try codex 5.3. it's dry and very obviously AI; if you allow a bit of anthropomorphisation, it's kind of high-functioning autistic. it isn't an oracle, it'll still be wrong, but it's a powerful, completely different from claude tool.
replyDoes it get numbers right? One of the mistakes it made in reading the paper was swapping sets of numbers from the primary/secondary outcomes.
replyit does get screenshots right for me, but obviously I haven't tried on your specific paper. I can only recommend trying it out, it's also has a much more generous limits in the $20 tier than opus.
replyI see. To clarify, it parsed numbers in the pdf correct, but assigned them the wrong meaning. I was wondering if codex is better at interpreting non text data
reply