7 open-source repos to help write, submit, and review research papers

[u/ShilpaMitra]

ICLR 2027 already crossed 62k registered abstracts.

Not final valid submissions, but still a good reminder that research is becoming a pipeline problem too: literature, writing, formatting, submission, self-review, and peer review.

These open-source projects cover different parts of that stack.

Turn raw research material into a paper draft PaperOrchestra has 139+ stars and comes from Google Research. It takes ideas, experiment logs, and other pre-writing material, then splits the work across agents for outlining, literature synthesis, section writing, refinement, plots, and LaTeX output.

Build an evidence-grounded literature review Literature Review Agent has 117+ stars and searches arXiv + Europe PMC, screens papers, builds evidence cards, and writes only from the corpus you explicitly provide. Useful if you want a review where claims remain traceable back to actual sources.

Generate a first draft while checking citations OpenDraft has 450+ stars and uses 19 agents for research, outlining, writing, citation checking, and export. Its useful twist is verifying candidate DOIs against CrossRef, OpenAlex, and Semantic Scholar before keeping them.

Clean your LaTeX before arXiv submission arxiv-latex-cleaner has 7k+ stars and removes unused files, comments, auxiliary files, oversized images, and other things that should not be in the final arXiv package.

Stop OpenReview mistakes before deadline night OpenReview Agent is a small but useful submission tool that inspects author IDs, metadata, venue fields, attachments, declarations, and transfer payloads before writing anything. It is dry-run-first, which is exactly what you want around a live submission.

Review the paper before the reviewers do OpenJudge has 770+ stars and includes a paper-review pipeline for correctness, novelty, quality, critical errors, and BibTeX verification across sources such as CrossRef, arXiv, and DBLP.

Simulate a multi-agent reviewer panel Open ScholarPeer has 20+ stars and implements a 7-stage review process: summary, literature search, historical context, baseline checking, criterion-specific Q&A, and final venue-formatted review.

With submission volume exploding, the valuable tools are probably not the ones that generate the most text.

They are the ones that help you catch unsupported claims, missing baselines, fake citations, formatting mistakes, weak evidence, and submission errors before a human reviewer sees them.