Skip to content

Every surface
on the platform.

A suite of tools for every part of your scientific workflow, built on our autonomous-research stack. Read how it works →

ReviewJun 2026
96
Platinum Tier
SynopsisMerits61Issues22References
Analytical approach
Light postulate carries the result; no ether smuggled in.
Synchronisation convention for distant clocks left implicit in §3.2.Major
Most researchers start here

Manuscript review.

Hours of in-depth analysis on your paper: benchmarked with details of both issues and merits, verified references, field-specific standards, and a Calibre score out of 100.

Upload a paper
Also available now · 12
ChatOn electrodynamics
Why did you flag §3.2 so heavily?
It derives the time coordinate but leaves the synchronisation convention implicit. State it explicitly and the Lorentz transformation follows as a theorem, not an assumption.
Where do I start?Top two to fix firstShow me the evidence
Ask your reviewer a question…

Meet Rosa.

Ask Rosa anything. She's always up-to-date with your work, so discuss any point: clarify, object, learn. Always grounded in the literature.

Try the chat
Iterate3 versions · +20
Calibre across versions+20 since v1
v1
Jun 12 · First draft
electrodynamics_v1.tex
76
v2
Jun 16 · Resubmit
electrodynamics_v2.tex
88+12
v3
Jun 19 · LatestViewing
electrodynamics_v3.tex
96+8

Projects & iteration.

One workspace per paper. Address the feedback, watch your Calibre score climb. Every revision is a measurable step toward publication.

Start a project
Protocol & ProposalLind · 1747
Confirmed
Primary outcome pre-specified
Fitness for duty, judged at fourteen days.
Comparator arms defined
Six remedies, two sailors each; citrus the standout.
To review
!
Sample size
Two per arm; only a dramatic effect will read.
In progress
+
Allocation method
Assigned by the surgeon, not yet randomised.

Protocol review.

A check for planned research, prior to study execution: pre-registrations, proposals, protocols. Optimise your research while changes still cost nothing.

Review a protocol
NoveltyAgainst the live literature
82Top quartile
Novelty score against the live literature
Closest prior work
71%
Lorentz (1904). Electromagnetic phenomena in a moving system.
Topical overlap · same transformation, different derivation
58%
Poincaré (1905). Sur la dynamique de l'électron.
Methodological overlap · shared symmetry, different aim
49%
Larmor (1897). A dynamical theory of the luminiferous medium.
Finding-level overlap · convergent result, distinct setup

Novelty check.

Assess whether your research contributes something new to the field. Weighs your claims, methods, aims, and findings against the literature.

Check novelty
EditorialDouble-blind · 11 criteria
IJournal fit
Scope
Within scope
Novelty
Not novel
Impact
Limited reach
IICommunication
Articulation!
Uneven
Coherence!
Adequate
Clarity
Clear
Abstract
Deficient
IIIScientific rigour
Robustness
Underpowered
Support
Thin
Grounding!
Partial
References
Gaps

Editorial review.

The paper through an editor's eyes: a tailored journal fit assessment of scope, novelty, and impact. Includes key metrics of communication and scientific rigour.

Review a paper
IntegrityThree lenses
Originality8%matched text
AI text24%likely AI
AI figures1flagged of 5
Matched sources5 sources
180w
Field-matched methods, prior cohort study
Database
74w
Open preprint, adaptive sampling under drift
Web

Originality & AI checks.

Match the manuscript against web and academic sources, flag AI-written passages, and screen every figure for synthetic or edited images: one scan, three lenses.

Run an integrity scan
Bibliography · 34 checkedZotero linked
Watson & Crick
Nature · 1953
Verified
Franklin & Gosling
Nature · 1953
Verified
Avery, MacLeod & McCarty
J. Exp. Med. · 1944
Verified
Chargaff
Experientia · 1950
!Year off
+2 recommendedSend to Zotero

References, verified.

Every bibliographic entry validated against its real source with inaccuracies and omissions flagged. Connect Zotero and import directly to your library.

Check your references
TIFsobral_plate_02.tiff
Release to add files
MaterialsEclipse · 1919
TIFeclipse_plate_06.tiff18 MB · May 29
CSVstar_deflections.csv1.61″ at Príncipe · 1919Result
Phil. Trans. eclipse reportroyalsociety.org · 1920
TIFsobral_plate_02.tiff24 MB · just now
@sobral_plate_02.tiff what deflection did this plate record?
1.98″ at Sobral, in line with the 1.75″ light-bending prediction within error.

File storage.

Everything for a project in one place: uploads, reviews, data, code. Versioned and chat-readable, so Rosa can draw on any of it.

Opportunities · matchedGrants · Journals
Grants · Grants.gov
Genome Integrity & Repair
Open · NIH · Closes Oct 3 · Up to $2.5M
Molecular Biophysics Program
Open · NSF · Up to $600K
Journals · ranked by fit
Nature Struct. & Mol. Biology
OA · 4 of your references
Q1
Nucleic Acids Research
OA · h-index 445
Q1

Opportunities for you.

Open funding calls and target journals matched to your field and work - with award sizes, deadlines, quartiles, and the reason each one fits.

See your matches
Project Team3 active · 1 invited
MembersActivity
[email protected]
AEAlbert EinsteinOwner
DHDavid HilbertRevoke
ENEmmy NoetherRevoke
[email protected]Invited
N. Bohr invited to the projectjust now
E. Noether's access revoked1 min ago
electrodynamics_v3 reached Platinum · 9612 min ago
D. Hilbert commented on §31 hr ago

Teams & labs.

One review standard across every paper your group ships. Invite, share, collaborate..

Start a team
MC
Marie CurieEdit
Physicist and chemist · Institut du Radium
iD ORCIDScholar
140kCitations
92h-index
58Papers
Research focus
  • Radioactivity
  • Isolation of polonium and radium
Recent publications
  • Recherches sur les substances radioactives
    1903 · 8,900 citations · Université de Paris
  • Sur une substance nouvelle radio-active (polonium)
    1898 · 5,200 citations · Comptes Rendus
  • Sur une nouvelle substance fortement radio-active (radium)
    1898 · 4,100 citations · Comptes Rendus

Collaborator profiles.

Every co-author on a project carries an enriched card: bibliometrics, research focus, and recent work, pulled from ORCID, OpenAlex, and Scholar.

Complete your profile
Amplify · from the reviewDraft & post
Social
ThreadX · Bluesky · MastodonReady
PostLinkedIn
Written
Lay summaryPlain language
SignificanceFor journals
Press releaseFor the press

Amplify the work.

Turn your finished review into ready-to-post pieces: a thread, LinkedIn post, lay summary, significance statement, or press release. Drafted in your voice.

Amplify a paper
Roadmap

Beyond the review.

The editor.

In progress

Write inside the platform, not a separate tool. A full editor with real-time co-authoring, inline suggestions and LaTeX export.

Literature review.

In progress

From a broad topic or a precise question: a scoping or systematic review that covers the literature in full, structured and referenced, in 6 to 12 hours.

The scorecard.

In progress

An assessment of published papers by quality, not citation count. See where papers stand.

The AI Scientist.

The end-to-end system: idea to manuscript. Yours to run in full or in part. The AI Scientist traverses the full arc of science in a single pipeline - novelty, design, analysis, figures, drafting - but you decide where to jump in and where to stop. Given a hypothesis, it designs a rigorous method. Given data, it executes a reproducible analysis pipeline. Every standalone capability leads here.

Learn how the engine thinks.

no card required

Features · Explore Science