Science Fair AI Rules: What ISEF Allows and Bans

If your kid is doing a science fair project this year, the science fair AI rules just got more explicit. For 2026–27, the International Rules that govern the Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair (ISEF) and its affiliated fairs added a line under eligibility: AI “may be used as a resource but must be cited and given proper acknowledgment,” and a student “may not use generative AI to write the research plan, abstract, poster or to create citations (it is known to hallucinate and falsify references).”

Society for Science, which runs ISEF, also publishes a task-by-task table of what’s acceptable. It’s one of the clearest AI policies any youth competition has written. Here’s what it says, line by line, and a sample prompt log your kid can copy.

Key Takeaways

• ISEF’s 2026–27 rule changes say AI may be used as a cited resource, but not to write the research plan, abstract or poster, or to create citations.
• The Society’s generative-AI table (October 2025) lists specific tasks as acceptable, acceptable with citation and a prompt log, or “never acceptable.”
• Never acceptable: AI writing the initial plan, abstract, paper or poster; AI producing conclusions; AI adding points to the paper; AI generating a starter bibliography or citations.
• Acceptable with conditions: brainstorming with a chatbot, AI-written starter code, AI-made graphics, and AI help choosing statistical tests, usually with a logbook of prompts.
• Affiliated fairs “may adopt their own, more strict, policies.” Check your local fair’s rules first.

What the Science Fair AI Rules Say for 2026–27

The International Rules for Pre-college Science Research are, in the Society’s words, “the official rules of the Regeneron ISEF and students competing at Society-affiliated science fairs.” They’re updated every year. The key changes for 2026–2027 include this new text under Eligibility/Limitations:

“Artificial Intelligence (AI) may be used as a resource but must be cited and given proper acknowledgment. A student is expected to do independent work and all materials presented must be in the researcher’s own words. A student may not use generative AI to write the research plan, abstract, poster or to create citations (it is known to hallucinate and falsify references).”

Alongside the rules, the Society links a separate document, “Use of generative AI to support a research project,” dated October 2025. It says the Society for Science and the Regeneron ISEF Scientific Review Committee created the table “to indicate our guidance on when it is acceptable to use generative AI in the development and execution of a research project and how to properly cite this usage.” It describes itself as “a preliminary model,” adapted from guiding principles approved by the American Historical Association’s council in July 2025. And it adds a line every parent should notice: “Affiliated fairs may adopt their own, more strict, policies.”

The ISEF Acceptable-Use Table, Walked Through

Here is every task in the table, grouped by verdict. Quoted conditions are the Society’s own wording.

Task	Acceptable?	Condition
Ask AI to identify or summarize key points in an article before you read it, as a starting point for a literature review	Yes	”Acceptable without explicit citation”
Ask AI to summarize a book or article and reproduce that summary in your literature review without reading the source	No	”Never acceptable, as there has been no engagement with the book or source itself”
Use a chatbot as a writing tool to help generate and develop ideas	Yes	”May require explicit citation depending on circumstances. Maintain a logbook of your prompts as part of your research notebook.”
Use AI to initially write the research plan, abstract, paper or poster	No	”Never acceptable. This must be the independent work of the student.” Later guidance or refinement can be done “with explicit citation and a log”
Ask AI to write an abstract or section and submit it as your own	No	”Never acceptable”
Write your own abstract and ask AI to sharpen the language without changing the main points	Yes	Without citation “only if changes suggested by AI are limited to grammar and syntax”
Use AI to write initial code for the project	Yes	”Only with explicit citation stating which portions of the code were AI generated and with a log of the prompts”
Ask AI to produce a flowchart, graphic or image	Yes	”Image should be clearly marked as AI-generated and with explicit citation as to how the image was created”
Write your paper and ask AI to add more points to it	No	”Never acceptable”
Use AI to produce conclusions, future steps, etc.	No	”Never acceptable”
Use AI to help identify appropriate statistical tests or software tools	Yes	”Requires a log of your prompts.” Interpretation of data “must be done by the student researcher”
Use AI to collect data and write the research plan; use AI to provide citations that back up your claims	No	”Never acceptable”
Ask AI to produce a starter bibliography	No	”Never acceptable”
Ask AI to fix the structure or formatting of your bibliography	Yes	Without citation, but “you must review and verify all citations as valid”

The Logic Behind the Lines

Read the table as a whole and a pattern appears. AI is allowed where it supports work the student still does, and banned where it would replace the thinking the fair is judging.

Reading stays with the student. Summarizing an article before you read it is fine. Using a summary instead of reading is not. The difference is whether the student engaged with the source.

Words stay with the student. The new rule says all presented materials “must be in the researcher’s own words.” AI can fix grammar on an abstract the student wrote; it can’t write the abstract.

Interpretation stays with the student. AI can suggest a statistical test. It can’t interpret the data or write the conclusions. That’s the science.

Citations get special treatment, for a technical reason. The rule says AI is “known to hallucinate and falsify references.” Here’s the mechanism: a language model generates text that looks like a plausible citation, author names, journal, year, page numbers, because it learned the pattern of citations. It doesn’t look them up. The result can be a reference that doesn’t exist. That’s why even formatting help comes with “you must review and verify all citations as valid.”

Code and graphics are allowed with a paper trail. The table treats AI-assisted code and AI-made graphics as acceptable, as long as the student says which parts came from AI and keeps the prompts.

The broader research supports the “student does the thinking” line. In a 2025 PNAS field experiment with nearly 1,000 high school math students, Hamsa Bastani and colleagues found unrestricted GPT-4 raised practice grades by 48% but left students 17% worse once it was taken away. A 2024 study in the British Journal of Educational Technology (Fan et al.) found university students who revised essays with ChatGPT improved their scores but not their knowledge. A science fair is designed to measure what the student can do. The rules protect that.

A Sample Prompt Log Your Kid Can Copy

The table asks for “a logbook of your prompts as part of your research notebook” in several places. A prompt log doesn’t need to be fancy. A page in the lab notebook or a dated document works. Here’s a sample entry format, using a hypothetical project on how water temperature affects how fast sugar dissolves:

Date	Tool	What I asked (prompt)	What I used from it	What I did myself
Oct 3	ChatGPT	”What variables affect how fast sugar dissolves in water? List them.”	Reminded me of stirring and particle size as variables to control	Chose temperature as my variable; wrote my own hypothesis
Oct 10	ChatGPT	”Write Python code to plot dissolve time vs. temperature from a CSV.”	Lines 1–18 of plot.py (marked as AI-generated in comments)	Collected all data; fixed axis labels; checked the plot by hand for 3 points
Oct 17	ChatGPT	”Which statistical test fits 5 temperatures with 3 trials each?”	Suggestion to try a regression and check with a scatter plot	Ran the analysis, interpreted the result, wrote conclusions myself
Oct 24	Grammarly	Grammar check on my abstract	Fixed two comma errors	Wrote the whole abstract

Four habits make a log useful: date every entry, copy the prompt exactly, say what you kept, and say what you did yourself. We go further into this habit in keep a prompt log.

How Parents Can Help Without Overstepping

Find your fair’s rules before the project starts

ISEF rules apply to Society-affiliated fairs, but local fairs can be stricter. The San Diego County Fair’s 2026 student showcase guide, for example, says any work “created by generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), either partially or completely, is not eligible.” School fairs may have their own rules, or none in writing. Ask the teacher or fair coordinator in September, not February.

Set up the log on day one

A prompt log is far easier to keep from the start than to reconstruct later. Help your kid make a page or a doc with the columns above and leave it next to the notebook.

Verify every citation together

Since AI fabricating references is the specific problem the rule names, make “open every source” a family rule. If a citation can’t be found, it doesn’t go in the bibliography. That’s a research skill worth more than any ribbon.

Ask the judge’s questions at home

Judges ask students to explain their choices. At dinner, ask: “Why did you pick that variable? What would you change if you did it again? What does your graph actually show?” If your kid can answer, the work is theirs. For more on what makes fairs worthwhile, see our piece on science fairs and STEM identity.

What not to do

Don’t treat AI as forbidden fruit or as a free pass. The table shows a middle path that’s honest and teachable. And don’t let your own help cross the same lines: a parent who writes the abstract violates the “independent work” principle just as an AI would. For how other youth competitions handle AI, see Scholastic Awards and AI.

What to Watch For Over the Next 3 Months

• Week 4: Your child knows which fair they’re entering, has read its AI rules and has a prompt log started.
• Month 2 red flags: The research plan or abstract sounds more polished than your child’s usual writing. Citations appear that your child hasn’t opened. The log has gaps, or there’s no log at all.
• Month 3 self-check: Your child can explain every step of the project, point to what AI helped with in the log, and show they verified every reference.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can students use AI for science fair projects?

Under ISEF’s 2026–27 rules, yes, as a cited resource for some tasks, like brainstorming, summarizing an article before reading it, starter code, graphics and choosing statistical tests, usually with a prompt log. Students may not use generative AI to write the research plan, abstract, paper, poster, conclusions or citations. Local fairs may be stricter.

Why can’t AI make my kid’s bibliography?

Because language models can invent references. The 2026–27 rule says AI “is known to hallucinate and falsify references.” A model generates text that looks like a citation from learned patterns rather than looking it up, so a reference can appear real and not exist. AI can help format a bibliography, but every citation must be verified.

What is a prompt log for a science fair?

It’s a dated record in the research notebook of what the student asked an AI tool, what they used from the answer and what they did themselves. ISEF’s table requires a log for uses like chatbot brainstorming, AI-written code and statistical help. It shows judges how AI was used and proves the core work is the student’s.

Do all science fairs follow the ISEF AI rules?

No. The International Rules apply to Regeneron ISEF and Society-affiliated fairs, and the AI table says affiliated fairs “may adopt their own, more strict, policies.” Some local fairs ban generative AI entirely. School fairs may have different rules or none. Always check the specific fair’s current rules.

Can AI fix the grammar in my child’s abstract?

Yes, if your child wrote the abstract. ISEF’s table says asking AI to sharpen the language is acceptable without explicit citation “only if changes suggested by AI are limited to grammar and syntax.” If AI modifies, adds to or replaces the main points, it’s no longer allowed.

---

About the author

Ricky Flores is the founder of HiWave Makers and an electrical engineer with 15+ years of experience building consumer technology at Apple, Samsung, and Texas Instruments. He writes about how kids learn to build, think, and create in a tech-saturated world. Read more at hiwavemakers.com.

---

Sources

1. Society for Science. (2025, October). “Use of generative AI to support a research project” (Generative AI Use Table). https://sspcdn.blob.core.windows.net/files/Documents/SEP/ISEF/2026/Rules/Generative-AI-Use-Table.pdf
2. Society for Science. “Final Rule Modifications for 2026–27,” International Rules for Pre-college Science Research. https://sspcdn.blob.core.windows.net/files/Documents/SEP/ISEF/2027/Rules/FINAL-Rule-Modifications-for-2026-27.pdf
3. Society for Science. “International Rules: Guidelines for Science and Engineering Fairs.” https://www.societyforscience.org/isef/international-rules
4. San Diego County Fair. (2026). “Student Showcase entry guide: Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Rules.” https://downloads.delmarfairgrounds.com/downloads/SDFair/2026/competitions/2026_student-showcase-ms_entry.pdf
5. Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., et al. (2025). “Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422633122
6. Fan, Y., Tang, L., Le, H., Shen, K., Tan, S., Zhao, Y., et al. (2024). “Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance.” British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13544