LitReview-AI

LitReview-AI

Go from many PDFs to a citable literature review in minutes.

16 followers

πŸš€ AI-powered literature review generator for academic research. Instantly analyze PDF documents and create comprehensive summaries. Perfect for researchers, PhD students & academics. Transform weeks of work into minutes!
LitReview-AI gallery image
LitReview-AI gallery image
LitReview-AI gallery image
LitReview-AI gallery image
LitReview-AI gallery image
LitReview-AI gallery image
LitReview-AI gallery image
Free
Launch Team / Built With
Checkmarx Developer Assist for AI IDEs
Security linter for vibe coding: fix vulns as you build
Promoted

What do you think? …

Aerovic
Maker
πŸ“Œ
Hello Product Hunt community! πŸ‘‹ I'm Aerovic, the maker of LitReview-AI. I'm incredibly excited (and a bit nervous!) to share my project with you all today. πŸ€” Why did I build this? As someone deeply involved in research, I've always found the literature review process to be a brutal, time-consuming nightmare. I'd spend weeks drowning in dozens of PDFs, trying to connect the dots and remember "who argued what". I tried using generic AI tools, but the results were often frustrating. They would give me vague summaries, or worse, hallucinate citations. For serious academic work, this is a non-starter. I realized the core problem wasn't just "summarization," it was the lack of traceable synthesis. ✨ What's new and unique? That's why I built LitReview-AI with a completely different philosophy. It's not another "AI summarizer." It's an "AI Academic Synthesizer." Here’s the core difference: You upload up to 20 PDFs at once. Instead of a generic summary, the AI identifies the core themes discussed across all the papers. Under each theme, it generates a structured "Argument Map", presenting the key points from each paper with a strict, clean [Author, Year] citation. The goal is to give you an output that is not only insightful but also 100% citable and academically rigorous. πŸ† What am I most proud of? I'm most proud of the output quality. After a lot of trial and error (and some invaluable, brutally honest feedback from a top-tier professor!), we've achieved what I call the "Golden Standard" output. It's clean, professional, and provides the kind of evidence map that I, as a researcher, would actually trust and use in my own writing. This is a solo project, born out of a personal pain point. It's completely free to use, and I would be incredibly grateful for your feedback. Does this solve a real problem for you? Is the output format truly useful? What features would make this indispensable for your work? Thank you so much for checking it out! I'll be here all day to answer every single question. πŸ™