If the inaccuracies are limited to metadata and do not constitute scientific fabrication, the most plausible explanation is that the author attempted to patch incomplete Zotero exports using GPT, inadvertently introducing errors.
Such errors arise from the uncritical adoption of automated tools and a failure to verify outputs manually. This reflects academic laxity and an excessive trust in LLMs. As AI tools become ubiquitous in research—even for generating encyclopedic content—some individuals have developed a misplaced confidence in GPT, leading them to undervalue the importance of citation accuracy.
However, while this is undeniably negligent, it does not validate wholesale dismissal of the paper’s scientific merit, nor does it warrant ad hominem attacks. Demanding the end of an academic career for citation errors is a draconian measure akin to a witch hunt.
Such errors arise from the uncritical adoption of automated tools and a failure to verify outputs manually. This reflects academic laxity and an excessive trust in LLMs. As AI tools become ubiquitous in research—even for generating encyclopedic content—some individuals have developed a misplaced confidence in GPT, leading them to undervalue the importance of citation accuracy.
However, while this is undeniably negligent, it does not validate wholesale dismissal of the paper’s scientific merit, nor does it warrant ad hominem attacks. Demanding the end of an academic career for citation errors is a draconian measure akin to a witch hunt.