I mapped 8.5M research papers into an interactive atlas

When I read papers, I have to jump between multiple tabs to find the dataset, code, videos, peer reviews, and so on. I tried to fix this with this project.It started as a project just for papers on arXiv, but after its initial success on Twitter (got like 1.9k views: the most I have gotten for a post), I have now expanded it to include other openly available papers from PubMed Central, bioRxiv, medRxiv, and eLife. These papers have been linked with their genes, proteins, diseases, drugs, clinical trials, 3D protein structures, code, and cited and similar papers.This project now has four parts:First, a map. I embedded nearly 8.5M papers (with SPECTER2), ran UMAP for 2D representation, and rendered them as a scatterplot. The dots can be clicked to see brief information about the papers, like an LLM TLDR, key findings, peer reviews, linked entities, and more. The clusters are also labeled, though you might have to zoom in.Second, I built a detailed paper page for each paper. They give you the paper's full text, images, videos, peer reviews (from OpenReview), GitHub links, Hugging Face dataset/model links, clinical trials, genes, diseases, 3D protein structures, cited papers, and similar papers. You can also copy the whole page, including the full paper text and image URLs, as markdown for your LLM.Third, I have released an extension so you can read all this information in your sidebar by clicking "open in Tomesphere" that shows up in arXiv, PMC, bioRxiv, Google Scholar, or medRxiv. I have tried to provide as much information as possible in the extension, though for things like viewing all the images or a 3D protein structure, you might still have to go to the paper page using the link provided in the extension.Fourth, all this data is available for your LLM via MCP. The MCP does have a 50-query free limit (this jumps 10x with signup).Note: this project is still in beta, so papers might have some mismatched information. I am rolling out feedback form

Hacker NewsToolAISource
0Sign in to voteCopy link

FL score

72

out of 100

Verdict

VALIDATE

high confidence

Competition

No competitor data yet

Trend

No signal yet

A searchable atlas of 8.5M research papers with embedded metadata, peer reviews, and code links that reduces tab-switching for researchers.

The pain

Researchers waste time jumping between tabs to find datasets, code, peer reviews, and related papers. A single paper requires cross-referencing multiple sources and platforms. This friction compounds across hundreds of papers read annually.

The gap

Existing tools (Google Scholar, arXiv, PubMed) show papers in isolation. No platform aggregates the supporting infrastructure (code repos, datasets, clinical trials, protein structures) alongside the paper itself. Researchers manually stitch this together.

Build angle

Start by proving retention and usage on the arXiv subset. Measure whether researchers actually use the extension repeatedly and whether the LLM integration drives adoption. Then determine if the value justifies a freemium model or if this becomes a feature inside a larger research platform.

Strengths

  • Solved a real workflow problem with working prototype and measurable traction (1.9k views, extension deployed)
  • Multi-format access (map, paper pages, browser extension, MCP) reduces friction for different user behaviors
  • 8.5M papers is substantial scale; SPECTER2 + UMAP clustering is technically sound
  • Integrated data (genes, proteins, diseases, clinical trials) adds value beyond existing tools
  • Early signal on Twitter suggests product-market fit potential in research community

Risks

  • Data quality issues acknowledged (mismatched information in beta). This erodes trust quickly with researchers who rely on accuracy.
  • No clear monetization path. Free tier with MCP limits won't sustain infrastructure costs at 8.5M papers. Researchers resist paying for tools.
  • Dependency on third-party data (OpenReview, GitHub, Hugging Face, clinical trial APIs). If these change or restrict access, the product breaks.
  • Competitive threat from Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and LLM-native research tools. Unclear what defensible moat exists.
  • Usage metrics missing. 1.9k Twitter views ≠ active users. No data on extension installs, repeat usage, or LLM query volume.
  • Maintenance burden. Keeping 8.5M embeddings fresh and linked data current requires ongoing engineering. Unclear if solo builder can sustain this.

Questions about this idea?

FlyBot reads the scoring and gives you a second opinion on “I mapped 8.5M research papers into an interactive atlas”.

Open FlyBot