Academic Peer Review Co-Pilot
Get a realistic, data-rich peer review before you submit—and clear guidance on how to answer real reviewer reports. The Peer Review Co-Pilot helps you spot weaknesses, prioritize revisions, and reply with confidence.
The Academic Peer Review Co-Pilot is your companion for the most stressful part of the publication journey: peer review. It reads your manuscript the way a reviewer would, highlights its strengths and weaknesses, and suggests concrete next steps.
Instead of guessing what reviewers might say—or struggling to answer their comments—you work in a focused dashboard that turns feedback into an ordered revision plan. Whether you are preparing a first submission, revising after “major changes,” or resubmitting to a new journal, the Co-Pilot helps you move faster with more control and less uncertainty.
Two ways to use the Peer Review Co-Pilot
Mode A – Pre-submission Peer Review
Upload your manuscript and specify your target journal or field.
Receive a structured review that goes far beyond grammar: contribution, methods, clarity, journal fit, and ethical or methodological risks.
View a clear decision suggestion (e.g., Accept, Minor revision, Major revision, Reject) with a confidence score and a ranked list of the top issues to fix first.
Explore the results in an interactive dashboard with radar charts, a claim-to-evidence matrix, risk-of-bias flags, and inline comments linked directly to your text.
Mode B – Responding to Reviewers
Upload your manuscript together with one or more reviewer reports.
Get an overview of the revision effort: which sections are most affected, which concerns repeat across reviewers, and what can be addressed quickly.
See a “reviewer persona” profile that summarizes tone, priorities (theory, methods, writing, data, etc.), and openness to revision.
For each comment, receive AI-generated suggestions for both the manuscript change and the wording of your response, tailored to that reviewer’s expectations.
Who uses the Peer Review Co-Pilot?
PhD students and early-career researchers
Build confidence, learn how reviewers think, and avoid common reasons for rejection before you submit.Supervisors and principal investigators
Pre-screen student or group papers quickly, identify structural issues, and focus meetings on the most important revisions.Researchers publishing in a new field
Check that tone, structure, and conventions match the expectations of your target journal, especially when writing outside your main discipline or in a second language.
