Skip to Main Content

Generative AI Tools for Students

Verifying Generative AI

Generative AI tools can be valuable for brainstorming and generating ideas, but they sometimes produce inaccurate or completely fictional information, a phenomenon known as "hallucination." To ensure your work is credible and reliable, it’s important to verify AI-generated content.

AI tools may also invent citations or reference non-existent sources.

If you encounter this, check our FAQs for guidance on:

Steps for Verifying AI-Generated Content

SIFT Method

1. Stop: Pause and consider whether the AI-generated information seems credible.

2. Investigate the Source: Check where the information comes from. If sources are missing, independently research the author, organization, or dataset.

3. Find Better Coverage: Use trusted resources like BU Libraries Search or Google Scholar to verify claims. Fact-checking websites can also help you quickly confirm widely shared information:

  • FactCheck.org: Verifies claims made by politicians and public figures.

  • Snopes.com: Debunks rumors and viral misinformation.

  • Fact Checker (Washington Post): Evaluates political statements for accuracy.

  • PolitiFact: Rates the truthfulness of public claims with the Truth-O-Meter.

4. Trace Claims to the Original: Search for the primary sources—peer-reviewed studies, data, or expert-authored content—to ensure accuracy and context.

Improving Accuracy with Scholarly Tools

  • Microsoft Copilot and Perplexity AI: Tools that can verify information but may still rely on less reliable sources.
  • Elicit and Consensus: AI tools designed to focus on research-backed sources, which are more reliable for academic work.

Always corroborate information from these tools with trusted resources like BU Libraries Search or Google Scholar.

Why Fact-Checking AI Matters
Generative AI is a starting point, not a definitive source. Fact-checking ensures your research remains credible, accurate, and academically sound.

If you need help with fact-checking, please contact the library.

Citing Generative AI

Before using generative AI tools like ChatGPT for assignments, always confirm with your instructor, as policies vary. Some may allow limited use, while others may prohibit it entirely.

Citation Examples
The following examples illustrate how to format AI-generated content in common citation styles. For best results, consult the Citation Guidelines section below, which links directly to sources from APA, MLA, and Chicago.

APA (7th Edition)
Format: Author. (Year). Tool Name (Version) [Large language model]. URL
Example: OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT [Large language model]. https://openai.com
In-Text: (OpenAI, 2025)

MLA (9th Edition)
Format: Author. "Title of Response." Tool Name, Version, Date, URL.
Example: OpenAI. “Response to Who is the CEO of Starbucks?'" ChatGPT, 8 Feb. 2025, https://openai.com.
In-Text: (OpenAI)

Chicago (17th Edition)
Format: Author. "Title of Response." Tool Name, Version, Date, URL.
Example: OpenAI. "Response to 'Who is the CEO of Starbucks?’” ChatGPT, Feb. 8, 2025, https://openai.com.
Footnote: ¹ OpenAI, "Response to 'Who is the CEO of Starbucks?’” ChatGPT, Feb. 8, 2025, https://openai.com.

Citation Guidelines
For detailed instructions, follow the official style guides:

Note: Your instructor may also request an appendix with the prompts you provided to ChatGPT or a transcript of your interaction. Citation practices for AI tools are still evolving, so always check the applicable style guide for the latest requirements.

Additional Resources
For guidance on citing other formats of generative AI (e.g., images, code, videos), refer to:

It’s also worth reviewing expert advice on non-traditional citation scenarios:

Ensure your citations follow academic standards and clearly indicate how you used AI in your work.

Librarian

Profile Photo
Brock Edmunds
Contact:
edmundsb@bu.edu
Room 318D
Pardee Library
(617) 353-4311