Everything you need for a grounded review

Follow the route a literature review takes through Litreviews — each stop is a tool, grounded in the one before it.

1. Start — your project workspace

   
2. 1

   Discovery

   Relevance-rankedFoundational vs. frontierCitation walking

   Search published literature for the work that matters to your project, ranked by relevance to your Research Fingerprint rather than by date, and split into foundational and frontier literature. Expand any result to walk its citation network — backward to the papers it builds on, forward to the papers that cite it — so you stop missing the source everyone else cites. Nothing is crawled from the open web; metadata is pulled from publication records, never invented.

3. 2

   Source Library

   DOI / URLPDF upload ×25AI metadata

   Manage every source for the active project — title, authors, year, venue, DOI, URL, abstract, and full text. Add a source by DOI/URL, by pasting paper text (which grounds it for quote verification), or by uploading up to 25 PDFs per batch. For uploads, the AI reads the document's own text to fill in the real title, authors, and year — so the library never just shows a filename — while the original file is kept for download. A source can only ever enter the project it belongs to.

   
4. 3

   Synthesis Studio

   Claim × source matrixDefensibilityQuote bank

   Add the claims your review makes and bind each to a source with a verbatim quote, page, and stance (supports / weakens / untested). Quotes are verified against the stored source text. You get a claim × source matrix, a defensibility score and consensus/contention tally per claim, a source coverage heatmap, a chronological evidence view, a quote bank, and an AI comparison table of short method/dataset/population/finding tags. Save and export any table to CSV, Excel, Word, or PDF. Output is structured tables only — never paragraphs you could paste into a paper.

   
5. 4

   Coverage Gaps

   Untested claimsContradictionsUncovered concepts

   See where the evidence is thin, computed only from this project: untested claims, claims resting on a single source, contradictions, Research Fingerprint concepts no source mentions, and year-range coverage. Each gap is stated factually with a suggested kind of source to fill it — a map of where your evidence runs out and where your contribution might begin. An optional AI pass classifies library gaps without fabricating sources.

   
6. 5

   Citations

   APA · MLA · Chicago · HarvardIndex-validatedWord · BibTeX · CSV

   Compile a reference list from your external sources in any major style — APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, IEEE and more — built only from each source's own metadata, never guessed from a title. Cross-check and gap-fill against a canonical index to complete DOIs, journals, and years, and flag any conflicts to review. Export the list to Word, Excel, CSV, Markdown, JSON, BibTeX, or plain text.

   
7. 6

   Calendar & Tasks

   Linked to claimsDue datesBoard & calendar

   Lightweight, academic research-task tracking tied to the project — e.g. “review paper X”, “find a source for claim Y”, “resolve contradiction on claim Z” — with optional links to a specific claim or source and due dates on a simple board and month calendar.

   
8. 7

   The ProfessorPro

   Source-boundSocraticUp to 5 chats / project

   A source-bound, Socratic research advisor that pressure-tests how defensible your review is. It references specific claims and sources in your project, flags weak or over-reaching claims, and highlights gaps — reasoning only over this project's Fingerprint, claims, and sources (and your other chats here), introducing no outside facts and never drafting prose.

   
9. 8

   Question builderPro

   Scope boundariesConcept definitionsKeyword clusters

   Turn a vague idea into a sharp, answerable research question, with working definitions for its key terms, keyword clusters for searching, and inclusion/exclusion boundaries — then apply any of them straight into your Research Fingerprint. A scoping aid only: it never invents findings, sources, or prose.

10. 9

    Methods helperPro

    AssumptionsStrengths & limitsTrade-offs

    Understand a research method or design — its assumptions, strengths, limitations, the trade-offs it forces, when it fits, and alternatives to weigh — tailored to your discipline. Advisory only: it explains the options and never chooses your design for you.

11. 10

    Research planPro

    VariablesData requirementsTimeline

    Build a structured plan — variables to measure, data requirements and their sources, and a timeline of milestones — with an optional AI suggestion of plan items. Structured artifacts only, never proposal prose.

    
12. 11

    OutlinePro

    Ordered sectionsClaims as evidenceNo prose

    Order your review into sections and group each claim under the section it supports, with a standard review skeleton to start from. Purely structural — it arranges your claims as evidence and never writes a word of prose.

    
13. 12

    Writing supportPro

    Structure diagnosticsFlags onlyNever drafts

    Structure-only diagnostics over your outline and evidence: contested or unsupported claims in the outline, empty or ungrounded sections, ungrouped claims, and unused sources. It flags issues to resolve and never generates text.

    
14. 13

    Reading plannerPro

    Progress trackingPace vs. deadline

    Track your reading progress across the library and pace it against your deadline, so you know whether you're on track to finish the review on time.

    
15. 14

    Evidence mapPro

    Theme coverageCoverage over timeVenue clusters

    Cluster and gap visualizations across themes, time, and venues — how many sources match each Fingerprint keyword, your coverage per year (with empty-year gaps), and where your sources were published — all computed only from your own library.

    
16. 15

    Export & evidence packPro

    Markdown / JSONReference listPaper cards

    Package your work into artifacts — project profile, claim ledger with bound evidence, a styled reference list, and paper cards — as a Markdown or JSON pack, plus reference exports to Word, BibTeX, and plain text. Structured exports from your data only; no prose is generated.

    
17. ★

    A review you can defend

    Every claim tied to a verified quote, every gap mapped — exported as an evidence pack. You wrote it; the evidence backs it.

    Start freeSee pricing