How to Cite Sources You Found Through AI Tools

How to Cite Sources You Found Through AI Tools

AI research tools are changing how we find literature. But when you discover a paper through Wonders, Elicit, Semantic Scholar, or even ChatGPT, citation gets confusing fast. Do you credit the tool? Just the paper? Both? Let's sort it out.

Jan 3, 2026

By

Author Picture: Joe Pacal, MSc

Joe Pacal, MSc

TL;DR

Cite the sources you actually read—not the AI tool that helped you find them. Only mention the tool in your methodology if doing a systematic review, or if you're using the tool's synthesis rather than the original papers. Always verify AI-surfaced papers actually exist.

The Short Answer

Cite the source you actually read and used. You generally don't need to cite the AI tool that helped you find it, but you will likely need to disclose that you used it in Acknowledgements.

Think of it like Google Scholar—you wouldn't cite Google Scholar for helping you discover a paper. The same logic applies to AI-powered discovery tools like Elicit, Consensus, Semantic Scholar, ResearchRabbit, or Wonders.

When You Might Need to Mention the Tool

There are a few exceptions where acknowledging your discovery method makes sense:

In your methodology section if you're conducting a systematic review or describing your search strategy. Reviewers and readers care about how you found your sources. This isn't a formal citation—it's methodological transparency.

If the AI tool provided the summary or synthesis you're using. This is different from finding a source. If Consensus gave you a claim like "8 out of 10 studies found X" and you're reporting that synthesis, you're not citing the original papers—you're citing Consensus's analysis. That requires attribution.

If your institution or journal requires disclosure of AI use. Some venues want to know about any AI involvement in your research process, including literature discovery.

What Actually Needs a Citation

The paper, article, or source itself—always. Using AI to find it doesn't change your obligation to cite the original work.

If you read the abstract through an AI tool but then accessed and read the full paper, cite the full paper normally.

If you only read the AI-generated summary and never accessed the original, that's a problem. You shouldn't cite sources you haven't actually read. More on that below.

The "I Only Read the AI Summary" Problem

This is where things get ethically sticky. AI tools often provide summaries, key findings, or extracted claims from papers. It's tempting to cite the original paper based on that summary alone.

Don't do this.

If you cite a paper, you're representing that you've engaged with and understood that source. Citing based solely on an AI summary means you can't verify the summary is accurate, you might miss context that changes the meaning, and you're essentially citing something you haven't read.

Better options: access the actual paper (Wonders will point you directly to it), use the AI summary to decide if the paper is worth reading, or if you truly can't access it, see our guide on citing sources you can't fully access.

How to Describe AI-Assisted Search in Methods

If you're writing up a formal methodology—for a thesis, systematic review, or publication—here's how to handle it:

"Initial literature discovery was conducted using [Wonders/Elicit/Semantic Scholar], supplemented by manual searches in [databases]. AI-generated summaries were used to screen relevance; all cited sources were read in full."

This is transparent, honest, and increasingly normal in academic writing.

Common Scenarios

You asked ChatGPT for paper recommendations. ChatGPT might hallucinate citations that don't exist. Verify every recommendation actually exists before citing. If the paper is real and you read it, cite the paper—not ChatGPT.

You used Elicit to find papers and extract claims. Cite the papers you actually read. If you used Elicit's extracted data tables in your analysis, mention this in your methods.

You used Consensus to see what "the research says" on a topic. If you're citing Consensus's synthesis (e.g., "According to Consensus, 85% of studies support X"), you need to attribute that to Consensus. If you then read those studies yourself, cite them directly.

You used Semantic Scholar or ResearchRabbit to map a citation network. No citation needed for the tool. Cite the papers you read.

The Verification Step You Can't Skip

AI tools can surface papers that are retracted, misrepresent findings, or simply don't exist (especially ChatGPT). Before citing any source you discovered through AI:

  1. Confirm the paper exists (check DOI, search the actual journal)

  2. Access and read the actual source

  3. Verify the AI's characterization matches what the paper says

  4. Check if it's been retracted or corrected

This takes time. It's also non-negotiable for credible academic work.

The exact formatting for your citations depends on your required citation style. Check the specific guide for your discipline below.

Frequently asked questions

Should I mention AI tools in my acknowledgments?

It's not always required for discovery tools, but increasingly common. A brief mention like "Literature discovery was aided by [tool]" is appropriate if you want to be transparent. Some journals prohibit AI use entirely (looking at you, Science).

Should I mention AI tools in my acknowledgments?

It's not always required for discovery tools, but increasingly common. A brief mention like "Literature discovery was aided by [tool]" is appropriate if you want to be transparent. Some journals prohibit AI use entirely (looking at you, Science).

Should I mention AI tools in my acknowledgments?

It's not always required for discovery tools, but increasingly common. A brief mention like "Literature discovery was aided by [tool]" is appropriate if you want to be transparent. Some journals prohibit AI use entirely (looking at you, Science).

Is using AI to find papers considered cheating?

No—this is equivalent to using any search tool. AI-assisted discovery is becoming a normal part of modern research. The issue is only if you cite sources without reading them. But again, some schools, departments, or journals see things differently.

Is using AI to find papers considered cheating?

No—this is equivalent to using any search tool. AI-assisted discovery is becoming a normal part of modern research. The issue is only if you cite sources without reading them. But again, some schools, departments, or journals see things differently.

Is using AI to find papers considered cheating?

No—this is equivalent to using any search tool. AI-assisted discovery is becoming a normal part of modern research. The issue is only if you cite sources without reading them. But again, some schools, departments, or journals see things differently.

What if I found a paper through ChatGPT and it doesn't exist?

Yup, that happens. AI chatbots frequently hallucinate (we prefer the term confabulate) plausible-sounding citations that aren't real. Always verify existence through Google Scholar, your library database, or the journal website before citing anything.

What if I found a paper through ChatGPT and it doesn't exist?

Yup, that happens. AI chatbots frequently hallucinate (we prefer the term confabulate) plausible-sounding citations that aren't real. Always verify existence through Google Scholar, your library database, or the journal website before citing anything.

What if I found a paper through ChatGPT and it doesn't exist?

Yup, that happens. AI chatbots frequently hallucinate (we prefer the term confabulate) plausible-sounding citations that aren't real. Always verify existence through Google Scholar, your library database, or the journal website before citing anything.

What if the AI tool has a DOI or citable format?

Some tools like Semantic Scholar have preferred citation formats for their platform. Use these in your methodology if describing your search process, not for individual papers you found.

What if the AI tool has a DOI or citable format?

Some tools like Semantic Scholar have preferred citation formats for their platform. Use these in your methodology if describing your search process, not for individual papers you found.

What if the AI tool has a DOI or citable format?

Some tools like Semantic Scholar have preferred citation formats for their platform. Use these in your methodology if describing your search process, not for individual papers you found.

Can I trust paper summaries from AI tools?

Use them for screening and relevance checking, not as a substitute for reading. AI summaries can miss nuance, misstate findings, or lack important context. Always verify against the original.

Can I trust paper summaries from AI tools?

Use them for screening and relevance checking, not as a substitute for reading. AI summaries can miss nuance, misstate findings, or lack important context. Always verify against the original.

Can I trust paper summaries from AI tools?

Use them for screening and relevance checking, not as a substitute for reading. AI summaries can miss nuance, misstate findings, or lack important context. Always verify against the original.

Should I mention AI tools in my acknowledgments?

It's not always required for discovery tools, but increasingly common. A brief mention like "Literature discovery was aided by [tool]" is appropriate if you want to be transparent. Some journals prohibit AI use entirely (looking at you, Science).

What if the AI tool has a DOI or citable format?

Some tools like Semantic Scholar have preferred citation formats for their platform. Use these in your methodology if describing your search process, not for individual papers you found.

Is using AI to find papers considered cheating?

No—this is equivalent to using any search tool. AI-assisted discovery is becoming a normal part of modern research. The issue is only if you cite sources without reading them. But again, some schools, departments, or journals see things differently.

Can I trust paper summaries from AI tools?

Use them for screening and relevance checking, not as a substitute for reading. AI summaries can miss nuance, misstate findings, or lack important context. Always verify against the original.

What if I found a paper through ChatGPT and it doesn't exist?

Yup, that happens. AI chatbots frequently hallucinate (we prefer the term confabulate) plausible-sounding citations that aren't real. Always verify existence through Google Scholar, your library database, or the journal website before citing anything.

All Citation guides

The author-date system for anthropological research.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

The Australian AGLC standard for citing in legal contexts.

A clearer alternative to the Bluebook for law students and practitioners.

The citation format for maths and American Mathematical Society publications.

The official citation style of the American Political Science Association developed.

The citation format for civil engineering journals and ASCE publications.

Legal citations for law students and practitioners.

The essential citation format for biology, natural sciences, and scientific research.

The IEEE citations for engineering and computer science.

The MHRA citation style guide used by arts and humanities in the UK.

The citation format for biomedical research, medical journals, and life sciences.

Writing about biblical or theological topics? SBL style is the standard for the field.

The Vancouver citation style for biomedical and health sciences.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

The ACS citation style for chemistry and related sciences.

The standard citation style for physics journals and American Institute of Physics publications.

AMA citations for medicine and health sciences.

The APA citation style for psychology, education, and social sciences

The citation style used for sociology and social sciences.

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers numbered citation system.

Chicago-format citations used by history, arts, and humanities

GB/T 7714是中国学术写作的国家标准引用格式。

The Harvard citation style used in by UK, Australian, and international universities.

The ISO 690 Style: International Bibliography Standard (2021 Edition)

MLA citation style for humanities, literature, and languages

The citation style used in the UK by Law studies.

The student-friendly guide to Chicago-style citations for research papers and theses.

The author-date system for anthropological research.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

The Australian AGLC standard for citing in legal contexts.

A clearer alternative to the Bluebook for law students and practitioners.

The citation format for maths and American Mathematical Society publications.

The official citation style of the American Political Science Association developed.

The citation format for civil engineering journals and ASCE publications.

Legal citations for law students and practitioners.

The essential citation format for biology, natural sciences, and scientific research.

The IEEE citations for engineering and computer science.

The MHRA citation style guide used by arts and humanities in the UK.

The citation format for biomedical research, medical journals, and life sciences.

Writing about biblical or theological topics? SBL style is the standard for the field.

The Vancouver citation style for biomedical and health sciences.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

The ACS citation style for chemistry and related sciences.

The standard citation style for physics journals and American Institute of Physics publications.

AMA citations for medicine and health sciences.

The APA citation style for psychology, education, and social sciences

The citation style used for sociology and social sciences.

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers numbered citation system.

Chicago-format citations used by history, arts, and humanities

GB/T 7714是中国学术写作的国家标准引用格式。

The Harvard citation style used in by UK, Australian, and international universities.

The ISO 690 Style: International Bibliography Standard (2021 Edition)

MLA citation style for humanities, literature, and languages

The citation style used in the UK by Law studies.

The student-friendly guide to Chicago-style citations for research papers and theses.

The author-date system for anthropological research.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

The ACS citation style for chemistry and related sciences.

The Australian AGLC standard for citing in legal contexts.

The standard citation style for physics journals and American Institute of Physics publications.

A clearer alternative to the Bluebook for law students and practitioners.

AMA citations for medicine and health sciences.

The citation format for maths and American Mathematical Society publications.

The APA citation style for psychology, education, and social sciences

The official citation style of the American Political Science Association developed.

The citation style used for sociology and social sciences.

The citation format for civil engineering journals and ASCE publications.

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers numbered citation system.

Legal citations for law students and practitioners.

Chicago-format citations used by history, arts, and humanities

The essential citation format for biology, natural sciences, and scientific research.

GB/T 7714是中国学术写作的国家标准引用格式。

The Harvard citation style used in by UK, Australian, and international universities.

The IEEE citations for engineering and computer science.

The ISO 690 Style: International Bibliography Standard (2021 Edition)

The MHRA citation style guide used by arts and humanities in the UK.

MLA citation style for humanities, literature, and languages

The citation format for biomedical research, medical journals, and life sciences.

The citation style used in the UK by Law studies.

Writing about biblical or theological topics? SBL style is the standard for the field.

The student-friendly guide to Chicago-style citations for research papers and theses.

The Vancouver citation style for biomedical and health sciences.

The author-date system for anthropological research.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

The Australian AGLC standard for citing in legal contexts.

A clearer alternative to the Bluebook for law students and practitioners.

The citation format for maths and American Mathematical Society publications.

The official citation style of the American Political Science Association developed.

The citation format for civil engineering journals and ASCE publications.

Legal citations for law students and practitioners.

The essential citation format for biology, natural sciences, and scientific research.

The IEEE citations for engineering and computer science.

The MHRA citation style guide used by arts and humanities in the UK.

The citation format for biomedical research, medical journals, and life sciences.

Writing about biblical or theological topics? SBL style is the standard for the field.

The Vancouver citation style for biomedical and health sciences.

ABNT is the official citation format used in Brazil.

The ACS citation style for chemistry and related sciences.

The standard citation style for physics journals and American Institute of Physics publications.

AMA citations for medicine and health sciences.

The APA citation style for psychology, education, and social sciences

The citation style used for sociology and social sciences.

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers numbered citation system.

Chicago-format citations used by history, arts, and humanities

GB/T 7714是中国学术写作的国家标准引用格式。

The Harvard citation style used in by UK, Australian, and international universities.

The ISO 690 Style: International Bibliography Standard (2021 Edition)

MLA citation style for humanities, literature, and languages

The citation style used in the UK by Law studies.

The student-friendly guide to Chicago-style citations for research papers and theses.

Finding these guides useful?

Try these techniques in Wonders—an AI workspace for literature review. 21 days free. Students get 50% off.

Finding these guides useful?

Try these techniques in Wonders—an AI workspace for literature review. 21 days free. Students get 50% off.

Finding these guides useful?

Try these techniques in Wonders—an AI workspace for literature review. 21 days free. Students get 50% off.

Finding these guides useful?

Try these techniques in Wonders—an AI workspace for literature review. 21 days free. Students get 50% off.

Wonders AI Research Workspace Logo

Solutions

More

Globe Icon - Language Switcher
Chevron Down Icon
Wonders AI Research Workspace Logo

Solutions

More

Globe Icon - Language Switcher
Chevron Down Icon
Wonders AI Research Workspace Logo
Wonders AI Research Workspace Logo