翻译和作品集。

3. [S3] Admission Revocation Policy

  • 官方来源Official source https://admissions.cornell.edu/policies/admission-revocation-policy
  • 发布单位Issuing unit Cornell University Office of Undergraduate Admissions
  • 页面日期Page date not stated
  • 适用范围Scope undergraduate; general admission-revocation wording
  • 来源性质Authority kind policy
  • 采集时间Retrieved 2026-09-24T23:06:50+08:00; full-text (ordinary public HTTP request)

[S3-Q1]

Cornell University reserves the right to revoke an offer of admission under certain circumstances, and at any time, including after a student is in attendance at the university. Authority to revoke admission rests with the admitting academic unit. Admission may be revoked for fraud, misrepresentation, material omission of fact, failure to meet a condition of admission (including but not limited to satisfactorily completing any schoolwork in progress at the time an offer of admission is extended and upholding high standards of character in all activities within and outside of the classroom), or any other pre-attendance misconduct.

中文说明:本科招生网站发布的一般撤录政策;引文保留 “reserves the right”“may” 和适用事由,不承诺某种 AI 使用一定撤录。政策其余正文还列有调查与决策程序,本地保存的是完整正文。

Permitted / prohibited / not stated(按用途)

  • 明确允许:AI 调研学校/建立学校清单、文书题目头脑风暴、检查已完成文书的语法和拼写。[S1][S2]
  • 明确不接受:AI 生成提纲、起草或写申请回答;AI 翻译另一语言的回答;AI 生成必需作品集作品(FAQ 特别举图像)。[S1][S2]
  • 仍由本人负责:题目最终选择、经历、观点与实际措辞;校对许可不是 AI 实质重写许可。[S2]
  • 未单独说明:具体 AI 披露模板、AI 检测流程、可接受语法改动的字数/比例阈值、研究补充材料内的 AI 细则。不能由这些留白推定可使用。
  • 后果:一般欺诈/虚假陈述撤录政策适用;没有在已引 AI 清单中宣布所有违规均自动撤录。[S3]

Research limitations

  • 本文件不适用 Cornell Tech 或其他研究生项目;未把本科较严格翻译规则推广到全校。
  • 本科 FAQ 与 Receiving Help 的允许例子细致程度不同;本文合并阅读而非把其中某页未提到的内容视为反向禁止。
  • 官方页面没有明确发布日期;访问日期不等于生效日。
  • web_fetch 对 Cornell 的 Policies 索引抽取不完整,改用普通 requests 读取链接并全文抓取子页面;S2/S3 的 main 标签只有标题,保存时改用完整页面 body 提取。
  • 额外探查研究生 URL https://gradschool.cornell.edu/admissions/application-steps/important-application-policies/use-of-generative-ai-in-graduate-admissions-applications 返回 403;未确认正文与页面是否实际存在,未作为证据。
Search log
  • 检索日期Research date 2026-09-24, Asia/Shanghai. Search results were leads only; findings above are based on retrieved official body text.
  1. 检索Query site.cornell.edu admissions application "AI" essays
    • 结果Result 找到本科 FAQ 并全文核验 [S1]。
  2. 检索Query site.admissions.cornell.edu "Receiving Help" application policy AI
    • 结果Result 第二组定向检索正式政策;从公开 Policies 索引找到 [S2][S3] 并抓取正文。
  3. 检索Query Direct public fetch: https://admissions.cornell.edu/policies
    • 结果Result 普通 requests 读取索引,确认 Receiving Help 与 Admission Revocation 两个官方链接。
  4. 检索Query Direct public fetch: Cornell Graduate School AI-policy candidate URL
    • 结果Result 补充探查研究生候选页面遭 403,未确认内容,未用于任何政策结论。

官方原文The official text

univ/05-Cornell.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

  • 来源层级Source level院系或项目级 —— 仅适用于某一学院、项目或系Unit or school — applies to one school, programme or department only
  • 抽取审计Extraction audit轻微修正(审计员修正 1 处)Minor corrections (1 corrections by the auditor)
  • 官方来源Official sourceEnglish Language Support office
    https://elso.as.cornell.edu/ai-and-academic-integrity
  • 访问日期Accessed 2026-08-21
  • 格式说明Format note Text extracted from the official university webpage; navigation and site chrome removed. Wording is retained; layout may differ from the webpage.
  • 适用范围Scope note Student guidance from the English Language Support Office in Arts & Sciences, grounded in Cornell’s academic-integrity rules; it is not one universal course permission policy.
  • 用途说明Use note This is source material for comparison, not a translation or the school’s final high-school policy.

AI and Academic Integrity — Student Guidance


Cornell’s Code of Academic Integrity states that “a student shall in no way misrepresent his or her work.” Sample violations include “knowingly representing the work of others as one’s own” and “using, obtaining, or providing unauthorized assistance on examinations, papers, or any other academic work.”

Use of AI during the writing process has created a fuzzy area for academic integrity, an area that many in the academic community are struggling to clarify. At Cornell, many faculty and offices are striving to figure out how to best protect academic integrity while also protecting students. The Center for Teaching Innovation has created guidance to help faculty clearly communicate their expectations around the use of generative AI and what would constitute a violation in their classes.课程规则优先Instructor override

The English Language Support office has created guidance for students so that they can take students before and during the writing process to protect themselves from charges of inappropriate use of generative AI, steps to take if they are questioned about their use of generative AI, and steps to take if they are charged with an academic integrity violation for use of generative AI.违规定性Integrity framing

Students who have questions about use of generative AI during the writing process may make an appointment with our GenAI Writing tutors , with whom they can have private and open conversations about using the technology.

How to protect yourself from being charged with inappropriate use of generative AI

  • Before using GenAI in a class to translate and/or transcribe a course lecture (which is a type of course recording), be sure to get written permission from your professor知识产权IP & copyright (you may use this form that ELSO developed). Recording a course lecture without written permission is an academic integrity violation.
  • Before using GenAI for writing a course paper or a thesis or dissertation, ask your professor/advisor for their policy. You can use this ELSO handout listing ways GenAI can be used when writing to ground the conversation.默认规则Default rule
  • Document your writing process by keeping copies of drafts before, during, and after use of GenAI.摘录Excerpt To do this, number each draft and save it as a separate file.过程留证Process evidence You can also keep notes in which you document how you use GenAI during a particular project.
  • Save the chats you used to work on your paper. For ChatGPT, select "Share" and keep a link to your chat. Ask other chatbots how a chat can be saved. If all else fails, take a screenshot or print a chat using "Save as PDF" for the destination.
  • Check any references and any quotes, paraphrases, and summaries provided by GenAI before using them in your paper.核实责任Verification duty
  • Be prepared to describe the ways that you used GenAI during the writing process.
  • If you used GenAI during the writing process, when submitting the paper, include a written statement disclosing your use of GenAI.披露要求Disclosure See a sample disclosure statement here .
  • Be prepared to orally discuss any content included in your paper.

What to do if a professor asks if you inappropriately used generative AI

  • Stay calm. Understand that professors are seeing a lot of student writing generated by AI and their sensitivity is heightened.
  • Be honest. See this conversation as an opportunity to get clarity on your professor’s policies on using generative AI.
  • Share with your professor evidence of the ways in which you used and didn’t use generative AI. If you don’t have this evidence with you (i.e. you don’t have your laptop handy), ask if you could set up another meeting. If the professor agrees to this, ask the professor what kinds of materials they would like you to bring.

What to do if a professor reports you with an Academic Integrity Violation

  • If you are reported for an academic integrity violation, you will be asked to attend a primary hearing. Read more about this process here .
  • Prepare for the primary hearing by gathering evidence of the ways in which you used and didn’t use generative AI. This evidence may include copies of drafts, screenshots of gen AI chats, and copies of other papers that show evidence of your writing style. If you met with an ELSO tutor during your writing process, you may ask the ELSO Presenting and Writing Tutoring Coordinator (Nathan Lindberg) for verification that you made an appointment and a summary of the tutor’s session note. If you met with an ELSO faculty member during your writing process, you could ask the faculty for a letter describing the content of the meeting.
  • Be honest during the primary hearing. See this as an opportunity to learn more about academic integrity, generative AI, and academic writing.
  • If you are found guilty and disagree with this finding and/or the penalties, you have the right to appeal (and have ten days to do so). Read more about this process here: https://deanoffaculty.cornell.edu/faculty-and-academic-affairs/academic-integrity/guidelines-for-students/ .

Developed September 2025

  • About/Contact Information Open subnav ELSO Info Sessions ELSO Listserv Faculty, Staff and Tutors Give to ELSO GAI Statement Opportunities
  • Courses and Programs Open subnav Courses Workshop Series English Conversation Hours Summer Writing Support
  • Tutoring Open subnav Tutoring on Pronunciation Tutoring on Writing and Presenting Write-Ins
  • Resources Open subnav Additional English Language Support Additional Writing Support Support for Faculty AI and Academic Integrity Support for Graduate Fields Writing and GAI