paper-review-committee

Run an academic peer review on a PDF by instructing the host agent to execute the committee review root-orchestrator workflow, which normalizes the manuscript once and coordinates multiple reviewer perspectives to produce structured JSON artifacts.

A committee-style manuscript review workflow normalizes your document, classifies its research paradigm, and coordinates eight distinct reviewer perspectives to generate evidence-grounded reviewer opinions and finalized structured JSON artifacts.

Yes, you can review revisions by running a dedicated revision-response review that compares previous reviewer concerns against the author responses and the revised manuscript to produce a structured assessment.

Yes, the structured peer review process supports DOCX and DOC files alongside PDF manuscripts, normalizing each format to produce a shared evidence bundle with page and line indexing for downstream review.

Reviewer opinions are structured and saved as individual structured JSON files written by leaf tasks under the <run_dir>/reviews/{agent_id}.json path, relying on a shared evidence bundle and manuscript paradigm classification.

Manuscript paradigm classification selects method-appropriate review criteria by evaluating the shared evidence bundle, ensuring the eight coordinated reviewers apply relevant standards to the specific research methodology.