AI errors hit report behind Australia’s under-16 ban

A government-commissioned report that helped support Australia’s plan to restrict social media access for children under 16 has come under scrutiny after several inaccurate and apparently fabricated academic references were identified.

The report, produced as part of a $3.48 million government-funded trial examining age-assurance technologies, was prepared by the Age Check Certification Scheme (ACCS). The organisation has acknowledged that ChatGPT was used to rewrite parts of the document after initially denying that artificial intelligence had been involved.

An analysis of the report found six problematic citations in a chapter examining emerging technologies. Some of the digital object identifiers, or DOIs, reportedly directed readers to research papers that did not exist. Other references contained combinations of authors, journals and publication dates that could not be verified in academic records.

In another case, a DOI reportedly led to a genuine research paper, but the paper did not support the claim attributed to it in the report.

The controversy intensified after ACCS was questioned about the use of artificial intelligence. A spokesperson initially said no AI had been used in producing the report. The organisation later acknowledged that ChatGPT metadata was present in four links across two sections of the document.

ACCS maintained that the metadata effectively disclosed the use of the tool and said the references had been manually checked. However, efforts to correct the disputed citations reportedly resulted in further inconsistencies.

One example involved a research paper that an ACCS source said had been accessed in March 2025. According to the paper’s lead author, however, the research was not published until June 2025, raising additional questions about the accuracy of the report’s references.

The report has attracted attention because it was used in the policy process surrounding Australia’s planned restrictions on social media for under-16s. Communications Minister Anika Wells had previously praised the report for identifying potential approaches to age verification.

The minister’s department told a Senate inquiry that it had discussed the citation problems with ACCS. However, the department was reportedly informed about faulty links rather than allegations that some references had been fabricated.

Australian National University academic Christian Downie warned that unreliable references can have serious consequences regardless of whether they were generated by AI or resulted from human error. He said inaccurate citations could contribute to poor policymaking and weaken public confidence in government-commissioned research.

Independent Senator Fatima Payman also compared the controversy with a separate case involving Deloitte, which refunded part of a $440,000 government contract after problems were identified with AI-generated references.