How it works
Paste a draft. We check every source. You publish with proof.
The short version
You give us a draft. We pull out the factual claims, read the sources those claims point at, and show you the sentence that supports each one.
Where a source doesn't say what your draft says, we tell you. Where a paper has been retracted, we flag it. You see the evidence and you decide.
We find the claims
The first job is separating facts from everything else. A draft is full of opinion, framing and transition, and none of that can be checked.
We read the document and pull out the statements that assert something checkable. A number, a finding, a quote, a date, an attribution. Those become the list you work from.
A figure sitting in a table is a claim in the same way a sentence is. Numbers in tables get pulled out and checked alongside the prose. A wrong number in a table is just as published as a wrong number in a paragraph.
We go and read the sources
For each claim, we fetch the page or the paper it cites and read it. We read the document itself, not a summary of it and not a cached description of it.
If a claim has no source attached, we go looking for one. If the source turns out to be dead, paywalled or an error page, we say so rather than guessing.
We show you the exact words
For every claim we can support, you get the verbatim sentence from the source that supports it. You can read it yourself and judge whether it holds.
Support is often spread across a source instead of sitting in one tidy line. Where that happens you get each supporting piece, so nothing is cherry-picked on your behalf.
What we check against
We read from the live web and from scholarly databases, depending on what the claim needs.
- Live web & news
- OpenAlex
- Europe PMC
- Crossref
- arXiv
- Retraction Watch
Retracted papers get flagged automatically. A retracted study looks completely normal in a reference list, which is one of the easier ways for a careful draft to go wrong.
What the results mean
Supported
We found wording in the source that backs the claim, and we show you that wording.
Partly supported
The source backs some of the claim but not all of it. Usually a number has drifted, or a finding is stated more strongly than the source states it.
Not backed
We couldn't find support for the claim in the source it points at. People misread this one most often, so it's worth being precise.
It means we couldn't find support in that source. The claim might be true and cited to the wrong page. The source might be behind a paywall we couldn't read.
Treat it as a prompt to look rather than a verdict. We don't tell you whether a claim is true. We tell you whether the source you cited actually says it.
What this doesn't do
Knowing the edges is more useful than a longer feature list.
- It doesn't rule on whether a claim is true in the world. It checks the claim against the source, which is a narrower and more honest question.
- It can't read what it can't reach. Paywalled papers, login-gated pages and some PDFs come back as unread, and we label them that way rather than calling them unsupported.
- It doesn't replace your judgment. It gets you the evidence much faster than reading every source by hand, and then the call is yours.
Stop trusting citations. Start verifying them.
Paste a draft. See every claim checked against a real source.