どのように機能するか
白紙のページから引用付きの論文まで、3つのステップで
ソースをインポート
PDFをドラッグして取り込み、ZoteroまたはMendeleyからインポートするか、Jenniに2億件以上の論文を検索させましょう。ライブラリは数秒で準備完了です。
AIと一緒に書く
Smart AI のオートコンプリートは、実際の論文に基づいた文章を提案します。提案には出典が示されており、元の情報源までたどれます。
引用、レビュー、エクスポート
ワンクリックでインライン引用を2,600以上のスタイルで挿入。あらゆる主張を元のPDFで確認できます。.docx、LaTeX、またはHTMLに書き出し。
Six ways your citations can fail — and how Jenni catches them
Claim Confidence verifies every cited claim against its source and sorts issues into six categories — so you know exactly what kind of fix is needed.
Misrepresented
The claim distorts what the cited source actually says.
EXAMPLE
"Smith (2022) demonstrated that GPT-4 outperforms human teachers" — when Smith only measured grading speed, not teaching quality.
Contradicted
The cited source argues the opposite of the claim.
EXAMPLE
"Continuous fasting accelerates cellular repair (Lin et al., 2023)" — but Lin's findings show repair plateaus after 72 hours.
Unsupported
The cited source doesn't address the claim at all.
EXAMPLE
"CRISPR-Cas9 has been ethically endorsed by the WHO (Doudna, 2020)" — Doudna discusses mechanism, not WHO policy.
Weakly supported
Evidence in the source is thin or limited in scope.
EXAMPLE
"Resistance training improves cognition across populations (Conan, 2020)" — Conan studied only collegiate athletes.
Overstated
The claim goes further than the source warrants.
EXAMPLE
"LLM tutors significantly improve student outcomes (Park, 2024)" — Park reports a small effect on one task.
Unverifiable
The cited source can't be located or accessed.
EXAMPLE
"(Nakamura et al., 2019)" — DOI doesn't resolve, and no record exists in any indexed database.
See Claim Confidence in action
Watch Jenni's AI citation checker verify a real draft, flag weak and unsupported claims, and surface the source passages — in just over a minute.
また別のAIチャットボット？
AIツールは何百種類もあります。JenniがChatGPTと違う理由はここにあります。
Reads the full source
Other AI citation checkers verify metadata — does the paper exist, is the DOI valid, is the author real. Claim Confidence reads the full text of every cited source, so verdicts come from what the paper actually says.
Six verdicts, not pass/fail
A binary "verified" stamp doesn't tell you how to fix a problem. Six categories pinpoint exactly what kind of edit each claim needs.
Suggested rewrites grounded in the source
When a claim falls short, Claim Confidence surfaces the actual passage from the cited source and proposes a rewrite that fits what the source supports.
査読者より先に弱点を見つける
Reviewsはあなたの論文内のあらゆる主張を分析し、出典を照合し、6つのカテゴリにわたる問題を指摘します。自信を持って、安心して投稿しましょう。
検証されていない、または推測に基づく主張は、査読で却下される最も一般的な原因です。Jenniはそれらを数秒で見つけます。
Peer review8 / 10
Manuscript scored against a peer-review rubric with reviewer comments on each section.
Soundness
3/4
Presentation
4/4
Contribution
3/4
Results
Strengths
Weaknesses
Claim confidence7 issues
Every cited claim verified against its source — sorted into seven verdicts so you know exactly what kind of fix each one needs.
Supported
23Misrepresented
Contradicted
1Unsupported
3Weakly supported
2Overstated
Unverifiable
1Proofread18 edits
Whilst generally sound, the text contains some areas for improvement to comply with academic best practices.
Word choice
AllThe majority of participants reported improved outcomes.
Formality
Yang (2024) found a negative correlation which was interesting..
Grammar
These results indicate that early intervention be effective. appears to be effective.
Transitions
Also, In addition, Jones (2022) found similar results.
Overgeneralized
AllThe majority of participants reported improved outcomes.
The results provesuggest that X has an effect on Y.Tone of voice22 notes
Suggestions across vocabulary, syntax, punctuation, tone and flow to keep a consistent academic voice.
All Suggestions
22Vocabulary
6Syntax
5Punctuation
4Tone
3Flow
4引用分析
学術校正
インラインフィードバック
インラインフィードバック
よくある質問
私たちのユーザーは100以上のジャーナルに論文を掲載しています
IEEE、Springer、Elsevier などの学術誌に掲載された本格的な研究——Jenni で企画・執筆。
