I think you missed the point. Yes it was meant to be humorous, and also to emphasise one of the reasons AI-generated citations are completely untrustworthy, especially with the growing number of AI-generated (junk) papers being published.
No, I had no intention of trying to offer a real source for the accuracy of AI generated citations. It is not hard to Google, search HN or even (ironically) use AI to search, to find numerous relatively recent studies discussing the problem or highlighting specific cases of respected journals/conferences publishing papers with junk citations.
It feels like allowing fake citations in the output from the AI means that you didn't do even the barest minimum of verification (i.e. tell the AI to verify it by sending a new AI to download the pdf that matches that DOI and verifying that it matches what the citation says).
While funny, it does nothing to prove your assertion.