Allowed. The funder lets applicants use AI, and applicants answer for everything they submit.
What applicants may do
- Applicants may use generative AI tools to draft or summarize sections of an application. [1][2]
- Applicants may use generative AI to translate parts of an application, for example from French to English, and should review the translation for accuracy. [1]
- Applicants do not have to disclose AI use. If AI surfaces specific works that significantly inform the application, they should acknowledge and reference those sources. [1]
What the funder asks of applicants
- Applicants must verify and take responsibility for the accuracy, completeness and relevance of all AI-generated content. The named applicant is accountable for the full content of the application, including inaccuracies, misattributions or lack of attribution. [1][2][3]
- Applicants must make sure all sources are real, appropriately acknowledged and referenced. [2]
- Applicants are advised to check the AI platform's privacy, retention and reuse terms before entering sensitive or proprietary data. They remain responsible for protecting that data and information from research partners. [1][2]
Rules for reviewers
- Reviewers must not upload application material into online generative AI tools, even to translate it. This breaches the Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Agreement. [1][2][3]
- Reviewers must not upload application material into generative AI tools procured and deployed by their institution. [1][2][3]
- Reviewers must not upload their own review materials, including draft reviews, notes and assessments, into any generative AI tool. [1][2]
- Reviewers should not let known or suspected AI use in an application affect the evaluation. They should focus on whether the project meets program criteria. [3]
- Proposing AI use in research is a matter of methodology. Reviewers assess it using their expertise and disciplinary norms. [3]
Where this comes from
The funder's own words, from its own pages.
Yes. However, you should be aware that a generative AI tool may not protect the privacy of your application material, and you must fully verify and take responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, and relevance of all application content generated by AI.
Yes, this is acceptable, particularly to improve clarity.
No, there is no requirement for applicants to disclose the use of generative AI in their applications.
However, if generative AI identifies or surfaces specific works or sources that significantly inform the content of your application, you should acknowledge and appropriately reference those original sources.
Before using generative AI tools with sensitive or proprietary data, it is strongly advised that you review the AI platform’s privacy policies, data retention practices, reuse terms, and associated data security controls to ensure that the platform adequately protects your intellectual property and confidential information.
No. Reviewers must not upload applicant material into online generative AI tools, even for the sole purpose of translating application material.
No. Reviewers must not upload applicant material into generative AI tools procured and deployed by their institution.
No. Reviewers are required to treat all application materials, including their assessments, notes and feedback, as confidential and protected information within the peer review process.
The named applicant is ultimately accountable for the complete contents of their application.
The agencies recognize that generative AI may be a valuable tool to applicants in the development of funding applications, including the potential to improve efficiency, assist non-native speakers of Canada’s two Official Languages, and streamline the application writing process.
In accordance with existing agency policies, applicants are responsible for ensuring that information included in their funding applications is true, accurate and complete and that all sources are real, appropriately acknowledged and referenced.
Therefore, the use of publicly available, online, or institutionally procured and deployed generative AI tools for reviewing funding applications is strictly prohibited.
SSHRC Manual for Merit Review Committee Members (opens in a new tab)
In the evaluation of applications, reviewers are prohibited from inputting application information into generative artificial intelligence (AI).
Therefore, use of generative AI tools for evaluating applications is strictly prohibited.
SSHRC does not discourage the use of AI in either application development or in research;
whether or not AI has been used in application development, researchers remain responsible for the full content of their applications, including any inaccuracies, misattributions or lack of attribution in their application;
applicants may proactively or inadvertently disclose the use of AI. Known or suspected AI use should not factor into the evaluation; reviewers should focus on whether the project meets program criteria; and
proposing the use of AI in research is a matter of methodology, and reviewers should assess based on their expertise and disciplinary norms.
This is a reading of what the funder has published, and it is not legal advice. A solicitation can set its own rule, so read the funding announcement before a PI applies.