ARBITER — AI Peer Reviewer

AI Review for Biomedical Investigation, Text Evaluation, and Refinement

Pre-submission manuscript review that catches what humans miss — in days, not months. Identify the weaknesses that cause desk rejection and fix them before you submit.

Get Started Free See What You Get

Days, Not Months

Comprehensive review delivered within 24 to 48 hours vs. 3-6 month journal timelines

Secure Infrastructure

Manuscript data encrypted in transit and at rest on Google Cloud with access restricted to the analysis pipeline

Confidential Processing

Your manuscript is processed on isolated cloud infrastructure — content is never logged or shared

Physician-Scientist Built

Created by a cardiologist with 150+ publications and editorial board experience

Calibrated to Journal Standards

Review criteria reflect the expectations of high-impact biomedical journals

First Review Free

Try ARBITER with no commitment — credit-based pricing for subsequent reviews

Why Researchers Need Pre-Submission Review

Peer Review Takes 3 to 6 Months

The average time from submission to first decision at major journals is 3 to 6 months. If reviewers request major revisions, the cycle repeats. Researchers lose momentum, miss conference deadlines, and delay career milestones while waiting for feedback that could have been addressed before submission.

Review Quality Is Inconsistent

Reviewer expertise varies widely. Some provide detailed methodological feedback; others focus on superficial issues or miss critical statistical errors entirely. ARBITER delivers the same thorough analysis to every manuscript, every time — so you know exactly what to fix before submission.

Desk Rejection Rates Are Rising

Top-tier journals desk-reject 40 to 70 percent of submissions before external review. Common reasons include methodological flaws, inappropriate statistical tests, and unclear clinical significance — exactly the issues a structured pre-submission review identifies.

No Systematic Pre-Submission Feedback

Most researchers rely on co-authors and informal feedback before submitting. There is no systematic way to get structured, expert-level critique across methodology, statistics, and clinical relevance without sending the manuscript to a journal and waiting months.

What Your Report Delivers

ARBITER identifies the issues that cause desk rejection and provides specific, actionable guidance to fix them.

Methodological Weaknesses

Study design issues, sampling problems, and protocol gaps that reviewers will flag — identified before they see your manuscript.

Statistical Errors

Inappropriate tests, underpowered analyses, and statistical reasoning flaws that are among the most common causes of desk rejection.

Unsupported Conclusions

Overstatement, claims not supported by the data, and gaps between results and interpretation that undermine credibility.

Missing Literature Context

Relevant studies, comparators, and ongoing trials your discussion should address — so reviewers do not find them first.

Reporting Guideline Gaps

Deviations from CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, and other reporting standards that signal incomplete methodology.

Prioritized Revision Plan

Every issue ranked by impact, with specific guidance on what to change and why it matters — so you focus on revisions that count.

Built by a Physician-Scientist Who Knows What Reviewers Look For

ARBITER was designed by a staff cardiologist and physician-scientist with direct experience on both sides of the peer review process. The review criteria reflect the standards and expectations of high-impact journals because it was built by someone who reviews for them.

150+ peer-reviewed publications across cardiovascular medicine, digital health, and clinical trials
Peer reviewer for Circulation, European Heart Journal, JACC Advances, npj Digital Medicine, and BMJ Open
Clinical and research training at Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, and UPMC
Machine learning specialization at Georgia Institute of Technology

Learn more about the founder →

Frequently Asked Questions

Can AI replace traditional peer review?

No. ARBITER is a pre-submission tool designed to identify methodological, statistical, and presentation weaknesses before you submit to a journal. It helps reduce desk rejection risk and strengthens your manuscript, but it does not replace the editorial judgment and domain expertise of human peer reviewers.

How is ARBITER different from grammar checkers like Paperpal or Writefull?

Grammar tools correct prose — they fix spelling, syntax, and readability. They do not evaluate study design, statistical appropriateness, or clinical significance. ARBITER performs substantive scientific review: methodology evaluation, statistical error detection, unsupported conclusion identification, missing literature gaps, and reporting guideline adherence — the issues that actually cause desk rejection.

How accurate is ARBITER compared to human reviewers?

ARBITER was calibrated by a physician-scientist with 150+ peer-reviewed publications and editorial experience at major cardiovascular journals. It excels at systematic analysis that humans perform inconsistently — such as verifying statistical test appropriateness and identifying unsupported conclusions.

How long does manuscript review take?

Typically within 24 to 48 hours, compared to the 3 to 6 months typical of traditional journal peer review. ARBITER enables rapid iteration — you can revise and re-review before submission rather than waiting months for feedback you could have addressed in advance.

What file formats are accepted?

PDF and DOCX. Upload your manuscript in either format and ARBITER will analyze it and deliver a structured review report.

Is my manuscript data secure?

Yes. Your manuscript is encrypted in transit and at rest on Google Cloud infrastructure. Access is restricted to the automated analysis pipeline — manuscript content is never logged, shared with third parties, or used for model training. You can request deletion of your data at any time by contacting information@ai-heart.org.

What types of manuscripts can ARBITER review?

Original research, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical trials, observational studies, case series, and methodology papers. ARBITER is strongest in clinical and biomedical research but can evaluate any scientific manuscript with a methods section.

How much does ARBITER cost?

Your first review is free. Individual reviews are $39.99, with discounted packs available ($113.99 for 3, $174.99 for 5). Volume discounts available for enterprise and institutional accounts — contact us at information@ai-heart.org.

Get Started Free