Can irrelevant #citations feign credibility?

Participants from #academia admitted #AI tools seemed more credible when they cited links.
...even though they probably wouldn't #factCheck links.
...and the links sometimes had "nothing to do with" the topic.

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.14849

Ars Technica: Legal fail: Don’t use AI to sue Facebook users for calling you a bad date. “An attempt to pressure Meta into removing a critical post from a Chicago Facebook group called ‘Are We Dating the Same Guy’ may end in sanctions for lawyers whose takedown arguments appeared to rely on fake AI citations to support doxing claims.”

Going Concern: EY Gets Busted and Yeets Cybersecurity Report Littered With AI Hallucinations . “The investigation found that the 2025 EY Canada report titled ‘Points of Attack: Uncovering Cyber Threats and Fraud in Loyalty Systems’ was stuffed with hallucinations: 16 out of 27 citations to be exact.”

Let's discuss of it.

#women #academia #citations

https://www.science.org/content/article/women-researchers-cited-less-men-heres-why-what-can-done

Search Engine Roundtable: Study: Adding Schema Did Not Improve AI Citations On Google, ChatGPT & More. “A new study from Ahrefs says that adding schema (structured data) does not and did not boost citations on any of the AI platforms including Google (AI Overviews or AI Mode), ChatGPT and others. ‘Adding schema produced no major uplift in citations on any platform,’ Ahrefs wrote.”

🌞 JabRef 6.0 Alpha 6 released! 🌞

We are thrilled to announce a new alpha version! The version is formally an alpha but stable enough for usage.

Highlights:

- Revamped notifications and pop-up
- Improved generation and handling of inserted citations in LibreOffice
- Improved inspections for #biblatex and #bibtex

https://blog.jabref.org/2026/05/14/JabRef6-0-alpha6/

#javafx #bibliography #academia #citations #TexLatex #academic #opensource #research

@foojay @frankdelporte

CIDRAP: Review uncovers rising rate of fake references in published biomedical papers. “A systematic review published yesterday in The Lancet reveals that of 97.1 million verified references in published biomedical papers, 4,046 were likely fake, with rates of fabrication rising 12-fold from 2023 through 2025—which commentators call a disturbing discovery that highlights the need to improve […]

More evidence of the corrosive impact of AI on #scholarship #integrity. According to this research in the biomedical context, #fabricated #citations existed in: ~1 in 2,828 papers (2023), ~1 in 458 (2025), ~1 in 277 (early 2026). A twelvefold increase.

Horrifying. The recommendations here are obvious (e.g. #retractions); but I might also suggest that sanctions against authors who are found to have submitted such work are necessary (e.g. desk rejection).

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(26)00603-3 #scholcomm