“This is exceptionally powerful. It can create a new level of scientific integrity”

Ast. Prof. Ryan Flynn

Harvard

May

2025

“I'm impressed, the AI was very accurate at catching real gaps and suggesting logical (and mostly doable) experiments”

Dr. Bluma Lesch

Yale

April

2025

“This should be in every research lab!”

Prof. Tom Schonberg

Tel Aviv University

June

2025

“I was surprised by the system’s precision – it accurately captured the essence of my work”

Prof. Asya Rolls

Tel Aviv University

June

2025

“It identified the main gaps in our reasoning, very helpful!”

Prof. Michael Shapira

UC Berkeley

May

2025

“I was amazed by how good it was and struggled to believe that it was an AI rather than a human”

Assoc. Prof. Peter Sarkies

Oxford

June

2025

“I love it, the experimental critiques are spot-on!”

Prof. Christopher E. Mason

Cornell

April

2025

“This is just what I was missing, it’s already highly valuable to the lab”

Dr. Meital Oren‑Suissa

Weizmann Institute

June

2025

“I had a more rigorous, attentive, constructive and useful experience with q.e.d than with many of my peer reviewers in my 35+ years submitting papers”

Prof. Michael Levin

Tufts

June

2025

“I was amazed with the tool’s performance. It gave me Nature reviewers-level feedback on two different papers I uploaded”

Dr. Netanella Illouz Eliaz

Salk Institute

May

2025

Our origin story

Summary

June 2025

We built q.e.d to scale scientific critical thinking, evolve evidence-based answers, and empower research decisions across disciplines and time.

Niv SM.

|

GenAI evaluation presents persistent challenges across applications. Drawing from human reviews, we found that one metric could simultaneously measure a system coverage and at the same time be used to improve it’s percision.

Enav W.

|

Meir M.

Authors-Centered AI Review

Summary

July 2025

On paper, academia is a dream for curious, independent people. In reality, the publish-or-perish cycle, with peer-review in its heart, dramatically limits the creativity of scientific work.

Accepted for publication.

See the research blueprint.

Identify weaknesses and potential solutions.

Get to the bottom line.

Built by scientists, for scientists.

“This is exceptionally powerful. It can create a new level of scientific integrity”

“I'm impressed, the AI was very accurate at catching real gaps and suggesting logical (and mostly doable) experiments”

“This should be in every research lab!”

“I was surprised by the system’s precision – it accurately captured the essence of my work”

“It identified the main gaps in our reasoning, very helpful!”

“I was amazed by how good it was and struggled to believe that it was an AI rather than a human”

“I love it, the experimental critiques are spot-on!”

“This is just what I was missing, it’s already highly valuable to the lab”

“I had a more rigorous, attentive, constructive and useful experience with q.e.d than with many of my peer reviewers in my 35+ years submitting papers”

“I was amazed with the tool’s performance. It gave me Nature reviewers-level feedback on two different papers I uploaded”

“This is exceptionally powerful. It can create a new level of scientific integrity”

Your research is private and it stays that way.

q.e.d

blog

Our origin story

Niv SM.

|

From Coverage to Precision

Enav W.

|

Meir M.

Authors-Centered AI Review

Oded R.

|

We are a team of scientists and builders sharing a vision.

Niv Samuel Mastboim, MD

Oded Rechavi, Prof.

Itamar Zigel

Enav Weinreb, PhD

Meir Maor

Guy Ronen

Lior Onn, PhD

Mor Sela, PhD

Efrat Goffer, PhD

Michael Dynkin

Shay Hummel

Lilach Bien

Sagi Hammer

find us on

/

/

To meet up the demand we’re gradually opening up access. Please fill in your details below and we’ll get in touch soon!