Opyt vs Elicit

Elicit searches the literature when you ask. Opyt keeps searching after you stop.

Elicit and scite come closer to Opyt's growth loop than anything else here. scite's Research Feeds and Elicit's alerts genuinely are standing queries, and they only see papers.

Opyt's topics are written by your assistant with you and previewed against the last month before anything is saved. Each watches named things on arXiv, GitHub, OpenAlex, X and Substack every day, picks out your own people's posts on the subject beside them, and nothing reaches you until your assistant has checked it.

At a glance

Where Elicit is better

• Rigor in the literature: 20 extraction columns on Pro up to 40 on Enterprise, and screening runs of 5,000 papers on Pro up to 40,000 on Enterprise. Opyt has neither.
• Scale of the index: 138 million papers, against whatever has entered your own store.
• Citation graphs, reference management and PDF annotation, none of which Opyt has.
• For an actual systematic review, Opyt is not in the running.

Where Opyt is better

• A heterogeneous corpus: posts, repos, blogs, and papers ranked in one index.
• A preview of what each watch would have found last month, before you commit to it.
• Your own prior reading sits in the same store as the literature, beside everything your topics kept.
• Your own people's posts on the subject arrive beside the papers, and every find is checked before you see it.

Which one

Inside the literature, Elicit is stronger. Across the sources a working researcher reads day to day, Opyt is.

install Opyt free, MIT, five minutes