CheckMyManuscript vs PaperReview.ai
PaperReview.ai (by Andrew Ng's team at Stanford/deeplearning.ai) simulates AI peer review. CheckMyManuscript checks submission compliance. They solve different problems, and the best researchers use both.
Try CheckMyManuscript, it's freeNo account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX
PaperReview.ai is an AI-powered peer review simulator developed by Andrew Ng's team at Stanford and deeplearning.ai. It reads your paper, searches arXiv for related work, and generates feedback modeled on what a peer reviewer would say about your scientific contribution. CheckMyManuscript does something completely different: it validates that your manuscript meets the format, structure, citation, and compliance requirements journals check before it even reaches peer review. Both tools target researchers, but they sit at different points in the submission process.
Feature comparison
| Feature | CheckMyManuscript | PaperReview.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Scientific merit feedback Evaluates how sound your methodology and conclusions are | format checks only, not content evaluation | AI peer review simulation with 7-dimension scoring |
| Manuscript format validation Checks 80+ format-level requirements before submission | 80+ format-level checks | |
| Journal submission compliance Checks specific formatting rules for major journals | Nature, Elsevier, IEEE, APA, PLOS | |
| Citation-reference matching Confirms every in-text citation has a matching entry in your bibliography | in-text vs bibliography | |
| Missing declarations (ethics, COI, funding) Flags mandatory statements journals require before accepting | mandatory statement checks | |
| Abstract completeness check Makes sure your abstract covers all 5 expected elements | all required elements validated | Partial: abstract quality only |
| Manuscript structure validation Verifies your paper follows the standard Intro, Methods, Results, Discussion layout | full IMRaD structure check | |
| Related prior work analysis Checks how well you've cited and engaged with existing literature | arXiv search and summarization | |
| Originality and novelty feedback Assesses how novel your contribution is | reviewer-style originality score | |
| Supported fields Which fields and research areas the tool works for | all academic disciplines | Partial: best for AI/ML (arXiv-dependent) |
| PDF/LaTeX support Works with the file formats researchers actually use | PDF, DOCX, LaTeX | PDF only |
| Pricing What it costs to get started | Free overview + $5 full report | Free |
Why researchers choose CheckMyManuscript
Catches what gets papers desk-rejected
Most papers are rejected before peer review, at the desk editor stage, for format and compliance failures: missing declarations, wrong structure, citation errors. CheckMyManuscript is built to prevent exactly this. PaperReview.ai never sees these issues.
Works for every academic field
PaperReview.ai relies on arXiv for prior work lookup, making it most accurate for AI/ML and computer science. CheckMyManuscript works across all disciplines: medicine, biology, economics, psychology, physics, social sciences.
Validates the administrative layer
Author affiliations, ORCIDs, keywords, funding statements, ethics declarations, and figure numbering are invisible to a peer review tool but critical for journal submission. CheckMyManuscript covers all of these.
Deterministic, repeatable checks
CheckMyManuscript applies 80+ rule-based checks consistently on every submission. No hallucinations, no randomness, no variance between runs on the same paper.
The practical edge your peers already use
Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Frequently asked questions
PaperReview.ai is an AI peer review simulator developed by Andrew Ng's team at Stanford and deeplearning.ai. It converts your paper to markdown, searches arXiv for related work, and generates structured review feedback across 7 dimensions: originality, research question importance, claim support, experiment soundness, writing clarity, community value, and contextualization. It is free to use.
Yes, and this is actually the ideal workflow. Use PaperReview.ai first to get feedback on scientific content and novelty, revise accordingly, then run CheckMyManuscript before submitting to ensure your manuscript is format-complete and compliance-ready. The two tools are fully complementary.
According to their published metrics, PaperReview.ai achieves a 0.42 Spearman correlation with human reviewers (compared to 0.41 human-to-human correlation) and an AUC of 0.75 for predicting paper acceptance. These are solid results for AI peer review simulation, though accuracy is strongest for AI/ML papers due to arXiv reliance.
No. CheckMyManuscript does not evaluate scientific merit, novelty, or argument quality. It checks the submission requirements: format, structure, citations, declarations, metadata, and journal-specific compliance. If you need scientific feedback, PaperReview.ai or actual colleagues are the right resource.
Use PaperReview.ai first for scientific feedback while the paper is still in revision. Use CheckMyManuscript last, right before submission, to confirm the final manuscript is administratively complete and compliant with your target journal.