# Lune vs R Discovery

R Discovery is built for reading. It follows your interests across the published record, reads papers aloud, translates them, and does it well on a phone. Lune is not a reading app.

Competitor site: https://discovery.researcher.life.

## Choose R Discovery if

- You want a daily feed you can read on the train, in your own language.
- Your reading crosses journals, patents and preprints.
- Audio and translation are the features that save you time.

## Choose Lune if

- The bottleneck is checking a draft, not finding things to read.
- You want the literature in the editor, not in another app.
- You need quotes with locators that survive review.

## From a question to a citation

R Discovery: Follow your interests -> Read or listen -> Papers to work through.
Lune: Ask one question -> Read the full text -> Quote with a locator.

One ends with papers to read. The other ends with the line that supports the claim.

## Line by line

| Dimension | Lune | R Discovery |
| --- | --- | --- |
| What it is for | Grounding an agent: retrieval, full text, citations, claim checks. | Reading: a feed, chat with a PDF, reviews, audio. |
| What is indexed | Top-tier venues, most papers in full text. | The journal literature at full scale, plus preprints and patents. |
| Agent access | MCP and a CLI, on every plan. | A ChatGPT integration and a Chrome extension. |
| How deep a citation goes | A verbatim quote and its locator, per claim. | AI summaries with top paper references. |
| Reading experience | Not the point. Public paper pages exist for links. | Audio papers, 30+ languages, a strong mobile app. |
| Entry price | $4.99 a month, or $47.90 a year. | Prime from $12 a month. |

## These two barely compete

R Discovery answers the Monday morning question: what came out that I should read? It does that across an enormous span of work, and its translation and audio solve a real problem for people who do not read English all day.

Lune answers the Thursday night one: is this sentence supported, and by which line of which paper? One is a reading habit. The other runs while you write. Using both is sensible.

## Feeds hand you papers, agents need passages

A recommendation works at the level of the paper. That is the right unit for reading and the wrong one for an agent, which needs the paragraph holding the number.

So Lune indexes accepted papers in full and exposes search, sweep, full text, the citation graph, typed extraction and claim checking. Chain those and you arrive at a quote. A feed was never trying to.

## Pricing

- Lune Free: $0, 10 requests a day, every tool
- Lune Pro: $4.99, a month or $47.90 a year, 300 requests a day
- Lune Max: $9.99, a month or $95.90 a year, 600 requests a day
- Lune Credits: $0.99, 300 extra requests, no expiry
- R Discovery Free: $0, search, feed, reading
- R Discovery Prime: from $12, a month, annual options

R Discovery sits alongside Paperpal on researcher.life.

## Questions

### Is Lune an R Discovery alternative?

Only partly. R Discovery is a reading app; Lune is retrieval and verification for agents. Many people would use both.

### Does R Discovery work with AI agents?

It publishes a ChatGPT integration and a Chrome extension. No MCP server is listed on their site.

### Does Lune have a mobile app?

No. Lune runs inside the AI apps you already use, and its dashboard works in a phone browser.

## What we read

- [R Discovery](https://discovery.researcher.life)
- [Researcher.Life](https://researcher.life)