Most research platforms cover one slice — citations, screening, a survey tool, a writing app. Eidolon Research covers the whole craft — literature review, methodology and ethics, experiments and analytics, writing and synthesis — taught and tracked together, with the Quad's four specialists and a Senior Consensus Reviewer over your shoulder. The Literature Review module is live now and competes with EndNote on the dimensions that matter; the rest of the craft ships over the beta. Founding-researcher pricing locks in for life.
Real research runs in parallel — your ethics application drafts alongside your lit review, your methodology informs your experiments, your writing pulls from all of it. The platform's phases are surfaces you move between, not steps in lockstep. Founding-researcher pricing locks until every phase below is live.
The lit-review module that's already an EndNote-class workspace, with PRISMA discipline and the Quad's four specialists doing the screening alongside you.
Read more →Design your study. Draft the ethics application alongside your lit review (because real ethics committees take months and the work can't wait). Pre-registration with a one-shot lock; ethics with living revision history. Methodology Compile turns your design into validation gates the platform enforces.
What's coming →Reproducible runs of your designed methodology — surveys, experiments, established methods, the work itself. The Analytics runner turns results into interpretations you can defend, not just outputs you have to explain.
What's coming →A writing surface with your literature, your matrix, your data, and your citations all one click away. v1 ships the basics; v2 turns the writing canvas into the busy-but-easy hub where every piece of evidence you've collected sits within arm's reach.
Read more →Most postgrads are handed Covidence, an ethics-form template, an SPSS install, and a deadline. They learn the tools, not the craft — and produce work that fails reproducibility checks at submission. Eidolon Research closes that gap: every workspace is a learning surface, every step explains why, and the Quad checks your work as you go.
Junior researchers do searches blindly and pile up irrelevant hits. Eidolon's framework-first gate makes you define the themes before you search — because that's what systematic reviewers actually do. Power-users move fast; juniors learn the method.
This is the lit-review module's workflow. Methodology, experiments, and writing each have their own — flagged in the Phase Map above. Phases run in parallel: you can draft your ethics application alongside your lit review, because real ethics committees don't wait.
Hard gate — no searching until your Tier 1 themes are pinned. Secondary and other emergent themes come later, from the literature itself. See the three-tier theme structure ↓
The Quad proposes a Boolean expression with synonym OR-groups + truncation + year filter, and explains why. Read the reasoning to learn; skip past it once you don't need to.
OpenAlex + Crossref + arXiv. Boolean-query support, reproducible counts, no scraping. Your search is replicable.
At title/abstract and full-text, the Quad votes with confidence. Theme-context prompts mean a paper might be in for one theme and out for another. You resolve the disagreements.
Diagram auto-generated per-theme and combined for journal submission. Included papers flow into the matrix for synthesis. Audit trail preserved forever.
Two features turn every step of a literature review into a methodology lesson — the lit-review module's pedagogical signature. Both are unique to Eidolon Research. (Methodology, experiments, and writing each get their own pedagogy when those modules ship.)
Most platforms treat themes as one undifferentiated bag. Eidolon Research separates them into three tiers, because each is doing different epistemic work.
From your reading of the research problem. You pin them at project setup; the framework gate enforces it. Searches are built against these.
Emergent from the literature, filtered for relevance to your problem definition. The Quad surfaces them; you confirm. Picked-up secondary themes refine the rubric below.
Serendipitous — relevant to the field but outside your problem definition. Logged and tagged so they don't get lost; available for future projects, side-papers, or thesis "future work" sections.
Auto-generated from your primary and secondary themes. Every paper in your collection gets the same disciplined evaluation — so you stop reading once and forgetting, and start reading systematically. Junior researchers learn what experienced reviewers do; senior reviewers move faster because the questions are pre-formed.
Eidolon Research will not execute your research for you. You define the framework. You make the calls. You write the synthesis. The AI assists with sub-tasks — Boolean expansion, screening votes, theme operationalisation, rubric application, methodology validation, experiment execution — but never runs the work itself. The point isn't to skip the work; the point is to do the work better, with a coach over your shoulder.
The Lit Review module is live in v1. The other phases of the craft — methodology, experiments, writing — ship over the beta. See the Phase Map above and the roadmap below for what's coming.
The Literature Review module already competes with EndNote on the dimensions that matter — harvesting from OpenAlex, Crossref, and arXiv; deduplication; full-text screening; PRISMA flow; thematic synthesis; citation export. It adds three things EndNote doesn't: the Quad's four specialists in the screening loop, the auto-generated reading rubric, and a methodology pedagogy that teaches the review as you do it. Sub-£10/month for students; locks at founding-researcher pricing for life.
Coming from EndNote? Import your .enw
library and PRISMA picks up where you left off. (Subject
to import-format availability — see Roadmap.)
Full PRISMA workflow + Quad-assisted screening. Per-theme + combined diagrams. Audit trail forever. Manual + BibTeX import alongside the PRISMA pipeline.
Cells reference papers from your curated collection. Quad / LLM grading on demand. Surface gaps, contradictions, and emergent themes the matrix can see and you can't.
Long-form drafting alongside your matrix and collection. Cite-as-you-go. Calibrated confidence in every claim. Don't write what you can't defend.
PRISMA flow diagram (per-theme + combined). Thesis appendix. BibTeX. Markdown. Everything you need at submission, generated from the audit trail.
Every PRISMA stage has a Why? button. Review-type-aware: mandatory vs recommended vs optional changes between systematic, scoping, narrative, integrative.
Systematic (PRISMA 2020), Scoping (PRISMA-ScR), Narrative (simplified PRISMA-style), Integrative (hybrid PRISMA-style). Pick the type at project start; the workflow adapts.
Every AI-assisted action tracked against a universally adopted AI Usage framework. Researcher engagement scored alongside. Export the full report at submission — declare exactly what the AI did and what you did, with an evidence trail. The transparent answer to "did you use AI?"
Every write to your literature review, matrix, and thesis chapters is versioned. Export a complete change log at submission — the audit trail your examiner expects, generated automatically from the work you were already doing.
The system actively pushes you forward — surfaces what's next, nudges where you've stalled. And it stipulates compulsory tasks at every stage: define themes before you search, apply the rubric to every paper, log AI use as it happens. Not optional steps you can skip — the methodology you needed to follow anyway, baked into the workflow.
Most "AI assistants" give you one opinion and call it advice. Eidolon Research gives you five — four independent specialists examining your work from four angles, and a fifth role that reads all four and writes the resolution.
The four specialists make up the Quad. Each comes at the work from a different lens. They don't see each other's output. Above them sits the Senior Consensus Reviewer — not a specialist, a synthesiser. It reads all four, reconciles where possible, flags genuine disagreement, and writes a concrete plan you can act on.
You resolve the calls. The Quad assists, explains, and surfaces what would otherwise be tacit. Junior reviewers learn what experienced reviewers do; senior reviewers ship faster because the surface area is pre-explored.
The Quad reviews work in every phase of the craft, not just literature work. When the Methodology workspace ships, the same four specialists evaluate your study design — Coverage analyses whether your design covers the research questions, Methodology audits the operationalisation, Critical Reviewer takes the thesis-examiner stance, Equity & Bias examines who your study can and can't generalise to. When Experiments ship, the Quad reviews your runs. When you write, the Quad reviews your draft. Same architecture, every phase.
Does the framework cover every aspect of your problem? Is every research question addressed by at least one theme? Are there literature areas falling outside all themes?
Are your themes at the right level of abstraction? Is there overlap or redundancy? Can each be operationalised in the matrix? Are they specific enough to discriminate between papers?
Thesis-examiner perspective. Can the framework expose gaps? Reveal tensions and contradictions? Support "to what extent has the literature addressed this problem?" Will it pass viva scrutiny?
Who is represented in this body of literature — and who isn't? Examines sample bias, cultural assumptions baked into the framework, generalisability beyond the studied groups, and whether marginalised perspectives are addressed. Every review requires this lens.
Reads all four specialist evaluations. Reconciles where possible, flags disagreement, and writes a concrete, actionable improvement plan — "add theme X under Y", "split Z" — not vague advice.
Other research tools — Google Scholar, the AI assistants, the citation-cloud platforms — ingest your work into pipelines you don't see, to train models, target ads, or refine retention metrics. Eidolon doesn't. Your literature, your matrix, your draft, your data sit in storage you own, in a record you can inspect, dispute, export, and delete.
When the Quad gets a screening call wrong, you push back — and the twin learns from the disagreement. It's a conversation, not a one-way pipe.
Inspect. Dispute. Export. Delete. Anytime, without losing access to the platform.
Every phase is committed. Founding-researcher pricing locks in until every workspace below is live — buy in beta, lock the price for the full platform, for life.
Lock in beta pricing until v1 ships — every plan, every month, no hidden ramp. v1 means every phase of the craft live — Literature Review now, then methodology, experiments, and the Writing v2 surface over the beta. Buy in beta, lock the price for the full platform, for life.
For postgrads & coursework reviews
For PhD candidates & full thesis reviews
For supervisors & research groups