⚡ 簡単な評価:
- 価格: AIを引き出す starts free, then $9. Scite has no free tier and starts at $12/month yearly.
- 最適な用途: Elicit AI for a literature review and data extraction. Scite for checking evidence behind citations.
- 主な違い： Elicit AI helps you find relevant papers. Scite tells you how other papers judged them.
- 私たちのおすすめ： Elicit AI, because it covers more research tasks in one place.
Two tools keep showing up in academic workflows.
Both promise to save you so much time on a literature review.
But they answer different questions about the same papers.
Elicit AI finds papers and pulls key information out of them.
Scite shows you the context of the citation behind each one.
Here is how to pick the right research アシスタント あなたの仕事に感謝します。
概要
This Elicit vs Scite comparison covers pricing, searching features, and daily research workflows.
また、それぞれが誰なのかも分析します AIツール actually helps.
情報源としては、公開されている仕様書、ドキュメント、および一般ユーザーのレビューなどが挙げられます。
弊社のライター陣は、各プラットフォームを実際に操作して検証しました。
それらのメモは、以下の「チームが気づいたこと」のセクションに記載されています。
Elicit AIとは何ですか？
Elicit AI is a free artificial intelligence research assistant built by Ought.
It automates part of the work researchers do every day.
You type a research question, and the ai tool surfaces top papers in that field.
Elicit uses language models to read each paper and extract key information.
It pulls publications from Semantic Scholar and PubMed, so the sources stay verifiable.
Semantic search matches intent, not just a perfect keyword match.
That helps you find relevant papers even when your wording differs from theirs.
Here is where to start if you want to try it yourself.
🏆 Winner: Elicit AI
Screen thousands of papers against your own criteria. Extract key information into a table you can sort.
AIの価格設定を引き出す
Here is what Elicit AI costs in 2026. Let’s break it down.
| プラン | 価格 | 最適な用途 |
|---|---|---|
| ベーシック（無料） | $0 | Trying the search and abstract summary tools |
| 基本 | $9 | Students running a first literature review |
| 標準 | $12 | Regular data extraction across many papers |
| プロ | $19 | Systematic reviews and heavy screening |
| 企業 | 営業担当者へのお問い合わせ | Labs and institutions with shared libraries |
価格は2026年7月に確定しました。
無料トライアル: The Basic (Free) tier works as an open-ended trial. No card is needed to create an account.
返金保証: No published refund window. Cancel before renewal to avoid the next charge.
📌 注記： Elicit AI runs on a freemium model. Higher tiers raise your data extraction limits rather than unlocking a different product.
⚠️ Pricing conflict: Some guides still describe Elicit as fully free after signup. Our CSV records five tiers, from $0 up to $19 plus Enterprise. We list the CSV figures above and flag the difference here.
Key Benefits of Elicit AI
Here is what makes Elicit AI worth considering:
- Screening at scale: Elicit screens thousands of papers against your inclusion and exclusion criteria. It also shows a rationale for each decision.
- Structured tables: It organises study details, interventions, outcomes, and populations into rows. That format suits systematic reviews better than a narrative reply.
- Sentence-level citations: Every claim links back to a specific sentence in the source. This guards against hallucinated references.
- Elicit Reports: The report feature runs rapid reviews and drafts a 10+ page literature review. You still edit it, but the skeleton is there.
- Citation managers: Zotero and EndNote both import and export directly. Your existing library moves across without retyping.
- Question support: It brainstorms research questions, suggests search terms, and offers alternate questions when a search stalls.
- Gap spotting: Elicit helps identify research gaps and future study opportunities. That matters when you are scoping a thesis.
私たちのチームが気づいたこと
Our writer signed up for Elicit AI and spent several days running real literature searches. Here is what stood out from that hands-on time:
Elicit AI Pros & Cons
✅ メリット
- Free tier lets you test the searching features before paying
- Pulls from Semantic Scholar and PubMed rather than the open web
- Extracts sample size and methodology into a sortable table
- Sentence-level citations make every claim checkable
- Simple interface that needs almost no training
❌ デメリット
- Does not label whether a citing paper agrees or disagrees
- Extraction limits on lower tiers cap large projects
- Coverage thins outside medicine and the sciences
- No browser extension for reading papers elsewhere
Sciteとは何ですか?
Scite helps researchers discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations.
A raw citation count tells you a paper was cited. It does not tell you why.
Smart Citations show the context of the citation and a classification describing the intent.
Each citing paper is tagged as supporting, contrasting, or mentioning evidence.
Here is how scite works under the hood.
It processes full-text scientific literature and applies a deep learning model to each citation statement.
Over 1 billion citation statements have been analysed and indexed this way.
Here is the quickest way to see the evidence labels in action.
Runner Up: Scite
See whether a scientific article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. Check your own references before you submit.
Sciteの価格
Scite keeps its pricing short. There are two ways to pay.
| プラン | 価格 | 最適な用途 |
|---|---|---|
| 月額プラン | $20 | Short projects and one-off reference checks |
| 年間プラン | 月額12ドル | Researchers who cite and publish year round |
価格は2026年7月に確定しました。
無料トライアル: No free tier is listed in our pricing data. Some search results and badges stay visible without an account.
返金保証: No published refund window. Cancel inside your account before the renewal date.
📌 注記： The yearly plan is billed up front. It works out $8 per month cheaper than paying monthly.
⚠️ 警告： Several users have reported problems with billing and subscription renewals. Set a calendar reminder before your renewal date.
Key Benefits of Scite
Here is what makes Scite worth considering:
- Evidence labels: Every citing paper is sorted into supporting, contrasting, or mentioning. You see disagreement instead of guessing at it.
- Retraction flags: Scite marks publications that were retracted or corrected. That adds a credibility check before you cite.
- 照会確認： Upload a manuscript and scite verifies whether your sources were retracted, disputed, or given editorial notices.
- Browser extension: Scite badges appear on Google Scholar and PubMed, so smart citation counts show while you search.
- カスタムダッシュボード： Track a topic, a journal, or your own work. Email alerts tell you when new evidence lands.
- Structured insights: It extracts PICO terms or named biomarkers into tables you can adjust.
- API アクセス: Teams can pipe citation data into their own systems and internal resources.
私たちのチームが気づいたこと
Our writer used Scite while checking references on a draft paper. Here is what that hands-on session showed:
Scite Pros & Cons
✅ メリット
- Shows the actual 文章 around each citation, not just a count
- Flags retracted and corrected publications before you cite them
- Reviewers praise the user-friendly design
- Browser extension works on Google Scholar and PubMed
❌ デメリット
- No free plan in our pricing data
- Some users reported accuracy problems with the search engine
- Reports exist of fabricated quotes and nonexistent sources
- Billing and renewal complaints appear in reviews
機能比較
These two platforms overlap less than their marketing suggests. We compared ten areas that decide which one belongs in your workflow.
| 特徴 | AIを引き出す | サイト |
|---|---|---|
| 開始価格 | $0 (Basic Free) | $12/month yearly |
| 無料プラン | ✅ | ❌ |
| Semantic Paper Search | ✅ | ✅ |
| スマート引用 | ❌ | ✅ |
| Data Extraction Tables | ✅ | ✅ |
| Automated Literature Review | ✅ | ❌ |
| Retraction Flags | ❌ | ✅ |
| ブラウザ拡張機能 | ❌ | ✅ |
| Citation Manager Import | ✅ | ❌ |
| 最適な用途 | Finding and summarising papers | Judging evidence and references |
1. Paper Discovery and Search
AIを引き出す: You enter a question and Elicit tries to identify the top papers in the field. Semantic search reads intent, so you find relevant papers without hunting for the exact phrasing an author used.
引用元: Search here starts from the citation graph rather than the abstract. That is useful for finding related work, though some users reported accuracy problems with the search engine itself.
2. Citation Context and Evidence
AIを引き出す: Claims link back to a specific sentence in the source paper. That keeps the ai research assistant honest, but it does not tell you whether later work agreed.
引用元: This is the core strength. Each Smart Citation provides supporting or contrasting evidence labels, plus the sentence where the citing paper made its point. Contrasting evidence is the signal most tools hide.
3. Data Extraction and Tables
AIを引き出す: It pulls sample size, methodology, and outcomes from hundreds of research articles into one table. You can filter an abstract summary by intervention, outcome, or population.
引用元: Structured insights extract PICO terms or named biomarkers into adjustable tables. The output leans toward citation quality rather than study design.
4. Literature Review Automation
AIを引き出す: Elicit Reports run a rapid review end to end and produce a 10+ page draft. Nothing else here comes close for a first-pass literature review.
引用元: There is no drafting step. Scite gives you deeper context than citation counts so you can conduct the review yourself with better judgement.
5. Seed Articles and Topic Discovery
AIを引き出す: Topic Finder helps you find seed articles and build outward from them. Older guides describe Elicit as a way to locate seed articles and mine subject headings before a formal search.
引用元: Citation chaining does this job instead. Forward chaining finds newer work citing your source, and backward chaining checks the quality of a paper’s own references.
6. Screening and Custom Columns
AIを引き出す: Custom Column lets you define your own extraction field across a whole set of papers. Screening runs against your inclusion criteria and shows the thought process behind each include or exclude call.
引用元: Filtering leans on funder, journal, and institution data rather than study criteria. Useful for mapping a field, less useful for screening a systematic review.
7. Alerts and Research Tracking
AIを引き出す: Research Alerts watch a saved question and flag new papers. The alerts sit inside the same workspace as your tables.
引用元: Personalised dashboards track literature relating to your interests. Email alerts tell you when someone cites your work and whether they agreed. The browser extension surfaces the same data while you read online.
8. Subject Coverage and Access
AIを引き出す: Medical and life sciences coverage is strongest, since PubMed and Semantic Scholar sit underneath. Open access papers are easiest to work with, and paywalled content is limited to what the abstract carries.
引用元: Full-text processing spans publisher agreements, so it reaches into academic articles that sit behind a paywall. Coverage of a given scientific article depends on whether the publisher shares full text.
9．使いやすさと習得の容易さ
AIを引き出す: The interface is simple and does not require a lot of training. Students get answers on day one, which is why it spreads through labs quickly.
引用元: Customers appreciate the user-friendly design, and reviewers call the dashboards easy to read. The concept of a citation classification takes a session or two to click.
⚠️ 警告： Neither tool replaces reading. Users have reported fabricated quotes and nonexistent sources on Scite, so verify anything you plan to cite.
10. 価格設定とコスト
プランを並べて比較してみましょう。
| プラン | AIを引き出す | サイト |
|---|---|---|
| 無料 | Basic (Free): $0 | ❌ |
| 入場料支払い済み | Basic: $9 | Yearly Plan: $12/month |
| 中級クラス | Standard: $12 | Monthly plan: $20 |
| 最高級 | Pro: $19 | ❌ |
| カスタム | 法人向け：営業担当までお問い合わせください | ❌ |
AIを引き出す: Five tiers give you room to grow. The free plan is enough to test the searching features, and $9 covers a 学生 running one review.
引用元: Two options, both paid. At $12/month on the yearly plan you get the full product, which is simpler than tier-hunting but harder to trial.
さまざまなシナリオ
| 必要な場合は | 選ぶ | なぜ |
|---|---|---|
| 無料の出発点 | AIを引き出す | Basic (Free) tier at $0 |
| To screen hundreds of papers | AIを引き出す | Criteria screening with rationale |
| To judge disputed findings | サイト | Supporting vs contrasting labels |
| To check your own references | サイト | Reference Check on manuscripts |
| A drafted review | AIを引き出す | Elicit Reports write 10+ pages |
| 初心者向けのセットアップ | AIを引き出す | Almost no training needed |
💰 あなたの予算
Elicit AI costs nothing to start and $9 for its first paid step. Scite asks for $12/month on the yearly plan before you see anything.
🔌 あなたの技術スタック
Elicit AI connects to citation managers like Zotero and EndNote for import and export. Scite offers API access plus a browser extension that follows you across other resources.
📝 Your Research Style
If you are still answering questions about what exists, start with Elicit AI. If you already have a pile of research and need to weigh the evidence, Scite fits better.
🎓 あなたの経験レベル
Undergraduates and independent researchers get moving faster on Elicit AI. Scite rewards people who already understand how a citing paper can misrepresent its source.
🆓 無料トライアルとデモ
Only Elicit AI lets you test properly without paying. With Scite, budget one month at $20 before you commit to a year.
🛟 サポートオプション
Both run email support with documentation behind it. Scite reviews mention billing issues more often, so keep your receipts.
切り替えガイド
Already using one of these? Here is what changes if you move.
🔄 Switching from Elicit AI to Scite?
✅ 得られるもの：
- Evidence labels that describe how each citing paper used a source
- Retraction and correction flags before you cite a publication
- A reference check that audits a finished manuscript
❌ 失うもの：
- The free tier, since Scite has no $0 plan
- Automated report drafting for a literature review
- Zotero and EndNote import and export
📋切り替え方法：
- Export your Elicit tables and saved papers to your citation manager
- Start a Scite monthly plan and install the browser extension
- Rebuild your saved topics as dashboards and turn on email alerts
🔄 Switching from Scite to Elicit AI?
✅ 得られるもの：
- A free plan you can keep using indefinitely
- Extraction tables built for systematic reviews
- Drafted reviews that shortcut the blank page when writing papers
❌ 失うもの：
- Smart Citations and the context behind every reference
- Retraction alerts on papers you already cite
- The browser extension and its Google Scholar badges
📋切り替え方法：
- Export your Scite dashboards and reference lists
- Create a free Elicit AI account and connect Zotero or EndNote
- Re-enter your research questions and rebuild your extraction columns
私たちのレビューで取り上げられなかったこと
This comparison focused on individual researchers and small labs. We did not test institutional licensing, the Scite API at scale, or how either platform handles non-English literature. Our notes reflect the July 2026 versions, and both products change often. If your work sits outside medicine and the sciences, coverage may look thinner than we describe here.
最終評決
| カテゴリ | 勝者 |
|---|---|
| 💰価格 | AIを引き出す |
| 🔍 Paper Discovery | AIを引き出す |
| 🧾 Citation Context | サイト |
| 📊 データ抽出 | AIを引き出す |
| 📝 Review オートメーション | AIを引き出す |
| 🔔 Alerts and Tracking | サイト |
| 🌐 Full-Text Access | サイト |
| 👶 使いやすさ | AIを引き出す |
| 🏆総合優勝 | AIを引き出す |
🏆 WINNER: ELICIT AI
Elicit AI wins 5 out of 8 categories.
最適な用途: systematic reviews, thesis scoping, and answering questions across a large body of literature
These are two different products aimed at two stages of the same job. Elicit AI sits at the front end, where you still need to find and sort papers.
Scite sits at the back end, where you already have a research paper in hand and need to know whether the field agreed with it. For that specific job, many reviewers call it indispensable.
Elicit AI takes the win because it covers more ground. It handles discovery, extraction, drafting, and other research tasks that Scite never attempts.
If your goal is to automate research workflows like screening and summarising, start with the free plan. If your goal is evidence quality, Scite earns its $12/month.
More of Elicit AI Compared
Here is how Elicit AI stacks up against other research tools:
Elicit AI vs サイスペース
Elicit AI wins on: criteria-based screening with a stated rationale, extraction tables built for systematic reviews, sentence-level source linking
SciSpaceが勝利した点： chatting with a single PDF, plain-language explanation of dense passages, broader coverage outside the sciences
Elicit AI vs ペーパーパル
Elicit AI wins on: discovery across Semantic Scholar and PubMed, structured data extraction, a $0 entry tier
Paperpalが勝利した点： academic language editing, submission-readiness checks, Microsoft Word integration for drafting
Elicit AI vs ジェニー
Elicit AI wins on: screening volume, evidence tables you can filter, research question ブレインストーミング
ジェニが勝利した点： in-line writing assistance, autocomplete while you draft, formatting citations as you type
More of Scite Compared
Here is how Scite stacks up against other tools researchers consider:
Scite vs ペーパーガイド
Scite wins on: citation classification at scale, retraction flags, dashboards that track a field over time
PaperGuide wins on: note-taking around saved papers, a free entry point, lighter setup for coursework
Scite vs クイルボット
Scite wins on: evidence context behind a reference, manuscript reference 監査, publisher full-text depth
QuillBotが勝利した点： paraphrasing and rewriting, grammar correction, a usable free tier for students
Scite vs よむ
Scite wins on: the size of its indexed citation database, browser badges on Google Scholar, API access for teams
ヨムの勝利条件： guided エッセイ structuring, an editor built for students, cheaper monthly entry
よくある質問
Elicit AIは何をしますか？
It searches academic databases, screens papers against your criteria, and pulls findings into tables. You ask a question, and it returns papers with the details extracted.
Elicit AIの無料版はありますか？
Yes. Our pricing data lists a Basic (Free) tier at $0. Paid plans start at $9 and raise your extraction limits.
サイトは何に使われますか？
It shows how other papers cited a source and whether they supported or disputed it. Researchers use it to check references and spot retractions.
What is the difference between Scite AI and チャットGPT?
One reads real citation statements from published literature. The other generates text from training data and can invent references, so it needs verification.
Elicitは研究に適していますか？
Yes, especially for reviews in medicine and the sciences. Coverage thins in humanities fields, and you still need to read the papers it surfaces.
English 
Spanish 
Chinese 
German 
French 
Arabic 
Russian 
Portuguese 
Japanese 
Korean 
Italian 
Turkish 
Dutch 
Polish 
Indonesian 
Thai 
Vietnamese 