Get started
Work

Universal Evidence-Bound Peer-Review Support Tool for Universities, Researchers, and Hobbyists Using Free ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini

Year: 2026
Type: other
Abstract: This Zenodo record establishes an independent, open-methods pilot for reviewing dissertations and other research claims through the V6A Falsifiability Sheet. It is designed for students, academic and independent researchers, reviewers, hobbyists, and anyone interested in testing one bounded claim through a transparent evidence trail. The first planned live dissertation case involves a postgraduate student affiliated with Alexandria University, Egypt. The participant’s identity and case details will be added through a later update only after the case is completed and public attribution is authorized. The workflow uses three separately labeled PDFs: Step 1: the completed human R1 Falsifiability Sheet and an illustrated teaching comic. Step 2: the Quick Teaching Guide and isolated Evidence Packet containing the only evidence permitted for R2. Step 3: the blank V6A University Output Sheet containing the rules used to evaluate R1 and R2 and determine the final result. Participants upload all three PDFs to the free version of ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini and send the exact message prompt provided below. The prompt directs the AI to preserve the completed human R1 record but ignore the R1 outcome while independently determining R2. The AI may use only the Evidence Packet in Step 2. After determining R2, it follows the comparison and traffic-light logic printed on the Step 3 Output Sheet to evaluate the completed R1 and R2 records and produce a final Green, Yellow, Red, or STOP result. This separation is central to the method: the prompt isolates Reviewer 2, while the Output Sheet governs the later comparison of Reviewer 1 and Reviewer 2. The AI must not browse outside the Evidence Packet, introduce outside sources, fill gaps from model memory, invent citations or evidence, or treat its own output as evidence. When essential evidence is missing, unreadable, or insufficient, the required outcome is STOP rather than a guessed answer. AI therefore functions as a constrained second reviewer, not as an authority. The completed Output Sheet preserves the claim, permitted evidence, R1 review, independently determined R2 review, disagreement, uncertainty, and final result. V6A does not replace supervisors, specialists, formal peer review, ethical review, or university requirements. Its purpose is to make the complete review path visible and revisable. Platform Use Notes The same Step 1, Step 2, and Step 3 PDFs and the same exact prompt are used across all three platforms. In observed free-tier use, each platform produced an Output Sheet, but the presentation differed. Claude Free: Claude most closely used the supplied Output Sheet, although it took longer than ChatGPT Free and Gemini. Gemini Free: Gemini was the fastest. It produced an altered version of the Output Sheet, and the Canvas option was needed to create the PDF. ChatGPT Free: ChatGPT was the second-fastest. It may produce its own version of the Output Sheet or return an initially unpolished result. When that occurs, send the following second prompt: “Please polish this so it is cohesive.” Updated research results comparing the revised workflow across the three platforms will be added through a later Zenodo version after testing is completed. The planned Alexandria University case will extend the workflow from a controlled demonstration into a live postgraduate research setting. It does not claim official endorsement, partnership, institutional adoption, approved dissertation status, ethical approval, academic accreditation, or formal peer-review recognition by Alexandria University or any other institution. Exact Message Prompt “Using only the uploads, treat the photo as the completed R1 record, ignore the R1 outcome when deciding R2, use only the Evidence Packet for R2, then follow the traffic-light logic instructions on the University Output Sheet to grade the completed R1 and R2 outcomes, complete the University Output Sheet, and create the completed PDF.” Additional Description — Notes This record establishes the universal pilot framework and may be updated with revised forms, corrected instructions, replication reports, research results, completed cases, blank templates, evidence packets, and documented limitations. The first planned university case involves a postgraduate student affiliated with Alexandria University. The participant’s identity and case details will remain withheld until the test is completed and public attribution is authorized. Students, researchers, specialists, reviewers, hobbyists, and members of the public may independently test the workflow using their own bounded claims and evidence. Participation does not establish a university partnership, institutional adoption, approved dissertation procedure, ethical approval, accreditation, official peer-review status, or institutional endorsement. Each participant remains responsible for the academic, legal, ethical, copyright, privacy, and research requirements applying to their own work, evidence, institution, and location. The Zenodo DOI serves as the permanent pilot archive. The Echoes of the Script: Open Lab LinkedIn group is an optional forum for questions, replication reports, reviewer exchange, feedback, and public updates. Participation in the forum is not required.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21710596
Language: English
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W7171975394
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: