{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-11-07T02:55:54.494Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"academic-integrity","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"core","evidence":"","year":"2026","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":3,"coverage":{"cases":3,"countries":3,"languages":4,"unknownLocation":0,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":3,"contextualRelations":0,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2026-lulea-university-disciplinary-board-suspends-two-students-over-unauthorised-ai-use-with-invented-references","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Disciplinnämnden vid Luleå tekniska universitet har fattat beslut i sex disciplinärenden.'; 'Fem studenter stängs av från utbildningsverksamheten i sex veckor.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The disciplinary board of Luleå University of Technology decided six disciplinary cases, suspending five students from teaching for six weeks and giving a sixth a warning.","causal_attribution":"The newspaper's report of the board's decisions; the decisions were not inspected."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'I två fall rör det sig om otillåten AI-användning där inlämnade arbeten innehöll påhittade källhänvisningar, bland annat till en bok som inte existerar.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Two of the cases concerned unauthorised AI use in which the submitted work contained invented source references, including one to a book that does not exist.","causal_attribution":"The newspaper's account of the board's grounds; the method by which the AI use was established is not described."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Alla avstängningar gäller från den 14 september till 25 oktober 2026.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"All the suspensions run from 14 September to 25 October 2026.","causal_attribution":"As reported by the newspaper."}],"effects":[{"label":"six-week suspension from teaching for two students over unauthorised AI use","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.kuriren.nu/nyheter/lulea/artikel/fem-studenter-avstangs-vid-ltu-efter-fusk-med-ai/rexpg4xl","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"sv","translation_note":"Read in the original Swedish (HTML body and stripped text); the page is marked as not free to access (isAccessibleForFree false), so text beyond the inspected passages may exist. Passages are quoted in Swedish; the English renderings in the record are translations by the research agent (an AI), not by a human translator.","independence_group":"kuriren-ltu-disciplinary-sep-2026"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["education"],"unknowns":["Which AI tool was used, in which courses and how the board established the AI use.","The date of the board's decisions and whether either student appealed to the administrative court.","What the students said in their defence."],"geography":{"basis":"The decisions were taken by the disciplinary board of Luleå University of Technology in Luleå, Sweden, as the report states. The students' own countries are not stated.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["SE"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a concrete sanction for prohibited AI use: two students were suspended for six weeks after the disciplinary board found unauthorised AI use in work that cited invented sources. The facts rest on one local newspaper's report of the decisions.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-23"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Norrbottens-Kuriren reports that two of the disciplinary cases concerned unauthorised AI use in which the submitted work contained invented source references, including one to a non-existent book; the article's headline says AI invented a source ('AI hittade på källa'), and the board suspended the two students for six weeks. The tool is not named and the way the board established the AI use is not described.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Luleå university board suspends two students for six weeks over unauthorised AI use whose submitted work cited invented sources, local paper reports","summary":"The disciplinary board of Luleå University of Technology (LTU) in northern Sweden decided six disciplinary cases and suspended five students from teaching for six weeks, from 14 September to 25 October 2026, Norrbottens-Kuriren reported on 21 September 2026. In two of the cases, according to the newspaper, the matter was unauthorised use of AI in which the submitted work contained invented source references, among them a reference to a book that does not exist. The other suspensions concerned plagiarism of a classmate's lab report and unauthorised notes at an exam; a sixth student received a warning. The report does not name the AI tool, the courses or the students and quotes neither the students nor the university.","incidentDate":"2026-09-14","incidentEndDate":"2026-10-25","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-09-21","aiSystem":"An unnamed AI tool whose use the disciplinary board treated as unauthorised; the submitted work contained invented source references, including one to a non-existent book, according to Norrbottens-Kuriren","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI writing tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["educational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to Norrbottens-Kuriren, two students were suspended from teaching for six weeks, from 14 September to 25 October 2026, after the disciplinary board found unauthorised AI use in work that cited invented sources.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":2,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Two students: the report says two of the six cases concerned unauthorised AI use; each case concerned one student.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"SE","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"internal_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.kuriren.nu/nyheter/lulea/artikel/fem-studenter-avstangs-vid-ltu-efter-fusk-med-ai/rexpg4xl","primarySourceLabel":"Norrbottens-Kuriren, 21 September 2026: Five students suspended at LTU for cheating, AI invented a source","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-23T03:15:03.052663+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-23T03:15:03.052663+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["academic-integrity","invented-references","student-suspension","university","sweden","own-use"]},{"id":"2026-seoul-national-university-computer-engineering-course-36-students-penalised-after-admitting-banned-ai-use","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'컴퓨터공학부 4학년 학생을 대상으로 하는 이 강의는 컴퓨터 네트워크의 원칙과 구현·운영 원리를 다루는 수업으로 과제를 푸는 데 코딩이 필요했던 것으로 전해졌다.'; '모든 수업 활동에서 생성형 AI를 활용하지 않고 진행한다'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'이 수업은 애초 ‘모든 수업 활동에서 생성형 인공지능을 활용하지 않는다’는 공지를 내걸었다.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"According to the course syllabus as reported by JoongAng Ilbo and Hankyoreh, a fourth-year computer engineering course on computer networking at Seoul National University in the first semester of 2026 stated that all course activities would be conducted without generative AI; the assignments required coding.","causal_attribution":"Both outlets quote the same syllabus notice; one documentary origin, so reported."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'30일 서울대 관계자에 따르면 지난 1학기 서울대 공대 컴퓨터공학부의 한 전공과목에서 수강생 62명 중 절반이 넘는 36명이 AI를 과제에 사용해 성적에 불이익을 받았다.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'30일 연합뉴스 취재를 종합하면 서울대 공대 컴퓨터공학부의 한 전공과목에서 지난 1학기 수강생 62명 중 절반이 넘는 36명이 AI를 과제에 사용한 것으로 드러났다.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Thirty-six of the 62 students enrolled in a fourth-year computer engineering course during the first semester of the 2026 academic year were penalized for using AI to complete their assignments'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"According to an SNU official and the professor, 36 of the 62 students enrolled in the course were penalised in their grades for using AI on assignments.","causal_attribution":"The university's and the professor's account; the outlets do not show independent access to the grade records, so reported."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'박 교수는 AI 사용을 자진 신고한 학생 25명에 대해 해당 과제에 0점을 부여했다.'; '신고하지 않았다가 면담에서 AI를 사용한 사실을 시인한 11명에 대해서는 과목 성적 D-가 주어졌다.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'He gave the 11 students who only later confessed to using AI during their meeting a final grade of D minus for the entire course.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"According to JoongAng Ilbo, the professor gave zero marks on the affected assignments to 25 students who disclosed their AI use voluntarily and a D-minus grade for the whole course to 11 students who admitted it only when interviewed at the end of the semester.","causal_attribution":"The professor's account in one reporting chain (Korean original and its English version)."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'박 교수는 “AI 사용이 의심되는 과제에선 교수와 조교가 이해하지 못하는 코드가 포함됐고 학생이 이를 설명하지 못한 경우가 있었다”고 했다.'; '같은 과제를 AI에게 입력했을 때 학생의 답변과 유사한 코드가 만들어지기도 했다고 한다.'; '“적발된 36명 모두 과제에 AI를 사용한 사실을 시인했다”고 밝혔다.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'\"처분된 학생들은 전원 본인이 인정한 경우\"라며'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The professor said some suspected submissions contained code that neither he nor the teaching assistants could understand and that students could not explain; according to JoongAng, entering the same assignment into AI produced code similar to students' answers; the professor said all 36 penalised students admitted using AI.","causal_attribution":"The professor's own statements (interview and course notice); one actor, so reported. The AI tools used are not named."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'학생회는 최근 AI 사용 여부를 판별하는 기준이 불명확하다는 내용을 담은 학생 의견서를 교수에 전달했다.'; '사람과 AI 답변이 비슷한 경우 AI를 쓰지 않은 학생도 AI를 썼다고 오인돼 감점됐을 수 있다는 취지'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'“솔직하게 답변한 학생은 불이익을 받고, 실제로 (생성형 인공지능을) 사용했지만 이를 부인하거나 적발되지 않은 학생은 불이익을 받지 않았을 가능성이 있어 공정하지 않다”는 취지의 의견서를 냈다고 한다.'; '“죄지은 사람 모두가 잡히지 않았다고 죄를 지은 사람을 처벌하는 것이 불공정하다라는 주장은 도저히 받아들일 수 없다”고 했다.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The computer engineering student government sent the professor a written objection saying the criteria for judging AI use were unclear, that students who did not use AI might have been wrongly penalised, and that students who answered honestly were penalised while others who denied use may not have been; the professor rejected the objection.","causal_attribution":"Counter-evidence from the student government, relayed by two outlets; reported."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'지난 1학기 공대 컴퓨터공학부의 한 전공과목에서는 수강생 62명 중 36명이 사전에 금지된 AI를 과제에 사용해 성적상 불이익을 받았다.'; '\"가이드라인을 좀 더 보완하고 수정해야 할 부분이 있다고 생각한다\"'; '안 의원은 교양과목과 공대에서 발생한 부정행위를 언급하며 \"AI 가이드라인을 제시했음에도 불구하고 상당히 무력화되고 있는 양상\"이라고 지적했다.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"At the National Assembly education committee's audit of Seoul National University on 16 October 2026, a lawmaker said the university's AI guidelines were being rendered ineffective, citing incidents including the engineering course; the university president said the guidelines needed to be supplemented and revised.","causal_attribution":"Statements at a public parliamentary audit as reported by one outlet."}],"effects":[{"label":"zero marks on assignments or a D-minus course grade after admitted use of banned AI (professor's and university's account)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/25449436","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ko","translation_note":"Read in Korean on 2026-10-21 from the publisher page (HTTP 200); translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed it. JoongAng Ilbo exclusive published 30 July 2026, 11:13 KST, citing an SNU official and an interview with the course professor.","independence_group":"joongang-snu-report-2026-07-30"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20260730123800004","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ko","translation_note":"Read in Korean on 2026-10-21 from the publisher page (HTTP 200); translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed it. Yonhap report sent 30 July 2026, 14:29 KST ('연합뉴스 취재를 종합하면'), quoting the professor's notice to students. The underlying actor (the professor) is the same as in s1, so claims stay reported.","independence_group":"yonhap-snu-report-2026-07-30"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/1271237.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ko","translation_note":"Read in Korean on 2026-10-21 from the publisher page (HTTP 200); translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed it. Hankyoreh follow-up published 3 August 2026, describing the student government's written objection and quoting the professor.","independence_group":"hankyoreh-snu-report-2026-08-03"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.newspim.com/news/view/20261016001323","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ko","translation_note":"Read in Korean on 2026-10-21 from the publisher page (HTTP 200); translated by the research agent (an AI); no human translator reviewed it. Newspim report of the National Assembly education committee audit of Seoul National University on 16 October 2026 (published 17:10 KST).","independence_group":"newspim-national-assembly-audit-2026-10-16"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.koreajoongangdaily.com/korea/prompt-and-punishment-50-of-snu-students-in-coding-course-penalized-for-ai-use/12799877","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-21 (HTTP 200). Korea JoongAng Daily's English version of the s1 report, published 30 July 2026; its footer says it was translated with the help of generative AI tools and edited by the newsroom. Same reporting chain as s1.","independence_group":"joongang-snu-report-2026-07-30"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["education"],"unknowns":["Which AI tools the students used.","The exact dates within the first semester of 2026 when the assignments were submitted and the penalties imposed.","Whether any student appealed or whether the university reviewed the penalties after the student government's objection.","Whether any student who did not use AI was penalised, as the student government suggested might have happened."],"geography":{"basis":"The course was taught at Seoul National University in Seoul, South Korea, as stated in all reports. Students' nationalities and residences are not stated.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["KR"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a sanction for prohibited AI use: Seoul National University's professor and an SNU official say 36 of 62 students in a computer engineering course that banned generative AI admitted using AI on coding assignments and received zero marks or a D-minus grade; the student government's objection and the October 2026 parliamentary audit are recorded. No student is identified.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-21"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The professor said the penalised students used AI to complete coding assignments in a course whose syllabus banned generative AI; he found code he and his teaching assistants could not understand and students could not explain, entering the assignment into AI produced similar code, and all 36 students admitted the AI use. The students' exchanges with generative AI produced the submitted code, and the penalties are the professor's response to that use. The AI tools are not named.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Seoul National University professor penalised 36 of 62 computer engineering students who, he says, admitted using banned generative AI on assignments","summary":"In the first semester of 2026, 36 of the 62 students in a fourth-year computer engineering course on computer networking at Seoul National University were penalised for using AI on coding assignments, according to an SNU official and the course's professor as reported by JoongAng Ilbo and Yonhap on 30 July 2026. The syllabus said all course activities would be conducted without generative AI. The professor gave zero marks on the affected assignments to 25 students who came forward and a D-minus course grade to 11 who admitted AI use only when interviewed; he said all 36 admitted using AI. The department's student government objected that the criteria were unclear and that honest students were penalised while others may not have been; the professor rejected this. On 16 October 2026 a lawmaker raised SNU's AI cheating incidents at the National Assembly audit, and the university president said its AI guidelines needed to be supplemented.","incidentDate":"2026-01-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-07-30","aiSystem":"Generative AI used by students to produce code for assignments in a course that banned it; the tools are not named in the reports","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI coding tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["educational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to the professor and an SNU official, 36 students received zero marks on assignments or a D-minus course grade after admitting banned AI use; the student government disputes the fairness of the criteria.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":36,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"36 students: the number an SNU official and the professor say were penalised (25 with zero marks on affected assignments, 11 with a D-minus course grade), all of whom admitted AI use according to the professor. The other 26 students in the course are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"KR","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"internal_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/25449436","primarySourceLabel":"JoongAng Ilbo, 30 July 2026: SNU course gives mass zeros and D-minus grades over AI cheating (Korean)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-21T03:09:55.020868+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-21T03:09:55.020868+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["academic-integrity","generative-ai","coding-assignments","grade-penalty","own-use","consequential-response","korea"]},{"id":"2026-leiden-law-student-thesis-sanction-over-ai-invented-references-annulled-by-council-of-state","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Bij beslissing van 29 januari 2026 heeft de examencommissie de scriptie van'; 'tot en met 28 januari 2027 uitgesloten van deelname aan het bachelorscriptietraject en enig ander tentamen van een door de faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid verzorgde opleiding'; 'De examencommissie heeft deze sanctie opgelegd omdat in het verwijzingsapparaat van zijn bachelorscriptie een aantal niet bestaande bronnen is opgenomen. Volgens de examencommissie duiden deze fictieve bronvermeldingen op ongeoorloofd gebruik van generatieve AI en dus fraude.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'De examencommissie beschouwde dit als fraude.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On 29 January 2026 the Leiden law faculty's exam board declared the student's bachelor thesis invalid and excluded him until 28 January 2027 from the thesis track and any exam in the faculty's programmes, because, in its view, non-existent sources in the references indicated unauthorised use of generative AI and therefore fraud.","causal_attribution":"The decisions are recorded in the ruling; the PONT summary restates them."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Hij heeft niet zelf bronnen verzonnen, maar de AI-tool die hij heeft gebruikt bij het opstellen van het verwijzingsapparaat heeft niet alle bronnen uit het concept van zijn scriptie correct overgenomen.'; 'Het gaat om zeven foutieve verwijzingen - waarvan één tweemaal - op een totaal van zesendertig voetnoten met bronverwijzingen.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The student stated that he had not invented sources himself and that the AI tool he used to prepare the references had not carried over all sources from his draft correctly, affecting seven references in footnotes of the final version, one of them twice, out of 36 footnotes with references.","causal_attribution":"The ruling documents that he made this argument; the count of errors is stated by the court."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'heeft toegelicht dat hij voor zijn scriptie AI heeft gebruikt voor een spellingcontrole en om zijn bronnenlijst te controleren en te ordenen'; 'toegelicht welke bronnen door AI zijn verdraaid, zoals verkeerde jaartallen of voorletters van auteurs, of door AI zijn bedacht'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Sommige bronnen bevatten verkeerde jaartallen of auteursnamen, andere waren door AI verzonnen.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"He had used AI to spell-check the thesis and to check and order its reference list, and the AI distorted some references (for example wrong years or author initials) and invented others.","causal_attribution":"The student's own account; the appeals board and the Council of State found it plausible, but no examination of the tool's output is described."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Bij beslissing van 4 maart 2026 heeft het CBE het door'; 'heeft voldoende aannemelijk gemaakt dat hij met het oog op het opmaken van zijn bronnenlijst gebruik heeft gemaakt van generatieve AI. Dat is een geoorloofde vorm van AI-gebruik. Dat daarbij niet-bestaande bronnen in het verwijzingsapparaat zijn terechtgekomen, komt evenwel voor zijn rekening.'; 'voor de duur van een half jaar een passender maatregel'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 4 March 2026 the university's appeals board for examinations upheld his administrative appeal, finding that he had plausibly shown he used generative AI to compile his reference list, a permitted use, that the non-existent sources were his responsibility, and that a half-year exclusion was a more fitting measure.","causal_attribution":"Recorded in the ruling."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Bij beslissing van 6 mei 2026 heeft de examencommissie de scriptie van'; 'tot en met 29 juli 2026 uitgesloten van deelname aan het bachelorscriptietraject en enig ander tentamen'; 'Bij beslissing van 8 juli 2026 heeft het CBE het door'; 'ingestelde administratief beroep ongegrond verklaard'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 6 May 2026 the exam board again declared the thesis invalid and excluded him until 29 July 2026, and on 8 July 2026 the appeals board dismissed his appeal against that decision.","causal_attribution":"Recorded in the ruling."},{"id":"c6","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Datum uitspraak: 14 oktober 2026'; 'al deze juiste bronnen in een eerdere versie van de scriptie, vóór het gebruik van AI, in verkorte vorm zijn terug te vinden'; 'heeft het CBE onvoldoende aannemelijk gemaakt dat sprake is van meer dan alleen een onzorgvuldigheid'; 'alsnog worden beoordeeld, met inachtneming van wat de Afdeling heeft overwogen'; 'Het is aan de examinator of, en, zo ja, welke gevolgen hij in dat kader aan de geconstateerde onzorgvuldigheid verbindt voor het cijfer.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'De Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State geeft hem gelijk.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On 14 October 2026 the Council of State found that the appeals board had not made it plausible that there was more than carelessness, so fraud was not established beyond reasonable doubt; it noted that the correct sources were in an earlier version written before AI was used, annulled the decisions of 8 July and 6 May 2026, ordered that the thesis still be assessed, and left it to the examiner whether the carelessness affects the grade.","causal_attribution":"The ruling is the decision itself."},{"id":"c7","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'te wijten is dat hij na het gebruik van AI niet nogmaals zelfstandig alle bronvermeldingen in de voetnoten heeft gecontroleerd'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'De Raad van State stelt expliciet dat hij de bronvermeldingen na het gebruik van AI zelfstandig had moeten controleren.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Council of State held that the student was at fault for not independently checking all the references again after using AI.","causal_attribution":"The court's finding; it bears on the student's own share in the errors."}],"effects":[{"label":"bachelor thesis declared invalid and exclusion from the thesis track and faculty exams, later annulled","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://data.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraken/content?id=ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:6088","kind":"court_record","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-17 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Full text of the Council of State ruling 202602163/1/A2 of 14 October 2026 (ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:6088) from the rechtspraak.nl open data service, HTTP 200; the student is anonymised in the ruling.","independence_group":"raad-van-state-ruling-202602163"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://privacy-web.nl/samenvatting/ai-verzint-bronnen-in-scriptie-raad-van-state-ziet-geen-fraude/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-17 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. PONT Data & Privacy editorial summary of the same ruling, 15 October 2026, HTTP 200, full text read; it derives from the ruling and is not independent of it.","independence_group":"raad-van-state-ruling-202602163"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["education","justice"],"unknowns":["Which AI tool the student used; the ruling does not name it.","Whether the exclusion orders kept him from any particular exam or delayed his studies, and what grade the thesis eventually received.","The exact wording of the incorrect references and how the examiner discovered them."],"geography":{"basis":"The sanctioning exam board belongs to the Faculty of Law of Leiden University and the appeal was decided by the Council of State, both in the Netherlands. The ruling withholds the student's place of residence, so that field is left unknown.","court_countries":["NL"],"event_countries":["NL"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published on the Council of State's ruling of 14 October 2026: the student's explanation, found plausible by the university appeals board and the court, is that a generative AI tool he used to order his reference list distorted or invented seven references; the exam board treated those references as evidence of AI-enabled fraud, invalidated the thesis and excluded him from exams, and the court annulled the sanction because only carelessness had been shown.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-17"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Council of State ruling records the student's explanation that the AI tool he used to prepare his footnote references did not carry over all sources from his draft correctly and that it distorted some references (wrong years or author initials) and invented others; the university's appeals board found he had plausibly shown he used generative AI for his reference list, and the Council of State found his explanation plausible, noting that the correct sources were in an earlier version written before he used AI. The exam board itself attributed the fictitious references to generative AI and sanctioned him for them. The AI tool's output, returned to the student and kept in his thesis, is what the sanction was based on.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Leiden law student's thesis invalidated and exams barred over references he says an AI tool distorted or invented; Council of State annuls fraud sanction","summary":"A law student at Leiden University used a generative AI tool to spell-check his bachelor thesis and to check and order its reference list. Seven of the thesis's footnote references (one of them appearing twice, out of 36 footnotes with references) were wrong in the final version; according to his explanation, the tool had distorted some of them, for example with wrong years or author initials, and invented others. On 29 January 2026 the faculty's exam board declared the thesis invalid and excluded him until 28 January 2027 from the thesis track and every exam in the faculty's programmes, reasoning that the fictitious references indicated unauthorised use of generative AI and therefore fraud. The university's appeals board for examinations found in March 2026 that he had plausibly shown he used generative AI to prepare his reference list, which it called a permitted use, but held him responsible for the non-existent sources; the exam board then re-imposed the invalidation with an exclusion until 29 July 2026, and the appeals board upheld that in July. On 14 October 2026 the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State (Raad van State) found his explanation plausible, held that no more than carelessness had been shown, and annulled the sanction; the thesis must now be graded, and the examiner may take the incorrect references into account in the grade.","incidentDate":"2026-01-29","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-10-14","aiSystem":"An unnamed generative AI tool that the student used to spell-check his bachelor thesis and to check and order its reference list, according to the Council of State ruling","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI writing tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["educational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The exam board declared the student's thesis invalid and excluded him from the thesis track and the faculty's exams, first until January 2027 and then until 29 July 2026, over references that according to his accepted explanation an AI tool had distorted or invented; the Council of State annulled the sanction on 14 October 2026.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the appellant student, who used the AI tool himself (ruling, paragraphs 1 to 6).","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"NL","platformType":"other","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://data.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraken/content?id=ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:6088","primarySourceLabel":"Raad van State, ruling 202602163/1/A2 (ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:6088), 14 October 2026","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-17T03:05:14.201173+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-17T03:05:14.201173+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["academic-integrity","thesis","non-existent-references","fraud-sanction-annulled","netherlands","administrative-court","own-use"]}]}