How to cite AI assistance in MLA, APA and Chicago
MLA, APA and Chicago have each published guidance for citing generative AI. The shared principle is that you name the tool, the version, the date and the prompt context. Citation and disclosure are different obligations, and your course policy overrides a style guide’s default whenever the two disagree.
Do I cite it, disclose it, or both?
Citation credits a source you quoted or drew on. Disclosure tells your reader how the work was produced. AI use often triggers the second even when it does not obviously trigger the first, for example when a tool rewrote your sentences rather than supplying information.
Check the syllabus first. Some courses require a short methods note describing every tool used, some require formal citation, and some prohibit the assistance entirely, in which case no citation format makes it acceptable. A style guide tells you how to format, not whether you were permitted.
Drawn from [3]
MLA format
MLA treats the prompt as the title of the source and the tool as the container. The MLA Style Center also recommends describing the AI use in your prose or in a note, since the citation alone does not explain what the tool contributed.
Works Cited pattern: the prompt text in quotation marks, followed by the tool name, version, company, date and URL. In text, refer to the tool and prompt descriptively rather than with a page number, because there is no stable pagination to cite.
Drawn from [1]
APA format
APA treats the tool’s maker as the author and the model as the title, following its software citation pattern. APA also recommends including the full prompt and response in an appendix when the output is material to your argument, because your reader cannot retrieve it independently.
Reference pattern: Company. (Year). Tool Name (Version) [Large language model]. URL. In text, cite as (Company, Year) and describe in your methods or narrative what you asked and how you used the answer.
Drawn from [2]
Chicago format
Chicago’s guidance treats AI output as closer to personal communication, because a reader cannot retrieve it. For that reason Chicago generally recommends a note rather than a bibliography entry.
Note pattern: text generated by the named tool and company, with the date, the URL and the prompt described within the note. If your instructor prefers a bibliography entry, follow that preference and stay consistent throughout the paper.
What should I record while I work?
Keep the exact prompts, the date, the tool and version, and what you did with the output. Doing this while you write costs almost nothing, while reconstructing it weeks later under question is difficult and looks worse.
If a tool rewrote your prose rather than supplying facts, note that specifically. A rewriting tool changes how your ideas are expressed, which is a different disclosure from a tool that supplied information you then verified independently.
- Save the exact prompt text.
- Record the tool name, version and date.
- Note whether it supplied ideas, information or only phrasing.
- Keep the original output beside your edited version.
- Verify any factual claim independently before using it.
Common questions
Do I need to cite AI if it only fixed my grammar?
Style guides generally do not require citing basic spelling and grammar correction. Many course policies still ask you to disclose it, and substantive rewriting is a different matter. Check your syllabus.
What if my instructor has not said anything about AI?
Ask in writing before you submit. Silence in a syllabus is not permission, and a short email creates a record that protects you either way.
Can I cite an AI tool as the source for a fact?
You should not. Generative models produce plausible text, not verified information. Find and cite the underlying source, and confirm the claim yourself.
Sources
These were read for this revision. A provider's description of its own product is an attributed claim, not independent certification. Check the current documentation before making a purchase or an academic decision.