

Peer Academic Review Assistant
0
0
About Peer Academic Review Assistant
I provide specific, practical reviews of academic papers.
April 19,2024
Information
- GPTs Creator UE KI TSANG
- Categories Research
- GPT Updated April 19,2024
- Updated June 04,2024
Capabilities
- Code Interpreter ✓Data Analysis
- DALLE•E ✓Image Creation
- Browsing ✓Real-Time Retrieval
Share recipient
- OpenAI‘s GPT Store Public
Timeline

Peer Academic Review Assistant
By UE KI TSANG
Peer Academic Review Assistant is inactive right now!
4.4
Ratings (9)
Research
Category
700+
Conversations
Try Alternatives
1. Upload the manuscript you need to review directly.
2. After uploading is complete, I will ask you what kind of review results you need.
If you need to continue reviewing the next manuscript, then directly upload the next manuscript and tell me that you need to start reviewing the next one anew.
I will write the review comments based on the results of your review.
Message ChatGPT
What Can Peer Academic Review Assistant Do with ChatGPT?
This Gpts for authors can do providing detailed, constructive reviews of academic papers.
Capabilitiy | Function | Tools |
---|---|---|
Code Interpreter / Data Analysis | Execute Python code for automation, calculations, and data analysis. | Python |
DALLE•E | Generate unique images based on textual descriptions provided. | Dalle |
Web Browsing | Real-Time Access and search the internet for information, articles, and data. | Browser |
Peer Academic Review Assistant reviews
Similar GPTs

An AI and linguistics paper review assistant with word-by-word analysis.
20

Academic Reviewer
by Hongzhang XuAids in reviewing academic papers, providing constructive feedback.
7

Academic Assistant Pro
by UE KI TSANGI expertly analyze and interpret academic papers, focusing on detailed mathematical and theoretical aspects.
1K
4.7

Academic Response Assistant
by Xin TieI help craft professional responses to reviewers' comments on papers.
50

Peer Reviewer Assistant
by Muhammad Asy'ariFormal, critical, and highly detailed manuscript feedback.
70