Skip to main content

The manuscript development platform for neuroscience.

Weave follows the literature for you, keeps your co-authors on one page, picks the journal that fits, and tells you when the draft is ready to submit. It knows neuroscience, and it learns your research.

What's inside

Every step of the manuscript, in one place.

Researchers juggle PubMed, email threads, a journal finder, and a writing tool that don't talk to each other. Weave brings every step into one platform, with Weave AI as the one intelligence behind it all.

Manage

Weave Horizon

Early 2027

The manuscript development workspace.

Project management built for manuscripts: one shared workspace where your whole team plans, tracks, and decides every stage together, on a framework built by Scribendi and Edanz.

The Horizon dashboard for a neuroinflammation project: setup complete, with eight active workstreams from authorship through post-submission, each showing its own progress
  1. Discover

    A literature feed that learns your research: new papers matched to your topic, from a real PubMed query you can see and edit.

  2. Target

    Weave Atlas

    October 2026

    Journal recommendation built for your manuscript: journals ranked by what matters to you, with the reasoning behind every rank.

  3. Write

    Weave for Word

    Late 2026

    A writing assistant built into Word: your draft checked against the target journal's requirements, with referee-style review and a readiness score before you submit.

Weave AI

The manuscript development AI.

Weave AI is trained on neuroscience research, not just prompted for it, and it keeps up as new research is published. It learns your research, follows the literature in Stream, ranks journals in Atlas, and is the writing assistant inside Word. The same intelligence throughout, so what it learns in one product is already there in the next.

  • 01

    Mock peer review

    Reads the whole paper the way a careful referee does: what the study claims, what it actually shows, and where the gap between the two sits. It separates the objections that would sink a submission from the ones an author can fix in a week, and it says where it would land.

    • Major concerns
    • Minor concerns
    • Missing controls
    • Statistical issues
    • Accept to reject
  • 02

    Claim consistency

    Walks every conclusion back to the result it rests on. A correlation quietly becoming a cause, a mechanism asserted from an association, a hedge that goes missing between the results and the abstract: it flags the sentence, not just the section.

    • Evidence match
    • Overclaim detection
    • Causal-inflation risk
  • 03

    Alternative mechanisms

    Names the explanations the authors did not test, weighs how plausible each one is, and pairs it with the experiment that would rule it out.

    • Competing mechanisms
    • Plausibility
    • Falsification test
  • 04

    Bias and confounds

    Design decides what a result can mean, long before the statistics do. This reads the study for the variables that travel with the effect, the population it was measured in, and the distance between who was studied and who the conclusion is written about.

    • Design biases
    • Confounds
    • Sex bias
    • Demographic reporting
    • Overgeneralization
  • 05

    Methods audit

    Inventories every technique the paper leans on and rates how rigorously each one was applied, not how confidently it was described. A method can be state of the art and still be run in a way that cannot carry the claim.

    • Imaging
    • Electrophysiology
    • Genetic tools
    • Assays
    • Statistics
    • Rigor rating
  • 06

    Reproducibility

    Asks the only question that matters of a methods section: could another lab run this? It looks for procedural detail that is actually written down rather than implied, for data and code a reader can reach, and for whether randomization and blinding were reported at all.

    • Protocol clarity
    • Data and code
    • Randomization
    • Blinding
    • 0 to 10 score
  • 07

    Multi-level interpretation

    A finding rarely stops at the scale it was measured. This reads the result upward and downward, from molecules to behavior, so the implications land at every level the work touches.

    • Molecular
    • Cellular
    • Circuit
    • Systems
    • Behavioral
  • 08

    Field positioning

    Places the work in its literature: the subfield it speaks to, whether it confirms or unsettles the prevailing view, and the gap it fills.

    • Subfield
    • Paradigm status
    • Literature gap
  • 09

    Closest prior work

    Argues the most convincing wrong reading of the study, then takes it apart. If a result can be misread, it is better to see how here than in a review.

    • Plausible misreading
    • Why it fails
    • Correction
  • 10

    Abstract gaps

    Reads an abstract for what is not in it, and names the details a reader needs before they can judge the work at all.

    • Species and strain
    • Sample size
    • Dosage
    • Remaining gaps
  • 11

    Specific aims

    Turns the paper you just read into the grant you have not written yet: the objective it implies, the hypothesis worth testing next, and three aims with the outcome each one would produce.

    • Objective
    • Central hypothesis
    • Three aims
    • Expected outcomes
    • Impact

Weave for Word

Write submission-ready manuscripts.

Weave AI works where your manuscript is written. It checks your draft against the target journal's requirements, reviews it the way a referee would, and gives you a readiness score before you submit. Arriving late 2026.

Get early access

Weave HorizonEarly 2027

The manuscript development workspace.

Run the manuscript as a project, with every co-author in one workspace. Authorship, key decisions, the journal choice, and the path to submission, all tracked on the manuscript development framework Scribendi and Edanz use with authors every day.

  • Target journal awareness

    Set the journal once and its requirements stay in view everywhere. A readiness score shows how close you are, and what still stands in the way.

  • Key decision tracker

    Who will be an author, what the story is, which journal to aim for: every open question logged with its rationale, voted on if needed, and closed with an audit trail.

  • Author information management

    Standardized forms collect affiliations, ORCID iDs, conflict-of-interest declarations and funding disclosures, without the email chase.

  • Author contribution tracking

    Every author's contribution recorded against the CRediT taxonomy and the ICMJE criteria, and the author order agreed before the draft.

  • EQUATOR checklists

    The right reporting guideline for the study, ARRIVE, STROBE or PRISMA, open beside the manuscript with its progress tracked to submission.

  • Reviewer response tracking

    Reviewer comments become tasks, each response tracked point by point, and a revision or a new target journal starts from the same project, not a new one.

  • Manuscript workstreams

    Every stage of the framework is a workstream in the side menu, with its own tasks, deadlines and progress. The plan and the platform are one thing.

  • Manuscript workspaces

    One workspace per manuscript, with its own people, permissions and color, and nothing bleeding between projects.

  • Expert manuscript support

    A Scribendi or Edanz editor or subject-matter scientist, one click away at any stage of the manuscript, from a referee-style read to the response to reviewers.

Weave StreamNow

Never miss a paper.

Build a stream from your keywords and research focus, and new neuroscience papers come to you. Weave AI expands it with MeSH terms and synonyms into a real PubMed query you can see and edit.

  • Queries built by Weave AI

    Your keywords become a MeSH-aware PubMed query, expanded with the synonyms you’d have missed. See every term and edit it.

  • Works out what you mean

    Weave AI proposes what your keywords might be after. You choose the research focus before anything is searched.

  • Alerts, per paper or daily

    Your stream watches PubMed and sends you each new match, or a daily digest.

  • Share with your co-authors

    Share a stream or a collection with your co-authors, so everyone on the manuscript reads from the same list.

  • Read the full text inline

    Open-access full texts and figures inline, with figure zoom. No tab hopping.

  • Collections that feed your project

    Save papers into collections you name. Connect one to a project and Weave AI knows every paper in it.

Weave AtlasOctober 2026

Choose the journal with confidence.

Add your title, abstract, and MeSH terms, set what matters most (speed, impact factor, cost, open access), and Weave AI ranks the journals that fit, with the reasoning shown: why each one ranks where it does, and why others were left out.

  • Best match, up front

    The top pick first, with impact factor, time to decision, cost and acceptance rate, and a plain explanation of why it ranks.

  • Ranked by your priorities

    Pick a preset, from Best fit to Aspirational, set your limits, and the trade-off map plots every match on the axes your priorities set.

  • Every exclusion explained

    The excluded view names the preference that ruled each journal out, and loosening it brings them back.

  • Share with your co-authors

    Send the results to your co-authors, so the shortlist is a decision you make together.

  • Set as target

    Send the chosen journal to your project as its target, and Weave for Word checks your draft against its requirements.

A human expert, one click away.

In Stream, Atlas, Word, or Horizon, one button reaches one of 500+ editors and subject-matter scientists at Scribendi and Edanz, with two decades of manuscripts in your field behind them. They pick up where Weave AI leaves off.

  • A referee-style read before you submit
  • Editing to your target journal's standard
  • Journal strategy, even after a rejection
  • A response to reviewers, drafted with you

Research Consultant

Katherine Halievski, PhD

Neurobiology

Katherine holds a PhD in Neuroscience from Michigan State, was a L'Oréal-UNESCO fellow at SickKids, Toronto, and reviews for Nature Medicine. She drafts your response to reviewers with you, separating the comments that need new data from those that need clearer writing.

The team behind Weave.

Built by the teams behind Scribendi and Edanz, helping researchers get published since 1995.

James Graham, PhD, Scientific Director at Edanz

James Graham, PhD

Scientific Director at Edanz

A neuroscientist specialising in molecular neuroscience and neurodegenerative disease, with over 20 years in research and 70+ manuscripts taken to publication with authors worldwide. He created the manuscript development framework that Weave Horizon is built on.

Security and data

Your research stays yours.

Weave AI reads your manuscript and learns your research to do the work you asked for. That is the only thing that happens to either.

  • Never trained on.

    Your papers are not training data. Nothing you upload teaches the model anything.

  • Never sold or shared.

    Not to advertisers, not to data brokers, not to anyone. Your manuscript is not a product we have for sale.

  • Never read by us.

    No one at Weave opens, reviews or samples your manuscript. A human expert reads it only when you ask one to.

  • Encrypted throughout.

    In transit and at rest, from the moment a file reaches us.

  • Yours to take back.

    Delete a manuscript and it is gone. Take your work back out whenever you want.

Built to get you published.

Weave knows neuroscience and your research, so it finds the papers that matter, the journal that fits, and tells you when you're ready to submit.

Get started for free

No credit card.