Successful submissions are rarely won on the idea alone; they're won in the fine-tuning. ProofInk.AI analyzes grant proposals, journal and conference manuscripts, and response-to-reviewer letters the way experienced panelists and referees would — scored against your target agency's own review criteria, adapted to your field, with evidence-backed critiques that quote your own text and a prioritized improvement plan. Results in minutes, not weeks.
ProofInk.AI delivers structured, criterion-level analysis with mandatory evidence — not surface-level comments. Built with agency-specific rubrics and multi-angle evaluation for both grant proposals and research papers. And when reviews come back, it checks your revision against every reviewer comment and drafts your response letter.
Multi-agent analysis against your target agency's actual criteria. Evaluates each criterion with concrete rubric anchors, cross-references for internal consistency, and generates a prioritized improvement roadmap.
USA: NSF · NIH · DOE · Simons | Canada: NSERC · CIHR · SSHRC | EU: ERC | UK: UKRI · Wellcome · NIHR*Comprehensive analysis across 10 criteria with rubric-calibrated scoring. Rigorous multi-angle evaluation probes for logical weaknesses, unsupported claims, and methodology gaps. Critiques include page-level evidence and specific, actionable fixes.
10 criteria · Multi-angle evaluation · Page-level citationsReviews came back? Upload the reviewers' comments alongside your revised manuscript. ProofInk.AI separates out each reviewer concern, checks it against your revision with page-level evidence, marks whether it is fully addressed, partially addressed, or still open, and drafts a point-by-point response-to-reviewers letter you can edit and export.
Reviewer-by-reviewer · Evidence-backed · Response letter (LaTeX · Word · Markdown)Ask questions about your uploaded documents and get answers grounded in the actual text. Semantic search finds the most relevant passages. Works across your entire project library.
Semantic retrieval · Multi-docEvery point — strength or weakness — must cite a direct quote from your document. No vague criticism. Every finding is traceable to specific text.
Mandatory quotingA dedicated pass catches contradictions between sections that single-shot analysis misses — like budget-scope mismatches or abstract-methodology gaps.
Internal consistency verificationEvery revision is tracked. Compare your latest draft against a previous feedback report to see which issues have been resolved, partially addressed, or remain unresolved — so you know exactly what still needs work. Disagree with a point? Mark it Not Agree and it's dropped from future comparisons — so ProofInk tracks only the feedback you accept.
Revision-aware feedbackDeep feedback evaluates each criterion from multiple independent perspectives, then reconciles them — catching disagreements that single-pass analysis misses. Where reviewers diverge, the finding is flagged for your attention so you know which scores are confident and which are worth a second look.
Multiple independent perspectives · Confidence flaggingYour paper isn't reviewed against generic criteria. ProofInk.AI detects your field and reweights the scoring criteria for it, then applies that field's reviewer guidance — so a computer science systems paper is held to CS standards and a clinical study to clinical ones. Five field profiles, each with its own weights and expectations.
Computer Science · Biomedical & Life Sciences · Engineering · Math & Physics · Social SciencesFor papers with formal mathematical content, theorems and proofs get a dedicated verification pass. Claims are checked for logical gaps, unstated assumptions, and notational consistency — the kinds of issues a careful referee would flag.
Theorem & proof analysis · Math & Physics papersYour documents are never used for model training. Your proposals, papers, and research data stay strictly confidential — processed for your analysis only. For single reviews, documents are automatically deleted when you close the page. Lab Suite subscribers manage their own document retention.
Your data stays yoursEach analysis runs a structured multi-agent pipeline — specialized agents handle extraction, evaluation, cross-checking, and synthesis, the same way a panel of experienced reviewers would assess your work from different angles.
Parse evaluation criteria, requirements, and key structural elements from your document
Score each criterion independently using rubric-calibrated anchors specific to your review type
Verify internal consistency across sections and flag contradictions or gaps
Generate a prioritized improvement roadmap with evidence-backed, actionable fixes
Start with a free quick feedback report. Upgrade when you need deeper analysis — no long-term commitment required.
ProofInk is in final beta. Drop your email and we'll let you know the moment public registration opens.
ProofInk.AI is an independent tool and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by any funding agency or research council, including NSF, NIH, DOE, Simons Foundation (USA), NSERC, CIHR, SSHRC (Canada), ERC (EU), UKRI, Wellcome Trust, NIHR (UK), or any other organization. Review templates and evaluation criteria are based on publicly available solicitation documents and general grant-writing best practices — they do not constitute official agency guidance. All agency names, acronyms, and trademarks are the property of their respective organizations and are used here solely for identification purposes. Always refer to the specific solicitation and agency guidelines for authoritative requirements.