University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校
ai.policy.nestudy.cn/UNC
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.
AI should help you think, not think for you.
↓ 在原文中的位置↓ Where it appears in the source
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.
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?
Students must follow the syllabus and ask the instructor when unsure.
编码说明CODING NOTENo stated fallback for silent assignments; permission level is set per assignment and students are routed to the syllabus and the instructor.
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)
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?
Students must follow the syllabus and ask the instructor when unsure.
编码说明CODING NOTEPermission level is course/assignment-set, but general "must" duties (openness, no confidential data, evaluating output) are stated without exception.
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)
是否设有分级的使用许可框架？Is there a graduated permission framework?
UNC recommends four assignment-level permission categories:No AI Use: all work is completed independently without AI assistance.
编码说明CODING NOTEFour named assignment-level categories, from no use to full generative use; framed as a recommendation to faculty.
52 校中 5 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径：非正式分类（15/20）5 of 52 take this position · most common: Informal categories (15/20)
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?
“The use of AI must be open and documented.” Students should declare, explain, and cite AI use under the applicable standard.
编码说明CODING NOTEOpenness and documentation are stated as a must; declaring, explaining and citing are phrased as "should" and keyed to the applicable standard.
52 校中 20 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径：强制披露（20/46）20 of 52 take this position · most common: Required (20/46)
是否须保留草稿、提示词或编辑历史？Must drafts, prompts or edit history be kept?
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
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?
Students are “ultimately 100% responsible” for the final product.
编码说明CODING NOTETotal accountability for the final product, alongside a duty to evaluate output for bias, limitations, inaccuracies and false output.
52 校中 10 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径：须自行核实（17/38）10 of 52 take this position · most common: Verification required (17/38)
违规使用在纪律体系中如何定性？How is a violation classified in the disciplinary system?
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 8 所同样未作表述8 of 52 are likewise silent
AI 检测工具的结果能否作为证据？Can AI-detection results be used as evidence?
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
哪些内容不得输入 AI 工具？What must not be entered into an AI tool?
Personal or confidential data must not be entered into AI tools.
编码说明CODING NOTENamed categories - personal and confidential data - are barred from entry into AI tools.
52 校中 20 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径：禁止上传受限数据（20/31）20 of 52 take this position · most common: Restricted data prohibited (20/31)
是否规定版权及他人材料的使用？Does it regulate the use of copyrighted and others' material?
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 27 所同样未作表述27 of 52 are likewise silent
学校是否指定或提供 AI 工具？Does the institution designate or provide AI tools?
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
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?
“AI should help you think, not think for you.” Students must determine what is appropriate and accurate.
编码说明CODING NOTERules are justified by AI amplifying rather than replacing student thinking; full generative use is reserved for assignments designed to teach AI use.
52 校中 22 所与此相同 · 该条主流口径：明确以学习目标为据（22/37）22 of 52 take this position · most common: Explicit learning-objective rationale (22/37)
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.
已核验本科申请页希望个人文书展现本人声音；未在所查页面核验到申请人AI用途的具体规则。招生办自身使用AI的FAQ不能当作申请人可以使用AI的依据。
52 所大学对照 →All 52 compared →authenticity-only — 已核验本科申请页希望个人文书展现本人声音；未在所查页面核验到申请人AI用途的具体规则。招生办自身使用AI的FAQ不能当作申请人可以使用AI的依据。undergraduateofficial-advicefull-text; HTTP 200; 2026-09-24T15:06:58.124607+00:00[S1-Q1] personal voice
Your personal essay gives us the chance to hear your voice and see you as a whole person, not just a student. When you respond, we hope you’ll be yourself and sound like yourself.
undergraduateofficial-advicefull-text; HTTP 200; 2026-09-24T15:06:58.124787+00:00[S2-Q1] essay purpose
Your personal essay response helps us get to know you.
undergraduate-reviewer-sideofficial-faqfull-text; HTTP 200; 2026-09-24T15:06:58.124969+00:00[S3-Q1] reviewer-side AI, not applicant permission
UNC uses AI programs to provide data points about students’ common application essay and their school transcripts. Data points include writing style and grammar and the rigor of students’ coursework.
undergraduate-reviewer-sideofficial-indexfull-text; HTTP 200; 2026-09-24T15:06:58.125148+00:00[S4-Q1] reviewer-side FAQ scope
Does AI make decisions about whether an application is accepted, waitlisted, or denied?
已核验本科申请页希望个人文书展现本人声音；未在所查页面核验到申请人AI用途的具体规则。招生办自身使用AI的FAQ不能当作申请人可以使用AI的依据。
未核验到本科申请人使用AI的明确许可；个人文书应以本人声音呈现。[S1]
所查正文未列出申请人AI用途的明确禁令；不能把空白写成允许。
AI选题/脑暴、提纲、起草、改写、语法拼写、翻译、短答/补充材料、披露格式、AI检测及AI违规处罚均未在这些申请人指导正文中明确。
检索日：2026-09-24。搜索结果用于发现来源；只有成功实时取得的正文支持已核验规则。
site:admissions.unc.edu "AI" essaysite:admissions.unc.edu "essay" "own"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.
UNC recommends four assignment-level permission categories:
The resource also encourages educators to consider accessibility, equitable participation, and AI’s environmental costs.
以下为整理者所写的高中适用要点，非该校原文，不作为任何条款的依据。Below: the collector’s notes on application to high school — not the university’s text, and not used as evidence for any provision.