What problem does it solve? Authors lack access to realistic, multi-perspective journal peer review before submission, making it hard to anticipate reviewer objections, methodological critiques, and editorial outcomes. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Five-seat review panel: A field analyst configures four reviewer personas (Journal-Fit, Methodology, Domain, Perspective) plus a fixed Devil's Advocate, each producing a role-separated report. - Six operational modes: full review, re-review (revision verification), quick assessment, methodology-focus, Socratic guided review, and calibration against adjudicated paper sets. - Editorial synthesis: A synthesizer consolidates all reports into an Editorial Decision Letter and an immutable Revision Roadmap with author adjudication sidecar. - Use Case: Before submitting a manuscript, run a full review to receive five independent reviewer reports, a decision letter, and a prioritized revision roadmap, then use re-review mode after revising to verify each comment was addressed. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to review this paper and paste the manuscript text or provide the file path.
