What do institutions use Octym for most?

The everyday work: grant applications checked against the funder's own criteria, and a full integrity and quality review of every manuscript, against the journals your researchers submit to, before it leaves the institution.

Which funders can applications be checked against?

Review profiles are already built for NIH (R01 and R21) and ERC (Starting, Consolidator and Advanced). Any funder that isn't in the library yet, your Octym team builds for you.

Can different departments or labs run different reviews?

Yes. What runs, what leads, and who it runs for is configured per department, lab, or policy. You decide, and your Octym team makes it happen.

What happens if an allegation arrives?

Your integrity officer starts from evidence rather than a blank page: a maximum-depth review of any paper, submitted or published, on the same platform. Every finding is a signal traced to its source; a person always decides.

Is our researchers' unpublished work kept private?

Yes. Manuscripts and applications are analyzed on secure, private servers and are never used to train AI models.

For research institutions

Every integrity and quality check, in one review, for every funder, lab, and department.

Grant applications checked against each funder's own criteria, and every manuscript checked against the journals your researchers submit to, configured at onboarding, before it leaves the institution. Configured for your policies by your Octym team.

Leaving the institution

each checked at its own gate

Grant applicationNIH R01
Specific aimsRigor & reproducibilityData-management plan
ManuscriptTarget journal
Required statementsLength & count limitsReporting completeness

Measured by the rules it will actually face, before it goes out.

What every review covers

One review, every lens.

The same three families of check run across your institution's work, whether it is a grant application, a protocol, or a manuscript heading out the door.

Internal manuscript integrity

AI-generated text signals
Image manipulation
Image duplication
AI-generated images
Graph & chart duplication
Statistical & analytical consistency
Figure–legend consistency
Claim & citation consistency
Internal consistency
Prior publication & reuse disclosure

External checks & requirements

Image & graph plagiarism
Retracted reference detection
Hallucinated / non-existent references
DOI & metadata resolution
Reference analytics
Data & code availability
Paper-mill signals
Authorship & affiliation consistency
Funder requirements
Submission requirements & completeness

Research quality

Methods & rigor
Reproducibility
Replicability signals
Research ethics
Novelty & contribution
Peer-review-grade analysis

See every check in detail

Where institutions use it most

The everyday work, checked before it counts.

Most of the value is in the work your institution submits every week: applications and manuscripts, each reviewed against the rules it will actually face.

Grant applications

Checked against the funder's own criteria (NIH R01 and R21, ERC Starting, Consolidator and Advanced): structure, rigor, compliance, and references, before the research office signs off.

Before submission

Every manuscript is reviewed against the journals your researchers submit to, configured with your Octym team at onboarding, alongside the full integrity and quality review, before it leaves the institution.

And if something ever goes wrong. When an allegation arrives, your integrity officer starts from evidence rather than a blank page: a maximum-depth review of any paper, submitted or published, ready on the same platform.

Before it goes out

Checked against the journal it is actually going to.

Every journal publishes its own instructions for authors, and they differ in ways that cost real time. At onboarding, tell your Octym team which journals your researchers submit to, and the review is measured against those venues' rules, not a generic standard.

Required statements

Ethics approval, data availability, funding, author contributions, competing interests, AI-use disclosure: present, complete, and in the form that journal asks for.

Structure & article type

Section order, abstract format, and the rules that apply to the specific article type, which often differ within the same journal.

Length & count limits

Abstract and word limits, page and figure counts, and reference limits, checked against the numbers that journal publishes.

Reporting completeness

Methods, participant flow, outcomes, statistics and figures reported clearly enough to be appraised, so a reviewer's first question is not a missing method.

A desk rejection for a missing statement costs weeks. The check costs one upload.

Complete control

Your institution's rules, your call.

What runs, what leads, and when it changes. You decide; your Octym team makes it happen.

You decide

Which funders, which policies, and what runs for which department or lab.

Your Octym team builds it

A new funder, a new policy, a new requirement. Tell them, and it's configured for you.

It changes when you do

Funders rewrite guidelines and policies evolve. Your reviews keep up without a project on your side.

Image & figure integrity is powered by Proofig, a trusted leader in scientific image integrity, adopted by leading journals and trusted by top research institutions.

Funder review profiles built for NIH R01 and R21 and ERC Starting, Consolidator and Advanced, alongside journal profiles configured with you at onboarding to each venue's own instructions for authors. Anything not in the library yet, your Octym team builds for you.

FAQ

Questions, answered.

See it on your institution's work.

Tell us your funders and your policies. We'll configure Octym around them.

Analyzed on private servers. Never used to train models.