Write Better Papers.
Zero Hallucinated Citations.
OpenQuill discovers, verifies, and drafts academic papers with 0% citation hallucination. Every reference checked against Semantic Scholar before you see it.
Precision Engineering for Research
Three steps from topic to verified, citable output
Enter your topic
Get an instant feasibility preview with suggested research angles. Completely free.
FreeGet verified citations
24+ papers discovered and verified against Semantic Scholar. BibTeX export included.
$5Receive your paper
Complete academic draft with iterative refinement and reviewer scoring.
$20What verified citations look like
Every citation includes full metadata and a direct Semantic Scholar link
Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks
Lewis et al., 2020
We explore a general-purpose fine-tuning recipe for retrieval-augmented generation combining pre-trained parametric and non-parametric memory...
View on Semantic Scholar →Attention Is All You Need
Vaswani et al., 2017
We propose a new simple network architecture, the Transformer, based solely on attention mechanisms, dispensing with recurrence and convolutions...
View on Semantic Scholar →A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models
Huang et al., 2023
This survey provides a comprehensive overview of the phenomenon of hallucination in LLMs, analyzing its causes, detection methods, and mitigation...
View on Semantic Scholar →Free AI tools find sources. OpenQuill verifies them.
Unverified AI Tools
- ✗Web URLs — not academic sources
- ✗No metadata (authors, year, venue)
- ✗18-28% hallucination rate
- ✗Manual BibTeX formatting
- ✗No verification step
OpenQuill
- ✓Semantic Scholar verified papers
- ✓Full metadata — authors, year, venue, abstract
- ✓0% hallucination rate
- ✓BibTeX export included
- ✓Every citation independently verifiable
Publisher-friendly: AI-assisted literature search requires no disclosure under current major publisher policies.
See a real paper written by OpenQuill
This paper was generated end-to-end by the OpenQuill pipeline
UX Patterns for Academic Writing Tools: What Makes Researchers Actually Adopt and Pay
While 57-72% of researchers have adopted AI writing tools, abandonment rates remain high due to friction at the input stage and a lack of verifiable trust signals. This paper conducts a narrative review of technology acceptance models, HCI research, and freemium UX to analyze adoption patterns in academic workflows...
Choose Your Depth
Start free. Pay only when you need verified output.
Topic Preview
Validate your research direction instantly
- ✓Feasibility assessment
- ✓3+ suggested angles
- ✓Estimated paper count
- ✓Instant results
Citation Library
The heavy lifting of sourcing, completed
- ✓24+ verified academic citations
- ✓BibTeX export
- ✓Full paper outline
- ✓Semantic Scholar cross-check
- ✓3-7 minute delivery
Full Paper
A comprehensive, refined academic draft
- ✓Everything in Citation Library
- ✓Complete 2,000+ word draft
- ✓Iterative refinement
- ✓Reviewer scoring (8/10 avg)
- ✓10-30 minute delivery