.jpg)
The University of Hong Kong in Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong Island. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
HKU professor apologizes after PhD student’s AI-assisted paper cites fabricated sources.
Updated
November 28, 2025 4:18 PM
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
A new bet on early heart failure detection and why women’s health is at the center.
Updated
December 23, 2025 12:36 PM
A doctor holding an artificial heart model. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
Heart disease does not always announce itself clearly, especially in women. Many of the symptoms are ordinary, including fatigue, shortness of breath and swelling. These signs are frequently dismissed or explained away. As a result, many women are diagnosed late, when treatment options are narrower and outcomes are worse. That diagnostic gap is the context behind a recent investment involving Ultromics and the American Heart Association’s Go Red for Women Venture Fund.
Ultromics is a health technology company that uses artificial intelligence to help doctors spot early signs of heart failure from routine heart scans. It has received a strategic investment from the American Heart Association’s Go Red for Women Venture Fund.
The focus of the investment is a long-standing blind spot in cardiac care. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, or HFpEF, affects millions of people worldwide, with women disproportionately impacted. It is one of the most common forms of heart failure, yet also one of the hardest to diagnose. Studies even show women are twice as likely as men to develop the condition and around 64% of cases go undiagnosed in routine clinical practice.
Ultromics works with a tool most patients already experience during heart care: the echocardiogram. There is no new scan and no added burden for patients. Its software analyzes standard heart ultrasound images and looks for subtle patterns that point to early heart failure. The goal is clarity. Give clinicians better signals earlier, before the disease advances.
“Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is one of the most complex and overlooked diseases in cardiology. For too long, clinicians have been expected to diagnose it using tools that weren't built to detect it and as a result, many patients are identified too late,” said Ross Upton, PhD, CEO and Founder of Ultromics. “By augmenting physicians' decision making with EchoGo, we can help them recognize disease at an earlier stage and treat it more effectively.”
The stakes are high. Research suggests women are twice as likely as men to develop the condition and that a majority of cases are missed in routine clinical practice. That delay matters. New therapies can reduce hospitalizations and improve survival, but only if patients are diagnosed in time.
This is why early detection has become a priority for mission-driven investors. “Closing the diagnostic gap by recognizing disease before irreversible damage occurs is critical to improving health for women—and everyone,” said Tracy Warren, Senior Managing Director, Go Red for Women Venture Fund. “We are gratified to see technologies, such as this one, that are accepted by leading institutions as advances in the field of cardiovascular diagnostics. That's the kind of progress our fund was created to accelerate.”
Ultromics’ platform is already cleared by regulators for clinical use and is being deployed in hospitals across the US and UK. The company says its technology has analyzed hundreds of thousands of heart scans, helping clinicians reach clearer conclusions when traditional methods fall short.
Taken together, the investment reflects a broader shift in healthcare. Attention is shifting earlier—toward detection instead of reaction. Toward tools that fit into existing care rather than complicate it. In this case, the funding is not about introducing something new into the system. It is about seeing what has long been missed—and doing so in time.