AI assistants and search decision

Elicit

A small team can build a narrow research-search+reporting workflow using public indexes and LLMs, but Elicit's proprietary indexed corpus, validated systematic-review tooling, and enterprise features are durable advantages that are costly to reproduce.

Visit website
Subscription$11/month ✓ verified
Initial build80 hours
Monthly upkeep12 hours + $50
Evidence3/3 runs agree

Open-source builds that already do this

Every project below is open source and already does this job today. Fork one, self-host it, or take the parts you need — the build prompt further down assumes an empty file, and this is the shortcut past that. Licences differ; check the one on each card before you ship.

Code Elicit publishes itself

Not a way out of the subscription — these are the vendor’s own repositories. Worth a look for how they build, and for anything you would have to integrate with.

What a replacement has to do

  • User submits a research question → semantic search over academic corpus → retrieve top papers and metadata → extract passages and citations → run LLM summarization to produce a cited report → present interactive report and allow exports

What it still won’t have

  • Access to Elicit's indexed proprietary corpus and integrated search over 138M+ papers
  • Validated accuracy benchmarks and PRISMA-grade systematic-review tooling
  • Enterprise features: SSO/SAML, admin panels, seat management, and high-usage quotas
  • Live collaboration, scale optimizations, and prebuilt export templates

What remains hard

  • Proprietary dataSearch over 138 million academic papers and 545,000 clinical trials, with more data sources coming soon.
  • Brand trustTRUSTED BY OVER 5 MILLION RESEARCHERS, INCLUDING AT
Read the build prompt

First-year cost

Keep paying

Paying ischeaper in year one.

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 6 seats.

Paid seatsseats

Money you would actually spend

Keep paying

Subscription price × seats × 12

Build it

AI build APIs + hosting

Time you would spend

What you would spend

What we assumed

The verdict above measures whether you could build it. This one is only about money.

Runnable build prompt

Not run yet
Build a minimal Elicit-style research assistant using: Next.js frontend, FastAPI backend, PostgreSQL for metadata, Weaviate (or Pinecone) for embeddings, and OpenAI (or compatible) for summarization. Scope: implement semantic search over an indexed set of public papers (ingest abstracts via Semantic Scholar API or arXiv), store paper metadata and PDFs, extract sentence-level citations, implement an LLM pipeline that generates a structured, cited research report, provide a web UI to query, display top papers, and export PDF/CSV. Out of scope: reproducing Elicit's full proprietary corpus, enterprise SSO, PRISMA-grade automation, and large-scale collaboration. Include error handling for failed fetches and LLM timeouts, basic unit tests for ingestion, search, and report generation, and a README with deployment steps (Docker Compose).
How we checked4 sources · 3/3 runs agreed · evidence score 64

How the score was reached

  • Partly verdict base52
  • An open-source build was found+5
  • 4 cited sources+3
  • Price verified on pricing page+3
  • 3/3 assessment runs agreed+4
  • Hard moats found in the evidence-3
  • Evidence score64

The base comes from the verdict. Everything under it is a check that either happened or did not, and each one is a fact frozen in this record rather than a judgement made at render time — so the same evidence always produces the same number.

How scoring works →

Cited sources · 4

Every page the run actually retrieved.

Integrity checks

What held up, and what did not.

✓ Price read off the page✓ 3 independent runs, one answer✓ Citations limited to fetched pages! 2 moats quoted from the page