CiteOwl

Free citation tools

Three small tools for anyone holding a reference list they are not sure about. Each one answers a single question against the same public registries librarians use. No account, nothing to install.

Which one you want

Start with the citation checker if you have a bibliography and a suspicion. It takes the whole list at once, resolves every DOI in it, searches for the entries that do not have one, and then does the thing most checkers skip: it compares the record it found against what you actually wrote. A reference can point at a real, resolvable, respectable paper and still be wrong about which paper that is.

Use the DOI lookup when one identifier is misbehaving and you want to see what sits behind it. Use the citation generator when you have found the paper and need it written out properly.

Nothing here needs an account and nothing is stored. Paste, read the answer, close the tab. The lookups run against free public sources, so there is no quota to burn and nobody keeps your bibliography.

What they read

CrossRef and OpenAlex. CrossRef is where journal publishers deposit metadata when they register a DOI, so it is the authority on whether an identifier exists and what it points at. OpenAlex is an open index of published works, which is how a reference with no DOI still gets checked, by title and author.

Between them they cover journal articles well. They cover books, book chapters, theses, conference papers, government reports and small regional journals much less well, and a paper published in the last few weeks may not have propagated yet. So not found means the check could not confirm the reference, never that the reference is fake. Those are the ones to look up by hand at the publisher or the library, and the manual routine takes about a minute per reference.

Why these exist

Because a chatbot produces a reference the same way it produces any other sentence, by predicting what usually comes next, and author names, journal titles and DOI suffixes all follow strong enough patterns that the result looks exactly right while corresponding to nothing. There is no registry inside the model to consult, which is the mechanism behind fabricated citations and the reason asking it to double check its own work never helps. The fix is to ask a registry, which takes seconds and is what these pages do.

If the list has already been handed in, there is a separate guide for that conversation. If it has not, check it now.

Or skip the checking entirely

CiteOwl researches before it writes and cites what it actually retrieved, so there is nothing to verify afterwards. Every change it makes arrives as a diff you can reject.

Start writing

Questions people ask.

Are these tools really free?
Yes. No account, no sign-in, no card. They run against CrossRef and OpenAlex, which are free public sources, so there is nothing to charge for.
Which tool should I use?
If you have a whole reference list and a suspicion, use the citation checker. If one DOI in a paper is misbehaving, use the DOI lookup. If you have a paper and need it written out in a style, use the citation generator.
Do you store what I paste?
No. The text is used to run the lookups and is not kept afterwards. There is no account to attach it to.
Can these tools prove a paper is fake?
They can prove an identifier is not registered and that two indexes hold no matching record, which together is strong evidence. They cannot prove a negative, because books, chapters, theses and very new papers are legitimately missing from those indexes. Treat not found as a prompt to check by hand.
Read next.