CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 23Topic ModelingEthics and Social Impacts of AIArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

The Origins and Veracity of References 'Cited' by Generative Artificial Intelligence Applications: Implications for the Quality of Responses

Open access
Spennemann, Dirk H. R.·2025·Publications
DOI 10.3390/publications13010012
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The public release of ChatGPT in late 2022 has resulted in considerable publicity and has led to widespread discussion of the usefulness and capabilities of generative Artificial intelligence (Ai) language models. Its ability to extract and summarise data from textual sources and present them as human-like contextual responses makes it an eminently suitable tool to answer questions users might ask. Expanding on a previous analysis of the capabilities of ChatGPT3.5, this paper tested what archaeological literature appears to have been included in the training phase of three recent generative Ai language models: ChatGPT4o, ScholarGPT, and DeepSeek R1. While ChatGPT3.5 offered seemingly pertinent references, a large percentage proved to be fictitious. While the more recent model ScholarGPT, which is purportedly tailored towards academic needs, performed much better, it still offered a high rate of fictitious references compared to the general models ChatGPT4o and DeepSeek. Using ‘cloze’ analysis to make inferences on the sources ‘memorized’ by a generative Ai model, this paper was unable to prove that any of the four genAi models had perused the full texts of the genuine references. It can be shown that all references provided by ChatGPT and other OpenAi models, as well as DeepSeek, that were found to be genuine, have also been cited on Wikipedia pages. This strongly indicates that the source base for at least some, if not most, of the data is found in those pages and thus repre…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/publications13010012

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists are queued

They are fetched later and appear here then.

References 63 · Cited by 23

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. Agapiou, 2023, Interacting with the Artificial Intelligence (AI) language model ChatGPT: A synopsis of earth observation and remote sensing in archaeology, Heritage, 6, 4072, 10.3390/heritage6050214 · DOI
  2. Allen, 2019, How can we ensure visibility and diversity in research contributions? How the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) is helping the shift from authorship to contributorship, Learned Publishing, 32, 71, 10.1002/leap.1210 · DOI
  3. Tumber, H., and Waisbord, S. (2021). Misinformation and disinformation. The Routledge companion to media disinformation and populism, Routledge. · DOI
  4. Athaluri, 2023, Exploring the boundaries of reality: Investigating the phenomenon of artificial intelligence hallucination in scientific writing through ChatGPT references, Cureus, 15, e37432
  5. Babl, 2023, Generative artificial intelligence: Can ChatGPT write a quality abstract?, Emergency Medicine Australasia, 35, 809, 10.1111/1742-6723.14233 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Bang, Y., Cahyawijaya, S., Lee, N., Dai, W., Su, D., Wilie, B., Lovenia, H., Ji, Z., Yu, T., and Chung, W. (2023). A multitask, multilingual, multimodal evaluation of chatgpt on reasoning, hallucination, and interactivity. arXiv. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Bays, 2023, Artificial intelligence and obesity management: An Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) 2023, Obesity Pillars, 6, 100065, 10.1016/j.obpill.2023.100065 · DOI
  8. Biswas, S. (2025, February 05). Importance of chat GPT in agriculture: According to chat GPT. Available at SSRN 4405391. arXiv:2305.00118, Available online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4405391. · arXiv
  9. Bloxham, 2012, ‘You can see the quality in front of your eyes’: Grounding academic standards between rationality and interpretation, Quality in Higher Education, 18, 185, 10.1080/13538322.2012.711071 · DOI
  10. Borkakoty, H., and Espinosa-Anke, L. (2024). Hoaxpedia: A unified Wikipedia Hoax articles dataset. arXiv Preprint. · DOI
  11. Campbell, L. (1979). Middle american languages. The languages of native America: Historical and comparative assessment, University of Texas Press. · DOI
  12. Campbell, 1980, On mesoamerican linguistics, American Anthropologist, 82, 850, 10.1525/aa.1980.82.4.02a00120 · DOI
  13. Campbell, 1983, Mesoamerican historical linguistics and distant genetic relationship: Getting it straight, American Anthropologist, 85, 362, 10.1525/aa.1983.85.2.02a00080 · DOI
  14. Campbell, 1985, Mayan linguistics: Where are we now?, Annual Review of Anthropology, 14, 187, 10.1146/annurev.an.14.100185.001155 · DOI
  15. Cao, Y., Zhou, L., Lee, S., Cabello, L., Chen, M., and Hershcovich, D. (2023). Assessing cross-cultural alignment between chatgpt and human societies: An empirical study. arXiv. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Chang, K. K., Cramer, M., Soni, S., and Bamman, D. (2023). Speak, memory: An archaeology of books known to chatgpt/gpt-4. arXiv. · DOI
  17. Lechien, 2024, Exploring the potential of Chat-GPT as a supportive tool for sialendoscopy clinical decision making and patient information support, European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 281, 2081, 10.1007/s00405-023-08104-8 · DOI
  18. Ciaccio, 2023, Use of artificial intelligence in scientific paper writing, Informatics in Medicine Unlocked, 41, 101253, 10.1016/j.imu.2023.101253 · DOI
  19. Elazar, Y., Kassner, N., Ravfogel, S., Feder, A., Ravichander, A., Mosbach, M., Belinkov, Y., Schütze, H., and Goldberg, Y. (2022). Measuring causal effects of data statistics on language model’s factual’predictions. arXiv.
  20. 2025, Navigating the future of pedagogy: The integration of AI tools in developing educational assessment rubrics, European Journal of Education, 60, e12826, 10.1111/ejed.12826 · DOI
  21. Flannery, K. V., and Marcus, J. (2003). The cloud people: Divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations, Academic Press.
  22. Giray, 2024, ChatGPT references unveiled: Distinguishing the reliable from the fake, Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 28, 9, 10.1080/10875301.2023.2265369 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Hartmann, J., Schwenzow, J., and Witte, M. (2023). The political ideology of conversational AI: Converging evidence on ChatGPT’s pro-environmental, left-libertarian orientation. arXiv. · DOI
  24. Kacena, 2024, The use of artificial intelligence in writing scientific review articles, Current Osteoporosis Reports, 22, 115, 10.1007/s11914-023-00852-0 · DOI · Paper page
  25. King, 2023, The future of AI in medicine: A perspective from a Chatbot, Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 51, 291, 10.1007/s10439-022-03121-w · DOI · Paper page
  26. Lapp, 2024, Evaluating ChatGPT as a viable research tool for typological investigations of cultural heritage artefacts—Roman clay oil lamps, Archaeometry, 66, 696, 10.1111/arcm.12937 · DOI
  27. Lund, 2024, Can ChatGPT be an author? A study of artificial intelligence authorship policies in top academic journals, Learned Publishing, 37, 13, 10.1002/leap.1582 · DOI
  28. Martin, L., Whitehouse, N., Yiu, S., Catterson, L., and Perera, R. (2024). Better call GPT, comparing large language models against lawyers. arXiv.
  29. McCabe, 1997, Ten principles of academic integrity for faculty, The Journal of College and University Law, 24, 117
  30. McGee, R. W. (2025, February 05). Is chat gpt biased against conservatives? an empirical study (February 15), Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4359405.
  31. Sodangi, 2024, The implications and effects of ChatGPT on academic scholarship and authorship: A death knell for original academic publications?, Information & Communications Technology Law, 33, 21, 10.1080/13600834.2023.2239623 · DOI
  32. Motoki, F., Pinho Neto, V., and Rodrigues, V. (2025, February 05). More human than human: Measuring chatgpt political bias, Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4372349.
  33. Nicholson, 2021, Measuring the quality of scientific references in Wikipedia: An analysis of more than 115M citations to over 800 000 scientific articles, The FEBS Journal, 288, 4242, 10.1111/febs.15608 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Onishi, T., Wang, H., Bansal, M., Gimpel, K., and McAllester, D. (2016). Who did what: A large-scale person-centered cloze dataset. arXiv. · DOI
  35. Qi, 2023, The promise and peril of ChatGPT in geriatric nursing education: What we know and do not know, Aging and Health Research, 3, 100136, 10.1016/j.ahr.2023.100136 · DOI
  36. Sarraju, 2023, Appropriateness of cardiovascular disease prevention recommendations obtained from a popular online chat-based Artificial Intelligence model, Jama, 329, 842, 10.1001/jama.2023.1044 · DOI
  37. Shokri, R., Stronati, M., Song, C., and Shmatikov, V. (, January May). Membership inference attacks against machine learning models. 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), San Jose, CA, USA. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Sng, 2023, Potential and pitfalls of ChatGPT and natural-language artificial intelligence models for diabetes education, Diabetes Care, 46, e103, 10.2337/dc23-0197 · DOI
  39. Spennemann, 2023a, ChatGPT and the generation of digitally born “knowledge”: How does a generative AI language model interpret cultural heritage values?, Knowledge, 3, 480, 10.3390/knowledge3030032 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Spennemann, D. H. R. (2023b). Children of AI: A protocol for managing the born-digital ephemera spawned by Generative AI Language Models. Publications, 11. · DOI
  41. Spennemann, 2023c, Exhibiting the Heritage of Covid-19—A Conversation with ChatGPT, Heritage, 6, 5732, 10.3390/heritage6080302 · DOI
  42. Spennemann, D. H. R. (2023d). Exploring ethical boundaries: Can ChatGPT be prompted to give advice on how to cheat in university assignments?. Preprint, 1–14. · DOI
  43. Spennemann, D. H. R. (2023e). What has ChatGPT read? References and referencing of archaeological literature by a generative artificial intelligence application. arXiv.
  44. Spennemann, D. H. R. (2023f). Will the age of generative Artificial Intelligence become an age of public ignorance?. Preprint, 1–12. · DOI
  45. Spennemann, 2024, Will artificial intelligence affect how cultural heritage will be managed in the future? Conversations with four genAi models, Heritage, 7, 1453, 10.3390/heritage7030070 · DOI
  46. Spennemann, 2024, ChatGPT giving advice on how to cheat in university assignments: How workable are its suggestions?, Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 21, 690, 10.1108/ITSE-10-2023-0195 · DOI
  47. Trichopoulos, G., Konstantakis, M., Alexandridis, G., and Caridakis, G. (2023a). Large language models as recommendation systems in museums. Electronics, 12. · DOI
  48. Trichopoulos, G., Konstantakis, M., Caridakis, G., Katifori, A., and Koukouli, M. (2023b). Crafting a museum guide using GPT4. Bid Data and Cogntiive Computing, 7, (3). · DOI
  49. Wen, 2023, The future of ChatGPT in academic research and publishing: A commentary for clinical and translational medicine, Clinical and Translational Medicine, 13, e1207, 10.1002/ctm2.1207 · DOI
  50. Wylie, A. (2002). Thinking from Things: Essays in the philosophy of archaeology, University of California Press. · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Spennemann, D. H. R.
Affiliations
Charles Sturt University (AU)
Corresponding author
Spennemann, Dirk H. R.
ORCID
Spennemann, Dirk H. R.
Venue
Publications
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2025-03-12
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
12
ISSN
2304-6775 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/publications13010012
OpenAlex
W4408365249
Cited by
23
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 8
FWCI
9.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Publications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Charles Sturt University Research Output (CRO) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
ChatGPT, DeepSeek, cited references, archaeological literature, training data, Wikipedia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review