Build a structured literature review table from research papers and preprints.
A research analyst screens dozens of papers, notes, and research URLs before deciding what deserves close reading. Abstracts are not enough, but reading every source in full is slow. Rowvia.ai prepares a first-pass table with method, dataset, key finding, and limitations for triage.
Upload PDF papers, DOCX files, Markdown notes, or add URLs. Rowvia extracts fields such as title, authors, year, venue, abstract, methodology, and findings into one row per primary source by default, with related notes or links kept with that row when useful.
Open the literature demoThe demo uses sample data. You will see how primary sources become rows by default, how related attachments can stay with them, how a template prepares columns, and how to review the result before export.
A short walkthrough of uploading research sources, applying the scientific paper template, and reviewing the extracted literature-review fields in a table.
The template focuses on bibliographic and screening fields:
Open template detail
Start with a prepared template for the workflow. The columns and instructions match the selected use case.
Each output column has its own instruction, so the result is structured table data instead of a loose summary. You can adjust the suggested columns or add custom ones for the fields you need.
Upload files, add URLs, or paste text. Each primary source becomes one row by default; related attachments can stay on the same row.
During processing, you can see what is done, what is waiting, and what is currently running. After completion, you can correct cells and export the table.
The demo uses synthetic file names, URLs, or text-source names and results. The same principle applies to your own primary sources; related attachments can be added to the same row.
The output is a table that works well in Excel or another review workflow. One row represents one primary source by default, related attachments can stay with it, and the columns describe the specific fields you want to extract. For scientific papers, this makes it easier to compare sources side by side without manual copying.
| Source | Title | Authors | Year | Venue | Research question |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| paper-retrieval-augmented-generation.pdf | service package | Alpha Ltd | 2026-06-14 | stated in source | stated in source |
| clinical-study-summary.pdf | equipment supply | Beta GmbH | 2026-06-21 | value to verify | value to verify |
| systems-evaluation-preprint.pdf | review overview | Gamma LLC | 2026-07-02 | fill after review | fill after review |
Rowvia is useful for a first structured overview, review, and export. It should not replace accounting, legal, insurance, or other expert decisions, and important values should be checked against the source document.
Ordinary OCR usually only reads text. In a scientific papers workflow, the more useful result is getting values into the same columns across several sources, so they can be compared, filtered, and handed off as a table.
Yes. Rowvia prepares a review table where each primary source becomes one row by default, related attachments can stay with it, and the columns match the selected workflow.
Typical fields include Title, Authors, Year, Venue. You can adjust the columns to match your process.
No. The output is a reviewable working table. Important legal, accounting, insurance, or compliance values should still be checked by the responsible person.
Yes. You can use a prepared template as a starting point, then adjust columns or add your own questions for the fields you need to extract.
This page is mapped to concrete long-tail queries and links onward to the matching template, pricing, or technical documentation.
Open the demo, use the related template, or compare similar document scenarios.
