PaperVote

Independent reader rankings · Beta

See which research papers readers think are worth reading.

Search the literature, then respond to papers you have genuinely read.

Explore Community Choice

Search engines tell you what exists. PaperVote shows how readers respond.

01FindFind a paper you know.
02ReadOpen the original record.
03RespondRecommend it or not.
04RankFive responses create a provisional rank.
One clear questionwas this paper worth reading?
Five responsesbefore a paper receives a rank
Reader responsenever a claim of scientific validity

Browse fields

Community choice by subject

Field / LSLife sciencesLiving systems, from molecules to ecosystems.Cellular and molecular biology · Neuroscience · Ecology and evolution11 papersField / HMHealth and medicineHuman health, disease and clinical evidence.Clinical medicine · Epidemiology · Public health3 papersField / CSComputingAlgorithms, software, data and intelligent systems.Computer science · Artificial intelligence · Data science · Robotics3 papersField / PSPhysical sciencesMatter, energy and the observable universe.Physics · Chemistry · Astronomy4 papers
View all fields

Reader contribution ledger

Who is building PaperVote?

Two separate rankings recognise participation without changing the weight of anyone’s vote.

View all contributors

Available participation credits

Credit ranking

  1. 1Jiggle Marsian1,045 credits
  2. 2hallumi1,040 credits
  3. 3giatzi1,000 credits

Distinct active paper responses

Papers reviewed

  1. 1hallumi2 papers
  2. 2Jiggle Marsian1 papers
  3. 3giatzi0 papers

Another route into the literature

What journal editors are highlighting

Browse live selections from Nature, APS, PLOS, Springer Nature, ACM and Oxford. Publisher curation stays separate from reader recommendations.

Browse publisher picks

Reader ranking

Community choice

Ranked by recommendations minus would-not-recommend responses after five distinct reader accounts respond.

View full ranking
  1. #01

    Taking the biology seriously makes models better

    Antonio Matas-Gil, Andreas Tiffeau-Mayer

    eLife · 2026

    100%Recommend5 reader responses

Awaiting reader response

New to PaperVote

Recently added papers that have not yet reached five responses from distinct reader accounts.

View all new papers
  1. New

    Programmable mesoporous carbon architectures from liquefied wood via reactive-emulsion-mediated self-assembly

    Yang Li, Kun Zhang, Shenghui Jiao, Guangying Li, et al.

    Nature Communications · 2026·Chemistry +1

    2 / 5reader responsesRespond
  2. New

    Brain-cognition relationships and treatment outcome in treatment-resistant late-life depression

    Peter Zhukovsky, Meryl A. Butters, Helen Lavretsky, Patrick Brown, et al.

    Nature Communications · 2026·Neuroscience +2

    1 / 5reader responsesRespond
  3. New

    Cavity-enhanced optical readout and control of nuclear spin qubits

    Alexander Ulanowski, Johannes Früh, Fabian Salamon, Adrian Holzäpfel, et al.

    Nature Communications · 2026·Quantum physics +2

    0 / 5reader responsesRespond
  4. New

    Disentangling the drivers of heterogeneity in SARS-CoV-2 transmission from data on viral load and daily contact rates

    Billy J. Quilty, Lloyd A. C. Chapman, James D. Munday, Kerry L. M. Wong, et al.

    PLOS Computational Biology · 2026·Epidemiology +2

    0 / 5reader responsesRespond
  5. New

    Personality pairing improves human–AI collaboration

    Harang Ju, Sinan Aral

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2026·Human–computer interaction +2

    0 / 5reader responsesRespond

Ranking policy

Reader recommendations are not scientific validity, peer review or consensus.

Read the ranking definitions