VerdictPal
Join
VerdictPal · editorial desk · updated 16 Oct 2026VerdictPal
Compare · Head-to-head

Ai2 Asta vs Consensus: pricing, privacy & capabilities

Put two dossiers side by side: fit, cost, privacy, and the failure modes that actually change the choice.
ToolsModels

Compare · Tool A / Tool B·Head-to-head

Ai2 AstavsConsensus

In the Research assistant set, Consensus edges ahead overall (editorial fit 58 vs 34). Ai2 Asta wins on privacy controls; Consensus wins on citation honesty, source quality, speed, and value for money. For the canonical workflow, pick Consensus. Use Ai2 Asta when its niche specifically wins above.

Ai2 Asta · avg
32
wins 2 of 16
Consensus · avg
63
wins 14 of 16
Fields differ
11
of 16 dossier rows
Receipts
22
sources + bench notes

Checked 2026-10-13 · Ai2 Asta·Checked 2026-10-13 · Consensus

Dossier fields

Sixteen fields, side by side.

No.FieldAi2 AstaConsensus
01Status · Editorial quality gateDraftFlagship
02Editorial fit · 0–100 score34 / 10058 / 100
03CategoryResearch assistantResearch assistant
04Primary surfaceConsumer appConsumer app
05Modalities
  • Text
  • Data
  • Text
06Role in a stackFind papers, explore literature and analyze non-sensitive dataCited academic Q&A and claim-level literature scanning
07Best for
  • Students trying a scholarly search assistant for an initial reading list, with time to open the papers
  • Researchers exploring a question through paper search, citation following and short literature reports
  • An exploratory analysis of non-sensitive structured research data, checked against your own calculations
  • A controlled trial of the public assistant before relying on experimental Preview features
  • Fast yes/no or claim-shaped research questions that need peer-reviewed citations
  • Students who need a first-pass literature answer with links back to papers
  • Comparing paper-level evidence before deciding whether to run a deeper review
  • Users who want Research Agent style multi-step search planning and academic filters
08Avoid if
  • Your dataset is sensitive or regulated: Ai2's FAQ explicitly says not to upload it to hosted Asta
  • You need a confirmed price, credit allowance or account-access rule before planning the work
  • You expect one data exploration to accept follow-up questions beyond its documented 24-hour window
  • You need a verified systematic-review search or an independently measured citation-reliability result
  • You need a full systematic-review workflow with reproducible search strings, screening audit trails, and PRISMA documentation
  • You plan to cite summaries without opening the underlying papers
  • Your topic depends heavily on books, policy documents, grey literature, or sources outside its scholarly corpus
  • You need a completely transparent ranking/corpus methodology for final evidence grading
09Capabilities tracked
  • Scholarly paper search
  • Research-query decomposition
  • Following citations to find related papers
  • Paper relevance assessment, according to Ai2
  • Literature summaries and mini-reviews
  • Analysis of uploaded structured datasets
  • Data visualizations
  • CSV, XLSX, JSON/JSONL, HDF5, TSV and Parquet uploads
  • Exploration-level dataset deletion for signed-in users
  • Asta Preview access to experimental features
  • AI academic search
  • cited answers
  • Research Agent
  • multi-step search planning
  • Pro Analysis
  • Ask Paper
  • advanced filters
  • paper lists
  • institution links
  • Zotero integration
  • incognito mode
  • history controls
10Failure modes · Documented, not buried
  • The FAQ's data explorations stop accepting follow-ups after 24 hours. A longer analysis needs a new exploration, not a continuation of the same conversation.
  • Uploaded datasets are purged after seven days, according to the FAQ. Keep your own source files; an exploration is not a dataset archive.
  • Anonymous data explorations depend on browser cookies. Clearing them loses access and deletion control; the FAQ also says inactive anonymous explorations are deleted after 30 days.
  • Ai2 advertises far more abstracts than full-text papers. The corpus figures do not establish that Asta can read every paper needed for your question; our coverage and citation checks are pending.
  • Preview features are experimental, and leaving Preview removes access to them. The public-versus-Preview feature split has not been tested here as of 13 Oct 2026.
  • AstaBench belongs to the Ai2 ecosystem. Its existence is not an independent evaluation of answers from asta.allen.ai, and this dossier reports no measured accuracy or hallucination rate.
  • AI summaries can over-compress uncertainty
  • Retrieval/ranking can make a field look settled
  • Academic-paper corpus can miss books, policy, and niche sources
  • Agent workflows can still miss important search terms
  • UX may encourage citing answer text instead of papers
11Evidence levelSynthesizedSynthesized
12Sources verified · Receipts on the dossier
13Benchmark entries
  • Check the advertised literature corpus
    The homepage checked 13 Oct 2026 advertises 108M+ abstracts and 12M+ full-text papers.
  • Check dataset retention and training scope
    The FAQ's Analyze data section states seven-day upload deletion, no raw-dataset training and no interaction training without explicit opt-in.
None recorded
14Alternatives tracked
  • Elicit
  • Consensus
  • SciSpace
  • Semantic Scholar
  • Scite
  • Elicit
  • Scite
  • Semantic Scholar
  • Perplexity
  • Connected Papers
15Pricing checked2026-10-132026-10-13
16Last verified2026-10-132026-10-13
16 metrics

Sixteen numbers, one shared midline.

Ai2 AstavsConsensus

In the Research assistant set, Consensus edges ahead overall (editorial fit 58 vs 34). Ai2 Asta wins on privacy controls; Consensus wins on citation honesty, source quality, speed, and value for money. For the canonical workflow, pick Consensus. Use Ai2 Asta when its niche specifically wins above.

  1. Editorial fit
    Ai2 Asta34Consensus58
  2. Source quality
    Ai2 Asta45Consensus55
  3. Citation honesty
    Ai2 Asta0Consensus58
  4. Privacy controls
    Ai2 Asta50Consensus40
  5. Value for money
    Ai2 Asta0Consensus70
  6. Speed
    Ai2 Asta0Consensus58
  7. Integration
    Ai2 Asta55Consensus60
  8. Onboarding
    Ai2 Asta0Consensus58
  9. Reliability
    Ai2 Asta0Consensus70
  10. Feature depth
    Ai2 Asta70Consensus94
  11. Data portability
    Ai2 Asta40Consensus59
  12. Transparency
    Ai2 Asta70Consensus98
  13. Ecosystem reach
    Ai2 Asta55Consensus60
  14. Documentation
    Ai2 Asta45Consensus55
  15. Independence
    Ai2 Asta50Consensus40
  16. Affordability
    Ai2 Asta0Consensus71
Ai2 Asta · avg 32 · wins 2 of 160avg 63 · wins 14 of 16 · Consensus
EvidenceAi2 Asta 1 · Consensus 3
  1. 01Editorial fit
    34
    58
  2. 02Source quality
    45
    55
  3. 03Citation honesty
    0
    58
  4. 04Privacy controls
    50
    40
PrivacyAi2 Asta 0 · Consensus 4
  1. 05Value for money
    0
    70
  2. 06Speed
    0
    58
  3. 07Integration
    55
    60
  4. 08Onboarding
    0
    58
CapabilityAi2 Asta 0 · Consensus 4
  1. 09Reliability
    0
    70
  2. 10Feature depth
    70
    94
  3. 11Data portability
    40
    59
  4. 12Transparency
    70
    98
Cost & fitAi2 Asta 1 · Consensus 3
  1. 13Ecosystem reach
    55
    60
  2. 14Documentation
    45
    55
  3. 15Independence
    50
    40
  4. 16Affordability
    0
    71
TOOL A · Ai2 Asta
Research assistant
Ai2 Asta
34/100
ROLEFind papers, explore literature and analyze non-sensitive data
Editorial fit
34
Source quality
45
Citation honesty
0
Privacy controls
50
Value for money
0
Speed
0
Pricing unverifiedPricing unverified
No public paid tieNo public paid tiers found
Low confidenceLow confidence
DraftVerified 2026-10-13VP·METHOD

Find papers, explore literature and analyze non-sensitive data — Allen Institute for AI's scholarly assistant for finding papers, short literature reports and analysis of structured datasets. Pricing remains unverified; citation checks and a hands-on data trial are still pending.

TOOL B · Consensus
Research assistant
Consensus
58/100
ROLECited academic Q&A and claim-level literature scanning
Editorial fit
58
Source quality
55
Citation honesty
58
Privacy controls
40
Value for money
70
Speed
58
FREE
$20/MOPro (monthly)
$144/YRPro (annual)
FlagshipVerified 2026-10-13VP·METHOD

Cited academic Q&A and claim-level literature scanning — AI academic search engine for cited answers, claim-level literature Q&A, Research Agent workflows, paper analysis, and deeper review-style summaries over a large peer-reviewed research corpus.

Privacy facets

Where each tool is actually private.

Ai2 AstaConsensus
Training on your dataPartialPartial: Ai2's FAQ, checked 13 Oct 2026, says under Analyze data that raw uploaded datasets are never used for model training. Prompts and interactions may be logged for reliability but are not used to train models without explicit opt-in; opting in may put de-identified interactions into a public research dataset to improve Asta. This is a scoped FAQ statement, not a full-policy audit or a blanket guarantee for every literature query. No account or data-flow trial was run.YesYes: Consensus says it does not use your personal or non-personal information to train large language models, or send user data to third parties for that purpose. You do not need to opt out of that stated use. Its privacy policy covers the website and mobile apps without different training rules for free, paid, team or enterprise accounts; it does not set out a separate API training rule. This is a promise about LLM training, not a promise that your searches are never stored or processed. Source: Consensus, Privacy policy (linked in Sources)
EU data residencyUnknownUnknown: Hosted EU residency and a DPA are unverified as of 13 Oct 2026. The FAQ directs sensitive or regulated datasets to self-hosting; this does not establish an EU-only hosted option or certify an institution's self-hosted setup.UnknownUnknown: Unknown
SOC 2 attestationUnknownUnknown: Not recorded as a plan-wide guarantee. Check the dossier's privacy notes and sources.UnknownUnknown: Unknown
Local-first by defaultPartialPartial: This dossier focuses on the hosted assistant at asta.allen.ai, not a local-only product. The FAQ describes self-hosting as the path for regulated data. No self-hosted installation or its external model calls were checked as of 13 Oct 2026.UnknownUnknown: Unknown
Capability split

What each tool does uniquely.

Only Ai2 Asta10

  • Scholarly paper search
  • Research-query decomposition
  • Following citations to find related papers
  • Paper relevance assessment, according to Ai2
  • Literature summaries and mini-reviews
  • Analysis of uploaded structured datasets
  • Data visualizations
  • CSV, XLSX, JSON/JSONL, HDF5, TSV and Parquet uploads
  • Exploration-level dataset deletion for signed-in users
  • Asta Preview access to experimental features

Shared0

No overlap detected.

Only Consensus12

  • AI academic search
  • cited answers
  • Research Agent
  • multi-step search planning
  • Pro Analysis
  • Ask Paper
  • advanced filters
  • paper lists
  • institution links
  • Zotero integration
  • incognito mode
  • history controls
Failure modes

Where each tool breaks.

Ai2 Asta

  • The FAQ's data explorations stop accepting follow-ups after 24 hours. A longer analysis needs a new exploration, not a continuation of the same conversation.
  • Uploaded datasets are purged after seven days, according to the FAQ. Keep your own source files; an exploration is not a dataset archive.
  • Anonymous data explorations depend on browser cookies. Clearing them loses access and deletion control; the FAQ also says inactive anonymous explorations are deleted after 30 days.
  • Ai2 advertises far more abstracts than full-text papers. The corpus figures do not establish that Asta can read every paper needed for your question; our coverage and citation checks are pending.
  • Preview features are experimental, and leaving Preview removes access to them. The public-versus-Preview feature split has not been tested here as of 13 Oct 2026.
  • AstaBench belongs to the Ai2 ecosystem. Its existence is not an independent evaluation of answers from asta.allen.ai, and this dossier reports no measured accuracy or hallucination rate.

Consensus

  • AI summaries can over-compress uncertainty
  • Retrieval/ranking can make a field look settled
  • Academic-paper corpus can miss books, policy, and niche sources
  • Agent workflows can still miss important search terms
  • UX may encourage citing answer text instead of papers
Pricing

Pulled straight from each dossier.

Ai2 Asta

Research assistant
  • Pricing unverifiedPricing unverified
  • No public paid tieNo public paid tiers found
  • Low confidenceLow confidence

raw · Pricing unverified · No public paid tiers found · Low confidence · Checked 13 Oct 2026: the research notes describe apparently free/public hosted access, not a confirmed price or unlimited allowance. The guide's early-access AutoDiscovery hypothesis-credit offer ran through 28 Feb 2026; it does not establish October access or credits for the default assistant. Confirm current terms before budgeting.

Consensus

Research assistant
  • FREE
  • $20/MOPro (monthly)
  • $144/YRPro (annual)

raw · Free $0 · Pro $20/mo or $144/yr ($12/mo annual) · Deep $65/mo or $540/yr ($45/mo annual) · Teams/Enterprise custom · verified students and faculty: 40% off Pro for 12 months · clinicians: 25% off.

Verdict

Which tool to actually pick.

In the Research assistant set, Consensus edges ahead overall (editorial fit 58 vs 34). Ai2 Asta wins on privacy controls; Consensus wins on citation honesty, source quality, speed, and value for money. For the canonical workflow, pick Consensus. Use Ai2 Asta when its niche specifically wins above.

Open Ai2 Asta's dossierOpen Consensus's dossier
Try Ai2 Asta ↗Try Consensus ↗

The Pack · Editorial newsletter

Know when the rules move.

One short email when a university changes its AI rule for theses, or a research tool changes its pricing or privacy terms. No tracking, no third-party analytics. Unsubscribe in one click.

The thesis AI checklist is free to use, no signup needed →

Questions this comparison answers

Every answer below is assembled from the dated fields on this page. Nothing is written separately for search.

Should you use Ai2 Asta or Consensus?

In the Research assistant set, Consensus edges ahead overall (editorial fit 58 vs 34). Ai2 Asta wins on privacy controls; Consensus wins on citation honesty, source quality, speed, and value for money. For the canonical workflow, pick Consensus. Use Ai2 Asta when its niche specifically wins above.

What can Ai2 Asta do that Consensus cannot?

Capabilities documented on the Ai2 Asta tool but not the Consensus tool:

  • Scholarly paper search
  • Research-query decomposition
  • Following citations to find related papers
  • Paper relevance assessment, according to Ai2
  • Literature summaries and mini-reviews
  • Analysis of uploaded structured datasets
  • Data visualizations
  • CSV, XLSX, JSON/JSONL, HDF5, TSV and Parquet uploads
  • Exploration-level dataset deletion for signed-in users
  • Asta Preview access to experimental features

What can Consensus do that Ai2 Asta cannot?

Capabilities documented on the Consensus tool but not the Ai2 Asta tool:

  • AI academic search
  • cited answers
  • Research Agent
  • multi-step search planning
  • Pro Analysis
  • Ask Paper
  • advanced filters
  • paper lists
  • institution links
  • Zotero integration
  • incognito mode
  • history controls

Is Ai2 Asta or Consensus cheaper?

Ai2 Asta: Pricing unverified · No public paid tiers found · Low confidence · Checked 13 Oct 2026: the research notes describe apparently free/public hosted access, not a confirmed price or unlimited allowance. The guide's early-access AutoDiscovery hypothesis-credit offer ran through 28 Feb 2026; it does not establish October access or credits for the default assistant. Confirm current terms before budgeting.. Consensus: Free Free · Pro (monthly) $20/mo · Pro (annual) $144/yr · Deep (monthly) $65/mo · Deep (annual) $540/yr · Teams Custom · Enterprise Custom.

How do Ai2 Asta and Consensus score against each other?

On editorial fit, Ai2 Asta scores 34 out of 100 and Consensus scores 58 out of 100. The score is a fit judgement for source-heavy research work, not a quality ranking — read both dossiers before you pick.