Expands a given {topic} into a more detailed, step-by-step methodology outline, covering tools, ethical considerations, and anticipated 2026 outcomes.
- Meant to run after an initial methodology draft, not as the first pass
- Surfaces gaps around data-collection tools and ethics that a first draft may miss
- Output: a structured outline suited to a thesis or dissertation methodology chapter
- Best compared side-by-side with the earlier draft to spot what's missing
Drafts a full research plan for a given {topic}, covering objectives, a timeline, a budget, and the 2026 impact and potential partners the project could involve. Built to turn a research idea into something closer to grant- or proposal-ready shape in one pass, organizing the scattered pieces of a project — goals, schedule, funding, collaborators — into a single structured document. Budget figures should be checked against the researcher's actual institutional costs before submission.
Writes a step-by-step research methodology for a given {topic}, covering the tools involved, ethical considerations, and the expected 2026 outcomes.
Intended as a first draft of the methodology chapter (commonly Chapter 3) of a thesis or dissertation, laying out the sequence of steps a researcher would follow.
Check the resulting structure and required sections against your institution's specific methodology template before treating it as final.
Assesses a single source at a given {link}, scoring its bias, evidence quality, and relevance on a 1-10 scale.
- Input: an article link or full citation
- Output: three 1-10 scores plus a short rationale for each
- Also suggests stronger, more authoritative alternative sources
- Scores should prompt closer reading, not replace peer review of the source
Analyzes a set of pasted {links} or citations to identify four gaps in the existing research and proposes one experiment or study design to address each gap. Aimed at researchers building the case for a thesis or dissertation topic, where the value of the project rests on demonstrating that a real, unaddressed gap exists in the literature. The identified gaps should be checked against the actual sources before being treated as confirmed, since the underlying research may already address them elsewhere.
Forecasts five trends likely to shape a given {field} between 2026 and 2030, drawing on 2025 data points and pairing each trend with a possible research angle.
Particularly useful for PhD candidates and funding proposals that need to argue for the significance and forward-looking relevance of a research direction.
The underlying 2025 data referenced in the forecasts should be verified independently before being cited.
Surfaces the ethical issues raised by a given research {topic}, covering privacy, bias, and current 2026 regulations.
- Input: the research topic or study design in question
- Output: a breakdown of ethical concerns across privacy, bias, and regulation
- Useful for drafting an IRB submission or ethics section of a proposal
- Regulation references should be confirmed against your institution's actual ethics board requirements
Recommends three statistical tests suited to a pasted {dataset_description} — its variables, sample size, and structure — along with the key insights each test would reveal.
Also suggests visuals appropriate for presenting those findings, aimed at the results/analysis chapter of a thesis written in tools like SPSS, STATA, EViews, or NVivo.
Each test's assumptions, such as normality, sample size, and independence, should be confirmed against the actual data before running it.
Summarizes the five leading studies published between 2024 and 2026 on a given {topic}, covering methods, results, gaps, and source links for each.
- Input: the research topic to search around
- Output: 5 study summaries with methods, results, gaps, and a link
- Built to speed up drafting a literature review section
- Every source link should be verified to exist and match the summary, since fabricated or misattributed citations are a known failure mode