Corporate Author. (DATE). Program Title (Version) [bracketed description of tool]. Web address.
OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (Mar 14 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat
"Description of the description given the AI Tool" prompt. Program Title, version, Corporate Author, Date, Web address.
“Describe the symbolism of the green light in the book The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald” prompt. ChatGPT, 13 Feb. version, OpenAI, 8 Mar. 2023, chat.openai.com/chat.
AI Tool, response to " prompt inserted here," Coporate Author, Date, [optional URL].
ChatGPT, response to “Explain how to make pizza dough from common household ingredients,” OpenAI, March 7, 2023.
To a certain extent, there is some fluidity in how citations are done with AI Tools. As of August 2023, main citation style guides have all released blogposts reacting the expansion of Generative AI with new styles on how to style them:
Reference:
Corporate Author. (DATE). Program Title (Version) [bracketed description of too]. Web address.
OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (Mar 14 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat
In-text:
(Corporate Author, Year)
(OpenAI, 2023).
Works Cited:
"Description of the description given the AI Tool" prompt. Program Title, version, Corporate Author, Date, Web address.
“Describe the symbolism of the green light in the book The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald” prompt. ChatGPT, 13 Feb. version, OpenAI, 8 Mar. 2023, chat.openai.com/chat.
In-text:
("part of prompt phrase")
("Describe the symbolism")
Endnote/Footnotes
AI Tool, response to " prompt inserted here," Coporate Author, Date, URL [optional].
ChatGPT, response to “Explain how to make pizza dough from common household ingredients,” OpenAI, March 7, 2023, URL [optional].
Alternatively, if the context of what the AI Tool was responding to is obvious from the essay text, you can use a simpler version.
Origin of information/AI Tool, Corporate Author, Date, URL [optional].
Text generated by ChatGPT, OpenAI, March 7, 2023, https://chat.openai.com/chat.
UFV's main policy document on academic dishonesty is laid out here, in Policy 70. While it makes no mention of generative AI Tools, many uses of this technology could clearly fall under the parameters of Academic Misconduct, as it can be used to falsify original work. The policy also expects student to inform on their fellow students' acts of plagiarism. For students "made aware of the Academic Misconduct of another Student they need to report this to a University Employee, such as a faculty member."
In order to avoid running afoul of UFV's Academic Integrity tools when using AI Tools, consider...
1) Clarify with your professor the rules for using AI Tools in their class. As of August 2023 UFV has no cohesive policy regarding how AI Tools can be used in coursework, with some professors allowing significant use and other forbidding their usage entirely. Do not expect the rules you learned in one class to apply to another.
2) If you do use AI Tools for composition, be sure to cite them as you would another source, being open and honest about the scope in which they were used in order augment your work.
