  The public release of ChatGPT has resulted in considerable publicity and has
led to wide-spread discussion of the usefulness and capabilities of generative
AI language models. Its ability to extract and summarise data from textual
sources and present them as human-like contextual responses makes it an
eminently suitable tool to answer questions users might ask. This paper tested
what archaeological literature appears to have been included in ChatGPT's
training phase. While ChatGPT offered seemingly pertinent references, a large
percentage proved to be fictitious. Using cloze analysis to make inferences on
the sources 'memorised' by a generative AI model, this paper was unable to
prove that ChatGPT had access to the full texts of the genuine references. It
can be shown that all references provided by ChatGPT that were found to be
genuine have also been cited on Wikipedia pages. This strongly indicates that
the source base for at least some of the data is found in those pages. The
implications of this in relation to data quality are discussed.
