HKU professor apologizes after PhD student’s AI-assisted paper cites fabricated sources.
Updated
January 8, 2026 6:33 PM
.jpg)
The University of Hong Kong in Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong Island. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
It’s no surprise that artificial intelligence, while remarkably capable, can also go astray—spinning convincing but entirely fabricated narratives. From politics to academia, AI’s “hallucinations” have repeatedly shown how powerful technology can go off-script when left unchecked.
Take Grok-2, for instance. In July 2024, the chatbot misled users about ballot deadlines in several U.S. states, just days after President Joe Biden dropped his re-election bid against former President Donald Trump. A year earlier, a U.S. lawyer found himself in court for relying on ChatGPT to draft a legal brief—only to discover that the AI tool had invented entire cases, citations and judicial opinions. And now, the academic world has its own cautionary tale.
Recently, a journal paper from the Department of Social Work and Social Administration at the University of Hong Kong was found to contain fabricated citations—sources apparently created by AI. The paper, titled “Forty Years of Fertility Transition in Hong Kong,” analyzed the decline in Hong Kong’s fertility rate over the past four decades. Authored by doctoral student Yiming Bai, along with Yip Siu-fai, Vice Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and other university officials, the study identified falling marriage rates as a key driver behind the city’s shrinking birth rate. The authors recommended structural reforms to make Hong Kong’s social and work environment more family-friendly.
But the credibility of the paper came into question when inconsistencies surfaced among its references. Out of 61 cited works, some included DOI (Digital Object Identifier) links that led to dead ends, displaying “DOI Not Found.” Others claimed to originate from academic journals, yet searches yielded no such publications.
Speaking to HK01, Yip acknowledged that his student had used AI tools to organize the citations but failed to verify the accuracy of the generated references. “As the corresponding author, I bear responsibility”, Yip said, apologizing for the damage caused to the University of Hong Kong and the journal’s reputation. He clarified that the paper itself had undergone two rounds of verification and that its content was not fabricated—only the citations had been mishandled.
Yip has since contacted the journal’s editor, who accepted his explanation and agreed to re-upload a corrected version in the coming days. A formal notice addressing the issue will also be released. Yip said he would personally review each citation “piece by piece” to ensure no errors remain.
As for the student involved, Yip described her as a diligent and high-performing researcher who made an honest mistake in her first attempt at using AI for academic assistance. Rather than penalize her, Yip chose a more constructive approach, urging her to take a course on how to use AI tools responsibly in academic research.
Ultimately, in an age where generative AI can produce everything from essays to legal arguments, there are two lessons to take away from this episode. First, AI is a powerful assistant, but only that. The final judgment must always rest with us. No matter how seamless the output seems, cross-checking and verifying information remain essential. Second, as AI becomes integral to academic and professional life, institutions must equip students and employees with the skills to use it responsibly. Training and mentorship are no longer optional; they’re the foundation for using AI to enhance, not undermine, human work.
Because in this age of intelligent machines, staying relevant isn’t about replacing human judgment with AI, it’s about learning how to work alongside it.
Keep Reading
Structured AI interviews and human judgment combine to address the global talent shortage
Updated
April 1, 2026 8:56 AM
ManpowerGroup World Headquarters in Milwaukee. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
As hiring pressures mount across global markets, ManpowerGroup is turning to technology to strengthen how it connects people to work. The workforce solutions major has announced a global partnership with Hubert, a startup focused on AI-driven structured interviews. The aim is simple: make hiring faster and fairer, without removing the human touch.
ManpowerGroup has spent decades operating at the center of the global labor market. The company works with employers across industries to fill roles, manage workforce planning and build talent pipelines. With millions of placements each year, it has a clear view of how strained hiring has become. A large share of employers today report difficulty finding skilled talent. At the same time, candidates expect more transparency, quicker feedback and flexibility in how they engage with employers.
Hubert enters this picture as a specialist in structured digital interviewing. The startup has built tools that allow candidates to complete interviews online, at any time, while being assessed against consistent criteria. Instead of relying on informal screening calls or resume filters, its system focuses on standardized questions tied directly to job requirements. The idea is to bring more consistency to early-stage hiring.
The partnership brings these capabilities into ManpowerGroup’s global operations. AI-powered interviews will now support the first stage of screening, helping recruiters identify qualified candidates earlier in the process. This does not replace recruiters. Final decisions and contextual judgment remain with experienced hiring professionals. What changes is the speed and structure of the initial assessment.
For employers, this could mean earlier visibility into job-ready talent and less time spent on manual screening. For candidates, it offers more flexibility. A significant portion of interviews on Hubert’s platform are completed outside regular office hours, allowing applicants to engage when it suits them. That flexibility can make a difference in competitive labor markets where timing matters.
The collaboration is also positioned as a step toward reducing bias. By evaluating each candidate against the same transparent standards, the process becomes more consistent. While no system can remove bias entirely, structured assessments can reduce the variability that often comes with unstructured interviews.
At its core, the partnership addresses a gap many large organizations are facing. They need scale and speed, but they cannot afford to lose the human judgment that good hiring depends on. Manual processes are too slow. Fully automated systems can feel impersonal and risky. ManpowerGroup’s approach suggests a middle path, where technology handles repetition and structure and recruiters focus on potential and fit.
The move also reflects a broader shift in the workforce industry. AI is no longer being tested on the sidelines. It is being built into the foundation of hiring operations. For established players like ManpowerGroup, the challenge is not whether to adopt AI, but how to do so responsibly and at scale.
By working with Hubert, the company is signaling that the future of recruitment will likely blend structured digital tools with human expertise. In a market defined by talent shortages and rising expectations, that balance may prove critical.