The passages in which the court addresses the fabricated authority, verbatim, by document. A bracketed ellipsis marks where a passage was cut for length; nothing else is changed.
Docket entry 38, 27 November 2024 · source · PDF · 3 pages
Docket text. Declaration of Peter J. Farrell in Support of 34 MOTION File amended expert declaration re 23 Affidavit in Opposition to Motion filed by Keith Ellison. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) A)(Farrell, Peter) (Entered: 11/27/2024)
4. I did not know that Professor Hancock’s declaration included AI-hallucinated citations when it was filed on November 1, 2024, or at any time before it was filed. None of the other members of the Attorney General’s litigation team knew that Professor Hancock’s declaration included AI-hallucinated citations when it was filed on November 1, 2024, or at any time before it was filed.
None of the other members of the Attorney General’s litigation team knew that Professor Hancock’s declaration included AI-hallucinated citations when it was filed on November 1, 2024, or at any time before it was filed. As discussed more fully below, the Attorney General’s Office first learned of the possibility that Professor Hancock’s declaration included AI-hallucinated citations after Plaintiffs filed their memorandum in support of their motion to exclude on November 16, 2024. 5.
The Attorney General’s Office relied on Professor Hancock to draft the substance of the expert declaration and to identify the academic literature and other sources that supported his expert declaration. The Attorney General’s Office did not add the AI- hallucinated citations to Professor Hancock’s declaration (or the supporting references document). 6.
Docket entry 37, 27 November 2024 · source · PDF · 8 pages
Docket text. MEMORANDUM in Support re 34 MOTION File amended expert declaration re 23 Affidavit in Opposition to Motion filed by Keith Ellison. (Attachments: # 1 LR7.1/LR72.2 Word Count Compliance Certificate)(Farrell, Peter) (Entered: 11/27/2024)
702. In doing so, they alleged that Paragraph 21 of Professor Hancock’s declaration cited to a non-existent journal article that was likely hallucinated by artificial intelligence (AI). Professor Hancock has since confirmed that Paragraph 21 of his declaration cites to a non-existent article by “Hwang et al.” Professor Hancock has also informed the Attorney General’s office that Paragraph 19 of his declaration cites to a non-existent article by CASE 0:24-cv-03754-LMP-DLM Doc.
But the citation lists the wrong co-authors. Until Plaintiffs’ exclusion motion, the Attorney General’s office was unaware of the possibility that Professor Hancock’s declaration cited non-existent articles. The Attorney General’s office did not insert the erroneous citations into Professor Hancock’s declaration or the supporting references document.
29. In doing so, Plaintiffs alleged that Paragraph 21 of Professor Hancock’s declaration cited to a journal article that did not exist. ECF No.
30 at 1, 4-9. Plaintiffs alleged that the citation was likely hallucinated by AI. Id.
5. The Attorney General’s office first learned of the possibility that Professor Hancock’s declaration included an AI-hallucinated citation after Plaintiffs filed their motion to exclude. Declaration of Peter J.
Id. The Attorney General’s Office did not add the AI- hallucinated citations to Professor Hancock’s declaration (or the supporting references document). Id.
Id. Professor Hancock subsequently confirmed to the Attorney General’s office that Paragraph 21 of his declaration cited to a non-existent 2023 article by Hwang et al. Declaration of Jeffrey Hancock dated Nov.
After re-reviewing the declaration, CASE 0:24-cv-03754-LMP-DLM Doc. 37 Filed 11/27/24 Page 3 of 8 4 Professor Hancock also informed the Attorney General’s office that Paragraph 19 also cited to a non-existent 2023 journal article by De keersmaecker & Roets. Id.
Docket entry 39, 27 November 2024 · source · PDF · 12 pages
Docket text. Declaration of Prof. Jeff Hancock in Support of 34 MOTION File amended expert declaration re 23 Affidavit in Opposition to Motion filed by Keith Ellison. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) 1-2)(Farrell, Peter) (Entered: 11/27/2024)
2. The first citation error appears in paragraph 19 and cites to a nonexistent 2023 article by De keersmaecker & Roets. The correct citation for the proposition is to Hancock & Bailenson (2021), cited in paragraph 17(iv).
The correct citation for the proposition is to Hancock & Bailenson (2021), cited in paragraph 17(iv). The second citation error appears in paragraph 21, a citation to a nonexistent 2023 article by Hwang et al., and is identified CASE 0:24-cv-03754-LMP-DLM Doc. 39 Filed 11/27/24 Page 1 of 12 2 by the Plaintiffs in their motion to exclude my declaration.
11. The two citation errors, popularly referred to as “hallucinations,” likely occurred in my use of GPT-4o, which is web-based and widely used by academics and students as a research and drafting tool. “Hallucinated citations” are references to articles that do not exist.
I did not mean for GPT-4o to insert a citation, but in the cut and paste from MS Word to GPT-4o, GPT-4o must have interpreted my note to myself as a command. The response from GPT-4o, then, was to generate a citation, which is where I believe the hallucinated citations came from. This only happened in these two instances and nowhere else in my declaration.
I then edited my declaration extensively as to its substance, and where I had notes to myself in both instances to add the citation, GPT-4o had put them in for me incorrectly and deleted the “[cite]” placeholder I had included to remind myself to go back and include the right citation. Without the “[cite]” placeholders, I overlooked the two hallucinated citations and did not remember to include the correct ones. This was the error on my part, and as I stated earlier, I am sorry for my oversight in both instances here and for the additional work it has taken to explain and correct this.
I asked GPT-4o to generate a reference list in APA format using the in-text citations already in the draft declaration. Given the relatively small number of citations, I did not run this through the reference software I typically use when I write my academic papers, which might have caught the hallucinated citations. Here too, I realize that I should have vetted this through my usual process.
The correct author list for this source is: Goldstein, J., Sastry, G., Musser, M., DiResta, R., Gentzel, M., and Sedova, K. As noted in paragraph 14 above, I did not run the citation list through the reference software I typically use when I write my academic papers, resulting in the inclusion of the two hallucinated sources. I believe GPT-4o also generated an incorrect list of secondary authors for Goldstein et al.—a real paper with which I was already familiar.