AI citation checks: does the source support the sentence?
Verify an AI-generated citation by checking three separate things: whether the source exists, whether the cited passage supports the sentence, and whether its scope matches the claim. A working link is only the first check. A reputable document can be attached to a sentence it never establishes.
The original ALCE research paper studies generating answers with citations and evaluating citation-related quality. Its existence is a reminder that answer quality and citation support need explicit evaluation. This page proposes a manual research workflow; it does not report a benchmark or claim that a particular assistant achieves a measured accuracy.
Break the sentence into claims
Start with the sentence the AI drafted, not with the source list. Split compound statements into small assertions. “Revenue increased, margins improved, and management expects acceleration” contains at least three claims with potentially different sources and evidence types.
For each assertion, open the actual document. Confirm author or issuer, publication date, document identity, and the relevant passage. Search snippets and another model’s summary can help locate the material, but they are not substitutes for reading the passage and nearby qualifications.
| Check | Question | Research status |
|---|---|---|
| Existence | Is the intended document actually available? | Located or unresolved |
| Support | Does this passage establish this assertion? | Supported, partial, absent, contradicted |
| Scope | Same entity, period, units, and population? | Matched or mismatch |
| Attribution | Fact, issuer statement, or inference? | Explicit label |
| Wording | Does the draft add certainty or causality? | Retain or revise |
A partial match needs a narrower sentence, not a more confident citation format. Preserve the original wording so that the revision can be audited.
Hypothetical citation mismatch
Assume a fictional annual report says total revenue increased because of an acquisition. An AI draft says organic demand accelerated and cites that report. The source exists and discusses revenue, but it does not establish organic acceleration. The correct response is to remove or narrow the claim, then look for separately disclosed organic measures if they are necessary.
Suppose the same report contains management’s expectation that margins may improve next year. Rewriting that as “margins will improve” changes both attribution and certainty. The research note should retain the speaker, future period, and qualification instead of borrowing the report’s authority for a stronger assertion.
The example is hypothetical. It demonstrates two distinct citation defects: a source can be topically related without supporting the asserted mechanism, and a genuinely relevant passage can be overstated during paraphrase.
Keep location and context
Save a page number, section heading, table identifier, or another reliable locator alongside the URL. Retain a short excerpt within appropriate quotation limits when useful, plus the surrounding qualification in your own notes. A document link alone makes later verification unnecessarily difficult.
For tables, include row, column, unit, and footnotes. For a web page, record the retrieval date and version if available. If the source changes or disappears, the locator and identity record help distinguish a publication revision from an incorrect original citation.
Then reread the draft without following the link. Ask what a reasonable reader would understand the citation to support. One citation at the end of a paragraph may appear to support every sentence. Move links closer to individual claims when their support differs, or divide the paragraph into clearer units.
Set a release rule
A useful rule is that every material factual assertion must have a support status before the memo is shared. Supported claims can remain; partially supported claims are narrowed; absent or contradicted claims are removed or explicitly discussed as unresolved. This is an editorial method, not a guarantee of complete truth.
The method cannot repair inaccessible primary sources or establish facts outside the cited document’s competence. A company report may establish what management stated, without independently verifying every causal explanation. Common errors include checking only that a URL opens, accepting topical similarity, letting one citation cover several unrelated claims, and copying an AI-generated page number without inspection.
FAQ
Is a real official source enough to validate a sentence?
No. The relevant passage must support the particular assertion, including its time, entity, units, and certainty.
What if the source supports only half of a sentence?
Split or narrow the sentence and mark the unsupported portion for further research. Do not conceal the gap with additional loosely related links.