For universities and graduate schools
Make AI use in thesis writing easier to supervise
Grongy AI brings source discovery, outlining, drafting, revision and citation into one workspace. Students can share a read-only draft, review AI edits and prepare an AI-use disclosure instead of moving between untraceable chat windows.
The challenge
A detector score does not show how a thesis was produced
Supervisors need evidence they can discuss with a student: the sources behind a claim, the decisions made during revision and the institution’s own rules on acceptable assistance.
AI use disappears into separate tools
When research, drafting and rewriting happen in unrelated chat windows, neither the student nor the supervisor has a coherent record of the writing process.
Plausible citations can still be false
A convincing title and author list are not proof that a paper exists or supports the claim. References need to be connected to identifiable publications and checked against the originals.
Policy is difficult to turn into practice
A rule such as ‘AI may support language but not replace authorship’ is useful only when students understand what to disclose, what to verify and what remains their responsibility.
A reviewable workflow
Built around sources, revision and student responsibility
Grongy AI does not decide whether a submission is acceptable. It gives students and supervisors a clearer workflow in which academic judgement can be applied.
Citations start with an identifiable source
Students work from papers found through OpenAlex and Crossref or from PDFs in their own library. Generated citations are tied to that library, while the student remains responsible for reading and verifying the original source.
AI edits can be reviewed before acceptance
Rewrite and review tools return suggested changes that can be accepted or rejected. Students stay in control of the final wording instead of silently replacing their text.
Disclosure support is built in
Students can generate an editable statement describing how AI supported source search, outlining, drafting or language improvement, then adapt it to their institution’s policy.
Supervisors can open a read-only draft
A share link lets a supervisor inspect the current draft and its cited sources without editing the student’s document or creating an account.
No detector-evasion tools
Grongy AI does not include a humanizer or an ‘undetectable AI’ mode. The product is designed for declared, critically reviewed assistance—not for concealing use.
Work remains portable
Students can export their work to common academic formats, including Word, PDF, LaTeX and BibTeX. An institutional pilot does not require locking dissertations into a closed format.
A practical starting point
Run a small pilot before making a campus-wide decision
Choose one programme or thesis cohort, agree on permitted uses and evaluate the workflow with students and supervisors using criteria you define.
1. Set the boundaries
Translate your existing AI policy into a short list of permitted, restricted and disclosure-required uses for the pilot group.
2. Onboard both sides
Show students how to verify sources and disclose assistance; show supervisors how to open shared drafts and review suggested edits.
3. Review the evidence
Assess source quality, revision habits, student confidence and supervisor workload before deciding whether or how to expand.
Where Grongy AI can fit
Graduate schools and departments
Offer a common thesis workflow to a cohort while keeping programme rules and supervisory judgement in charge.
Supervisors
Review the draft, argument and sources through a shared view instead of reconstructing the process from a final file.
Writing and learning centres
Teach planning, source use and revision with one consistent workspace, including support for multilingual writers.
University libraries
Connect AI-assisted writing to the practices libraries already teach: finding, reading, evaluating and citing research.
Questions institutions usually ask
Does Grongy AI guarantee that every statement is correct?
No. It grounds writing in the student’s selected sources and flags uncertainty, but the student must still read the papers, check citations and take responsibility for the submitted work.
Can we apply our own AI policy?
Yes. A pilot can be framed around your programme’s permitted uses and disclosure requirements. Grongy AI’s disclosure text is editable because institutional rules differ.
Do supervisors need an account to read a shared draft?
No. A student can provide a read-only share link. Access to unpublished student work should still follow your institution’s own privacy and supervision procedures.
Can we test it with one cohort first?
Yes. A limited pilot is the recommended starting point. Contact us with the programme, approximate cohort size and the questions you want the pilot to answer.
Start with a focused institutional pilot
Tell us which programme you have in mind, roughly how many students are involved and what your current AI policy allows. We will propose a scope you can evaluate before expanding.
Email the institutional team