Launching today
PaperDebugger
LaTeX-aware revision for paper writing in Overleaf
2 followers
LaTeX-aware revision for paper writing in Overleaf
2 followers
PaperDebugger is an open-source academic writing assistant that integrates directly into Overleaf. It provides LaTeX-aware debugging, reviewer-style feedback, and targeted revision suggestions without leaving the editor. There’s no signup: install the Chrome extension and it attaches immediately to your project. Under the hood, it reads your project structure and simulates a Research → Critique → Revision workflow rather than one-shot chat responses.
Hi Product Hunt!
I’m one of the makers of PaperDebugger. We’re a small team from NUS (undergrad + PhD). What started as a research project and my Final Year Thesis has since evolved into an open-source academic writing assistant for Overleaf!
Demo: https://github.com/PaperDebugger...
Why We Built It
As students and researchers, we kept bouncing between Overleaf, ChatGPT, and reviewer guidelines when submitting conference papers, and somehow still ended up missing issues that reviewers later flagged. We wanted feedback where the writing actually happens. Our goal is to bring these capabilities into a familiar writing environment without, copy-paste workflows:
• 🧠 LaTeX-aware debugging (structure, math, citations, references)
• 📝 Research → Review → Enhance workflow that provides high-level and local feedback
• 🔁 Targeted, multi-step revision passes and not one-shot chat responses
• 🧩 Reads your project structure, not just raw text
Who It's For
• Students, researchers, and collaborators who already write in Overleaf
• Anyone preparing conference or journal submissions
• Teams who want feedback inside the editor, not in a separate chat window
• Open-sourced; Self-host your own PaperDebugger and keep your files private
Try it!
Chrome extension (Overleaf integration):
https://chromewebstore.google.co...
It’s far from perfect, but since people are already using it, we are hoping to share it more widely and focus on stability, reliability, and gathering as much feedback as we can.
What We’d Love Feedback On:
• Whether the Overleaf-embedded workflow is actually more useful than copy/paste LLM editing
• Thoughts on UX and interaction inside the Overleaf editor
• Any concerns, e.g., about privacy or extension behaviour (we do have a policy published)
• Feature requests that would help with conference/journal submissions (we’re currently working on a conference format converter)
• Any advice or suggestions are welcome 😊
For readers interested in the technical details and research background that motivated the system, here’s a link to the paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.02589
Happy to answer any questions — about architecture, design decisions, or anything else!