Guidance for PGR students on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in thesis writing

The information on this page is for PGR students. It covers:

Introduction

To be awarded a research degree, you must meet several key standards in your research training.  One if these is the ability to write about your research in your own words.  This critical research skill is tested through your thesis and through your annual progress monitoring (APM) reports.  For this reason, you are not permitted to use generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, to write any text that is used in your thesis. This guidance sets out how AI tools can be used in thesis writing.

Acceptable uses of AI tools

1.Simple editing

It is acceptable to use AI tools, such as Grammarly, to check for simple typos and grammatical errors and to make changes based on those suggestions.  Use of these tools should be limited to the corrections of errors (proofreading) and not for improving the structure or readability of your text.

2. Using AI tools to identify places where text could be improved

It is acceptable to use AI tools, such as ChatGPT, to suggest places in your text where you might make improvements to the clarity or style of writing.  But you should not ask the AI to recommend changes or use any text generated by an AI tool in your thesis (or APM report).  Examples of acceptable and unacceptable use are given in the table below.

3.Using AI tools practice academic writing

It is acceptable to use AI tools, such as ChatGPT, to practice academic writing, and you are encouraged to do this if it helps you learn the skills you will need for your thesis.  So, you may use AI tools to give feedback on sections of practice writing and you can ask it to suggest improvements – as long as this text will not be used in your thesis (or APM report).  AI tools can give valuable feedback for improvement, and a chance to practice academic writing.  Make sure to ask for feedback from your supervisor to be sure that the advice you get is good, but this can be a way to gain the confidence you need for when it comes to write your thesis.

Further help and information

If you or your supervisor has any questions about the acceptable use of AI tools in your studies, please contact your School Graduate Director.  And if you are worried that you may have used AI tools inappropriately in your thesis writing so far, your School Graduate Director can give you advice on how to address this.

Examples of acceptable use

Asking the AI tool to diagnose surface‑level or structural issues, not to generate new content or specific rewrites.

Example student prompt

Why this is allowed

Please list any spelling or punctuation errors in the paragraph below.

Pure proofreading—no new wording supplied.

Flag sentences in this excerpt whose meaning is unclear or ambiguous, but don’t suggest rewrites.

Identifies problem spots without drafting fixes.

Give me a readability score (e.g., Flesch‑Kincaid) for this page of text.

Supplies an objective metric; no content created.

Point out any repeated phrases or terminology inconsistencies in Chapter 2.

Highlights mechanical issues students can correct themselves.

Do you notice abrupt jumps in logical flow between these two paragraphs? Just note where.

Diagnostic only; student determines how to improve.

Identify places where passive voice is used, without changing the sentences.

Surface‑level flagging comparable to a style checker.

List every reference citation that is missing from the bibliography, if any.

Cross‑checking accuracy; no writing generated.

Examples of unacceptable use

Asking the AI tool to create or substantially improve scholarly content, which goes beyond proofreading.

Example student prompt

Why this is not allowed

Rewrite my literature‑review paragraph to make it sound more academic.

Generates new prose; student is not the author of the wording.

Expand these bullet points into a full introduction section.

Model is ghost‑writing significant content.

Explain ‘cohomological descent’ in simple terms so I can copy it into Chapter 3.

Outsources understanding and exposition.

Combine and rephrase these two sources into a coherent synthesis paragraph.

Produces intellectual synthesis rather than merely editing.

Polish the language of my findings so it reads like a published article.

Goes beyond typo fixes to stylistic enhancement that masks authorship.

Draft a concise abstract summarising the entire thesis for me.

Full section written by the model.

Generate possible counter‑arguments to address in my discussion chapter.

Introduces substantive ideas the student did not originate.

Shorten this 1,000‑word conclusion to 300 words while preserving meaning.

Requires the model to re‑author text, not just mark issues.

Create a paragraph connecting these two theoretical frameworks.

Composes original scholarly linkage.

Rewrite every passive sentence in active voice.

Supplies finished wording rather than prompting the student to do the work.