Read the paper here: link.springer.com/article/10.1... A pleasure doing this with the great Thomas Lemberger @tlemberger.bsky.social and Niv Samuel Mastboim @nivsm.bsky.social

At the same time, we are building an alternative model that puts agency directly in scientists’ hands. Researchers should be the ones deciding when their work is ready to be shared. We are building the infrastructure to support that.

Our joint study with EMBO is just out! We are proud to be at the forefront of this sea change. AI will reinforce the central role of scientists in this new era. Strong science should be seen! @embo.org @reviewcommons.org @tlemberger.bsky.social link.springer.com/article/10.1...

It’s finally out! Together with @embopress.org and @reviewcommons.org, we conducted a structured side-by-side comparison of human peer review and our AI scientific review (see thread 👇👇👇🔥).

Thank you @lemonde.fr! If you’re a French scientist, you should try qed. Also if you’re not. www.lemonde.fr/sciences/art...

An article about @qedscience.bsky.social this time in @lemonde.fr 🍷 Would you prefer to get feedback on your paper in French? Lots of scientists in France are q.e.ding❤️https://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/article/2025/12/10/l-evaluation-des-articles-scientifiques-bouleversee-par-l-ia_6656706_1650684.html

And here's the report @qedscience.bsky.social generated for our new paper, summarizing what's new and what was already known before. I'm planning to submit q.e.d's reports as cover letters together with my pre-prints from now on (and so should you!)

Für life sciences gibt es den Tool von @qedscience.bsky.social . Es funktioniert eigentlich super: man erhält ein strukturiertes und sehr relevantes Feedback. Ich verstehe also die ganze Aufregung nicht: KI-Tools werden immer besser und als Hilfsmittel für die Begutachtung bereits sehr hilfreich.

I just tested q.e.d for a grant proposal and am blown away. The suggested changes are on the point and will surely help my proposal. This is amazing! @odedrechavi.bsky.social Can't wait to submit my next paper before preprint to q.e.d! 🧪

Science doesn’t actually run on truth – it runs on validity. In our latest blog post we explore why science advances not by proving absolute truths, but by continuously evaluating how valid a claim is within a given paradigm. qedscience.com/blog/why-we-... @odedrechavi.bsky.social

Here's how you can go to @qedscience.bsky.social from the @openrxiv.bsky.social @biorxivpreprint.bsky.social website, when you submit a manuscript:

IT'S HAPPENING! 💥 I'm psyched to launch the collaboration between @qedscience.bsky.social & @openrxiv.bsky.social @biorxivpreprint.bsky.social! Preprint + q.e.d = your science is out there, and anyone can appreciate it. Let's care about making discoveries, and not on “getting published” (1/3) 👇

Please read the thoughtful Blog that @richardsever.bsky.social and the @openrxiv.bsky.social team wrote on integrating pre-prints with AI review openrxiv.org/enabling-rev...

Many scientists (including me) have viewed AI review warily. But responses to trials of qed have been very positive. I was impressed with its output, which was developed by iteration with a large number of human reviewers. 3/n

Authors can now send papers directly from bioRxiv to qed and get feedback on improvements they should make – ‘gaps’ that require more work or revision of the claims. 2/n

And of course working with Oded and his team is 4/n

Excited to launch an openRxiv partnership with the scientist-run AI review service qed (@qedscience.bsky.social), the brainchild of @odedrechavi.bsky.social 1/n openrxiv.org/enabling-rev...

Here's the link to the system, try it! qedscience.com @qedscience.bsky.social

BIG ANNOUNCEMENT📣: I haven’t been this excited to be part of something new in 15 years… Thrilled to reveal the passion project I’ve been working on for the past year and a half!🙀🥳 (thread 👇)

This was also an exciting paper for us because we got to pre-review it even before submission with q.e.d’s AI qedscience.com. really helpful and improved a lot!