Litra.aiLitra.aiv2.22.0-beta
Change language

Frequently Asked Questions

Browse all FAQs about Litra.ai

Search Features

Litra.ai queries the OpenAlex academic database directly to retrieve papers. Unlike ChatGPT, which generates text, we fetch search results directly from real paper databases — so fabricated papers are never suggested. We also run link verification on every reference to confirm each paper exists.

Hybrid search combines keyword search with semantic search. Keyword search, like Google Scholar, matches exact terms, while semantic search finds papers with similar meaning or concepts. For example, a search for 'crop monitoring' would also discover papers about 'agricultural field observation' or 'farmland surveillance.' Litra.ai merges both approaches so you never miss relevant papers.

The papers suggested by Litra.ai are retrieved directly from the OpenAlex academic database, so only real papers are displayed. AI summaries, analysis, and research assistant responses are generated based on paper abstracts. They're useful for quickly grasping the big picture — for deeper understanding, we recommend reading the original papers directly.

Litra.ai accesses OpenAlex (280M+ papers). OpenAlex integrates over 50 data sources including arXiv and PubMed, covering 98.6% of PubMed and spanning a wide range of academic disciplines. Future integration with JALC (Japan Link Center) will improve access to Japanese-language papers.

Yes. OpenAlex includes some Japanese papers, though English papers are currently the majority. Litra.ai automatically translates your Japanese queries into English for searching, then displays results in Japanese. Future JALC integration will expand Japanese paper coverage.

Results typically stream in within 1-3 minutes. Results appear progressively during the search, so there's minimal perceived wait time. Compared to Gemini Deep Research or ChatGPT Deep Research (5-30 minutes), Litra.ai delivers results significantly faster.

Litra.ai works with abstracts and publicly available information only — we do not access paywalled full text. To read full papers, use your institutional access or purchase individually. For open-access papers (arXiv, PubMed Central, etc.), we provide direct links to the full text.

Pricing & Plans

The free tier gives you 3 credits (approximately 3 searches). GPT-4.1 mini is available. You can try the same features as paid plans — multilingual translation, AI analysis chat, and paper analysis. No credit card required.

Credits are the currency used to search papers on Litra.ai. Different AI models consume different amounts (GPT-4.1 mini: ~1 credit, Haiku 4.5: ~3 credits, Sonnet 4.5: ~9 credits per search).

For individual use: Mini ($9/mo, 30 credits) for occasional use, Standard ($19/mo, 100 credits) for regular use, or Pro ($69/mo, 400 credits) for heavy use. For research labs: Pro for 4-10 members, Max ($199/mo, 1200 credits) for larger groups up to 100.

For Individual Use

  • Occasional use (5-10 times/month): Mini ($9/mo, 30 credits) is recommended. Great for light literature searches and report writing.
  • Regular use (2-3 times/week): Standard ($19/mo, 100 credits) is recommended. Ideal for regular paper checks and research activities.
  • Daily / heavy use (10+ times/week): Consider Pro ($69/mo, 400 credits). Perfect for frequent Sonnet 4.5 usage (9 credits/search) or PhD literature review periods.

For Research Labs

  • Small labs (4-10 members): Pro ($69/mo, 400 credits) is recommended. Sub-account feature (up to 20 members) lets lab members share credits.
  • Large labs (up to 100 members): Max ($199/mo, 1200 credits) is recommended. Comes with sub-accounts (up to 100 members) and priority support.

Key Differences Between Plans

Mini vs Standard:

  • Credits: 30 vs 100
  • Paper PDF analysis (in Beta development): No vs Yes
  • Login devices: 2 vs 3

Pro vs Max:

  • Credits: 400 vs 1200
  • Recommended size: 4-10 vs up to 100
  • Sub-accounts: up to 20 vs up to 100
  • Priority support: No vs Yes

Yes, unused credits roll over to the next month. The maximum balance is capped at 2x your monthly credits. For example, on the Standard plan (100 credits/month), you can hold up to 200 credits including carried-over amounts.

We accept credit cards (Visa, Mastercard, American Express, JCB). All transactions are securely processed through Stripe.

Yes. We support reimbursement-based payment for KAKENHI. After paying by credit card, a receipt is automatically issued that you can submit to your university's accounting department. The receipt does not include a company seal (inkan), but this is legally fine. If your university requires a seal, please contact us and we'll accommodate. Bank transfer (invoiced payments) is planned for the future.

Yes, you can cancel at any time. After cancellation, you can continue using the service until the end of your current billing period.

If you purchased an annual plan within the last 14 days, you can request a refund from your account page. The refund amount is prorated based on unused credits (refund = payment × remaining credits ÷ total credits). Monthly plans do not offer prorated refunds, but you can continue using the service until the end of the billing period. A processing fee (3.6%) may be deducted from refunds.

We do not offer a dedicated enterprise plan. For research lab use, we recommend Pro ($69/mo, 400 credits) or Max ($199/mo, 1200 credits). If Max is insufficient, you can purchase multiple Max subscriptions.

Compared to Other Services

Google Scholar is an excellent search engine, but it only supports keyword search. Litra.ai combines keyword and semantic search (hybrid search) to discover related papers even when they use different terminology. Results are visualized in a tree-map UI showing paper relationships at a glance. Plus, an interactive research assistant helps you narrow down to exactly the papers you need — no more searching in Google Scholar and then uploading to NotebookLM.

Detailed comparison with Google Scholar

Elicit and SciSpace are excellent AI paper search services, but their UIs are English-only and require users to craft their own search queries. Litra.ai is fully multilingual — just describe what you need in your own language, and receive organized results in report format. Interactive dialogue lets you refine results, making it ideal for researchers who find searching itself challenging.

Detailed comparison with Elicit

Consensus specializes in Yes/No research questions and supports English only. Litra.ai supports multiple languages and handles open-ended research questions. Consensus excels at questions like 'Does Vitamin D reduce cancer risk?' while Litra.ai is better suited for exploratory research like 'Survey the latest crop monitoring methods.'

Detailed comparison with Consensus

CiNii and J-STAGE are excellent databases for Japanese-language papers, but they lack AI summaries, interactive analysis, and treemap visualization. Litra.ai integrates all of these into one seamless experience. For dedicated Japanese paper search, CiNii and J-STAGE are ideal; for AI-powered analysis including international papers, Litra.ai is the better choice.

Detailed comparison with CiNii & J-STAGE

Have a question that's not answered here?

Ask the AI assistant via the chat button in the bottom right.