Created by dissertation committee chairs and educational AI specialists with decades of combined experience.
Dr. Dissertation wasn't created by software engineers guessing what matters in academic work. It was developed by actual dissertation committee members who've reviewed thousands of dissertations and know exactly what makes the difference between acceptance and rejection.
Faculty members who've served on dissertation committees across multiple disciplines, understanding the nuances of different fields and methodological approaches.
Experts in educational technology and AI applications who understand how to translate academic expertise into effective computational analysis.
Writing center directors and dissertation coaches who work daily with students, understanding their challenges and what feedback actually helps.
Our development team brings experience across academic disciplines, ensuring Dr. Dissertation works for all fields of study.
Analyzed 500+ published studies on dissertation quality, interviewed 50+ committee members, reviewed common defense failures across disciplines.
Synthesized findings into the 10-dimensional HAIST© framework, validating each dimension against successful vs. unsuccessful dissertations.
Developed prompts and analysis methods to translate committee expertise into AI-driven evaluation, tested across diverse dissertation samples.
Real doctoral students tested reviews, compared feedback to their advisors' comments, validated accuracy and actionability of recommendations.
Ongoing improvements based on user feedback, defense outcomes, and emerging research on doctoral success factors.
Our team knows what dissertation committees actually care about—not generic writing advice, but specific academic standards and expectations.
Different fields have different standards. Our multidisciplinary expertise ensures feedback appropriate to your academic context.
We know what leads to successful defenses because we've been on committees. Our feedback targets actual defense requirements.
We don't guess—we validate our approach through research, beta testing, and tracking student outcomes.
"The feedback was remarkably similar to what my committee chair said during our meeting—but I got it in 10 minutes instead of waiting 3 weeks for her availability."
"Finally, someone who understands STEM dissertations. The methodology feedback was specific to quantitative research, not generic advice."
"I was skeptical about AI reviewing my humanities work, but the feedback on argumentation and theoretical grounding was spot-on."
Trust the feedback developed by people who've been where you are—and where you're going.